diy solar

diy solar

What Can I personally do to help against climate change?

I had a chat yesterday with the much better half and we have agreed to pursue a few specific options, which I am now going to research. The first two are:

1. Move our hot water storage tank energy from the overnight off-peak grid energy and onto our regular daytime tariff when our solar PV can supply most of the energy. Our solar PV can supply 70-80% of the HW energy demand, grid supplemental energy required for the balance. Currently our excess solar PV is exported to the grid, which offsets grid fossil fuel, but it also offsets grid daytime renewables.

So while this represents no difference in energy consumption, because the carbon emissions intensity of our daytime and night time grids are different, with night being almost all coal power while daytime grid has a much higher supply of renewables (and growing every day), this will have a net emissions reduction benefit. I estimate the benefit to be a reduction of 1.5-2 tonnes of CO2 emissions/year. I'm also working to do this in as a cost neutral way as possible.

2. Improve insulation at one end of the house. Our home is thermally pretty crap, and in many ways we can't do a lot about it due to its construction. This is our household electrical energy split:

fqGFb3T - Imgur.png
If we can reduce aircon (heating and cooling) energy consumption by say 25%, then that will have a net emissions reduction benefit of about 3-4 tonnes CO2/year (accounting for average grid emissions intensity for times the heating and cooling are required).

Of the others, The pool pump is now powered off-grid via the repurposed DIY pre-loved solar PV system I installed. It replaced using the grid tied solar PV which frees up solar PV energy for the hot water system. Considering the emissions intensity of the grid at time of use, this reduced emissions by ~0.5 tonnes CO2/year. The pre-loved solar kit would have already repaid its embedded emissions (one of the benefits of re-using stuff instead of recycling it).

I have some other options to consider as well. One involves our vehicle.
 
Updated Index to Ideas
The best ideas will not only be good for the environment but also save you money! Here's a list of those with little (if any) austerity:
Reordered them a bit, Let me know if I missed any!
 
Last edited:

Cool Roofs​


I forgot about this until @wattmatters commented about the albedo for Air Conditioning. I did that!

If seeing is believing, here are some panels on my Tropi-cool roof (90% initial solar reflectance, 85% after 3 years). The heat under the panels is from the heat radiated by the panels baking in the Florida sunshine. At the time I was more interested in panel temperatures, but you can see how cool the roof is in comparison to them:

capture-png.5888


It's more than being "white" paint. I've seen Ultrabright white roof coatings as low as 70%, all white coatings are not equal and why I went with Tropi-Cool (see the CRRC data).

Even better, I got credits back from the local utility for doing it!

The problem with the silicon coating is dirt sticks to it, we get a lot of rain which helps keep it clean. There are acrylic roof coatings that don't have the same "tack" as silicone and do a good job with reflection, but they only last a half dozen years. Silicon should be around 25 years.
 
Last edited:
This thread is much more civilized than the other climate change thread.

If people want to do something about climate change, they need reliable information.
And people should be able to interact like adults.

Part of the reason I decided to get solar and drive EVs is because I want to help the environment.
I am beginning to realize that a lot of people who are in to solar and EVs don't give a crap about helping the environment.
 
Please try and keep posts on-topic, it's about what individuals can do assuming climate change is real. Please post questions/discussions about if climate change is real or not to other threads (e.g., Can Solar & Wind Fix Everything (e.g., Climate Change) with a battery break-through?), the humor in the humor forum, and please let's not feed the trolls and make even more work for the mods.

I understand anything about climate change can be overpowering when you've got something to say... that's all cool... but please say it in an appropriate thread or start your own thread to discuss it.

Thanks! ?


This thread is much more civilized than the other climate change thread.
This isn't a thread about climate change per se (see the OP) ... but a big (y) to the moderators for keeping it on track & civilized!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
put on a hat & sweater and turn down the thermostat, fly less or not-at-all
 
Fat people are bad for the environment.
haha :)

Updated Index to Ideas
The best ideas will not only be good for the environment but also save you money! Here's a list of those with little (if any) austerity:
Reordered them a bit, Let me know if I missed any!

+ Buy lots of natural land do absolutely nothing with it, put it in a perpetual trust so that future generations can't touch it.
 
