Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Renewable Energy  (Read 1518856 times)

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2450 on: January 23, 2018, 07:02:10 PM »
looks like the germans export most of their renewable energy.

https://energytransition.org/2018/01/german-power-sector-coal-and-nuclear-down-renewables-up-in-2017/

Germany generates electricity using solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, gas and coal.  It all flows into the same same set of wires.

From your link -

"Renewable electricity has priority dispatch on the German grid, meaning that clean power is consumed before conventional power. "

Which means that if Germany had no connection to other countries then as solar and wind production increased fossil fuel production would have to decrease.  Renewable electricity has priority, the other stuff  has to curtail.

If other countries are buying electricity from Germany they are buying fossil fuel generated electricity.  If they weren't buying that FF electricity would not be produced.


Alexander555

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2503
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 185
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2451 on: January 23, 2018, 07:27:33 PM »
Maybe it's hard for them to close the old powerplants, politics .Depends how you look at it. Because they still need replacement for a big part of these 2,5 million barrels oil a day. And plenty of gas to heat homes. So they are going to need much more capacity in the future. But now they are talking about scaling down investment in renewables. That would be stupid.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2452 on: January 23, 2018, 07:34:27 PM »
Maybe it's hard for them to close the old powerplants, politics .Depends how you look at it. Because they still need replacement for a big part of these 2,5 million barrels oil a day. And plenty of gas to heat homes. So they are going to need much more capacity in the future. But now they are talking about scaling down investment in renewables. That would be stupid.

People who are invested in fossil fuels or who earn their living from fossil fuels do not want to see fossil fuel use drop.  We see that around the world, with Trump's "bringing back coal jobs" to Spain passing laws against installing solar.  Political battles rage in Australia.

These are forces which much be opposed.  We have to push on past these people and their campaigns against renewables.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2453 on: January 23, 2018, 09:06:27 PM »
How the new U.S. tariff on imported solar cells will affect Tesla’s solar business:  not too much, and not for long.

Tesla reiterates commitment to expanding solar product manufacturing in the US after new tariffs
https://electrek.co/2018/01/23/tesla-solar-product-manufacturing-us-tariffs/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2454 on: January 27, 2018, 09:18:44 PM »
Calculation on the effect of the Trump solar tariff on the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) of solar.

(hint: not much at all!)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DkUyzs4Ub9JlSexdydUlgSxU1A18tHa7NlilTdQDtJE/edit#gid=0
Haiku of Futures Passed
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2455 on: January 27, 2018, 10:46:47 PM »
It’s not nothing — it’s like going back 9 months of learning.

miel282002ab

  • New ice
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2456 on: January 28, 2018, 10:21:59 AM »

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2457 on: January 28, 2018, 04:52:08 PM »
I'm sorry, the news is written in spanish, but it's very interesting.

https://www.elconfidencial.com/economia/2018-01-28/energias-renovables-sol-bajos-costes-acuerdo-de-paris-fotovoltaica-espana_1512417/

Web translate works well.  Very nice article.  Thanks for posting, and, welcome!

Sun, low costs and the Paris Agreement activate the appetite for photovoltaics in Spain
Quote
...market conditions and the European political consensus reached after the Paris Agreement are attracting investment to Spain towards photovoltaics again, whose penetration in the energy mix barely covers 3% of current demand.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2458 on: January 28, 2018, 07:34:01 PM »
First Solar Is Using Robots to Better Tap the Sun
Quote
The Ohio plant has been reborn as an almost fully automated operation, daily churning out hundreds of solar panels for a fraction of what it costs rivals to make them. The secret: supersize panels made with cadmium telluride, an energy-absorbing metal compound that First Solar engineers figured out how to spray on glass sheets in a thin film. First Solar invested more than $1 billion in researching and developing the cad-tel spray over the course of two decades. Its success upended the business of solar panel production even before the Trump administration announced tariffs on overseas solar hardware on Jan. 22.
...
Today a visitor to the factory, which reopened in December, looks out over a line of robotic arms guiding sheets of specialized conductive glass onto rollers that snake 3 miles through cleaning, grinding, and spraying machines. A final robot grabs the completed panel, about the size of a large flatscreen TV, and places it in a box for shipment. There are just a few dozen workers scattered about; before the renovation, there were hundreds. The company acknowledges that it’s cut jobs, but it says the ones that remain are safer and pay better.

