Douglas County Jail installing solar panels to heat water
The installation is expected to save $18,000 from the jail's budget during the next 15 years. Enlarge video
Inmates soon will be washing their hands, cleaning their dishes and cleansing their bodies using water warmed by a new set of solar panels at the Douglas County Jail.
The system — using five solar panels installed out back — is powering a push for sustainability in the county’s public buildings and, by extension, among county residents, organizations and businesses.
“This is the first in what I hope will be many projects where the county will lead the way in managing its resources sustainably,” said Nancy Thellman, chairwoman of the Douglas County Commission. “It’s also a way of leading by example. Our hope is, little by little, it will inspire our citizens to make even little changes in their homes, because this is the way of the future.”
The current incarnation of the future angles up toward the southern sky: glass-encased water pipes made of copper and attached to thin strips of metal coated with thinner — even microscopic — strands of metallic paint.
Together, the system cycles 120 gallons of room-temperature water through each of the panels until it reaches temperatures of up to 180 degrees. The water then is pumped back into the jail, into a heat exchanger where another 120 gallons is warmed by the passing fluid.
The system is designed to produce 500 gallons of 120-degree water each day during the summer — enough to meet the building’s needs through May, June and July and still enough to cut into natural gas bills during colder weather.
Expected savings: $18,000 during the next 15 years, enough to pay off the system within a decade.
“It’s basically free heat,” said Eileen Horn, city-county sustainability coordinator.
The system is one of two being installed this week by Solar Heat Exchange Manufacturing, a Perry-based company founded three years ago. The other will serve the Douglas County Youth Services building in North Lawrence.
The combined $19,996 contract is the county’s first major move at Horn’s suggestion. On Wednesday, commissioners will consider buying a new boiler for the Douglas County Courthouse, one efficient enough to cover the unit’s $50,000 cost within nine years.
County buildings soon will be getting fluorescent light tubes that are thin enough to use 50 percent less energy, and the Judicial and Law Enforcement Center is awaiting adjustments to its air-handling units to boost efficiency.
Even chandeliers in the County Commission meeting room will be getting compact fluorescent bulbs to save energy.
“We’re pursuing all measures that have the shortest payback period first,” Horn said. “We’re getting more efficient.”
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
QuiviraTrail (anonymous) says…
All new public buildings in Lawrence should be LEED Platinum-certified green buildings. That means all City, County, USD 497, KU, and HINU buildings. There is no excuse anymore. Look at these:
Kansas
• 5.4.7 Arts Center, Sustainable Prototype, Greensburg, ks (leed nc v2.2)
• Bucklin Tractor & Implement (BTI), Greensburg, ks (leed nc v2.2)
• Greensburg Incubator, City of Greensburg, ks (leed nc v2.2)
• Private residences (8 attached units), Greensburg, ks (leed h)
• Private residence (Studio 804), Kansas City, ks (leed h)
headdoctor (anonymous) replies…
Maybe in your mind there isn't an excuse but in reality the cost and sound economics says otherwise.
oneeye_wilbur (anonymous) says…
Only $18,000 over 15 years? That's it? So over the 15 years will be panels be replaced and maintained at what cost?
Doesn't sound like much worthwhile this solar panel thing at the jail. The math works out to $100 a month savings. That's it. and that's pathetic for savings. Why not turn down the thermostat on the current water heaters.?Why not put the showers on timers?
Why isn't the Journal World doing a real investigate story on this with the math and then tell the public about the savings.
oneeye_wilbur (anonymous) says…
:"free heat" or "free heated water" There is a difference, but FREE it doesnt' look like so far.
headdoctor (anonymous) replies…
O' come on One-eye. Don't you just get that warm fuzzy feeling all under that the tax payers are saving natural resources at a cost that will no doubt work out to be three times the price of conventional systems and usage costs? You know all those savings projections put out by the companies that build these systems are so accurate. Those estimates always include engineering under sizing, prolonged cloudy weather, premature system failure, maintenance, along with Kansas wind and hail storms.
Ray_Finkle (anonymous) says…
Explain to me again why they need (deserve) hot water?
murphy59 (anonymous) replies…
Because you're Einhorn.
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
All electric appliances... hooked up to batteries... that are hooked up to stationary bicycles.
kansasfaithful (anonymous) says…
As a conservative I don't have to big an issue with this decision to heat water using solar panels. If it was really necessary to budget this project and over the course of the next 15 years we can save a hundred bucks a month I'm all for it. What wasn't mentioned is what the other bids were. They may have not been as green but it could have saved the taxpayer 300 bucks a month. I think the bean counters need to go with the bid that saves us the most money for the taxpayer and green projects need to come down in price. The taxpayer shouldn't have to pay more for solar just to say we have solar.
faceit (anonymous) says…
One of the most important savings is that it will be $18,000 of natural resources that won't be consumed to generate hot water in that building.
tange (anonymous) says…
( Hmm... would seem they're already in hot water.... )
EarthaKitt (anonymous) replies…
Maybe they got burned in a sting....
