RANCHING
Solar Pumps vs. Windmills Seven questions to help you pencil out the costs of getting water from your well by wind or solar power
By Lorie Woodward Cantu C
ATTLE TURN FORAGE INTO BEEF, BUT ONLY IF they have adequate water. Since the late 1800s ranchers have relied on mechani-
cal windmills to capture the wind and use its power to pump underground water to the sur- face, lifting water from the well like a straw in a glass. In recent years, innovators have used solar panels to harness the energy of the sun and produce electricity to run a pump to pull the water from the ground. “If electricity is readily available, then an
electric pump may be the most cost-effective option,” says Carl Homeyer, state agriculture economist for the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Temple. “Remote pumping, whether it’s solar-pow-
ered or wind-generated, is worth considering whenever the distance from the utility grid exceeds about one-half mile.” Utility exten- sions can commonly cost $10,000 to $30,000 or more per mile, making alternatives economi- cally feasible. Producers who are considering a remote wa- tering system, regardless of the power source,
should start with a basic list of questions.
1. How deep is the well? Knowing the depth of the well and the
depth to water is critical to sizing the pump, Homeyer says. Solar pumps are available in many fl ow rates from 1 gallon/minute to 80 gallons/minute. For livestock applications, 3 to 4 gallons/minute may be suffi cient. Another factor to consider is some solar
pumps are variable, meaning by increasing solar panels you increase fl ow rate. This allows producers to compensate for deeper well depths, but raises the cost of the system, he says. In general, mechanical windmills and solar
pumps are best for small quantities of water and low pumping heads, Homeyer says. Head is the elevation difference between the water and the tank. If producers are seeking a large-scale live-
stock watering application, wind-powered elec- tric systems, which use the wind to power submersible pumps, may offer an alternative. According to information from The Samuel
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94