Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Renewable Energy  (Read 536687 times)

jacksmith4tx

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 276
    • View Profile
    • Photon mine
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3100 on: September 05, 2018, 05:06:37 AM »
This report was just released which examines several current and future energy scenarios.
Electric Power Research Institute
https://www.epri.com

Developing a Framework for Integrated Energy Network Planning
https://www.epri.com/#/pages/product/3002010821/

In the white paper there are 7 topics covered in depth:
Capacity expansion 
Distributed energy resources
Distribution planning
Integrated resource planning
Production cost
Renewable integration
Transmission planning

Over 70 pages of research including 10 Key Resource Planning Challenges:
1. Incorporating operational detail.
As emerging power system resources (primarily solar and wind) replace synchronous generators (for example, coal, natural gas, and nuclear) that traditionally have provided needed operational reliability services, resource planners will need to explicitly consider operational reliability capabilities of candidate resources and methods to mitigate potential impacts.

2. Increasing modeling granularity.
Computer models for conducting long-range resource planning need to include finer geographic resolution and temporal granularity to address new resource planning challenges.

3. Integrating generation, transmission, and distribution planning.
Future resource planning will benefit from closer interaction of planners across the entire electricity supply chain to understand how decisions at one planning level may impact other levels as well as the ability to make trade-offs between potential investments in each of these subsystems to optimize the future overall electric power system. Closer integration driven by value reverses the recent trend to separate generation, transmission, and distribution planning to promote a competitive environment.

4. Expanding analysis boundaries and interfaces.
Electric companies are beginning to be asked by regulators and external stakeholders to address issues outside of their electric service territories and in other parts of the economy as part of their resource planning activities. Efficient electrification of end-use sectors such as transportation, in which electricity historically has played little role will further expand these boundaries.

5. Addressing uncertainty and managing risk.
There is a growing need for resource planners to account more explicitly for key uncertainties when developing resource plans and to adopt new approaches for managing evolving corporate risks.

6. Improving forecasting.
Improved and more granular forecasting is critical for robust long-term resource planning. More accurate forecasts of electric load, VER production, DER adoption, future natural gas prices, and weather are high priorities.

7. Improving modeling of customer behavior and interaction.
Robust system planning in the future will need to incorporate deeper understanding of electric customer behavior, incentives to change customer behavior, and how customer behavior may impact the performance of emerging customer resources for energy supply, storage, and demand.

8. Incorporating new planning objectives and constraints.
Future resource plans will need to be optimized to achieve objectives beyond traditional least-cost resource adequacy—including resiliency, flexibility, and new environmental and societal objectives while adhering to system operational reliability constraints.

9. Integrating wholesale power markets.
Increasingly, planners will need to consider the evolution of wholesale power markets that provide opportunities for companies to buy and sell energy, capacity, and ancillary services along with the impact of these markets on the economic viability of resources that provide reliability services and other desired system attributes.

10. Supporting expanded stakeholder engagement.
In recent years, public involvement in company resource planning has increased dramatically. Electric utilities are engaged now more than ever in designing extensive stakeholder engagement processes related to resource planning and responding to stakeholder comments.
Science is a thought process, technology will change reality.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3366
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 315
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3101 on: September 05, 2018, 11:37:18 AM »
Developing a Framework for Integrated Energy Network Planning

Over 70 pages of research including 10 Key Resource Planning Challenges:


Don't forget Challenge #11 Production of new mnemonics and other tools to support the new growth industry "Sustainable Management Consultancy Blah-Blah".
"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)

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3366
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 315
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3102 on: September 05, 2018, 01:49:43 PM »
Developing a Framework for Integrated Energy Network Planning
Over 70 pages of research including 10 Key Resource Planning Challenges:

Don't forget Challenge #11 Production of new mnemonics and other tools to support the new growth industry "Sustainable Management Consultancy Blah-Blah".

Meanwhile - maybe a practical next step in renewables.... (and it was a failure by a NASA project that started the ball rolling. Keeping Science open-source has never been more vital).

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/05/groundbreaking-spinning-wind-turbine-wins-uk-dyson-award
Groundbreaking 'spinning' wind turbine wins UK Dyson award
The O-Wind Turbine captures wind from any direction and, unlike traditional turbines, could be effective in cities

Quote
A ‘spinning’ turbine which can capture wind travelling in any direction and could transform how consumers generate electricity has won its two student designers a prestigious James Dyson award. Nicolas Orellana, 36, and Yaseen Noorani, 24, both MSc students at Lancaster University, have created the O-Wind Turbine which – in a technological first – takes advantage of both horizontal and vertical winds without requiring steering.

Conventional wind turbines only capture wind travelling in one direction, and are notoriously inefficient in cities where wind trapped between buildings becomes unpredictable, making the turbines unusable. Using a simple geometric shape, O-Wind Turbine is designed to make the most of multi-directional wind, generating energy even on the windiest of days. The turbine is a 25cm sphere with geometric vents siting on a fixed axis. It spins when wind hits it from any direction. When wind energy turns the device, gears drive a generator which converts the power of the wind into electricity. This can either be used as a direct source of power or fed into the electricity grid.

The students hope the turbine – which could take at least five years to be put into commercial production – will be installed on large structures such as the side of a building or balcony, where wind speeds are at their highest.

Orellana first became interested in the challenge of multidirectional wind after studying Nasa’s flawed Mars Tumbleweed rover. Six feet in diameter, the inflatable ball was designed to autonomously bounce and roll like tumbleweed across Mars’s surface to measure atmospheric conditions and geographical location. But like traditional wind turbines, it was powered by unidirectional wind blows which severely impaired the rover’s mobility when faced with obstructions, often throwing it off course and ultimately resulting in the failure of the project.

By exploring the limitations of the Tumbleweed, Orellana and Noorani were able to develop three-dimensional wind turbine technology. They then identified how cities could use this technology to harness energy to produce electricity.
"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)

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 12894
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 145
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3103 on: September 05, 2018, 01:58:52 PM »
By 2023, the World Will Have 1 Trillion Watts of Installed Solar PV Capacity
By then, 1.4-cent solar contracts will be “old news.”
Quote
WoodMac analysts simulated 625 auction-tariff scenarios and found a median price of 2 cents per kilowatt-hour by 2022.
"Bid prices will continue their downward march pretty much everywhere. More sub-2-cent PV bids are likely, both in leading low-cost markets and in emerging markets that are launching solicitations. By 2022, awarded prices as low as $14/MWh will be old news," they write in the report.
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/by-2023-the-world-will-have-one-trillion-watts-of-installed-solar-pv-capaci
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 707
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3104 on: September 05, 2018, 02:54:31 PM »
So we're now saying that there are enough electrical engineers for PV to be able to replace PV components on this scale?

How long did it take to get the shops and engineers and the volume of work balanced for washing machines?  70 years?

As Musk is finding out with ramping up Model 3 production.  Stats and presentations and spreadsheets are wonderful things.  But the second you introduce humans into the mix, it all goes to hell and has to be managed back into something approaching the nice streamlined spreadsheet.

if I were talking about this type of PV and planning it, I would demand at least 150% contingency.

I will repeat the reality of the electrical industry, in the UK, as it happens in the home.  10 years to try and fit smart meters.  Abject failure.

How long did it take to balance the needs of washing machine manufacturers and washing machine consumers?  Decades.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2081
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3105 on: September 05, 2018, 03:27:44 PM »

I will repeat the reality of the electrical industry, in the UK, as it happens in the home.  10 years to try and fit smart meters.  Abject failure.

How long did it take to balance the needs of washing machine manufacturers and washing machine consumers?  Decades.

Umm. Did supply and demand mean that the required engineers grew as needed over that time? If there was a shortage of engineers did those engineers find they could charge more for their services and this higher rate of pay bring extra people into the industry?

Replacing PV parts Hmmf I am inundated with people cold calling to offer services I don't want: New inverter that produces 25% more electric, yeah right, cleaning services. Hmm, yes this is a different problem.

If consumers find their system is running poorly or failing due to components, I am sure they will want replacements and the demand will be met in the normal way as with any other product.

>"smart meters.  Abject failure."
Are people demanding them? The comments I hear is they are the most useless thing ever. If I switch kettle on I am using more electric, and these smart meters tell me this. Real 'No sh!t Sherlock!' information. So perhaps the demand for these things isn't there and that is why it is an abject failure.


jacksmith4tx

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 276
    • View Profile
    • Photon mine
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3106 on: September 05, 2018, 04:54:24 PM »
About those smart meters...
When Texas rolled out their smart meters it spawned several new consumer activist groups. I'm sure if you do a vien diagram of anti-smart meter groups, the anti-vaxers and anti-GMO crowd there would be a lot of overlap. Check out https://stopsmartmeters.org/ . Note the ad for your own personal EMF detection device at only $165! Wireless Kills!!

