There is a friend, an owner suburban area with a capital house with an area of about 150 square meters. There is no gas nearby and is not expected in the next five-year plan (or even further). Now the house is periodically heated with electricity (arrived - turned on the heating, left - turned off), because of this, the decoration has come to a completely obscene state. In the coming winter, the comrade is going to move to this house for permanent residence, since it is close to the city, the dacha massif adjoins the neighboring village almost closely, that is, there are no problems with uncleaned roads.
There was a question of heating, the owner wants a wood-burning boiler like " long burning", and I strongly recommend him an autonomous gas supply. This is how we got into a dispute" tradition versus technology. "
Is there a reasoned opinion on this matter? I propose to discuss.
Only, please, right away - you are interested in the specifically indicated options - firewood and LPG, get rid of the "projectiles" of thermoelectric modules and others. windmills", the question is purely practical.
How to heat the house with wood or gas is up to you, of course, for the owners !!!
Once upon a time they wrote in large letters: "THE ECONOMY SHOULD BE ECONOMIC"
And here, too, you need to estimate and weigh, well, at least gas heating...
There is such data ... that the consumption of liquefied cylinder gas (propane 50l) for heating a house with an area of 150 m2 is 168 cylinders and with permanent residence costs will be - 102,000 rubles. in year!!!
It is also indicated that the cost can be reduced by up to 30% using a chronothermostat, that is, the costs will be 102,000 * 0.7 = 71,400 rubles. in year.
And now we believe that heating in an apartment with an area of 30 m2 costs 2,000 rubles. per month, and for the year 24,000 rubles.
If we compare the areas, then the house is equivalent to five apartments and the total heating costs of which will be 24,000 * 5 = 120,000 rubles. in year.
It turns out, as a first approximation, that in general such a house can be heated with gas ...
But is there an ALTERNATIVE ??? and something else !!! Let's take a look at the firewood !!!
It depends on which region. If Ussuriysk or taiga - of course firewood, if Ukraine - coal. If the house is on the coast of the sea - Joule's mixer. It's up to your comrade to decide, of course, but purely for aesthetic reasons, I would choose firewood, put up a fireplace for myself, put up a long-burning boiler and be like that. There are just a lot of forests in our region, so there is such a topic.
Sergey N wrote: It depends on which region. If Ussuriysk or taiga - of course firewood, if Ukraine - coal. If the house is on the seaside - Joule's mixer. It's up to your comrade to decide, of course, but purely for aesthetic reasons, I would choose firewood, put up a fireplace for myself, put up a long-burning boiler and be like that. There are just a lot of forests in our region, so there is such a topic.
I think there are real good offers with firewood too ...
Region - the Volga region, the winter temperature of the coldest five-day period is minus 30, the average for the heating season is minus 5.5. The duration of the heating period is about 210 days. Equally available firewood and liquefied gas.
I don’t like pointless conversations, let’s communicate with some reason.
Let's start with capital expenditures.
Installation of a gasholder with a volume of 4.8 cubic meters. will cost about 300 thousand rubles (180 - equipment plus 120 - installation work and commissioning).
I think the first point is worth finishing.
And if there is a second - liquefied gas + delivery at a price of 11 rubles / liter, so count how much it will turn out. In any case, if the Volga region, then firewood, a region with a fishing line (the middle strip where I live). We have woodworking waste all over the city.
And so on good count if, then it is necessary to take the specific calorific value of the fuel per kilogram of mass.
Okay...
You, Rikota, did not say anything about the firewood, it was in passing, but immediately grabbed the gas ...
Biased ... Gas us !!! Go...
We start with a gas tank ... We save 70 tr. and we buy our own used used for 230 tr. ... and our veteran will serve for 50 years !!!
Underground storage.
Volume 4800 liters.
LPG filling - 1.15 tons.
Weight 2200 kg.
Turnkey autonomous gasification using a second-hand gas tank: 230,000 rubles.
This amount includes:
Delivery of a used gas tank to the installation site within 100 km;
All necessary earthworks;
Concrete base for installing a gas tank;
Second-hand gas tank installation;
Conducting a gas pipeline from the gas tank to the house (within 10 meters);
Carrying out an in-house gas pipeline to the consumer (boiler, water heater);
Adjustment and commissioning.