+ Buy lots of natural land do absolutely nothing with it, put it in a perpetual trust so that future generations can't touch it.
Seems you wouldn't even have to do nothing with it so long as the things you do do don't diminish the ability of the land/flora to pull carbon from the atmosphere, or increase your own carbon footprint to the point that it no longer makes sense.

But, the more I think about it, this doesn't actually help/improve anything in and of itself. Because basically what you are doing buy buying a piece of land and not changing it is preserving the status quo. Now, this will eventually have a positive impact if we assume that that land would be developed at some point. But that is very dependent on the assumption that that land would be developed in the near future, if it wouldn't--and a lot of the land that people buy to just leave undisturbed (cheap land in the desert, hunting land, unbuildable/inaccessible land)--your action would have no net positive or negative effect. It would have the feeling of doing something because you now own it, but if the likelihood of it being developed was low, there would not be any net positive. For this strategy to be effective, you would have to buy land that would otherwise be likely to be developed/destroyed and buy land with a high capacity to pull carbon from the atmosphere (like a chunk of the amazon for instance), or you would have to buy land with a low capacity to do this and re-forest it. Just buying 10 or 100 or 1000 acres in Nebraska or Nevada, or Arizona would not in and of itself be a net positive.

At least that is the way it seems to me.
 
Seems you wouldn't even have to do nothing with it so long as the things you do do don't diminish the ability of the land/flora to pull carbon from the atmosphere, or increase your own carbon footprint to the point that it no longer makes sense.

But, the more I think about it, this doesn't actually help/improve anything in and of itself. Because basically what you are doing buy buying a piece of land and not changing it is preserving the status quo. Now, this will eventually have a positive impact if we assume that that land would be developed at some point. But that is very dependent on the assumption that that land would be developed in the near future, if it wouldn't--and a lot of the land that people buy to just leave undisturbed (cheap land in the desert, hunting land, unbuildable/inaccessible land)--your action would have no net positive or negative effect. It would have the feeling of doing something because you now own it, but if the likelihood of it being developed was low, there would not be any net positive. For this strategy to be effective, you would have to buy land that would otherwise be likely to be developed/destroyed and buy land with a high capacity to pull carbon from the atmosphere (like a chunk of the amazon for instance), or you would have to buy land with a low capacity to do this and re-forest it. Just buying 10 or 100 or 1000 acres in Nebraska or Nevada, or Arizona would not in and of itself be a net positive.

At least that is the way it seems to me.

I would definitely say, buy desertified land, and start a project to de-desertify it, yeah like you are indicating...
 
This would just be an extremely satisfying achievement on many levels!

Or can do what our agriculture cooperative is doing (since it is harder to afford to do on an individual level). Our group of shareholders started the Utah OSR Land Co-op, purchased a 1245 acre land in the middle of nowhere (BLM lands all around it), and we are selling up to 250 shares/lots, and our plans are to develop the lands into an eco-friendly modern community of off-grid permaculture farmers who are like-minded individuals, and eventually we hope to get to a point where we could help to develop the surrounding lands with more trees, plant-life, and ground cover as well.

Wish us luck, because this is like a minimum 30-year project and all obstacles are against us, but we still believe we can make some sort of positive difference as we roll along... We have sold 90 shares so far and around 15 families living out there full time at present.

1638757282271.jpeg

1638757298359.jpeg

1638757427305.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Seems you wouldn't even have to do nothing with it so long as the things you do do don't diminish the ability of the land/flora to pull carbon from the atmosphere, or increase your own carbon footprint to the point that it no longer makes sense.
in my part of the world when you leave stuff alone it's overgrown rather quickly.
My point is that humanity as whole has a pretty a good ability to make mistakes. Even the most well meant intentions - 50-100 years down the line we discover that it was a stupid idea, whatever sounded great way back then.

By conserving pockets of land and doing absolute nothing with it, we avoid all those potential mistakes.

I would definitely say, buy desertified land, and start a project to de-desertify it, yeah like you are indicating...

In my neighborhood (Florida) a farm got abandoned like 3-4 years ago. It was completely deserted - only sand, destroyed ground.
Nature recaptured it in record time. Without any help. Grasses came back, then shrubs and the first trees are now growing.

