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

Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

cleantechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 257 posts

Re: Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

#21

Post by griffinkelly »

briga wrote: post #2

This is good to hear. I assume location must play a large part in this? Solar must be more cost-effective in, say, the Mojave desert, than it is in Alaska. I sometimes wonder if the widespread adoption of solar is going to have an environmental impact that isn't immediately apparent. Every solar panel you put on the ground is going to take up solar energy that could otherwise be absorbed by a plant, which in turn mea…

I've read a few articles that these solar farms are creating their own microclimates, and particularly in already warm areas can have significant impacts to wildlife with the local temperature increasing in the range of 3-4 degrees C: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep35070

Re: Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

#22

Post by jxidjhdhdhdhfhf »

rich_sasha wrote: post #5

If solar were free, but we still needed to pay for battery storage, how would it then compare in cost to fuel-based alternatives (fossil fuel, nuclear etc)?

Might be of interest to you: the think tank Rethinkx is forecasting wind and solar + lithium ion batteries will be cheaper than continuing to run already existing coal and gas power plants by 2030. They believe this will cause the capital invested in other types of power plants to become "stranded".

https://youtu.be/6zgwiQ6BoLA

Re: Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

#23

Post by kragen »

tzs wrote: post #17
kragen wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I assume location must play a large part in this? Solar must be more cost-effective in, say, the Mojave desert, than it is in Alaska. Yes, each peak kilowatt of utility-scale solar produces about 240 watts average in Arizona, 140 in Maine, and 100 in Germany ("capacity factors" of 24%, 14%, and 10%). I assume the number for Alaska would be even lower. > Every solar panel you put on the ground is going to take up so…

> Yes, each peak kilowatt of utility-scale solar produces about 240 watts average in Arizona, 140 in Maine, and 100 in Germany ("capacity factors" of 24%, 14%, and 10%). I assume the number for Alaska would be even lower. In this US government report [1] that looks at solar energy in remote parts of Alaska the capacities of 11 systems in use in 11 villages they looked at ranged from 7.1% to 11.6%. Looks like around 9…

Thank you, this is wonderful information!

Re: Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

#24

Post by vkou »

amelius wrote: post #18
andechs wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all battery storage needs to be electrochemical - hydroelectric dams work amazingly as pumped storage batteries (although site specific).

What is the typical efficiency of a charge-discharge cycle?

It's relatively high, the problem is that building new dams is an environmental disaster, and existing dams are two orders of magnitude below needed capacity.

Also, hydro dams kill a lot of people when they have accidents.

Re: Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

#25

Post by danans »

andechs wrote: post #12
rich_sasha wrote: post #5

If solar were free, but we still needed to pay for battery storage, how would it then compare in cost to fuel-based alternatives (fossil fuel, nuclear etc)?

Not all battery storage needs to be electrochemical - hydroelectric dams work amazingly as pumped storage batteries (although site specific).

And even simpler: electric heat pump water heaters, which already coat about the same as has water heaters to operate, and also serve as dispatchable one way energy storage for intermittent renewables.

Re: Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

#26

Post by cronix »

turtlebits wrote: post #15
rich_sasha wrote: post #5

If solar were free, but we still needed to pay for battery storage, how would it then compare in cost to fuel-based alternatives (fossil fuel, nuclear etc)?

People use way too much power for battery storage to be viable. The average household consumes 28.9kwh in a day (in 2017), which is way more than rooftop solar can provide. Maybe when we have smaller houses and don't have a bajillion devices plugged in all the time.

It's amazing how much less of something you use when you don't have basically an endless, cheap supply of it. You tend to conserve a lot more because you know it's finite and will run out if you use too much.

Re: Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

#27

Post by jxidjhdhdhdhfhf »

kleton wrote: post #9
rich_sasha wrote: post #5

If solar were free, but we still needed to pay for battery storage, how would it then compare in cost to fuel-based alternatives (fossil fuel, nuclear etc)?

Would need $20/KWh battery storage to be competitive with nuclear for baseload according to https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(19)30300-9 At the moment, we're at about $800/KWh.

Aren't car battery packs under $100/KWh? Is there some other factor which drives up the price for grid level storage?

Re: Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

#28

Post by turtlebits »

kleton wrote: post #9
rich_sasha wrote: post #5

If solar were free, but we still needed to pay for battery storage, how would it then compare in cost to fuel-based alternatives (fossil fuel, nuclear etc)?

Would need $20/KWh battery storage to be competitive with nuclear for baseload according to https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(19)30300-9 At the moment, we're at about $800/KWh.

~$140/KWh is the current low price for cells (that can be bought by consumers). I just built a battery last month.

Re: Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

#29

Post by coderintherye »

turtlebits wrote: post #15
rich_sasha wrote: post #5

If solar were free, but we still needed to pay for battery storage, how would it then compare in cost to fuel-based alternatives (fossil fuel, nuclear etc)?

People use way too much power for battery storage to be viable. The average household consumes 28.9kwh in a day (in 2017), which is way more than rooftop solar can provide. Maybe when we have smaller houses and don't have a bajillion devices plugged in all the time.

The majority of solar comes from Utility scale about 60/40 vs. rooftop solar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_the_United_Stat...
Post reply on HN