Is Solar really worth it?

[mcrover]

Got a quote on fitting solar to the sheds at work and the club house the other day........not happy really and hopefully someone here will know of a more reasonable way to go.

Ok to start with they didnt like it that the shed is about 200m away from the clubhouse where the meter is and then there is the golf ball issue.......:(

Then the price.......he started off by talking about domestic house systems at around $4000 and I was thinking thats sort of reasonable but then we hit the usage hurdle.

Do cover 3/4 of what we use the system would cost (after a gov rebate for being a community building if we qualify) $50+k and save us approx.....$540 per annum.

Meaning it would take 95 years to break even.

Now this is all just estimated at the moment, how do you work it out to be more accurate as I cant take it to the commitee and say I want to spend $50k on something that will not really save us any money and will take 100years to recover the money.

Can you depreciate a Solar system over a certain time frame to make it worth while?

Is there better systems out there that would atleast save us a bit more than $540 per year on power, this wont even cover the electric carts we have and Im wanting to move to as many electric machines as possible for noise reasons as well as enviromental reasons.

[isuzurover]

Solar (photovoltaic), while a good option, is the most expensive (currently available option). It relies on rebates to make it anywhere near attractive, and these have been cut back (at least domestically). Large scale generation costs are approx 4c/kWh for coal, and 25c/kWh for photovoltaic.

There is a fair bit of competition these days (especially now the rebates are halved) so it would be worth getting a few quotes.

How windy is it where you are? Would a wind generator be worth looking at??? Large systems work out around 12c/kWh. If you are worried about aesthetics, you can get vertical (VAWT) systems which are shaped a bit like an ice cream cone.

I cannot comment on any depreciation/tax issues. However, could you sell it on the PR value??? People might prefer playing on a "greener" green (pardon the pun ;) :D ).

Btw - out of interest, Red or Green?

[JDNSW]

As indicated above, by Isuzurover, photovoltaic is inherently much more expensive than anything else! There is no way you will ever justify it on a financial basis.

Except, you can reasonably expect all non - renewable methods of electricity generation to get a lot more expensive in the future, and in a lot less than 95 years. What electricity cost were you using to calculate the annual saving? To be realistic you would have to use an escalating figure, rising to perhaps double the current one (plus inflation) within ten years, and continuing to rise after that. This is how a photovoltaic system starts to look better.

Even with this I would expect the best breakeven period would be around ten to twenty years.

John

[mcrover]

Solar (photovoltaic), while a good option, is the most expensive (currently available option). It relies on rebates to make it anywhere near attractive, and these have been cut back (at least domestically). Large scale generation costs are approx 4c/kWh for coal, and 25c/kWh for photovoltaic.

There is a fair bit of competition these days (especially now the rebates are halved) so it would be worth getting a few quotes.

How windy is it where you are? Would a wind generator be worth looking at??? Large systems work out around 12c/kWh. If you are worried about aesthetics, you can get vertical (VAWT) systems which are shaped a bit like an ice cream cone.

I cannot comment on any depreciation/tax issues. However, could you sell it on the PR value??? People might prefer playing on a "greener" green (pardon the pun ;) :D ).

Btw - out of interest, Red or Green?


Im assuming you are meaning grass greens or scrapes?

They are Green, very very green at the moment actually, we just cored and fertilised and the bloke doing the fertiliser put out about 4 times too much on 3 of the greens meaning they nearly glow in the dark they are sooooo green.

The PR was one of the reasons we were thinking about it and yes there is value in that seems that we now have 3 other courses in the area that were'nt there 10 years ago and we are all fighting for the same little white ball whackers money to keep going.

My reason is for the machinery side of things, we now have houses on all 4 sides of the course and they will start getting narky with us mowing at 5:30am on a sat morning so I was pushing for an electric mower to replace our now old and wearing out GK6.

The electric equipment doesnt just save money on fuel, they are lower maintenance as all you need to maintain in the drive train is brushes and the batteries I have made last for 6 years in previous machines I maintained at other courses so Im sure it would work well for us.

It's just the electric stuff is more expensive and the solar was hopefully going to be the sweetner to get it over the line but it doesnt look as though this will happen at the moment anyway.

They also have some great electric transport vehicles these days which are just as good as the petrol versions (unlike the old ones that were either slow and didnt last long or very very heavy) which the boss likes but again they are a few grand more exxy so again I was hopeing that the solar would sweeten that pie as well.

Wind isnt really the go, we do get our fair share but I wouldnt say it was regular like on the coast.

There is a Hydro set up that I looked up in which it used the incoming water to the dam system (which includes irrigation return and storm water in our case) to turn a turbine which made electricity which then helped off set the cost of running the irrigtion system (this was from the states) but I dont think it would be close to the scale that we would need.

[Blknight.aus]

if your only using it for charging sniff around government websites for ex gov auctions and telstra auctions....

If memory serves we should be getting close to either the 10 or 5 year interval when they replace all the panels on the remote monitoring stuff...

I got 210ish watts worth for under $50... including 2 regulators

that should be enough to charge a couple of decent batteries...

[zelko]

Hey mate

What is your usage, kw per day and what size system has he quoted you on.

Zelko

[mcrover]

if your only using it for charging sniff around government websites for ex gov auctions and telstra auctions....

If memory serves we should be getting close to either the 10 or 5 year interval when they replace all the panels on the remote monitoring stuff...

I got 210ish watts worth for under $50... including 2 regulators

that should be enough to charge a couple of decent batteries...

There are 6 batteries in each buggy and 12 buggies that would be on it as well as the mower and transport vehicals would be another 4 battery banks of 6 each (48 Volts)

We will need a pretty big array apparently to cover that.