Back to reality...
The biggest failure of the utilities/government in the roll out of smart meters was they didn't give the consumers a way to monitor and analyze their data. I think it might have gone much better if every consumer received a in-home monitor/display device that could show the users actionable data.
Useful information might include:
Historical consumption data compared to current usage & day-ahead or week-ahead forecasting of estimated demand.
Real time price signals so people can better schedule their usage and save money.
Break out how their electricity is being generated by type(fossil fuels, wind, solar, nuclear, bio) in percentages and in watts in historical and real-time data.

I have a smart meter and I also have a in-home monitoring device from Rainforest Automation that has some of these features (https://rainforestautomation.com/our-products/) but I also use the ERCOT SmartMeterTexas website to download my historical data (15min. resolution). Put this all together and I managed to cut my usage between 2011 and 2018 by over 70%.

A few other observations:
Utilities can now remotely disconnect meters from the grid without sending a service crew to do it manually. Sometimes this for not paying their bill and I assume they could do this to avoid blackouts and brownouts if the grid is unstable which would be a critical feature of a managed Demand Response. Smart meter software can be remotely updated to incorporate new features like behind the meter usage meta-data. Meta-data like voltage or current spikes/drops could help spot potential equipment failures and alert the consumer to schedule maintenance and avoid expensive repairs. 
Science is a thought process, technology will change reality.

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 707
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3107 on: September 05, 2018, 08:52:06 PM »
>"smart meters.  Abject failure."
Are people demanding them? The comments I hear is they are the most useless thing ever.

Correct but they are mandated by EU directive and the utility companies have to supply them.  People don't want them but the "governments" have decided this is a great way to get people to reduce their energy consumption, thus allowing them to meet their Paris accord target without doing all that much.

It's going great in France though.  ONE company, the government.  Job done.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 707
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3108 on: September 05, 2018, 09:02:09 PM »
Umm. Did supply and demand mean that the required engineers grew as needed over that time?

Almost certainly.  However, bet on Solar and here is the picture.

You spend 20 years rolling out Solar on a world scale.  5 Years later and Inverters start to fail on an epic scale.  10 years after that, the panels themselves start to degrade and need to be either replaced or to have new capacity AND inverters installed.

The difference being that if you need to wait for a plumber or a washing machine, it's no big deal.  However if 15% of your grid goes down in winter, you don't have 6 months to replace it, you have a few days.

When you are talking about this scale of engineering you need to factor in the capacity to maintain it.  However all of these articles just talk about getting it there.  They don't talk about the sheer cost and effort to keep it maintained.

Nuclear is condemned for the ongoing maintenance cost and the decommissioning cost.  What is the cost of renewing half your Solar grid every 60 years and your inverters 2-3 times in-between.

I'm old enough to remember the 3 day week in the UK where we had days of power outages.

You do not bet on baseload power when you don't know if you can actually keep it up to speed and you also need to factor in the need to virtually double the size of it before you start refreshing all the panels.

If we go with these wonderful estimates which do not factor in all the issues, we'll wind up, 35 years from now, putting in coal fired stations to balance it out.  Coal, in 35 years, is going to do a LOT more damage than it does today.

I am absolutely not saying we can't use large chunks of solar.  Just don't try and sell me on the whole "it can do it all" story.  I don't and never will, believe it, with the technology we have today.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

etienne

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 493
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3109 on: September 05, 2018, 10:30:59 PM »
Comments here about PV maintenance are not all fair. We supervise systems that are 15 years old with almost no failure, I wouldn't say so from a 20 years old system where panels started to have problems after more or less 17 years, but 2 of 7 strings (these are inverters with 1 string) have no issue after such a long time. Most of the time, there is more than one inverter on a production site, so when there is a failure, you only loose part of the production, comparing the production of different inverters  on the same site is even the best way to find out if there are failures, dirt...
Panels do break, but it seems easy to find the broken ones with an infra-red  camera. Didn't try it yet, but it seems quite easy excepted that you need to put the camera on a drone and here you have different legal problems/processes to manage.
I feel that PV systems are easier to repair than washmachines, excepted that they are often on a roof.

etienne

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 493
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3110 on: September 05, 2018, 10:37:25 PM »
Smart meters don't bring much regarding energy saving because they still are in a place where you don't see them. I read a long time ago a study saying that the best way to save electricity was to have the meter visible in the entrance hall. With the old ones, you could hear them turn and so people knew if they forgot a light somewhere when leaving the house.
I understood that the aim of smart meters is not energy saving, but the creation of a smart grid, so that electricity might have a different price at peak and low times.

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3772
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3111 on: September 05, 2018, 11:37:15 PM »
"PV systems are easier to repair than washmachines"

No moving parts. I am familiar with two people who have put in largish systems, 1 acre and 3 acres in PA.
PA you get average of 5.5 hrs full sun daily, and need about 5 acres per megawatt of power.

One is an Amish farmer, that particular community dont connect to the grid, electric in the barn but not in the house, drives a buggy to work. Runs a metal shop, makes nice trailers. Used to get power off a big old diesel engine, he saw a payback time on the PV of less than three years in fuel costs. He don't need no steenking electrician to change out an inverter or anything else, he could probably have built the racking himself. Built an outhouse for batteries, using the LiFePO4 chemistry.

The other runs a high end machine shop, buncha 5 axis CNC. Got a PPA with PPL that PPL tried to renege on, he took em to court and won, but took him a while. He dont need anybody to fix his gear either.

The big outfits have their own techs on staff. Replacing an inverter is not a big deal. Nor is replacing a panel.

I know  a couple community solar projects in PA and OH and they outsource maintenance. Not an issue.

sidd

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 707
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3112 on: September 06, 2018, 12:28:51 PM »
"PV systems are easier to repair than washmachines"

No moving parts. I am familiar with two people who have put in largish systems, 1 acre and 3 acres in PA.

This is the problem.  These internet articles talk about a scale which replaces ALL baseload power with PV.  It is the Scale that is the issue.  I'm well aware of the effort to replace inverters, I can do it myself and do all my own electrical work, plumbing work and moderate engineering work in upgrading an 1850's era home that last saw any upgrades in the 1950's.  My father and his 3 brothers are electricians.

I'm also aware of scale.  Something I have real issues getting over to people in IT where we are only talking about shifting data around.  Try as I might, it is almost impossible to get over to people, who should know, just how long it takes to move or restore extremely large amounts of data.  Witness when Kings College London had a SAN failure and were still restoring data 3 months later.

So, putting it on a human footing and talking about baseload power for the whole world.  First of all you need ALL the power required for each time of day, day/night, in ALL the key locations in the world.  Because Baseload is Baseload, it is always on.  You either store it (and we're talking about just how impossible that might be on the batteries thread), or you transmit it from somewhere else.  There are 24 hours in the day but only 5-6 hours of full power ( in summer) at most locations.  So we'd need at least 4-5 major locations in the world.  Each one would have to be the full size of the required baseload of the grid, assuming no way of storing and having to transfer long distance.  Now we're at 4-5 times the calculated size without talking about line loss.

If we use available land, then we can concentrate on a few very high power inverters.  If we go with the "easy" option of using buildings, then we can increase the number of inverters exponentially.

If we have open land for panel, replacement is easy, if we use available buildings it is exponentially more hard to replace them.

It all comes down to scale.  Just like the fairy story of wind.  I read the article in the Guardian about the new Irish sea wind farm coming on line officially.  it's 659 MW.  Great.

Current power generation, by wind, of our UK installed 20GW???

1.038GW.  We're burning coal again, 2.384GW of it.  We're paying billions to put in "capacity".  Theoretically we should be burning no coal and almost no gas today.  But if the wind doesn't blow?  If the hemisphere is cloudy?

Renewables are not easy.  Approaching them as if they are only leads to disaster and those who want to keep us on fossil fuels rubbing their hands.  My preference is to avoid that scenario.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2081
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3113 on: September 07, 2018, 01:55:09 AM »
Large-scale wind and solar power 'could green the Sahara'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-45435593

But not sure about it being realistic:

Quote
The scientists modelled what would happen if 9 million sq km of the Sahara desert was covered in renewable energy sources.

They focussed on this area because it is sparsely populated, and it is also exposed to significant amounts of sun and wind and is close to large energy markets in Europe and the Middle East.

According to authors' calculations, a massive installation in the desert would generate more than four times the amount of energy that the world currently uses every year.

Previous studies have shown that installing wind and solar can have an impact on temperatures - but the key difference with this research is the impact on vegetation.

"Our model results show that large-scale solar and wind farms in the Sahara would more than double the precipitation, especially in the Sahel, where the magnitude of rainfall increase is between 20mm and 500mm per year," said Dr Yan Li, the lead author of the paper from the University of Illinois, US.

"As a result, vegetation cover fraction increases by about 20%."

Who would pay for it if most of the energy wasn't needed?

