Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
SUNEQ: 7,000+ employees and 1,000+ projects on-record! ........ Still going strong, with proposed employee bonuses...... Into the solar future..... I think, this enterprise will come out of reorganization better than ever, along with the common shares as well. IMHO
Possible New Wind Turbine Lightning Protection Available- Details:
EMP Solutions, Inc. unveils newest lightning prevention solution for the growing Wind Turbine Industry.
Date : 09/24/2015 @ 2:16PM
Source : InvestorsHub News
EMP Solutions, Inc. unveils newest lightning prevention solution for the growing Wind Turbine Industry.
EMP Solutions, Inc. unveils newest lightning prevention solution for the growing Wind Turbine Industry.
ATLANTA, GA -- September 24, 2015 -- InvestorsHub NewsWire -- EMP Solutions, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: EMPS) has unveiled a lightning prevention solution for the Wind Turbine Industry that protects all the components of a wind turbine from direct and indirect lightning strikes.
The solution, which incorporates between One and Three HALO units per turbine, protects the Base, Tower, Nacelle and Blades. Blade damage is, by far, the most expensive and disruptive damage caused by lightning but damage to the control system is far more common, according to the National Fire Protection Association handbook. While strikes directly to the blades can result in the immediate explosion of expanding gas within the blade, much of the damage goes undetected and can result in a shortened service life. Other common damage caused by lightning strikes includes damage to the control system, switchgear elements, generators and batteries. According to one study, lightning strikes account for 80% of all insurance claims on wind turbines.
SUMMARY OF PROTECTION
The HALO PDCE Lightning Suppression system takes into account geographical area, tower height, blade dimensions and other critical factors to mitigate damage by deionizing the electrical field created by the natural environment as well as the turbine itself. As an alternative to traditional lightning protection, the HALO PDCE System offers a long-term solution to the Wind Power Industry that has both a warranty and a no strike guarantee, protecting owners, operators, workers and insurance companies from losses.
MARKET SIZE
According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) there are over 1,000 utility-scale wind projects in the United States totaling more than 49,000 Wind Turbines.
EMP Solutions, Inc. is excited to introduce this technology to the Wind Industry and hopes it assists in their ability to grow, increase output, safety and reliability and while reducing costs associated with lightning damage.
For more information about the HALO PDCE Lightning Suppressor and how it can protect wind turbine installations please contact www.empsolutionsinc.com or contact Jay Kothari, CEO at jay@empsolutionsinc.com
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????
QUESTION: was just on web and saw massmegawatts.com website and looked at one
stock tracking page. I saw no news about them going out of business.
they keeping it quiet? ANSWER: Here is what I have seen: MMMW is only one guy, and when he's sick, sleeping, or sitting around, there is no company, but a few great "press releases" and a website with a bunch of figures and pictures of other people's work, made folks think he might be onto something good, but it turned out, his "invention" was a product someone else already made, then,. he finally ran out of money in July, with $600 in the company back then, and he could no longer pay his rent for the MMMW company space, he could no longer pay an accountant to produce his quarterly reports, and couldn't even pay to rent a hotel conference room, to have a "meeting" of stockholders, so he could issue more "shares" of his company......you get a partial idea.......Oh, he never did what he said he would do, either, so I think there's no company. What would you think?
Xzeres(XPWR) shows improving results as wind-energy demand increases worldwide. Low float: Number of common shares outstanding: 72,768,897 as of July 15,2015.
GROSS REVENUES for Three Months ending May 31,2015: $616,588 GROSS REVENUES for Three Months ending May 31, 2014: $501,948 ... LOSS BEFORE PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES AND OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)....May 31, 2015:(1,772,809).....May 31, 2014:(3,051,499)
After inventing the light bulb, Edison had 50,000 installations in two years, and 250,000 installations in five years; Two years after announcing that MMMW has a new power plant, how many are running? Zilch? If you vote to allow this guy to issue more shares, what do you get out of the deal? Again, it looks like Zilch. So, two years from now, at this rate, will MMMW still have Zilch? It would seem that this is the case.
In January 2014, the CEO said, that when MMMW increased the number of authorized shares from 33 million to 67 million, MMMW would not subsequently dilute the shareholders anymore. So this is just one more broken pledge by MMMW, which has done diddly squat with its funds except pay rent, salaries, and produced very little.
Having watched MMW for years, and now, after losing thousands of dollars on non-performance and slow-performance, I believe I can share some final (for me)thoughts about MMMW............the pain is still fresh, but perhaps, there could be some humor here. ALWAYS do your own DUE DILIGENCE!....These are the actual, unchanged press-releases from MMMW..............WORCESTER, Mass., April 29, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- "Mass Megawatts Wind Power, Inc. (OTC: MMMW) today launched an effort to be profitable in Fiscal Year Ending April 30, 2014. A good portion of the goal is contingent on the successful marketing of electricity at a deep discount in targeted geographical areas. In some local areas, Mass Megawatts can sell electricity at less than half the price offered by the local utility. Much of the effort of reaching the goal is based on a revenue matching program from Independent Energy Associates working with Mass Megawatts in an effort to obtain customers."....................EFFORT? HOW MUCH EFFORT?...................WORCESTER, Mass., October 16, 2013 /Accesswire/ - "Mass Megawatts Wind Power, Inc. (OTC: MMMW) today announces the beginning of electrical production from its first new solar tracking system. The power unit began producing electricity on Tuesday during the afternoon."...........NOW, WAIT A YEAR AND YOU'LL SEE WHAT WE PUT TOGETHER........... WORCESTER, Mass., October 25th, 2013 /Accesswire/ - "Mass Megawatts Wind Power, Inc. (OTCBB: MMMW) announces that their first, no-money-down, power purchase agreement (PPA) sale is projected to start construction soon in central Massachusetts. With this PPA, the company will deliver their innovative ‘Solar-Power Tracking System’ (STS), with no upfront, out-of-pocket costs incurred by the small business customer. Installation is planned to begin in November".................IN NOVEMBER OF WHAT YEAR ARE WE REFERRING TO?............."WORCESTER, MA - (ACCESSWIRE - November 14, 2013)"Commercial production of the dual-tracking, STS is expected to begin over the next three to six months.".......... DEFINE: "COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION, PLEASE: DO YOU MEAN ONE PROTOTYPE?"....................WORCESTER, MA, November 5, 2013 /Accesswire/ - "Mass Megawatts Wind Power, Inc. (OTCBB: MMMW) reports the development of manufacturing processes to support large-scale production of the company’s Solar Tracking System (STS). Working many hours and with experienced individuals in the manufacturing community, these new processes will reduce costs, streamline assembly, and improve quality control efforts. Initial production efforts are based in Worcester, Massachusetts, with additional manufacturing sites being evaluated."........OKAY, .... HOW MANY MANUFACTURING SITES DOES IT TAKE TO BUILD A DUAL 3' by 5' SOLAR TRACKER UNIT?................
WORCESTER, Mass., December 5, 2013 /Accesswire/ - "Mass Megawatts Wind Power, Inc. (OTC: MMMW) today announces the test result of its solar tracking system. The new product is within the expectations of increasing solar energy production by 22% to 28% for less than 7% additional cost than a standard stationary configuration. The Company is comparing the new unit’s power output with the electricity generated from a stationary system of similar size. The first test was abandoned as it received less than 70% of the available sunlight due to excess shading. The tracking unit would have shown a better than 50% increase in power output than the stationary unit due to the lack of sunlight available during peak hours. As much as we would like to use that data, the test results would not be accurate. The second test is required to receive at least 85% of the available sunlight during the day and qualified as generating the accurate results"..................IT WON"T WORK WELL IN THE SHADE, WHO KNEW?........................................... WORCESTER, Mass., December 6, 2013 /Accesswire/ - "Mass Megawatts Wind Power, Inc. (OTC: MMMW) today announces plans to build a small demonstration unit for explaining the cost benefits of the new solar tracking technology. The mobile unit will bring an additional marketing benefit to several high visibility locations."........ WHERE IS THE MOBILE UNIT TODAY?............. "Some designs in the solar market are more expensive than the stationary units.".............ARE WE BUYING SOMEONE ELSE"S UNIT(S), AND THEN CLAIMING IT IS OUR IDEA?............
WORCESTER, MA--(Marketwired - Dec 30, 2013) "A detailed description is projected to be available for potential customers in January 2014."........... DID THAT HAPPEN? ................... WORCESTER, MA - (ACCESSWIRE - February 21, 2014) - "Mass Megawatts Wind Power, Inc. (MMMW) today announces modifications of its solar tracking system, to be introduced in April 2014.".........NOW, WAIT, TO OCTOBER 2014?....WASN'T THAT ALMOST SIX MONTHS AGO?....WHAT ARE WE GOING TO FIND OUT NEXT?.....STAY TUNED! ...... MMMW$$$$$$, HOW LONG?
