Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Renewable Energy  (Read 473998 times)

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3202
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2750 on: May 22, 2018, 07:39:37 PM »
Quote
Perfectly operating nuclear isn’t being retired early

But it is.  Kewaunee was the first operating and licensed reactor to be closed for purely economic reasons.  Other reactors are being closed because they cannot compete in the energy market even though they require no repairs and have years to go on their license.

Oyster Creek will close later this year because an upgrade would be required for it to stay in operation but that's the exception.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 11261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2751 on: May 23, 2018, 08:20:27 PM »
New eruptions at Hawaii volcano send lava closer to geothermal power plant
Also:  poverty and the people not evacuating
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/05/22/hawaii-volcano-lava-kilauea-power-plant/632294002/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 11261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2752 on: May 24, 2018, 02:55:05 PM »
GE Power division builds turbines for thermal power plants.  Of GE’s many problems, that’s among the worst.

What the Hell Happened at GE?
Few corporate meltdowns have been as swift and dramatic as General Electric’s over the past 18 months—but the problems started long before that.
http://fortune.com/longform/ge-decline-what-the-hell-happened/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3202
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2753 on: May 24, 2018, 10:20:53 PM »
The EIA just released the May monthly electricity report.  It covers the first quarter of 2018. 

Comparing the first quarter of 2018 to 2017 -

Wind generated electricity increased 19%.

PV solar generated electricity increased 33%.

That suggests the US will transition more fossil fuel generation to renewables in 2018 than they did in 2017 when 2.2% changed hands.

numerobis

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 766
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2754 on: May 24, 2018, 10:24:50 PM »
Quote
Perfectly operating nuclear isn’t being retired early

But it is.  Kewaunee was the first operating and licensed reactor to be closed for purely economic reasons.  Other reactors are being closed because they cannot compete in the energy market even though they require no repairs and have years to go on their license.

Oyster Creek will close later this year because an upgrade would be required for it to stay in operation but that's the exception.

In Canada the closures have been down to not refurbishing. I didn't realize the US economics were so bad that nuclear plants can't make money even when they don't have to pay for maintenance.

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3468
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2755 on: May 24, 2018, 10:26:25 PM »

Sig

Thanks for the GE link. My grandfather was GE's first Superintendent. He resigned prior to WWI when he came to distrust the direction the board was heading. Probably 100 years too early. ::)
Terry

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3202
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2756 on: May 24, 2018, 10:34:11 PM »
Quote
Perfectly operating nuclear isn’t being retired early

But it is.  Kewaunee was the first operating and licensed reactor to be closed for purely economic reasons.  Other reactors are being closed because they cannot compete in the energy market even though they require no repairs and have years to go on their license.

Oyster Creek will close later this year because an upgrade would be required for it to stay in operation but that's the exception.

In Canada the closures have been down to not refurbishing. I didn't realize the US economics were so bad that nuclear plants can't make money even when they don't have to pay for maintenance.

Back in 2012 the New York Times published an article reporting that 25% of US reactors were in danger of going bankrupt.  Now the number is even higher.  60% of US nuclear plants (which isn't 60% of US reactors) are in trouble.  The 40% that are competitive are largely plants with multiple reactors which allow them to spread some overhead costs over reactors.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1940
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 75
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2757 on: May 24, 2018, 10:36:42 PM »
My grandfather was GE's first Superintendent. He resigned prior to WWI when he came to distrust the direction the board was heading. Probably 100 years too early. ::)
Terry
Looks like something happened in late 2016 for the markets to take the share price down so consistently.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"

ASILurker

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2758 on: May 25, 2018, 01:09:11 AM »
The EIA just released the May monthly electricity report.  It covers the first quarter of 2018. 

Comparing the first quarter of 2018 to 2017 -

Wind generated electricity increased 19%.

PV solar generated electricity increased 33%.

That suggests the US will transition more fossil fuel generation to renewables in 2018 than they did in 2017 when 2.2% changed hands.

