@Stowed4Sea As a "new member" you must quickly realize owning a tractor makes you an expert in virology, economics, "general science" and everything else. 
How long before Compact Diesels are obsolete?
- Thread starter MiserableOldFart
- Start date
Phil Timmons
Silver Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 111
Since we have sort of hijacked this into the Texas Grid -- what is your look-ahead as more of Distributed Renewable (small Solar) comes on line as Grid-Tied in Texas? Looks like it may take down the Peak Use? As some of these are also battery-and-back-up systems, will also build in more resilience?
Stowed4Sea
Bronze Member
Well, it's kinda related to the topic. I was looking at getting an electric car (and I'd be interested in an electric tractor eventually after they prove themselves if they get there in my lifetime), but only because I'm eventually heading towards building my little solar farm out on my property. My initial problem is when I work, I work 12 hours, and don't get home until after dark, and once I start living out there, that means having a fairly huge battery to charge up my electric car battery (I think they are in the 80 kilowatt-hour range?) overnight so I can drive it to work the next day.
So if I add a tractor to my own little grid there, that's even more battery storage I'd need. I'm planning on doing this off-grid, not grid tied. Currently there's no power on my property, and for the cost of bringing it there, I could build my own small system enough to power my house and some decent battery backup, just not enough to charge up electric car, let alone not enough for a Tractor.
The Distributed Renewables @Phil Timmons is definitely on ERCOT's radar, it's a topic that comes up every year during our annual training seminar. It is a good thing, but also bad thing. Good because it does lower peak demand a bit, but bad because anything most residents do are un-regulated and don't need to be reported to ERCOT under NERC regulations. Distribution companies kinda make up their own rules, and don't have to report it to ERCOT, ERCOT has a good idea how much distributed renewables there are, but it's just an educated guess. Texas is huge, if the whole state was sunny one day at 80 degrees, and had X MW of load, then the next day the whole state was cloudy and had X MW load at 75 degrees at the same time, they can do the math to kinda figure out the temperature difference and guess how much extra load they have to generate that isn't produced from distributed renewables, but how do you do that when it's cloudy in some parts and sunny in others. But by tracking weather in the populated areas, they can kinda get an idea of this.
The hard part is, say you have the extreme: Let's assume everyone has solar panels on their roof and can produce most of their own power during the day. Then the next day it's cloudy and almost no rooftop solar produced say in all of Dallas....So one day they need another 30,000 MW of generation. But the whole next week it's sunny. This is an extreme, but it's to show that they still need 30,000 MW of generation, just sitting there, not making money (really losing money). This is the same problem really with Grid scale Solar and Wind. When it's not there on a given day, you still need the fossil fuel generation available. So what, you waste billions annually on maintenance/upkeep just to keep power plants available just in the event they are needed a few times a year? Well, Texas certainly wouldn't be enjoying some of the best energy prices in the United States, that's for sure lol. Again, that's an extreme but it's to show there is a tipping point where it becomes a problem with no good solution.
It's a fascinating problem....another issue is ERCOT needs a given inertia for whatever generation it has online. Wind/Solar/Distributed Energy don't have anything spinning (think about purpose of a flywheel, it's exactly same concept in grid and why we need it). Grid scale Wind, for those not familiar, use AC generator that spins at random speeds to produce DC, and then they convert that back into AC (they have to do because of NP=120f) so they can get steady 60 Hz. So the more renewables we have online, the less inertia we have online. I forget the percentage that is critical, I think it's 40% if I recall, but at some point, if a refinery starts a big enough load or some huge plant like that, it could collapse the grid because there isn't enough inertia to keep it going.
The only real solution is to have a bunch of batteries or some other way to store that energy for later, then have something like synchronous condensers that aid in the inertia problem without being a generator, but that's a whole lot of infrastructure to build....and you run into same problem as above, what happens if you have extreme 100 year event like we had recently and it's cloudy for 3 straight days and the batteries all dry up. Are we also going to be paying billions to just keep fossil fuel plants upkeep to be at the ready within say a weeks time?