U.S. crude inventories fell 404,000 barrels last-week! SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Brent crude rose towards $57 a barrel on Wednesday, paring some of the previous session's sharp losses, after data showed U.S. crude stocks fell for the first time in two months.
The benchmark closed nearly 4 percent down in the previous session on a rallying U.S. dollar and before an industry group said U.S. crude inventories fell by 404,000 barrels last week. Analysts had expected a 4.4 million barrel build in stocks
Without certification from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, an arm of the US Department of Energy, MMMW cannot proceed with any community solar projects that would hook up to the electric power grid; however, when MMMW gets the certification, then there is a ton of money to be made! There's a fascinating article in the Washington Post today: "Utilities wage campaign against rooftop solar" Let's get moving on this, MMMW$$$
By Joby Warrick March 7
Three years ago, the nation’s top utility executives gathered at a Colorado resort to hear warnings about a grave new threat to operators of America’s electric grid: not superstorms or cyberattacks, but rooftop solar panels.
SolarCraft workers install solar panels on the roof of a home in San Rafael, Calif. According to a report by the Solar Foundation, the solar industry employs more workers than the coal-mining industry. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
If demand for residential solar continued to soar, traditional utilities could soon face serious problems, from “declining retail sales” and a “loss of customers” to “potential obsolescence,” according to a presentation prepared for the group. “Industry must prepare an action plan to address the challenges,” it said.
The warning, delivered to a private meeting of the utility industry’s main trade association, became a call to arms for electricity providers in nearly every corner of the nation. Twaging a determined campaign to stop a home-solar insurgency that is rattling the boardrooms of the country’s government-regulated hree years later, the industry and its fossil-fuel supporters are electric monopolies.
The campaign’s first phase—an industry push for state laws raising prices for solar customers—failed spectacularly in legislatures around the country, due in part to surprisingly strong support for solar energy from conservatives and evangelicals in traditionally “red states.” But more recently, the battle has shifted to public utility commissions, where industry backers have mounted a more successful push for fee hikes that could put solar panels out of reach for many potential customers.
[Solar energy’s new best friend is .?.?. the Christian Coalition]
In a closely watched case last month, an Arizona utility voted to impose a monthly surcharge of about $50 for “net metering,” a common practice that allows solar customers to earn credit for the surplus electricity they provide to the electric grid. Net metering makes home solar affordable by sharply lowering electric bills to offset the $10,000 to $30,000 cost of rooftop panels.
A Wisconsin utilities commission approved a similar surcharge for solar users last year, and a New Mexico regulator also is considering raising fees. In some states, industry officials have enlisted the help of minority groups in arguing that solar panels hurt the poor by driving up electricity rates for everyone else.
Utility companies take on solar power View Graphic
“The utilities are fighting tooth and nail,” said Scott Peterson, director of the Checks and Balances Project, a Virginia nonprofit that investigates lobbyists’ ties to regulatory agencies. Peterson, who has tracked the industry’s two-year legislative fight, said the pivot to public utility commissions moves the battle to friendlier terrain for utilities. The commissions, usually made up of political appointees, “have enormous power, and no one really watches them,” Peterson said.
Industry officials say they support their customers’ right to generate electricity on their own property, but they say rooftop solar’s new popularity is creating a serious cost imbalance. While homeowners with solar panels usually see dramatic reductions in their electric bills, they still rely on the grid for electricity at night and on cloudy days. The utility collects less revenue, even though the infrastructure costs — from expensive power plants to transmission lines and maintenance crews — remain the same.
Ultimately, someone pays those costs, said David K. Owens, an executive vice president for Edison Electric Institute, the trade association that represents the nation’s investor-owned utilities.
“It’s not about profits; it’s about protecting customers,” said Owens, said. “There are unreasonable cost shifts that do occur [with solar]. There is a grid that everyone relies on, and you have to pay for that grid and pay for that infrastructure.”
Nearly 174,000 people work in the solar industry compared with close to 80,000 in the coal industry. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
Whether home-solar systems add significant costs to electric grids is the subject of intense debate. A Louisiana study last month concluded that solar roofs had resulted in cost shifts of more than $2 million that must be borne by Louisiana customers who lack solar panels. That study was immediately disputed by clean energy groups that pointed to extensive ties between the report’s authors and the fossil-fuel lobby.
Other studies commissioned by state regulators in Nevada and Mississippi found that any costs are generally outweighed by benefits. For one thing, researchers found, the excess energy generated by solar panels helps reduce the strain on electric grids on summer days when demand soars and utilities are forced to buy additional power at high rates. Other experts note that the shift to solar energy is helping states meet new federal requirements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while also producing thousands of new jobs. The residential solar industry currently employs about 174,000 people nationwide, or twice as many as the number of coal miners.
“Independent studies show that distributed solar benefits all ratepayers by preventing the need to build new, expensive power plants or transmission lines,” said Matthew Kasper, a fellow at the Energy & Policy Institute, a pro-solar think tank. “Utilities make their money by building big, new infrastructure projects and then sending ratepayers the bill, which is exactly why utilities want to eliminate solar.”
Solar-panel costs plunge
Residential solar panels have been widely available since the 1970s, but advances in the past decade have transformed home solar energy in many areas from an expensive novelty to a cost-competitive alternative to traditional power.
The average price of photovoltaic cells has plummeted 60 percent since 2010, thanks to lower production costs and more-efficient designs. Solar’s share of global energy production is climbing steadily, and a study last week by researchers from Cambridge University concluded that photovoltaics will soon be able to out-compete fossil fuels, even if oil prices drop to as low as $10 a barrel.
SolarCraft workers Joel Overly, left, and Craig Powell install a solar panel on Feb. 26 in San Rafael, Calif. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
In the United States, utilities have embraced solar projects of their own making, building large solar farms that produce nearly 60 percent of the electricity that comes from the sun’s rays.
“We are pro-solar,” said Edison’s Owens. “We are putting in more solar than any other industry.”
But the arrival of cheaper solar technology has also brought an unexpected challenge to the industry’s bottom line: As millions of residential and business customers opt for solar, revenue for utilities is beginning to decline. Industry-sponsored studies have warned the trend could eventually lead to a radical restructure of energy markets, similar to earlier upheavals with phone-company monopolies.
[Pebble Mine debate: EPA becomes target by planning for rare ‘veto’]
“One can imagine a day when battery-storage technology or micro turbines could allow customers to be electric grid independent,” said a 2013 Edison study. “To put this into perspective, who would have believed 10 years ago that traditional wire line telephone customers could economically ‘cut the cord’?”
Support from conservatives
The utility industry’s playbook for slowing the growth of residential solar is laid out in a few frames of the computer slide show presented at an Edison-sponsored retreat in September 2012, in a lakeside resort hotel in Colorado Springs, Colo. Despite a bland title—“Facing the Challenges of a Distribution System in Transition”—the Edison document portrays solar systems as a serious, long-term threat to the survival of traditional electricity providers.
Throughout the country, it noted, lawmakers and regulatory agencies were “promoting policies that are accelerating this transition — subsidies are growing.” The document, provided to The Washington Post by the Energy & Policy Institute, called for a campaign of “focused outreach” targeting key groups that could influence the debate: state legislatures, regulatory agencies and sympathetic consumer-advocacy groups.
Two-and-a-half years later, evidence of the “action plan” envisioned by Edison officials can be seen in states across the country. Legislation to make net metering illegal or more costly has been introduced in nearly two dozen state houses since 2013. Some of the proposals were virtual copies of model legislation drafted two years ago by the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, a nonprofit organization with financial ties to billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch.
SolarCraft worker Craig Powell carries a solar panel on the roof of a home in San Rafael, Calif. The average price of photovoltaic cells has plummeted 60 percent since 2010. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
Most of the bills that have been considered so far have been either rejected or vetoed, with the most-striking defeats coming in Republican strongholds, such as Indiana and Utah. There, anti-solar legislation came under a surprisingly fierce attack from free-market conservatives and even evangelical groups, many of which have installed solar panels on their churches.
“Conservatives support solar — they support it even more than progressives do,” said Bryan Miller, co-chairman of the Alliance for Solar Choice and a vice president of public policy for Sunrun, a California solar provider. “It’s about competition in its most basic form. The idea that you should be forced to buy power from a state-sponsored monopoly and not have an option is about the least conservative thing you can imagine.”
Where legislatures failed to deliver, power companies have sought help from regulatory agencies, chiefly the public utility commissions that set rates and fees that can be charged by electricity providers. Here, the results have been more encouraging for power companies.
