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

Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

carbonbrief.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 115 posts

Re: Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

#31

Post by yummypaint »

martin_a wrote: post #15
perfunctory wrote: post #2

> “There’s also the fact that companies just can’t be bothered a lot of the time – there are roofs all over Europe where solar could probably save money, but people are not jumping to do it.” That's why believing in market forces alone is a little naive. There has to be a little nudge from the government.

Installing solar panels has become more and more uninteresting, at least in Germany. In former times there were generous subsidies for installing solar panels: You got, I think, a fixed amount per kWh that you installed on your roof and you also got a better price for the electricity that you put back into the grid. In Germany it's called "Einspeisevergütung" if I remember correctly. This program was limited though,…

I believe the english term is "feed in laws" where the utility company must pay market rate for power individuals put onto the grid. My understanding is that this was a key driver of Germany's rapid growth in wind power capacity. In the US we dont even have feed in laws

Re: Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

#32

Post by sergiosgc »

supermatt wrote: post #20
concerned_user wrote: post #19

From engineering standpoint it is not an easy task to balance random load that comes and goes from solar, centralized solar plants is one thing but panels on the roof is another. While electricity is abundant running the grid is not such an easy task as it may seem. So this might explain why there is such push back from utility companies against uncontrolled user solar devices connected to their grid.

what does "balance the random load" mean in an engineering context? i would have thought electricity would balance itself?

Electricity absolutely does not balance itself. Passively, the energy that goes into the grid must come out somewhere.

Electrical utility companies manage this with two major levers:

1) Standby power plants, that are running but not producing at full load. The plant load is actively adapted to the monitored needs of the grid.

2) Hydroelectric storage, to soak up excess production, where hydroelectric dams with secondary reservoirs are available.

Grid load management is very much an active process, not a passive self-correcting one.

Re: Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

#33

Post by amirmasoudabdol »

yummypaint wrote: post #22
iagovar wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in a flat, as most europeans do. I'm not even the owner, so how I am supposed to push for that. Even if the owner did I don't think the surface of the roof is enough, not to mention that it has shadows from other buildings, antennas and so on.

Solar may not be the best option for your particular location. You might consider purchasing some sort of carbon offset corresponding to your use (pay to plant x trees etc). https://solargis.com/maps-and-gis-data/download/europe

Is there any organization that you could recommend for planting trees?

Re: Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

#34

Post by martin-adams »

supermatt wrote: post #20
concerned_user wrote: post #19

From engineering standpoint it is not an easy task to balance random load that comes and goes from solar, centralized solar plants is one thing but panels on the roof is another. While electricity is abundant running the grid is not such an easy task as it may seem. So this might explain why there is such push back from utility companies against uncontrolled user solar devices connected to their grid.

what does "balance the random load" mean in an engineering context? i would have thought electricity would balance itself?

I take it to mean that sometimes you have lots of energy coming in (during daylight for example), then suddenly very little (during nighttime). Weather can affect it also.

So to balance the supply of electricity to customers you need a way to make sure there is an not too much and not too little.

Many years ago in Britain, it was predictable that at the end of the TV show Eastenders, people would all go to turn on their kettle for Tea. The surge was so big that someone had to monitor when the programme ended and initiate the additional supply of electricity to meet demand. That supply even had electricity from France as a backup.

I recall an interview where they had that energy available from a Hydroelectric Power Station where they could release the water and get an instant source of electricity.

All for tea.

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2017/09/06/britain-turned...

[2] https://www.geek.com/geek-cetera/tea-time-in-britain-causes-...

Re: Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

#35

Post by azernik »

angstrom wrote: post #25
mc32 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if we become energy independent from ME oil, which we’re net independent I think, (and about 90% on the crude side?) then we still have Japan, Europe and many parts in Asia which need uninterrupted oil supplies from the ME.

It's easy to ignore. Just as easy as 2003 when the American empire secured the ME oil unilaterally from Iraq by ousting Saddam while all other powers made no retaliation for the move other than strong condemnation which is really the same thing. No one liked it, but no one was really going to lift a finger to prevent it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_Iraq_War#Off...

The oil was already flowing in 2003.

1991 was fought over the oil, 2003 was fought over ideology and wishful thinking.

Re: Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

#36

Post by consumer451 »

angstrom wrote: post #25
mc32 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if we become energy independent from ME oil, which we’re net independent I think, (and about 90% on the crude side?) then we still have Japan, Europe and many parts in Asia which need uninterrupted oil supplies from the ME.

It's easy to ignore. Just as easy as 2003 when the American empire secured the ME oil unilaterally from Iraq by ousting Saddam while all other powers made no retaliation for the move other than strong condemnation which is really the same thing. No one liked it, but no one was really going to lift a finger to prevent it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_Iraq_War#Off...

Even that purported rationale for the second invasion of Iraq was false. “We” secured that Iraqi oil to export it mostly to Asia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_industry_in_Iraq

Re: Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

#37

Post by JanSt »

martin_a wrote: post #15
perfunctory wrote: post #2

> “There’s also the fact that companies just can’t be bothered a lot of the time – there are roofs all over Europe where solar could probably save money, but people are not jumping to do it.” That's why believing in market forces alone is a little naive. There has to be a little nudge from the government.

Installing solar panels has become more and more uninteresting, at least in Germany. In former times there were generous subsidies for installing solar panels: You got, I think, a fixed amount per kWh that you installed on your roof and you also got a better price for the electricity that you put back into the grid. In Germany it's called "Einspeisevergütung" if I remember correctly. This program was limited though,…

Germany already has extremely high energy prices (~0,29€/kwh) of which nearly 0,07€ is just for renewable energy subsidies. More investments will not increase jobs, because China produces solar panels at way lower costs. While I agree that coal needs to be phased out, it's not so much about the 20k jobs but more so about base-load. You either need massive storage (which comes at massive cost) or some other form, i.e. nuclear. Germany could have very low CO2 emissions if coal would have been cut first, not nuclear energy.

Re: Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

#38

Post by stefan_ »

B2oka wrote: post #21

Fundamental problem of this type of article: comparing $/kWh across energy sources without accounting for energy dispatchability. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispatchable_generation ) See people commenting on Germany and Portugal situations or articles by this man ( https://medium.com/@oliviercorradi )

Yes. There are times in the German power grid when you can get paid for consuming (green) electricity!

Re: Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

#39

Post by scld »

perfunctory wrote: post #2

> “There’s also the fact that companies just can’t be bothered a lot of the time – there are roofs all over Europe where solar could probably save money, but people are not jumping to do it.” That's why believing in market forces alone is a little naive. There has to be a little nudge from the government.

Or, perhaps, this article is naive and the market realizes that there are some unseen costs associated with solar investment. Not to mention the opportunity cost of the capital needed to convert to another type of energy infrastructure.

Re: Solar now ‘cheaper than grid electricity’ in every Chinese city

#40

Post by diafygi »

B2oka wrote: post #21

Fundamental problem of this type of article: comparing $/kWh across energy sources without accounting for energy dispatchability. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispatchable_generation ) See people commenting on Germany and Portugal situations or articles by this man ( https://medium.com/@oliviercorradi )

Solar, when combined with energy storage, can serve as a dispatchable resource. Even with battery storage, solar is already cheaper that existing dispatchable coal generation.

http://ieefa.org/ieefa-u-s-solar-plus-storage-is-undermining...

Post reply on HN