EDIT: For clarity, just wanted to say it's awesome to talk about this and don't mean to sound condescending in my answers when I state my rhetorical questions just presenting the problem. My personal thoughts coming from the nuclear navy is that it is far safer than people realize and the best solution as a stop gap until better tech like better battery tech is available. Fossil fuels will always be needed as additional backups and ability to ramp up or ramp down (can't ramp down nuclear nearly as easy) but Nuclear is very stable as long as you build it smart (not Chernobyl liquid graphite moderator insides instead of the normal water that is safer) and don't build it where it can get slammed by Tsunami (Fukishima had many other problems they were warned about not up to good standards they ignored) etc. Nuclear Waste I think seems far better to deal with than wasting all our fossil fuels, but I think it's just too scary for most people. I blame Hollywood
Back to this tractor problem by the original poster that I started out with here, even if electric tractors were great today and had been around, tested and improved upon for the last 5 years, I still wouldn't get one, because currently, with my setup, I just wouldn't have the battery capacity overnight to charge them up, and when I have 8 hours off to play around, I'd want something that wouldn't need plugged in while I'm forced to take a break. I work in shifts and have two 7 day off periods each 6 weeks....Currently I'm out on my property often 10 hours a day with just my chainsaw, I want a tractor that can go at least that long so electric just wouldn't work for me. It's easy to say, oh just buy more batteries but I think it would be cost prohibitive, even if I build my own battery packs like I'm planning to do for solar by the way. Yeah buddy! I'm kinda geeking out about planning my own mini-grid system.
So if I add a tractor to my own little grid there, that's even more battery storage I'd need. I'm planning on doing this off-grid, not grid tied. Currently there's no power on my property, and for the cost of bringing it there, I could build my own small system enough to power my house and some decent battery backup, just not enough to charge up electric car, let alone not enough for a Tractor.
The Distributed Renewables @Phil Timmons is definitely on ERCOT's radar, it's a topic that comes up every year during our annual training seminar. It is a good thing, but also bad thing. Good because it does lower peak demand a bit, but bad because anything most residents do are un-regulated and don't need to be reported to ERCOT under NERC regulations. Distribution companies kinda make up their own rules, and don't have to report it to ERCOT, ERCOT has a good idea how much distributed renewables there are, but it's just an educated guess. Texas is huge, if the whole state was sunny one day at 80 degrees, and had X MW of load, then the next day the whole state was cloudy and had X MW load at 75 degrees at the same time, they can do the math to kinda figure out the temperature difference and guess how much extra load they have to generate that isn't produced from distributed renewables, but how do you do that when it's cloudy in some parts and sunny in others. But by tracking weather in the populated areas, they can kinda get an idea of this.
The hard part is, say you have the extreme: Let's assume everyone has solar panels on their roof and can produce most of their own power during the day. Then the next day it's cloudy and almost no rooftop solar produced say in all of Dallas....So one day they need another 30,000 MW of generation. But the whole next week it's sunny. This is an extreme, but it's to show that they still need 30,000 MW of generation, just sitting there, not making money (really losing money). This is the same problem really with Grid scale Solar and Wind. When it's not there on a given day, you still need the fossil fuel generation available. So what, you waste billions annually on maintenance/upkeep just to keep power plants available just in the event they are needed a few times a year? Well, Texas certainly wouldn't be enjoying some of the best energy prices in the United States, that's for sure lol. Again, that's an extreme but it's to show there is a tipping point where it becomes a problem with no good solution.