(I'm stretching it now, aren't I?)
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
headdoctor and oneeye:
You've made a lot of claims, and backed them up with absolutely nothing.
Why should anyone believe that you're nothing more than a pair of bitter, puckered, sour old persimmons? "Anything-for-a buck" environmental rapists?
What's good for the goose is certainly good for the gander, no?
headdoctor (anonymous) replies…
You get up on the wrong side of the bed yesterday, Agnostick? I would have figured you had been an internet junkie long enough to be able to see when someone is poking a stick for a reaction. I am neither a bitter, puckered, sour old persimmon nor an "Anything-for-a buck" environmental rapists" but since you decided to go that direction, we can. I don't believe the environment should be raped but at the same time I am not going to rape my own finances for that feel good feeling all under.
I noticed below that you put up a link to Greensburg, Kansas. Give me Government and insurance money and free volunteers like they had in Greensburg and I will gladly convert some houses and buildings because without outside money and help doing the whole efficiency thing still isn't financially practical or possible for many, many people especially in older houses. New construction is a different matter.
As far as the jail program, it is great that they are making some improvements. Where I start scratching my head is there are systems out there for half of that price that are designed for small to medium houses, mostly small houses, that are not big enough to do the job. I have to wonder if the system they added will actually do what it is suppose to or if in reality all it did is add $18k the utility bill over the next several years.
Agnostick (anonymous) replies…
So, in other words, you still have absolutely nothing to back up this post?
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2010/jun...
The "costs" and "sound economics" are just figments of your imagination, huh?
Not surprised.
As for you poking your stick just to get a reaction, there's a word for that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(I...)
Agnostick (anonymous) replies…
So then, you admit that you really don't know anything about the system that's being installed?
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
http://www.greensburgks.org/
headdoctor (anonymous) replies…
BTW, Agnostick, perhaps you should ask yourself the question. In principle, is there any real difference between those raping the environment who are doing it directly or those who under the disguise of efficiency are driving people away from being able to cut back on natural resources by insisting on gouging for high prices that people can not afford or that makes any financial sense to do?
LesBlevins (anonymous) says…
"Our hope is, little by little, it will inspire our citizens to make even little changes in their homes,"
Hmmm, reminds me of the frog in the pan of water over a slow fire scene. All the world's oceans are warming out there little by little and are being poisoned and dying and we are here at home safe in our nice round pan and feeling warm and smug and content with warm and fuzzy feel-good stuff?
President Obama summoned Americans yesterday to a “national mission” to move away from reliance on oil and develop alternative sources of energy, demanding that we move quickly to overcome “a lack of political courage and candor.”
independant1 (anonymous) says…
is there a right to a hot shower?
independant1 (anonymous) says…
down the temp of the hot water to 95degrees, buy fewer panels, save more $, energy and water.
or is that cruel and unusual?
Cappy (anonymous) replies…
The shrinkage might decrease the risk of soap droppage.
sherbert (anonymous) says…
It does seem like a long time to recoup costs. Did the city get tax rebate/credits?
ibroke (anonymous) says…
those green jobs are starting to pour in to the state! great
QuiviraTrail (anonymous) says…
As Amory Lovins with the Rocky Mt. Institute says, you get far more bang for the buck through energy conservation than first going to renewable energy.
rtpayton (anonymous) says…
Does the soap get dropped more often in hot or cold water? The city may want to pay a consullting group to study this issue haha!
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
The name of the company is Solar Heat Exchange Manufacturing. Funny address, isn't it?
Allow me to take the sweaty little paws of you worry-warts, and start you down the path to enlightenment:
http://www.solarheatexchangemanufactu...
Email. Phone.
Pick the transportation mode of choice and drive out and SEE them.
Oh, wait, it's so much easier to hide behind a computer screen and throw rocks mined from your own skulls...
independant1 (anonymous) replies…
It's a good system, had one in my previous home worked like a charm and always had plenty of hot water for family of 6 on one 80 gal. heater ew/solar drainback system, but not too popular due to 4 year payback and $5-6K expense for starters. The folks, the minions ought to have it but live so close to the belt the initial $5K can't be rationalized. If there is extra money there are better returns on investment and pressing needs for the cash elsewhere.
The people that could benefit most aren't in the tax bracket where the 30% tax credit tips the scales.
I seem to recall, a couple decades ago, the tax credit was 50% or greater. There was a mini boom for solar but not now. It's there for those that can afford to be green.
Nothing wrong with poking fun at Larryville though, it keeps them honest.
tanaumaga (anonymous) says…
I like the bicycle hooked up to batteries....nice idea....earn your keep , or take a cold shower.
joebloe (anonymous) says…
Wouldn't it be cheaper and easier to put in tankless water heaters and power them with the solar panels or better yet a wind turbine.