First Solar’s patented handful of steps takes just three and a half hours, compared with the three days the leading Chinese solar companies need to make similar-size silicon panels. The conventional process requires more than 100 steps, including fabricating silicon ingots in a furnace, shaving them into wafers, wiring on metal contacts to make cells, and assembling 60 or so of those cells.

The panels coming off the new line in Ohio are triple the size of First Solar’s previous model and produce 244 percent more power at a manufacturing cost of as little as 20¢ per watt, about 30 percent less than the cheapest Chinese equivalent. The advantage widens in hot, humid, and low-light conditions. “They have a great new product and a significant cost advantage for at least a couple years,” says Jay Rhame, a portfolio manager at Reaves Asset Management, which has invested in First Solar.
...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-24/first-solar-is-using-robots-to-better-tap-the-sun
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2459 on: January 28, 2018, 07:39:26 PM »
Quote
The panels coming off the new line in Ohio are triple the size of First Solar’s previous model and produce 244 percent more power at a manufacturing cost of as little as 20¢ per watt, about 30 percent less than the cheapest Chinese equivalent.

The result of Trump's tariff on imported solar panels might mean highly automated panel factories built in the US. 

Lower cost production.  Lower cost shipping.  Much faster solar installation.

The Kocks might have shot themselves in their feet.

Shared Humanity

  • Guest
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2460 on: January 28, 2018, 09:53:31 PM »
First Solar Is Using Robots to Better Tap the Sun
Quote
The Ohio plant has been reborn as an almost fully automated operation, daily churning out hundreds of solar panels for a fraction of what it costs rivals to make them. The secret: supersize panels made with cadmium telluride, an energy-absorbing metal compound that First Solar engineers figured out how to spray on glass sheets in a thin film. First Solar invested more than $1 billion in researching and developing the cad-tel spray over the course of two decades. Its success upended the business of solar panel production even before the Trump administration announced tariffs on overseas solar hardware on Jan. 22.
...
Today a visitor to the factory, which reopened in December, looks out over a line of robotic arms guiding sheets of specialized conductive glass onto rollers that snake 3 miles through cleaning, grinding, and spraying machines. A final robot grabs the completed panel, about the size of a large flatscreen TV, and places it in a box for shipment. There are just a few dozen workers scattered about; before the renovation, there were hundreds. The company acknowledges that it’s cut jobs, but it says the ones that remain are safer and pay better.

First Solar’s patented handful of steps takes just three and a half hours, compared with the three days the leading Chinese solar companies need to make similar-size silicon panels. The conventional process requires more than 100 steps, including fabricating silicon ingots in a furnace, shaving them into wafers, wiring on metal contacts to make cells, and assembling 60 or so of those cells.

The panels coming off the new line in Ohio are triple the size of First Solar’s previous model and produce 244 percent more power at a manufacturing cost of as little as 20¢ per watt, about 30 percent less than the cheapest Chinese equivalent. The advantage widens in hot, humid, and low-light conditions. “They have a great new product and a significant cost advantage for at least a couple years,” says Jay Rhame, a portfolio manager at Reaves Asset Management, which has invested in First Solar.
...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-24/first-solar-is-using-robots-to-better-tap-the-sun

Very encouraging. Now build the industry (manufacture, construction and service) to completely replace our existing power generation in a decade. That would be something.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2461 on: January 28, 2018, 10:54:15 PM »
Solar One's Asian factories will also be roboticized in the near future.


CEO Widmar has committed an additional $1.4 billion over the next two years to expand production at two new factories in Vietnam and to retrofit four others the company runs in Malaysia.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-24/first-solar-is-using-robots-to-better-tap-the-sun
Terry

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2462 on: January 28, 2018, 11:07:41 PM »
Solar One's Asian factories will also be roboticized in the near future.


CEO Widmar has committed an additional $1.4 billion over the next two years to expand production at two new factories in Vietnam and to retrofit four others the company runs in Malaysia.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-24/first-solar-is-using-robots-to-better-tap-the-sun
Terry

That's fine but it simply puts them on even footing with automated US/North American plants.  Shipping costs will start being the determining factor when it comes to purchasing.