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3772
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3114 on: September 07, 2018, 07:17:09 AM »
ISO-NE price spike ameliorated by solar:

"Distributed solar reduced New England wholesale power costs by nearly $20 million dollars during a heat wave from July 1 to July 7 ... "

" ...  the amount of solar produced during the week-long July heatwave was the equivalent of removing 1.37 million homes from the grid. "

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/distributed-solar-saved-iso-ne-consumers-20m-during-july-heatwave-report/531336/

Background: ISO-NE prices hit 2.6K$/MWH, natgas was offline

"Real-time power prices topped $2600/MWh in ISO-New England on Monday ... "

" ... planned for 22,800 MW of demand at 4:30 p.m. on Monday, but real demand topped 23,100 MW ..."

sidd



rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 669
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 18
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3115 on: September 08, 2018, 08:35:55 PM »
Southeast Asia’s sustainable development path under threat

Excellent piece on the issues with large scale hydro-electric dams in areas subject to large climate change variability (too much rain in the case of South East Asia, but could also be too much drought in SW US and Brazil etc.). Also, does not mention the issue of the breakdown of the lush vegetation in the area producing large amounts of CO2/methane for years after they have been flooded by a new dam.

Seems much of the development is also for energy exports, so only probably benefitting an elite, while rivers like the Mekong are severely affected.

Good point from the World Bank stating that a large dependence upon dams for energy/water places countries at a higher risk to climate change. More dams in Canada may be good (as "US" rainfall moves north) but not in places like Brazil or Asia.

https://energytransition.org/2018/08/southeast-asias-sustainable-development-path-under-threat/

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1504
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3116 on: September 10, 2018, 03:15:18 AM »
Tesla Energy is quietly setting its sights on peaker plants

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-energy-peaker-plants/

Quote
Behind the spotlights trained on the Model 3 production ramp and Elon Musk’s online behavior, Tesla’s Energy business is quietly growing and spreading its reach. Tesla notes that its deployment of stationary batteries, which are designed to supply electricity to residential homes, businesses, and even the power grid, surged 450% in the first six months of 2018 alone. These figures are well in line with Elon Musk’s statement during the Q2 2018 earnings call, when he noted that Tesla Energy is growing at such a pace that it would likely catch up and exceed the company’s electric car business in the future.
...

Tesla’s energy storage solutions are starting become more and more accepted by utility companies, particularly since battery technology has reached a point where it now has the potential to replace inefficient and dirty “Peaker” power plants, which are powered on when the demand for electricity is at its highest. Straubel believes that battery solutions such as those offered by Tesla Energy are poised to outcompete conventional peaker plants.

“I think what we’ll see is we won’t build many new peaker plants, if any. Already what we’re seeing happening is the number of new ones being commissioned is drastically lower, and batteries are already outcompeting natural gas peaker plants,” Straubel said.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1527
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3117 on: September 10, 2018, 09:30:31 AM »
Tesla Energy is quietly setting its sights on peaker plants

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-energy-peaker-plants/

Quote
Behind the spotlights trained on the Model 3 production ramp and Elon Musk’s online behavior, Tesla’s Energy business is quietly growing and spreading its reach. Tesla notes that its deployment of stationary batteries, which are designed to supply electricity to residential homes, businesses, and even the power grid, surged 450% in the first six months of 2018 alone. These figures are well in line with Elon Musk’s statement during the Q2 2018 earnings call, when he noted that Tesla Energy is growing at such a pace that it would likely catch up and exceed the company’s electric car business in the future.
...

Tesla’s energy storage solutions are starting become more and more accepted by utility companies, particularly since battery technology has reached a point where it now has the potential to replace inefficient and dirty “Peaker” power plants, which are powered on when the demand for electricity is at its highest. Straubel believes that battery solutions such as those offered by Tesla Energy are poised to outcompete conventional peaker plants.

“I think what we’ll see is we won’t build many new peaker plants, if any. Already what we’re seeing happening is the number of new ones being commissioned is drastically lower, and batteries are already outcompeting natural gas peaker plants,” Straubel said.

More Brand Name Marketing PR spin primarily based on unsubstantiated claims by the Tesla CTO JB Straubel doing his best to enhance Shareholder Wealth.

Do you have anything resembling objective academic or scientific data, research and analysis which pointedly confirms what Tesla CTO JB Straubel says or what that 'cheap biased' internet advertising website claims? https://shop.teslarati.com

Something that is even remotely related to the topic of AGW in general » Policy and solutions » would be nice. 

I think it is noteworthy that the first "big battery" installed now in South Australia that the Govt has ordered/approved the building two new Gas Fired "peaker" power plants to meet their electicity demand requirements.

One has to run on Diesel for the first couple of years before it's properly up and running. I note that this is happening as opposed to buying another ~600 MW of Tesla Grid Batteries - so there must be a reason for that which is contrary to the claims and assertions being made in the ref PR article above.

I have posted material on these two new gas plants for SA several weeks ago already. I see no point in wasting my time by repeating myself. 

.......................

The teslarati url also speaks about the Tesla Powerwall 2.

Quote
In my humble opinion, the vast majority of the hype about the Powerwall 2 has come from Tesla's excellent branding and marketing efforts - they truly are the Apple of the battery storage industry.

It's easy to get caught up in all the Tesla hype and forget that there are many energy storage alternatives to the Powerwall battery system, either currently in the market or set to be released soon.
https://www.solarquotes.com.au/teslaalternatives.html

That's one website of tens of thousands saying the same thing. One could be forgiven for assuming that Elon Musk actually owns and operates the ASIF too!

........................

Meanwhile where the rubber meets the road we have this anecdotal report from Downunder:

Quote
This price increase is the exact opposite of what is supposed to be happening with the cost of home battery storage.   It may be the result of Tesla being too optimistic about how cheap they could make them, or it might be because the company is desperate to raise money due to the huge delays and quality control issues they are having with the production of their Model 3 electric car.

I’m a great believer in compromise, so I don’t see why both reasons can’t be right.  I’d even throw in a third reason of my own involving orders from the planet Mars if I thought anyone would fall for it.

A History Of Australian Powerwall 2 Prices

Prior to the Powerwall 2’s official launch, Elon Musk made some rather optimistic remarks about its price but I will ignore them.  After all, when you get down to it, he is only the CEO of the 383rd largest company in the United States and so can’t be expected to get things right.  CEOs can’t be held responsible for their public statements.  That would be positively un-American.

When the Powerwall 2 battery first launched this price appeared on Tesla’s Australian site:

Tesla Powerwall 2 battery launch price

That’s $8,000 Australian along with a claim that “Installation and supporting hardware starts at $1,450.”  But it only took Tesla a couple of days to tell us they had made a mistake and that was the price without GST 10%.  This is what they replaced it with:

Tesla Powerwall 2 battery revised price

The $8,000 price remained the same, so apparently they didn’t forget GST, but the cost for “Installation and supporting hardware” went up by $700 and started at $2,150 instead of $1,450.  Tesla stuck with this price for a little over a year and now they have this on their Australian site:

Tesla Powerwall 2 battery current price - April 2018

This shows a cost increase of $600.  They have improved the way the price is set out as it is now more clear there is an additional charge for “Supporting hardware”.  But in my opinion, it’s still clearly in breach of Australian Consumer Law on displaying prices. One price including all components must be given, so the price of the Powerwall 2 is actually $9,600.  That “Supporting hardware” is not an optional extra.  Your Tesla Powerwall 2 won’t work without it so it has to be included in a single price.

So using Tesla’s figures an installed Powerwall 2 (14 kWh) will cost you somewhere from $10,750 to $12,500.  Even the upper end of this does not leave much money for installers to make a living. So if anyone offers you an installed Powerwall 2 battery for less than this range you are either very very lucky or something strange is going on.  For example, if it’s bundled in with a solar system then they’ve bumped up the solar power system’s cost so they can try to distract you with what appears to be a great price for a battery.

https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/tesla-powerwall-2-price-increase/

Would you like information explaining why Tesla Powerwalls are one of the most expensive on the market and do not necessarily represent good value for money over the short and long term?
Of course not - hard to cope when one's cult hero and his Corporation is outed publicly as an unreliable manipulative liar and scam artist. :)

What use is a Powerwall 2 if you can't even procure one when you want it? It's of no use.
.................

If Tesla Powerwall 2 is so shit hot why does one of their resellers offer this and in fact RECOMMEND it as their #1 solution?

Quote
The Autonomy ESS is the highest capacity and most flexible and versatile system available for on grid use. If you’re after enough storage to survive the night without needing any grid power, or something capable of running your entire home during a blackout (not just a few small circuits), then this is the system for you. In fact, the Autonomy system is your building blocks for eventual grid disconnection and off-grid living – just add extra Lithium-ion battery modules and solar when the time comes! Systems include the smart home manager, with home automation functionality.

Battery Capacity 10 kWh - 200 kWh Battery expandability to 500 kWh
Grid Defection: Enables you to disconnect from the grid entirely
High Performance: German BMZ L-ion battery and Aussie Selectronic inverters
High Capacity: high peak power and storage capacities; 1 or 3 phase options
Flexible: expandable solar and storage (75kWh max storage)
Plug & Play: compact, outdoor rated, easy to install units available
Monitoring: comprehensive consumption and system web and app monitoring
Smart Home: intelligent performance optimisation, and home automation options


Cost - Systems installed from: $18,550
http://www.offgridenergy.com.au/grid-battery-storage-autonomy-unit/
Or try a Tesla Powerwall from $12000 plus all the extras above not included. 

