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

Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

earther.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 352 posts

Re: Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

#171

Post by aoeusnth1 »

duxup wrote: post #157

My house faces south westish. I have a lot of roof on the back side that I think would be good for solar but all the automated online stuff seem to indicate it was be expensive and not pay off for a LONG while. At least around here in MN there's not a lot of residential push for it. Hopefully as prices drop it becomes more viable.

Online calculators over-estimate costs for large systems. You can find newer installers who are more willing to negotiate prices, and play them off each other. I negotiated one company down from ~$3.5/W to $2.30/W (before 30% credit) on my large residential system - and these weren't budget panels either (Sunpower E20).

If you do the discounted cash flow calculation of solar, at $2.3/W, electricity costs you around 5c/kWh: http://databin.pudo.org/t/19ece6

Re: Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

#172

Post by matt4077 »

inputcoffee wrote: post #153
jartelt wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment gets made in every single solar article put on HN. The true price of solar is what the market is willing to pay for it. If the solar was ruining the grid or was way more expensive than what it seems, we would not keep seeing solar installed at this pace and at these costs. We need to get out of the mindset that all power generators need to produce a steady amount of power 24/7. A flexible grid made of ma…

You misunderstand the sense of "true" here. The point is not that the "true" price in the sense of what it ought to be. It is the "true" price in the sense of what the market is actually paying for the service. When people put out the number $23, they compare it with the cost of power and wonder why, if it is so much lower, it doesn't already swamp the current solution. So the purpose of the comment is to explain tha…

Yet the market isn't "actually paying" for battery storage at anywhere near the amount of installed solar capacity...

Which was the point you misunderstood: dedicated storage installation are not needed at current production levels, and can be avoided even when solar's share of the energy mix grows.

Among the possibilities are "smart" appliances scheduling their demand to production peaks (dishwashers can often wait a few hours, cars might not need to charge right away). The same is true for industrial usage, where smelters, for example, have the natural capacity to store energy as heat.

A growing fleet of electric cars could also serve as distributed storage: if your car is parked for the night, it could feed energy back into the grid (partially, if you are paranoid).

Re: Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

#173

Post by chx »

rsynnott wrote: post #96
inputcoffee wrote: post #71

The true price of solar is the price to produce reliable, continuous energy. That requires something to smooth out the signal and store the energy, most probably a battery. The solar + battery price is also going down, though not as fast as the solar only piece. But that's the metric we should be following. When that hits $30 per MWh, it'll be game over.

I wouldn't bet on batteries, or at least conventional batteries, being the long term solution. There's interesting work being done with air pressure storage, flow batteries (the largest batteries currently under construction are mostly flow batteries in the 500MWh-1GWh range, though the technology is still in its infancy), and big scary vacuum flywheels. All of these are far less developed than lithium ion cells, but…

I think what ARES is doing has the biggest potential: running heavy trains on a closed loop uphill to store energy and downhill to generate. They claim 80% charge/discharge efficiency which is quite good. The technology is very well understood and mature and the environmental effects are lower than building a reservoir.

Re: Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

#174

Post by matt4077 »

rsynnott wrote: post #136
CompelTechnic wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One weird thought I had the other day: high voltage DC transmission lines are getting more popular. I wonder if it would be economical for a high voltage DC line to form a loop around the entire planet, so that the load can follow the sun through a complete cycle.

This has terrifying geopolitical implications, so probably no-one will want to depend on it anytime soon.

It's no different than data links, which have mostly worked without political interference.

Re: Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

#175

Post by mrfusion »

neworbit wrote: post #105
mrfusion wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an idea for a product to solve this if anyone is interested in chatting. I just don’t have the capital or hardware knowledge to get it going.

Your username suggests an option, but I shall hope you are focused on solar at the moment

Just solar but rethinking things into something you can start using without installing.