This is likely to be the case with more and more manufactured goods.  As we automate countries with inexpensive labor lose their advantage.  It will often be cheaper to manufacture close to market than to manufacture and ship long distances.


numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2463 on: January 29, 2018, 02:26:27 AM »
China no longer beats the US principally on labour cost -- if you need cheap labour, you go elsewhere. It beats the US on supply chain. From the startup scene I know various people who built their high-end electronic widget in China because that's where you will find suppliers for all the different components they needed.

Mechanization doesn't really change that advantage.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2464 on: January 29, 2018, 07:56:02 AM »
Just as every North American manufacturer in the 50's had a rail spur, China has spent what is needed to give her businesses a leg up.
Until Chicago, Toronto, Los Angeles, Huston and New York are linked by HSR, or the equivalent, they'll be playing catch up,
Terry

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2465 on: January 29, 2018, 08:26:51 AM »
Just as every North American manufacturer in the 50's had a rail spur, China has spent what is needed to give her businesses a leg up.
Until Chicago, Toronto, Los Angeles, Huston and New York are linked by HSR, or the equivalent, they'll be playing catch up,
Terry

Business people are not going to use HSR for long distance travel.  It's the old "time is money" issue.  Most people are not going to spend a full day riding the rails when they can fly in a few hours.

If you want to get people out of petroleum fueled airplanes then you need to create an electricity based solution that will get them to their destination about as fast or faster.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2466 on: January 29, 2018, 05:16:16 PM »
More and more, economics trumps (*cough*) the politics of renewable energy.

Renewable Energy Took This Republican Louisiana Town Out of the Red
Abita Springs, Louisiana's officials moved the city away from fossil fuels because of their minimal economic benefit.
https://impact.vice.com/en_us/article/kzazjn/renewable-energy-took-this-republican-louisiana-town-out-of-the-red
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2467 on: January 29, 2018, 05:49:47 PM »
Quote

The US government has confirmed which countries shall be exempted from the newly-announced 30% import tariffs on solar cells and modules.

The most notable exemptions are India, Turkey, Brazil and South Africa, under Annex I of the proclamation from the Federal Register, the daily journal of the US government.

Imports from exempted countries are restricted to 3% of annual US crystalline silicon solar imports per country and 9% for all exempt countries combined. It is not yet clear how the tariffs will be reimposed once the limitations of 3% or 9% have been reached.

The exempted countries include: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo (Brazzavile), Congo (Kinshasa), Cote d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Dominica, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, The Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Basson, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Macedonia, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Solomon Island, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Swaziland, Tanzania, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

https://www.pv-tech.org/news/48264


Expect some Chinese panel manufacturers to pack their equipment into shipping containers and move to a tariff exempt country.

If we hit a panel shortage in the US we might see the 9% limit adjusted.

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2468 on: January 29, 2018, 06:17:30 PM »
Just as every North American manufacturer in the 50's had a rail spur, China has spent what is needed to give her businesses a leg up.
Until Chicago, Toronto, Los Angeles, Huston and New York are linked by HSR, or the equivalent, they'll be playing catch up,
Terry

Business people are not going to use HSR for long distance travel.  It's the old "time is money" issue.  Most people are not going to spend a full day riding the rails when they can fly in a few hours.

If you want to get people out of petroleum fueled airplanes then you need to create an electricity based solution that will get them to their destination about as fast or faster.

Business people will happily use high-speed rail for a lot of their travel under 1000km. We already do. In fact, even low-speed rail (about 120 km/h) is advantageous on some trips compared to a flight. You can work on the train much better than on a plane, you have better reliability, and the whole experience is less stressful.

For longer-distance travel, I don't see why carbon-free synthetic fuels won't be good enough.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2469 on: January 29, 2018, 06:48:27 PM »
Just as every North American manufacturer in the 50's had a rail spur, China has spent what is needed to give her businesses a leg up.
Until Chicago, Toronto, Los Angeles, Huston and New York are linked by HSR, or the equivalent, they'll be playing catch up,
Terry

Business people are not going to use HSR for long distance travel.  It's the old "time is money" issue.  Most people are not going to spend a full day riding the rails when they can fly in a few hours.

If you want to get people out of petroleum fueled airplanes then you need to create an electricity based solution that will get them to their destination about as fast or faster.