Except .....
Quote
New Tesla Powerwall 2 Orders Won’t Arrive Until “Early 2019”.
If you order a Tesla Powerwall 2 home battery system, according to a Tesla spokesperson, you will now have to wait until early next year to have it delivered.  This means the supply of Powerwalls for new Australian orders will be halted for at least 7 months. If these turn out to be Tesla months then your guess as to when they will be available is as good as mine. [Read more…]

DCS PV 13.5 - Cost per Total warranted kWh (1 cycle per day) $0.20 (+ inverter cost)
Tesla Powerwall 2 - Cost per Total warranted kWh (1 cycle per day) $0.25 (+ inverter cost)

If the battery is cycled once per day, this is how much each warranted kilowatt-hour of stored electricity will cost.  Once an individual product's figure gets below 10 cents, battery storage is likely to be a worthwhile investment for a large number of households.
https://www.solarquotes.com.au/battery-storage/comparison-table/


Quote
Tesla Powerwall 2
The Battery Test Centre originally planned to use the DC version, but Tesla cancelled its production even though they had already taken deposits for it, so the AC version was used.

    The Powerwall 2 is AC coupled and so does not require a separate inverter to function as it has its own built in battery inverter.
    It was supposed to be available in January 2017 but did not arrive until May and this was one of the first units in the world to be delivered.  That’s 4 months late.
    Tesla said they would provide a technician to assist with installation, but this did not happen.
    Installation was much quicker and easier than with the Powerwall 1, so this is a clear example of a company learning from experience.
    The Powerwall 2 also requires the installation of a Gateway box (a fact Tesla does not advertise) and its installation was also easy.
    Did not come with installation documentation and it had to be accessed online.
    After charging for the first time, no problems were experienced but a burned out terminal block was discovered and replaced.
  While the Powerwall 2 would work if installed in a home, it lacks the functionality to be charged and discharged as required for testing. This ability was expected to come with the Powerwall 2, but did not.  The Battery Test Centre hopes to be able to get it running for their next report that will be released in a few months time.
https://www.solarquotes.com.au/blog/battery-test-centre-results/

...........................

There is much more information out there from similar websites and genuine solar energy installers with direct hands on experience for several decades in this field. There is also more objective knowledge available from renewable energy Govt backed entities like ARENA and University researchers.

For those who prefer Marketing Hype Wild Claims and Spin instead, well more fool you - but do you have keep spreading it and doing Musk's PR advertising for free 24/7/365?
« Last Edit: September 10, 2018, 10:04:56 AM by Lurk »
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1504
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3118 on: September 10, 2018, 01:50:28 PM »
Thanks, that last post has actual useful information.

>Do you have anything resembling objective academic or scientific data, research and analysis which pointedly confirms what Tesla CTO JB Straubel says or what that 'cheap biased' internet advertising website claims?

A 450% increase in battery installation is reported by Tesla. Usually that is accepted as a fact. I see no reason why it wouldn't be true. Their production capacity greatly increased as the battery production of  Model 3 increased. It makes sense that they increased installations and it makes sense that the installation rate will increase.

Do you have a good reason to believe that they didn't install as much as they claim they did?

Quote
I think it is noteworthy that the first "big battery" installed now in South Australia that the Govt has ordered/approved the building two new Gas Fired "peaker" power plants to meet their electicity demand requirements.

Yeah, Tesla is production constrained as is the battery market. Peaker plant substitution is a gradual process. As the grid is stabilized by batteries at increasing granular levels the need for peaker plants will make less sense all the time and in more markets. Small moves, Ellie. Small moves.

Quote
Would you like information explaining why Tesla Powerwalls are one of the most expensive on the market and do not necessarily represent good value for money over the short and long term?

Sure.

Quote
If Tesla Powerwall 2 is so shit hot why does one of their resellers offer this and in fact RECOMMEND it as their #1 solution?

Probably because it is available and more profitable for them. Good. I hope a million more energy storage businesses, each with their own recommended #1 solution.

Quote
There is much more information out there from similar websites and genuine solar energy installers with direct hands on experience for several decades in this field. There is also more objective knowledge available from renewable energy Govt backed entities like ARENA and University researchers

Of course there is. However, there is also lag between the moment things happen and the time science can gather information, clean it, process it, and publish it. Whatever lag science has, it is a small portion of the lag most forms of government have.

There is also the concept of  "forward looking statements". That is the vision of the future an entity wants to create.  With out a vision for the future, how can you create it?

In the case of Tesla and peaker plants, it is an inevitable conclusion of the growth of home, business and grid stabilizing batteries and renewable energy sources. No doubt for most market the volume of batteries is not large enough to create a tipping point. Thankfully that is changing.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 12894
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 145
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3119 on: September 10, 2018, 08:07:45 PM »
4 ways Mars Inc. will slash emissions and still grow – plus other insights from the maker of M&Ms
Quote
To manage the company’s growth year after year while also meeting its sustainability goals, Winston told me, Mars has to invest significantly in both energy efficiency and renewable energy. It uses a four-pronged strategy to accomplish that.

1. Invest in technology upgrades

Mars looks for ways to reduce energy demand through adoption of more energy-efficient technologies. This includes low-hanging fruit such as lighting upgrades, but also more capital-intensive improvements to manufacturing equipment.

2. Make operations more efficient

Ultimately, energy demand not only depends on the efficiency of the technology, but also how it’s used on the factory floor. Mars works with its employees to optimize the operation of equipment to minimize waste while improving productivity.

3. Rethink manufacturing processes

Reinventing how things are made can reduce energy demand. Mars invests in innovation improve its manufacturing processes – for example, in its baking and drying of pet food – to minimize energy use.

4. Procure renewable energy

Mars also looks for solutions to decarbonize its energy supply, working with developers and utilities to procure renewable energy through Power Purchase Agreements, or PPAs.
...
Here’s the thing: Leaving energy production to the pros, Mars is able to scale the renewable portion of its energy supply quickly by partnering with other investors in large projects. That includes a 60-megawatt wind project in Scotland that will produce enough power to cover all of Mars’ annual electricity demand in the United Kingdom.
https://www.edf.org/blog/2018/08/30/4-ways-mars-inc-will-slash-emissions-and-still-grow-plus-other-insights-maker-mms
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 12894
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 145
  • Likes Given: 70
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3120 on: September 11, 2018, 01:54:56 AM »
The state of California is the fifth largest economy in the world.

California governor commits to 100 percent clean energy
Quote
The law requires utilities to source 60 percent of their power from renewable energy by the end of 2030, up from a prior goal of 50 percent. By 2045, all of the state's electricity must come from renewable or other zero-carbon sources.

In 2017, 32 percent of California's retail electricity sales were served by renewable energy facilities, according to the California Energy Commission.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-california-cleanenergy/california-law-will-wean-power-sector-off-fossil-fuels-by-2045-idUSKCN1LQ28J

Cross-posted from the Paris Agreement thread.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1527
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3121 on: September 11, 2018, 11:31:42 AM »
Just quickly as am out of time.

Thanks, that last post has actual useful information.

>Do you have anything resembling objective academic or scientific data, research and analysis which pointedly confirms what Tesla CTO JB Straubel says or what that 'cheap biased' internet advertising website claims?

A 450% increase in battery installation is reported by Tesla. Usually that is accepted as a fact. I see no reason why it wouldn't be true. Their production capacity greatly increased as the battery production of  Model 3 increased. It makes sense that they increased installations and it makes sense that the installation rate will increase.

Do you have a good reason to believe that they didn't install as much as they claim they did?

Have another look at what the site said
Quote
"Tesla notes that its deployment of stationary batteries, which are designed to supply electricity to residential homes, businesses, and even the power grid, surged 450% in the first six months of 2018 alone."

OK, so let's keep in mind the notion of "cherry-picking" and "framing" and how that usually works. iow remain skeptical. I am saying I do not have a good reason to believe they did what it sounds like this person is claiming they did or said they did. That's the right / better way to approach what other people claim and say.

Now I do not monitor public statements or news from tesla, nor monitor multiple Tesla orientated websites at all. Nor read these tesla orientated threads on asif either. So me I have no clue even where to start looking to find the numbers.

Maybe I could ask you and the group reading a question. Do you know or have to hand the actual (verifiable) numbers of stationary batteries Installed by Tesla batteries in the first half of 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018?

And would you also have the similar numbers for the full years 2015-2017 please? Without those I have no idea if the reported 450% is a fair way to describe Tesla performance "is accepted as a fact."

I'd prefer some kind of external data that confirms Tesla's claims but if none exists then Tesla's own numbers would do to start with... eg reported to the stock exchange. 

No big deal if you're not interested in chasing this down - but if I wanted to make comments about Tesla like in that article I would sure want to know I got my facts right first - and when I read such articles in the news media, in company announcements and by misc websites - it's the first thing that comes to mind.

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1504
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3122 on: September 11, 2018, 11:57:21 AM »
So if you don’t want to believe Tesla you have to wait until someone does some sort of  international survey and gives an estimate. That may take years and not be possible at all without using Tesla’s data.