Bob, is your mouse broken?  :) Would it be too much of an effort for you to copy and paste a url ref every time you present some 'info/data' you are quoting please? It's really helpful for others and it's a very bad habit not to where complex intricate data is concerned. 

Regarding the % above I have a comment:
In the first quarter of 2017 I ate 3 green apples. This year I ate 12. That's a 400% increase in consumption. I hope our national green apples production can keep up next years projected growth in demand.

Bob's data source seems to be this report:
Table ES1.B. Total Electric Power Industry Summary Statistics, Year-to-Date 2018 and 2017
Net Generation and Consumption of Fuels for January through March
Total (All Sectors)
Net Generation (Thousand Megawatthours)
Page 12 https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/current_month/epm.pdf

Coal
Utility Scale Facilities
281,437
291,801
-3.6%

Petroleum Liquids
Utility Scale Facilities
6,831
3,040
+124.7%

Natural Gas
Utility Scale Facilities
309,802
267,195
+15.9%

Nuclear
Utility Scale Facilities
206,472
201,774
+2.3%

Hydroelectric Conventional
Utility Scale Facilities
76,902
82,616
-6.9%

Renewable Sources Excluding Hydroelectric
Utility Scale Facilities
110,700
98,137
+12.8%

Compare ... Solar Thermal and Photovoltaic Utility Scale Facilities of 12,399 against
... Wood and Wood-Derived Fuels Utility Scale Facilities of 10,937 YTD 2018,

Making Solar Thermal and Photovoltaic Utility Scale Facilities 1.2 % of All Energy Sources Utility Scale Facilities YTD 2018

All Energy Sources Utility Scale Facilities
999,588 952,106 +5.0%

This means:
Total Energy Consumption/Demand increased by 47482 or +5%
Renewable Sources Excluding Hydroelectric increased by 12563 or +1.3%
This represents a 26.45% Share of the Total increase.

Therefore Renewable Sources Excluding Hydroelectric was and remains unable to match even the national Energy demand growth YoY at this time.

Therefore Renewable Sources Excluding Hydroelectric - Utility Scale Facilities accounts for only a 11% Share of All Energy Sources Utility Scale Facilities in 2018

This 11% share equates to
About half of total Nuclear energy consumption
About 40% of total Coal energy consumption
About a third of total Natural Gas energy consumption

About half of the growth in Renewable Sources only makes up for the massive drop in Hydroelectric output.

Adding growth of 11% on top of a very low base from Renewable Sources Excluding Hydroelectric's share of All Energy Sources Utility Scale Facilities results in a small marginal change of Renewable Sources Share of Total Energy Consumption.

Comment: It's a good thing that Renewable Sources Excluding Hydroelectric continues to grow YoY in the USA. However it is not growing at a rate capable of meeting Paris Agreement Goals, let alone see the USA achieving Net Zero Emissions by 2050 or even much later. Which means there is no chance at this Rate of Growth YoY of the USA doing it's fair share of efforts to positively contribute to the world remaining under 2C (let alone not breaking 1.5C).

It's not good enough. Not even close to being sufficient over time if that Growth Rate does not multiply by several factors very soon.

Here's the url Ref again - much more Data in Tables is available in this document. 
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/current_month/epm.pdf

...................................
Being biased with how one presents Data / % is kind of lopsided; the logical fallacy label of 'Cherry-picking' is usually applied to such entrenched behavior; a biased person favors one side or issue over another.

While biased can just mean having a preference for one thing over another, it also is synonymous with "prejudiced," and that prejudice can be taken to the extreme.
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/biased
« Last Edit: May 25, 2018, 02:00:53 AM by ASILurker »

ASILurker

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2759 on: May 25, 2018, 01:42:58 AM »
The EIA just released the May monthly electricity report.  It covers the first quarter of 2018. 