It's a fascinating problem....another issue is ERCOT needs a given inertia for whatever generation it has online. Wind/Solar/Distributed Energy don't have anything spinning (think about purpose of a flywheel, it's exactly same concept in grid and why we need it). Grid scale Wind, for those not familiar, use AC generator that spins at random speeds to produce DC, and then they convert that back into AC (they have to do because of NP=120f) so they can get steady 60 Hz. So the more renewables we have online, the less inertia we have online. I forget the percentage that is critical, I think it's 40% if I recall, but at some point, if a refinery starts a big enough load or some huge plant like that, it could collapse the grid because there isn't enough inertia to keep it going.
The only real solution is to have a bunch of batteries or some other way to store that energy for later, then have something like synchronous condensers that aid in the inertia problem without being a generator, but that's a whole lot of infrastructure to build....and you run into same problem as above, what happens if you have extreme 100 year event like we had recently and it's cloudy for 3 straight days and the batteries all dry up. Are we also going to be paying billions to just keep fossil fuel plants upkeep to be at the ready within say a weeks time?
EDIT: For clarity, just wanted to say it's awesome to talk about this and don't mean to sound condescending in my answers when I state my rhetorical questions just presenting the problem. My personal thoughts coming from the nuclear navy is that it is far safer than people realize and the best solution as a stop gap until better tech like better battery tech is available. Fossil fuels will always be needed as additional backups and ability to ramp up or ramp down (can't ramp down nuclear nearly as easy) but Nuclear is very stable as long as you build it smart (not Chernobyl liquid graphite moderator insides instead of the normal water that is safer) and don't build it where it can get slammed by Tsunami (Fukishima had many other problems they were warned about not up to good standards they ignored) etc. Nuclear Waste I think seems far better to deal with than wasting all our fossil fuels, but I think it's just too scary for most people. I blame Hollywood
Back to this tractor problem by the original poster that I started out with here, even if electric tractors were great today and had been around, tested and improved upon for the last 5 years, I still wouldn't get one, because currently, with my setup, I just wouldn't have the battery capacity overnight to charge them up, and when I have 8 hours off to play around, I'd want something that wouldn't need plugged in while I'm forced to take a break. I work in shifts and have two 7 day off periods each 6 weeks....Currently I'm out on my property often 10 hours a day with just my chainsaw, I want a tractor that can go at least that long so electric just wouldn't work for me. It's easy to say, oh just buy more batteries but I think it would be cost prohibitive, even if I build my own battery packs like I'm planning to do for solar by the way. Yeah buddy! I'm kinda geeking out about planning my own mini-grid system.
Last edited:
Phil Timmons
Silver Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 111
Lot to unpack there . . . going down both paths at once will sink this -- so maybe let me start with your local at-home-to-micro system? Then we can jump back to the big grid . . .Well, it's kinda related to the topic. I was looking at getting an electric car (and I'd be interested in an electric tractor eventually after they prove themselves if they get there in my lifetime), but only because I'm eventually heading towards building my little solar farm out on my property. My initial problem is when I work, I work 12 hours, and don't get home until after dark, and once I start living out there, that means having a fairly huge battery to charge up my electric car battery (I think they are in the 80 kilowatt-hour range?) overnight so I can drive it to work the next day.
So if I add a tractor to my own little grid there, that's even more battery storage I'd need. I'm planning on doing this off-grid, not grid tied. Currently there's no power on my property, and for the cost of bringing it there, I could build my own small system enough to power my house and some decent battery backup, just not enough to charge up electric car, let alone not enough for a Tractor.
The Distributed Renewables @Phil Timmons is definitely on ERCOT's radar, it's a topic that comes up every year during our annual training seminar. It is a good thing, but also bad thing. Good because it does lower peak demand a bit, but bad because anything most residents do are un-regulated and don't need to be reported to ERCOT under NERC regulations. Distribution companies kinda make up their own rules, and don't have to report it to ERCOT, ERCOT has a good idea how much distributed renewables there are, but it's just an educated guess. Texas is huge, if the whole state was sunny one day at 80 degrees, and had X MW of load, then the next day the whole state was cloudy and had X MW load at 75 degrees at the same time, they can do the math to kinda figure out the temperature difference and guess how much extra load they have to generate that isn't produced from distributed renewables, but how do you do that when it's cloudy in some parts and sunny in others. But by tracking weather in the populated areas, they can kinda get an idea of this.
