Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Renewable Energy  (Read 556531 times)

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 13231
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3250 on: January 03, 2019, 08:54:50 PM »
Another example of how international renewable energy projects begin nowdays:  on Twitter.

< why is TESLA not in Singapore?
Elon Musk: Govt has been unwelcome
Vincent: The Chinese government is very supportive to the Tesla
Elon Musk (@elonmusk) 1/3/19, 12:51 PM
Yes, support of the Chinese government is very much appreciated
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1080884388525555712

< Care to explain?
C- Singapore's economy is reliant upon fossil fuels. Their electricity is generated from imported natural gas, and they host multiple gigantic petroleum refineries. Their government is against EVs.

Elon Musk (@elonmusk) 1/3/19, 1:07 PM
Singapore has enough area to switch to solar/battery & be energy-independent
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1080888452256657408

Min-Liang Tan: I've got a building in Singapore coming up 2020. Happy to get a solar/battery outfit there to test/showcase it:
     Razer plans new S-E Asia HQ at one-north in Singapore, Business News & Top Stories - The Straits Times
      https://www.straitstimes.com/business/razer-plans-new-s-e-asia-hq-at-one-north-in-spore

EM: Sounds great, will connect you with Tesla Energy
EM: Btw, I like your gaming equipment
MLT: And I'm a big fan of your work at @Tesla , clearly we both have good taste ;)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 13231
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3251 on: January 04, 2019, 10:17:17 PM »
Quote
“New solar facility in northwestern China sells power at a lower price than coal-fired power plants - for the first time in the country: 0.316 yuan (5 U.S. cents) per kWh for solar v. 0.325 for coal”

Two solar power bases launched in northwestern China
https://www.azernews.az/region/143423.html
https://twitter.com/AssaadRazzouk/status/1080897862609833985
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1257
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3252 on: January 08, 2019, 03:52:26 PM »
PG&E is threatening to declare bankruptcy over a potential  lawsuit regarding it's liability in starting the Camp fire. But there are a whole host of issues that may be involved.
Also remember that PG&E Diablo Nuclear Plant is scheduled for shutdown and decommissioning in 2024 . I have seen initial cost estimates at $1.7 billion for the two Diablo reactors but remember that SCG&E San Onofre Nuclear shutdown 2014 and the decommissioning estimates are over $10 billion with about $ 4 billion already paid by ratepayers in advance. So I would expect Diablo's  costs to rise substantially.
Also Calif. is still expanding commercial solar and there is already a large residential solar adoption rate . So for someone like me that already has solar and will see large rate increases to pay for “fire” risks plus decommissioning risks that the utilities will undoubtably add on to my rates that already have an annual meter fee that is about as high as my electric use bill there will be a strong temptation to just go totally off-grid. Those customers who want to go off-grid can collect a tax rebate for a tesla power wall or other battery options already on the market. So the utility companies are facing increased costs for Nuclear decommissioning, renewable mandates, potential customers pulling out of market, fire costs, endless lawsuits, and at some point maybe increased natural gas costs,
The poor( yes there are poor people ) who can’t put up solar or batteries and that live in apartments or trailers will somehow be asked to pay much higher bills and they will figure out how to use less. New construction in Calif. already will have a solar requirement starting soon . So if anyone thinks PG&E is bluffing they should pencil out the numbers first.
If the state is stratled with all these costs you gotta remember we just elected the most liberal governor we have ever had and he is very very green. So the state won’t back down on solar rebates, new construction solar mandates, or other efforts to choke off existing revenue streams from fishing, lumber, mining, or brown generating options like gas fired generating plants. Also a large coal generator in Arizona that used to send us electricity is shutting down.

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4216
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3253 on: January 08, 2019, 05:39:15 PM »

If the state is stratled with all these costs you gotta remember we just elected the most liberal governor we have ever had and he is very very green. So the state won’t back down on solar rebates, new construction solar mandates, or other efforts to choke off existing revenue streams from fishing, lumber, mining, or brown generating options like gas fired generating plants. Also a large coal generator in Arizona that used to send us electricity is shutting down.
Perhaps a strain on California's power consumers, but surely a big plus for the region and the world.
My understanding is that Boulder Dam no longer contributes to So. Cal's energy base, but is now only used as peak energy due to low water levels at Lake Mead.