Business people will happily use high-speed rail for a lot of their travel under 1000km. We already do. In fact, even low-speed rail (about 120 km/h) is advantageous on some trips compared to a flight. You can work on the train much better than on a plane, you have better reliability, and the whole experience is less stressful.

For longer-distance travel, I don't see why carbon-free synthetic fuels won't be good enough.

600 miles is not long distance.  Long distance is NYC to LA.  3,000 miles.  4,800 km.  600 miles from NYC or LA just doesn't cover much.


numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2470 on: January 29, 2018, 08:19:28 PM »
This is headed to be the same old discussion where you insist that only hyper loop can save us. We're on the wrong thread for that.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2471 on: January 29, 2018, 09:15:24 PM »
This is headed to be the same old discussion where you insist that only hyper loop can save us. We're on the wrong thread for that.

No.  We have three options for replacing long distance petroleum fueled flight - battery power, synthetic/biofuels and the Hyperloop.

We can't yet replace long distance flight with batteries or the 'loop.  We don't know if either will prove out.  Replacing petroleum with non-petroleum fuel will work, we've flown with biofuel, but the cost might be higher than the market would bear. 

We haven't yet, as far as I know, flown long distances with synfuel.  Hydrogen does not look to be a good candidate as it takes very large storage tanks.

I have never stated that only the 'loop can save us.


Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2472 on: January 29, 2018, 09:49:15 PM »
This is headed to be the same old discussion where you insist that only hyper loop can save us. We're on the wrong thread for that.

No.  We have three options for replacing long distance petroleum fueled flight - battery power, synthetic/biofuels and the Hyperloop.

We can't yet replace long distance flight with batteries or the 'loop.  We don't know if either will prove out.  Replacing petroleum with non-petroleum fuel will work, we've flown with biofuel, but the cost might be higher than the market would bear. 

We haven't yet, as far as I know, flown long distances with synfuel.  Hydrogen does not look to be a good candidate as it takes very large storage tanks.

I have never stated that only the 'loop can save us.

Also, the SpaceX BFR rocket could fly long distances around the globe without using fossil fuels, given mass production of methane from atmospheric CO2 using the Sabatier reaction.  "Cost per seat should be about the same as full fare economy in an aircraft."

https://www.space.com/38314-elon-musk-spacex-mars-rocket-earth-travel.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2473 on: January 29, 2018, 10:43:22 PM »

600 miles is not long distance.  Long distance is NYC to LA.  3,000 miles.  4,800 km.  600 miles from NYC or LA just doesn't cover much.
NYC to LA is 2,450 miles (4,000 k), or 4.38 hours of flight time, plus 2 hours for check-in.


A non-maglev HSR @ 300 kph could cover the distance in 13.33 hours, with restrooms and restaurants.


Hyperloop @ 240 mph (387 kph) could cover the distance in >10 hours.


I'd expect that all times will be improved on, but it's still going to burn up a day to make the run. HSR & the Hyperloop will add miles as they snake through the country, and airports will move ever further from downtown.


If 50# of unobtainium is suddenly required at the Los Angeles factory, it won't arrive from the New York refinery until the following day. :(


So the question becomes which mode of transportation releases the least GHG both in building the infrastructure and running the system.
Terry




Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2474 on: January 29, 2018, 11:50:07 PM »

600 miles is not long distance.  Long distance is NYC to LA.  3,000 miles.  4,800 km.  600 miles from NYC or LA just doesn't cover much.
NYC to LA is 2,450 miles (4,000 k), or 4.38 hours of flight time, plus 2 hours for check-in.


A non-maglev HSR @ 300 kph could cover the distance in 13.33 hours, with restrooms and restaurants.


Hyperloop @ 240 mph (387 kph) could cover the distance in >10 hours.


I'd expect that all times will be improved on, but it's still going to burn up a day to make the run. HSR & the Hyperloop will add miles as they snake through the country, and airports will move ever further from downtown.


If 50# of unobtainium is suddenly required at the Los Angeles factory, it won't arrive from the New York refinery until the following day. :(


So the question becomes which mode of transportation releases the least GHG both in building the infrastructure and running the system.
Terry

Musk calculated a speed faster than jet passengers.  Getting rid of taxi time, weather diversions, and landing times the 'loop, if it works, should be faster than flying.