But thanks Dave, where is it that you get them? is it at auction or do you get it though an internal sorce?



Hey mate

What is your usage, kw per day and what size system has he quoted you on.

Zelko

I cant remember off hand, Ive been sick all week but went in today to catch up and didnt even look at that stuff.

When I get back to work next week I will look it up and let you know.

[Blknight.aus]

my panels all turned up at a pickles site, a couple in darwin and the others in townsville.

I didnt need the bigger ones which were essentially up to 8 of the 70 w panels Ive got mounted on a frame with a kick ass regulator.

my single panel will charge a 12v n70 in a day from about 9v to 12.5ish v. thats the one that I took to cooma.

[mcrover]

Id need 64 of those panels then to charge everything in a day but then again it's not all used at once so maybe be able to halve that to say 30/32 something like that.

The other problem is that they are all 48v systems on chargers that need 240 50hz so I would need to invert it or feed back to grid and just pull from the grid as per usuall (or maybe fit a timer or 2 to feed the chargers off peak to then drop the amount needed again but Im not sure by how much).

I will keep an eye on pickles auctions then, that would make it worth while.

[EchiDna]

there is always Welcome to Platypus Power - Micro Hydro Electric Generator Factory (http://www.platypuspower.com.au) - micro hydro and aussie... ;) but maybe tooo micro....

[mcrover]

there is always Welcome to Platypus Power - Micro Hydro Electric Generator Factory (http://www.platypuspower.com.au) - micro hydro and aussie... ;) but maybe tooo micro....

Thats much like the system I mentioned in the earlier post to put on the intake pipe on the dam and the return from the irrigation system.

[isuzurover]

Im assuming you are meaning grass greens or scrapes?

Actually, I meant Deere or Toro. Have done consulting for the latter. They are very keen to improve their environmental footprint, so may be willing to assist.




Wind isnt really the go, we do get our fair share but I wouldnt say it was regular like on the coast.


Might still be worth getting someone to crunch some numbers and give you a quote. Offender90 on here should have some contacts in that area.

[lewy]

i am sure i am missing something here,those vehicles you mentioned to be charged will be in use in daytime hours and be charged at night when there is no sun,does the system store the power through the day and discharge at night

[mcrover]

Actually, I meant Deere or Toro. Have done consulting for the latter. They are very keen to improve their environmental footprint, so may be willing to assist.

We dont have any John Deere Equipment, they have a lot of good equipment but it doesnt nessesarilly suit our course and budget.

We do have some Toro stuff, our new Spray rig is on a Toro 3300 workman primemover, We have 5 GR1000 walkbehind pedestrian mowers, 2 Toro Sandpro Bunker rakes and a GM6500 Fairway mower.

The rest of our stuff is mainly Jacobsen (Orange).

Might still be worth getting someone to crunch some numbers and give you a quote. Offender90 on here should have some contacts in that area.


i am sure i am missing something here,those vehicles you mentioned to be charged will be in use in daytime hours and be charged at night when there is no sun,does the system store the power through the day and discharge at night

Yes your right but most are only used 1 or 2 days a week so there is plenty of time to charge up (another 5 or 6 days to charge up) but there is the opertunity to feed back to the grid during the day and draw off in the off peak times.

The later is the least economical for the user but is probably the most enviromentally freindly due to the power created will deffinatly be used.

[stuee]

The later is the least economical for the user but is probably the most enviromentally freindly due to the power created will deffinatly be used.

When we have the carbon trading scheme forced upon us could you not use the solar panels to reduce your carbon footprint and pay less tax. Being a golf course I imagine it should be pretty low anyway (all that grass :D). If your really keen on the solar or other renewable sources perhaps you could use the new tax as a driver/excuse to get a renewable system installed.

[mcrover]

When we have the carbon trading scheme forced upon us could you not use the solar panels to reduce your carbon footprint and pay less tax. Being a golf course I imagine it should be pretty low anyway (all that grass :D). If your really keen on the solar or other renewable sources perhaps you could use the new tax as a driver/excuse to get a renewable system installed.

Yeah well this is a bit of a shakey subject when it comes down to sporting fields and Golfcourses.

The thing is that even though All types of grass convert carbon it wont count in the carbon trading sceme as it stands at the moment.

This is a bit of a sore point more on sporting fields as there is not many ways a sporting field can grow tree's to off set their carbon usage as small as it is (Diesel for mowers, petrol for rollers and other small equiment e.g. line markers etc and electricity for lighting and running or the clubrooms etc).

We have on average 1000 more tree's per acre than what we should have as far as a golf course land usage goes but only about 1/3 of those trees will count with the carbon credits sceme as they have to be within a certain age (3yo to 30yo depending on type of tree as well).

We have spent a massive amount of money so far on doing a tree audit as a start to a complete enviromental audit which will be my best chance at getting some alternative technology into the place but as it stands, the government wont subsidise alternative energy for us so there is no economical advantage.

I was helping out a mate on another course today who is preparing to run some of his fleet on Bio Diesel.

At the moment all off road vehicals get a 19c per ltr off on normal dino diesel but comertial Bio is only about 10c cheaper than the normal bulk price but the gov wont give the same rebate on Bio as they will Dino plus because the comertial bio suppliers are relatively small they have to charge a fairly hefty delivery charge which pretty much eats away the 10c discount so subsequently you using a bit more, paying 19c more for it and you have to pay money to convert your machinery to use it.

Bloody hard to see the value in that as well.

The Gov isnt making it easy for us to clean up our act.

So much for going green, all businesses are in business to make money.....at least enough to keep running but how are we meant to move forward in a responsible way if it just keeps becoming more and more expensive to do.

The other thing a found out today is that we will soon be charged a premium to dispose of lead acid batteries.