It seems to have reached the boiler ??? And what about the boiler ??? He's not here yet !!! There is no boiler room either !!! There is no thermal characteristics of the house either !!!
It is unlikely that according to SNiP it will be cozy and good ???
So let's go, Ricota, and your opinion on this matter ??? Not a house of cards for 150 squares ???
Yes, in any way, gas is more expensive, whatever one may say. It is necessary to be ready to immediately pay for heating for 20 years in advance. And who knows what else will be there in 20 years! I think not many people will want to set themselves such settings. The only serious plus of this gas tank is its autonomy, I turned it on and forgot it. No need to carry firewood, no need to heat, everything works by itself.
And then questions immediately arise both to firewood and to gas ??? In any case, gas is more expensive, whatever one may say. Let's twist it ??? This is exactly what Ricota asks !!! Asks to count !!!
And you too ...
"And so on good count if, then it is necessary to take the specific calorific value of the fuel per kilogram of mass," - said Sergei. What hinders ???
As far as I know, the calorific value of 1 m3 of methane is 34 mJ / m3 This is not a dogma ... Ricota can clarify this value depending on the content of impurities, etc. etc. And not only can she ... She can even convert this amount of heat into power, both theoretical and EVEN practical ...
For firewood, carrying out the same operation with a calorific value of 1 m3 of firewood will not present any difficulty for you, Sergey ...
After that, you can use numbers and talk about firewood ...
Ricota has questions about gas too ??? But she's not here yet ... She will come ... let's talk ...
Anatoly wrote: As far as I know, the calorific value of 1 m3 of methane is 34 mJ / m3
Simple arithmetic calculations and here you go: liquefied gas - 1 MJ for 0.7 rubles, on wood - 1 MJ for 0.2 rubles. Let's translate this into "generally available" kilowatts and get 2.35 rubles / kW for LPG, 0.71 rubles / kW for wood.
At the present time, many owners of suburban private houses or summer cottages increasingly have to look for an alternative to gas as the main type of fuel to heat their homes. The reasons are different: for someone, natural gas is becoming too expensive a pleasure, someone has the opportunity to use other energy sources, and for someone the main gas is simply unavailable due to its complete absence nearby. Then the question arises - which one exists at all economical heating at home without gas and what kind of fuel is better to use then?
There is no unequivocal answer to this question, since each individual case has its own nuances. For example, on your land there are many old big trees, which just ask to be put into the firebox of a wood-fired boiler.
Option two: in return for certain services, the customer is ready to supply you with diesel fuel or coal for a long time. It is clear that in such situations you will lean towards these types of energy carriers and not pay attention to others. In the long term, this will be a mistake, since such sources will sooner or later run out and you will have to look for other methods of heating. country house or buy the same fuel, but at the generally accepted cost.
We will try to develop some kind of universal method for determining the optimal energy carrier for heating a home, which is suitable for each individual case. First, we will make a reservation that the methodology will help to determine the cheapest heating without gas, we do not take it into account.
Just as we do not take into account various high-tech and exotic types of heating, inaccessible to ordinary citizens. This includes heat pumps, solar panels, windmills and different kinds machine and vegetable oils. Then how to heat the house if there is no gas and the above sources? We have at our disposal: 
For each of these energy carriers, a cost calculation should be made for the entire cold period, then it will be clear the cheaper it is to heat the house.
Important! Before starting the calculations, it is imperative to bring the units of measurement of the amount of fuel into conformity, that is, to avoid confusion between volume (m3) and mass (kg). It is recommended that all types of energy carriers, except electricity, be reduced to units of mass - kilograms.
To find out what is the most economical heating of a country house, it is recommended for clarity to draw up a simple plate of this form:
In this table, the second column is filled in based on the cost of each type of fuel in your region, or your individual price is entered into it. The third column has already been filled in for the convenience of calculations. The cost of 1 kW of thermal energy can be easily determined by dividing the price of 1 kg of fuel (column 2) by its specific calorific value (column 3).
The fifth column is filled on the assumption that the average heat consumption in a private house with an area of 100 m2 per season is 5 kW / h, and the duration of the heating season is 180 days (5 x 24 x 180 = 21,600 kW / h).
It is clear that house designs are all different and the area will be different, just as the length of the season in your region may differ, so you will need to make appropriate adjustments. By multiplying the data in columns 4 and 5, we determine the estimated costs for the season.