As EV's prices drop and their popularity grows, California utilities will require a massive buildout. Flexible charging schedules will expand peak hours to 24 hours per day. If your AC, TV, oven or clothes dryer aren't spinning your meter at night, your EVs charging up from the day's commute will be demanding juice even as the family sleeps.


Can inexpensive clean energy be rolled out faster than EVs come on line? Where are these plants being built? Who will ultimately foot the bill for the infrastructure?


Once E-Trucking becomes available these vehicles will make diesels obsolete overnight. Instead of needing millions of gallons of diesel fuel, the trucking sector will require TWs of additional power to be generated and distributed across the State. How will this be generated. Who will pay the bills?


Terry

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 13231
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3254 on: January 08, 2019, 08:34:01 PM »
If the projects are approved, Hawaiian Electric said they will also help double current reductions in oil demand, with reductions totaling about 100 million gallons below 2008 levels.

Hawaiian Electric Announces ‘Mind-Blowing’ Solar-Plus-Storage Contracts
Quote
If the state’s public utility commission approves the power-purchase agreement contracts, it would mean a big boost for the U.S. storage market. WoodMac currently logs 1.4 gigawatt-hours of energy storage installed in the nation, with just 75 megawatt-hours in Hawaii. According to Finn-Foley, Hawaiian Electric’s projects would nearly double what’s installed in the U.S. and grow Hawaii’s market exponentially. Taken together, the projects would also rank as the second-largest storage announcement ever, just behind the recently approved Moss Landing project in California.

But that’s not even the most thrilling part of this announcement for clean energy analysts.

“What’s even more notable is the range of PPA prices,” said Finn-Foley.

Past solar-plus-storage prices in Hawaii came in at 13.9 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2016 and 11 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2017. One of the projects announced this week by Hawaiian Electric is more expensive than the latter price — 15 megawatts of solar and 60 megawatt-hours of storage at 12 cents per kilowatt-hour. But another 90 megawatts of solar and 360 megawatt-hours of storage came in at what Finn-Foley called a “jaw-dropping” 8 cents per kilowatt-hour. That means that from 2016 to 2019 solar-plus-storage PPA prices in the state dropped by 42 percent.
https://www.greentechmedia.com/amp/article/hawaiian-electric-industries-announces-mind-blowing-solar-plus-storage-cont
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1257
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3255 on: January 09, 2019, 03:47:56 AM »
Terry, I too agree that closing down coal power plants is a good idea. California will be
shutting down it's last Nuclear plant that is about 45 miles upwind from me. We are cranking out commercial solar power and people are putting in tesla power walls along with their residential solar.
The power wall state rebate is about $3,400  and an additional $3,400 Federal tax rebate results in an installed power wall for about $8,000 in what otherwise would be a $15,000 bill.  All tax payers are shouldering the costs even though it is generally the wealthy that can afford electric cars, solar systems or power walls. Pacific gas and electric has lost about half of it,s stock value in the last couple months however and the reliability of our power grid is starting to look tenuous. Those of us who can afford renewables are ponying up and the state is moving forward with plans to get to a 100% renewable grid by 2045. If however the utility companies go broke there is something going wrong and that is before electric transport ramps up.
 O.K. Solar with a power wall takes away some of the demands for gas power to supply peak power during high demand hours and those of us who get the rebates are required to allow our power walls to cycle to receive the rebates. But those who don't have the money to afford the technology will undoubtably have to pay more for their electricity as we go forward and I believe that power will be less dependable as we move forward. Calif. generally has a mild climate and good solar and hydro resources so it makes sense that we should be taking the lead . Home heating demands are generally less so even with higher electric rates a household total energy cost isn't what it would be further east.
 I plan on forking over the money for a power wall so I will let you know what I think about the new toy as I get some experiance with it. Mostly I am doing it as some sort of insurance against potential brown outs because my annual electric costs are only about $400. Four years on solar and other than crawling up on the roof about once a month during dry season to wash them they are working perfectly.
 