Tunneling is an electricity job.  There would be a need to use low CO2 concrete in order to make the 'loop very low carbon.

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2475 on: January 30, 2018, 03:03:26 AM »
Topic is: Arctic Sea Ice : Forum » AGW in general » Policy and solutions » Renewable Energy


Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2476 on: January 30, 2018, 03:12:23 PM »
“There would be a need to use low CO2 concrete in order to make the 'loop very low carbon.”

Renewable energy transport, built with recycled material!  Here are bricks made from Boring Company tunnel debris.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2477 on: January 30, 2018, 09:12:38 PM »
“According to Ørsted, an 8MW turbine – the MH1 by Vestas – generates enough electricity in one revolution of the turbine blades to power a house for 29 hours. If proportional, then that means these 7MW units will generate 25 hours of electricity with a single rotation.”

Hornsea Project One, located 74.5 miles off the coast of Yorkshire, UK.

World’s largest offshore wind farm starts construction
https://electrek.co/2018/01/30/worlds-largest-offshore-wind-farm/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2478 on: January 31, 2018, 06:43:51 PM »
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/solar-wind-energy-land-negotiations-alberta-1.4505394

Quote
Unlike oil and gas companies, who are required to use provincially licensed land agents, renewable companies don't have to use licensed agents for land rights acquisitions for things like wind turbines and solar panel farms.
[...]
About $3.4 billion in revenue raised by the province's carbon levy on large emitters has been earmarked for large-scale renewable energy, bioenergy and technology.

The government has pledged to have 30 per cent of Alberta's electricity demand met with non-greenhouse gas emitting renewable energy by 2030. The most recent data on renewable generation in Alberta shows it at 9.9 per cent.

The goal is expected to result in significant renewable infrastructure development, producing a wave of negotiations between landowners and renewables companies.

Given the relentlessly pro-oil bent of CBC reporting in Alberta I'm a bit suspicious, but it does sound generally like a good idea to have standards and ethics boards.

Some of this might be from an industry sector (the Canadian Association of Petroleum Landmen) trying to remain relevant. Good for them trying to butt in to this new segment rather than simply preventing its existence.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6774
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1047
  • Likes Given: 0

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2480 on: February 02, 2018, 12:03:42 AM »
Going mainstream!

Tesla Expands Sales of Solar Gear at Home Depot
Quote
Tesla Inc. is planning a major expansion of its solar division at Home Depot Inc., embarking on a critical test of the mainstream appeal of its renewable-energy products.

The tech pioneer, best known for its electric cars, is beginning to roll out Tesla-branded selling spaces at 800 of the retailer’s locations, the company confirmed to Bloomberg News. The areas, which will be outfitted during the first half of this year, are staffed by Tesla employees and can demonstrate its solar panels and Powerwall battery.

Lowe’s -- the second-largest U.S. home-improvement chain, after Home Depot -- has also been in discussions with Tesla about selling its solar products, said people familiar with the situation. At some point, Home Depot may also offer Tesla’s much-anticipated solar roof....
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-01/tesla-expands-sales-of-solar-gear-at-home-depot-in-critical-test
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

BenB

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 283
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2481 on: February 04, 2018, 10:21:26 AM »
UK wind farms produced a record amount of electricity in January - around 5,750 GWh.

http://www.ref.org.uk/fuel/index.php?tab=month&order=seqdate&share=N&dir=desc

You have to add ~25% for embedded wind to the figures quoted on that site.

The amount generated in January is about 50% more than in any month prior to October 2017, and equivalent to a share of around 22%. It is also the first time that wind farms generated significantly more electricity than nuclear (in December they were neck-and-neck).

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2482 on: February 04, 2018, 02:32:21 PM »
South Australia:

Tesla is installing Powerwalls and solar power on 50,000 homes to create biggest virtual power plant in the world
Quote
... But now instead of being a large centralized battery system using Tesla’s Powerpacks, the new project announced today is using Tesla’s residential battery system, the Powerwall, to create decentralized energy storage, which basically results in creating a massive virtual power plant.

South Australia Premier Jay Weatherill announced the deal today – the biggest of its kind by far.

