Green New Deal wildly popular with all population segments

[southernhybrid]

It's unrealistic politically. But technically and economically it's not only realistic it could even be profitable.
Politically, coal and other CO2 polluters should be banned from funding anything or anybody who is even remotely into politics

So, how do you make that happen? Coal is already being used less than ever, despite Trump's love of it, so I'm not too worried about coal being a problem. But since it's politicians who run the country, how exactly do you get most of them on board, and how do you pass that ban?

Right now, our idiot president is doing great harm to our environment by allowing all kinds of environmental regulations to expire, including some regarding some of them most harmful pesticides used on our food crops. There are so many obstacles that would need to be overcome before any serious progress could be made toward drastically reducing our reliance on fossil fuels in such a short time?

That's all I"m saying and so far, nobody has given me any details of how enough of those in power would get on board and then come up with a realistic plan. All of the things that Obama did to slow down the usage of fossil fuels have already been over turned by the current administration. So, basically, we took a few steps forward only to be taken several steps backwards. I'm a progressive by nature, but I'm also a realist.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What part of "Solar have reached parity with coal/nukes" don't you understand? It's cheaper after you do all your multiplications.

In cost per installed watt, in no case is the duty cycle taken into consideration.

you're looking at a very poor duty cycle--20% is about the best you'll get in most places.

Irrelevant.

So the panels magically power the house when the sun isn't shining??

No, but it's irrelevant to cost of electricity. Solar is just cheaper and storage is separate problem to solve.

But until it's solved we can't just go with solar. That's Soviet-level planning stupidity.

Even if you could redistribute the power from the places that had the sun to the places that don't one night's worth isn't going to do it.

Yes, it's gonna do it.

We would need some major grid upgrades to simply be able to move the power around. Furthermore, long distance power transmission incurs some pretty substantial losses. If half the country is under clouds you'll incur at least 20% loss in transmission and that's the simple case--not counting phase losses which will be a big issue at that point. (You can't just put in fatter wires to deal with them.)

If half the nation is under clouds then you have to double the size of the arrays to make up for it, plus another 20% for the losses.

I just did some calculations on this. I got a copy of our electric usage for the last two years and figured what sort of solar system we would need--oops, it won't handle the summer days. Try again, I grabbed a hot summer day (I don't know if it was the hottest day or not, so my numbers might be low) and went looking for a solar setup that would do the job. I had to estimate this as all the websites that will give me quotes will not accept me simply entering the desired size. (Note: Under local law it would be illegal for any company to install such a system as it would be considered too big.) I'm getting about $40k installed. The batteries (lithium ion as they have the best cost over time at present) are harder, I'm getting about $60k for the equipment, not installed.

Now, if we scale this up so we can ship power around we are looking at something like $250k for the power setup. Note that this is only the house part of the system, not the grid. Note also that I live in a place that's nearly ideal for solar and where peak demand coincides with peak sun. Go someplace north and you've added something like 25% before looking at the clouds.

 

[barbos]

In cost per installed watt, in no case is the duty cycle taken into consideration.

It's cost of kW*h generated.

you're looking at a very poor duty cycle--20% is about the best you'll get in most places.

Irrelevant.

So the panels magically power the house when the sun isn't shining??

No, but it's irrelevant to cost of electricity. Solar is just cheaper and storage is separate problem to solve.

But until it's solved we can't just go with solar. That's Soviet-level planning stupidity.

We can, existing batteries allow going with solar.

Even if you could redistribute the power from the places that had the sun to the places that don't one night's worth isn't going to do it.

Yes, it's gonna do it.

We would need some major grid upgrades to simply be able to move the power around. Furthermore, long distance power transmission incurs some pretty substantial losses. If half the country is under clouds you'll incur at least 20% loss in transmission and that's the simple case--not counting phase losses which will be a big issue at that point. (You can't just put in fatter wires to deal with them.)

If half the nation is under clouds then you have to double the size of the arrays to make up for it, plus another 20% for the losses.

I just did some calculations on this. I got a copy of our electric usage for the last two years and figured what sort of solar system we would need--oops, it won't handle the summer days.

Try again, I grabbed a hot summer day (I don't know if it was the hottest day or not, so my numbers might be low) and went looking for a solar setup that would do the job.