 

 

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 699
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3256 on: January 10, 2019, 10:47:27 PM »
California already got 56% of its electricity from renewables and nuclear in 2017, the rest was from natural gas. The Diablo Canyon nuclear plant output will have to be replaced, so that will slow progress a little, but the state is still well on its way to renewable only (perhaps with standby gas) future.

Lets remember that an EV utilizes energy much more efficiently than an ICE, and therefore moving from ICE to EV reduces emissions by itself. Using renewable electricity is the cherry on the top. That extra energy efficiency also limits the amount of extra electricity that is required, an estimate for the UK put the need at an extra 10% of currently provided electricity for 100% EV cars - so maybe 30%+ for California for all EV cars and trucks

https://phys.org/news/2018-09-california-aims-carbon-free-2045is-feasible.html

https://greycellsenergy.com/articles-analysis/evs-electricity-demand/

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4216
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3257 on: January 10, 2019, 11:06:49 PM »
California already got 56% of its electricity from renewables and nuclear in 2017, the rest was from natural gas. The Diablo Canyon nuclear plant output will have to be replaced, so that will slow progress a little, but the state is still well on its way to renewable only (perhaps with standby gas) future.

Lets remember that an EV utilizes energy much more efficiently than an ICE, and therefore moving from ICE to EV reduces emissions by itself. Using renewable electricity is the cherry on the top. That extra energy efficiency also limits the amount of extra electricity that is required, an estimate for the UK put the need at an extra 10% of currently provided electricity for 100% EV cars - so maybe 30%+ for California for all EV cars and trucks

https://phys.org/news/2018-09-california-aims-carbon-free-2045is-feasible.html

https://greycellsenergy.com/articles-analysis/evs-electricity-demand/


Didn't we work out the avg miles driven, the avg electricity used without an EV & the number of miles/KWh just a few months ago?


We'd worked with American averages as opposed to Californian numbers. I'd have to assume that with it's mild climate Californian homes would use less energy, and with California's lauded car culture and extensive freeway grid, that Californians probably exceed the rest of the country in miles driven/month.


I don't have those figures in front of me, but there's no need to guess about the electricity required when we've already done the required math.


Perhaps someone familiar with the search functions could chime in?
Terry

James Lovejoy

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 155
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3258 on: January 11, 2019, 12:36:43 AM »
According to https://alankandel.scienceblog.com/2014/02/07/annual-per-capita-california-driving-1-5-times-the-national-average

California drivers drive 300 billion miles a year.  Cross checking with fhwa data, that seems to include all on-highway vehicles from motorcycles to semi trucks.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/motorfuel/dec17/dec17.pdf

The Tesla 3 gets almost 4 miles per kWh.  That would be 75 billion kWh.  Raise it to 100 billion kWh on the assumption that the overall fleet efficiency will be lower than the Tesla 3's.  According to the California government website: 
https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/electric_generation_capacity.html

in 2017 California used 206,328 GWh of electricity.

100 billion kWh is 100,000 GWh.  So by this back of envelope calculation, motor vehicles would require a 50% increase in electricity production.

An impossible task if we switched over instantly.  Over a period of a decade or more it is very doable.

oren

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3058
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 336
  • Likes Given: 648
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3259 on: January 11, 2019, 02:48:27 AM »
Nice calculation JL.
There are some losses in charging EV batteries, and I think average energy use per mile is a bit higher than the headline number due to car heating/AC and non-flat terrain. So maybe 110,000 or even 120,000 GWh. Still very doable over a decade or two.
Note: there'll also be some retired activities related to petrol - refining, tanker trucks, gas pumps, but they are probably negligible for such a calculation.

