81–90 of 176 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are physical potential energy storage systems completely impractical? Flywheels, compressed air, gravity storage?
Of those, I believe only gravity storage (at facilities like Blenheim-Gilboa) are currently in use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Natural gas will stick around until utility scale batteries ramp up, to where peaking plants are too expensive compared to utility scale batteries. There's another possibility which is that there will be an overbuild of solar and wind caused by a clean energy boom (ZIRP already did this to oil; where is that ROI-hungry risk capital going to look for returns next?). The market will then figure out ways of putting the…
I have high hopes that practically free energy leads us to post scarcity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Natural gas will stick around until utility scale batteries ramp up, to where peaking plants are too expensive compared to utility scale batteries. There's another possibility which is that there will be an overbuild of solar and wind caused by a clean energy boom (ZIRP already did this to oil; where is that ROI-hungry risk capital going to look for returns next?). The market will then figure out ways of putting the…
I have high hopes that practically free energy leads us to post scarcity.
Whenever I would go home, the heat would completely wreck my productivity. I would have to sequester myself in the coolest room in the house, then judiciously use the air conditioning to maintain some semblance of sanity.
Then my dad got fed up and took advantage of a government subsidy to buy solar panels.
It was expensive initially, but now we essentially have free power. We'll break even in terms of costs within 4 years.
We now run air conditioning when we want, wherever we want.
The increase in productivity is massive. I no longer have to deal with heat when I go home.
Now imagine this happening for billions of people living in tropical climates.
It's going to change the contour of the world
Wind and solar are still not competitive. The report says that coal costs $75 per megawatt hour, while land-based wind costs $83 and solar comes in at a whopping $122. That's far from "almost competitive". Also note that these are not costs of production , these are what people wind up paying for it. That means that the coal numbers include extensive taxes, while the solar and wind numbers include extensive tax disco…
The trend is very clear: solar and wind are dropping in prices. It's now only a matter of when, not if.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have high hopes that practically free energy leads us to post scarcity.
My parents live in a part of India where summer temperatures routinely hit 45C (113F). Because electricity is expensive and my parents' house is quite large, they couldn't afford to run air-conditioning for more than 8-10 hours a day - usually at night. Whenever I would go home, the heat would completely wreck my productivity. I would have to sequester myself in the coolest room in the house, then judiciously use the…
That means a loan of up to 25% interest could have financed the solar panels. Are interest rates higher than that for your parents?
> The increase in productivity is massive. I no longer have to deal with heat when I go home. > Now imagine this happening for billions of people living in tropical climates
For what it's worth, the GDP per capita of Singapore used to track the introduction of air conditioning. Not sure what's cause and what's effect, or coincidence.
Wind and solar are still not competitive. The report says that coal costs $75 per megawatt hour, while land-based wind costs $83 and solar comes in at a whopping $122. That's far from "almost competitive". Also note that these are not costs of production , these are what people wind up paying for it. That means that the coal numbers include extensive taxes, while the solar and wind numbers include extensive tax disco…
This reminds me of that comment attributed to Bill Gates: "64k memory ought to be enough for everybody" The trend is very clear: solar and wind are dropping in prices. It's now only a matter of when, not if.
1. This is excellent. It means we're well on our way to sustainable energy generation. Wind and solar are only going to get cheaper. Even without subsidies, there is no reason to ever build another coal or oil fired generation facility. Natural gas will stick around until utility scale batteries ramp up, to where peaking plants are too expensive compared to utility scale batteries. 2. Nuclear is dead. Very dead. Thor…
You did miss two things - distribution networks and industrial customers. Those are the two problems that nobody seems to be solving yet. Basically, high-voltage electricity is distributed with networks that are dumb and old. The generation and usage is very carefully balanced with heavy users and large producers, because the network does not have storage capacity. It also has very little tolerance for power imbalanc…
Absolutely! A key point regarding energy is that you must be able to plan its availability. Lacking major improvements in energy storage, it boils down to predictability for energy production. Unfortunately, solar and wind miss it.
1. This is excellent. It means we're well on our way to sustainable energy generation. Wind and solar are only going to get cheaper. Even without subsidies, there is no reason to ever build another coal or oil fired generation facility. Natural gas will stick around until utility scale batteries ramp up, to where peaking plants are too expensive compared to utility scale batteries. 2. Nuclear is dead. Very dead. Thor…
You did miss two things - distribution networks and industrial customers. Those are the two problems that nobody seems to be solving yet. Basically, high-voltage electricity is distributed with networks that are dumb and old. The generation and usage is very carefully balanced with heavy users and large producers, because the network does not have storage capacity. It also has very little tolerance for power imbalanc…
Another thing, while wind/solar might might be approaching the cost of fossil fuels I suspect the story may be different for developing countries. In South Africa we have power capacity problems and what was the decision? Build the biggest coal power plant in the southern hemisphere.
If we want to solve climate change developing countries are going to be a very severe problem. The people in charge have no interest in fore-sight.
Wind and solar are still not competitive. The report says that coal costs $75 per megawatt hour, while land-based wind costs $83 and solar comes in at a whopping $122. That's far from "almost competitive". Also note that these are not costs of production , these are what people wind up paying for it. That means that the coal numbers include extensive taxes, while the solar and wind numbers include extensive tax disco…
Additionally, the article notes that in some countries the costs are even higher for coal and natural gas, and in those countries, solar is certainly within competitive costs.
You might not like that governments are taxing some forms of electricity more heavily, but it's a valid way of encouraging the industry to migrate to cleaner options.
1. This is excellent. It means we're well on our way to sustainable energy generation. Wind and solar are only going to get cheaper. Even without subsidies, there is no reason to ever build another coal or oil fired generation facility. Natural gas will stick around until utility scale batteries ramp up, to where peaking plants are too expensive compared to utility scale batteries. 2. Nuclear is dead. Very dead. Thor…
You did miss two things - distribution networks and industrial customers. Those are the two problems that nobody seems to be solving yet. Basically, high-voltage electricity is distributed with networks that are dumb and old. The generation and usage is very carefully balanced with heavy users and large producers, because the network does not have storage capacity. It also has very little tolerance for power imbalanc…
No. This is primarily a political issue not a question of lack of resources, and the capex and difficulty required is, while high, typically overestimated by a large degree.
The main problem is that the networks are usually owned by monopoly utilities with interests in power generation. How much do you think they want to upgrade if the net result is more competition? Hell, they'd probably pay not to have to upgrade.
>There are already extremely severe network problems in Germany for example where quite a bit of power comes from solar and wind.
"Severe" would suggest blackouts or at least brownouts like California had in 2001.
>The other problem is industrial consumers - an aluminium smelter requires a certain amount of power coming in 24/7 or the ovens will freeze and if they do, restart is basically impossible.
If you must do something impossible, do it at least... twice :) ??
http://www.renewablesinternational.net/german-aluminum-firm-...
"Over the past 12 months, German aluminum giant Trimet has ramped down production twice on request from German grid operators."
Yes, they didn't shut it off entirely, but this demonstrates that smelters who can vary their electricity usage are actually part of the solution, not the problem.
(provided Germany didn't overpay them to ramp down that is... which they may well have)