[Report: Effects of climate change ‘irreversible’]
Last month’s decision to slap monthly surcharges on solar customers in south-central Arizona was hailed as a breakthrough for the utilities in a state that has turned back several similar attempts in the past two years. The Tempe, Ariz., Salt River Project, one of Arizona’s largest utilities, approved the new fee despite furious opposition from solar users, including about 500 people who packed the commission’s hearing room for the Feb. 26 vote.
Solar companies already have filed suit to stop a similar fee increase approved last year by Wisconsin commissioners, and others are watching closely to see if New Mexico’s Public Service Co. will adopt a proposal to impose a monthly surcharge of up to $35 on solar customers there.
Regulators in each of the three states have cited fairness as the reason for the proposed increases. But solar advocates say the real injustice is the ability of electric monopolies to destroy a competitor that offers potential benefits both to consumers and to society.
“It’s really about utilities’ fear that solar customers are taking away demand,” said Angela Navarro, an energy expert with the Southern Environmental Law Center. “These customers are installing solar at their own cost and providing a valuable resource: additional electricity for the grid at the times when the utilities need it most. And it’s all carbon-free.”
Related:
Wind and solar energy have tripled since 2008
Solar energy is playing well in conservative parts of the U.S.
The best idea in a long time: Covering parking lots with solar panels
Joby Warrick joined the Post’s national staff in 1996. He has covered national security, intelligence and the Middle East, and currently writes about the environment.
Comments
The Post Recommends
A wave of mostly white voters is reshaping the politics of D.C.
Young residents of newly affluent neighborhoods are getting political, eroding blacks’ dominance.
U.S. sees bigger test for Iraq after Tikrit battle
Book review: "The Nuns of Sant'Ambrogio" by Hubert Wolf
Discussion Policy
3029 Comments
Mentioned in this story and want to comment? Learn more
Please Sign In to Comment
All Comments
Newest First
Pause live updates
McKite
1:28 AM EST
The portrayed behavior of the utilities industry is emblematic of the big U.S. industry at large: when given a choice of embracing new developments and fighting them as threats, they opt for fighting them, in particular by using their ability to influence legislation. This behavior may well hasten the downfall of the U.S. economy as opportunities to advance and improve performance on the macro level are forsaken for short-term protection on the micro level.
For the utilities industry, this behavior is particularly deplorable since the industry exists to serve the community in its geographic scope and enjoys competitive protection from the community's government.
I wonder if there is a utility that is active in both, central power generation plus distribution and decentralized solar generation offers.
As I am making plans to build a new house, I will make sure active solar is part of the design as well as power storage. Why would anyone put themselves at the mercy of an industry that can't depart from the status quo?
See More
LikeReplyShare
Hans-Joachim_Zierke
1:10 AM EST
@dalyplanet
"I am generally in agreement Hans-Joachim although I think there needs to be two pronged approach. CO2 free baseload and everything else."
As soon as a Danish share of renewable energy is reached (they have 30% wind electricity), the baseload becomes 0%.
LikeReplyShare
Randje K Randje
12:12 AM EST
My heart bleeds for the power industry brokers. Their brazen sense of entitlement outstrips and outpaces any conservatively drawn welfare-state- mentality-caricatures I've ever encountered. The simple fact is that power-for-money ought never have seen the light of day upon this planet. Economies driven by social necessities are predatory, abberrant, and greed-driven. They invariably act to seize control of governmental bodies and regulatory agencies and a few men doggedly suck the life-force out of the economy, while flagrantly breaking the rules of their own professed economic ideology. I give you the Koch brothers, if you need an example of corrupt power suppliers runnning full throttle to gain control of America's political system. If the horse-and-buggy industry had wielded the same influence, they would have fought the advent and introduction of the automobile into our culture at every turn. And in retrospect, they might have been doing us a good turn while trying to do themselves one.
LikeReplyShare
middletnen
3/8/2015 11:29 PM EST
Oil pollutes my air and I don't like it. I never gave them permission to pollute my air. Profits of every Oil Company is therefore illegitimate and must be turned over to the peoples' whose air they have polluted.
Do the oil companies say sorry about ruining your air, let me compensate you with some money, some cash. Does the Big Oil company say of course I foul your air, even if you don't use my product, even if you aren't my customer so then I will work to make sure that Oil that we process won't' do that in the future. Does any government say I will protect you from oil pollution? Where I am I to turn to make the Oil company stop polluting my air, my children's air.
Take away the profits of the OIl companies, if they want to continue to produce oil that fouls my air they cannot make a profit off of their actions at the same time.
Let other energy industries bloom that do not pollute my air, Let Solar and Wind and Hydropower companies keep their profits since they don't pollute. And if ever Oil companies want to make a profit let them clean the air they first polluted and never pollute again be the low bar of their continued existence.
See More
LikeReplyShare
1
L8
3/8/2015 11:23 PM EST
First off nuclear plants are terrorist targets, solar panels are a lot less dangerous. Next WE energies in Wisconsin wanted to charge people extra if they wanted their energy to come from their clean solar panels, and wind turbines what a racket! Tesla will develop new batteries, and people will start storing their power instead of selling it to the power companies at peak. It's already possible to live off the grid by storing the extra power made during the daytime, and better batteries will make this all work better. The power company is whining but the population is increasing every year, more and more homes are being built, which means technically there is more customers to offset the customers that do go to solar. Either way power needs to made by some source, and to be a middle man using power created by one neighbor to feed another neighbors needs and charging that other neighbor for that power is cheaper for the utility company who doesn't need to send as much power down the lines from the power plant. As electricity travels down the lines its loses power along the way, so the power company has to send a lot more power because of power losses, but when your power comes from your neighbor there is less current lost because there is less line travel involved. The power company is shooting themselves in the foot with this fight, because better batteries will be built, more people will leave the grid, and the power company won't get anymore free power from these people to supply to their neighbors with, so they will have to send extra power down the lines to supply them. The power company makes out from solar by having less maintenance costs, they don't have to repair the customers solar panels the customer does, and solar costs stay the same. Fuel costs to feed their power plants on the other hand constantly changes. Solar helps Utility companies by keeping energy generating costs more predictable, and less dependent on fuel costs which fluctuate constantly.
See More
LikeReplyShare
Hans-Joachim_Zierke
3/8/2015 10:28 PM EST
@eric654
"Are you referring to what happens when a plant goes down? I'm talk about load variations which solar providers would fall under since they carry load."
I'm talking about both. Predictions for solar and wind are now good enough, that we (in Germany) normally don't need gas plants for balancing, we can do it with hard coal plants (which need some hours for firing up).
_Unpredicted_ fluctuations of solar or wind are some hundred MW, possibly (but that's an extreme event!). Since we need 3.2GW of hot and synchronized standby anyway (= the two biggest plants), a few hundred MW of unpredicted fluctuation get a shrug.
LikeReplyShare
dalyplanet
3/8/2015 10:31 PM EST
So the atomic power is simply wasted when there is high solar on the line.
LikeReply
Hans-Joachim_Zierke
3/8/2015 10:36 PM EST
@dalyplanet
"So the atomic power is simply wasted when there is high solar on the line."
At the moment ... no. It has happened a few times in winter storms, that nuclear plants had to be throttled, but the next shutdowns of nuclear plants will take care of that.
But you are right, that nuclear and a high share of renewables does not mix, because nuclear plants aren't controllable enough.
LikeShare
dalyplanet
3/8/2015 10:36 PM EST
Or excess power is shunted to Norway sometimes at negative rates (paying) to pump hydro storage, to be purchased back often at very high rates while conventional generation spins up to stability.
LikeReply
Hans-Joachim_Zierke
3/8/2015 10:44 PM EST [Edited]
Technically, it makes a lot of sense to store renewable energy in Norway, because pumped storage can reach 90% efficiency, better than any other storage method known to mankind. Plus we have that efficient 450kV DC Norned link.
LikeShare
mopsie
3/8/2015 10:16 PM EST
Just your good old capitalist greed at work, as usual
LikeReplyShare
Hans-Joachim_Zierke
3/8/2015 10:12 PM EST [Edited]
@eric654
"Mentioned only briefly in the doc: "The variability of wind power necessitates a higher safety margin." probably applies to solar as well."
While it might have been stated in some doc, it is plain nonsense without any foothold in reality. Of course wind energy and solar energy fluctuate, but >95% of that fluctuation is predictable in advance.
This isn't the 1990s, when prediction models weren't good enough.
Germany now has 8.6% wind and 5.8% solar (2014). We need plenty of reserve for it, but not a single kW of standby reserve. The worst event for grid stability in the last years was the emercency shutdown of Neurath G and F, August 30th 2012, with more than 2GW lost within minutes. The network rode through it at 49.94 Hz instead of 50. No unpredicted fluctuation of solar or wind comes close, by a huge margin.
