twa Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 When you inflate the cost of new fossil fuel generation, require buying excess at prime rate and subsidize solar heavily....and of course ignore the needed supplemental power generation capacity needed. Maybe one day though......could I interest you in a windmill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Right now, if solar power is installed in new construction it's no more expensive than the current energy systems now used. The problem is that utilities don't want individuals to generate their own power, they want that monthly payment. The energy industry is trying to figure out how they can install the huge windmills and solar farms to keep those monthly payments coming in, at a profit for the shareholders. It's all about the shareholders and profits. That's why we are seeing the focus on the Grid and not on individuals. Solar costs for individual systems are coming down, one of the problems is battery storage systems. They need to be smaller and more efficient.Tesla and their competitors are really doing some good things here, especially helpful for retrofitting already built homes. With lowering product costs, labor costs will rise with more systems installed. The jobs will come, if the government gets behind alternative energy sources. With Trump, he knows he's not bringing back coal jobs and so does the Congress. It was a ploy for votes. People can be trained to install systems. With government programs ramped up, they can even stay in their communities if those communities can access the government programs. In my opinion, having independent energy systems on each house is the main reason why alternative energy isn't embraced, because it will cut profits for the traditional energy industry. And we can't have that, now can we? Can't have people making an investment in something that ends up producing free energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 1 hour ago, LadySkinsFan said: Right now, if solar power is installed in new construction it's no more expensive than the current energy systems now used. Where does this fact come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 Read China's linked article prior to mine. If you replace solar or wind systems in new construction and it's financed, it costs the same as conventional systems. Where it was really expensive is retrofitting a new energy systems because the cost of the existing system was already included in the financing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 16 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said: Read China's linked article prior to mine. If you replace solar or wind systems in new construction and it's financed, it costs the same as conventional systems. Where it was really expensive is retrofitting a new energy systems because the cost of the existing system was already included in the financing. I'm sorry, maybe I'm missing something, but it looks like the article says the cost of the power is the same, not the installation. From what I understand it's 10k to 30k to put renewable energy onto a home so that it doesn't need power from "the grid" upfront and then you have maintenance costs added on. That being said, it's a heck of a lot closer then it was even 3 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 12 minutes ago, daveakl said: I'm sorry, maybe I'm missing something, but it looks like the article says the cost of the power is the same, not the installation. From what I understand it's 10k to 30k to put renewable energy onto a home so that it doesn't need power from "the grid" upfront and then you have maintenance costs added on. That being said, it's a heck of a lot closer then it was even 3 years ago. it has to be "all-in" cost of power.... because solar is basically free once it is installed (throw in the cost of an occasional can of windex..?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 I've never seen Windex in a can! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 14 minutes ago, mcsluggo said: it has to be "all-in" cost of power.... because solar is basically free once it is installed (throw in the cost of an occasional can of windex..?) It's about $500 to $1000 to inspect and clean the panels each year. The battery life is about half of the panel so those will have to be replaced once or possible twice also (although they could be under warranty) Plus, now I know you need windex in a can. That's got to be a special order product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 20 minutes ago, daveakl said: It's about $500 to $1000 to inspect and clean the panels each year. The battery life is about half of the panel so those will have to be replaced once or possible twice also (although they could be under warranty) Plus, now I know you need windex in a can. That's got to be a special order product. thermal plants have LOTS of moving parts (as well as lots of heat), they are going to need more extensive inspections .... and fuel. lots of fuel. the operating cost of a built PV solar plant is deminimus compared to the operating expense of a built thermal plant. .... but the power is less reliable and (for now) is mostly only good for providing peak daytime, "topper" energy, in conjunction with baseload power supplied by some thermal source (CSP-Solar can do some of this, but the power from it is much more expensive than PV-solar) but i have heard that ammonia mixed with water is much more green and sustainable for your solar panel washing needs. although engineers in the Georgia penitentiary system have greatly increased the efficiency of alternative window cleaning technologies -- as demonstrated in the popular culture, through films like Cool Hand Luke. what washing a solar panel MAY look like : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 27, 2016 Share Posted December 27, 2016 well this thread has perked up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 Now that's some alternative energy I can get behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 2 hours ago, daveakl said: Now that's some alternative energy I can get behind. Don't forget the degradation rate....aging has issues and always use safe search for granny car wash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted December 28, 2016 Share Posted December 28, 2016 7 hours ago, twa said: Don't forget the degradation rate....aging has issues and always use safe search for granny car wash. Forget that. Advancements in technology mean that we can get a newer and better version in 2-3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 This kinda goes here Will Franklin @WILLisms 7h7 hours ago More California uses 2.6% less electricity annually than in 2008 but pays $6.8 billion more for it: http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-electricity-capacity/ … #txlege http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-electricity-capacity/ The missteps of regulators have been compounded by the self-interest of California utilities, Lynch and other critics contend. Utilities are typically guaranteed a rate of return of about 10.5% for the cost of each new plant regardless of need. This creates a major incentive to keep construction going: Utilities can make more money building new plants than by buying and reselling readily available electricity from existing plants run by competitors. Regulators acknowledge the state has too much power but say they are being prudent. The investment, they maintain, is needed in case of an emergency — like a power plant going down unexpectedly, a heat wave blanketing