That's capitalist level of lack of planing and general stupidity.Your stupid capitalist home is a result of "cheap" electricity provided by delaying real costs to future generations. Properly designed and yes, expensive to build, home would require practically no electricity to run.
50 watt on a hot or cold day for A/C and 2 watt for a fridge.

I had to estimate this as all the websites that will give me quotes will not accept me simply entering the desired size. (Note: Under local law it would be illegal for any company to install such a system as it would be considered too big.)

Again, these stupid calculations assume stupid homes. Properly insulated would consume 50 watts. Less expensive insulation could still be powered by 5KWh battery just fine.

 

[barbos]

It's unrealistic politically. But technically and economically it's not only realistic it could even be profitable.
Politically, coal and other CO2 polluters should be banned from funding anything or anybody who is even remotely into politics

So, how do you make that happen? Coal is already being used less than ever, despite Trump's love of it, so I'm not too worried about coal being a problem. But since it's politicians who run the country, how exactly do you get most of them on board, and how do you pass that ban?

Right now, our idiot president is doing great harm to our environment by allowing all kinds of environmental regulations to expire, including some regarding some of them most harmful pesticides used on our food crops. There are so many obstacles that would need to be overcome before any serious progress could be made toward drastically reducing our reliance on fossil fuels in such a short time?

That's all I"m saying and so far, nobody has given me any details of how enough of those in power would get on board and then come up with a realistic plan. All of the things that Obama did to slow down the usage of fossil fuels have already been over turned by the current administration. So, basically, we took a few steps forward only to be taken several steps backwards. I'm a progressive by nature, but I'm also a realist.

President(s) are irrelevant. They are doing lip service to the environment at best. So basically we both agree that politics would not allow anything at present at more less required global level.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's cost of kW*h generated.

Since the KWh generated will vary by a factor of two more more depending on placement it makes no sense to say it has been factored in.

But until it's solved we can't just go with solar. That's Soviet-level planning stupidity.

We can, existing batteries allow going with solar.

I note you omitted the $250k pricetag.

That's capitalist level of lack of planing and general stupidity.Your stupid capitalist home is a result of "cheap" electricity provided by delaying real costs to future generations. Properly designed and yes, expensive to build, home would require practically no electricity to run.
50 watt on a hot or cold day for A/C and 2 watt for a fridge.

I presume you're sitting on the toilet since you're obviously pulling numbers from your ass.

You're not going to get either of these numbers in the real world even given unobtainium insulation--you'll need more than that to cover opening the doors. (And air exchange for the house. You can recover much of that energy, not all of it.)

I had to estimate this as all the websites that will give me quotes will not accept me simply entering the desired size. (Note: Under local law it would be illegal for any company to install such a system as it would be considered too big.)

Again, these stupid calculations assume stupid homes. Properly insulated would consume 50 watts. Less expensive insulation could still be powered by 5KWh battery just fine.

Let me acquaint you with the reality of insulation--it's subject to diminishing returns. Building codes are usually set at about this point--adding more insulation ends up costing you more than the power it saves. Obviously, with more expensive power the breakeven point is going to move but not by all that much.

In practice even an underground house doesn't get numbers as low as you think can be done.

 

[ZiprHead]

We can, existing batteries allow going with solar.

I note you omitted the $250k pricetag.

I presume you're sitting on the toilet since you're obviously pulling numbers from your ass.

Speaking of pulling numbers from your ass. "$250K"

Tesla Powerwall 2s start at $13K. Add another $10K for the solar panels and that's not even 10 percent of your ridiculous figure.

 

[barbos]

Since the KWh generated will vary by a factor of two more more depending on placement it makes no sense to say it has been factored in.

One more time, solar have reached parity on most of the US in 2012. And certainly in southern deserts.

We can, existing batteries allow going with solar.

I note you omitted the $250k pricetag.

It's 20K and it's for everything, not just home use. Home use is much lower than that.

That's capitalist level of lack of planing and general stupidity.Your stupid capitalist home is a result of "cheap" electricity provided by delaying real costs to future generations. Properly designed and yes, expensive to build, home would require practically no electricity to run.
50 watt on a hot or cold day for A/C and 2 watt for a fridge.

I presume you're sitting on the toilet since you're obviously pulling numbers from your ass.

You're not going to get either of these numbers in the real world even given unobtainium insulation--you'll need more than that to cover opening the doors. (And air exchange for the house. You can recover much of that energy, not all of it.)