LikeReplyShare
dalyplanet
3/8/2015 10:47 PM EST
Germany still gets more power from burning trash and trees than from solar despite having the largest by far nameplate solar installed per megawatt consumed.
LikeReply
Hans-Joachim_Zierke
3/8/2015 10:59 PM EST
"8.6% wind and 5.8% solar" is slightly less than 100%, yes.
And if you look at a map,
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/db...
it's not too much of a surprise, that California or Arizona might get more kWh from a kWp.
LikeShare
dalyplanet
3/8/2015 11:06 PM EST
And Northern California, Washington and Oregon have the Bonneville Dam and others to dance with. In the south there is the Hoover Dam. But solar and wind are not the full replacement or even half the replacement even in rich countries. In developing countries replacing the expected 1200 to 1700 new coal boilers before they are built will not come from solar and wind.
LikeShare
dalyplanet
3/8/2015 10:56 PM EST
I applaud Germany and its people for leading the way on this difficult transition. Germany shows the way for what is possible with wind and solar.
LikeReply
Hans-Joachim_Zierke
3/8/2015 11:06 PM EST
There are 2 ways to look at it:
1) It is utterly expensive. No question.
2) It isn't more than people might transfer to a development aid agency at christmas time. And I'm convinced, that jump-starting solar energy will have more of an effect in the 3rd world, than all the development aid given by Germans in the last 50 years.
LikeShare
dalyplanet
3/8/2015 11:26 PM EST [Edited]
I am generally in agreement Hans-Joachim although I think there needs to be two pronged approach. CO2 free baseload and everything else. The US can provide the CO2 free baseload engineering and should. Germany has no interest and the US has thousands of highly trained, under utilized engineers in this field. We have engineers that designed an airplane that never has to land, and huge aircraft carriers that run 30 years on a single load of fuel.
I do appreciate and consider your informed comments.
LikeShare
5amefa91
3/8/2015 10:01 PM EST [Edited]
The grid for distributing power from a few gigantic coal powered generators is an obsolete 20th century technology. In 2015 we can already see it's end coming up. As little as the utilities like it, they are about to be disrupted. Solar is getting so cheap per Watt that we don't really need net metering to justify it.
Cogeneration of electricity and heat using Sterling cycle natural gas engines are over 90% efficient overall, so that is an additional option for home owners.
Like or not, the future comes, and it is distributed generation.
LikeReplyShare
dalyplanet
3/8/2015 10:14 PM EST
There are thousands of generation sources, tens of thousands across the US. Utilities do not care what the regulators tell them to use because their profit is guaranteed. At this point in time there are conversations as to the cost and reliability issues for incorporating rooftop solar.
If there is large scale incorporation of rooftop solar at high cost so far, and no resultant drop in CO2 emissions, what is the purpose?
LikeReply
John-ManuelAndriote
3/8/2015 10:00 PM EST
It's exciting and encouraging to see an issue that is fundamentally American--self-reliance--on which both conservatives and progressives can agree. Not only that but it's good for the environment. Let the utility companies squeal as their monopolies get busted up just like Ma Bell.
LikeReplyShare
2
westrim
1:01 AM EST
Unfortunately, there are many other issues where they should agree, but conservatives have been successfully misled by big business and/or allowed their mistrust of government to decide their position rather than bare facts and merits.
LikeReply
Hans-Joachim_Zierke
3/8/2015 9:27 PM EST [Edited]
@dalyplanet
"How does rooftop solar improve grid stability?"
The noon peak is eliminated. This even works in a country like Germany, which does not have domestic air condition.
Eliminating the secondary 17.00 peak is a different story, this would need lower battery prices than we have at this moment.
LikeReplyShare
2
eric654
3/8/2015 9:30 PM EST
More complicated than that, see my link below. Stability doesn't just refer to amounts of power and load. Eliminating the peak saves money by letting the utility lower the safety margin. But stability defined in the PDF doc has more meanings than that.
LikeReply
Hans-Joachim_Zierke
3/8/2015 9:41 PM EST [Edited]
"Eliminating the peak saves money by letting the utility lower the safety margin."
That's completely wrong. Reserves are not related to demand, but to the supply side. In central Europe, the rule is: "Hot standby = supply by the two biggest plants".
In Germany, where the biggest single sources are 1,6 GW nuclear reactors, this means 3.2 GW in hot and synchronized standby.
LikeShare
eric654
3/8/2015 9:51 PM EST
Are you referring to what happens when a plant goes down? I'm talk about load variations which solar providers would fall under since they carry load.
LikeShare
dalyplanet
3/8/2015 9:55 PM EST
There is no noon peak
there is a 7 pm peak in summer and a 7 am 7 pm peak in winter
LikeReply
GeoType
3/8/2015 9:24 PM EST
I've always been able to generate heat w/ my wood stove when power went out during a winter ice storm, etc...no problem.
When the derecho came thru in July 2011 I had no way to generate cool [AC].
After day 2 I broke down and bought a 5500 watt generator.
LikeReplyShare
Hans-Joachim_Zierke
3/8/2015 9:31 PM EST [Edited]
The USA has SAIDI figures in the 200-250 range. (System Average Interruption Duration Index, minutes)
Singapore has the best figures in the world, and Luxembourg, Denmark, Germany, Switzerland top the European list with results around 20.
LikeReply
GeoType
3/8/2015 9:37 PM EST
We lost power for 8 days after hurricane Hugo. I don't know how many minutes that is...but it's got to be a lot.
LikeShare
pam8
3/8/2015 9:43 PM EST
8X24X60
LikeShare
2
GeoType
3/8/2015 9:49 PM EST
it seemed like much longer..
LikeShare
View More Replies
TLN2
3/8/2015 10:00 PM EST
Try running 12 elevators up 100 stories on that!
LikeReply
1
5amefa91
3/8/2015 9:11 PM EST
Power reliability hereabouts sucks. And it sucks due to dis-investment deliberately done by the Utilities.
Backups are getting to be necessary.
LikeReplyShare
2
GeoType
3/8/2015 9:32 PM EST
where is that?
LikeReply
5amefa91
3/8/2015 9:38 PM EST
Here.
LikeReply
Palladia1
3/8/2015 10:28 PM EST
I think the question, "where is that" was an attempt to solicit a geographic location.
YOU may know where "here" is, but it is not a helpful answer.
LikeShare
SteelWheel25
3/8/2015 8:52 PM EST
The utility companies has passed on every single cost to doing business to the customer and the state government as done very little to protect its citizens from the monopoly. And now the citizens are seeking alternatives and suddenly the electric company is looking out for our best interest by killing our alternatives. You can bet your last dollar that the politicians will help them do it.
LikeReplyShare
7
Fate1
3/8/2015 8:54 PM EST
Consider that the electric company is not free to do whatever they want. Anything they do must be approved by the regulators, and upgrading the grid or providing home solar will raise rates. They may be looking to keep solar in a bottle but even if they see it as a new revenue source, they have hoops to jump through.
LikeReply
gnsherman56
3/8/2015 8:59 PM EST
That is suppose to make someone feel better, that they have enough money to jump threw hoops? Get real, this is the problem in America that the playing field is not equal.
LikeShare
3
5amefa91
3/8/2015 9:09 PM EST
Actually, in California the utilities found that the rooftop solar improves the stability of the grid. It is a cost savings not an expense item for the grid managers.
LikeShare
5
dalyplanet
3/8/2015 9:10 PM EST
How does rooftop solar improve grid stability?
LikeShare
View More Replies
Ibleedredwhiteandblue
3/8/2015 8:48 PM EST
When storage technology improves homeowners will have even less need to use the grid on cloudy days and at night. The utility companies should be in a panic.
LikeReplyShare
Fate1
3/8/2015 8:52 PM EST
But electric companies could be providing panels and other equipment, for sale or rent. I checked out Solar City. They provide the panels for free, they own them, but they are deemed an electric provider and you pay THEIR rates. I didn't like that part. Plus if I have a leak I have to pay them to remove the panels to fix the leak or install a new roof. That did not bother me much, but this new company being my sole energy provider and I pay their rates? Not comfortable with that.
MMMW has few or no short sellers, as the stock price is already so low, little profit can be had in shorting MMMW. There is a true wind power company- XZERES, that has certifications from NREL, the National Renewable Energy Lab, and AWAE, the American Wind Energy Association, that certify that the equipment is grid-ready, and the Xzeres Company meets the criteria necessary to build, install, and maintain renewable energy equipment, as well as being grid-applicable. Has MMMW any plans to obtain these certifications, or is MMMW entering into partnership with a company that has these certifications already? .............................. Disclosure: Until February 6,2015, I held up to 800,000 shares of MMMW, but I have now sold my position, and I will wait until the MMMW STS demonstration vehicle arrives in Virginia, or MMMW has the necessary certifications, before I consider a long position again in MMMW stock. Best Wishes to All.