oren

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3058
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 336
  • Likes Given: 648
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3260 on: January 11, 2019, 02:57:14 AM »
Lets remember that an EV utilizes energy much more efficiently than an ICE, and therefore moving from ICE to EV reduces emissions by itself. Using renewable electricity is the cherry on the top. That extra energy efficiency also limits the amount of extra electricity that is required, an estimate for the UK put the need at an extra 10% of currently provided electricity for 100% EV cars - so maybe 30%+ for California for all EV cars and trucks

https://greycellsenergy.com/articles-analysis/evs-electricity-demand/
I note that the link includes several optimistic assumptions - reduction of energy per mile and reduction of total number of cars by 2050, and that looking at the "business as usual" column shows a 25% increase in electricity demand, rather than 10%. But that is still not a very high number over 30 years.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 402
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3261 on: January 11, 2019, 12:12:00 PM »
I dug up that old calculation for the USA and chucked in a column for California. The data might be a bit shaky but I think it is in the right ballpark.

The data I have suggests that California electricity consumption per capita is well under half the average for the USA. That's a surprise.

I also cannot find any official data that supports that the average mileage driven per capita in California is 1.5 times the average. The data I could find suggests rather the reverse.

But the table ends up with 100% EVs needing a 50% increase in total electricity generation.

As renewables (+ nuclear) electricity generation is currently at 56%, to power EVs requires a doubling of existing renewable electricity generation capacity. A target of 100% renewable electricity generation for all purposes requires a 177% increase in existing renewable electricity generation  (plus an amount to replace existing nuclear electricity generation).

Given that history tells us since the beginning of the industrial revolution that overall energy demand is likely to increase despite efforts to improve energy efficiency, the target for 100% electricity generation in California requires a tripling at least of existing renewable electricity generation capacity over the coming decade(s).
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1257
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3262 on: January 11, 2019, 06:07:09 PM »
It is important to realize that Calif. hydroelectric power can fluctuate with snowpack/ water variability .For example hydro delivered ~ 49 terra watts in 2005-2006 after a good rain year and only produced ~ 15 terra watts in the 2014-2015 water season.  Yes wind/solar have increased their production but much of those gains will be offset by the loss of nuclear. So just a back of napkin calculation would mean we need to triple wind/solar to just stay even with current statewide electric use if we again saw a bad hydro year like 2015. So unless we can cut back ~ 35 terra watts of use during bad rain seasons wind/solar need a lot of extra capacity to maintain base load.
 News today is that Trump is considering cutting $2.5 billion in Army Corp of Engineers water projects for Calif. and another $2.5 billion from Puerto Rico. These cuts would obviate  any chance that Calif. could improve it's Hydro capacity.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-california-wall-funding-20190111-story.html

I would think it is time for Calif. to leave the U.S. 

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4216
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3263 on: January 11, 2019, 11:17:18 PM »
I dug up that old calculation for the USA and chucked in a column for California. The data might be a bit shaky but I think it is in the right ballpark.

The data I have suggests that California electricity consumption per capita is well under half the average for the USA. That's a surprise.

I also cannot find any official data that supports that the average mileage driven per capita in California is 1.5 times the average. The data I could find suggests rather the reverse.

But the table ends up with 100% EVs needing a 50% increase in total electricity generation.

As renewables (+ nuclear) electricity generation is currently at 56%, to power EVs requires a doubling of existing renewable electricity generation capacity. A target of 100% renewable electricity generation for all purposes requires a 177% increase in existing renewable electricity generation  (plus an amount to replace existing nuclear electricity generation).

Given that history tells us since the beginning of the industrial revolution that overall energy demand is likely to increase despite efforts to improve energy efficiency, the target for 100% electricity generation in California requires a tripling at least of existing renewable electricity generation capacity over the coming decade(s).

Thanks for dragging out, and improving on your spreadsheet. I'll be sure to copy it for future reference.

Edmund's model 3, after >10,000 miles has averaged 3.11 miles/KWh. The Mod.3 is acknowledged as getting much better mileage than either the model S or Model X.  I'd assume that 3 Miles/KWh for passenger vehicles is probably quite high, and with the Tesla E-Semi expected to come in at an estimated 1mile/KWh, the combined mileage must be much lower.

https://www.edmunds.com/tesla/model-3/2017/long-term-road-test/2017-tesla-model-3-monthly-update-for-september-2018.html

Another niggle in that direction is that as far as I see you've omitted the 20% battery charge/discharge loss, as well as whatever additional costs the charging unit itself imparts.

