• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The Remarkable Progress of Renewable Energy

...

There are a number of technologies that require electricity, and don't always need to run. They are nice to have but not necessarily immediately useful.

Such technology would include carbon capture to petrochem, a variety of scalable Indoor farming, much automatic manufacturing, and the like.

While our systems can be unmanned and efficient when they run, they simply don't always need to be running if we make them efficient enough.

So I would think that we should scale renewable energy up...

And then also scale nuclear up...

Scale them both up as much as possible, in fact...

And then scale it up with a load balancer that operates a variety of on-demand manufacturing, capture storage, and indoor farming that will rotate load for accommodating off-peak use.

Instead of asking "how do we handle base load with nuclear and weird-hours peak on solar" with "let's figure out a way to soak the load on shit we need and GO BIG".

Battery charging, desalination, chemical production, refrigeration, and many other pumpings are just some more examples of electricity use which can be performed at off-peak times.

The important first step is to charge different prices for electricity at different times, reflecting supply and demand.

How many countries implement such variable metering? How expensive is such metering?

So you don't think that McDonalds should produce as much food as they possibly can?

The system that I (and presumably Jarhyn) envision would not involve forceful coercion of McDonald's or anyone else. I am proposing that the free market does what it does best, by making proper pricings available.
I think our biggest problem is in fact our inability to scale demand to peak production, because scaling supply just isn't an option with the renewable and future-resistant power generation technologies we have.
 
The system that I (and presumably Jarhyn) envision would not involve forceful coercion of McDonald's or anyone else. I am proposing that the free market does what it does best, by making proper pricings available.
There are areas that do that. For example Santee Power in South Carolina offers a menu of options of how to buy their power from a flat rate to several other options including time of day pricing based on fluctuating total system demand.

 
The important first step is to charge different prices for electricity at different times, reflecting supply and demand.
Actually, the first step is to pay different prices at different times, and to pay the same price to any and all suppliers, at any specific moment.

Much of the huge profit in wind and solar is caused by wholesale price guarantees, a hidden subsidy whereby grid operators are required to buy all the power generation from those sources at a pre-determined price, and only then to set the wholesale spot price.

This results in negative wholesale prices on breezy afternoons, when demand is low. Negative prices are a strong signal that something is very wrong in any market.

Once the wholesale price is universal for all suppliers, then you can look at floating the retail prices, in accordance with that variable wholesale price, if you want to go ‘free market’ in the electricity business.

But retail electricity is a monopoly, or rather, a series of local monopolies, so floating retail prices probably isn’t a good idea. Monopolies need regulated prices, or they will bleed their customers dry.

This is one of the reasons why infrastructure needs to be controlled by governments. Roads, water, electricity, all are very poor choices for a free market paradigm. That’s a major reason why a mixed economy, in which capitalistic elements are used to allocate luxuries, and socialistic elements are used to allocate necessities, works vastly better than a purer form of either system.
 
After Going Solar, I Felt the Bliss of Sudden Abundance | WIRED - "My rooftop panels showed me that a world powered by renewables would be an overflowing horn of plenty, with fast, sporty cars and comfy homes."
I used to worry about using too much electricity.

If one of my family members left their bedroom and forgot to turn off the air conditioning? I’d snap at them: “What, you want the planet to cook extra fast?” If I found lights left on overnight, I’d fume.

Reader, I was insufferable. In my defense, I’d been worrying about climate change ever since Jim Hansen’s 1988 landmark congressional testimony about it. With every cool blast of AC, I knew more carbon was being dumped into the atmosphere. So I turned into an energy miser. I’d go around the house turning lights off; if no one else were home, I’d leave the AC off entirely, even on blazingly hot days.
But 3 1/2 years ago, author Clive Thompson bought some solar panels for his house.

The panels were predicted to supply 100% of the house's electricity consumption, but on hot summer days, they supplied 25% more, and on sunny spring and fall days, 50% more. He saved $2,000/year, enough to amortize the cost of the panels over 7 years.
no longer walk around finger-wagging at my family members. Want to blast the AC? Crank away. It’s coming from the sun, and I can’t use all that electricity even if I try. And I’ve tried! I’ve charged an electric bike, run multiple loads of laundry, had many computers and a game system and a TV going, and still those panels were kicking out a net surplus. I’ve idly thought of running a power strip out to the sidewalk with a sign saying “FREE ELECTRICITY,” just to be the Johnny Appleseed of solar.

In essence, I went from a feeling of scarcity to a sense of abundance.
After noting that many people feel that using renewable energy means depriving oneself of a lot, he noted that many people who got solar panels came to feel what he feels: a lot less inhibited about the use of electricity.
 