However, these values do not take into account the efficiency of the equipment, the values of which are given below. Dividing the estimated costs by the efficiency, in the last column we get a direct answer to the question - the cheaper it is to heat a house except for gas.
For homeowners whose homes already have gas boilers, you can add another line below for comparison, filling it with data on natural gas, based on the actual indicators of fuel consumption and its price.
It would seem that now everything has fallen into place and you can safely make a choice in favor of one or another energy carrier for economical heating. But this approach is one-sided, because there is also such a thing as convenience and complexity in the maintenance and operation of the heating system of a private house.
The comfort of operation of boiler equipment that supplies heat to water heating is an important factor, since any unnecessary troubles and inconveniences are your time and money. That is, the total cost increases indirectly according to how much effort is put into keeping the system running. In some cases, economical heating systems after the first season no longer seem so economical and sometimes you want to pay extra money, just not to get involved with such problems.
In contrast to financial indicators, ease of use - the value for each type of fuel is unchanged, so it can be found out immediately, which will help to make the right choice. Convenience will be assessed by the following criteria:
To find out which of the energy carriers will provide comfortable and economical heating of a private house, we will draw up a second table, where for each of the criteria we will put down all types of fuel according to a five-point system, after which we will summarize.
No maintenance required electric boilers apart from occasionally opening the lid and dusting off or cleaning the contacts, for which they receive the highest marks. Some actions are required if heating Vacation home liquefied gas. It is recommended to check and, if necessary, clean the igniter and burner once every 2 years, because propane is a solid four. Pellet boilers get 3 points for the fact that they require cleaning the combustion chamber several times a year and once the chimney.
Accordingly, wood and coal units need to be cleaned frequently as they become dirty. The worst situation in this respect is the situation with diesel fuel, since its quality often leaves much to be desired, which is why the frequency of service is unpredictable.
It is clear that electricity does not require storage space, while LPG and diesel fuel may require some storage space. But when economical heating of a private house with wood is organized, then a lot of storage space will be required. The same applies to pellets, as they require a dry room or special silo. As for coal, there is a lot of waste, dust and dirt from it, therefore - the lowest rating.
And here economical electric heating turned out to be at its best, since it does not require any intervention during work. Pellets and liquefied gas must be replenished periodically, 1-2 times a week, or even less often. A little more attention should be paid diesel fuel, more for supervising work than for adding fuel.
Well, and most of all the hassle traditionally delivers heating system in a private house on coal and wood, here loads into the combustion chamber are needed from 1 to 3 times a day.
The last column summarizes the results according to which heating is the most comfortable and convenient. country house in winter with electricity. If this result is considered in combination with financial costs, then electricity may not be the worst option.
An integrated approach to the issue shows that the most economical heating systems for summer cottages and country houses can be the most troublesome in the process of operation. Therefore, you should not rush and carefully weigh and calculate everything, or even better - install an electric boiler in combination with any other.
The most important part heating system is a cauldron. It is he who generates thermal energy that heats the cottage. The basis for choosing a heating boiler is the fuel on which it will work, and here two main options are possible - gas and solid fuel. An electric boiler is more often used as backup source heating.
Although gas prices are rising, it still remains the No. 1 energy resource for most households. In such a situation, almost every cottage owner thinks about how to increase the efficiency of the heating system by reducing the consumption of blue fuel.
In Ukraine, heating a house with an area of 150 m 2 may require up to 3500-4500 m 3 of natural gas per season. In terms of the released energy, this is about 30-40 thousand kW or 25-35 Gcal per year (season). At today's tariffs for the consumption of such a volume of gas, you will have to pay up to 4-5 thousand hryvnia per month during the entire heating season. When using natural gas, the cost of 1 Gcal of heat is about 941 UAH(1023 UAH, taking into account the boiler's KDP 92%).
Gas consumption can be reduced by reducing the heating area, repairing and replacing heating equipment, reducing the heat loss of the building, as well as changing the daily routine (lowering the temperature in the premises of the house, reducing consumption hot water etc.).
One of the most simple ways gas saving - replacing the boiler with a device with a higher efficiency. Traditional gas boilers, which are called convection boilers, have an efficiency of about 90-98%. However, a significant part of modern devices belongs to the category of condensing boilers. Their efficiency can reach 108-112%.
