Live data from Hacker News

Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels

grist.org

161–170 of 651 posts

Re: Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels

#161
post #110

This is such a total failure of state capacity. Why can the government or industry not build solar power at an industrial scale, and then bring it to people's homes via the existing infrastructure at a price that makes this kind of micro-scale setup completely uneconomical? It's bad enough when we have to put solar panels on actual roofs to reduce electricity bills. This is just absurd. Where are the economies of sca…

It may be actually better (in the welfare-economics sense) to build the micro-scale setups because the economies of scale may actually be inverted by cheap solar panels. See my analysis in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45487051 .

I don't think so. This is well studied. The LCOE of rooftop solar is terrible compared to utility. I can't imagine what it looks like for balcony.

https://www.investigativeeconomics.org/p/solar-is-only-cheap...

Re: Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels

#162
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solar power is fundamentally different from traditional power plants because it's modular. Since the panel is the basic unit, a network of rooftop systems is as effective as a single large installation. A rooftop installation makes perfect sense.

Paying contractors to climb on rooftops one at a time and cable up a million distinct houses is clearly not comparable to an industrial installation. Similarly the generation from a balcony on a bad angle, and from walking around Germany, typically shaded, makes no sense.

So by bringing up shading and suboptimal angle you're already admitting that for an unshaded balcony these things make sense? The overhead of hanging one of these over the rail of your balcony is pretty minimal, compared to industrial scale installations. There is plenty of overhead with finance, management, billing, land use, and utility profits. That's why it makes sense.

Re: Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels

#164
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A hectare of land is a few hundred euros per year to rent - https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php... Power consumption in the EU has flatlined and is even falling. New HV transmission lines are not needed - put the solar farms next to some of the shut down nuclear plants (as we now do with big batteries in Australia and decrepit coal plants).

>A hectare of land is a few hundred euros per year to rent Acquiring land-use rights, permitting, environmental reviews, and zoning changes for an industrial power plant costs far more than the raw rent. >Power consumption in the EU has flatlined This is dangerously short-sighted, the mass adoption of electric vehicles and heat pumps will place enormous new demands on the grid. > put the solar farms next to some of t…

>Acquiring land-use rights, permitting, environmental reviews, and zoning changes for an industrial power plant costs far more than the raw rent.

So the argument against my claim that the government and market has failed if balcony solar is cost effective, is that the government is the problem?

Re: Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels

#165
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You grow herbs at home because it's kitsch, fun, or even convenient, not to save money. Store harvested herbs die in the fridge, electricity does not. In Australia, our government massively subsidizes putting solar panels on our roof, and batteries in our garages, for a $/kWh price wildly higher than could be achieved with economies of scale in an industrial installation. Batteries are even more egregious than solar,…

What does your vision of perfect solar power look like? And within that vision, is a free person still able to decide for themselves if they want to buy a solar panel to hang on their balcony?

I think you're misunderstanding plantain's point.

Where I live, in Argentina, every house has a water tank on the roof, which is filled from the water main through a float valve, like a toilet tank. Many houses need a pump to drive the water up to the water tank because the water main has such low pressure. This is somewhat expensive, and the pumps, float valves, and water tanks fail sometimes, which is inconvenient. And the tank is not really that high up, so the water pressure at the faucet is not that high, and it's somewhat variable, which is inconvenient when it changes the temperature of the shower.

Some other places I've lived, such as various places in the US, instead have a large shared water tank for an entire neighborhood, town, or even city—a so-called "water tower". If you've been to the US, you may have seen these. Making this work involves several expenses:

- Larger-diameter water mains to reduce head loss when water demand is high.

- Highly responsive repair crews to respond rapidly to water main breaks, because the higher-pressure water with a high flow capacity can be very destructive.

- The construction and maintenance of the large water tower, which is very dangerous if done badly.

- A high-powered pump to get water up the water tower in the first place.

However, these expenses turn out to be significantly smaller per person than the expenses of small per-house water tanks and water pumps. And they provide better service. (Also, because people are stupid, in the US they build many of their houses out of wood, so they need fire hydrants, which require the larger water mains anyway.)

So, the fact that people in my neighborhood Argentina are spending more to get worse water service is a failure of coordination.

Of course, people in the US can still put water tanks in their houses if they want to. In earthquake areas, it's even recommended to have a store of potable water that isn't dependent on the water main. But, because they have succeeded in collectively building excellent municipal water systems, they generally don't need to.

The claim that plantain is making is that people actually choosing balcony solar panels is a symptom of a similar failure of coordination. To me that seems plausible but not necessarily correct, for reasons I've explained in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45487051.

Re: Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels

#166

Some people laugh at the 800W output. However, in Indonesia, roughly half of the 300 million people live in homes with an electricity capacity of 900W or less. Wish these kind of panels were available at that price here. We have pretty much 12 hours of sunlight every single day but household solar panel is discouraged by the state owned utilities.

[flagged]

Do I have to erect the monument to the tomb of the unknown balcony?

Re: Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels

#167
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's getting harder and harder to justify the efficiencies of centralization. A lot of times they aren't even real to begin with. People assume that economies of scale keep going up as long as scale keeps going up, but that's almost never true. They typically have diminishing returns or thresholds past which the unit cost stops going down. If you want to build solar panels you have to build a factory. If the factor…

Well, there really are economies of scale involved in building solar farms. Accidental deaths per installed megawatt are orders of magnitude lower than rooftop solar. A single-axis solar tracker can rotate hundreds of square meters of solar panels. Washing dust off solar panels can increase their output by several percent, but is much more likely to happen if it's somebody's full-time job instead of a household chore…

Are deaths per megawatt really better if one looks at total infrastructure deaths from transmission wires and the like?

Re: Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels

#168
This would be very cute if it was some 3rd world island country grasping at the straws to improve their quality of life...doing this.