They are blaming enviromental presures for that as well but that means that this will work against me and others like me who wish to use electric machines in the future.

The more I get into it, the more disappointed and angry it is making me.

I think im going to give up with it all soon and worry about it when we absolutly have to.

[1103.9TDI]

....the low Aussie dollar isn't going to help either...

[isuzurover]

Being a golf course I imagine it should be pretty low anyway (all that grass :D).

Actually, you might be surprised... Most golf courses use a lot of water and a lot of fertiliser. Fertiliser use releases greenhouse gases (N2O, CO2 etc...), and producing/pumping water requires energy, which also equates to GHGs.

Solar panels have indeed probably gone up recently... Whereas the cost of buying green power has probably stayed the same...

McRover - how about looking into Natural Gas vehicles? Then you can compost your waste and capture the CH4 to use as biogas ;)






We have on average 1000 more tree's per acre than what we should have as far as a golf course land usage goes but only about 1/3 of those trees will count with the carbon credits sceme as they have to be within a certain age (3yo to 30yo depending on type of tree as well).


You sure about that??? Sure, most CO2 sequestration occurs over the first 30 years, however this continues until 80+ years. No reason you can't plan commercially valuable trees and harvest them at 30yo???

[mcrover]

Actually, you might be surprised... Most golf courses use a lot of water and a lot of fertiliser. Fertiliser use releases greenhouse gases (N2O, CO2 etc...), and producing/pumping water requires energy, which also equates to GHGs.

Solar panels have indeed probably gone up recently... Whereas the cost of buying green power has probably stayed the same...

McRover - how about looking into Natural Gas vehicles? Then you can compost your waste and capture the CH4 to use as biogas ;)


You sure about that??? Sure, most CO2 sequestration occurs over the first 30 years, however this continues until 80+ years. No reason you can't plan commercially valuable trees and harvest them at 30yo???


As far as Bio gas goes, I havnt looked into it but thats a possability.

As far as the tree's go, thats what we have been told is going to happen so we are looking at ways to make it work for us but establishing trees in new areas takes time which Golfers dont like so that is a major reason why we are not looking at commertial type crops of trees.

Your right about the energy usage and the fertaliser etc which is why we want to be able to offset the carbon emissions.

The turf does convert carbon the same as any other plant though, some species better than others in specific areas but the gov wont allow us at this stage to include turfed areas in our enviromental audit.

[JDNSW]

.........
The turf does convert carbon the same as any other plant though, some species better than others in specific areas but the gov wont allow us at this stage to include turfed areas in our enviromental audit.

Soil carbon sequestration (which is what you probably get mainly from the grass) is not going to be counted at all, mainly because it is too poorly understood to estimate with any accuracy. This means that although many farming practices (e.g. zero till) would greatly increase this, there is no incentive for farmers to use these practices. Of course, those of us who have large areas of trees we are not allowed to use or clear are providing major carbon sinks with no credit for it at all, so what's new?

John

[isuzurover]

Soil carbon sequestration (which is what you probably get mainly from the grass) is not going to be counted at all, mainly because it is too poorly understood to estimate with any accuracy. This means that although many farming practices (e.g. zero till) would greatly increase this, there is no incentive for farmers to use these practices. Of course, those of us who have large areas of trees we are not allowed to use or clear are providing major carbon sinks with no credit for it at all, so what's new?

John

The CPRS put agriculture in the too hard basket - even though there are plenty of groups including some of my colleagues, and collaborators at the WA Ag department obtaining accurate data for various cropping systems, etc...

"Large areas of trees" however do not sequester much carbon if they are old growth. Rainforests emit as much as they sequester. "Managed" forests sequester the most (not that I am advocating logging in old growth forests).

[EchiDna]

hmm...

seems we should start up an AULRO environmental/CDM/carbon trading consultancy team :)

[isuzurover]

hmm...

seems we should start up an AULRO environmental/CDM/carbon trading consultancy team :)

Sounds like it ;)

Funnily enough, when I looked at your post I saw this ad in the ad bar:


Trade Carbon in Australia
The 1st Emissions Trading Exchange in Australia. Trade now on the ACX!
ACX - Australian Climate Exchange (http://www.ClimateExchange.com.au)

A mate of mine and former colleague works for them.

[EchiDna]

I got this one:

Google Carbon Calculator (http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/iclk'sa=l&ai=BLWCCx6QaSbqnF5L-uQP4mdyXCdj-0UWQn73vA8CNtwHAm18QAxgDIILWowUoAzgAUPrDo9D-_____wFgu76ug9AKoAGm0e3-A7IBDXd3dy5hdWxyby5jb226AQk3Mjh4OTBfYXPIAQHaAUxodH RwOi8vd3d3LmF1bHJvLmNvbS9hZnZiL2FsdGVybmF0ZS1lbmVy Z2llcy82NTkwNS1zb2xhci1yZWFsbHktd29ydGgtMy5odG1sqA MByAMH6APuBegDrwboA-4CmAQA&num=3&ggladgrp=6412926126826585828&gglcreat=15551731277058086943&adurl=http://www.google.co.uk/carbonfootprint/index.html%23utm_source=en-emea-uk-ha-goog&utm_medium=ha&utm_campaign=google&source=cfha&client=ca-pub-3748326773257940&nm=12) Calculate Your Carbon Footprint & Put Yourself On The Map
Google.co.uk/CarbonFootprint

I hate cookies sometimes...

[JDNSW]

The CPRS put agriculture in the too hard basket - even though there are plenty of groups including some of my colleagues, and collaborators at the WA Ag department obtaining accurate data for various cropping systems, etc...

"Large areas of trees" however do not sequester much carbon if they are old growth. Rainforests emit as much as they sequester. "Managed" forests sequester the most (not that I am advocating logging in old growth forests).

