Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

climatechangenews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 256 posts

Re: Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

#151

Post by downandout »

Osiris30 wrote: post #147
downandout wrote: post #119

"Solar energy prices hit a new record low in January with the auction of 420 megawatts in Rajasthan at 4.34 rupees a kilowatt-hour. In comparison coal tariffs range between 3-5 rupees/kWh." So the headline here is, as is usually the case with articles in this space, misleading at best. It's slightly cheaper than the highest-end coal, but dramatically more expensive - nearly 1.5X more - than the lower end. Overall, it…

No. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11524691 Why does solar always need batteries? These are not "advances". India is adding 20k MW of solar and 10k MW of wind p.a. China is at 20+20. US at 20+20. Europe at 20+20. 30% of all new power capacity additions globally will be from renewables for the foreseeable future. Probably more. This is without "batteries". Without subsidies. The need for "baseload", "storage…

But it is not cheaper than coal, which is what the headline says and was the impetus of my comment. I'm happy to see the costs going down, and maybe one day it will be competitively priced. But that day is not today.

Re: Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

#152

Post by barney54 »

Osiris30 wrote: post #147
downandout wrote: post #119

"Solar energy prices hit a new record low in January with the auction of 420 megawatts in Rajasthan at 4.34 rupees a kilowatt-hour. In comparison coal tariffs range between 3-5 rupees/kWh." So the headline here is, as is usually the case with articles in this space, misleading at best. It's slightly cheaper than the highest-end coal, but dramatically more expensive - nearly 1.5X more - than the lower end. Overall, it…

No. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11524691 Why does solar always need batteries? These are not "advances". India is adding 20k MW of solar and 10k MW of wind p.a. China is at 20+20. US at 20+20. Europe at 20+20. 30% of all new power capacity additions globally will be from renewables for the foreseeable future. Probably more. This is without "batteries". Without subsidies. The need for "baseload", "storage…

The need for reliable energy or energy when the sun is not shining is critical important--according to the people of India. For example, according to this article in ClimateWire (a trade pub) http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/stories/1060026477/

Dharnai, a community of about 3,200 people in eastern India's Bihar state, had been without electricity for three decades. So when activists with Greenpeace set up a solar-powered microgrid in July of 2014, the excitement was palpable. But, residents said, the problems started almost immediately.

When the former chief minister of Bihar state visited to inaugurate the grid, villagers lined up to protest, chanting, "We want real electricity, not fake electricity!"

By "real," they meant power from the central grid, generated mostly using coal. By "fake," they meant solar.

Re: Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

#153

Post by rfrey »

forgetsusername wrote: post #110
mentos wrote: post #87

Solar is nuclear energy as Elon Musk has put it we have a reactor in the sky we can harness

Oh yes, let's credit Mr. Musk with recognizing the sun's potential.

I think that was an attribution for the qoute, not credit for inventing solar.

Re: Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

#154

Post by saravanannkl »

invalid-access wrote: post #39

Shameless plug: If you want to participate in India's progress towards bigger rooftop-solar, please consider joining http://www.oorjan.com . We believe we are doing something unique in leveraging banking and financial relationships to productize solar deployments. And looking for great devs right now - esp frontend :-)

Is solar viable for small installations without any subsidies ? I was recently looking at a 30KW proposal for a small enterprise in Tamil Nadu. The quoted price is Rs. 36 lakhs. At the rate of Rs 6.75 per unit, it doesn't even cover the interest costs. Does this match with your capex costs or is this way off ?

Re: Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

#155

Post by Osiris30 »

downandout wrote: post #142
Kliment wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comparison is between the cost of new installations - coal power is very cheap because the facilities are old and the capital expenses were sunk a long time ago. New solar power is now cheaper to build out than new coal plants, which is reasonable enough given the cost of both raw materials and production processes for solar had plummeted over the last decade whereas coal is a very mature technology that is effec…

>The comparison is between the cost of new installations That may be, but that isn't what the headline says. It simply says that solar is cheaper than coal, which of course is not the case right now.

Yes, all solar installations are not cheaper than all coal installations.

But conversely, all coal is not cheaper than all solar!

That applies globally and in India.

The point is that solar costs are declining every year, by 10% p.a. In many sunny places it is already at parity or below (eg Arizona, Mexico, Rajasthan and Gujarat in India, Mexico). We have already seen several bids this year at US¢ 3/Kwh ($30/MWh). $20/MWh is in sight - that would be well under the cheapest coal.