I fear when allowances are made for these, simply converting the passenger vehicle segment of the market will overwhelm our best efforts, if we restrict ourselves to non-polluting, renewable sources of Californian produced electricity. The trucking sector alone might overwhelm a rapid buildout of the grid and I expect that sector to change to charging as rapidly as vehicles and charging stations become available.

Bruce might be safe behind his (Power)Wall, under the shade of his solar panels, ;D but neighbors needing refrigerated milk for a toddler, or heat for an aged parent, may resent it when either their bills exceed their house payment, or their electrical supplier can't afford to service their rural lines. :-\

I've often driven Tehachapi Pass, and there isn't much room for more windmills. Boulder Dam once kept the lights of the marquee blazing bright at Grauman's Chinese Theater, but today they only let water through when peak power would otherwise cause brownouts in LA.

Terry
« Last Edit: January 12, 2019, 07:12:05 AM by TerryM »

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4216
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3264 on: January 12, 2019, 07:26:34 AM »
Terry, I too agree that closing down coal power plants is a good idea. California will be
shutting down it's last Nuclear plant that is about 45 miles upwind from me. We are cranking out commercial solar power and people are putting in tesla power walls along with their residential solar.
The power wall state rebate is about $3,400  and an additional $3,400 Federal tax rebate results in an installed power wall for about $8,000 in what otherwise would be a $15,000 bill.  All tax payers are shouldering the costs even though it is generally the wealthy that can afford electric cars, solar systems or power walls. Pacific gas and electric has lost about half of it,s stock value in the last couple months however and the reliability of our power grid is starting to look tenuous. Those of us who can afford renewables are ponying up and the state is moving forward with plans to get to a 100% renewable grid by 2045. If however the utility companies go broke there is something going wrong and that is before electric transport ramps up.
 O.K. Solar with a power wall takes away some of the demands for gas power to supply peak power during high demand hours and those of us who get the rebates are required to allow our power walls to cycle to receive the rebates. But those who don't have the money to afford the technology will undoubtably have to pay more for their electricity as we go forward and I believe that power will be less dependable as we move forward. Calif. generally has a mild climate and good solar and hydro resources so it makes sense that we should be taking the lead . Home heating demands are generally less so even with higher electric rates a household total energy cost isn't what it would be further east.
 I plan on forking over the money for a power wall so I will let you know what I think about the new toy as I get some experiance with it. Mostly I am doing it as some sort of insurance against potential brown outs because my annual electric costs are only about $400. Four years on solar and other than crawling up on the roof about once a month during dry season to wash them they are working perfectly.


I had no idea that the subsidy was so high for a power wall.
I've heard that paying attention to the fine print can be important.


Best of luck with your investment.
Terry

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 699
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3265 on: January 12, 2019, 07:36:09 PM »
Thanks for the detailed calculations for California. With a 15-20 year timeframe, a tripling of renewable energy is more than doable. It will take that long to retire the last ICE unless they are specifically outlawed. Given that the EV does not need gasoline, and has a much lower maintenance cost, the consumer is simply swapping one input cost for another - so don't quite understand the affordability issue. Will there be standby natural gas plants? Quite possibly, unless the large scale storage issue gets fixed in that timeframe.

I am quite skeptical of most green energy boosterism, but California looks especially well set up given its solar and onshore and offshore wind capacity, plus that of its neighbouring states. Not such a good story for many other parts of the US.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 13231
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3266 on: January 13, 2019, 09:17:01 PM »
China launches subsidy-free solar and wind power
Quote
BEIJING/SHANGHAI, Jan 10 (Reuters) - China will launch a series of subsidy-free wind and solar projects this year to take advantage of a rapid fall in construction costs since 2012 and tackle a gaping payment backlog, the country's top planning agency said on Thursday.

Last year, the government was forced to suspend all new subsidised solar capacity approvals after a record 53-gigawatt capacity increase in 2017 left it with a backlog of at least 120 billion yuan ($18 billion) in subsidy payments.