You don't need to open doors at night, at daylight this 50 watt number is so inconsequential that it's essentially zero. Yes, home can operate A/C and heating without any external power, using only roof solar panels. Yes, I used VIP (Vacuum Insulation Panels) and heat pumps in my calculations, but it can be done and there are no reasons why it can't be affordable.

I had to estimate this as all the websites that will give me quotes will not accept me simply entering the desired size. (Note: Under local law it would be illegal for any company to install such a system as it would be considered too big.)

Again, these stupid calculations assume stupid homes. Properly insulated would consume 50 watts. Less expensive insulation could still be powered by 5KWh battery just fine.

Let me acquaint you with the reality of insulation--it's subject to diminishing returns. Building codes are usually set at about this point--adding more insulation ends up costing you more than the power it saves. Obviously, with more expensive power the breakeven point is going to move but not by all that much.

You are in no position to acquaint me with anything. I am acquainting here, not you.
I just told you low cost of energy is based on delaying cost of CO2 emissions to future generations.

In practice even an underground house doesn't get numbers as low as you think can be done.

In practice people are idiots and buy cheap houses which are more expensive in the long run

 

[barbos]

We can, existing batteries allow going with solar.

I note you omitted the $250k pricetag.

I presume you're sitting on the toilet since you're obviously pulling numbers from your ass.

Speaking of pulling numbers from your ass. "$250K"

Tesla Powerwall 2s start at $13K. Add another $10K for the solar panels and that's not even 10 percent of your ridiculous figure.

He uses factor 10 to multiply amount of storage needed. Yes, he pulled it out of his ass.
I got my $20K figure to get through night. He wants to be able to live through 10 days of darkness

 

[barbos]

Speaking of VIPs, google says it costs $45/m^2. That's $10k for a single 70m^2 house to insulate everything including floor and ceiling.
For a typical apartment complex it would cost 1 iPhone per apartment.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We can, existing batteries allow going with solar.

I note you omitted the $250k pricetag.

I presume you're sitting on the toilet since you're obviously pulling numbers from your ass.

Speaking of pulling numbers from your ass. "$250K"

Tesla Powerwall 2s start at $13K. Add another $10K for the solar panels and that's not even 10 percent of your ridiculous figure.

You can't just say some panels and some batteries. I was looking at actual numbers--what it would actually take to power our house (which the power company used to consider to be doing quite well on efficiency until one day they didn't--no change and they can't tell me why. I think they changed the yardsticks to encourage more power savings.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Speaking of pulling numbers from your ass. "$250K"

Tesla Powerwall 2s start at $13K. Add another $10K for the solar panels and that's not even 10 percent of your ridiculous figure.

He uses factor 10 to multiply amount of storage needed. Yes, he pulled it out of his ass.
I got my $20K figure to get through night. He wants to be able to live through 10 days of darkness

I used your one-day figure to get $100k. I then considered the effect of a storm across half the country--something that certainly occurs.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Speaking of VIPs, google says it costs $45/m^2. That's $10k for a single 70m^2 house to insulate everything including floor and ceiling.
For a typical apartment complex it would cost 1 iPhone per apartment.

Except they will leak in time and become worthless. And the high R-value for where you have the panels isn't as effective as you think because it doesn't cover the joists and it doesn't apply at all to the windows. They are not the panacea you think. No matter how good you insulate your walls you still have losses through the doors, windows and required air exchange. (Heat exchangers don't recover 100%.)

 

[ZiprHead]

Making perfect the enemy of good.

 

[barbos]

Speaking of VIPs, google says it costs $45/m^2. That's $10k for a single 70m^2 house to insulate everything including floor and ceiling.
For a typical apartment complex it would cost 1 iPhone per apartment.

Except they will leak in time and become worthless.

LOL. You really are a buzz killer. I don't have a data on $44/m^2 panels but I know that thermos don't measurably leak.
They would have to be redesigned not to leak. if they leak too much.

And the high R-value for where you have the panels isn't as effective as you think because it doesn't cover the joists

It would be if they are integrated by design. Not that it matter much.

and it doesn't apply at all to the windows.
They are not the panacea you think.

There are vacuum insulated windows. Not that it matter because it's does not have to be $50 level insulation.

