How does town respond to company that cuts its power bill?
December 16, 2009 by Tom GuayPosted in: Cost Cutting, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, News, solar power, Wind Power
The owner of Nantucket’s restaurant in Fenwick Island, DE, didn’t want to wait around for his power company to go green. He did it on his own and is now pocketing major savings on his electricity bill.
Dave Twining created a personal power plant for his restaurant by installing 48 solar panels on the roof and a 53-foot tall wind turbine.
Result: Nantucket’s cut its monthly electric power bill by a third. The wind and solar combination generate about 12 kilowatts of power. The average U.S. house uses about 4-6 kW, according to a report on Twining’s power investments on the Build Baby Build Web site.
Twining used federal stimulus funds to help defray the $104,000 energy project.
But other businesses in Fenwick Island won’t be so lucky to escape from total dependence on the local power company. At least wind power won’t be an option anymore.
Reason: The town reacted to Nantucket’s investment in renewable energy by banning new wind tower installations.
Although the town prides itself on being sustainable, town fathers don’t want to look at more “eyesores” like the 53 ft. wind turbine at Nantucket’s.
The town can’t ban wind turbines outright because Delaware law allows them. The Coastal Point reports that Fenwick Island officials adopted a zoning restriction to keep any future wind turbine towers to 33 ft., which is well under the recommended height to maximize efficiency.
Have you investigated wind power and run into similar obstacles? Post your experiences in the comments section.
Tags: energy savings, solar panels, wind towers
GreenandMore.com
Loading ...
December 17th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Although there is some question as to the problem with wind turbins, I suggest that you look into the vertical axis wind turbins. These turbines do not require the heighth that bladed turbines require and are more pleasing to the eye and are bird friendley. GUS Systems out of Toronto, Canada have this type of turbine and can be installed on roof tops or even on poles 20′ or higher.
I would suggest that there be more study done before they close the book on such systems.
December 17th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
So, the company spent $104,000 to save 12KW ?
Does that make any financial sense? NO !
Here in my area electricity cost 6.5 cents for 1,000 watts.
So 12 KW is 78 cents per hour… or $18.72 per day….. or $561.60 per month.
The savings does not even pay the cost of interest to finance such a venture.
And let’s be realistic: How much electricity does he really get from the solar panels
… and of course, don’t forget the cost to maintain everything.
A kilowatt-hour is a unit of energy (not power) that is used by electric companies, but seldom by scientists. Kilowatts are power units, and kilowatt-hours are kilowatts multiplied by hours. Power is energy divided by time, so power multiplied by time is energy. Kilowatt-hours is a power unit (kilowatts) multiplied by a time unit (hours), so it is an energy unit. One kilowatt-hour equals 3,600,000 joules.
A 100 watt light bulb uses 0.1 kilowatts of power. Burning the light bulb for 10 hours uses 0.1 kilowatts multiplied by 10 hours, which equals 1 kilowatt-hour of energy. The electric company will then charge for a kilowatt-hour of electricity.
December 22nd, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Kudos to Nantuckets for trying to save the planet. So he isn’t going to realize any savings right now, but over time, it will recoup some of the money invested. If every business and person on the planet does just one thing, it will eventually be cumulative and make a huge difference.
As far as the City is concerned, I say how dare they stop their citizens from trying to save the planet. Besides I think the wind turbines are nice looking..
December 30th, 2009 at 9:20 am
The real problem isnt a towns poor attitude or the need to “save the planet”. If you want to find out how to fix the worlds problems, you need to start by fixing the monetary policies starting with disolving the Privately owned federal reserve. That criminal entity started by the Rockefeller & Rothchild families has robbed us all blind and created an Oil/currency monolopy that inhibits the things we need such as cheaper alternative fuels, power sources and believe it or not FOOD.
I’m certainly not against wind, solar and alternative power, but you need to know that we the people arent killing the planet, its the criminals holding back the energy technology that would actually solve the problems but put themselves out of bussiness. The stories of oil companies eliminating sources of energy that would help us, are real, solutions have been denied to the millions of Americans and billions around the world. Why? Because its not profitable.
Its apalling in some respectes that we have a meeting of the world leaders and yet thousands are starving every day. The amount of jet fuel consumed to have the meeting that was planned to “Save the world” could have easily fed 1.5 million people for a month. I always say-”Beware of the do-gooders, they often do more harm then good”
December 30th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
I would venture a guess that this restaurant owner will profit by the inefficient venture – spending $104,000 to save 12 KW — because of the PR that goes with it. He gains public approval, which is worth a lot. Then if there is a controversy and the local paper covers it, he gets lots of free publicity, which in turn can save him advertising dollars. I would say that if the band wagon is popular, it’s a good idea to get on it, however mythical the whole alternative power issue might be.
January 7th, 2010 at 12:43 pm
You need to read the article. He did not invest $104,000 to save $561.60 a month. WE paid for this with our stimulus money. Now the question is, do I want my children, grandchildren to lower this man’s restaurant costs. I don’t think so.