The hard part is, say you have the extreme: Let's assume everyone has solar panels on their roof and can produce most of their own power during the day. Then the next day it's cloudy and almost no rooftop solar produced say in all of Dallas....So one day they need another 30,000 MW of generation. But the whole next week it's sunny. This is an extreme, but it's to show that they still need 30,000 MW of generation, just sitting there, not making money (really losing money). This is the same problem really with Grid scale Solar and Wind. When it's not there on a given day, you still need the fossil fuel generation available. So what, you waste billions annually on maintenance/upkeep just to keep power plants available just in the event they are needed a few times a year? Well, Texas certainly wouldn't be enjoying some of the best energy prices in the United States, that's for sure lol. Again, that's an extreme but it's to show there is a tipping point where it becomes a problem with no good solution.
It's a fascinating problem....another issue is ERCOT needs a given inertia for whatever generation it has online. Wind/Solar/Distributed Energy don't have anything spinning (think about purpose of a flywheel, it's exactly same concept in grid and why we need it). Grid scale Wind, for those not familiar, use AC generator that spins at random speeds to produce DC, and then they convert that back into AC (they have to do because of NP=120f) so they can get steady 60 Hz. So the more renewables we have online, the less inertia we have online. I forget the percentage that is critical, I think it's 40% if I recall, but at some point, if a refinery starts a big enough load or some huge plant like that, it could collapse the grid because there isn't enough inertia to keep it going.
The only real solution is to have a bunch of batteries or some other way to store that energy for later, then have something like synchronous condensers that aid in the inertia problem without being a generator, but that's a whole lot of infrastructure to build....and you run into same problem as above, what happens if you have extreme 100 year event like we had recently and it's cloudy for 3 straight days and the batteries all dry up. Are we also going to be paying billions to just keep fossil fuel plants upkeep to be at the ready within say a weeks time?
EDIT: For clarity, just wanted to say it's awesome to talk about this and don't mean to sound condescending in my answers when I state my rhetorical questions just presenting the problem. My personal thoughts coming from the nuclear navy is that it is far safer than people realize and the best solution as a stop gap until better tech like better battery tech is available. Fossil fuels will always be needed as additional backups and ability to ramp up or ramp down (can't ramp down nuclear nearly as easy) but Nuclear is very stable as long as you build it smart (not Chernobyl liquid graphite moderator insides instead of the normal water that is safer) and don't build it where it can get slammed by Tsunami (Fukishima had many other problems they were warned about not up to good standards they ignored) etc. Nuclear Waste I think seems far better to deal with than wasting all our fossil fuels, but I think it's just too scary for most people. I blame Hollywood
Back to this tractor problem by the original poster that I started out with here, even if electric tractors were great today and had been around, tested and improved upon for the last 5 years, I still wouldn't get one, because currently, with my setup, I just wouldn't have the battery capacity overnight to charge them up, and when I have 8 hours off to play around, I'd want something that wouldn't need plugged in while I'm forced to take a break. I work in shifts and have two 7 day off periods each 6 weeks....Currently I'm out on my property often 10 hours a day with just my chainsaw, I want a tractor that can go at least that long so electric just wouldn't work for me. It's easy to say, oh just buy more batteries but I think it would be cost prohibitive, even if I build my own battery packs like I'm planning to do for solar by the way. Yeah buddy! I'm kinda geeking out about planning my own mini-grid system.
Do you mind saying which direction or near location it may be? Asking for design considerations, maybe, if desired. What you build and what you need can vary widely across Texas -- at least if you want to get the most from the methods.
For example -- for some areas, mixing in some Small Wind is a smart option. Especially if you use a mixed or same charging system. So Solar PV can feed the day -- about 6 hours, and then Wind gets the other 18 hours. And maybe considering some Time-of-Use aligned with Time-of-Production can REALLY shift design needs in a very favorable way.