Comparing the first quarter of 2018 to 2017 -

Wind generated electricity increased 19%.

PV solar generated electricity increased 33%.

That suggests the US will transition more fossil fuel generation to renewables in 2018 than they did in 2017 when 2.2% changed hands.

Why I see quoted % like this as a problem is because it lacks so much context, lacks scale and perspective that it becomes extremely misleading.

Pro-renewable websites and news reports do this all the time. On the surface it "looks like" a huge positive improvement when in reality the increase is so marginal it pails into insignificance in the big picture.

Especially when the penetration of renewable in the USA is already greater than most other nations it provides a false sense of the size of renewable growth globally. Which is so minutely small Renewable Sources Excluding Hydroelectric growth is not or only barely keeping up with  Total Global Energy Demand Growth YoY.

This results in the average uninformed public being manipulated into a false sense of security that something significant is changing for the better when overall it is still but a drop in the bucket with impacts on the margins of only some nations.  To me these kinds of 'reports' might more properly belong in The Media: Examples of Good AND Bad Journalism thread.

At the same time increases of 19% and 33% are much better than a decrease or no increase. However such data would be better presented in the proper perspective and in fullest context so the real truth is communicated to one and all. Be it here or in the news and on those pro-renewable websites. If only ..... ?

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2821
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2760 on: May 25, 2018, 02:04:29 AM »
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/current_month/epm.pdf 

is monthly statistics, horribly affected by seasonality.

i bet somewhere on that site there are year to year stats, and i think Mr. Wallace is correct in his numbers that wind and solar are growing rapidly, although from a very small base. I further agree with him that coal is dead, and that natgas replacement of coal is chasing ever lower utilization rates.

sidd




ASILurker

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2761 on: May 25, 2018, 02:14:49 AM »
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/current_month/epm.pdf 

is monthly statistics, horribly affected by seasonality.


Sure. Including YTD Quarterly Statistics. I do not see any problem nor 'horrible'. Either way, the Data being reviewed is still comparing apples with apples. From Jan-March 2017 it was the same season/s as this year.  :)

A fair justifiable comparison on all counts. The same applies to MLO ghg data weekly, monthly and YTD. Of course Decadal data comparisons are more useful as far as establishing longer term trend lines. But that's another story / issue.

ASILurker

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2762 on: May 25, 2018, 02:30:32 AM »
and i think Mr. Wallace is correct in his numbers that wind and solar are growing rapidly, although from a very small base.

If any of my numbers are incorrect or the conclusions and meanings they represent in my comments are faulty, by all means do point them out. 

numerobis

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 766
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2763 on: May 25, 2018, 03:45:53 AM »
ASILurker: if you’d been doubling your apple consumption every two years for the past 20 years or so, I’d be worried about apples. But you haven’t, whereas solar power has been growing at that rate. The numbers Bob posted are not a blip, they’re part of a long-term trend.

At this point, at a linear rate of replacement we don’t switch fast enough. But there’s plenty of reason to expect the growth to be exponential at double-digit rates for a while yet.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3202
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2764 on: May 25, 2018, 07:03:17 AM »
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/current_month/epm.pdf 

is monthly statistics, horribly affected by seasonality.


Sure. Including YTD Quarterly Statistics. I do not see any problem nor 'horrible'. Either way, the Data being reviewed is still comparing apples with apples. From Jan-March 2017 it was the same season/s as this year.  :)

A fair justifiable comparison on all counts. The same applies to MLO ghg data weekly, monthly and YTD. Of course Decadal data comparisons are more useful as far as establishing longer term trend lines. But that's another story / issue.

Of course quarterly comparisons are not the sort of thing one would want to use to make an important decision but they can be telling.

In the case of wind and solar in the US decadal comparisons are meaningless.  Wind and solar are just now entering the playing field at any sort of significant level. A decade ago they provided roughly 1% of US electricity and now they are closing on 10%.  And their growth is accelerating.  Q1 2017 to Q1 2018 comparisons give us a hint that they are going to show acceleration again in this calendar year.