 It makes sense that their battery installations increased because now gigafactory is operational.  It also makes sense that energy installations will keep increasing as Gigafactory expands.

I have no reason to believe a 450% increase isn’t true. It was expected.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

jacksmith4tx

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 276
    • View Profile
    • Photon mine
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3123 on: September 11, 2018, 08:02:42 PM »
My solar panels might outlive me (hope not!) but when I do retrofit the array I expect it to be about 25% as large as it is now and 1/2 the cost due to increased efficiency. Maybe something like this will become available.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180910093533.htm
Quote
Solar power: Golden sandwich could make the world more sustainable

Scientists have developed a photoelectrode that can harvest 85 percent of visible light in a 30 nanometers-thin semiconductor layer between gold layers, converting light energy 11 times more efficiently than previous methods.

In the pursuit of realizing a sustainable society, there is an ever-increasing demand to develop revolutionary solar cells or artificial photosynthesis systems that utilize visible light energy from the sun while using as few materials as possible.

The research team, led by Professor Hiroaki Misawa of the Research Institute for Electronic Science at Hokkaido University, has been aiming to develop a photoelectrode that can harvest visible light across a wide spectral range by using gold nanoparticles loaded on a semiconductor.

I would hope Gold is just a stepping stone to something far more common and less environmentally harmful than heavy metal mining.
Science is a thought process, technology will change reality.

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 707
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3124 on: September 12, 2018, 12:39:31 AM »
Maybe I could ask you and the group reading a question. Do you know or have to hand the actual (verifiable) numbers of stationary batteries Installed by Tesla batteries in the first half of 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018?

Not so easy as =https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/tesla-solar-and-storage-delays-and-deliveries#gs.1fah_b4Greentech Media shows.

Quote
Tesla doesn't make it easy to divine the exact numbers of Powerwalls sold, which leaves it for GTM to read some tea leaves.

No kidding reading that article.

Although it does give pointers.  For the US they are tied to government subsidies.  So it should be possible to track via the government sites.

However, looking at the numbers, Tesla could have achieved that gaol simply by shifting 20,000 powerwalls in the first half of 2018.

Very high % changes are easy when numbers are very low.  Tell me they are making a 450% increase when they are shipping 100,000 per year and I'll say they have gone somewhere.

Reality.  They are late to market, unprepared to produce volume, constrained by a battery factory which is still ramping up and still working on product (solar shingles).

This is normal in a start up and that is what Powerwall is.  If, however, it continues for another 5 years, then Tesla is going to be out of the powerwall and solar roof business.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3366
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 315
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3125 on: September 12, 2018, 12:51:26 AM »
My solar panels might outlive me (hope not!) but when I do retrofit the array I expect it to be about 25% as large as it is now and 1/2 the cost due to increased efficiency. Maybe something like this will become available.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180910093533.htm
Quote
Solar power: Golden sandwich could make the world more sustainable

Scientists have developed a photoelectrode that can harvest 85 percent of visible light in a 30 nanometers-thin semiconductor layer between gold layers, converting light energy 11 times more efficiently than previous methods.



What matters to someone installing a solar panel facility is how much of the radiation hitting it is going to be converted to electricity. Current panels do up to around 20%. 11 times 20% = 220%. So this 11 x thing cannot refer directly to energy harvested by a solar panel. I wonder what it does refer to and the difference it would make to the current percent conversion rate. Or are we talking cost reduction? (The article refers to gold and titanium - so not likely?)
"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)

jacksmith4tx

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 276
    • View Profile
    • Photon mine
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3126 on: September 12, 2018, 03:48:57 AM »
What matters to someone installing a solar panel facility is how much of the radiation hitting it is going to be converted to electricity. Current panels do up to around 20%. 11 times 20% = 220%. So this 11 x thing cannot refer directly to energy harvested by a solar panel. I wonder what it does refer to and the difference it would make to the current percent conversion rate. Or are we talking cost reduction? (The article refers to gold and titanium - so not likely?)
Yeah those are some bodacious claims. I always thought there was a theoretical limit somewhere around 33% but that only applied to a single junction silicone cell (Shockley–Queisser limit). Since this new cell doesn't use silicone we can't compare apples to apples.
I can only guess they were referring to cells constructed in a similar manner. In the article they are quoted as saying "The light energy conversion efficiency is 11 times higher than those without light-trapping functions.". Cells that thin would be pretty delicate and there was no mention of how the layers were connected to the conducting substrate. All that aside, if there is really a breakthrough here I would expect to see it deployed in space first where size and weight are at a premium.
Science is a thought process, technology will change reality.

etienne

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 493
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3127 on: September 13, 2018, 08:15:04 AM »
Quote
I think it is noteworthy that the first "big battery" installed now in South Australia that the Govt has ordered/approved the building two new Gas Fired "peaker" power plants to meet their electicity demand requirements.

Yeah, Tesla is production constrained as is the battery market. Peaker plant substitution is a gradual process. As the grid is stabilized by batteries at increasing granular levels the need for peaker plants will make less sense all the time and in more markets. Small moves, Ellie. Small moves.
Well, we have the issue that batteries only store electricity, there is no production. So if you are under the required amount of kWh for a longer time, it won't help.

Below, you have a graph of a house with PV pannels and batteries. In the upper part is the consumption (red from the grid, orange from the battery, green from the PV). In the lower part, the production (green : direct consumption, orange : loading the battery). A bigger battery won't help.

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1527
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3128 on: September 13, 2018, 02:04:05 PM »


Quote
I think it is noteworthy that the first "big battery" installed now in South Australia that the Govt has ordered/approved the building two new Gas Fired "peaker" power plants to meet their electicity demand requirements.

Yeah, Tesla is production constrained as is the battery market. Peaker plant substitution is a gradual process. As the grid is stabilized by batteries at increasing granular levels the need for peaker plants will make less sense all the time and in more markets. Small moves, Ellie. Small moves.

What a stupid churlish response. It shows you obviously do not comprehend what was written even means, why it is critically important to know, how or why Sth Aust. got to that point in the first place, and worse than all that you do not want to know. Probably believing you know it all already and your comments are doing "good for the world" by being pro-renewable and pro-tesla. Well you don't know it all and you' (and everyone else like you) are not helping one bit. 

It's a waste of my time discussing these issue or providing any more information about these matters. Because you do not want to learn and as such are unteachable.

"Small moves, Ellie. Small moves"? It's far too late for small moves. Tesla's 100MW battery for SA was not even made of Tesla Batteries. They bought them from Germany - so talk about "Tesla production is constrained" ..... it's next to non-existent most of the time. That's the norm not the exception.

Meanwhile you and those like you live in a fantasy world of massive battery grid units and Powerwall 2 raining down on your heads from above like manna from heaven. What happened in SA with a +60% wind solar electricity supply network is going to unfold everywhere else as Coal fired and gas fried and nuclear power plants and shutdown. SA is the canary in the coal mine and yet here you are being flippant churlish and insulting (can't even read what people say eg GSY did NOT say what you have repeatedly and falsely claimed he said about 2 acres, because I checked) of others intelligence and knowledge while you very much come across as a mystical thinker hanging onto false beliefs still living in denial. No one can help you while you refuse to help yourself and remain stuck.

Quote
Thankfully that is changing.

No it isn't. No where near fast enough nor properly planned and well managed enough. Renewable wind, solar, biomass and battery deployment is insignificant and is going to remain insignificant as GHG emissions from FF and Land use and cement use remain essentially stable at current levels globally out to 2040 onward. You're living in denial. Period.
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1527
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3129 on: September 13, 2018, 02:37:18 PM »

Well, we have the issue that batteries only store electricity, there is no production. So if you are under the required amount of kWh for a longer time, it won't help.

Below, you have a graph of a house with PV panels and batteries. In the upper part is the consumption (red from the grid, orange from the battery, green from the PV). In the lower part, the production (green : direct consumption, orange : loading the battery). A bigger battery won't help.

Good anecdotal graph. In that situation you're right, a bigger battery won't help in that configuration. It's really telling that less than 30% of their electricity production comes from the solar panels. Doing it this way is a waste of time, money and resources imo. While obviously cost constraints is a problem for home owners where 60% of all properties are rentals and landlords have no interest, or the funds or the motivation to add renewable power for their tennants, homes like that one shown are still a waste of time - bar the positive PR effect of having a few panels on their roof.

So they need to add on 200% more solar panel capacity , and/or add-on a mini-wind turbine that can also operate at night and possibly up to 24/7 at times. Will the neighbors complain about the noise at 3 am in the morning, is the question?

Only then would adding more Battery capacity serve a purpose. And of course the cost goes through the roof and can they even afford it relative to the cost of Grid electricity wherever they happened to live.

The next issue then becomes would such a householder be able secure reasonable feed-in tariff rates to provide their excess power back into the grid? If so are those rates fair, and secondly are they reliable over the long term life of the Capital investment required? Most fo the time in most regions all over the world they are not. Capital Subsidies from Govts for renewable energy doesn't always apply to the Battery backup system, nor the extra cost to remain connected to the Grid itself. Worse than that these subsidies come and go and keep being changed.