But I can see your point some lands need more help getting started back to health.
 
I'd say it depends on the "net"... what's the expected decline in GHGs by the improvements in the next 50 years versus the GHGs created to get those improvements. The "best" projects would be the ones with the most significant reductions. Of course, if you're getting the land to prevent someone else from doing something that increases GHGs (e.g., cut down forests and raise cattle) that's a win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
I'm soon to install a smart power diverter for my resistive element hot water storage system.

It monitors for excess solar PV (exports to the grid) from my grid-tied solar PV system and adjusts the amount of power sent to the tank's heating element so as to minimise power exported to the grid (until the tank's thermostat cuts off the power). It uses a burst fire method to adjust the power level (other similar products use PWM to control the power).

It's an Australian product from a company located only a 2-3 hours drive from where I live, so I figured I'd support a local:

Currently my hot water is powered via a dedicated off-peak circuit which operates overnight (mostly) and uses grid power. This circuit is controlled by the utility via a ripple control relay.

Overnight our grid is mostly coal powered (85% to 95% of overnight supply), a little hydro and some wind but coal dominates and so my hot water energy is fossil fuel and emissions heavy. The daytime grid however is less emissions intensive and coal is more like 40% to 55% of supply.

The diverter will instead use my solar PV output to heat the water rather than export that energy to the daytime grid. Since the daytime grid has a far higher proportion of renewables in the supply (and often renewable supply gets curtailed), exporting my solar PV at that time is offsetting much less coal. So using energy in the daytime it's a net gain on emissions compared with at night.

I estimate the net CO2 emissions reduction will be about 1 tonne/year.

Cost wise the overnight off-peak electricity costs more than we get back for our daytime exported energy, so that's a plus, operationally at least. It'll take a while to recover the cost of the diverter though. How long depends on what retail electricity plan I go with. Increasing self consumption of our solar PV opens up other opportunities to save money with alternative retails plans.
 
It seems that individual homestead/household/individual can become carbon neutral, albeit with some effort, but completely doable, via sufficient residential solarPV installation. The challenge is to scale up. Just drove ~2000 e-mile from CA to Houston in a Tesla, it's just amazing how many vast empty sunny acres in Arizona and Texas. Plus there's a lot wind over those vast plains. It's totally doable.
 

Get the Word out!

I was talking to a relative yesterday about the migration away from
fossil fuels.

They were convinced it couldn't happen. Given HB741 passing, they
might even be right.

While I suspect that almost everyone is aware of the climate change
issue these days, I don't think a lot of people are aware there is a
national strategy or that it needs their help.

As a nation, we're not yet pulling together as we need to be.
It's not a topic we can afford to be divided about or treat with the
usual politics. As with any war-time footing, we need to pull together.

People are either willfully ignorant (e.g., the "peace-niks" of our
time claiming there is no problem (link)), those vehemently opposed
because their business interest and wealth would be affected,
or because they are war-weary after fighting for so long and seeing
so little change.

Sam: Yeah, boss?
Rick: If it's December 1941 in Casablanca, what time is it in New York?
Sam: Uh, my watch stopped.
Rick: I bet they're asleep in New York. I bet they're asleep all over America.
[America entered WW2 that month after the Japanese bombed Pearl harbor.]
1647690990637.png

So what can we do?
We can get the word out that the real WW3 is already being waged. It's not about political ideology or borders. That it needs to be an issue at the forefront, and that we can win if we work together. That it will hopefully be the last of such wars and herald a new age of prosperity.
 
It seems that individual homestead/household/individual can become carbon neutral, albeit with some effort, but completely doable, via sufficient residential solarPV installation. The challenge is to scale up. Just drove ~2000 e-mile from CA to Houston in a Tesla, it's just amazing how many vast empty sunny acres in Arizona and Texas. Plus there's a lot wind over those vast plains. It's totally doable.
I've lived in an Arizona desert. Ya really have to want to be there. Water sourcing becomes an issue as well. I didn't enjoy the experience and won't be returning.

But basically I agree. There is land and sunshine to be had. The biggest problem seems to be folks trying to control the planet instead of showing respect and working with nature.
 
I've lived in an Arizona desert. Ya really have to want to be there. Water sourcing becomes an issue as well. I didn't enjoy the experience and won't be returning.