A few more years of acceleration and we might get to the point at which we're replacing 4% or more of fossil fuels with renewables.  That would put the nasty, evil US of A in the position to become fossil fuel free prior to 2040.

You'll have to excuse me if I get a little happy when I see progress.  I want to see us avoid extreme climate change and when we strengthen our hand I think it a good thing.  Makes me want to do a happy dance.


ASILurker

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2765 on: May 25, 2018, 08:02:52 AM »
At this point, at a linear rate of replacement we don’t switch fast enough. But there’s plenty of reason to expect the growth to be exponential at double-digit rates for a while yet.

It sure sounds good. Non-stop exponential growth sounds even better. But are you speaking of the US or globally? The most important question (issue to me) is, is it fast enough? Will that exponential growth continuing on be enough of an increase (off setting FF use) in 5 years or 10 years from now too? 

People like Kevin Anderson (and there are very many) say reductions in FF consumption of every kind plus ghg emissions reductions of every kind need to be in the order of 10% cut  globally per year every year at least for the next 20 years starting several years ago.

Do you know if the USA has achieved even one year drop in FF use by 10% yet? I have never heard of it. Nor in any other nation either. I don't want to get into the math or refs but there's a very good argument that suggests the really big consumers in particular the USA due to it's historical footprint share of total Warming contribution of the Planet should be cutting it's FF use by around 20% per year on year already (rough indication). So should the UK Canada, Germany Russia and others.  Not happening. Increasing renewable energy is only one part of the solutions that could be implemented now but it's still not making much impact on total FF use GHG emissions in the USA even.

There's no NETs on the horizon as yet. Have to think of both the big picture and long term all the time about every issue to know if enough is enough yet. It's not enough. It's best to never deny nor ignore that at every occasion someone points out some good progress anywhere.

ASILurker

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2766 on: May 25, 2018, 08:10:19 AM »
the nasty, evil US of A

What's that got to do with anything? I understood the rest. Enjoy your happy dance.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3202
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2767 on: May 25, 2018, 09:43:44 AM »
Quote
People like Kevin Anderson (and there are very many) say reductions in FF consumption of every kind plus ghg emissions reductions of every kind need to be in the order of 10% cut  globally per year every year at least for the next 20 years starting several years ago.

I don't understand that.  Right now the US gets about 60% of its electricity from fossil fuels.  62.8% in 2017.  If the percentage of electricity produced by fossil fuels dropped by 10% per year then the US would no longer be using FF for electricity seven years from now.

Cutting the percentage by 10% doesn't make sense.  Each year the amount cut would decline.  Ten percent of a decreasing number. 

It's going to be the other way around, at least for awhile.  There will be an increase in the amount of renewable generated year on year as more utilities start aggressively cutting FF use.  Later on we may settle into a somewhat steady year to year growth.

For the US to reach 0% FF in 20 years for electricity there needs to be an average drop of 3% per year.  For transportation it would take 5% per year since we're close to 100% petroleum based transportation at the moment.

2016 to 2017 the US saw a 2.2% decrease in electricity generated using fossil fuels.  That's the largest annual drop to date. 

My guess is that the US will increase the annual drop in fossil fuel use for electricity up until the point at which EVs start selling well.  At that point there will be higher demand for electricity.  Fossil fuel use will drop, but it will be petroleum rather than the coal and NG used for generating electricity.  Hopefully we'll get coal use down a lot lower before EVs start increasing electricity demand.


BenB

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 123
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2768 on: May 25, 2018, 09:46:13 AM »
ASILurker: if you’d been doubling your apple consumption every two years for the past 20 years or so, I’d be worried about apples. But you haven’t, whereas solar power has been growing at that rate. The numbers Bob posted are not a blip, they’re part of a long-term trend.