Certification is required in order to connect renewable energy equipment to the grid, so does anyone know if MMMW is applying for or has tried to obtain this certification yet?
MMMW has now been around for 15 years, and they have not yet taken a development and scaled it up.... and in wondering about this and questioning an engineer who is familiar with renewable energy and with MMMW, I have learned that a special certification is required to install renewable energy equipmemt to the electric grid, and that MMMW does not have this certification, (which is needed to proceed with greater plans.....) If I am wrong, will someone please correct me?
MMMW- we are halfway through the business quarter today, and winter has reached the halfway point, too, so the 3 feet of snow on the rooftops in Worcester won't last much longer. Are we setting up the mobile demonstration unit, announced in the Press Release of December 6, 2013: "Mass Megawatts Wind Power, Inc. Plans Mobile Demonstration Unit for the Solar Tracking System"? And, more importantly, is the first installation in place yet, and up-and-running, so we can have pictures of the actual installation ? Even Edison took threee years to get his first city block powered when he invented the light bulb, but if you remember, there were forty men on the project, too. Who will run the sales department, who will be in charge of engineering, and who will be tasked with maintenance? Please get the personel you need to scale up NOW. Thanks. GLTA!
When MMMW ramps up commercial Solar Tracker production, and produces dozens each week, an emerging market in Africa for solar trackers cannot be ignored. This article appeared today on Yahoo:
Africa's quiet solar revolution
The continent skipped land lines for mobile phones. Now a new generation of start-ups is trying to bring sun power to rural Africa – and leapfrog the fossil fuel era.
Christian Science Monitor
By Lorena Galliot
By Tanzanian standards, Nosim Noah is not poor. A tall, handsome woman with the angular features of her fellow Masai tribe members, Ms. Noah makes a good living selling women’s and children’s clothes in the markets of this northern Tanzanian city. The four-bedroom brick house she shares with her parents and three children outside town has many modern comforts: mosquito screens on the windows and doors, a gas cookstove, and, most important, a faucet with running water in the back of the yard, next to a stall with a working toilet.
But despite their relative prosperity, up until late 2013, the family had no electricity.
“We waited 10 years for them to turn the power on – 10 years and nothing,” says Noah.
Then, one afternoon, the Noahs had an unexpected knock on the door. An agent for a new electrical company called M-POWER said that, for a sign-up fee of only 10,000 shillings ($6), he could install a fully functioning solar home system in their house – enough to power several LED lights and a radio. The payoff was immediate. While Noah used to spend $18 a month on kerosene, she now pays a monthly average of $11 for her solar lighting, and she no longer has to go into town to charge her cellphone. The person most affected, though, may be her 2-year-old daughter, Emilia, who is afraid of the dark.
“She would cry every night – every single night,” says Noah. “It was a struggle to put her to sleep.” Now, with a new light above her bed, “it makes a huge difference,” she says.
The changes taking place under the Noahs’ roof are emblematic of a quiet revolution sweeping across much of rural Africa and the developing world.
Until recently, the lack of electricity in many poor areas was seen as something of an inevitable fact of life. Building power grids across long distances to reach remote communities is slow and costly, and when the people in those communities are subsistence farmers living on less than $2 a day, the returns often fail to justify the massive investment.
Now, however, a new solar energy movement is bringing kilowatts to previously unlit areas of Africa – and changing the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. The idea behind the latest effort isn’t to tap the power of the sun to electrify every appliance in a household. Instead, it is to install a small solar panel not much bigger than an iPad to power a few lights, a cellphone charger, and other basic necessities that can still significantly alter people’s lives.
Going smaller better fits the budgets of the rural poor. People use the money they normally would spend on kerosene to finance their solar systems, allowing them to pay in small, affordable installments and not rely on government help. The concept is called pay-as-you-go solar.
Many see it as helping to overcome the problems that have plagued previous solar “revolutions” in Africa. Richard Hosier, a senior analyst at the World Bank, likes to tell the story of his first encounter with solar panels in Africa.
“It was in a village in Kenya, in 1981, during the Carter administration,” he recalls. “There were solar panels all right – cut into little bits to make necklaces for the women.”
African villages, Mr. Hosier says, are littered with failed solar projects donated by well-meaning government agencies or nongovernmental organizations that installed the technology but couldn’t afford to follow up with maintenance or battery replacements.
While some remain skeptical of the new approach, many believe the scale of the current movement, coupled with the involvement of local entrepreneurs and the changing economics of solar power, will make it different this time around. Some observers are even asking, Will rural Africa leapfrog the carbon energy age altogether and go directly to a solar-powered future?
* * *
No one doubts the need to bring kilowatts to remote areas of the developing world. According to the International Energy Agency, more than 1.3 billion people – one-sixth of the world’s population – lack access to modern energy services. In Tanzania, 81 percent of the population live without electricity.
Instead, many of these people rely on candles, battery lamps, and CO2-emitting kerosene lanterns and diesel generators to light their homes. This can be expensive. Kerosene and diesel, the two main fuels available to the poorest of the poor, are among the costliest for consumers. The United Nations Environment Program estimates that Africans spend between $12 billion and $17 billion a year on fuel-based lighting. In Asia, people spend $9 billion to $13 billion.
These fuels are also dirty. Burning kerosene in African homes and small businesses causes an estimated 30 million to 50 million tons of CO2 emissions annually, according to a 2010 study commissioned by the World Bank. Globally, kerosene use releases 190 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year – an amount greater than the emissions of Australia and Britain combined. Replacing all of the world’s kerosene lamps with clean energy sources would have the same environmental impact as taking 30 million cars off the road, the study noted.
Underlying this welter of statistics is the main reason that advocates think the moment is propitious for a small solar revolution in Africa – improving economics. The Global Off-Grid Lighting Association, a nonprofit group based in the Netherlands, estimates that an African household living on $2 a day can save as much as 86 percent of its expenses for kerosene and mobile-phone charging by switching to solar.
Many residents of Tanzania who have installed solar panels have already felt some of these effects on their wallets, as well as in other ways. In one village, a resident describes how he’d stopped feeling the throbbing pain behind his eyes that came from working evenings in dim light.
In another case, a woman says that her 3-year-old son’s chronic cough improved dramatically once he stopped breathing in kerosene fumes daily. Salome Simon, a young single mother in the northern Tanzanian village of Oldadai, mentions a more unusual benefit: Thieves stopped stealing the chickens in the coop outside her house after she hung a bright solar-powered LED light above her doorstep.
Yet solar is spreading for other reasons as well. As technology has improved, the cost of photovoltaic panels has dropped by more than 99 percent since 1977. LED lights and batteries are also becoming increasingly affordable.
Perhaps even more important, a new technology has come along in recent years that has had a deeply transformative impact on developing economies: cellphones. Cellular networks in Africa have spread at a pace that no one anticipated a decade ago, now covering more than 85 percent of the continent.
“Say you’re one of our customers, a Tanzanian farmer living on less than $5 a day,” says Xavier Helgesen, cofounder and chief executive officer of Off-Grid Electric, M-POWER’s parent company.
“You won’t have electricity, and you certainly won’t have a bank account, but you’ll have a cellphone.”
Their ubiquity, along with the development of mobile payment technologies that are commonly used by Africans, has helped change the calculus for entrepreneurs such as Mr. Helgesen. Before, transactions in rural Africa were cash-only – an open window for corruption, and a huge obstacle to business. Now, M-POWER’S solar home systems have meters digitally linked to the customers’ cellphone numbers. No matter how poor they are, or how remote their village is, customers can pay for the electricity consumption recorded by the meter simply by sending a text message.
All these factors have emboldened a generation of entrepreneurs to venture into the Wild West that is the last mile of electrification. Companies with business models rivaling M-POWER’s are flourishing all across East Africa, South Asia, and to a lesser degree in South America (where existing electrification rates are higher). According to the Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP), a World Bank-backed umbrella group of 34 organizations, at least 25 companies are promoting pay-as-you-go solar products and services across the developing world, with an estimated 250,000 such products sold as of late 2014. The organization projects that at least 3 million pay-as-you-go solar systems will be sold around the world in the next five years.
The numbers are even more impressive in countries where solar has benefited from government backing. In Bangladesh, more than 2.9 million pay-as-you-go solar home systems have been financed by Infrastructure Development Company Limited, a government-backed solar bank launched in 2003. The country is now installing systems at a rate of 80,000 a month, with a target of 6 million sold overall by 2017.
CGAP sees such technology as allowing developing countries to carve out an energy future that is smarter, cheaper, and cleaner than the one the West pursued decades ago. As energy consultant Julian Popov put it in a recent opinion piece he wrote for Al Jazeera, most African countries never did string phone lines to every home and business – and in the end, they didn’t have to. Just as African mobile-phone networks skipped the land-line phase, he believes that African solar companies could bypass the fossil fuel era.