What I live next to is not old growth - it has grown up in the last hundred years, although most has grown in the last fifty. Last year a large proportion of the carbon held was reconverted to carbon dioxide, leaving, in some areas, bare ground which was actually red where it got hot enough to even burn the top layer of topsoil, although a lot of it had a thin veneer of carbon and a few standing trunks. Having seen this, I have to wonder how permanent most of the forest sequestration is over much of Australia - sooner or later there is a hot fire that converts most of it back to CO2

John

[mcrover]

What I live next to is not old growth - it has grown up in the last hundred years, although most has grown in the last fifty. Last year a large proportion of the carbon held was reconverted to carbon dioxide, leaving, in some areas, bare ground which was actually red where it got hot enough to even burn the top layer of topsoil, although a lot of it had a thin veneer of carbon and a few standing trunks. Having seen this, I have to wonder how permanent most of the forest sequestration is over much of Australia - sooner or later there is a hot fire that converts most of it back to CO2

John

Yep John, well said :D

I have argued that from a bush fire point of veiw to supporting percieved non green groups such as selective logging, the cattleman Farming and the golf industry.

We're used to being the last ones to be consulted about all of this even though the so called "Green Belt" is what all these groups manage on a daily basis and know how to achieve what they are asking but they are still asking the wrong questions and the wrong people to get the answers that will really help us from my point of veiw.

[EchiDna]

ah but fires are typically an 'act of God' not of man... so it would be just like owning a sinking boat - your investment in the sequestered carbon becomes valueless. You could argue that it is a write-off to the insurance company then ask for the right to recover the "goods" by growing new trees, and hence increasing the value again with newly sequestered carbon to trade, this could then be harvested every 30 years or so and the proceeds used as income.... replant... continue the cycle....

[Bushwanderer]

The reason grass is excluded is that it is almost 100% mature, and so ALL extra carbon used in further growth is removed by cutting.

What happens to your grass cuttings?

Further, fertiliser produces greenhouse emissions while encouraging extra growth in order for you to cut the grass more often.

Hardly a greenhouse-sustainable industry. :eek:

[Bushwanderer]

Hi JD,
Yes, burning of trees does release greenhouse gasses, which should be taken account of in the "burn" maps (or whatever they're called).

This is also a reason why the "end use" of "forests" is important. The carbon needs to remain 'locked up' for their positive greenhouse effect to be there over time.



B

[JDNSW]

The reason grass is excluded is that it is almost 100% mature, and so ALL extra carbon used in further growth is removed by cutting.

What happens to your grass cuttings?

Further, fertiliser produces greenhouse emissions while encouraging extra growth in order for you to cut the grass more often.

Hardly a greenhouse-sustainable industry. :eek:

Depends on the grass - perennial grasses have most of their growth below ground, with root systems up to two metres or more deep in the right soil. Most of that carbon eventually becomes part of the soil carbon, from which it is removed only very slowly, if at all, in a reasonable length of time.

John

[mcrover]

The reason grass is excluded is that it is almost 100% mature, and so ALL extra carbon used in further growth is removed by cutting.

What happens to your grass cuttings?

Further, fertiliser produces greenhouse emissions while encouraging extra growth in order for you to cut the grass more often.

Hardly a greenhouse-sustainable industry. :eek:

Well......are you a horticulturalist?

Im not entirely sure what your saying here but I will try and answer and extend on what your saying.

Grass is 100% mature, is this all the time......then why does it grow in the first place?.....kinda like what came first the chicken or the egg? your saying the chicken and thats not going to grow any more.......doesnt make sense to me.

As far as our clippings, we trim 1/3rd of our plant (leaf only) at any one time, our fairways are pure santa ana couch and our greens are 50% bent/poa blend.

Normal cutting hights are +-1mm 75mm short rough (long rough is not cut at all) 15mm tee surrounds 10mm fairways, 8mm tees/ green surrounds, (2 to 3mm) greens depending on growth.

Our slippings are mostly cought, we have catchers on all machines other than rough mowers and there are few areas other than rough that we dont catch the clip.

The clippings are normally thrown into the long rough to break down naturally.

What your saying about fertiliser I dont understand.

Are you saying that the machinery produses carbon when we fertilise? if so, Nope sorry as we use injection through the irrigation system mostly and if we do granular is is with sand when topdressing anyway, doing 2 jobs at once.

As far as clippings go as fertiliser, its rubbish.

As it's breaking down it creates a black layer in the soil which prevents water from getting down into the sub soil thus why we catch all our trimmed areas and why we top dress.

A lot of golf courses put out carbon on greens etc to attract heat and improove growth and strengthen the cell wall as well as calcium/carbon make the plant more salt tolerant so it can take the high sodium levels in bore and recycled (either treated grey/sewerage or storm) water so it cant be all bad.

Is it solid carbon thats a problem or more carbon dioxide that they are more worried about?

If it's carbon then were stuffed as everything has carbon in it, it is a base element I think from my High school science days.

My point is that all plants are continually growing and converting C02 into oxygen so why remove certain plants from the list.

Ok, if grass produces as much as it uses then for sure but what about all our trees, why because we have gum trees over 30yo do they not count, they are still young in red gum years, shouldnt it go on the variety not just weather it is tree or grass.

We could cut down all the red gums and plant peppermint or swampgums which grow heaps fast but are crap trees, no good for anything and look hidius.

[Bushwanderer]

Hi Mcrover,
Thanks for taking the time to reply to my post and for providing all that extra detail (it gives me a better understanding of the complexity of developing and maintaining a golf course).