This link is useful summary http://cleantechnica.com/2016/04/15/why-energy-experts-are-s...

(And none of this accounts for the massive unpriced carbon + health externality of coal plants).

Coal is staying at best flat + whatever the fuel cost.

Re: Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

#156

Post by toyg »

avidphantasm wrote: post #140

Many Indians already have backup battery systems because the grid, even in big cities, is so unreliable. This may make the switch to solar less burdensome, at least cognitively, if not practically.

The real winners of the current movement towards decentralized tech (mobile phones, solar etc) will be BRICS and developing countries, if only they can keep their political systems consistent enough.

Re: Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

#157

Post by StreamBright »

nhaehnle wrote: post #47
StreamBright wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it is still true, wind will be never be able to compete with nuclear for the simple fact that wind blows when it blows and you need energy when you need it. Unless we develop a technology that is able to cope with the huge spikes that windmills put on the energy grid and store energy in a very efficient way (including gaining the energy back when we need it) wind will not be more than few percentage of the overal…

Note that nuclear is also not exactly grid-friendly, since you cannot quickly change the power output of a nuclear power plant. They are useful for base load and nothing else.

This is not the definition of grid-friendly. I am just calling out that windmills could never serve as base power plant, and serving as peak power source has a serious side effect of requiring gas turbines to provide smooth energy production that does not stress the grid. You do not change the output of your base power plant on a daily basis, this is why it is called base. For the peak coverage you have something that is easy to change the performance of.

Re: Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

#158

Post by eveningcoffee »

murukesh_s wrote: post #8

“I sincerely believe that what the West is doing in this respect is anti-development and anti the fight against climate change,” he said, accusing rich countries of charging too much for clean technology." I really don't believe any country is sincere towards climate change. Every country puts their economy before others. So expecting another economy to help you is a foolish assumption.

"I sincerely believe that what the West is doing in this respect is anti-development and anti the fight against climate change,” he said, accusing rich countries of charging too much for clean technology."

Look who is talking: http://visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2007/12/09/comparing-po...

Until countries like India do not take steps towards sustainable human population, these are all pointless games.

Re: Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

#159

Post by Certhas »

downandout wrote: post #119

"Solar energy prices hit a new record low in January with the auction of 420 megawatts in Rajasthan at 4.34 rupees a kilowatt-hour. In comparison coal tariffs range between 3-5 rupees/kWh." So the headline here is, as is usually the case with articles in this space, misleading at best. It's slightly cheaper than the highest-end coal, but dramatically more expensive - nearly 1.5X more - than the lower end. Overall, it…

True, but the externalities for coal are huge, as are the hidden subsidies. A fair comparison would also include those:

https://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/edenh/publications-1/copy...

The important thing to note is that politicians are hopefully willing to act on this.

Re: Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister

#160

Post by chris_wot »

Eat your heart out Tony Abbott!

Unfortunately, the Australian Government, which under the Labor Party was trying to phase out polluting industries via a Carbon Tax and then an ETS were voted out of power due to their own cromulence and internal dysfunction.

We then got one Anthony John Abbott as the new Prime Minister who was backed by Joseph Benedict Hockey, his Treasurer.

Joe Hockey attempted to shut down the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, and said the following:

"If I can be a little indulgent please, I drive to Canberra to go to Parliament, I drive myself and I must say I find those wind turbines around Lake George to be utterly offensive. I think they're just a blight on the landscape."

The first thing that the Abbott government did once they got into power was roll back the mining tax and stop the ETS. Tony Abbott said:

"Coal is good for humanity, coal is good for prosperity, coal is an essential part of our economic future, here in Australia, and right around the world."

Abbott lasted just under two years before his even more dysfunctional government (which barely passed any legislation and whose leader was the most unpopular and incompetent Australian leader of recent history) came to an ignominious end and Malcolm Turnbull was reinstated as the leader of the LNP, and thus was elevated from backbencher to leader of Australia.

I am hopeful that Malcolm Turnbull can turn this around, but I think it's unlikely. Much of Australia's wealth is derived from coal exports, even though it never actually employed a large proportion of the Australian population (and employs even less now as there have been a lot of mine closures, especially in the Hunter area of NSW).

Sadly, we squandered the huge wealth that it generated and although the Labor party made a start towards transitioning to a clean energy economy, it has all been rolled back in only two years and the momentum they got going is unlikely to be reestablished any time soon.

Our leaders have let us down badly, and Abbott's risky bet on coal is going to cause Australia a lot of problems in the years ahead.

Post reply on HN