The 50,000 homes in the state will be fitted with 5 kW solar arrays and 13.5 kWh Tesla Powerwall 2 battery systems.  It will result in at least 650 MWh of energy storage capacity distributed in the state.

Tesla said in a statement:

“When the South Australian Government invited submissions for innovation in renewables and storage, Tesla’s proposal to create a virtual power plant with 250 megawatts of solar energy and 650 megawatt hours of battery storage was successful. A virtual power plant utilises Tesla Powerwall batteries to store energy collectively from thousands of homes with solar panels. At key moments, the virtual power plant could provide as much capacity as a large gas turbine or coal power plant.”

It will function much like Tesla’s giant Powerpack system, which charges when demand and electricity rates are low and discharges when demand and prices are high.

We reported last month the single battery system managed to make around $1 million in just a few days.

The new project is going to be financed through power sales and it is being assisted by the government with a $2 million grant and $30 million loan from the Renewable Technology Fund. ...
https://electrek.co/2018/02/04/tesla-powerwall-solar-virtual-power-plant/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2483 on: February 04, 2018, 03:50:47 PM »
Interesting. An equally large solar farm + battery farm would be cheaper overall, but I guess this way you get to use well-off citizens' capital without needing to increase taxes.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2484 on: February 04, 2018, 04:51:41 PM »
Interesting. An equally large solar farm + battery farm would be cheaper overall, but I guess this way you get to use well-off citizens' capital without needing to increase taxes.


Quote
The government says that they already started installations for a trial in 1,100 Housing Trust properties, which is for lower-income households.
And, “financed through power sales“...  looks like they are not going after the well-to-do with this.  Perhaps the model is like the one in Vermont, where customers can pay a small monthly fee to “rent” the personal use of utility-connected batteries installed on their residence.

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2485 on: February 04, 2018, 05:50:07 PM »
Interesting. An equally large solar farm + battery farm would be cheaper overall, but I guess this way you get to use well-off citizens' capital without needing to increase taxes.


Quote
The government says that they already started installations for a trial in 1,100 Housing Trust properties, which is for lower-income households.
And, “financed through power sales“...  looks like they are not going after the well-to-do with this.  Perhaps the model is like the one in Vermont, where customers can pay a small monthly fee to “rent” the personal use of utility-connected batteries installed on their residence.

They have likely negotiated a bulk-purchase agreement to provide this resource as a low-income assistance program, locking in lower costs of future electricity rates and helping to stabilize the grid.  The fact that they are touting this as a collective effort for generation indicates that these home batteries will work together on some kind of dispatch arrangement to provide power to the grid as needed, not just their homes.  And yes, in Australia, the lower costs of rooftop solar due to less fees and lower 'soft costs' makes this very cost-effective.
Haiku of Futures Passed
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2486 on: February 04, 2018, 08:14:06 PM »
Confirmed: the system is provided free for users, and financed by the sale of electricity produced.  Over 25,000 housing project installations will be completed before opening access to the general public.

Tesla, Australia to turn 50,000 homes into power generators
Quote
Under a new plan unveiled on Sunday, a network of solar panels linked to rechargeable batteries will be provided free to households and financed by the sale of excess electricity generated by the network, the government said.

"My government has already delivered the world's biggest battery, now we will deliver the world's largest virtual power plant," state Premier Jay Weatherill said in a statement.  "We will use people's homes as a way to generate energy for the South Australian grid, with participating households benefitting with significant savings in their energy bills."

A trial phase will begin with 1,100 public housing properties, each supplied with a 5kW solar panel system Tesla battery.

Following the trial, the systems will be installed at a further 24,000 public housing properties before the scheme is opened up to other South Australians over the next four years. ...
https://phys.org/news/2018-02-tesla-australia-homes-power.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2487 on: February 04, 2018, 11:58:25 PM »
That is one amazing project! I guess part of fhe economics is using the roofs of all these homes as free real estate for solar installations.

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2488 on: February 05, 2018, 12:39:50 PM »
And yes, in Australia, the lower costs of rooftop solar due to less fees and lower 'soft costs' makes this very cost-effective.

I thought residential rooftop solar was expensive:


Lots of inverters, connecting to grid, and work in lots of little bits.