the region or a wildfire taking down part of the transmission network. “We overbuilt the system because that was the way we provided that degree of reliability,” explained Michael Picker, president of the California Public Utilities Commission. “Redundancy is important to reliability.” Some of the excess capacity, he noted, is in preparation for the retirement of older, inefficient power plants over the next several years. The state is building many new plants to try to meet California environmental standards requiring 50% clean energy by 2030, he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 3 hours ago, twa said: This kinda goes here Will Franklin @WILLisms 7h7 hours ago More California uses 2.6% less electricity annually than in 2008 but pays $6.8 billion more for it: http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-electricity-capacity/ … #txlege http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-electricity-capacity/ After the Enron situation, I seriously doubt many Californians are complaining over an over built electric infrastructure. It seems like it might be an over reaction, but it isn't really surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Did Enron cost them $6+B a year? I can't recall....but good for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 34 minutes ago, twa said: Did Enron cost them $6+B a year? I can't recall....but good for them. I'm seeing $40 billion dollars over 2 years and then you need to take into account decreased economic growth due to the artificially high electric prices, the artificial blackouts and brown outs, and the unknown ability to reliably acquire electricity and its costs in the future (at that time). http://www.laweekly.com/news/the-enron-rip-off-2134658 Realistically, they've probably over reacted, but given human nature it isn't surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 They reacted pretty slow if Enron was the driver. But then they were pretty slow at seeing market manipulation then. Your link even claims capacity was not the problem for some reason. add Do you think the green energy might be a cause for excess stated capacity? It does seem to overstate then not live up to potential....and need excess backup capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 10 hours ago, twa said: They reacted pretty slow if Enron was the driver. But then they were pretty slow at seeing market manipulation then. Your link even claims capacity was not the problem for some reason. add Do you think the green energy might be a cause for excess stated capacity? It does seem to overstate then not live up to potential....and need excess backup capacity. I suspect the root driver is that the electric industry has found a way to make money based on CA law/regulations. Just like Enron. I suspect politicians/regulators use various excuses for supporting the laws/regulations other than they have been bought by the electric companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 PV panels still have serious limitations, as noted above the weakest link is storage. We are still tied to a 200 yr old technology in batteries. THAT'S where I'd support govt research funding, upgrade storage with breakthroughs coming into focus, ie. graphene applications, and all of a sudden you address a lot of the shortcomings simultaneously. There are also very tempting hints at material aps that might boost efficiencies and lifespan for PV. People are sold on "free electricity" but it isn't, TANSTAAFL, power input for production, transport, etc., adds to the overall costs but you have to consider the entire lifeline of the tech and it's attendant benefits. The big problem is that IF (and today it is still a big IF) a new battery tech evolves people might be able to genuinely go "off the grid", alone or in conjunction w/ their neighbors, pooling panel input and storage and that would kill the power companies. Somehow, I don't see that happening easily or soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 23 minutes ago, LD0506 said: PV panels still have serious limitations, as noted above the weakest link is storage. We are still tied to a 200 yr old technology in batteries. THAT'S where I'd support govt research funding, upgrade storage with breakthroughs coming into focus, ie. graphene applications, and all of a sudden you address a lot of the shortcomings simultaneously. There are also very tempting hints at material aps that might boost efficiencies and lifespan for PV. People are sold on "free electricity" but it isn't, TANSTAAFL, power input for production, transport, etc., adds to the overall costs but you have to consider the entire lifeline of the tech and it's attendant benefits. The big problem is that IF (and today it is still a big IF) a new battery tech evolves people might be able to genuinely go "off the grid", alone or in conjunction w/ their neighbors, pooling panel input and storage and that would kill the power companies. Somehow, I don't see that happening easily or soon. I'm dubious of the economics of independent electrical production. Right now, I can buy a generator for my house, tie it into the natural gas line running to my house, and unplug from the grid, but it doesn't make sense to do it economically. Scale matters. Especially that we already have the infrastructure in place to transport it. Historically, the production of electricity in mass and distribution of it has made more sense. Maybe solar will be different, but I'm doubtful. This is one of those things that I suspect will be different in developing countries without the infrastructure in place now. Those people are never going to have wires (phone or electric) running to their house. But once you have the wires, then that changes things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 fuel cells seem the best neartime solution for point of use generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Exactly, there are widescale ramifications of all of these issues. The thing is, US households have been markedly decreasing their overall usage as efficiencies ramp up in insulation and construction, appliances upgrades, hell even LED lighting made enough of a difference that I could see it in the baseline on my usage. The problem is the when of it, usage spikes later in the day into the evening as dinners are prepared and entertainment toys are fired up, right as you lose the peak production from solar. If you could store it all day to use later, ahh, but there's the rub. PV is seriously inefficient in overall conversion of sunlight >> electricity, that's why I noted above storage + efficiency upgrades would push us past the threshhold point where actually severing from the grid becomes feasible. You look at the efforts ongoing to integrate aerogels- a reasonably well understood tech at this point- into appliances, housing construction, especially windows, and there are opportunities there to cut usage even more. The utilities will react by raising prices to maintain profit margins and drive even more alternatives to fruition. But the entrenched corporate interests that have, own and rent out all that infrastructure ain't gonna be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 On 12/27/2016 at 1:23 PM, China said: I've never seen Windex in a can! Umm... I have. It's actually the best Windex that is made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 25 minutes ago, Kosher Ham said: Umm... I have. It's actually the best Windex that is made. Probably contains hydrofluorocarbons, bad imaging for solar use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.