In some markets HALF the cost of electricity is made of the regular base charges to be connected, before you use a penny of their power. Different suppliers have different rules and contracts. It's a damn nightmare for anyone who attempts to look into these matters. I know of locations where a feed-in tariff was set to encourage solar uptake by consumers, and then the Govt jumped in a 3 years later and cut it in half making most users home systems financially nonviable at the stroke of a pen. The Tariffs were supposed to last much longer than 3 years. People bought in in good faith and got screwed. Electricity retailers are still trying to get those tariffs cut further.

This all goes back to incompetent ideological govts, beholden to rent seekers/donors and BS social beliefs about "free markets" superiority on everything. False of course. There is no consistency in these things, at regional level, at grid provider level, at a state level and national level and definitively not internationally. The whole INDUSTRY is a right mess across the board. Yet in this environment, where Tesla can't even supply a batter pack for the next 9 months or more, some people still (foolishly imo) believe Nirvana is going to break out. It's isn't. What you are going to see is endless nightmares for years to come - unless until Govts get serious and are demanded to get serious by the people who elect them. And frankly that isn't going to happen either except in some rare locations of exceptional wisdom vs the norm.

So anyway, what to do? In that example graph scenario they have two choices. Ensure they can get a proper return on their investment and go the whole hog with a feed-in wholesale tariff that works - (hopefully contractually fixed over a decade plus) and increase their solar/wind production and maximize their battery capacity over the top, to ensure there is always excess power to feed back into the grid.

Or two, take another tack, refine their numbers and capacity so that they can go totally Off-Grid and simply be self-sufficient 99.9% of the time and have a short term Honda generator backup for emergencies such as storms extended bad cloudy weather, or battery malfunctions etc. Too easy that Generator will cost under $1000 and you can also use going Camping!!! :) And then those people are sweet & setup forever. They will not need to expand their capacity as much as the first option connected to the grid earning income and they will save a lot of money forever by disconnecting from the grid permanently.

The best benefit? Peace of Mind .. never having to think about grid electricity of what the damned Govt is doing ever again.

There is a third option ..... working with their neighbors to build a communal system shared between multiple houses close together and or apartments. That's tricky due to local council regs but it can be done if everything works well and people cooperate in good faith. Contractually setup properly it means that everyone doesn't have to have solar panels on their own roof. The battery doesn't need to be installed in every home. What you need is smart eclectic electrician and a bit of common sense capitalizing on the best attributes of each home setup and then simply sharing the electricity between each other ... where everyone shares a % of the running costs and setup costs dependent on their usage or do it as a flat rate fee.

And / or feeding it back to the Grid too but via only ONE home still connected to it .. a bonus income for all. Or, like version 2 just get off it entirely - where one home has a larger Generator installed that switches on automatically if the system/battery fails. Too easy!!!  :-)

Actually there is a fourth option for that home example in the graph ..... that is just shut it down, and remove it completely and  stay on the Grid while maximizing your own energy efficiency/use. Use Solar hot water, and gas stoves etc. Sell the system second hand to the highest bidder and forget about it. Put the money in your bank and get some interest on it forever. Then wait for wisdom and nirvana to break out in a decade or two from now. :)

Happy Daze all. Don't go counting your Renewable 'Chickens' until they Hatch, OK?

PS imo I could have written this lecture snippet 6 years ago and it would have fitted reality. If I come back 6 years from now I could repeat it verbatim and it'll still be true. I don't believe in Miracles and Fantasy Land (except at Disneyland)
« Last Edit: September 13, 2018, 02:53:47 PM by Lurk »
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

etienne

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 493
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3130 on: September 13, 2018, 04:57:51 PM »
I forgot to say that the graph is for a winter day, and that the house is heated with heat pump, which explains the importance of the base load.

Heating with wood would be an easy way to make it renewable without having too much electricity used.

On a full year, there is more electricity produced by the PV than electricity consumed, but storage is the issue, and since batteries are too expensive, I really see wood (logs, pellets...) as an energy storage solution for heating.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2018, 06:10:30 PM by etienne »

jacksmith4tx

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 276
    • View Profile
    • Photon mine
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3131 on: September 13, 2018, 06:28:29 PM »
Solar Broke Records All Over Europe This Summer
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/solar-broke-records-all-over-europe-this-summer
Quote
In the U.K., solar broke the record for weekly output between June 21 and June 28, producing 533 gigawatt-hours of energy. The spike in output led solar to take over from gas as the number-one energy source in the country, said the European PV industry body SolarPower Europe.

In July, solar also reached a new high in Germany, with a record 6.17 terawatt-hours of production, SolarPower Europe said. Further north, Denmark registered 361 hours of sunshine in May. This led to an increase of 33 percent in solar electricity production, smashing previous records.

And in the Netherlands, a sunny July saw 75 percent more solar power generation than in the same month last year.
...
In France and Germany, coal and nuclear power plants had to be powered down as they could no longer use the huge volumes of water needed to cool their power stations, resulting in intermittent supply.


To be fair, peak electricity demand in Europe is in the winter when solar output drops to it's seasonal low.

Also note that thermal power plants face two problems in a warmer world. One is the lack of water during drought conditions and the other is the temperature differential AKA Carnot/Rankine Cycle efficiency limits. Both of these problems could be solved by building closed loop cooling systems but that will raise the costs.
Science is a thought process, technology will change reality.

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 707
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3132 on: September 13, 2018, 06:41:13 PM »
Heating with wood would be an easy way to make it renewable without having too much electricity used.

I heat with wood.  There is little "easy" about it, but I can't get enough electricity into the house, let alone cheaply enough, to heat the house fully.  Pellets are better for that and I will be moving to pellets in the next 12 months, however they use a lot more CO2 to produce and distribute.

Lurk is dead right on the downsides of Solar today, I investigated that to an end a decade ago and would have had to oversupply by 400% to make it work.  €5,000 +++ for a system which could only heat water was never going to fly. It was solar PV or nothing. After the EU tariffs on Chinese solar, that turned into nothing..
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

jacksmith4tx

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 276
    • View Profile
    • Photon mine
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3133 on: September 13, 2018, 07:09:50 PM »
Heating with wood would be an easy way to make it renewable without having too much electricity used.

I heat with wood.  There is little "easy" about it, but I can't get enough electricity into the house, let alone cheaply enough, to heat the house fully.  Pellets are better for that and I will be moving to pellets in the next 12 months, however they use a lot more CO2 to produce and distribute.

Lurk is dead right on the downsides of Solar today, I investigated that to an end a decade ago and would have had to oversupply by 400% to make it work.  €5,000 +++ for a system which could only heat water was never going to fly. It was solar PV or nothing. After the EU tariffs on Chinese solar, that turned into nothing..
I installed a forced air fireplace insert that puts out 40,000 BTU but it is a pain in the ass to feed and clean it. Compared to my old electric central heating unit it costs about 1/10th as much to operate since I have access to free wood. Most of the time I use zoned heating - I only heat the rooms I'm using with space heaters and I close off the rest of the rooms.
Science is a thought process, technology will change reality.

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1504
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3134 on: September 14, 2018, 05:56:40 AM »
Well, we have the issue that batteries only store electricity, there is no production. So if you are under the required amount of kWh for a longer time, it won't help.

True, but thankfully most power produced today is wasted. Even when solar is low, batteries can capture wasted energy and release them during peak times.

Quote
Below, you have a graph of a house with PV pannels and batteries. In the upper part is the consumption (red from the grid, orange from the battery, green from the PV). In the lower part, the production (green : direct consumption, orange : loading the battery). A bigger battery won't help.

Well yes this is December somewhere quite far up north... In what latitude was this measurement taken?, Do you know? Because where I live December gets much more power than that.

Surely the further north you go solar power becomes more troublesome in winter. But a large percentage of the world lives near the tropics.

Also the solution for that home is simple. Overbuild. If the true cost of Carbon was priced in fossil fuels, overbuilding solar/ batteries would be extremely profitable. As it is today overbuilding is expensive. But the solution is there if we decide to implement it.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

GoSouthYoungins

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 534
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 32
  • Likes Given: 102
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3135 on: September 14, 2018, 06:13:57 AM »
Also the solution for that home is simple. Overbuild. If the true cost of Carbon was priced in fossil fuels, overbuilding solar/ batteries would be extremely profitable. As it is today overbuilding is expensive. But the solution is there if we decide to implement it.

Do you realize that a carbon tax would make overbuilding MORE expensive? It may be economical over time, but it would definitely cost more up front than without a carbon tax. I'm all for proper carbon accounting, but it's not a fairy tale that somehow lowers the cost of anything.
big time oops

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1504
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3136 on: September 14, 2018, 07:31:29 AM »

"Small moves, Ellie. Small moves"? It's far too late for small moves.


So what big move do you suggest?
 
I think that decreasing the price of batteries through mass production and targeting the most expensive and unstable energy markets first sounds like a great idea to make batteries even cheaper, allowing batteries to penetrate cheaper markets.

For some reason you don't like that idea. Fine. Then what is the plan? What is the solution to transition civilization to carbon negative state.?

