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

Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

cleantechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 166 posts

Re: Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

#151

Post by cubefox »

triceratops wrote: post #141
cubefox wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how it went through. The Green party in Germany heavily pushed against nuclear energy and coal energy and for solar energy. Now nuclear has been phased out and solar is here. Energy prices have gone up. Possibly because solar is extremely expensive during the night or on overcast days, so expensive gas power plants have to be used during that time. The old nuclear and coal plants would have been cheaper th…

> Now nuclear has been phased out You can't really blame solar for phasing out nuclear. That was a political decision. Uranium mostly comes from Russia and China too, so it's not like it was geopolitically "safer" than gas. > The old nuclear and coal plants would have been cheaper than replacing them with solar and gas. Gas's share of electricity generation has not meaningfully changed in Germany since 2015. [1] It's…

> You can't really blame solar for phasing out nuclear. That was a political decision.

You can't say solar "saves" Germany money when this is apparently not the case. You can't just selectively count the cases where solar replaced an energy source which happens to be more expensive than solar. Solar saves you money if and only if its implementation, including backups, is less expensive than what was used previously, whatever it was.

> Gas's share of electricity generation has not meaningfully changed in Germany since 2015. [1] It's ranged from 80 to 95 TWh. Last year it was 82 TWh.

What then explains Germany's high electricity prices?

> That data also shows coal's share of generation reducing since 2022. If coal is really cheaper than solar and wind, why is Germany using less of it?

Because the Greens and other environmentalists pushed for using less coal. Just like they pushed heavily against nuclear. And in favor of heavy subsidies for solar. It was a political decision, not an economical one.

> Solar and batteries are already cheaper than gas in sunny climes. [2] It's only a matter of time before they're the cheapest source of nighttime power in Germany.

Even if that report is correct (Ember is a solar energy company so that information could be heavily biased) that doesn't mean they would be cheaper than nuclear and coal would have been during the night in the past, or that switching from nuclear and coal to solar and backups didn't increase, rather than decrease, energy prices.

Re: Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

#152

Post by frm88 »

tapoxi wrote: post #23

I installed a solar system at my home in Massachusetts for 17k last year (after tax credits), 7.82 kw. So far it's covered about 70% of my usage and 5.7 Mwh. I don't have a full year of data yet so I expect that number to grow as it includes the summer months. I drive an EV and this includes the car.

Same. I installed 9kw plus BYD batteries this year (finished first week January) for €19K. Completely self sufficient, even surplus which I distribute to the public net and they pay me for. I hope to have complete data by next year but it looks like I can reduce electricity bills by 85% which is for Europe with really high costs/kw a bargain. Expected ROI 10 years.

Re: Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

#153

Post by triceratops »

cubefox wrote: post #151
triceratops wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now nuclear has been phased out You can't really blame solar for phasing out nuclear. That was a political decision. Uranium mostly comes from Russia and China too, so it's not like it was geopolitically "safer" than gas. > The old nuclear and coal plants would have been cheaper than replacing them with solar and gas. Gas's share of electricity generation has not meaningfully changed in Germany since 2015. [1] It's…

> You can't really blame solar for phasing out nuclear. That was a political decision. You can't say solar "saves" Germany money when this is apparently not the case. You can't just selectively count the cases where solar replaced an energy source which happens to be more expensive than solar. Solar saves you money if and only if its implementation, including backups, is less expensive than what was used previously,…

> You can't just selectively count the cases where solar replaced an energy source which happens to be more expensive than solar

Wait so you're admitting nuclear actually was more expensive than solar?

> What then explains Germany's high electricity prices?

You've already been given an explanation in this comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48462996 which you chose not to accept.

> Because the Greens and other environmentalists pushed for using less coal. Just like they pushed heavily against nuclear

I'm supposed to believe the plucky brave environmentalists actually won against money? Please. When has that ever happened?

> Ember is a solar energy company

It's a non-profit think tank, so wrong on both counts.

