Solar Farm taking Shape on Asbury Anderson Road
Does any one know the back story on this huge Solar Farm. Such as how much it will produce and why and how it happened. It is incredibly big.
CraftBeerBob 
Brad2I'm all for solar energy, but I strongly think buildings/spaces that are already not terribly pretty should be used first before farmland --- Schools, parking lots/garages, shopping malls, Industrial parks, etc. there is so much opportunity to take advantage of before farmland. And the technology is there that durability is no longer a real issue.
trekster3- Look on nj.com for what is going on down at Great Adventure, they want to tear up a forest to build a solar farm, its a joke at best.
roywhite That would require one heck of a building........Sure is taking out a lot of NJ corn. Big one between Blairstown High and Rt. 94 too.
That is a good question, how many KWs per acre? So let's google it.
From energymanagertoday.com
"A large fixed tilt photovoltaic plant that generates 1 GWh per year requires, on average, 2.8 acres for the solar panels. This means that a solar power plant that provides all of the electricity for 1,000 homes would require 32 acres of land.
Small single-axis PV systems require on average 2.9 acres per annual GWh – or 3.8 acres when considering all unused area that falls inside the project boundary.
Concentrating solar power plants require on average 2.7 acres for solar collectors and other equipment per annual GWh; 3.5 acres for all land enclosed within the project boundary."
OK, now to the calculator.... let's see, 1,000 homes, 2.6 people per home, that's 2,600 people supported. 10,000 people in h-town, less than 4 times the homes requiring 32 acres or 128, round up and get to about 130 acres to support Hackettstown population. Now add Walmart and you get to 300 acres :>)
mistergoogle This is a Garden Solar LLC project. Mansfield Township rejected the plans in 2011 but later turned around and approved it.
OnTheEdge 
darwin The solar panel manufacturers and the solar panel installation contractor, the developer once he sells enough power to the electric company to cover his investment, and then you get into the less tangible beneficiaries.
ianimal In about 50-75 years we are out of oil.... don't worry about solar panels, the Nuke Power is the only future.. oh right... i don't care because i am not around in 75 years...
Ceelo I believe a 65 acre parcel is allocated to the solar farm.
Garden Solar LLC is a Hunterdon county company.
I dunno but I think there might be a road coming in from 57 so does the solar farm go all the way there..... In 2012 there was a 112 acre plan by a private concern, the private concern being the beneficiary. Let's call it 130 acres so we can power Hackettstown in our virtual google study.
To continue our land usage study; someone asked is power an appropriate use for the land. Well, this land was corn and probably would either be corn or houses before the solar opportunity. Since corn can equal cows, what is the cost, where's da beef.... Bear in mind cows eat lots of other stuff, corn is used to finish, so it's just not corn. Plus depending on the feedlot usage, the amount can vary. Likewise for bushels per acre. So at 170 bushels per acre, Iowa's average, and 50 bushels per cow, again Iowa, that's about 3.5 cows per acre. Given the land needed to power all the homes in Hackettstown, our 130 acres means giving up 455 moo-moo's per year.
How much corn is used for ethanol and what is the energy density ratio of an acre of corn to an acre of solar panels? That would probably be the most pertinent comparison.
But the real question to me is how many bottles of bourbon could have been made from all the corn lost to these solar panels?
We Have a lot of extra land. Look how many acres we are paying farmers not to plant on.
Old Gent I guess that they studied it, but it doesn't seem likely that we have enough insolation here in northern NJ to make it worthwhile - this isn't exactly southern Arizona.
Reggie Voter Let me guess, Iman is an engineer. Civil no doubt :>)
While I understand your concept, I think the energy density ratio of an acre of corn won't get you to the energy density ratio of the ethanol made from an acre of corn so you might need to rephrase. But an acre of corn, using the corn stats above and 2.8 gals per bushel, 476 gallons of ethanol. Not to mention some spin-offs like dried distillers grains, i.e. cattle food, and CO2 for sodas.....
Of course, cows spin off other items too like 14 basketballs per hide, enough methane to darken the sun, etc.
