Solar is now cheaper than some coal, says India energy minister • Hacker News Board

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

#181

Post by ageofwant » Tue, Apr 19, 2016, 1:20 PM UTC

iSnow wrote: post #141

dexterdog wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't the same be said for local nuclear?

In the age of global terrorism, local nuclear is a no-go from the start. Dirty bombs hardly make sense in terms of headcount, but their psychological effects would be tremendous. Therefore, security around nuclear installations will remain high - and that's easier to organize and cheaper around big, centralized stations.

Bill Gates disagrees http://terrapower.com/

Modern LFTR and TWR designs addresses most of your concerns and leaves the rest with less risk than the incumbent status quo.

Update your ken on nuclear, the current narrative is hurting as all deeply.

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

#182

Post by arm85 » Tue, Apr 19, 2016, 1:22 PM UTC

StreamBright wrote: post #21

mgnacl wrote: post #5

This is great news. Years ago it was considered an indisputable fact that solar (and wind) couldn't compete with the economics of coal and nuclear.

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…

Can you provide some info about how pumped storage doesn't cover this need? Because pumped storage was developed to deal with the huge spikes that user demand put on an energy grid that's mainly generated with nuclear.

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

#183

Post by ageofwant » Tue, Apr 19, 2016, 1:26 PM UTC

Intermernet wrote: post #124

levemi wrote: post #23

Whatever the realities of the cost of solar, I tend to worry about a future in which we cover vast swaths of areas with solar panels and the impact such a thing will have on the environment. I don't know if anyone has done good studies on it. A bunch other sustainable forms of energy have environmental problems. Wind generators cause harm to birds, geothermal electricity sources like in Hawai'i raise the temperature…

> Wind generators cause harm to birds This is an often repeated exaggeration. The Australian government did a study on this[1] as it was claimed that the Orange-bellied Parrot (an endangered species) was at risk from wind farm developments. They concluded: "The potential threat that wind farm developments in Tasmania, western Victoria and south-eastern South Australia pose to the Orange-bellied Parrot has been quanti…

Which can also be alleviated by reducing the local cat population by 0.2%

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

#184

Post by ageofwant » Tue, Apr 19, 2016, 1:30 PM UTC

spacecowboy_lon wrote: post #179

Osiris30 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 requiremnt for baseload is not a read herring.

No, but its much less of an issue that its made out to be. It is an argument, but not a particularly strong one.

A much better argument is that we want and need many orders of magnitude more energy to do the things than need to be done. And renewables are not energy dense enough for that.

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

#185

Post by ageofwant » Tue, Apr 19, 2016, 1:35 PM UTC

toyg wrote: post #156

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.

The beauty of decentralised systems like these is that they make central governtment less relevant. This is generally a good thing, but particularly so in place with less stable political systems.

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

#186

Post by cies » Tue, Apr 19, 2016, 1:40 PM UTC

cies wrote: post #60

noisy_boy wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct that every country puts their economy before others. However, India is not asking another economy to help them. India can develop its solar energy sector by itself. The west accuses the developing countries to be big polluters since they use less environmentally-friendly means of energy production. Then when countries like India try to subsidize the domestic solar energy market, WTO accuses them of il…

F k the WTO. Let's forsake them.

Funny how I expected (and was willing to absorb) down votes on my WTO-nag. Instead it was up voted!

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

#187

Post by u_me_him » Tue, Apr 19, 2016, 1:42 PM UTC

xaldir wrote: post #70

hnarn wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best location for covering a large area of land for purposes of solar energy would arguably be a desert. "90% of the world’s population lives within range of a desert and could be supplied with solar electricity from there", says this article, which also shows you how much needs to be covered to supply the entire globe in theory: http://cleantechnica.com/2009/06/22/half-a-trillion-dollars-...

No it's not. Solar panels must be free from dust to remain efficient, meaning you have to clean them, frequently, with water...

There is some type of coating that doesn't allow anything to stick to it. That is a start. I think is called enduroshield. It is not a permanent solution because it wears down but it would help.

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

#188

Post by Intermernet » Tue, Apr 19, 2016, 1:44 PM UTC

ageofwant wrote: post #183

Intermernet wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wind generators cause harm to birds This is an often repeated exaggeration. The Australian government did a study on this[1] as it was claimed that the Orange-bellied Parrot (an endangered species) was at risk from wind farm developments. They concluded: "The potential threat that wind farm developments in Tasmania, western Victoria and south-eastern South Australia pose to the Orange-bellied Parrot has been quanti…

Which can also be alleviated by reducing the local cat population by 0.2%

I once drove from Sydney to Cooktown (according to Google, 30hrs over 2720.4km, which sounds about right) and horribly managed to kill 2 birds, 1 wombat and 1 wallaby. I'd hate to think what the truck transport industry kills with every single trip compared to this apparent risk from wind-farms.

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

#189

Post by ageofwant » Tue, Apr 19, 2016, 1:47 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #137

dexterdog wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't the same be said for local nuclear?

Local nuclear is not going to happen in the lifetime of anyone who remembers Chernobyl's fallout across half of western Europe.

Which is a real pity as we traded the flu for cancer when we discarded nuclear in favour of carbon. What will those that will have to live through the fallout of the coal era have to remember ?

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

#190

Post by Cerium » Tue, Apr 19, 2016, 2:06 PM UTC

ageofwant wrote: post #175

mistermann wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The need for "baseload", "storage", or "the sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow" are red herrings. They are not relevant. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your comment, but how is my desire for electricity at night time "not relevant"?

Its not relevant to people who are prepared to sacrifice convenience for cost. Especially if night-time prices are directly linked to supply. Smarter devices will become available that use energy when its cheaply available. Long time storage will improve and spread the load, probably from smaller to larger scale. Base load is really an artefact of system and usage inefficiencies, not some inherent problem with renewa…

Exactly! If daytime electricity was cheap enough I would double the size of my refrigerator and fill it with water to increase thermal mass. At night time it would stay cold enough to not use any power. Almost all energy except lighting is good to go. My laptop already has enough power to last the evening. I just need a few watts for the router.