Same with mixing in some Solar Thermal. You may not believe what that can do with Heat for the Winter in Texas. Had I not helped build some I would have never believed it.
How far (distance, miles or whatever) do you figure you will be beyond a grid-tie point? There may be some cheaper ways of doing that once we look at it? But if you are fairly certain you will be "beyond-the-grid," I would encourage you to look at and study another forum, sort of like here, but for those type applications -- called The Other Power -- their forum is here >>> Fieldlines.com: The Otherpower discussion board - Index
[add on Edit] Missed the EV in there -- you can charge it at work? During the day? You work in some Grid Related field right? They would let you add a site charger? Or maybe even give you one if you asked? To charge a remote storage battery -- just to use that to charge an EV, later -- is quite a task.
Last edited:
CalG
Super Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2011
- Messages
- 5,105
- Location
- vermont
- Tractor
- Hurlimann 435, Fordson E27n, Bolens HT-23, Kubota B7200
I spent the entire day moving soil "fill" from a mound that I wanted taken down, to the slope off the shed roof addition on the house. About 100 yards between, through the woods at that.
I must have made 50 trips. Some with only the loader bucket, and some with both bucket and rear scoop. The scoop tip latch broke about midday due to over aggressive engagement and the underlying stone. Then that tool was non-op. (Fixed now)
The Hurlimann Mitsubishi 4 cylinder used about 4 gallons of fuel (less than 10 bucks!) doing this work.
Could an "electric" have done the work? I doubt it.
I must have made 50 trips. Some with only the loader bucket, and some with both bucket and rear scoop. The scoop tip latch broke about midday due to over aggressive engagement and the underlying stone. Then that tool was non-op. (Fixed now)
The Hurlimann Mitsubishi 4 cylinder used about 4 gallons of fuel (less than 10 bucks!) doing this work.
Could an "electric" have done the work? I doubt it.
Stowed4Sea
Bronze Member
That's a great forum Tim, thanks for suggesting that! I'm all about DIY as are most here so it's great to see a forum like that for power!
Despite having several large wind farms directly connected to the part of the Grid I operate, I hadn't really considered that for my home. I live in Burnet County. It's not that I'm out reach from the grid, I just don't see the value in connecting at least here near the beginning when I'm getting started. I can build my own system for less than the cost to hook up to PEC. If I hookup then I pay each month for energy and if I want to do a grid-tie system it's even more money on top of that. If I build my own system then I don't have a monthly bill and I can easily scale it up later as needed later.
I think wind is a great way to go to supplement, I didn't realize they made small turbines. Back when I worked for GE as a field engineer, I started to specialize in Solar before I left, they even sent me to their Wind Energy Management course in NC because their solar inverters use the exact same equipment, just chop out 1/3 of the cabinet (since solar is already DC of course). It's pretty brilliant when you think about it, both grid solar and wind need the final 2/3 of generating AC sine wave to 60 HZ and also Capacitators and Reactors but I always thought it funny to plug into the "Wind Energy Management" circuit board when out on a solar farm.
Out in Burnet, it's almost always got a wind above 6 mph it feels like, it would be interesting to see the data, but I know from burning fires it's almost always too windy so I'd think I'd have good luck with a turbine. I'll have to look into that forum to see how to connect up the turbine into the system I had in mind. I'm not sure if there are inverters for wind and if they would play nice in parallel to the inverters I had in mind or if I should couple it to the DC side. I'm not sure the voltages home turbines produce or output. I'll start more research, thanks for that site suggestion! I guess I had in my mind that solar can be scaled down because a panel is just a panel, you just use less of them when compared to grid scale, but I hadn't ever seen a small wind turbine for homes so never really thought about them! Thanks again for suggestion.
