Pages: 1 ... 109 110 [111] 112 113   Go Down

Author Topic: Extreme weather  (Read 54314 times)

HSakols

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1210
    • Hugh Sakols Photography
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2200 on: September 16, 2020, 07:41:27 pm »

Again this is a video of someone who is out of their element. I am the walrus!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS8X2Qp_6aA
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10292
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2201 on: September 17, 2020, 08:08:49 am »

Wow, they look like nice roofs.  Too bad we are trending towards urbanization living in apartment buildings throughout the world, making solar roofs a moot point.   

In Australia we used to have a dream of owning a house on a quarter acre block. Many homes where I live, on the outskirts of Brisbane, are on blocks of land ranging from 1/2 an acre to 10 acres.

However, you are right that there is a general movement towards homes in apartments, but in Australia, the vast majority of the population still live in separate houses. As the population expands, an increasing proportion of them choose to live in an apartment, but the number of separate houses is still expanding, but not art the same rate as apartment-dwelling.

If the entire roof of a separate house is covered with solar panels, the electricity generated will be more than the household needs. The excess energy can be transmitted to apartment dwellers where the roof of the apartment building is not large enough to meet the electricity requirements of all the inhabitants.

From the 2016 Australian Census:

"Separate houses continued to account for the largest proportion of Australian homes. However, separate houses decreased from 76% of households in 2011 to 73% in 2016. Semi-detached, row housing, town houses, flats and apartments increased to make up just over one-quarter of housing (26%)."

When considering the over all efficiency and cost of a particular type of energy supply, one should consider the impact and costs of all related issues.
For example, the 'true', over all cost of burning coal, must include the damage to the environment of mining the coal, which includes the cost of rehabilitation of the environment after the mining ceases, the damage to the health of the miners, and the damage to the general health of the population in the vicinity of the mining and in the vicinity of the coal-fired plants where a certain amount of 'real' pollutants will usually be emitted.

When new technology is developed to reduce toxic emissions from coal-burning, one must also consider the additional cost of including the emission controls in the construction of the plant, and the regulatory cost of ensuring that such emission controls are always switched on, which requires frequent visits from the inspectors and their employment costs.

Quote
I also would like to point out it is twice as expensive to produce electricity from solar roofs, which is largely subsidized, as it is from farms.  Fact is, without any subsidizes, solar power would not be possible.  Fossil fuels, hydro-electric and nuclear would all continuing to operate, albeit slightly more expensive.

Not necessarily, if you take all factors into consideration. The advantage of roof-top solar is that no additional land is taken up that could be used for other productive purposes. I've seen quite a few solar farms located in fertile areas that could be used for growing food or creating recreational nature reserves. That cost should be included.

If one locates the solar farm in a remote desert or arid region, then one has to include the cost of very long HVDC transmission lines.

Subsidies are a necessary incentive to increase demand for solar panels, unlike cameras which have their own, innate attraction. As the manufacturing costs of solar panels decrease, the subsidies will also decrease.

Quote
Plus, the idea of connecting the entire world through one grid would not only be nearly impossible and extremely costly, but from a national security perspective foolish and would leave us open to being vulnerable to enemies.

Not necessarily. It will often be a two-way process where two connected countries with different time zones provide energy to the other whenever the sun shines in their own country. Since the two countries, and other connected countries, will rely upon each other for a regular supply of energy, which is a fundamental requirement for all prosperity, this two-way reliance will reduce the likelihood of any future conflict.

Do you still have a leg to stand on?  ;D

Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10684
    • Flicker photos
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2202 on: September 17, 2020, 10:59:00 am »

Ray, Using someone else's solar panels when it's dark in your area would require double the number of sensors.  After all, when it sunny in their area, they want power for their needs as well. Ditto with wind generators. That's why you need fossil fuel secondary plants to providee energy when its dark or calm.

Batteries would help.  But we're a long way from making them with enough storage at reasonable cost.  The Tesla plant in the USA is the largest in the world.  It would take them 300 years to make enough batteries to store power needs for the world for just one days use. 

Then think of all the manufacturing environmental issues created.  What about disposal when they;re done in a  few years?  Germany is already replacing their wind generators. Although they have 50% or more power generated from green, their energy cost per KWH are 2 1/2 times America's.
Then you have mining operations, tractors, fossil fuel to mine and manufacturer solar and wind, etc.  What do you do with all the plastic in the wind propellers? 
« Last Edit: September 17, 2020, 11:04:10 am by Alan Klein »
Logged

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4023
    • advantica blog
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2203 on: September 17, 2020, 11:37:06 am »

Batteries would help.  But we're a long way from making them with enough storage at reasonable cost.  The Tesla plant in the USA is the largest in the world.  It would take them 300 years to make enough batteries to store power needs for the world for just one days use. 

 What do you do with all the plastic in the wind propellers?

Next week, on September 22, Tesla will make an important announcement about their new batteries. That may make them feasible also for residential and industrial use.