After Going Solar, I Felt the Bliss of Sudden Abundance | WIRED - "My rooftop panels showed me that a world powered by renewables would be an overflowing horn of plenty, with fast, sporty cars and comfy homes."
I used to worry about using too much electricity.

If one of my family members left their bedroom and forgot to turn off the air conditioning? I’d snap at them: “What, you want the planet to cook extra fast?” If I found lights left on overnight, I’d fume.

Reader, I was insufferable. In my defense, I’d been worrying about climate change ever since Jim Hansen’s 1988 landmark congressional testimony about it. With every cool blast of AC, I knew more carbon was being dumped into the atmosphere. So I turned into an energy miser. I’d go around the house turning lights off; if no one else were home, I’d leave the AC off entirely, even on blazingly hot days.
But 3 1/2 years ago, author Clive Thompson bought some solar panels for his house.

The panels were predicted to supply 100% of the house's electricity consumption, but on hot summer days, they supplied 25% more, and on sunny spring and fall days, 50% more. He saved $2,000/year, enough to amortize the cost of the panels over 7 years.
no longer walk around finger-wagging at my family members. Want to blast the AC? Crank away. It’s coming from the sun, and I can’t use all that electricity even if I try. And I’ve tried! I’ve charged an electric bike, run multiple loads of laundry, had many computers and a game system and a TV going, and still those panels were kicking out a net surplus. I’ve idly thought of running a power strip out to the sidewalk with a sign saying “FREE ELECTRICITY,” just to be the Johnny Appleseed of solar.

In essence, I went from a feeling of scarcity to a sense of abundance.
After noting that many people feel that using renewable energy means depriving oneself of a lot, he noted that many people who got solar panels came to feel what he feels: a lot less inhibited about the use of electricity.
Just wait until he finds out that at least three quarters of every watt he uses, for sixteen of every twenty four hours, is still coming from burning fossil fuels.

The idea that you are carbon neutral because you generate more power than you use is similar to the belief that your food bills are zero, because you work as a chef. That is to say, it's utter nonsense.

If the fossil fuel burning generating stations were to vanish without warning, this guy would find himself without electricity for about two thirds of every day. Yet he genuinely believes that all the electricity he uses "can be thought of as" coming from solar power.

Good news: You can "think of" your electricity as coming from solar or wind power, and nobody can stop you from "thinking of" this.

Bad news: It's complete bollocks, and your contribution to protecting the environment is less than a third of what you blissfully imagine it to be.

In other news, I am teetotal, because I brew and give away more beer than I drink myself.

If he feels sufficiently relaxed about his electricity consumption today as to increase it by more than 30% over his pre-solar power days, then he is almost certainly doing more to harm the environment now, than he was before he bought his solar panels.

But he feels good about it, so that's nice.
 
After Going Solar, I Felt the Bliss of Sudden Abundance | WIRED - "My rooftop panels showed me that a world powered by renewables would be an overflowing horn of plenty, with fast, sporty cars and comfy homes."
I used to worry about using too much electricity.

If one of my family members left their bedroom and forgot to turn off the air conditioning? I’d snap at them: “What, you want the planet to cook extra fast?” If I found lights left on overnight, I’d fume.

Reader, I was insufferable. In my defense, I’d been worrying about climate change ever since Jim Hansen’s 1988 landmark congressional testimony about it. With every cool blast of AC, I knew more carbon was being dumped into the atmosphere. So I turned into an energy miser. I’d go around the house turning lights off; if no one else were home, I’d leave the AC off entirely, even on blazingly hot days.
But 3 1/2 years ago, author Clive Thompson bought some solar panels for his house.

The panels were predicted to supply 100% of the house's electricity consumption, but on hot summer days, they supplied 25% more, and on sunny spring and fall days, 50% more. He saved $2,000/year, enough to amortize the cost of the panels over 7 years.
I'm thinking the phrase "results not typical" is in order, if not "this is complete and utter bullshit". Solar Panels often break even around the time they need to be replaced 15 to 25 years.

You don't buy solar panels to save money. You buy them to go green... or at least 20 years ago that was the idea. Today you should buy solar panels because there is no widely distributed electrical grid to connect to by your home.

That article is rife with claims and backed up with absolutely nothing.
 
My brother is getting twelve solar panels installed on his house. I'll report back his result.
 
My brother is getting twelve solar panels installed on his house. I'll report back his result.
It might save him money, or cost him money, depending on where he lives, what subsidies he gets, and how the panels are sited (amongst other factors). But money isn't the issue here.

The effect on his carbon footprint will be a reduction of between zero and about 25%, depending on where his grid operators get their power, how much power he uses in the daytime vs at night, and whether he uses more electricity (particularly outside the hours of peak insolation) than before the panels were installed. And it will be very difficult for him to know that figure.