Now for specific energy, ethanol rates 26 MJ/kg; cows or beef on the other hand are trickier with fat rating at 37, carbohydrates and proteins each at about 17. So depends whether you have Five Guys fat enriched burger or a plain ole BK burger.
Now I know your energy comparison is the way to go if one was comparing energy values; but we are looking at the value of land usage; that was the question.
To determine the best use of land in the interest of NJ citizens and their wants and desires, remember that NJ ranks 23 out of the 35 states that use Ethanol, but at 50,000,000,000 burgers per year or three burgers per person per week in the U.S., I would say more of us are familiar with the burger than the ethyl.
Or try it another way. Drive down the strip. How many places can you buy ethanol? How many places sell burgers? What's more important to NJ?
So back to the most pertinent analysis since not many are fueling with ethanol around here but almost everybody had some burgers this week, our 130 acre solar plant that could power Hackettstown's homes but takes out 455 moo-moo's --- what's the pertinent relevance that strikes close to our ever-clogging hearts?
Either turn on the lights or grab half a million quarter pounders; that's what our 130 acres can bring us. That's 55 q-p's per H-towner per year which may only be 33% of our burger demand.
We gonna need to turn on more lights.
You act as if NJ is a big producer of beef cattle. I think dairy cows are much more prevalent. NJ ranks 47th out of 50 in cattle production, ahead of only Delaware, Alaska and Rhode Island.
And just because NJ doesn't use a lot of ethanol, that doesn't mean that ethanol producers won't purchase NJ corn at market. 40% of all corn grown today is used for ethanol production. That's why I think it's practical to look at the land yield from an energy production standpoint.
And from the most practical standpoint, I suppose you should look at it from an economic standpoint. How much is the corn worth versus the electricity that's produced?
Corn prices are in the toilet again and so are the milk prices. He is most likely renting the field to the developer and he gets a check each month. I
JD4020 
the_coach The future is renewable energy -- solar, wind, tidal, hydroelectric (past and future), and battery substations for electric "storage" to meet demand at all times. This all could be done today but oil is big business with powerful special interest representation.
So, embrace the solar farm...
iJay Corn prices have indeed dropped from their all time high starting in 2011 through the first half of 2014. Corn prices have been king since 2011 due to increased demand due to ethanol production. Also, the droughts in the midsection have reduced supply. Production has fallen from 2009 to 2012 but since 2013 have been at an all time high. If you noted the abundance and harvests in NJ in the past few years, you would have seen more farms and some really lush yields. Yippee for farmers.
However even with the drop in corn prices, they are still double their 2006 levels so really just falling back to more of a historical price line. I still expect to see a healthy production in NJ as farmers begin to look for higher returns from other things. Meanwhile, beef prices have yet to react and still are at a historical high. Can't wait for the prices of beef to fall away from their all time high. Takes awhile apparently.
JIT: "no reason to get excited, the googleman he kindly spoke....." I don't think NJ produces much moo moo's, meat or milk. Nor do we produce any ethanol. In NJ, we certainly have a higher demand for the moo's that we do the ethanol juice though.
40% usage for ethanol is a hefty number which looks to be a cherry picked year. Many years place it at 10%. I think 30% is the current number. For most years feed usage for corn is larger than ethanol usage. Alcohol is about 10% so you can do the JD comparison too. But tell you what: you can find every corny fact you ever wanted at The World of Corn: http://www.worldofcorn.com/#/
But back to our comparison. The previous use for this land was corn. It was not people corn. The question was is solar a better use of the land? So first I looked at the size which, based on the original plan, was roughly equivalent to what it would take to power the residential homes of the H-town population. That's kinda cool that it puts off that much power. Cool, relevant, and convenient since it aligns with the power needed in our town. The other land usage choice seemed to it's traditional usage for corn, which thanks to JD, might not have been the choice this year due to price but then again what's better to plant than corn? Especially if corn, a heavy drain on the land to begin with, has been there for years. Appears to be solar which only has one need comparative to corn: sun. But I thought well, how to equate the value of corn to something that is relevant to H-towners. I still say burgers are more relevant to us in our everyday lives than ethanol so I went with something that would let me compare with something I know --- the burger. Could done porterhouse but heck, that's pretty rare (get it). Or basketballs......
