I wrote:
Equipment needed to provide adequate capacity to fully power a
typical home (with an ICE and generator) runs something like $10,000,
which most people aren't going to shell out, and the equipment requires
maintenance, attention, and space.
Actually, nowadays it runs about $4,500, retail from Lowe's, for a
20 kW generator, which is enough for my house. . . .
Regarding space and maintenance, a co-generator would not take up
much more space or require much more maintenance than conventional
HVAC equipment.
I recently installed a heat pump (both heating and airconditioning)
for a 2000 sq. ft. house. It cost $6,000. That includes a cheap
auxiliary gas heater for cold days. It saves a lot on both natural
gas and airconditioning, because it is a high performance model, but
it sure ain't cheap going in.
By the way, I expect first generation cold fusion co-generators will
cost $50,000 to $100,000 each. They will toys for wealthy people,
like the Tesla electric car. I was not suggesting that they will be
cost effective from the start.
Also, to clarify, I wrote: "If the New York Times were to publish on
the front page that cold fusion is real after all, and likely to be
commercialized, I expect the Waynesboro plant would be canceled a
month later." I did not mean the plant under construction would be
abandoned. I meant that if it were still in the planning stages it
would be shelved. If it were already under construction it would make
sense to finish it. A late model nuke would be a good thing to have
for the first few decades of the cold fusion era. Better than a
coal-fired plant.
- Jed