Quote
(can't even read what people say eg GSY did NOT say what you have repeatedly and falsely claimed he said about 2 acres, because I checked)


I asked him, like I ask you, what is your solution?

This is what I got from his avoidant non-answers to the same question followed by my opinion.


Quote
People used to grow their own food, and build their own shelters. With access to boundless information and a few crucial durable goods, this could be made drastically easier.

To me he is suggesting that 7 billion people stop what they are doing and become farmers. Not that there is anything wrong with becoming farmers, but everyone has a different role in society. If we all become farmers science ceases, education ceases, medicine ceases, eventually energy and infrastructure ceases. Humanity disappears. If we knowingly do that it is genocide.

Quote
Less than a billion people could survive if we had to grow our own food and build our own shelters? Why?

37 billion land acres on earth. Half is considered habitable by traditional methods, (I think much more is actually habitable with human management). But lets say just under half, so 18 billion acres. You think a family of 4 needs 72 acres to survive? Estimates by people who actually grow their own food come out to 2 acres. 36 times less. Are the other 70 acres for solar panels and your garage full of teslas (the apparent foundation of life)?

Now he is suggesting that the earth be split in portions as small as 2 acres and force people to move there. The 70 acres bit is nonsense, because if we are all farmers there is no production of anything other than food.

Quote
Fair point about the distribution of land ownership. A new homestead act is also necessary.


He wants to force people to move by using the law. How do you choose who goes farming and who keeps providing society with school and hospital? Do we separate families?

Quote
It's not like fossil fuels would be outlawed, they would just be expensive. You could make tools, they would just be more expensive. And it would be outrageously expensive to make a car, or to power it, regardless of power source.

IMPORTANT:  In his solution, fossil fuels remain king but very expensive.

He wants to stop transportation without a replacement. Think about that for a second. How can we have computers if transportation is reduced by 95%? How can the farmers have basic farming tools if transportation is reduced by 95%? Transportation as we know it must be replaced. It has to be ordered and it has to be fast.

Quote
Not everyone would have to farm...it would just be much more common. Food would just be much more local. Food that can be stably stored and transported probably would be still

I want to know details. How do you make most people stop their lives and move to farms?  How many years this takes? How do you handle the transition in cities? How do you protect them from drought or floods? How do we irrigate the land? What happens when local crops fail and there is no transportation?

Quote
Trains are incredibly efficient. Air travel would reduce 1000 fold.

How do you make cars incredibly expensive but trains remain? Who makes the trains? And the train parts? And how do you power the trains? With solar panels and batteries? But he says they can't be made because fossil fuels are too expensive?

Quote
You think the year 1850 is nonsense, a fake time?

In 1850 there were only 1.2 billion people in the world. Most of them lived in cities like we do today.
 
Quote
Wouldn't we be much much better at farming and simple living with access to information and some more complex durable tools and materials.

That would be paradise, so long as we had irrigation and tools and seed and trade for produce and indoor plumbing and electric power. Also protection from the elements, hospitals if needed, medicine and schools. Roads would be nice, even if only walking was allowed. But that is a fantasy when considering 7 billion people.

Quote
Modern technology doesn't just stop, it gets redirected toward leveraging historically normal human occupations.

huh? How do you redirect technology if there is no transportation, and no energy other than heavily taxed fossil fuels? There is no innovation, technology or manufacturing.

Quote
And energy consumption drops to less than 10% current levels, probably more like 1%. We are currently incredibly wasteful.

 1% of today's energy? Really? 1% of today's energy?




Nah. He was clear, that he wants most people to move to some kind of farming situation and cease all modern activity. That means a small parcel of land. 2 acres is the number he gave.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1504
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3137 on: September 14, 2018, 07:45:33 AM »
Quote
Do you realize that a carbon tax would make overbuilding MORE expensive?

1. It doesn't matter if it is more expensive as long as the rate of return is higher than fossil fuels.
2. It will be less expensive for factories that take at least part of their power from the sun and wind.
3. Factories fully powered by the sun and wind that use batteries to smooth out low energy times will be immune to the tax, except for transportation and mining. Electric Semi Trucks can alleviate the transportation problem.

Quote
I'm all for proper carbon accounting, but it's not a fairy tale that somehow lowers the cost of anything

Are you? So you understand that if a factory gets a percentage of it's power from the sun or wind carbon emissions are reduced?
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

etienne

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 493
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3138 on: September 14, 2018, 08:20:45 AM »
Well, we have the issue that batteries only store electricity, there is no production. So if you are under the required amount of kWh for a longer time, it won't help.

True, but thankfully most power produced today is wasted. Even when solar is low, batteries can capture wasted energy and release them during peak times.

Quote
Below, you have a graph of a house with PV pannels and batteries. In the upper part is the consumption (red from the grid, orange from the battery, green from the PV). In the lower part, the production (green : direct consumption, orange : loading the battery). A bigger battery won't help.

Well yes this is December somewhere quite far up north... In what latitude was this measurement taken?, Do you know? Because where I live December gets much more power than that.

Surely the further north you go solar power becomes more troublesome in winter. But a large percentage of the world lives near the tropics.

Also the solution for that home is simple. Overbuild. If the true cost of Carbon was priced in fossil fuels, overbuilding solar/ batteries would be extremely profitable. As it is today overbuilding is expensive. But the solution is there if we decide to implement it.
The house is in Luxembourg, that's about
Latitude : 49°36′42″ North
Longitude : 6°07′47″ East
Altitude : 316 m
If you are close to the equator, you have the problem during the summer/fall because of the AC when it's raining or cloudy.
The house has already overbuild PV (22kWp), it has been done so that each usable spot has been covered with PV panels. The yearly production is higher than the yearly consumption.

The false problem is geothermal heat pump heating, but it's very efficient and the house is really a great achievement, just that it uses most of the electricity during the winter when there is little sun. During the winter when there is sun, the house is also directly heated through the windows.

Well the real problem is the concept of self-sufficiency, to achieve it you need different sources of renewable energy, and you can't have them all on one house. So the real solution is to have shared renewable electricity production with a grid to transport it.

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1527
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3139 on: September 14, 2018, 08:33:35 AM »


Quote
I think it is noteworthy that the first "big battery" installed now in South Australia that the Govt has ordered/approved the building two new Gas Fired "peaker" power plants to meet their electicity demand requirements.

Yeah, Tesla is production constrained as is the battery market. Peaker plant substitution is a gradual process. As the grid is stabilized by batteries at increasing granular levels the need for peaker plants will make less sense all the time and in more markets. Small moves, Ellie. Small moves.

What a stupid churlish response. It shows you obviously do not comprehend what was written even means, why it is critically important to know, how or why Sth Aust. got to that point in the first place, and worse than all that you do not want to know. Probably believing you know it all already and your comments are doing "good for the world" by being pro-renewable and pro-tesla. Well you don't know it all and you' (and everyone else like you) are not helping one bit. 

It's a waste of my time discussing these issue or providing any more information about these matters. Because you do not want to learn and as such are unteachable.


I stay away from these threads because most of it Tesla PR hype, Musk arguments and far too many pronouncements of mystical  faith and hope all is going to be well by "believers" .... itl;s fine being positive and forward looking but what the point discussing anything when the real details are ignored ... such as what went down in Sth Australia and why, and why they're building two new gas plants instead of building more solar panels and batteries. 

Everything I have said in the comment above is pretty much reflected in fact based analysis such as this report, provided by JACK at the top of this very page.

These challenges are expected to become more widespread in the future. The critical overarching challenge is to develop power system resource plans that will continue to guide investments that provide safe, affordable, reliable, and environmentally responsible electricity supply. These plans also need to be resilient and flexible as well as support the unprecedented pace of change occurring in the production, delivery, and use of electricity—and in the policies that govern energy use.
https://www.epri.com/#/pages/product/3002010821/?lang=en

Ignore these matters at our peril, and they are being ignored. EPRI has no power to make plans nor any changes. Only GOVTS do.

Those are the REAL issues people need to know about and the politicians must act on now and everyday into the future. And that is precisely what is not happening globally. It's why Sth Australia ended up in a total mess and it's coming to a region near you once coal, gas and nuclear plants get shut down. At a time when extreme weather events massive heatwaves also arrive.

These matters should be a top priority for the UNFCCC where all Govts tackle this as a genuine problem in need of Govt intervention and regulation ad controls. The same as home renewables and business based renewable are never going to work without Govt intervention in regulations and support and coordinated across the world - to best practice levels - to actually achieve global goals

Which won't happen while deniers keep getting voted into office and corporations resist sensible coordinated plans regulations and long-term Guidance by all Govts.  Luxury Teslas and Tesla batteries, and Tesla HYPE and delusions of a Messiah in the making are not the solution to anything.

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3366
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 315
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3140 on: September 14, 2018, 12:01:10 PM »

I stay away from these threads because most of it Tesla PR hype, Musk arguments and far too many pronouncements of mystical  faith and hope all is going to be well by "believers" ....