Re: Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

#154

Post by frm88 »

cubefox wrote: post #151
triceratops wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now nuclear has been phased out You can't really blame solar for phasing out nuclear. That was a political decision. Uranium mostly comes from Russia and China too, so it's not like it was geopolitically "safer" than gas. > The old nuclear and coal plants would have been cheaper than replacing them with solar and gas. Gas's share of electricity generation has not meaningfully changed in Germany since 2015. [1] It's…

> You can't really blame solar for phasing out nuclear. That was a political decision. You can't say solar "saves" Germany money when this is apparently not the case. You can't just selectively count the cases where solar replaced an energy source which happens to be more expensive than solar. Solar saves you money if and only if its implementation, including backups, is less expensive than what was used previously,…

It's maybe worth to study the composition of energy prices in Germany: https://energiewende.bundeswirtschaftsministerium.de/EWD/Red...

The higher prices are partly artificial: surcharges for offshore wind and special-grid-use surcharge, subsidies for 'co-generation of electricity and heat and to compensate for the burden caused by the Combined Heat and Power Act' , the concession fee, VAT. Except for the offshore wind surcharge, all the others would exist no matter the fuel you use. Together with 43% procurement charges - which would also exist independent of the fuel used, all of these explain your bill. Substituting the renewables with coal or nuclear would only marginally lower your prices.

Maybe if they would cut their $5.9B subsidies for coal, which are also in your bill, prices could go down a little more.

Edit: the numbers for subsidies in fossile fuels were wrong, not 1.9 but 5.9

https://www.diw.de/de/diw_01.c.827737.de/nachrichten/schluss...

Re: Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

#155

Post by thelastgallon »

alexey-salmin wrote: post #66

The title is misleading. $135 is not "money saved", it's "money not spent on fossil fuels" (even for that I couldn't find how it was calculated by solarpowereurope, but the number seems plausible). To the discussion of whether $50B/y is a big figure or not. EU has around 400GW of PV installed. Cost to install per 1kW ranged between $600 and up to $4000 because a big chunk of that capacity was built when prices were m…

Yes, you are right. The money saved is not just $50B.

1) Add the money saved from fossil fuel subsidies, that don't need to be spent

2) Add ethanol/biodiesel subsidies

3) Add defense spending to protect oil pipelines and fossil fuel assets

4) Add healthcare spending, fossil fuels are linked to nearly every kind of disease (except STIs, mad cow, polio, etc)

5) Add deaths/injuries from fossil fuels and the associated hospitalization costs, lost productive human years. Fossil fuels have the highest deaths/TWH.

6) Add the money saved from demand destruction (Less demand --> cheaper oil)

6a) Immediately, decreasing the price of fuel.

6b) Slows down fossil fuel multibillionaires becoming richer. Oil is profitable at $10/barrel, but with global demand skyrocketing, Oil is extracted from costlier sources (fracking/sands) which need a minimum price. However, the cheapest extraction (Saudi) will profit immensely and with that money buy everything else in the world, extracting wealth via rentier capitalism or stock market, making housing, healthcare, everything else costlier for all of us.

7) Creating the initial demand for solar panels, enabling scale production, making solar panels dirt cheap now and forever.

There are probably more.

Re: Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

#156

Post by thelastgallon »

ramesh31 wrote: post #78
polairscience wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This perspective is always so myopic to me. I say this as someone who doesn't make much money who's in the middle of a massive solar install (DIY). I made some simulations and a spreadsheet to work out all of the scenarios and I figured out that with a loan I can come out at monthly financing costs nearly exactly my electrical bill every month. That's right, I can have a 12 kWh battery backed 18 kW whole-home install…

>"Saying there's no "ROI" is looking at the situation like the only variable is your monthly expenses." That's the reality of life for most people outside of our little bubble of six figure earners. If it's a higher monthly price, it's a nonstarter. >"Additional home value/equity" I wouldn't be so sure of that. Solar is a massive maintenance liability that a majority of buyers will avoid. Fine if you find the right o…

> massive maintenance

What maintenance for solar panels? Please share your videos of oil changes on your solar panels.

As opposed to equipment for fossil fuel which (a) doesn't burn fuel (b) has no moving parts (c) doesn't have thousands of parts and therefore runs free of any maintenance forever?

I wonder where these kind of people come from and what kind of education they have? Even Pakistan seems far more technologically advanced, they've been rapidly deploying solar with no issues.

