🚀 go-pugleaf

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------060804090108010204050808
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jim Baber's comments:

wkearney99 wrote:

>>Is there anything written up about residential roof cooling with water
>>spray?
>>    
>>
>
>Besides the glaring fact of WASTING WATER?  
>
Bill has a point here, but if you were to use misters (like I do between 
my solar panels and my roof), you might see the same kind of drop in 
attic temp that I have had.  My roof that has my solar system is a 6:12 
pitch facing due south.  I have noticed a 10 degree reduction in the 
attic temperature just due to the shading by my solar panels, down from 
160 to 150 deg. on a 100 degree day.

I installed those commercial cooling misters for patios and yards, 
behind my solar panels to cool the panels themselves, figuring that I 
did NOT want mineral deposits on the front.  I was not to worried about 
roof deposits, because I intended to only run the misters on days over 
90 when I had measured a drop in power generated by the panels because 
of temperature degradation above 95 degrees.

This supposedly only uses about 2 gal. an hour per the Mfg. claims, and 
has not deposited significant or noticeable minerals in 2 years of 
operation.  The roof does get damp sometimes but not usually, since 
there is considerable convection air flow upwards behind the panels that 
evaporates most of the mist before it wets the roof.  I do use a 
demineralizing cartridge in the supply line, and they are available 
where I got the misters.

When I turned on the misters behind the solar panels the temperature 
dropped an additional 30 degrees in the attic to 120 degrees.  This 
isn't cool by anyone's idea, but I noticed that the A/C has reduced the 
number of minutes the it runs each hour by about 15% on those 100 degree 
days we have too many of here. 

By the way the misters also accomplished what I wanted in the first 
place, I got back the 0.83 kW of peak solar production I had lost 
because of the solar cell heating. (that's about $1.62 for any day over 
90)   All in all I found it to be a very worthwhile effort since we had 
67 days over 90 last year for an additional estimated $108.00 worth of 
power we produced.  I have not estimated how much the reduction in A/C 
time was worth but I could from the cost of running it vs not running it.

>Do the math on your water bill ............
>  
>
At 10.8 gal. a day for 67 days that's not much water, but I can't put a 
value on it since we are not metered at all.  You could put a value on 
it at your cost, but I can't even make a guess as to that.

>........ (or the electric to pump your own well water) and you'll probably find it's
>a helluva lot cheaper to just leave the roof alone.  If anything, put in an
>attic vent fan.  Water's not as harmless a material as one might imagine.
>The various minerals causing deposits, the likelihood of algae other
>mold/fungus growth and even it's weight are all factors to consider.  Enough
>that unless the roof was designed with in mind would make it not only a bad
>idea but a potentially dangerous one at that.
>
>-Bill Kearney
>  
>
I can't see how it would be dangerous, in fact in So. Calif. some people 
do this for protection from brush fires,  and I would do it here if I 
still had a shake shingle roof.

--------------060804090108010204050808
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=utf-8;
 name="jim.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="jim.vcf"

begin:vcard
fn:Jim  Baber
n:Baber;Jim 
adr:;;1350 W. Mesa Ave.;Fresno;CA;93711-2008;USA
email;internet:jim@baber.org
tel;home:(559)435-9068
tel;cell:(559)905-2204
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.baber.org
version:2.1
end:vcard


--------------060804090108010204050808--