141–150 of 432 posts
Meanwhile in Iowa, Mid American Energy is well on their way to 100% renewal by 2021 with an endless array of wind farms. Their final phase of the project started in 2018 with a $922M investment. Iowa Public Radio toured one of the windmills back in January. https://www.iowapublicradio.org/post/skyscrapers-fields-wind...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
very situational Yes. You need a mountain lake and a low level lake close to each other, and the lakes aren't useful for much else because the water level goes way up and down every day. The US has 10 pumped storage plants bigger than a gigawatt, and few attractive sites for more.
I've hear the Hoover Dam proposed, and theoretically any existing dam could be converted? Just need to pump some water back upstream when there's excess load in the system. Here in Canada a lot of our energy is hydroelectric and I know there's a lot of talk about this sort of solution in Quebec.
For that, you need water that can be pumped back upstream, that is, you need also a lower reservoir. If your dam discharges directly into a river, you won't have enough water downstream of the dam to pump back upstream. Not all dams have suitable geology to form another reservoir below them. An alternative would be to create a new reservoir higher than the dam, using the existing dam as the lower reservoir, with a set of tunnels with the reversible generator/pumps linking both reservoirs (this new upper reservoir does not need to be in the path of the river).
I’ve always wondered about something, yet have never found anyone discussing it online. So maybe some smart people can help me out: a lot of people install solar on their rooftops. Much of the time this is done with the assumption that it will pay off financially because energy prices are currently at a certain rate and will continue to rise. But here’s my question: If its financially advantageous to install solar on…
You only need to think of the other things that solar requires in order to see where scale cost might arise - land and infrastructure. Labour is cheap. Solar needs space and it needs a way to export it's electricity to where it's needed, or to where it is stored. Places where space is cheap enough almost universally don't have infrastructure. So large scale solar does come with large capital costs. Contrast to home o…
The thing that surprised us the most when we installed our home solar system was how much cooler the house was during the summer, just because of how much the air-gapped panels on the roof reduced the heating load on the house. We noticed a significant reduction in our AC bills during the couple of months we had the system installed, but couldn't use the power due to permit-waiting.
$0.02/Kwh for the solar part is pretty good. A reasonable short-term goal: get 100% of US peak air conditioning load south of 37° N on solar. That's the line from the Virginia/North Carolina border west to central California. Peak solar power output and peak air conditioning load line up pretty well, so that doesn't need storage. Storage is more of an issue for wind, which varies about 4:1 over a day over large areas…
> Peak solar power output and peak air conditioning load line up pretty well, so that doesn't need storage. In general, yes, but if you look for a term called the duck curve which characterizes that frequently the load comes up after peak output, or even after sunset. For coastal CA wind often helps fill that offset as winds frequently come up near sunset, but it's not always a guaranteed thing. So there does need to…
What I think. Demand metering in a solar grid would likely motivate people enough to cut late afternoon and early evening usage. So I think policy and rate setting can match infrastructure and it's costs to demand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Person A: I'd like you to store one megawatt-hour of electricity that I will give you, and then later, I want you to give that electricity back to me. Person B: Certainly. That will be $187. It's not the cost of the battery. It's the cost of storing and releasing one megawatt-hour of electricity once. This has to pay for the capital cost over time, as well as overhead and depreciation.
How would this type of sales pitch work with nuclear? Person A: I'd like to buy power from you. Person B: Certainly. That will be $50/MwH. Accurate, but misleading.
Edit: I don't know what the equivalent of LCoE is for a power-storage facility, but hopefully you get the idea.
> the cost to decarbonize the U.S. grid alone would be $4.5 trillion They make this sound like a lot but that strikes me as actually pretty cheap. I don't think that number can be right. Edit: I mean seriously think. The F-35 has cost us 1.45 trillion dollars so far. That's roughly 1/3 of the price they're asserting here. Localizing our entire energy dependence has got to have some serious national security benefits.…
There are other limitations as well. Amount of lithium available, # of cycles before you have to replace the batteries, and so on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bet it's due to the heat island effect due to the proliferation of roads and parking lots.
All those internal combustion engines filling the congested LA roads aren't exactly cooling the place down either. More of the energy from the fuel is lost to heat out the radiator and tail pipe than goes towards propulsion.
I’ve always wondered about something, yet have never found anyone discussing it online. So maybe some smart people can help me out: a lot of people install solar on their rooftops. Much of the time this is done with the assumption that it will pay off financially because energy prices are currently at a certain rate and will continue to rise. But here’s my question: If its financially advantageous to install solar on…
There are two data points you are missing. Land purchase and annual taxes add cost. To get to the scale of 1000 house, let's just pretend you need 100 acres. So where are you going to get that much land close to people so you cheaply transport it? Also, developers will make far more from that land near a suburban neighborhood than you can as a solar farm provider meaning you would have to overpay for the land. Most s…
Why would you need the land to be close to people? Electricity transmission losses over 100-200 miles are minuscule, and there's plenty of cheap land in the radius of 100-200 miles from literally any point in the US.
I’ve always wondered about something, yet have never found anyone discussing it online. So maybe some smart people can help me out: a lot of people install solar on their rooftops. Much of the time this is done with the assumption that it will pay off financially because energy prices are currently at a certain rate and will continue to rise. But here’s my question: If its financially advantageous to install solar on…
Yes, it's highly likely the continued rise of utility-scale solar and lower retail electricity prices will impact the financial sensibility of home solar. Of couse, California recently mandated solar power on much of new home construction, so the state forced the issue and we're likely to see more legislative and legal efforts from its opponents to fight it, and from its supporters to try to remedy those impacts that…
What are you talking about? It's extremely easy to put a monetary value on it: how much rated capacity, how much exposure, cost of local electricity, and voila. It is worth the number of kilowatt hours it generates at the retail cost the electric utility would charge you.
Every early adopter I know has run the numbers. It's as easy as a simplified NPV spreadsheet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are probably conflating window insulation with window air leaks. The best windows generally available are R-5 at best on initial installation and degrade over time as The argon leaks. They are also extremely expensive. Not a very good investment. But most energy losses in older buildings are from leaking air not thermal conductance. So upgrading to R-1 but sealed and we'll installed Windows can do a lot without h…
We have an old house and the energy auditor was selling us hard on attic air sealing and insulation. Claim was that windows weren’t gonna make as big of an impact given the stack effect. (They’re also historic “wavy glass” windows, and we’d like to keep them.) Do you think attic air sealing, or more effective attic insulation would have a big impact? It does feel like the roof turns into a radiant heater in the summe…
If you have a really old house make sure you don't have vermiculite insulation which might make things way more expensive cause it likely has asbestos in it. Apart from that you can also DIY it but it's messy. Your state may offer incentives for doing it too.
https://www.energystar.gov/campaign/seal_insulate/attic_air_...