I see that my shorthand way of calling the grass "essentially mature" was unclear, perhaps not surprisingly. :( What I meant was that the grass was essentially at the point where any extra growth (which absorbs CO2) was countered by cutting it (which means that the CO2 is released back largely into the atmosphere) meaning that grass has a net zero greenhouse effect and therefore wouldn't be taken into consideration.

In support of this view, below I provide some extracts from a paper by an American (I know :() Jerry Hannan PhD, entitled "Our Role in the "Greenhouse Effect"".

"Carbon dioxide is absorbed by grasses, plants, shrubs, trees and phytoplankton by the process of photosynthesis."
and
"Grass absorbs CO2 but only on a short term basis. Grass clippings decompose or are eaten, but in a relatively short time much of the carbon is released back into the atmosphere as CO2. A more pertinent question would be to ask about the CO2 absorption rate of trees because they are the more permanent absorbers. Trees that have been converted into furniture provide a very long term storage of carbon."

The second extract above supports your view that trees should be taken into account (if they are growing and, therefore, absorbing CO2).

I agree with your view on this, depending on the end use of the trees. I imagine that, on your golf course, they are there for the "long haul" and so their end use could be considered to be "growing trees". I don't know why they are being excluded. Perhaps someone knows the argument that the department uses in this case and would post it for consideration.

Best Wishes,
Peter

[JDNSW]

.....
"Carbon dioxide is absorbed by grasses, plants, shrubs, trees and phytoplankton by the process of photosynthesis."
and
"Grass absorbs CO2 but only on a short term basis. Grass clippings decompose or are eaten, but in a relatively short time much of the carbon is released back into the atmosphere as CO2. A more pertinent question would be to ask about the CO2 absorption rate of trees because they are the more permanent absorbers. Trees that have been converted into furniture provide a very long term storage of carbon.".......
Best Wishes,
Peter

That may apply to American grasses, but is not the case with many perennial Australian native grasses. As I commented above, much of their carbon capture is concentrated in their root system, and when the plant dies, this becomes incorporated in the soil, often being more permanent than a lot of the carbon in the trees, which is largely converted back to carbon dioxide in the next major fire.

John

[isuzurover]

That may apply to American grasses, but is not the case with many perennial Australian native grasses. As I commented above, much of their carbon capture is concentrated in their root system, and when the plant dies, this becomes incorporated in the soil, often being more permanent than a lot of the carbon in the trees, which is largely converted back to carbon dioxide in the next major fire.

John

However in golf courses (even if they are using native grasses) - this would most likely be countered by CO2e emissions from fertilisers and CO2 generated providing the irrigation water.

Interestingly, one of my colleagues recently did a study comparing CO2 emissions from irrigated and non-irrigated tree plantations in WA. The irrigated case had significantly lower emissions, since the (different) fertilisers applied in the non-irrigated case had MUCH higher N2O and CO2 emissions.

[JDNSW]

Actually, I suspect the major part of carbon emissions from fertilisers is typically from the energy that is used to mine, refine, transport and apply the fertilisers. For fertilisers derived from atmospheric nitrogen, replace the "mine, refine" with "synthesise" - probably representing a much larger energy and hence CO2 cost. Compared to the carbon emissions involved in this regard any emissions after application would be negligible - and most fertilisers, by increasing the vigour of the plant growth, would, I think, increase CO2 absorption.

John

[isuzurover]

Actually, I suspect the major part of carbon emissions from fertilisers is typically from the energy that is used to mine, refine, transport and apply the fertilisers. For fertilisers derived from atmospheric nitrogen, replace the "mine, refine" with "synthesise" - probably representing a much larger energy and hence CO2 cost. Compared to the carbon emissions involved in this regard any emissions after application would be negligible - and most fertilisers, by increasing the vigour of the plant growth, would, I think, increase CO2 absorption.

John

Superphosphate fertiliser in OZ works out at 40kg CO2 per tonne (mining to delivery at wholesaler). Though in many cases this is high purity CO2 and is used to make soft drinks fizzy (but still ends up in the atmosphere).

N2O emissions can be quite significant (especially since N2O has significant GHG potential). (West) Australian soil chemistry means that N2O emissions from fertilisers are usually lower than in other countries though (on an identical application rate/HA).

There is some evidence to support your assertion (perennial crops which fix N and C in the soil are likely to have net sequestration (including fertiliser CO2e contributions). However annual crops which are left to decompose or fed to ruminants will have a net emission.

[mcrover]

Now at this point it shows why I chose a path to become a mechanic and not normally have to deal with all this stuff as now my brain hurts thinking about all this.

So all in all, regardless of the fact that we have about 140 acres if green grassy/tree'd area we are still polluters as far as carbon emissions goes.

How are we meant to get closer to a zero Co2 emission level which I think would be benificial to us as to be able to justify putting up green fees and memberships.

Then after all this, Is it all worth it,, how do we calculate acurately what our emissions are now.......etc etc?

It just goes on and on.

Ive run out of time at work at the moment to bother with it but come winter the brain pain may have subsided enough to be bothered to look into it again.

[JDNSW]

Superphosphate fertiliser in OZ works out at 40kg CO2 per tonne (mining to delivery at wholesaler). Though in many cases this is high purity CO2 and is used to make soft drinks fizzy (but still ends up in the atmosphere).
...

That figure sounds a bit low to me - I wonder if that is only part of it - I would have thought most of the CO2 involved would have been as diesel exhaust; if your talking about high purity CO2, that sounds like the byproduct of conversion from phosphate rock to superphosphate, but my understanding of the process is that neither heat nor much energy is involved.

John

[isuzurover]

So all in all, regardless of the fact that we have about 140 acres if green grassy/tree'd area we are still polluters as far as carbon emissions goes.


That depends. You would have to do an assessment. I have never seen an independant one for a golf course. However some colleagues are doing a study for a turf farm, so the results may be comparable.