But basically I agree. There is land and sunshine to be had. The biggest problem seems to be folks trying to control the planet instead of showing respect and working with nature.
Humans are hard wired to pick the lowest hanging fruit first.

When ease of access becomes a threat to our own survival, we must force ourselves to change. Unfortunately, this also means forcing change upon those who actively and militantly resist change..
 
I agree there is a lot people can do. But you can't just turn the spigot off when the infrastructure to make it happen just isn't there. People don't like things shoved down their throat. Which is what is happening now. I would love to have solar and an electric car but the cost are prohibitive. I can't build my own solar and can't afford the $30+k I was quoted. Nor can I afford a 70k electric car. So forcing fossil fuel prices up Which effects evey manufacturing company only forces all prices up. So now we can't afford food or essentials to live.

So the USA is already the cleanest most carbon neutral country but we don't manufacture here anymore. Is all gone to the dirty carbon producing countries, because the cost is cheaper. And why is it cheaper they don't care about the environment or using fossil fuels.

So how can everyone help with climate change stop buying from China, India etc, only buy USA made.
Oh wait we don't make solar here or windmills or batteries etc. So trying to save the environment actually probably produces more pollution then it saves because we are all buying from countries that do not take the environment seriously.

So I'm back to putting a lit match to my butt when I fart to burn off the methane, as what I can do to fight climate change.
 
I agree there is a lot people can do. But you can't just turn the spigot off when the infrastructure to make it happen just isn't there. People don't like things shoved down their throat. Which is what is happening now. I would love to have solar and an electric car but the cost are prohibitive. I can't build my own solar and can't afford the $30+k I was quoted. Nor can I afford a 70k electric car. So forcing fossil fuel prices up Which effects evey manufacturing company only forces all prices up. So now we can't afford food or essentials to live.
I would think that the more electric cars sold, the more petroleum fuel prices should fall.. Especially when they start selling electric trucks to replace the gas guzzling soccer mom and dad use to go back and forth to work with.

So the USA is already the cleanest most carbon neutral country
In what drug induced alternate reality universe did you get that load of misinformation garbage from? Not even close.

but we don't manufacture here anymore. Is all gone to the dirty carbon producing countries, because the cost is cheaper. And why is it cheaper they don't care about the environment or using fossil fuels.
Nope.. The cost is cheaper because the labor is cheaper.. Employees don't unionize, sue their own employers, or do all the other "spoiled entitlement" behaviors Americans do. Their employers also don't have to pay unemployment, social security, stupid insurance, and a variety of other legally mandated things.. American's demanded those things, we got what we asked for. Remember that the next time you read about someone slipping on a sidewalk and suing the business.. or spilling hot coffee on themselves and suing the business. It has absolutely NOTHING, ZERO, to do with a company's cost for environmental regulations.

In fact, most pollution controls are not even a significant investment for companies.. And I know.. My family's own company ran industrial ovens that exhausted gasses that had to be curtailed via the EPA guidelines.. The cost of installing and running after-burners was pretty minimal. I also did some engineering work with a plating company just down the road from us.. same deal. They had to cut emissions out of a waste water stream.. and again, the cost was minimal.

Stop reading all the wacko right wing crap.. they're lying to you.. pure and simple.
So how can everyone help with climate change stop buying from China, India etc, only buy USA made.
Buying USA made products is always a good thing.. but it has nothing to do with climate change. YOU driving your car does.. YOU keeping your home at 70+ degrees in the winter does.. YOU turning on the air conditioner because its "a bit warm outside" does.. YOU are the cause of climate change, not china, india, or any other country.

But the wack job websites won't tell you that.. and no politician WILL EVER EVER come out and say something is YOUR fault and YOU need to chage YOUR behaviors. Never going to happen.

Oh wait we don't make solar here or windmills or batteries etc.
Yes we do.. once again, your information is wrong.
So trying to save the environment actually probably produces more pollution then it saves because we are all buying from countries that do not take the environment seriously.

So I'm back to putting a lit match to my butt when I fart to burn off the methane, as what I can do to fight climate change.
NOPE.. WRONG WRONG AND WRONG AGAIN..

How the hell did you survive puberty?
 
Back
Top