But you're fucking Germany bro....where's your massproduced precision reactors and turbines everywhere..the planet needs work...what the f.. are you guys even doing..a rising standard of living means 10-100x more energy you know that right?

This whole attitude feels like clapping for a new garden tomato in the middle of a famine... go put some fucking tractors on the field lol but like seriously though.

Re: Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels

#169
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be actually better (in the welfare-economics sense) to build the micro-scale setups because the economies of scale may actually be inverted by cheap solar panels. See my analysis in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45487051 .

I don't think so. This is well studied. The LCOE of rooftop solar is terrible compared to utility. I can't imagine what it looks like for balcony. https://www.investigativeeconomics.org/p/solar-is-only-cheap...

That page, although it was written only four months ago, is citing LCOE figures from 02021, when mainstream solar panels cost €0.25 per peak watt. Now they cost €0.100 per peak watt—see https://www.solarserver.de/photovoltaik-preis-pv-modul-preis.... Power electronics and batteries are also enormously cheaper now. Also, note that the LCOE numbers it cites are for the US, where most of the costs stem from the US government's anti-renewable-energy policies such as punitive tariffs, policies that are not in effect in Germany.

That page also undermines its credibility by citing the hypothesis that the low cost at the time (which it acknowledges was already down to 36% of the number in 02012) was because the "massive wave of imports" was "subsidized by China’s central bank"; if that were the case, you'd expect that once China owned the world's solar market, the prices would have gone back up to reflect the true costs of manufacturing the panels, so that China's central bank could stop hemorrhaging money in these subsidies. Instead, the prices have continued to drop. They've dropped as much in the four years since that report as they had in the nine years before it. And, if you read the Department of Commerce filings justifying the "anti-dumping" tariffs, you will find that the arguments being made about "subsidies" are transparently ridiculous; the supposed "subsidies" include the fact that Chinese panel manufacturers pay their workers less than Turkish electronic assembly workers, and the fact that they have good public infrastructure to use.

It also incorrectly claims that solar panels need to be replaced after 25–30 years (that's just the warranty period) and that doing so would add US$20–30/MWh to Lazard's US$36/MWh LCOE, which is an obviously an arithmetic error that's off by orders of magnitude.

But its central claim, that rooftop solar is much more expensive than utility-scale solar, is actually true. The reason for this is mostly that rooftop solar requires much more labor and enjoys poorer economies of scale. You have to pay someone to design custom racking for your particular roof and a custom inverter and battery storage system for your house, pay someone to climb up on your roof and possibly die, pay for permitting and inspection, etc. You can find a more detailed breakdown of "turnkey installed cost" in SEIA's Solar Market Insight Report https://www.seia.org/research-resources/solar-market-insight....

However, all of these factors are completely the other way around for balcony power plants. You don't climb on the roof; you walk out onto the balcony. You don't design custom racking; you buy an off-the-shelf retail product. The same thing for battery storage, if you buy a system with battery backup. Instead of spending thousands of dollars, you just hang the solar panel off your balcony like a potted plant and plug the plug into the outlet. The engineering is being done at the factory for a mass-market product, not for your house or for a single utility-scale solar farm. So you're spending less in engineering and permitting and construction costs than a utility-scale solar farm would, not more.

There is one way in which balcony power plants are worse than rooftop solar: they are at terrible angles, so they don't get much sun. But that just means you get less power, maybe two or three times less than you'd get in an optimally-designed utility-scale plant. That matters much less now that solar modules are so cheap.

Re: Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels

#170
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's getting harder and harder to justify the efficiencies of centralization. A lot of times they aren't even real to begin with. People assume that economies of scale keep going up as long as scale keeps going up, but that's almost never true. They typically have diminishing returns or thresholds past which the unit cost stops going down. If you want to build solar panels you have to build a factory. If the factor…

Well, there really are economies of scale involved in building solar farms. Accidental deaths per installed megawatt are orders of magnitude lower than rooftop solar. A single-axis solar tracker can rotate hundreds of square meters of solar panels. Washing dust off solar panels can increase their output by several percent, but is much more likely to happen if it's somebody's full-time job instead of a household chore…

> Accidental deaths per installed megawatt are orders of magnitude lower than rooftop solar.

This is 100-150 people a year. It's not even clear that this is more than the number of people who would die in car accidents on their way to work at centralized solar farms etc.

> A single-axis solar tracker can rotate hundreds of square meters of solar panels.

Those also cost thousands of dollars and it's not clear that it's a significant savings over the units that rotate fewer panels but cost less money.

> Washing dust off solar panels can increase their output by several percent, but is much more likely to happen if it's somebody's full-time job instead of a household chore, especially a household chore that puts you at risk of falling off a roof and dying.

This is a cost rather than an efficiency. If you get home and see dust on your panels you grab the hose and spray them off from the ground without having to pay anyone. The solar farm has to pay salary and benefits.

> A FLIR image can identify failing solar cells so you can queue them for replacement or repair

This is an inefficiency again. The centralized farm is paying for space so they replace panels with degraded output. The homeowner leaves them to run, gets 10% of the expected instead of 0% and if they want more capacity they get more panels instead of doing work to identify and remove existing ones.

> a lawsuit against a maker of faulty solar panels is much more feasible if the potential damages are €60 million rather than €600.

Class action lawsuits are a thing.

> Even for solar energy, land is not a big cost, financially speaking. Morally and environmentally, it may be (it's arguable—solar farms don't have to devastate the ecosystem the way strip mining and oil spills do), but not financially.

Land cost is why they can't put the solar farm near where the users are, because that's where the land is expensive, so instead they put it in the middle of nowhere. But even that land isn't free, and then you have to eat even higher transmission costs.

Post reply on HN