* * *
On a hot, dusty afternoon, more than 80 villagers wait patiently for their turn to climb on the corrugated tin roof of the tallest house in Oldadai. Surrounding them is a team of recruiters holding clipboards and wearing T-shirts emblazoned with M-POWER’s lightning-bolt logo.
“If you join us, you’ll be climbing on roofs all the time to install solar panels,” says Raphael Robert, the lean, athletic Tanzanian who is head of expansion at the company. “If you can’t climb on the roof, then I’m sorry but you’re out.”
The unorthodox recruiting session is part of the young company’s aggressive blueprint. In every village it does business, M-POWER hires local “agents” – villagers who are trained to sell, install, and repair the start-up’s low-cost solar home systems. Typically, Mr. Robert and his team meet with a dozen or so candidates. But word of mouth on the company is spreading, and when they show up at Oldadai, a large crowd is waiting.
“There were old people, young people, village councilmen, schoolteachers, the pastor ... everyone wanted to try out,” says Robert. With too little time to interview them all, Robert does what his job at M-POWER often calls for: He improvises.
The ability to hire and train local staff is one of the key factors of these companies’ success – and one of the biggest challenges they face in electrifying rural Africa.
At the production center of a Tanzania-based solar micro-grid company called Devergy, a sign on the door of the outgoing inventory room reads, in bold red letters: “TUO.” It’s supposed to be “OUT,” but a local painter read the model that was handed to him backward, and obligingly reproduced it.
“We kept that sign as a reminder of the challenges we’ll inevitably face, which are never what you’d expect,” says Fabio De Pascale, the chief executive of Devergy.
Distribution is another complication faced by companies looking to sell their product in the developing world. How do you reach customers in areas where there are no roads, no infrastructure, and no delivery service?
“We basically had to build, from scratch, the equivalent of FedEx for rural Africa,” says Erica Mackey, M-POWER’s chief operating officer, a young Texan with long, flowing blond hair and cowboy boots.
The key, she and her partners realized, was to build on the existing local economy. Instead of opening new shops when they expand into an area, they team up with the little roadside “dukas” (general stores) in every village. To get their products to the stores, they partner with area minibus and mototaxi drivers who deliver the systems along their route. The final link is the local M-POWER agents themselves, who pick up the systems at the duka, then deliver and install them at customers’ homes.
Investors as far off as Silicon Valley are starting to take notice of the technology. More than $45 million flowed into the off-grid solar sector in the first four months of 2014. M-POWER’S parent company, Off-Grid Electric, completed a $7 million round of funding in March, with Microsoft cofounder Paul Allen, the US solar firm SolarCity, and Omidyar Network as lead investors. In February, M-KOPA Solar, a Kenyan pay-as-you-go company, announced that it had raised $20 million to fund the expansion of its customer base – a record amount for the sector.
As with any emerging industry, however, there are inherent risks with start-ups – especially ones that operate in the bush. Investors are naturally wary.
“I’d want to know the statistics: How many of the systems break? How many of them get stolen? How can they stop users from hacking into their meters and getting power for free?” says Anders Hauch, the investment director of Frontier Investment Management, a Danish firm that specializes in renewable energy projects.
These are some of the problems that doomed previous attempts at establishing solar energy in Africa in the 1970s and ’80s. But Helgesen says they are all woes that Off-Grid Electric has anticipated and successfully tackled. Before the company deployed its first pilot system, it bought “every solar product ever made” to test it in the field. Most broke down within a month, but one – from its current supplier – endured remarkably well in the rough rural conditions, with breakage rates in the single digits.
The company also created its own software, which links each M-POWER system sold to the address, cellphone number, and electricity use of each customer. Any lack of payment (or unusual payment pattern) is detected immediately, limiting the possibility of hacking or fraud. Ms. Mackey, Helgesen, and Mr. De Pascale are aware that companies like theirs, seemingly populated by idealistic 20- and 30-somethings who want to change the world, are the outsiders and underdogs of the energy field. Nevertheless, they hope that, ultimately, the success of their business model will speak for itself.
“We’re not just doing this out of the goodness of our hearts,” says De Pascale. “We’re in it for the money.”
* * *
The idea that off-grid solar power makes both shillings and sense would certainly have found a few skeptics at the “Powering Africa” conference, held in Tanzania’s largest city, Dar es Salaam, early last year. The three-day affair, which Helgesen and Mackey attended, brought together all of the country’s energy titans in a luxury oceanfront hotel. Of the 126 participants in attendance, many were white, middle-aged men. (“Will the bankers and lawyers please stand up?” a panel speaker quipped.)
“The reality is that no big investor is going to seriously consider funding off-grid rural electrification projects,” said Chris Ford, the head of asset management for the British power company Globeleq, in an interview at the conference. “It’s just too difficult to make money in that space.”
Nico Tyabji, an associate at Bloomberg New Energy Finance, views the emerging small-scale solar industry with more optimism – but is still cautious.
“It’s an exciting area, with high growth potential,” he says in a phone interview. “That being said, it’s been heavily incubated by development financing up until now. None of these companies has yet proven it can scale [up] with significant commercial investment, but they’re trying out different technologies and business models. We’re seeing a lot of innovation.”
Others worry that the power offered by off-grid solar is too limited to answer Africa’s growing electricity needs: Most systems currently on the market only power a few lights and cellphone chargers, not energy-intensive appliances.
“Africa must not be cornered to focus just on green energy,” says Mwangi Kimenyi, a senior fellow with the Africa Growth Initiative at the Brookings Institution in Washington. In an e-mail, Mr. Kimenyi stresses the need to invest in all power sources to boost electricity supply across Africa – including the continent’s recently discovered coal, oil, and natural gas reserves. “These will be cheaper sources and, given that Africa’s contribution to greenhouse gases is very low, it must utilize these sources.”
But others believe that pushing the development of fossil fuel-produced electricity over off-grid solutions is a colossal mistake. They argue that, for many poor people, replacing a candle with an LED light is already transformative. Even if they were connected to the grid, most rural Africans couldn’t afford larger appliances such as refrigerators or air conditioners.
Moreover, the International Energy Agency has said that if the world is to meet the UN goal of achieving universal energy access by 2030, more than half of all power-sector investments should be going to off-grid, clean energy services.
“The time frame for deploying solar is now; the time frame for extending centralized grids is hypothetically decades from now,” says Justin Guay of the Sierra Club in San Francisco. “Should millions remain in the dark while big corporations are busy digging up dirty coal?”
Back in Dar es Salaam, participants of the Power Africa conference gathered to unwind on the hotel’s private dock after a grueling day of talks. Sipping a cold drink, Helgesen surveyed the mingling crowd.
“Even if every single project announced in this conference gets going on schedule – and that’s a big if – then, sure, Dar es Salaam will get power, and the mines will get power,” he mused. “But the 80 percent of rural Tanzanians without electricity? Forget them.”
* * *
He wouldn’t get an argument from Noah and her family. When she and her late husband moved into their house in 2004, they paid about a $200 connection fee to TANESCO, the Tanzanian national utility, to extend a power line to their home. After a six-month wait, workers finally erected a utility pole outside their home, unspooled some wires, and attached a meter to the wall. The family put in a few sockets, light bulbs, and switches.
But the power never came. “I have no idea why it didn’t work,” Noah says. “All I know is that the lights never came on.”
They have power now, though, with the help of the sun. And no one is happier on those inky dark nights than 2-year-old Emilia.
"There's money in Licensing Deals"-lesson from 'SharkTank' episode this week. I am glad MMMW is setting up this spinoff, it is a good step. About the Press Releases-I am glad MMMW is not too slick yet- the guys there seem to speak straight from the hip, but I agree that editing the grammar mistakes from press releases can be helpful........
It'll be a happy new year for MMMW, as solar projects begin to flow, and the company grows in the positive direction.... I am believing the stock price will go higher and higher as the year goes on. Best wishes for all!
Massachusetts' electricity rates are set to rise 29%: I just spoke with one of my cousins in Amherst, Massachusetts, 40 miles from Worcester, and this week (Nov, 2014) he received notice his electricity rate is going up 29%. This has to provide additional incentive for the solar developments in that state- and this will help MMMW, too.
MMMW has much more information on the STS packages now, addressing a lot of the questions.
We are closer to sales, and the stock price will go up!
Another video is on Youtube with greater detail: It is at www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYW5y8OXkCQ There is no wind in the microphone as Mr. Ricker explains the MMMW Solar Tracker in good detail. The company made progress today, now let's get a sales force working and run with this!