At this point, at a linear rate of replacement we don’t switch fast enough. But there’s plenty of reason to expect the growth to be exponential at double-digit rates for a while yet.

Not only that, the increase in overall consumption in the first quarter was related to a cold winter, and is not representative of recent trends, and the drop in hydroelectric power generation reflects the fact that hydro is very "noisy" year to year, and had a good year last year.

Sleepy

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 655
  • Every day you live, something else dies.
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2769 on: May 25, 2018, 10:53:20 AM »
Quote
People like Kevin Anderson (and there are very many) say reductions in FF consumption of every kind plus ghg emissions reductions of every kind need to be in the order of 10% cut  globally per year every year at least for the next 20 years starting several years ago.

I don't understand that. 
<snipping out the US stuff>

Starting with an already posted screenshot by Kevin Anderson from the Gordon Goodman Memorial Lecture 2017:


Cross post from the Paris thread (another of those ingredients on that plate on the wall).
Adding the paper itself at the bottom, also cross posted two videos earlier in the Exponential growth thread.
-------------------------

Yet another article.

Alternative pathways to the 1.5 °C target reduce the need for negative emission technologies.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0119-8
Quote
Mitigation scenarios that achieve the ambitious targets included in the Paris Agreement typically rely on greenhouse gas emission reductions combined with net carbon dioxide removal (CDR) from the atmosphere, mostly accomplished through large-scale application of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, and afforestation. However, CDR strategies face several difficulties such as reliance on underground CO2 storage and competition for land with food production and biodiversity protection. The question arises whether alternative deep mitigation pathways exist. Here, using an integrated assessment model, we explore the impact of alternative pathways that include lifestyle change, additional reduction of non-CO2 greenhouse gases and more rapid electrification of energy demand based on renewable energy. Although these alternatives also face specific difficulties, they are found to significantly reduce the need for CDR, but not fully eliminate it. The alternatives offer a means to diversify transition pathways to meet the Paris Agreement targets, while simultaneously benefiting other sustainability goals.

Adding Table 1 & Fig 1 plus one line from the paper:

A rapid transformation in energy consumption and land use is needed in all scenarios.



Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.

ASILurker

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2770 on: May 25, 2018, 11:16:35 AM »
Quote
People like Kevin Anderson (and there are very many) say reductions in FF consumption of every kind plus ghg emissions reductions of every kind need to be in the order of 10% cut  globally per year every year at least for the next 20 years starting several years ago.

I don't understand that. 

OK. What do you not understand? Try asking a question instead of talking.

ASILurker

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2771 on: May 25, 2018, 11:31:29 AM »
ASILurker: if you’d been doubling your apple consumption every two years for the past 20 years or so, I’d be worried about apples. But you haven’t, whereas solar power has been growing at that rate. The numbers Bob posted are not a blip, they’re part of a long-term trend.

At this point, at a linear rate of replacement we don’t switch fast enough. But there’s plenty of reason to expect the growth to be exponential at double-digit rates for a while yet.

Not only that, the increase in overall consumption [of Green Apples] in the first quarter was related to a cold winter, and is not representative of recent trends, and the drop in hydroelectric power generation reflects the fact that hydro is very "noisy" year to year, and [so Red Apples] had a good year last year.

That made me laugh. Good one!  ;D

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2694
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2772 on: May 25, 2018, 04:33:10 PM »
ASILurker: if you’d been doubling your apple consumption every two years for the past 20 years or so, I’d be worried about apples. But you haven’t, whereas solar power has been growing at that rate. The numbers Bob posted are not a blip, they’re part of a long-term trend.

At this point, at a linear rate of replacement we don’t switch fast enough. But there’s plenty of reason to expect the growth to be exponential at double-digit rates for a while yet.

Not only that, the increase in overall consumption [of Green Apples] in the first quarter was related to a cold winter, and is not representative of recent trends, and the drop in hydroelectric power generation reflects the fact that hydro is very "noisy" year to year, and [so Red Apples] had a good year last year.