But if you can make a million $ in a few days by buying low and selling high (the opposite of what many normal rooftop solar users get) then it becomes cost effective?

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3342
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2489 on: February 05, 2018, 12:51:35 PM »
People with rooftop solar need to organize and unionize, so they can collectively bargain for the best rates, and if/when there are enough of them, they can threaten to go 'on strike' when need/rates are highest unless they get better rates for the electricity they provide.
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

gerontocrat

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 20384
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5289
  • Likes Given: 69
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2490 on: February 05, 2018, 01:07:53 PM »
And yes, in Australia, the lower costs of rooftop solar due to less fees and lower 'soft costs' makes this very cost-effective.

I thought residential rooftop solar was expensive:

Lots of inverters, connecting to grid, and work in lots of little bits.


I wonder how old the data is for your graph/table and the extent to which it now applies in Australia. Each installation used to be a on-off bespoke affair, but now the industry is maturing, it is much more a production line - i.e. a few standard installations for a few basic house types.

Therefore mass production of the bits and pieces and much simpler installation reduces cost. In the deal for social housing in South Australia, I believe from what I have read the individual household will get a standard rebate on their electricity bill - any games in the electricity spot market will be done by the electricity provider.
"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)

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2491 on: February 05, 2018, 01:44:25 PM »
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-2017/
is dated 2 Nov 2017 but obviously data is older than than, but seems an annual publication so not terribly old.

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2492 on: February 05, 2018, 02:52:25 PM »
I still don't get the economics of this relative to utility-scale. It seems like a great idea for social justice though, so I'm all for it.

There's no way the installation process is going to be cheaper on a house than on a plot of land out in the country. When you're setting up megawatts in a field, it's pretty simple. Setting up kilowatts on each of thousands of homes is a lot more fiddly work, each project similar but slightly different.

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 81
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2493 on: February 05, 2018, 03:29:48 PM »
I still don't get the economics of this relative to utility-scale. It seems like a great idea for social justice though, so I'm all for it.

There's no way the installation process is going to be cheaper on a house than on a plot of land out in the country. When you're setting up megawatts in a field, it's pretty simple. Setting up kilowatts on each of thousands of homes is a lot more fiddly work, each project similar but slightly different.

For consumer/investor, there is benefit by saving at retail rates for electric rather than at wholesale rate for utility. This can easily be double the savings so justifying double the cost.

For distribution company there is local generation so reducing/delaying need to upgrade/add substations due to growing demand from larger number of houses in area (without having to pay for such upgrades).

gerontocrat

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 20384
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5289
  • Likes Given: 69
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2494 on: February 05, 2018, 03:42:54 PM »
I still don't get the economics of this relative to utility-scale. It seems like a great idea for social justice though, so I'm all for it.

There's no way the installation process is going to be cheaper on a house than on a plot of land out in the country. When you're setting up megawatts in a field, it's pretty simple. Setting up kilowatts on each of thousands of homes is a lot more fiddly work, each project similar but slightly different.
The data is not there yet, but you are probably right that a mega-installation has less direct costs than loads of little installations.

I guess one has to move from micro-economic to macro-economics and what we used to call in the 1970's Cost-Benefit-Analysis (a useful approach to look beyond the project to society as a whole but discredited by politicians throwing untenable assumptions about costs and benefits to wider society). This throws up a load of questions.

1. What are the real costs of nuclear power from inception to final decommissioning of the power station not included in the table above?
Ukraine (Chernobyl) and Japan (Fukushima) suggest potentially large. The UK is going to spend an estimated USD 15+ billion for a depository of hot radioactive waste. In the US of A there is an underground facility somewhere in the West (near the Colorado river?) where an unknown but vast amount has been spent (as yet unsuccessfully) to safely store radioactive waste from their nuclear weapons program. There are electric utilities in the USA who are due to close down nuclear plants. Have they provided sufficient funds for decommissioning or will they choose Chapter 11 and dump the cost on the taxpayer ? Ask Sleepy about Sweden - another sorry tale to tell.

2. What are the real costs of power from oil, gas and coal from inception to final decommissioning of the operation not included in the table above?  How many coal companies have dumped the cleaning up of the environment on the taxpayer using Chapter 11 or flogging the business to Fly-by-Night Inc? Who will pay for the disposal of 35,000? redundant and abandoned oil and gas installations and pipelines that already exist ? How will Canada ever clean up the mess in that huge area when the tar sand thing is finished (hundreds of billion of dollars?) ?