Re: Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

#157

Post by thelastgallon »

ramesh31 wrote: post #51
tapoxi wrote: post #23

I installed a solar system at my home in Massachusetts for 17k last year (after tax credits), 7.82 kw. So far it's covered about 70% of my usage and 5.7 Mwh. I don't have a full year of data yet so I expect that number to grow as it includes the summer months. I drive an EV and this includes the car.

>I installed a solar system at my home in Massachusetts for 17k last year (after tax credits), 7.82 kw. This is the problem still in the US. Even at ~$0.23/kwh delivered in the northeast, you're looking at an ROI of nearly five years. Fine if you can float that kind of cash to feel better about yourself, but the economics just aren't there for most people, especially in cheaper parts of the country where rates are ~$…

> Fine if you can float that kind of cash to feel better about yourself,

Why do you need to float cash? Thats your assumption.

Re: Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

#158

Post by tpm »

elevation wrote: post #89
complianceowll wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, that's absolutely badass... As an adult, one of the things that fascinate me is self-sufficiency: the idea that you can buy a solar power system, install it, and use your own power -- without getting a bill in the mail every month, many times feeling like a victim of modern day suburban subjugation. I'm still a good little obedient peasant, but I hope one day I can rely more on well water/rain catchment system, s…

> one day I can rely more on well water/rain catchment system There are some fascinating youtube videos on digging your own backyard shallow well (12-40'). This close to the surface, the water is considered non-potable, and you should have yours tested, but you can pump up what you need for backyard garden irrigation. Wells like this can be seasonal, as it is essential a rainwater catchment system using the permeable…

> There are some fascinating youtube videos on digging your own backyard shallow well (12-40').

What's more fascinating is that you would have to dig your own - here in the backyard of Europe you can call a specialised company, they will arrive with a rig and drill a well for you to basically any depth/diameter you want (for heat pumps you can go to 100m) cheap and fast, so it's basically never worth it doing it yourself.

Re: Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

#159

Post by ZeroGravitas »

thelastgallon wrote: post #155
alexey-salmin wrote: post #66

The title is misleading. $135 is not "money saved", it's "money not spent on fossil fuels" (even for that I couldn't find how it was calculated by solarpowereurope, but the number seems plausible). To the discussion of whether $50B/y is a big figure or not. EU has around 400GW of PV installed. Cost to install per 1kW ranged between $600 and up to $4000 because a big chunk of that capacity was built when prices were m…

Yes, you are right. The money saved is not just $50B. 1) Add the money saved from fossil fuel subsidies, that don't need to be spent 2) Add ethanol/biodiesel subsidies 3) Add defense spending to protect oil pipelines and fossil fuel assets 4) Add healthcare spending, fossil fuels are linked to nearly every kind of disease (except STIs, mad cow, polio, etc) 5) Add deaths/injuries from fossil fuels and the associated h…

For point 6 a UCL study on Wind energy in the UK suggested that over the 13 year period they studied the new wind power had saved 14 billion in electricity costs, because it was cheaper than gas generation.

But it saved consumers 140 Billion by lowering demand for gas and so cutting prices.

So a 10x multiplier.

Re: Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day

#160

Post by rsynnott »

ramesh31 wrote: post #51
tapoxi wrote: post #23

I installed a solar system at my home in Massachusetts for 17k last year (after tax credits), 7.82 kw. So far it's covered about 70% of my usage and 5.7 Mwh. I don't have a full year of data yet so I expect that number to grow as it includes the summer months. I drive an EV and this includes the car.

>I installed a solar system at my home in Massachusetts for 17k last year (after tax credits), 7.82 kw. This is the problem still in the US. Even at ~$0.23/kwh delivered in the northeast, you're looking at an ROI of nearly five years. Fine if you can float that kind of cash to feel better about yourself, but the economics just aren't there for most people, especially in cheaper parts of the country where rates are ~$…

> you're looking at an ROI of nearly five years. Fine if you can float that kind of cash to feel better about yourself,

Huh? 5 years to ROI, _after which you get free energy for the next 20 years_, seems like a pretty good investment.

> Of course if you have the time to amortize it you'll come out ahead, but there's simply no cheap solution that can actually save real money out of pocket in any reasonable amount of time beyond theoretical future savings on paper.

I, ah, disagree that five years is not a reasonable amount of time.

Post reply on HN