No matter how good you insulate your walls you still have losses through the doors, windows and required air exchange. (Heat exchangers don't recover 100%.)

So it has to be 100% efficient to make any sense?

 

[barbos]

Speaking of pulling numbers from your ass. "$250K"

Tesla Powerwall 2s start at $13K. Add another $10K for the solar panels and that's not even 10 percent of your ridiculous figure.

He uses factor 10 to multiply amount of storage needed. Yes, he pulled it out of his ass.
I got my $20K figure to get through night. He wants to be able to live through 10 days of darkness

I used your one-day figure to get $100k. I then considered the effect of a storm across half the country--something that certainly occurs.

You mean you considered plenty of wind energy across half the country?

 

[Rhea]

An interesting side note to this: until very recently our power would cut out about 2x a month for a couple of hours or a couple of days. This is not actually the end of the world, you know. Luckily for us, they strung some new wire or fixed a connection at some point about two years ago. We are still susceptible to power outages during storms, of course, but now it’s 2x/yr instead of 2x/mo.

Point being that brown-outs or blackouts are not actually apocolyptic, while global warming could be.

 

[barbos]

An interesting side note to this: until very recently our power would cut out about 2x a month for a couple of hours or a couple of days. This is not actually the end of the world, you know. Luckily for us, they strung some new wire or fixed a connection at some point about two years ago. We are still susceptible to power outages during storms, of course, but now it’s 2x/yr instead of 2x/mo.

Point being that brown-outs or blackouts are not actually apocolyptic, while global warming could be.

Yes, LP thinks that everything must be powered no matter what, when in reality, if a factory can be stopped when there is a predicted reduction of power then it should be stopped and everybody get time off. Some places can not be stopped, for them you have to have backups, for everybody else you don't to do laundry and would have walk down instead of using the elevator. Not the end of the world, You just sit the "apocalypse" out at home. And yes, stores should not be open at night, it's a stupid American invention, they should be closed and lights should be off.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

LOL. You really are a buzz killer. I don't have a data on $44/m^2 panels but I know that thermos don't measurably leak.
They would have to be redesigned not to leak. if they leak too much.

And the high R-value for where you have the panels isn't as effective as you think because it doesn't cover the joists

It would be if they are integrated by design. Not that it matter much.

and it doesn't apply at all to the windows.
They are not the panacea you think.

There are vacuum insulated windows. Not that it matter because it's does not have to be $50 level insulation.

No matter how good you insulate your walls you still have losses through the doors, windows and required air exchange. (Heat exchangers don't recover 100%.)

So it has to be 100% efficient to make any sense?

The point is your numbers require 100% efficiency and then some. I'm looking at what we realistically can do.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

An interesting side note to this: until very recently our power would cut out about 2x a month for a couple of hours or a couple of days. This is not actually the end of the world, you know. Luckily for us, they strung some new wire or fixed a connection at some point about two years ago. We are still susceptible to power outages during storms, of course, but now it’s 2x/yr instead of 2x/mo.

Point being that brown-outs or blackouts are not actually apocolyptic, while global warming could be.

Yes, LP thinks that everything must be powered no matter what, when in reality, if a factory can be stopped when there is a predicted reduction of power then it should be stopped and everybody get time off. Some places can not be stopped, for them you have to have backups, for everybody else you don't to do laundry and would have walk down instead of using the elevator. Not the end of the world, You just sit the "apocalypse" out at home. And yes, stores should not be open at night, it's a stupid American invention, they should be closed and lights should be off.

You realize how expensive it will be for the economy when you can't count on production anymore?

 

[barbos]

LOL. You really are a buzz killer. I don't have a data on $44/m^2 panels but I know that thermos don't measurably leak.
They would have to be redesigned not to leak. if they leak too much.

It would be if they are integrated by design. Not that it matter much.

There are vacuum insulated windows. Not that it matter because it's does not have to be $50 level insulation.

No matter how good you insulate your walls you still have losses through the doors, windows and required air exchange. (Heat exchangers don't recover 100%.)

So it has to be 100% efficient to make any sense?

The point is your numbers require 100% efficiency and then some. I'm looking at what we realistically can do.

No, my numbers don't require that, they assume it for the sake of calculation. They also assume that outside temperature is +35C which is not usually the case. The point is, you can run house on tiny amount of electricity.