And who will pay for the environmental cost of CO2 emissions leading to 1, 3, 4 degrees celsius of  additional increase in global temperatures this century?

So, the true cost of fossil fuel and nuclear power generation, in my not very humble opinion, is far, far above those figures quoted in the table.

There are other benefits in home-based PV power, but of a more unquantifiable nature - e.g.s as you said - social justice, and just by existing making others think about going in to renewable, and in sparsely populated areas, perhaps reducing the scale of the required grid. But perhaps they do not belong in your table.

"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)

numerobis

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2495 on: February 05, 2018, 04:55:30 PM »
I suppose with the target install being social housing, then there's cost to the government of giving social benefits to people who immediately then spend the cash on electricity from the grid. Effectively, then, the government is buying electricity at retail rates. Spending a few extra bucks to buy panels + batteries now means presumably better outcomes for the same social spending in the near future.

It also gives pause to people who argue that solar power is just another way for rich people to take money from the poor.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2496 on: February 05, 2018, 06:06:22 PM »
The cost of Concentrated Solar Power with Molten Salt storage has been cut in half since the days of Tonopah/ Crescent Dunes. And the more recent plants are twice as big.

24-Hour Solar Energy: Molten Salt Makes It Possible, and Prices Are Falling Fast
Molten salt storage in concentrated solar power plants could meet the electricity-on-demand role of coal and gas, allowing more old, fossil fuel plants to retire.
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/16012018/csp-concentrated-solar-molten-salt-storage-24-hour-renewable-energy-crescent-dunes-nevada
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2497 on: February 05, 2018, 06:13:21 PM »
Here’s how the big-battery-tied-to-solar in Australia makes money.  Distributed solar/batteries should work the same way.

Tesla’s giant battery in Australia made around $1 million in just a few days
https://electrek.co/2018/01/23/tesla-giant-battery-australia-1-million/

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2045
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 309
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2498 on: February 05, 2018, 11:00:40 PM »
I still don't get the economics of this relative to utility-scale. It seems like a great idea for social justice though, so I'm all for it.

There's no way the installation process is going to be cheaper on a house than on a plot of land out in the country. When you're setting up megawatts in a field, it's pretty simple. Setting up kilowatts on each of thousands of homes is a lot more fiddly work, each project similar but slightly different.

For the economical side, I don't know, but from a smart grid and technical point of view it is very interesting. You don't need cooling for the inverters, you don't have problems in case of failure because only few kW and concerned, you have people who are worried about making some money so they check regularely if it works properly, you don't use agricultural land for energy production... I don't think that it helps anything regarding power transportation cables because maximum loads often don't match with maximum consumption time. I just checked a refrigerated building today where a 120 kWc installation would have only reduce of 30 kW the peak consumption of the building last year. The issue is that we had a hot cloudy evening in July last year, so we had a high consumption around 6-7 pm with a low production.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25763
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2499 on: February 06, 2018, 03:21:28 PM »
Renewables taking a bite out of fossil fuel business.

Tesla’s giant battery in Australia is already eating away at ‘gas cartel’s’ profits, report says
Quote
When an issue happens or maintenance is required on the power grid in Australia, the Energy Market Operator calls for FCAS (frequency control and ancillary services) which consists of large and costly gas generators kicking in to compensate for the loss of power.

These services are so costly that it can sometimes amount to up to $7 million per day – or 10 times the regular value of the energy delivered.

Electricity rates can be seen reaching $14,000 per MW during those FCAS periods.

Now Renewecomy reports that FCAS were required on January 14, but the prices didn’t skyrocket to $14,000 per MW and they instead were maintained at around $270/MW after a short spike.

The bidding of Tesla’s 100MW/ 129MWh Powerpack project in South Australia on the services is credited with escaping the price hike, which would have cost energy generator and consumers millions in costs.

The Powerpack system is able to switch from charging to discharging in a fraction of a second, which allows Neoen, the operator of the system, to quickly respond when frequency issues happen. ...
https://electrek.co/2018/02/06/tesla-giant-battery-australia-gas-cartels-profit-report/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.