Re: Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

#176

Post by dd36 »

inputcoffee wrote: post #153
jartelt wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment gets made in every single solar article put on HN. The true price of solar is what the market is willing to pay for it. If the solar was ruining the grid or was way more expensive than what it seems, we would not keep seeing solar installed at this pace and at these costs. We need to get out of the mindset that all power generators need to produce a steady amount of power 24/7. A flexible grid made of ma…

You misunderstand the sense of "true" here. The point is not that the "true" price in the sense of what it ought to be. It is the "true" price in the sense of what the market is actually paying for the service. When people put out the number $23, they compare it with the cost of power and wonder why, if it is so much lower, it doesn't already swamp the current solution. So the purpose of the comment is to explain tha…

It is swamping the current solution.

Re: Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

#177

Post by criddell »

inputcoffee wrote: post #153
jartelt wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment gets made in every single solar article put on HN. The true price of solar is what the market is willing to pay for it. If the solar was ruining the grid or was way more expensive than what it seems, we would not keep seeing solar installed at this pace and at these costs. We need to get out of the mindset that all power generators need to produce a steady amount of power 24/7. A flexible grid made of ma…

You misunderstand the sense of "true" here. The point is not that the "true" price in the sense of what it ought to be. It is the "true" price in the sense of what the market is actually paying for the service. When people put out the number $23, they compare it with the cost of power and wonder why, if it is so much lower, it doesn't already swamp the current solution. So the purpose of the comment is to explain tha…

I've thought about adding solar to my home and can't see any reason why I should even consider a battery for storage. I'm in Texas and so I get plenty of sun and my peak energy demand happens to coincide with that sunlight (due to HVAC).

Why should I worry about a complete solution?

Re: Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

#178

Post by Aloha »

CompelTechnic wrote: post #124
rsynnott wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't bet on batteries, or at least conventional batteries, being the long term solution. There's interesting work being done with air pressure storage, flow batteries (the largest batteries currently under construction are mostly flow batteries in the 500MWh-1GWh range, though the technology is still in its infancy), and big scary vacuum flywheels. All of these are far less developed than lithium ion cells, but…

One weird thought I had the other day: high voltage DC transmission lines are getting more popular. I wonder if it would be economical for a high voltage DC line to form a loop around the entire planet, so that the load can follow the sun through a complete cycle.

Loss is still an issue

Re: Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

#179

Post by abfan1127 »

reaperducer wrote: post #146
ghouse wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False equivalence. A similar argument could be made of nuclear power (which needs to run at/near 100% output), or supercritical coal (similar operating constraint to nuclear). Do we need to add batteries to those as well to make an apples-apples comparison? (Incidentally, much of the pumped hydro in the US was built to integrate nuclear power). Unless you're trying to power the grid with a single power plant (like on…

Plus, just because the sun goes down doesn't mean all solar generating stations stop making electricity. I'm not even remotely an expert in this field, but the towers at the solar furnaces I've seen continue to glow well into the night, meaning they're hot enough to still generate steam, and thus electricity, long after it's dark. I don't expect they generate electricity all night, but maybe not as much energy needs…

the solar furnaces take time to heat up in the morning too, so its more of a skew of time, rather than a stretch of operating time, although depending on the efficiency, it may stretch too.

Re: Solar Just Hit a Record Low Price in the U.S

#180

Post by gascan »

ryanmercer wrote: post #39
stcredzero wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you live in Ohio that is a problem, solar isn't going to keep you warm on a cold night Houses built to the German Passivhaus standard would do just fine in Ohio. I used to live in Ohio and Western Pennsylvania, so I should know. There was one Minnesota church built with polystyrene panels that had to start running air conditioning in the middle of winter, the insulation was so good. If you live in the South West t…

>Houses built to the German Passivhaus standard would do just fine in Ohio. I used to live in Ohio and Western Pennsylvania, so I should know. There was one Minnesota church built with polystyrene panels that had to start running air conditioning in the middle of winter, the insulation was so good. You'd have to level most structures and rebuild from scratch to manage that in large parts of North America to make a di…

The biggest challenge probably being the 2x4 walls... if there's one code change to future-proof today's new housing stock, it might be adding 2 inches to the walls, either with 2x6 studs or 2 inches of rigid foam, for R-20 or so. Much of the rest is possible to retrofit, though not always easy.

Actually, while we're on the subject, subslab insulation might be another.

Post reply on HN