WORCESTER, Mass. - September 23, 2014 ..... Progress is being made: "Solar-Power Tracking System (STS)-- A demonstration unit is near completion and the company plans to unveil it later this month." With a specific time-frame of one month stated, this is the first indication of when we will get to see the design. "Commercial production is anticipated to being in the next few months." I am still waiting and anticipating for the commercial production to get underway!
Here's an idea for marketing MMMW's solar tracker:......The concept that a tracker improves solar utilization is known, so now can a few of them be put on display, like at a trade show? Doing research on Mr. Ricker's previous patents is illuminating...(refer post 631). I put faith in Mr. Ricker's ability to put down the plan, prepare the process, and proceed to production, for turning out the first MMMW solar trackers.
Good Observation, the website does have new information about the Mass Megawatts tracker system, and how one can obtain yet more information and put in a sales order.
Now, It's Good to Have Easy-to-Find Company Information:................MMMW Security Details:............
Share Structure..................................................
Market Value........... $731,422 a/o Aug 29, 2014................
Shares Outstanding..... 48,761,477 a/o Aug 27, 2014..............
Float.................. 47,687,041 a/o Aug 27, 2014..............
Authorized Shares...... 49,000,000 a/o Aug 27, 2014..............
Par Value:... No Par Value......................................
Shareholders of Record:... 543 a/o Aug 27, 2014
Here's From Wikipedia: It's the OTCQB designation definition:
Effective May 1, 2014, OTCQB will be implementing a one penny ($0.01) bid price requirement which is "intended to remove companies that are most likely to be the subject of dilutive stock fraud schemes and promotions." Each company verify via an annual OTCQB Certification, signed by the company CEO or CFO, that their company information is current. This will include information about a company’s reporting status, company profile, information on management and boards, major shareholders, law firms, transfer agents, and IR / PR firms. Investor confidence improves when there is more information about a company’s ownership structure, professional advisors and service providers. This certification will be required for any security newly qualified to be publicly quoted by a broker-dealer under SEC Rule 15c2-11, or when an OTC Pink traded company becomes a current SEC reporting company, beginning May 1, 2014. For companies already traded on OTCQB, there will be an annual management certification requirement throughout 2014 and 2015 based on a company’s Fiscal Year End ("FYE"). The first set of certifications will be due by July 31, 2014 for companies that have a FYE of March 31, 2014. Also beginning May 1, 2014, International Reporting companies may upgrade from OTC Pink to OTCQB if they publish their 12g3-2(b) compliant disclosure on our website and verify their company profile. There will be an annual fee for the OTCQB marketplace of $10,000 per year and a one-time $2,500 application fee. These fees are discounted for current OTCQB companies that apply in 2014 to $7,500 per year for the first two years, and the application fee will be waived. Companies that are not currently OTCQB companies will be required to pay the standard annual fee and application fee.
Message today from Mr. Ricker on tracker status: "We have made a revision on our racking needs with an improvement recently. The web site shortly should have picture of it with an explanation of its competitive advantages from other trackers. A package describing the advantages with request for quotes should be ready at or shortly afterwards...."
Here's a Description of Massachusettes' Solar Assistance Program: (from 2012) Solar Program Benefiting 17 Massachusetts Communities
HOPKINTON— As part of the effort to reach Governor Patrick's goal of 250 megawatts (MW) of solar power installed by 2017, Energy and Environmental Affairs Secretary Richard K. Sullivan Jr. today announced the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC) and the Department of Energy Resources (DOER) selected 17 communities to participate in the Solarize Massachusetts (Solarize Mass) Program, which helps residents and business owners adopt solar photovoltaic (PV) technology.
“This month we reached 100 megawatts of installed solar, which is being used in 331 cities and towns across the state,” said Secretary Sullivan. “This program will help us achieve our renewable energy goals even faster, bring local clean energy jobs to our communities and stabilize our energy costs.”
Solarize Mass is a program that encourages the adoption of small scale solar PV by deploying a coordinated education, marketing and outreach effort, combined with a tiered pricing structure that provides increased savings as more people in the community go solar.
MassCEC, in partnership with the DOER’s Green Communities Division has selected the cities and towns of Acton, Arlington, Boston, Hopkinton, Melrose, Mendon, Millbury, Montague, Newburyport, Palmer, Pittsfield, Lenox, Shirley, Sutton, Wayland, Sudbury and Lincoln, to participate in Solarize Mass.
“By combining education and grassroots marketing with tiered pricing of solar PV Solarize Mass was able to help 162 residents go solar,” said MassCEC Chief Executive Officer Patrick Cloney. “By extending this program to 17 communities, we are confident that we can help more people in the Commonwealth use solar energy to help manage their energy costs and create a cleaner energy future.”
“These communities are leading the way in clean energy adoption and we’re pleased to honor them today for their effort to take their energy future into their own hands by investing in local sources of energy,” said DOER Commissioner Mark Sylvia.
Through Solarize Mass, MassCEC will provide education and marketing support and rebates to help the 17 communities implement a community-wide solar PV program for small-scale solar projects. MassCEC will provide technical support and host free educational meetings in the pilot communities to educate people about the benefits of installing solar and to drive interest in implementing the technology. MassCEC will also issue Request for Proposals (RFP) from solar integrators for bulk purchasing business models in which solar installation costs are based on a tiered structure that provide lower costs with increased capacity of solar installed within the community.
“I am thrilled that Pittsfield and Lenox were selected to participate in the Solarize Massachusetts program,” said Sen. Benjamin B. Downing, co-chair of the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy. “This program will help spread the use of clean energy and reduce these communities’ dependence on fossil fuels, in the most cost effective way.”
“Solarize Mass is an ambitious program that ensures cost effective development as we create green jobs and continue to strive toward our renewable energy generation goals,” said Rep. John D. Keenan, co-chair of the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy.
For more information about Solarize Mass visit www.SolarizeMass.com.
As a result of the Commonwealth Solar rebate programs launched in 2008, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding for solar on water treatment facilities and other public buildings, and Solarize Mass, the state has seen a nearly 30-fold increase in solar PV installations since 2007. Currently, there are more than 100 MW of solar energy installed in Massachusetts, and an additional 40 MW under contract for installation, up from 3.5 MW when Governor Patrick took office.
Massachusetts lies at the end of the energy pipeline – lacking indigenous supplies of coal, natural gas, and oil. As a result, we have some of the highest energy costs in the nation. Of the $22 billion Massachusetts spends annually to buy the energy that runs our power plants, buildings and vehicles, 80 percent flows out of state to purchase coal from Colombia, oil from Venezuela, and natural gas and oil from the Middle East and Canada. That’s nearly $18 billion in lost economic opportunity that Massachusetts is reclaiming through investments in home-grown renewable energy and energy efficiency.
Programs like this one and others that stem from the Green Communities Act of 2008 have helped grow the state’s clean energy economy. These policies cut energy costs, protect our environment and create jobs. We’re cultivating a clean energy economy that’s grown by 6.7 percent to employ 64,000 clean energy workers in Massachusetts.
About the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center
Created by the Green Jobs Act of 2008, the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC) is dedicated to accelerating the success of clean energy technologies, companies and projects in the Commonwealth—while creating high-quality jobs and long-term economic growth for the people of Massachusetts. MassCEC is a partner, clearinghouse and connector for people in the clean energy sector, making direct investments in clean energy companies, building a strong clean energy workforce, and supporting responsibly sited renewable energy projects across the Commonwealth. MassCEC works with the entire clean energy community in Massachusetts to propel promising technologies from the drawing board to the global marketplace. Join the Innovation Revolution at http://www.masscec.com/.
Some emerging solar plants scorch birds in mid-air! IVANPAH DRY LAKE, Calif.August 18, 2014 (AP) — Workers at a state-of-the-art solar plant in the Mojave Desert have a name for birds that fly through the plant's concentrated sun rays — "streamers," for the smoke plume that comes from birds that ignite in midair. The bird kills mark the latest instance in which the quest for clean energy sometimes has inadvertent environmental harm. Solar farms have been criticized for their impacts on desert tortoises, and wind farms have killed birds, including numerous raptors.
"We take this issue very seriously," said Jeff Holland, a spokesman for NRG Solar of Carlsbad, California, the second of the three companies behind the plant. The third, Google, deferred comment to its partners.
The $2.2 billion plant, which launched in February, is at Ivanpah Dry Lake near the California-Nevada border. The operator says it's the world's biggest plant to employ so-called power towers.
Federal wildlife investigators who visited the BrightSource Energy plant last year and watched as birds burned and fell, reporting an average of one "streamer" every two minutes, are urging California officials to halt the operator's application to build a still-bigger version................................................................................................................................
A bird fried every two minutes, while the sun is shining, is 130,000 birds a year; flat-plate solar photovoltaic panels with a Solar Tracker are a safer method of harvesting solar energy.