But in short - most trees sequester significant carbon for the first 80-100 years of growth - so if you have young trees then they will be sequestering something.
Grass - depends on species, fertiliser use, soil sequestration, management practices, etc... - these can be OPTIMIZED!

Then you have straight emitters - all your small engines/vehicles, and electricity consumption.

An assessment of all of the above would need to be done, there are established methods, but you would need a consultant to help.



How are we meant to get closer to a zero Co2 emission level which I think would be benificial to us as to be able to justify putting up green fees and memberships.


There are plenty of ways - electric vehicles, hydrogen powered vehicles (Toro has a prototype H2 greens mower in the US),etc... Recharged by "green power" - same for the clubhouse and workshop(s).

You could also start harvesting the mature trees on the course and replant (if possible?) - or plant extras...



Then after all this, Is it all worth it,, how do we calculate acurately what our emissions are now.......etc etc?


Whether all of the above is financially worth it is another matter... The answer is probably no, until the Carbon price is $50+/tonne and includes agriculture and golf courses. UNLESS your members are willing to pay a significant premium for playing on a "carbon neutral" course...

[isuzurover]

That figure sounds a bit low to me - I wonder if that is only part of it - I would have thought most of the CO2 involved would have been as diesel exhaust; if your talking about high purity CO2, that sounds like the byproduct of conversion from phosphate rock to superphosphate, but my understanding of the process is that neither heat nor much energy is involved.

John

That figure comes straight from a manufacturer. To be honest I don't know the breakdown (i'm sure you are right that transport is 50% or more). All I know is that all soft drinks in WA and bottled CO2 comes from the above process!!!


EDIT - sorry the figure doesn't include mining, just transport (by ship) from the terminal near the mine to the processing facility.

[Bushwanderer]

Sorry JD, but what I was referring to was an equilibrium position on the golf course where the grass is mown, it grows & is mown again. It's the carbon tied up in that growth and which is then clipped that is released relatively quickly back into the atmosphere. This happens, no matter what the origin of the grass. ;)




That may apply to American grasses, but is not the case with many perennial Australian native grasses. As I commented above, much of their carbon capture is concentrated in their root system, and when the plant dies, this becomes incorporated in the soil, often being more permanent than a lot of the carbon in the trees, which is largely converted back to carbon dioxide in the next major fire.

John

[Bushwanderer]

Hi mcrover,
I would think that there would have been a "greenhouse" study of a "typical" golf course in Australia. It may not be directly applicable but would show the process to be adopted. It may also give you ideas on what changes you could make effectively.

No promises, but I'll try to find one for you.

Best Wishes,
Peter

[mcrover]

Thanks, if you possibly find one that would be if great help.:D

[isuzurover]

Hi mcrover,
I would think that there would have been a "greenhouse" study of a "typical" golf course in Australia. It may not be directly applicable but would show the process to be adopted. It may also give you ideas on what changes you could make effectively.

No promises, but I'll try to find one for you.

Best Wishes,
Peter

I have never seen (an independant) one.

This is all I can fine (search golf+course+carbon). Mcrover - let me know if you would like any of these articles:

Title: Carbon sequestration in urban landscapes: the example of a turfgrass system in New Zealand
Author(s): Huh KY, Deurer M, Sivakumaran S, et al.
Source: AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF SOIL RESEARCH Volume: 46 Issue: 6-7 Pages: 610-616 Published: 2008
Times Cited: 0
Context Sensitive Links
2. Title: Denitrification of agricultural drainage using wood-based reactors
Author(s): van Driel PW, Robertson WD, Merkley LC
Source: TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASABE Volume: 49 Issue: 2 Pages: 565-573 Published: MAR-APR 2006
Times Cited: 2
Context Sensitive Links
3. Title: Microbial nitrogen removal in a developing suburban estuary along the south Carolina Coast
Author(s): Tuerk KJS, Aelion CM
Source: ESTUARIES Volume: 28 Issue: 3 Pages: 364-372 Published: JUN 2005
Times Cited: 2
Context Sensitive Links
4. Title: Nutrient, metal, and pesticide removal during storm and nonstorm events by a constructed wetland on an urban golf course
Author(s): Kohler EA, Poole VL, Reicher ZJ, et al.
Source: ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING Volume: 23 Issue: 4-5 Pages: 285-298 Published: DEC 31 2004
Times Cited: 10
Context Sensitive Links
5. Title: Effect of organic fertilizers derived dissolved organic matter on pesticide sorption and leaching
Author(s): Li K, Xing BS, Torello WA
Source: ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION Volume: 134 Issue: 2 Pages: 187-194 Published: MAR 2005
Times Cited: 14
Context Sensitive Links
6. Title: Simulations of fungicide runoff following applications for turfgrass disease control
Author(s): Vincelli P
Source: PLANT DISEASE Volume: 88 Issue: 4 Pages: 391-396 Published: APR 2004
Times Cited: 1
Context Sensitive Links
7. Title: Estimation of soil organic carbon changes in turfgrass systems using the CENTURY model
Author(s): Bandaranayake W, Qian YL, Parton WJ, et al.
Source: AGRONOMY JOURNAL Volume: 95 Issue: 3 Pages: 558-563 Published: MAY-JUN 2003
Times Cited: 10
Context Sensitive Links View full text from group of Free Journals hosted by Highwire
8. Title: Assessing soil carbon sequestration in turfgrass systems using long-term soil testing data
Author(s): Qian YL, Follett RF
Source: AGRONOMY JOURNAL Volume: 94 Issue: 4 Pages: 930-935 Published: JUL-AUG 2002
Times Cited: 25
Context Sensitive Links View full text from group of Free Journals hosted by Highwire
9. Title: Temporal patterns in near-surface CO2 concentrations over contrasting vegetation types in the Phoenix metropolitan area
Author(s): Day TA, Gober P, Xiong FSS, et al.
Source: AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST METEOROLOGY Volume: 110 Issue: 3 Pages: 229-245 Published: JAN 3 2002
Times Cited: 12
Context Sensitive Links
10. Title: Atrazine biodegradation to deisopropylatrazine and deethylatrazine in coastal sediments of different land uses
Author(s): Aelion CM, Mathur PP
Source: ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY Volume: 20 Issue: 11 Pages: 2411-2419 Published: NOV 2001
Times Cited: 8
11. Title: An approach to solventless sample preparation procedure for pesticides analysis using solid phase microextraction/supercritical fluid extraction technique
Author(s): Salleh SH, Saito Y, Jinno K
Source: ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA Volume: 418 Issue: 1 Pages: 69-77 Published: AUG 1 2000
Times Cited: 21
Context Sensitive Links
12. Title: Thatch biodegradation and antifungal activities of two lignocellulolytic Streptomyces strains in laboratory cultures and in golf green turfgrass
Author(s): Chamberlain K, Crawford DL
Source: CANADIAN JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY Volume: 46 Issue: 6 Pages: 550-558 Published: JUN 2000
Times Cited: 6
Context Sensitive Links
13. Title: Biodegradation and biotransformation of dicamba under different reducing conditions
Author(s): Milligan PW, Haggblom MM
Source: ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Volume: 33 Issue: 8 Pages: 1224-1229 Published: APR 15 1999
Times Cited: 7
Context Sensitive Links
14. Title: Estimation of leachability and persistence of pesticides at golf courses from point-source monitoring and model to predict pesticide leaching to groundwater
Author(s): Suzuki T, Kondo H, Yaguchi K, et al.
Source: ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Volume: 32 Issue: 7 Pages: 920-929 Published: APR 1 1998
Times Cited: 16
Context Sensitive Links
15. Title: Effects of carbon dioxide variations in the unsaturated zone on water chemistry in a glacial-outwash aquifer
Author(s): Lee RW
Source: APPLIED GEOCHEMISTRY Volume: 12 Issue: 4 Pages: 347-366 Published: JUL 1997
Times Cited: 6
Context Sensitive Links
16. Title: Nanofiltration of highly colored raw water for drinking water production
Author(s): Ericsson B, Hallberg M, Wachenfeldt J
Source: DESALINATION Volume: 108 Issue: 1-3 Pages: 129-141 Published: FEB 1997
Times Cited: 6
Context Sensitive Links

[mcrover]

Ben, I think these sound quite interesting, Im not sure how much of it I would understand but Im learning more and more about this every day thanks to you guys :p

If it's not too much trouble, I would like to have a look at them If I can, Thanks :D


Title: Carbon sequestration in urban landscapes: the example of a turfgrass system in New Zealand
Author(s): Huh KY, Deurer M, Sivakumaran S, et al.
Source: AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF SOIL RESEARCH Volume: 46 Issue: 6-7 Pages: 610-616 Published: 2008
Times Cited: 0
Context Sensitive Links

4. Title: Nutrient, metal, and pesticide removal during storm and nonstorm events by a constructed wetland on an urban golf course
Author(s): Kohler EA, Poole VL, Reicher ZJ, et al.
Source: ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING Volume: 23 Issue: 4-5 Pages: 285-298 Published: DEC 31 2004
Times Cited: 10
Context Sensitive Links

7. Title: Estimation of soil organic carbon changes in turfgrass systems using the CENTURY model
Author(s): Bandaranayake W, Qian YL, Parton WJ, et al.
Source: AGRONOMY JOURNAL Volume: 95 Issue: 3 Pages: 558-563 Published: MAY-JUN 2003
Times Cited: 10
Context Sensitive Links View full text from group of Free Journals hosted by Highwire

8. Title: Assessing soil carbon sequestration in turfgrass systems using long-term soil testing data
Author(s): Qian YL, Follett RF
Source: AGRONOMY JOURNAL Volume: 94 Issue: 4 Pages: 930-935 Published: JUL-AUG 2002
Times Cited: 25
Context Sensitive Links View full text from group of Free Journals hosted by Highwire

9. Title: Temporal patterns in near-surface CO2 concentrations over contrasting vegetation types in the Phoenix metropolitan area
Author(s): Day TA, Gober P, Xiong FSS, et al.
Source: AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST METEOROLOGY Volume: 110 Issue: 3 Pages: 229-245 Published: JAN 3 2002
Times Cited: 12
Context Sensitive Links

12. Title: Thatch biodegradation and antifungal activities of two lignocellulolytic Streptomyces strains in laboratory cultures and in golf green turfgrass
Author(s): Chamberlain K, Crawford DL
Source: CANADIAN JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY Volume: 46 Issue: 6 Pages: 550-558 Published: JUN 2000
Times Cited: 6
Context Sensitive Links

[drivesafe]

Well Folks, this thread is NOT what I started this section for but it sure as hell is becoming an education.

Keep it up, it’s been some brilliant reading.

Cheers and well done.

[Vern]

So Damo, did you put the solar in?

[mcrover]

Nah Vern,

Ive given up on it for now, I will get back into it when the course works slow down again as this is our busy time of the year (they tell me, I dont see much difference to be honest).

Ive got to do a bit more home work into where we could fit the panels on the club house as it is closest to the meters and would bennifit most from it for running light, computers and some of the bar equipment etc as most of the stuff in my shed is 3 phase other than lighting and a couple of computers.