When choosing a solid fuel boiler, it is necessary to take into account not the selling price of fuel, but the final unit costs of heating. For example, today the average price of a ton of pellets in Kiev and the region is 3000 UAH, coal - 4500 UAH, firewood - 3300 UAH. At the same time, the heat release during the combustion of 1 ton of fuel is on average estimated by specialists at about 3.45 Gcal for pellets, 6.45 Gcal for coal and 3.45 Gcal for firewood.
It means that 1 Gcal of heat released during the combustion of pellets costs about 870 UAH(UAH 1115, taking into account the boiler KDP 78%) , coal - 698 UAH(851 UAH, taking into account the boiler KDP 82%) , firewood - at UAH 957(1226 UAH, taking into account the boiler KDP 78%).
If you do not take into account the cost of fuel delivery and boiler maintenance, the amount will be commensurate (for pellets and firewood) or less (for coal and brown coal) than in the case of gas. However, the quality of gas in gas networks is more or less unified, but the quality and condition solid fuel can be very different.
When choosing a solid fuel, it is necessary to take into account its ash content (determines the frequency of cleaning the boiler and chimney), calorific value and humidity. For example, let's compare aspen and oak firewood. At the same humidity, a dense oak log will give almost two (1.76) times more heat energy than an aspen log of the same size. That is, to get the same result, you need 2 times less firewood, fewer trips to buy them, less storage space, less splitting time and fewer boiler loads.
Similarly, when buying other types of fuel, you need to understand that, say, the calorific value of black coal is higher than that of brown coal. And pellets are distinguished by the minimum ash content (0.5-1.0%) and ease of storage and use. For 3 tons of pellets, you need about 1.5-2 m³ of space, while for ordinary firewood you need up to 10 m³.
Today, when every six months there is an increase in tariffs for energy resources (electricity, gas), while incomes of the population remain at the same level, the issue of saving energy is becoming acute. This problem is especially relevant in suburban housing, which, as a rule, differs larger area than apartments, and for heating country houses and dachas take a lot of money.
Firewood and coal the old fashioned way?
At first glance, it seems that it is more profitable to drown private house wood or coal, - says Olga. - However, having studied this type of heating in more detail, you can identify the inconveniences that it causes. It turns out that a separate installation room is required solid fuel boiler and a special place for storing firewood or coal, finishing building is a waste again. When burning wood and coal, soot, soot and coal dust are constantly formed, and there is always a danger of fire and carbon dioxide poisoning.
When heating with wood or coal, it is imperative to throw firewood or coal into the boiler several times a day, as well as clean the chimney and the equipment itself. If this is not done, the room cools down quickly. With permanent residence, you will need to heat several cubic meters of fuel per month, this is unprofitable, add delivery to the cost of fuel - it looms big sum... Therefore, the woman came to the conclusion that heating with wood and coal is not cheaper than electricity, and compared to gas in general, heaven and earth.
"And we have gas in our apartment!"
Yes, today gas is the cheapest source of heat energy in Russia, - Olga admits. - But the cost of installing equipment, obtaining permission to connect again translates into a pretty amount, which may not be affordable for people with a low income. For example, I was counted about 600 thousand rubles to supply gas to the house. And I still have other expenses on the nose: repairs, moving, etc. Therefore, I dismissed this option as well.
Electricity is more profitable!
The only alternative I saw was electric heating, - continues the owner of the house with the stove. - Firstly, I found out that electric boilers are cheaper than gas boilers. And, according to the stories of neighbors, sometimes the money saved on gas equipment, can be enough to heat the house with electricity for several years. In addition, they explained to me that electric boilers are easier to connect, there is no need to obtain permission for their installation, a separate room is not required and, importantly, they are safer. But electricity tariffs are higher than gas. The question arises: how to make electric heating profitable? Among the many proposals, I drew attention to the Russian company "Koterm", which produces electric boilers that are popular among owners of summer cottages and private houses. "Summer resident M1" and "Summer resident M5", about which I heard a lot from friends and neighbors on SNT.
I considered the offer profitable, since the cost of these boilers is low even for people with an average income, and the manufacturer also offers with a guarantee to spend 30-40% less on electricity than other manufacturers of electric boilers, which makes it possible to stay in the country in cold months.