That made me laugh. Good one!  ;D

I go to Costco when I buy toilet paper and purchase a pack of 48 rolls which lasts months. It is not that I wipe my ass a lot all at once and then go months without toilet paper. I wipe my ass only when needed which is almost always daily unless I am having difficulties.

I know.

TMI

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3202
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2773 on: May 25, 2018, 08:42:04 PM »
Quote
People like Kevin Anderson (and there are very many) say reductions in FF consumption of every kind plus ghg emissions reductions of every kind need to be in the order of 10% cut  globally per year every year at least for the next 20 years starting several years ago.

I don't understand that. 

OK. What do you not understand? Try asking a question instead of talking.

I described how I interpreted "10% cut globally per year".  If you start with 100% and cut 10% a year then you reach 0% in ten years.

Or if it means starting at some higher level and cutting 10% of the residual each year then you are decreasing your efforts each year when the job should be getting easier each year.

Did I really need to add "Obviously that's not what it means.  What is the meaning?"?
 

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3202
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2774 on: May 25, 2018, 08:45:08 PM »
Quote
I go to Costco when I buy toilet paper and purchase a pack of 48 rolls which lasts months. It is not that I wipe my ass a lot all at once and then go months without toilet paper. I wipe my ass only when needed which is almost always daily unless I am having difficulties.

Install a handheld bidet.

Save a forest.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 5080
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 57
  • Likes Given: 36
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2775 on: May 25, 2018, 09:17:57 PM »
Install a handheld bidet.

Save a forest.

I'll second that. This is the best thing I installed in our new home. Very pleasant and fast.
Il faut cultiver notre jardin

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1940
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 75
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2776 on: May 25, 2018, 09:28:00 PM »
Or if it means starting at some higher level and cutting 10% of the residual each year then you are decreasing your efforts each year when the job should be getting easier each year.
Oh no it doesn't. The 80-20 rule does apply. Getting rid of coal and most nuclear and NG plants is easy, if the plonkers who presume to govern us let it happen,. Just build loads of solar and wind installations. It is the last bit where even battery storage (at current technology and cost) won't do that makes it hard to get to 100%.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3202
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2777 on: May 25, 2018, 09:28:38 PM »
Install a handheld bidet.

Save a forest.

I'll second that. This is the best thing I installed in our new home. Very pleasant and fast.

Not only cuts paper use but I suspect it cuts water use.  A lot of water is used in paper manufacturing.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3202
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2778 on: May 25, 2018, 09:37:48 PM »
This is one of the most exciting things I've read in a long time.

Quote

"GTM Research did the math in a new report, Trends in Solar Technology and System Prices, which projects that utility scale fixed-tilt systems could reach 70 U.S. cents per watt by 2022.

....

For this analysis, pv magazine chose to increase the system cost above to 75¢/W to account for single-axis tracking. Our opinion is that this price is actually giving an extra penny or two, considering efficiency gains.

For capacity factor – we started with the 30.2% that we’re getting in California single-axis trackers last year and the year before, and we added 12.5% for the bifacial panel gain. That brought us to a capacity factor of 34%.

Next, we brought the capacity factor to 38%, an increase of about 11.8%. We did this because 20% bifacial solar panels mean an increase in panel efficiency of 17-25% from today’s product, and 38% seemed conservative.

Next we adjusted O&M costs to $7.50/kW to align with increases expected here as well. Currently, there are contracts sneaking out at $8-10/W – some influenced by the tax credit, some by super dense installation areas.

That leaves us with a simple, levelized cost of renewable energy at 1.5¢/kWh. This price does include profits for the utility scale developers.