So again, the conclusion was either power the homes in H-town or get 33% of our burger demand from the land required in the original solar plan, about 130 acres.
I can see where the energy value of land might be interesting so feel free to show us. Can't wait.
Every gallon of gasoline sold in NJ contains 10% ethanol. I think you're grossly underestimating just how much ethanol NJ drivers consume (whether they want to or not... for me, not) at 1 gallon of ethanol for every 10 gallons of gasoline blend sold. At the rate of 10.8 gallons of gasoline per capita in NJ ( http://www.statemaster.com/graph/ene_gas_con_percap-energy-gasoline-consumption-per-capita) times 10,000 H-town residents, that equals 108,000 gallons of gasoline, or 10,800 gallons of ethanol used each year. At 476 gallons of ethanol per acre, you've lost 22.7 acres or about 18% of your hamburgers for the year.
As for the actual bottom line in dollars, using your 3.5 acres per GWH for solar energy production, we are looking at 37 GWh of energy for a 130-acre parcel, or 37 million kWh. For a generation rate of approximately $0.10 per kWh per my JCP&L bill, that equates to $3.7M in energy generation.
Using corn as a comparison and your 170 bushels per acre average for a total of 22,100 bushels over those 130 acres, a farmer would need to get a price of $167 per bushel to generate that much revenue. The actual price is closer to $4 per bushel.... which would mean that that land owner could only expect to gross $88,400 from the land as corn. When you consider the amount of work and expense involved in bringing corn to harvest, I don't see how anyone can make $ doing it.
Well played Iman, well played.
No, I got it right but just didn't include ethanol additives, so you got me. Still say burgers are as important.
You can see why corn at $5-$6 per bushel during 2010 - 2012 was grand.
Also, corn has the benefit of silage which at 22 tons per acre and $55 per ton for about $1,210 per acre or add a total of an additional $157,300 for our example making the corn total: $245,700.
Re you electric revenues --- you're using the end-user price. No way is the farmer nor the solar power company getting that number. That would be like pricing either MikeyD burgers or farm stand corn.
But it still will be a healthy number and if maintenance is low, and it should be, and product life is long, and it should be, there should be a great profit in this business.
Josh "Re you electric revenues --- you're using the end-user price. No way is the farmer nor the solar power company getting that number."
I thought the power companies were required to pay their generation rates for electricity generated elsewhere and introduced to their grid. Otherwise, even if your house were 100% sustainable but still connected to the grid at say 10,000 kWh per year... wouldn't the Utility say: "You generated 10,000 kWh, for which we will pay you $0.05 per kWh. However, you used 10,000 kWh, for which we will charge you $0.10 per kWh. Please send us $500."
And, Josh... I'm not concerned at all what this person does with his property. For me, it's just a little intellectual exercise.
How does comparing solar to corn to beef to ethanol show concern for what the property owner is doing? We just thinking bout land usage in general. As far as what is happening, that ship has passed, it's a solar farm...
I am pretty sure homeowner production rates for home solar versus commercial production rates for power generation plants have different values just as homeowner and commercial purchase prices are different. In other words, you don't pay what Walmart pays and JCPL does not pay you what it pays it's power generation company.
And it gets more convoluted. First homeowners in many states can only generate what they need. That's why they can buy and sell it to you at your price. Home solar profit is often made past that via the sale of reusable energy credits. I'll let you read about that piece of political gamesmanship on your own. I think that's how NJ operates meaning you can make about $3,000 per year, at least in the couple of examples I have seen, but you can't sell as much as you can buy building a bigger and bigger plant or consuming less. This is what slowed me down, I have space and wanted to really go bigger than my own needs which are pretty small and getting smaller.
Meanwhile ------- sorry man, but beef is energy, beef is power, beef is electric. It's called COW POWER and as soon as I get an extra week, I will factor that in :>)
Read on, McDuff: http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/2006-07-05/selling-power-back-to-the-grid
Commenting is no longer available.