The new subsidy-free projects will generate renewable power for sale at the same prices as non-subsidised coal-fired power plants, and will not have to comply with capacity quota restrictions, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) announced on Wednesday. It added that the projects would, however, receive support on land and financing. ...
http://news.trust.org/item/20190110110245-elvi8/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1257
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3267 on: January 13, 2019, 10:29:48 PM »
A flat kWH rate used to be available in Calif. , for me it was about 20 cents per kWh . As of 2019 that option is no longer available and peak rates 2pm to 8pm are now 46 cents per kWh depending on which rate plan you opt for.  The power walls are timed so that they send stored power back onto the grid during those hours. You don't have much choice about when your power wall feeds the grid because the rebates are only applicable if it feeds back it's stored energy and some minimum amounts during those peak rate hours.
 There is now a low rate available at very late night hours of 12 cents so if you can time your use to those hours and utilize a power wall at peak hrs. you still can maintain average kWh rates at something less than 20 cents per kWh. The power wall also needs to be hooked up to a solar system that you already own or purchase to receive the rebates.
 This is a rate plan , with options for SCE

https://www.sce.com/residential/rates/Time-Of-Use-Residential-Rate-Plans#collapse-accordion-15840-5

I don't think most rate payers are aware of the new changes so the power companies will make a bit of a windfall during peak hrs. until people catch on. I used an SCE rate plan because the one available for PG&E was too opaque to understand.
 The power wall contractor I contacted for installation quotes only installed about 100 power walls last year and they service three affluent counties.



oren

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3058
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 336
  • Likes Given: 648
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3268 on: January 14, 2019, 12:27:41 AM »
Quote
China launches subsidy-free solar and wind power
Very good news. These technologies are advanced enough to compete on their own without subsidies, and the Chinese will still provide land and financing, which means rapid deployment will resume.

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1257
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3269 on: January 14, 2019, 03:36:46 PM »
PG&E , Pacific Gas & Electric a company that services over 16 million Calif. utilities customers files for bankruptcy . 
 Will the state be left on the hook for decommissioning DiabloCanyon Nuclear plant ? Who will be footing the bill for trimming tens of thousands of trees ? How long will our power grid hold ? Lots of issues and the stock dropped by half today.
 I got my deposit in for two power walls on Friday. I predict they will get very popular and the rebate tiers will fill quickly after which the state rebates will disappear although the federal tax rebate will still be there.
 PG&E did file for bankruptcy once before over the Enron debacle and made it through but I wouldn't bet on it this time. 

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 13231
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3270 on: January 15, 2019, 09:20:31 PM »
Kees van der Leun: "On Saturday, wind power produced 20% of Europe's electricity!
Denmark 68%
Germany 53%
UK 30%
Portugal 30^%
Spain 27%
Austria 27%
NL 23%
Belgium 20%
(Ireland's data still seem to be missing)"
https://twitter.com/Sustainable2050/status/1084544175037661186
Image below.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4216
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3271 on: January 16, 2019, 01:37:33 AM »
PG&E , Pacific Gas & Electric a company that services over 16 million Calif. utilities customers files for bankruptcy . 
 Will the state be left on the hook for decommissioning DiabloCanyon Nuclear plant ? Who will be footing the bill for trimming tens of thousands of trees ? How long will our power grid hold ? Lots of issues and the stock dropped by half today.
 I got my deposit in for two power walls on Friday. I predict they will get very popular and the rebate tiers will fill quickly after which the state rebates will disappear although the federal tax rebate will still be there.
 PG&E did file for bankruptcy once before over the Enron debacle and made it through but I wouldn't bet on it this time.
If your power walls & solar panels are of adequate size you may escape the worst of the skulduggery that surely lies ahead.
Good luck to you and to the 15,999,999 others sure to be directly affected.


I assume that the rate plans, rebates and subsidies you've written of will undergo massive changes as PG&E contorts in her death throes, or writhes in extreme agony before recovering.
Trying to CYA and surviving with most of your electrical equipment intact might be more important at this juncture than striving to minimize your monthly usage/billing.