When MMMW origially started around 2002, the stock price traded above $10 a while; with commercial production of the solar tracker, sales, company profits, and perhaps, dividends in the years to come, MMMW may yet trade around $10 per share, again.
from Part IV in the Edgar filing 07/29/2014
"Is it anticipated that any significant change in results of operations from the corresponding period for the last fiscal year will be reflected by the earnings statements to be included in the subject report or portion thereof?" Reply: "no." .......... Let's keep in mind, this is for the previous 12 months to April 30, 2014; it is in the current fiscal quarter (Aug 1, 2014 to Oct 31, 2014) that commercial production is scheduled to begin, and the results will be published later on. Keep the Faith! Good things are about to happen to MMMW.
Rhyme: Be a backer of the solar tracker; and make some money when the weather's sunny!
Reasonable delay: The Registrant’s annual report on Form 10-K for the period ended April 30, 2014 will be filed on or before the fifteenth calendar day following the prescribed due date. The reason for the delay is that the Registrant had to resolve computer related issues and is also waiting for additional information from a third party related to the final copy of the document to be filed.
Buying opportunity: MMMW requires patience at this juncture; MMMW is on the verge of good things happening. Let MMMW develop itself, and the reward will go to the patient investors who are farsighted; not nearsighted, as the next few business quarters will see MMMW advancing spectacularly; there is demand for a solar tracker like the one Mr. Ricker is Patenting. It is time to line up the manufacturing- the mass-production capability- and then it is full-steam ahead toward sales and profits- (Currently, there is no company debt)- and a climbing stock price.....go MMMW!.... and Hooray for good old-fashioned Yankee Ingenuity at its Best.
Partial Summary MMMW stock offerings past 9 months: from FORM 10-Q December 16, 2013
During the three months ended October 31, 2013, the Company issued the following shares of stock:
Shares Amount
Common stock for cash at $0.010 per share (August 2013) 500,000 $ 5,000
Common stock for cash at $0.027 per share (August 2013) 257,000 $ 6,939
Common stock for cash at $0.030 per share (August 2013) 166,000 $ 4,980
Common stock for cash at $0.035 per share (August 2013) 106,000 $ 3,710
Common stock for cash at $0.037 per share (August 2013) 108,000 $ 3,996
Common stock for services at $0.0381 per share (August 2013) 190,000 $ 7,239
Common stock for services at $0.0389 per share (August 2013) 68,000 $ 2,645
Common stock for cash at $0.040 per share (August 2013) 117,500 $ 4,700
Common stock for cash at $0.020 per share (September 2013) 10,000 $ 200
Common stock for cash at $0.025 per share (September 2013) 40,000 $ 1,000
Common stock for services at $0.0252 per share (September 2013) 40,000 $ 1,008
Common stock for services at $0.0278 per share (September 2013) 20,000 $ 556
Common stock for services at $0.0281 per share (September 2013) 375,000 $ 10,538
Common stock for cash at $0.030 per share (September 2013) 250,000 $ 7,500
Common stock for cash at $0.015 per share (October 2013) 145,300 $ 2,180
Common stock for cash at $0.020 per share (October 2013) 997,000 $ 19,940
Common stock for services at $0.025 per share (October 2013) 300,000 $ 7,500
Common stock for services at $0.032 per share (October 2013) 100,000 $ 3,200
Common stock for cash at $0.036 per share (October 2013) 248,600 $ 8,950
Common stock for services at $0.036 per share (October 2013) 120,000 $ 4,320
Common stock for services at $0.040 per share (October 2013) 500,000 $ 20,000
Common stock for cash at $0.045 per share (October 2013) 60,000 $ 2,700
.........................................................................................................from FORM 10-Q March 24, 2014
During the three months ended January 31, 2014, the Company issued the following shares of stock:
Shares Amount
Common stock for cash at $0.015 per share (November 2013) 400,000 $ 6,000
Common stock for cash at $0.016 per share (November 2013) 240,000 $ 3,840
Common stock for services at $0.035 per share (November 2013) 350,000 $ 12,250
Common stock for cash at $0.030 per share (December 2013) 123,500 $ 3,705
Common stock for services at $0.032 per share (December 2013) 137,000 $ 4,384
Common stock for cash at $0.010 per share (January 2014) 200,000 $ 2,000
Common stock for cash at $0.011 per share (January 2014) 550,000 $ 6,050
Common stock for cash at $0.020 per share (January 2014) 550,000 $ 11,000
Common stock for services at $0.028 per share (January 2014) 550,000 $ 15,400
.........................................................................................................from FORM S-8 Feb. 5, 2014 AMOUNT TO BE REGISTERED: PROPOSED MAXIMUM OFFERING PRICE PER SHARE OF COMMON STOCK: MAXIMUM AGGREGATE OFFERING PRICE:
COMMON 2,000,000 shares $ .0275 $55,000 $.......................................................................................................from FORM S-8 May 14, 2014 AMOUNT TO BE REGISTERED: PROPOSED MAXIMUM OFFERING PRICE PER SHARE OF COMMON STOCK: MAXIMUM AGGREGATE OFFERING PRICE:
COMMON 2,500,000 shares $.022 $55,000
Having some young, energetic people onboard could help, too, in addition to the wise, mature guys in charge. I like MMMW's prospects, and the future is getting brighter with each quarter. We need manufacturing and sales, to solidify the bottom line.
Here is what I think about this price level: The company, in the past, puts out a new S-8 filing every 3 to 4 months, adding about 2 million shares to the "shares outstanding" with each filing, and often selling the shares at a steep discount; the "sophisticated buyers" who are given this opportunity, are the constant sellers, driving the price down. (Imagine buying MMMW shares for $.01 and selling them for $.015 a few weeks later...) This has to end, and the company begin to place a premium on its shares, and have some faith in the product it is marketing. Build a lot of them, and then market them and sell them; don't sit around waiting for orders! Continually paying rent, taxes, and expenses (for the company's officers and product development), without any income from products has been, I think, the company's problem, in the past. Bringing in a manufacturing base, having a sales force, and establishing a regular, growing income stream will make this gem shine as brightly as Apple or Google, or SolarCity, or FirstSolar; now, we have a working, practical solar tracker here, let's GET IT DONE!
Nice work on the new description for MMMW on Investorshub.com!
You have to remember, Mr. Ricker's an inventor, and has two patents already; The solar business is world-wide, and an improved, commercial tracker can be the better mousetrap that everyone has been waiting for; there are many benefits to having an improved tracker. From a solar engineer: "Another advantage a tracking mount adds to a dedicated solar device, is that if tracking is not used and operation is desired in the morning/evening, the solar panel must be enlarged to have enough power output to run the device at shallow sun angles. A problem with oversizing the panel, is that excessive output may then occur at noon. This can cause undesirable conditions where motors etc run too fast or hard, often causing burnout. To avoid this overpowering in the system, extra expense is encountered by oversizing the motor etc, or adding regulator electronics. A rule of thumb that ive seen for solar electric engineering is to always size the panels so that at maximum output directly into a load, that the system will encounter no overload, or overcharge. Stationary panels are at maximum output generally twice a year, so the rest of the time output is reduced, meaning that a safely engineered system can lack enough power to run away from times of peak output.
So the tracking has safety benefits as well.
A cheap solar yardlight that tracked could use a smaller collector, or a larger battery, and would be less likely to ruin the battery.A solar run motor would have more consistent output throughout the day, smaller solar panels or a bigger motor could be used, and properly sized panels would ensure that the motor wouldnt be overpowered.
Note that solar conditions can vary signifigantly and rapidly. For strict safety and equipment protection, I always keep in mind that I've observed panels outputting over twice their rated output. this condition of double output is rare enough that i use a fuse or breaker rated at twice the panels output rating. using a smaller fuse, the fuse would blow often. Thus the motor is rated at nearly double the panels specified output listed for standard typical solar intensity, since it needs to handle what is fed into it until the fuse or breaker trips. An 80watt panel powers a 160watt maximum rated motor, an 80watt panel hooked to an 80watt motor is a recipie for disaster.
An inverter unit designed to deliver gridtied AC power also has a maximum throughput rating, so it can be thought of like the aforementioned motor example. These typically have built in regulator/control circuits that prevent overload, but prevent overload by not delivering availiable power. We want to deliver and use availiable power, thats what its all about. The inverter should be rated to deliver twice the solar arrays output rating, to avoid power rejection by the regulator circuit in such units, as well the collector being on a tracking mount."
(MMMW)
$ 0.02?0.002 (11.11%)
Volume: 438,736
Coming Company profits will bring stock price appreciation: MMMW email reply states updated release coming soon- "with detailed explanations on the methods toward reducing the cost in comparison to other solar trackers on the market. Then, we can sell aggressively and aim for profits.Thanks for your patience."