I turned to the company's specialists and found out that these are electric heating boilers of a new type, in which unique technology heating, which allows you to significantly save energy.
What is the essence of the unique technology?
The main type of fuel in Siberia and Far East- coal. The European part of Russia accounts for 95% of the consumed gas and 76% of oil and oil products in the fuel balance. This territorial asymmetry determines the entire structure of energy consumption in the country. The asymmetry is even more pronounced in boiler and furnace fuel. So, in 2004 the share of oil and oil products was 19%, coal - 15%, the share of gas increased to 54%. Moreover, this trend has been observed since the early 1990s.
Coal consumption in Russia lags behind the world average. In the world, the share of gas is only 23%, and coal - 27%, and in the future specific consumption gas and oil products will continue to decline. First of all, the price factor will play its role: with the rise in oil prices, oil products are being gradually displaced and the demand for coal is growing, which leads to an outstripping rise in relative prices for it. In addition, non-price factors will also have a certain impact - large volumes of coal and shale reserves compared to other energy sources.
It all started back in the early 1970s, during the "gas pause". In those years, the USSR was implementing a program to convert coal-fired power plants to gas in order to solve environmental problems and build an efficient and "clean" nuclear and gas power industry. However, they switched to gas, but due to the economic collapse of the 1990s, no new coal technologies were introduced. With the reorientation to energy exports, the Russian economy, accustomed to cheap gas, began to experience a shortage of it. Delays in the development of Yamal, the Arctic shelves, the large Kovykta gas condensate field, and uncertainty with Turkmen gas lead to an aggravation of the situation in the medium term.
A solution that would satisfy many is the reverse conversion of gas stations to coal. But this is an expensive option: re-equipment is comparable to building a new station. At the same time, environmental problems accompany coal plants - carbon dioxide emissions, slag dumps. And the high transport costs of delivering coal from Siberia will lead to an increase in energy tariffs.
That is why the strategy of RAO "UES of Russia" is based on the modernization of existing plants. Those working on gas are being converted to combined cycle gas and gas turbine technologies, which increases efficiency and saves gas. At coal-fired thermal power plants (TPPs) in Siberia, environmentally friendly technologies of coal combustion are being introduced in order to subsequently use gas obtained from coal in steam-gas installations. The transition from steam-turbine to combined-cycle coal-fired TPPs can increase the efficiency of installations up to 60% or more.
Another factor that reinforces the asymmetry is resource prices. The fact is that coal prices have been regulated by the market since 1993, while gas prices, for the most part, by a natural monopoly - Gazprom.
On average, the cost of natural gas in the world is close to the price of oil and exceeds the price of coal by 3-4 times in conventional units (for example, in the USA). We have the opposite situation. Therefore, solid fuel is being squeezed out of the energy sector. Even in coal regions, gas is cheaper than coal. As a result, there is a bias in favor of the irrational use of gas instead of coal. Such disproportions harm not only the coal, but also the oil and gas industry, as well as the electric power industry and housing and communal services.
The issue of double pricing for gas is also key from the point of view of Russia's accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO). Low gas prices are an indirect subsidy to the economy. Due to cheap gas, we produce for export competitively priced aluminum, oil products, and energy. According to various estimates, these indirect subsidies for Russia amount to up to $ 5 billion annually. Therefore, when Russia joins the WTO, the EU countries will undoubtedly demand equalization of internal and external prices.
There are several solutions to this problem. One of them, at first glance, the simplest, is the establishment of market prices, which is now being proposed by the head of Gazprom, Alexei Miller. But it will hit hard on socially significant industries, on tariffs for heat and electricity. A smooth transition is needed here. Coal will become profitable in comparison with gas, according to experts, even at a price ratio of 1.5-1.8 (blue fuel is only 50-80% more expensive).
Replacing gas with coal in the fuel balance is one of the main tasks in the Energy Strategy of Russia until 2020. Countries such as the USA, China, India, Australia, South Africa adhere to similar views: the coal industry forms the basis of their economic, technological and environmental policies. In Russia, however, it is planned to achieve this through an increase in gas prices, a decrease in its share in consumption and the occupation of this niche by coal. Such forecasts given by the Ministry economic development and trade of the Russian Federation (MEDT) are insolvent for one simple reason - coal prices are growing faster than regulated gas prices.
