Almost all homesteaders want to use alternative energy, for some of the reasons that make us want to become homesteaders in the first place: It's Earth-friendly and sustainable, it provides independence, and the power itself is free.

But like most aspects of homesteading, it's not as simple as it first appears. Many people are put off by the original cost of even a modest wind or solar installation, or they're overwhelmed by the skills and technical knowledge required for do-it-yourselfers. And almost everyone has questions.

Chris LaForge has the answers. He is the owner of Great Northern Solar, which installed the wind and solar systems that power COUNTRYSIDE magazine's office, as well as such major projects as a dormitory at Northland College in Ashland, Wisconsin. He is on the board of directors of the Midwest Renewable Energy Association, he conducts seminars on alternative energy, and he has written several articles on the topic. Chris and Amy live and work on a beautiful, totally off-the-grid owner-built homestead a few miles from the southern shore of Lake Superior.

Your questions, comments and feedback are welcome, and will help make this new column a regular feature of practical value to homesteaders.

For nearly two decades I have had a passionate interest in developing and working with more sustainable ways to live on this planet. Whether working to find better ways to deal with radioactive waste or planning how a college dormitory can use composting toilets, I have been active in trying to improve our impact on the planet. I work with renewable energy and sustainable living technologies at Great Northern Solar in northern Wisconsin, and volunteer at the Midwest Renewable Energy Association, specializing in teaching about the design and installation of photovoltaic electrical systems. I hope to encourage you to try your hand at using more sustainable techniques in the way you live. I will also give you the opportunity to ask questions and see if I have any reasonable answers. (Or even unreasonable ones!)

Payback

The age-old issue of the cost effectiveness of renewable energy systems is a frequent question. "Payback" is the usual phrase, and "how long" the key killer. With our capital investments paying off quarterly and some paybacks coming instantly, a 10 to 50 year payback on a solar electric system leaves us in the dust economically. Using clean energy does not seem to pay off.

Several aspects of renewable energy are always left out when the discussion turns to "payback." First of all "constant cost" vs. a variable rate is rarely brought up. The cost of electricity varies depending on the variables of the market and utility industry. The cost of using renewable electricity is constant over the life of the system. Wild price fluctuations the market is experiencing in newly deregulated Californian markets indicates that stabilizing electrical costs over a long period of time may be given greater interest in the future.

Up-front costs vs. costs per watt generated over the life of the system is a consideration that is not usually addressed. The cost of a renewable system is usually all up-front, not financed, and overshadows the fact that the value pays off over a very long system life.

The concept of "externalities" is neglected by everyone other than those on the fringe of the environmental movement. If humans begin to concern themselves with global climate change, environmental degradation and some of the other current environmental crises, renewable and sustainable technologies present huge "paybacks" that are available now. The fact that environmental concern rates somewhere between insignificant and non-existent can only continue if we intend to become extinct.

Batteries vs. coal power

I have been looking into solar energy as an option for my home. One thing which concerns me is the life of the batteries, which seems to be about five years or less. I want to reduce the amount of pollution I personally contribute to the environment, but if I have to toss toxic batteries away every five years, I'm not sure my decision would be the right one. I average 200-300 kilowatt hours a month of grid power. Any comparisons as to how my use of coal-burning power plant compares to disposing of the batteries?

Batteries are the weakest link in the renewable energy system. With battery lives ranging from five to 25 years there is a wide range of types available for deep cycle energy storage. You will get what you pay for. Longer lived batteries cost more for each amp-hour stored. (Amp-hour is the unit of measure for batteries, usually used in the 20-hour rate for home systems.) If you choose to use batteries, make sure that your supplier has access to a good battery recycling center that recycles the whole battery including the electrolyte. This is very important because when you replace your old battery pack it is being recycled as much as possible. This is worth spending a bit more on.

This does not, however, eliminate the fact that batteries are a fairly dirty product. We can reduce our use of batteries and even eliminate them! If you have access to the utility power grid you can use a utility intertie renewable energy system with either no battery at all, or a very small battery for back-up during power outages. Grid intertie systems are very good for the environment and can be good for your pocket book. By eliminating the battery and using the utility as your storage, you avoid using the dirtiest element in renewable systems.

While I don't have any off-the-shelf data comparing coal fired plants with battery use, I can assure you that the wise use of recyclable batteries in a well-planned renewable energy system will greatly reduce your overall environmental impact.

If you have a question for Chris, write to: Countryside, The solar cowboy, W11564 Hwy. 64, Withee, WI 54498; csymag@tds.net.