So if, like the fool in Lpetrich's article above, he feels justified in discarding his attempts to use less electricity because now he's using solar power, he may well increase his carbon footprint, even if he saves oodles of dollars.
 
In the news coal stocks are rising after a decline. Overall demand is going up. Germany is reconsidering nuclear.

Given a choice between being cold and climate hchamge people will choose whatever keeps them warm in winter.
We remain catastrophically unable to ave the national political unity for a national long term energy strategy.

In this case the 'let the markets decide' mantra is killing us.
 
We don't need to choose; Nuclear fission can keep us warm at home without changing the climate.

It's the only current technology that can achieve this.

It's also by far the safest industry in human history (not just for generating electricity, but overall) - the nuclear industry makes the commercial aviation industry look like a bunch of cowboys with a cavalier disregard for life and limb.

It's one of the cheapest ways to generate electricity, even after six decades of morons lobbying to make it as expensive as possible.

It's the most reliable way to make electricity too, with less downtime than any other generating technology.

And it's the least damaging industry to the environment, and the only industry in history that contains and manages its entire waste stream, other than a little waste heat.

It's a total no-brainer.

Sadly, our society is run by people with no fucking brains.
 
It might save him money, or cost him money, depending on where he lives, what subsidies he gets, and how the panels are sited (amongst other factors). But money isn't the issue here.
Where he is having them placed isn't great. Lots of tall trees on the western side of the building, unless he's planning on cutting them down.
 
It might save him money, or cost him money, depending on where he lives, what subsidies he gets, and how the panels are sited (amongst other factors). But money isn't the issue here.
Where he is having them placed isn't great. Lots of tall trees on the western side of the building, unless he's planning on cutting them down.
There was a big debate here between the power companies and homeowners about panel siting. The power company wanted people to install west-facing panels, to generate electricity during the afternoon peak of demand, but homeowners wanted north-facing panels to maximise electricity output, and thereby maximise feed-in tariffs.

The vast majority of panels here face north, so I guess the homeowners won that battle.

Meanwhile, most of our electricity in Queensland is still coming from burning coal and gas.
 
My brother is getting twelve solar panels installed on his house. I'll report back his result.
I have 40 panels/7.6kW (installed by previous owner). They're west-facing.

So far in 2022:
  • Exported 6925kWh of solar @ 5c/10c per kWh.
  • Bought 2332kWh from the grid @ ~31c per kWh.
Yet even though we've generated about 3 times as much as we use, we still get pretty large electricity bills every quarter, because our household uses most electricity in the evening when our rooftop solar isn't able to supply any of our demand.
 
No battery storage a or DC to AC inverters?

There are ;ighs and appliances designed to work off of DC. You can run a lot directly off DC from batteries.
 
My brother is getting twelve solar panels installed on his house. I'll report back his result.
I have 40 panels/7.6kW (installed by previous owner). They're west-facing.

So far in 2022:
  • Exported 6925kWh of solar @ 5c/10c per kWh.
  • Bought 2332kWh from the grid @ ~31c per kWh.
Yet even though we've generated about 3 times as much as we use, we still get pretty large electricity bills every quarter, because our household uses most electricity in the evening when our rooftop solar isn't able to supply any of our demand.
Do you have an electric car? That will change significantly your electrical use profile esp. if you charge it at night.
 
My brother is getting twelve solar panels installed on his house. I'll report back his result.
I have 40 panels/7.6kW (installed by previous owner). They're west-facing.

So far in 2022:
  • Exported 6925kWh of solar @ 5c/10c per kWh.
  • Bought 2332kWh from the grid @ ~31c per kWh.
Yet even though we've generated about 3 times as much as we use, we still get pretty large electricity bills every quarter, because our household uses most electricity in the evening when our rooftop solar isn't able to supply any of our demand.
Do you have an electric car? That will change significantly your electrical use profile esp. if you charge it at night.
Can't afford one yet. But yes, I would guess that the vehicle would need to charge at night unless we only charge it on weekends or WFH days.
 
No battery storage a or DC to AC inverters?

There are ;ighs and appliances designed to work off of DC. You can run a lot directly off DC from batteries.
Two DC to AC inverters. Pretty sure our whole house needs 240V AC.

No batteries. Can't afford them yet and uncertain if they will pay for themselves. I only have the panels because they came with the house.
 
No battery storage a or DC to AC inverters?

There are ;ighs and appliances designed to work off of DC. You can run a lot directly off DC from batteries.

Batteries cost even more than the 31 cents/kWh he's paying for power.
 
And there I was thinking batteries are free. Learn something new every day.
 
Back
Top Bottom