When Enron's rolling brownouts were prevalent, refrigeration, A/C & heat pump compressors, even HVAC and swimming pool motors were over amping and burning out. The only solution is to take them off line, leave them off until the grid is hopefully stable, then bring them back on line sequentially.
Ovens or water heaters that rely on resistance are not affected, but motors, compressors and electronics seldom have the circuitry needed to save themselves from extended periods of varying voltage.


Having quick access to refrigerator, TV, computer, room A/C or heat pump plugs and receptacles might save their replacement costs. Knowing which breakers to throw to keep the A/C or heat pump safe can prevent a damn expensive service call.


Hope I didn't get too carried away, but memories of back to back 18 hour days and major supply houses unable to keep 2 hp compressors in stock are what flash to mind when someone mentions Enron. When PG&E can't pay their servicemen things could begin falling apart at an exponential rate.


Scratch a piggies snout for me :)
Terry

Bruce Steele

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1257
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3272 on: January 16, 2019, 03:29:57 AM »
Terry, If you wanted to buy a brand new F-250 diesel 4wd truck it would set you back about $80,000.
If you wanted instead a 6.5 K solar system on your roof, a couple power walls, and a fairly nice used
Tesla S 2014 with a ~240 mile range , the whole package would be less than the cost of that new Ford truck.
 The solar system would pay itself back in less than ten years. The power wall probably never would but it would address the intermittency issues and I guess the Tesla is just a way to test the option of living off grid , self sufficient on food and close to zero fossils fuels for transport.
 I see those shiny Ford trucks every day , lots of them. They're everywhere. And how many people might think that Tesla is a luxury, and anyone with solar , a wall, and a Tesla as some kind of elitist.
They wouldn't think for a minute the guy in the big Ford truck was.
 If your _$ 20,000 solar array pays itself back in ten years , you only have about $50,000 into your home energy and transport. Maybe retirement isn't big on my list but if my expenses decrease as I get closer then I am at least headed in the right direction.
 PG&E will emerge from bankruptcy , there will be more fires, and eventually we will change the law that holds the utility company's liable even if there is no malpractice. Trees fall on power lines, power poles fall over . You can't take all the risk out of running power through the grid. People are going to need to accept either the risk of overhead power delivery or pay for buried lines. Suing the power company every time there is a fire started by a utilitiy line is not a sustainable option.
 I am guessing people will figure this out but then I'm buying a power wall because I think it's going to take them awhile . I am also guessing the rebates are going to run out.
 If I had to make a prediction it would be that electric rates here in Calif. are going to get very expensive very soon.
 I do hope Mr. Musk made his power walls resistant to power surges . His rockets land themselves.

 






TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4216
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3273 on: January 16, 2019, 06:09:46 AM »
Bruce
Power costs in California are sure to increase.
My city owned utilities in Riverside provide some protection. Perhaps the present kerfuffle will encourage other municipalities to pick up the gauntlet?


I hope the Powerwalls meet your expectations.
Terry

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 13231
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 156
  • Likes Given: 90
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3274 on: January 16, 2019, 04:47:01 PM »
Tesla Powerwall gets a massive boost in Australia with ~50% subsidy for up to 40,000 homes
Quote
Some public tenants who received a Powerwall as part of the virtual power plant initiative are reporting savings of over $300 per quarter on their electricity bills. Households with higher energy needs could see even more savings.

Tesla already had a long backlog of Powerwall orders, in Australia and globally, but demand is expected to also increase now that it’s being included as part of this incentive. Tesla is talking about a 12-week lead time for the Powerwall in South Australia.

The government program also offers the discount on other home battery pack solutions, like sonnen’s sonnenBatteries. ...
https://electrek.co/2019/01/16/tesla-powerwall-boost-australia-discount/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 699
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3275 on: Today at 03:54:30 AM »
Bloomberg: Clean Energy Investment Exceeded $300 Billion Once Again in 2018

BUT, we are at the same $ level as 2011, although with continuing efficiencies much more capacity per $. China was the biggest cut to expenditures in 2018, will probably be a drag in 2019.

https://about.bnef.com/blog/clean-energy-investment-exceeded-300-billion-2018/