Despite having several large wind farms directly connected to the part of the Grid I operate, I hadn't really considered that for my home. I live in Burnet County. It's not that I'm out reach from the grid, I just don't see the value in connecting at least here near the beginning when I'm getting started. I can build my own system for less than the cost to hook up to PEC. If I hookup then I pay each month for energy and if I want to do a grid-tie system it's even more money on top of that. If I build my own system then I don't have a monthly bill and I can easily scale it up later as needed later.
I think wind is a great way to go to supplement, I didn't realize they made small turbines. Back when I worked for GE as a field engineer, I started to specialize in Solar before I left, they even sent me to their Wind Energy Management course in NC because their solar inverters use the exact same equipment, just chop out 1/3 of the cabinet (since solar is already DC of course). It's pretty brilliant when you think about it, both grid solar and wind need the final 2/3 of generating AC sine wave to 60 HZ and also Capacitators and Reactors but I always thought it funny to plug into the "Wind Energy Management" circuit board when out on a solar farm.
Out in Burnet, it's almost always got a wind above 6 mph it feels like, it would be interesting to see the data, but I know from burning fires it's almost always too windy so I'd think I'd have good luck with a turbine. I'll have to look into that forum to see how to connect up the turbine into the system I had in mind. I'm not sure if there are inverters for wind and if they would play nice in parallel to the inverters I had in mind or if I should couple it to the DC side. I'm not sure the voltages home turbines produce or output. I'll start more research, thanks for that site suggestion! I guess I had in my mind that solar can be scaled down because a panel is just a panel, you just use less of them when compared to grid scale, but I hadn't ever seen a small wind turbine for homes so never really thought about them! Thanks again for suggestion.
Phil Timmons
Silver Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 111
Good! That is just a start. You will want to look at this, too -- for Building Heat. Just a couple of 4'x8' Solar Thermal Panels (tubing + glass front + circulating water) with a Sunny Day will keep a building Very Warm for a couple of even cloudy and cold winter days weather -- if you use them with some thermal mass. Have you ever looked at Pex Tubing in Concrete?
Here is a simple sample video -- lots more if this is of interest to you.
Last edited:
Blue Mule
Gold Member
You can't swing a dead cat without hitting an "electric vehicles are the future!" thread. It's on the truck forums. It's on the Jeep forums. And now it's on the tractor forums too. I'm getting really sick of it.
Somebody call me when you "fill" an electric tractor in 90 seconds and run it in the field for 8 hours straight. I can do that with my diesel tractor right now, and it won't be possible with any electric tractor in our lifetimes.
Do you really think that after 150 years of ICE engines that nothing better has gone mainstream because people just haven't tried? Get outta' here....
Somebody call me when you "fill" an electric tractor in 90 seconds and run it in the field for 8 hours straight. I can do that with my diesel tractor right now, and it won't be possible with any electric tractor in our lifetimes.
Do you really think that after 150 years of ICE engines that nothing better has gone mainstream because people just haven't tried? Get outta' here....
Stowed4Sea
Bronze Member
While I think the title of the thread from the OP was a bit overstated and I also agree that I don't think an electric tractor would ever work for me for the same reason as you, but if you think about most people with compact tractors they put 4 hours on them per week, I think it would very much make sense to them. I could see them taking over the majority of the market. But there will always be disadvantages and for higher hour and higher power users I don't think it would ever make sense for them. He's not talking about all electric taking over 150hp+ range.
Think about the average consumer. It already seems everyone in town that I see has already swapped to electric push mowers because a machine with far easier maintenance. Especially the newer property owners that didn't already have something before and didn't want to deal with gas cans. Look at all the 1 and 2 series deers you see for sale that are a few years old where the hours average out to like 4 per week. I can see electric tractors really excelling for some people. Tech often improves exponentially, look at computers over the last 20 years, or in this case, battery tech that is making all these things possible. We've had lead acid batteries on submarines for over 60 years, but since I've been out of the navy (15 years) they've already changed battery types three times. Tech moves fast.