And, if the solar power developer were to partner with a strategic tax equity investor who discounted the tax credit and depreciation by 25% – lowering the effective capital cost to 52¢/W to install, we get a price of 1.1¢/kWh. The cheapest electricity on the planet...."


https://www.pv-magazine.com/2018/05/25/the-path-to-us0-015-kwh-solar-power-and-lower/

The impact of 1 to 1.5 cent per kWh electricity would be enormous.  And this is an analysis that seems reasonable.   

Solar under 2 cents and wind at or below 2 cents means that resistance to decarbonizing the world's grids should crumble.  It would create a rush to replace fossil fuels with renewables, the sort of World War II effort that Jacobson and Delucchi talked about in their 2009 Scientific American paper, their blueprint to a renewable energy world.

Those sorts of electricity prices would speed the movement to EVs, leaving oil behind.  And 2 cent and lower electricity from the turbine/panel would create a rush to find new movable loads, cutting our need for storage and dispatchable generation.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2018, 09:50:58 PM by Bob Wallace »

numerobis

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 766
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2779 on: May 25, 2018, 09:58:13 PM »
ASILurker, if you’re surprised that solar capacity has been growing exponentially for decades, and doing so globally, perhaps you should ramp down your tone of extreme superiority.

In order to limit to 1.5 C (or even 2 C) without negative emissions, it’s too late. The second half of this century will have to work with that. That’s been clear a while already; RCP2.6 goes negative, and we’re above its curve already. The fast we go, the less catch-up we need later.

Currently, and this is new, we’ve hit the spot where the cheapest energy is renewables in many situations. As prices continue to fall quickly, while prices for the fossil fuel competition are expected to rise, the number of situations increases. That’s what’s fueling the worldwide exponential growth in solar and wind deployment, and it’s why it’s reasonable to expect the exponential growth to continue a while longer.


Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1064
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2780 on: Today at 03:20:41 AM »
Check out what this guy is getting in his solar panels here at 18 North.

TODAY our solar roof generated 68 kWh. My house consumption was 25.8 kWh giving us a surplus of 42 kWh of energy. That's enough to charge a @Tesla Model 3 56%, good for 175 miles. That's just one day! This is the new #PuertoRico.  #PowerWall2

https://twitter.com/tecnocato/status/999167490402996224

I think we haven't seen the real solar growth inflection point yet. This is about to get good.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

jai mitchell

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1847
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2781 on: Today at 04:32:43 AM »
Check out what this guy is getting in his solar panels here at 18 North.

TODAY our solar roof generated 68 kWh. My house consumption was 25.8 kWh giving us a surplus of 42 kWh of energy. That's enough to charge a @Tesla Model 3 56%, good for 175 miles. That's just one day! This is the new #PuertoRico.  #PowerWall2

https://twitter.com/tecnocato/status/999167490402996224

I think we haven't seen the real solar growth inflection point yet. This is about to get good.

Imagine if s/he invested in a vibrant energy efficiency remodel!  That is a lot of energy use for a home.  Heat pump water heaters and solid insulation would cut lots of that usage!
Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

Archimid

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1064
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2782 on: Today at 04:45:34 AM »
That is a lot of energy. I see the house has a sustained load of about 1 KW. Most of that may be air conditioners or maybe server farms. For water heating I have to guess that the most energy efficient way is solar water heaters.

  Insulation is probably an issue he hasn't considered. His house is likely concrete, so that's good insulation, but he probably has aluminum/glass windows without good seals. I don't think insulation has ever been a priority in building codes, so there may be a lot to gain from better windows.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

ASILurker

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #2783 on: Today at 12:09:02 PM »
For water heating I have to guess that the most energy efficient way is solar water heaters.


I think they are. Also the cheapest all things considered. How common and popular are these in Europe and elsewhere?  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_water_heating

Winter time and cloudy periods they require some kind of booster and insulating water pipes also is necessary in colder climes. +100 years of tech experience in these with many types designed for specific locations uses.

"Israel was one of the first countries to mandate installation of SWH in 1980, leading to a flourishing industry"

yet others disagree http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/musings/solar-thermal-dead