Similar fuzziness economic policy, in our opinion, is harmful. Both direct market regulation, which will lead to a shock in the economy, and monopoly pricing, which has already led to a disproportion in the development of the heat and power complex, are dangerous. The government can and should impose rational restrictions on the use of this or that type of fuel. This is done in many developed countries.
The impulse of 1998, which was reflected in the coal industry through metallurgy, is still decisive in the dynamics of the industry's development in recent years. The shortage of coking coal has increased the demand for coal and led to the integration of the coal industry with the metallurgical industry. This process peaked in 2002-2003. Now there is a certain decline due to a certain saturation of the market: most metallurgical plants do not experience a sharp shortage of coke and have their own coal mines.
Smooth concentration processes can be clearly distinguished in the industry. There is a merger of homogeneous assets - close to each other mines and deposits, coking and power coal deposits. At the same time, the number of small and medium-sized companies is decreasing, while the number of large ones is increasing.
Since the coal industry has free pricing, it has both the pros and cons of free competition. Market-regulated prices improve the position of leaders, highly profitable companies, but at the same time the weaker ones are crowded out. An example is the recent announcement by the Chita Oblast administration on the introduction of quotas for coal production. On the other hand, there are also large companies in the industry that control large parts of the market and allow themselves to dictate terms. For example, SUEK is accused of monopoly overpricing in Buryatia.
In the medium term, the production vector will be directed to the east. Coal companies of Kuzbass, in order to increase their competitiveness, should move from a quantitative increase in production to an increase in product quality, since the high density of production will start to affect. The Kansk-Achinskoye direction is promising with a double production by 2020 - up to 60 million tons, the East-Beisky open-cut mine in Khakassia, as well as a number of projects in the Irkutsk and Chita regions.
The government's position, expressed in the Energy Strategy, is not clear enough: on the one hand, the priority of the coal industry, the replacement of gas with coal, is spelled out, and on the other, there are no real mechanisms for its implementation. At the same time, the actions of the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade to achieve the set goals, at best, can be called adequate. So far, there is no action plan either to switch to efficient coal technologies or to raise gas prices, while the market can spontaneously regulate these issues, but with high social costs. In fact, a serious problem is hidden here - the lack of interaction between government and business.
The long-term prospects of the coal industry, primarily associated with the replacement of gas with coal, will be determined not so much by internal as by external factors - the growth of the economy of the Asia-Pacific region (APR) and an increase in energy consumption. With a high degree of probability, it can be assumed that the growth rates of the world economy will remain the same and the demand for energy resources will not fall. Then Gazprom's policy will automatically be aimed at increasing gas exports - both eastward and westward. In particular, for this, it is planned to build gas pipelines to the countries of the Asia-Pacific region and increase domestic gas prices. The consequence will be the replacement of gas with coal, its displacement from the fuel and energy balance. Naturally, in such a situation, there will be no large-scale gasification of Siberia, especially its eastern part, except for a number of projects that have already been announced - in the Irkutsk region and areas close to the gas pipelines under construction.
Despite the fact that Russia is in the fifth place in the world in coal exports and coal exports are growing, especially to non-CIS countries (in 2004, the growth was 30.5%), its share in world exports, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA) , from 2015 onwards will decrease.
Summing up, we can say that in general, the coal sector is developing successfully. Like any other branch of the economy, it has its own problems, although many of them are being solved successfully, but with the help of market mechanisms. From the point of view of the national approach, such decisions are not optimal - only intra-industry interests are taken into account, without taking into account the effect on the entire economy of the country. Therefore, the first priority is federal authorities- development of an efficient scenario for the energy sector.
Force majeure registered
When the fixed assets of an enterprise are significantly worn out, production differs high level accidents. This is especially true for coal mines.
The main hazards of coal mines during intensive coal mining in difficult conditions are: rock caving, gas release, sudden coal and gas outbursts, methane and coal dust explosions, underground fires, water breakthroughs. Accident statistics in the Kemerovo Region are forcing coal companies to invest in safety. Since the beginning of 2004, about 20 accidents have occurred in the mines, 220 people have died, 206 of them have become victims of methane explosions. It is this that reduces the economic and consumer competitiveness of coal - the alarming expectation and public response to disasters in mines that lead to loss of life.
Prepared by Andrey Lipin