For someone who stays away from these threads there are a lot of posts from you, and very long ones too.
"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)

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1527
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3141 on: September 14, 2018, 12:40:55 PM »

I stay away from these threads because most of it Tesla PR hype, Musk arguments and far too many pronouncements of mystical  faith and hope all is going to be well by "believers" ....

For someone who stays away from these threads there are a lot of posts from you, and very long ones too.

Not really. several over several days doesn't make a lot over a few months.
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1527
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3142 on: September 14, 2018, 01:01:40 PM »
Solar Broke Records All Over Europe This Summer
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/solar-broke-records-all-over-europe-this-summer


To be fair, peak electricity demand in Europe is in the winter when solar output drops to it's seasonal low.
[/quote]

Yes exactly. This applies to both the grid and standalone PV solar sites/homes eg the individual graph shown by Etienne, which was during winter they said.

If solar can break records in summer, then it follows with ongoing growth of production supply can also break winter records too. The question is - how much is enough?

Jump forward to 2038 let's say. No Nukes left in Germany? How many have been shut down in France by then, and have they been replaced or not? By then aren't more Nukes also shutdown in Britain? What about Sweden too?

Britain is closing all it's coal fired plants before 2030 aren't they? Germany too I think. NO new coal fired are built, even some old gas plants will close. No one (?) wants any more Nukes built in Europe so what will things be like by 2038? Wind expands I suppose, but it doesn't blow every day. The further north you go the less production comes out of Solar PV and solar thermal too during winter. I assume that there's cutting edge mass battery storage all over Europe, yeah? Is it enough when Solar PV can only charge those batteries with a reasonable supply between 10 am and 3 pm.

Then what happens? Will it be enough to avoid blackouts and how much is it going to cost? I am not yet convinced given the complexity and planning coordination required in that report you provided Jack https://www.epri.com/#/pages/product/3002010821/?lang=en

And without even considering all the expected massive growth in Electricity consumption many think is going to occur between now and 2038 when all of Europe are assumed to be driving electric car and transportation trucks. I am far from confident the EU and the rest of the world are yet up to the ask that lies ahead. Projections from all major energy agencies are still projecting the FF energy use at the very same level it is at today globally. iow no real reduction in GHG emissions between now and this unknown future in 2038. The last 30 years and last 20 years suggests "we're" not really up to the task of being realistic as yet. 
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 707
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3143 on: September 14, 2018, 01:08:26 PM »


I installed a forced air fireplace insert that puts out 40,000 BTU but it is a pain in the ass to feed and clean it. Compared to my old electric central heating unit it costs about 1/10th as much to operate since I have access to free wood. Most of the time I use zoned heating - I only heat the rooms I'm using with space heaters and I close off the rest of the rooms.

My house is made up of two 1850's era stone built town houses.  The walls are 2-3 feet thick.  Despite full sealed units around the house, extensive insulation and not heating the attic rooms until required, heating without wood is a big issue.  When we bought the first house we removed the paraffin boiler from the hall as the house was, then, a holiday home.  Right now I have a 110,000 BTU wood burning boiler connected to ten radiators, mostly large cast iron.  I have also fitted a 34,000 BTU stove in the dining room which connects to a single cast iron radiator in the living room. When we arrive back from holidays in the winter, it takes 3 days to heat the house and one day with both the stove and the boiler on.

As it is impossible to keep the boiler running all night without coal or coke, we run a 3kw paraffin fan air heater in the downstairs hall to heat the core of the house in the late night to early morning.

We buy our oak for burning from a local who uses managed forests for supply.  The whole thing is about half the price of electricity to run, but the €5000 cost of the boiler took about 3 years to depreciate, even with the cost savings.  That is not the point though, we are warm.

The move to pellet burning is the reality that we need a manageable and controllable central heating which can be left on all night and also run for periods when we are away.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1504
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3144 on: September 14, 2018, 05:03:09 PM »
U.S. utility solar contracts 'exploded' in 2018 despite tariffs: report

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-solar/u-s-utility-solar-contracts-exploded-in-2018-despite-tariffs-report-idUSKCN1LT0EU

Quote
A record 8.5 gigawatts (GW) of utility solar projects were procured in the first six months of this year after President Donald Trump in January announced a 30 percent tariff on panels produced overseas, according to the report by Wood Mackenzie Power & Renewables and industry trade group the Solar Energy Industries Association
...
In every segment of the market except residential, system pricing is at its lowest level ever, the report said. Utility projects make up more than half the solar market.
...
In the first half of the year, the U.S. installed 4.7 GW of solar, accounting for nearly a third of new electricity generating capacity additions. In the second quarter, residential installations were roughly flat with last year at 577 MW, while commercial and industrial installations slid 8 percent to 453 MW.


That fall in commercial and home installation I attribute it directly to the stupid tariffs.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

NeilT

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 707
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3145 on: September 14, 2018, 06:02:19 PM »


And without even considering all the expected massive growth in Electricity consumption many think is going to occur between now and 2038 when all of Europe are assumed to be driving electric car and transportation trucks. I am far from confident the EU and the rest of the world are yet up to the ask that lies ahead. Projections from all major energy agencies are still projecting the FF energy use at the very same level it is at today globally. iow no real reduction in GHG emissions between now and this unknown future in 2038. The last 30 years and last 20 years suggests "we're" not really up to the task of being realistic as yet.

The UK is investing in both renewable and Nuclear.  One Nuclear in progress and two still looking for funding due to serious concerns about allowing Chinese companies into our electricity infrastructure.

Currently EDF is doing work on all active UK reactors (15 at seven sites), to extend their working life to 2040-2050.

Each new UK site will deliver more than twice the power of any existing 2 reactor site.  So, essentially, the planned new 3 reactor sites could replace all existing AGR reactors with a life span into the 2080's.

In the medium term the UK is heavily investing in offshore wind.  UK solar receives no government investment today, however deployments continue.

Until 2050 the UK should be fairly well supplied with power, if all the Nuclear goes ahead.  It should even be able ro deal with EV ramp up if charging is done mainly at night.

IF, however, the UK does not complete the investment in Nuclear, then it is going to be in a mess in about 20 years time.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1504
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3146 on: September 14, 2018, 08:52:40 PM »
Utilities have a problem: the public wants 100% renewable energy, and quick

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/9/14/17853884/utilities-renewable-energy-100-percent-public-opinion

Quote
Renewable energy is hot. It has incredible momentum, not only in terms of deployment and costs but in terms of public opinion and cultural cachet. To put it simply: Everyone loves renewable energy. It’s cleaner, it’s high-tech, it’s new jobs, it’s the future.

And so more and more big energy customers are demanding the full meal deal: 100 percent renewable energy.

The Sierra Club notes that so far in the US, more than 80 cities, five counties, and two states have committed to 100 percent renewables. Six cities have already hit the target.

The group RE100 tracks 144 private companies across the globe that have committed to 100 percent renewables, including Google, Ikea, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Coca-Cola, Nike, GM, and, uh, Lego.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

GoSouthYoungins

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 534
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 32
  • Likes Given: 102
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3147 on: September 15, 2018, 12:45:30 AM »
Utilities have a problem: the public wants 100% renewable energy, and quick

genocide, genocide, genocide, GENOCIDE, GENOCIDE, GENOCIDE!!!!!

I'm sure you are aware that this is not currently close to being possible. And thus, you seem to be cheer-leading GENOCIDE. We are all going to die. OMG. Help. GENOCIDE
big time oops

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1527
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3148 on: September 15, 2018, 04:56:26 AM »
Utilities have a problem: the public wants 100% renewable energy, and quick

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/9/14/17853884/utilities-renewable-energy-100-percent-public-opinion

Quote
Renewable energy is hot. It has incredible momentum, not only in terms of deployment and costs but in terms of public opinion and cultural cachet. To put it simply: Everyone loves renewable energy. It’s cleaner, it’s high-tech, it’s new jobs, it’s the future.

And so more and more big energy customers are demanding the full meal deal: 100 percent renewable energy.

The Sierra Club notes that so far in the US, more than 80 cities, five counties, and two states have committed to 100 percent renewables. Six cities have already hit the target.

The group RE100 tracks 144 private companies across the globe that have committed to 100 percent renewables, including Google, Ikea, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Coca-Cola, Nike, GM, and, uh, Lego.

Blatant Lies and Propaganda.

aka Fake News, it is not true. The public in the world, including in the USA, does not want 100% renewable energy, nor quickly.

It's delusional to believe they do and it's dishonest to suggest they do - the information in that hyper crappy Vox news source does not say they do either - which is why this is Fake News.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2018, 07:47:33 AM by Lurk »
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

GoSouthYoungins

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 534
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 32
  • Likes Given: 102
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3149 on: September 15, 2018, 07:28:34 AM »
Also the solution for that home is simple. Overbuild. If the true cost of Carbon was priced in fossil fuels, overbuilding solar/ batteries would be extremely profitable. As it is today overbuilding is expensive. But the solution is there if we decide to implement it.

It doesn't matter if it is more expensive…
I think people are starting to get the idea that your chalk-full of disingenuous BS and don’t have anything useful to add. You should probably cease and desist.
big time oops