They would be mor protected from ball strike on the lod of the club house as well as the shed gets hit regularly :(

There is a bloke up in Canberra (Solar Craig :D) whose a Turf Tech and has fitted panels to the shed there to off set charging their carts and he's sending me some info when he gets a chance on what he has done so when I get it I will go through it and see if I can post it up.

As I progress I will keep you all informed :D

[Vern]

Would it not be cheaper for now to run 240 down from the club house, its only 200 metres, yes a fair bit of volt drop, but atleast it would be up and running! And later in the year when i've finished my solar installation course i can come install it for you:p

[mcrover]

Would it not be cheaper for now to run 240 down from the club house, its only 200 metres, yes a fair bit of volt drop, but atleast it would be up and running! And later in the year when i've finished my solar installation course i can come install it for you:p

I think youve misunderstood a bit Vern....

The sheds are existing and I was thinking about adding solar to offset our supply and to maybe have more of a green theme going to encourage more golfers to play at our course over others as well as having a reason to put the greens fee's up.......a lot :D.

This will also mean that we can get more electric vehicals which are a lot less mainenance and if we were running pnels on the roof then the running costs would be offset by what were putting back into the grid.

If your going to get into it then for sure I will be giving you a call if/when we get the go ahead.:D

It's just at the moment the numbers are not adding up to make it feasable

[isuzurover]

McRover - sorry - I was have been flat out/on holiday. When I have a moment I can grab you the articles if you are still interested.

[mcrover]

If you can Ben that would be great. :D

[Blknight.aus]

just a thought... what volts are you running the carts at?....

Im having a kniving idea that might just work and be easy to setup too.

[mcrover]

just a thought... what volts are you running the carts at?....

Im having a kniving idea that might just work and be easy to setup too.


All our carts are 48v, they draw up to 40amps at full speed (which I never have them set at) and up to 100amps on start up for about 3 secs max.

Why??????

Should I be scared? :o

[isuzurover]

All our carts are 48v, they draw up to 40amps at full speed (which I never have them set at) and up to 100amps on start up for about 3 secs max.

Why??????

Should I be scared? :o

Solar panels on the roof!!!

[Blknight.aus]

yep 4x 12v 800MA panels on the roof(thats what fits onto the normal short 2x seater roof the longer ones should take up to 4x50 maybe 60 watt panels) to maintain them during the day and an under slung induction panel so all you have to do is park the cart over a specialised "speed bump" and the charging is taken care of without any hook up. then add whatever panels you want to the clubhouse or the shed to power the speed bumps.

the bonus is you only really need a couple of the speed bumps and the panels for each cart to get started or trial it and if it doesnt work out the panels can be put to use for emergancy lighting stuff or anything esle you can think of.

[mcrover]

yep 4x 12v 800MA panels on the roof(thats what fits onto the normal short 2x seater roof the longer ones should take up to 4x50 maybe 60 watt panels) to maintain them during the day and an under slung induction panel so all you have to do is park the cart over a specialised "speed bump" and the charging is taken care of without any hook up. then add whatever panels you want to the clubhouse or the shed to power the speed bumps.

the bonus is you only really need a couple of the speed bumps and the panels for each cart to get started or trial it and if it doesnt work out the panels can be put to use for emergancy lighting stuff or anything esle you can think of.


The only problem with this is that they would need some sort of protection form the golf balls.

Any thing on a golf course gets pounded by golf balls, Casper is parked about 300m from the nearest fairway and hard up against the wrokshop yet has been hit 3 times :mad:

I dont know how much charge they go through in a day as nobody every records power usage on them and Im at a loss of how they would, maybe taking voltage readings before plugging them into the chargers?

The other thing is that the chargers are plugged in 24:7 so as soon as they come back then most of the time they plug it in straight away (which is not what I want them to do) so Im more inclined to wire in a timer that only I can access and have the chargers come on in off peak times at night and use the panels to off set the cost of the power.

Great idea Dave but im pretty sure the golfers would find a way to remove the panels under trees and stuff that they shouldnt be driving under as well.:o

[isuzurover]

The only problem with this is that they would need some sort of protection form the golf balls.

Any thing on a golf course gets pounded by golf balls, Casper is parked about 300m from the nearest fairway and hard up against the wrokshop yet has been hit 3 times :mad:

I dont know how much charge they go through in a day as nobody every records power usage on them and Im at a loss of how they would, maybe taking voltage readings before plugging them into the chargers?

The other thing is that the chargers are plugged in 24:7 so as soon as they come back then most of the time they plug it in straight away (which is not what I want them to do) so Im more inclined to wire in a timer that only I can access and have the chargers come on in off peak times at night and use the panels to off set the cost of the power.

Great idea Dave but im pretty sure the golfers would find a way to remove the panels under trees and stuff that they shouldnt be driving under as well.:o

Actually - there are some pretty durable panels these days. I'm sure you could get some that could handle golf balls and tree branches. Would be $$$ though...

[Blknight.aus]

a flat sheet of clear acrylic solves the golf ball whacks.

if you fitted them out with an inductive charger then they never need to be plugged in, you just park them over an induction plate (the speed hump)

the induction plate stays plugged in 24/7 and they dont draw much until you park the cart over them. you cant overcharge with them if they're smartly designed and you dont need to have one charger for every cart.

[mcrover]

a flat sheet of clear acrylic solves the golf ball whacks.

if you fitted them out with an inductive charger then they never need to be plugged in, you just park them over an induction plate (the speed hump)

the induction plate stays plugged in 24/7 and they dont draw much until you park the cart over them. you cant overcharge with them if they're smartly designed and you dont need to have one charger for every cart.

Sounds great these induction chargers but not entirely nessesary if I do it my way.

Where would you get them from?

Wont the acrylic affect the cells and how they work?