As to the recycling of wind turbines, this will be a new industry. Until now, there were no decommisioned turbine blades but soon there will be enough supply to start recycling. Already now, there are several companies and universities researching such technologies.

https://www.re-wind.info/product/2020/8/28/reuse-and-recycling-of-decommissioned-composite-material-wind-turbine-blades
https://www.windtech-international.com/product-news/university-of-tennessee-receives-funding-to-recycle-wind-turbine-blades
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10684
    • Flicker photos
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2204 on: September 17, 2020, 12:33:24 pm »

Regarding recycling of plastics, we have that where I live in New Jersey.  There's a separate garbage can just for plastics.  Problem is I learned a couple of days ago is that most plastics cannot be recycled.  It was pushed as something to make plastics seem more acceptable.  So everyone who makes plastics, puts that triangle on their containers to say they're recyclable.  They're not.  Only plastic types that are used in milk and soda bottles are.  That means that the plastics have to be sorted.  Do they really do that?  Or do they just dump everything in the the dump anyway along with the trash in the other garbage can?  The only thing good about the extra can I have to put in the street for garbage pickup is that it forces me to do some exercise. 

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10292
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2205 on: September 18, 2020, 10:39:43 pm »

Ray, Using someone else's solar panels when it's dark in your area would require double the number of sensors.  After all, when it sunny in their area, they want power for their needs as well. Ditto with wind generators. That's why you need fossil fuel secondary plants to providee energy when its dark or calm.

Alan, when it's dark in your area, your demand for electricity might be less. Demand fluctuates all the time, throughout the day and throughout the seasons. The most efficient power plants, whether coal or nuclear, are 'base load', that is, they produce electricity at their maximum efficiency all the time. If production is scaled down because of lower demand during certain periods of the day or night, the efficiency of the power plant, during those times, is reduced.

We live in a world where hardly anything is used continuously at the same rate. Your car probably sits in the garage or a car park most of the time. Your house is empty whenever you are away. A fruit tree produces its fruit only once a year, but fortunately, because of international trade, you can probably eat any fruit you desire at any time of the year. Consider the long, underground HVDC power lines, as trade routes for energy supplies.

Quote
Batteries would help.  But we're a long way from making them with enough storage at reasonable cost.  The Tesla plant in the USA is the largest in the world.  It would take them 300 years to make enough batteries to store power needs for the world for just one days use.

We know from the history of technological development that products are continually improving whenever there is a will to improve them or a demand for the product. Rocket technology began with the Germans during WWII and progressed to landing men on the moon in 1969. The first digital cameras in the 1980's were often less than 1mp and very expensive. Look at them now.  ;D

https://www.digitalkameramuseum.de/en/cameras/item/kodak-professional-dcs

Quote
Then think of all the manufacturing environmental issues created.  What about disposal when they;re done in a  few years?  Germany is already replacing their wind generators. Although they have 50% or more power generated from green, their energy cost per KWH are 2 1/2 times America's.
Then you have mining operations, tractors, fossil fuel to mine and manufacturer solar and wind, etc.  What do you do with all the plastic in the wind propellers?

Environmental issues and disposal of waste have always been a problem. The mining of metals to produce solar panels is not necessarily a greater problem than the mining of coal and oil, and the mining of metals to build the coal power plants and oil storage tanks, and build the lorries, trains and ships to transport the coal and oil from the mines to the power plants, and then dispose of them later, after they've served their purpose.

It might well be the case that the recycling of windmills and solar panels in the future will not be properly addressed, due to government incompetence and a lack of planning, but that's another issue that applies to the waste disposal of all products.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10684
    • Flicker photos
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2206 on: September 19, 2020, 02:43:24 am »

Alan, when it's dark in your area, your demand for electricity might be less. Demand fluctuates all the time, throughout the day and throughout the seasons. The most efficient power plants, whether coal or nuclear, are 'base load', that is, they produce electricity at their maximum efficiency all the time. If production is scaled down because of lower demand during certain periods of the day or night, the efficiency of the power plant, during those times, is reduced.

We live in a world where hardly anything is used continuously at the same rate. Your car probably sits in the garage or a car park most of the time. Your house is empty whenever you are away. A fruit tree produces its fruit only once a year, but fortunately, because of international trade, you can probably eat any fruit you desire at any time of the year. Consider the long, underground HVDC power lines, as trade routes for energy supplies.

We know from the history of technological development that products are continually improving whenever there is a will to improve them or a demand for the product. Rocket technology began with the Germans during WWII and progressed to landing men on the moon in 1969. The first digital cameras in the 1980's were often less than 1mp and very expensive. Look at them now.  ;D

https://www.digitalkameramuseum.de/en/cameras/item/kodak-professional-dcs

Environmental issues and disposal of waste have always been a problem. The mining of metals to produce solar panels is not necessarily a greater problem than the mining of coal and oil, and the mining of metals to build the coal power plants and oil storage tanks, and build the lorries, trains and ships to transport the coal and oil from the mines to the power plants, and then dispose of them later, after they've served their purpose.

It might well be the case that the recycling of windmills and solar panels in the future will not be properly addressed, due to government incompetence and a lack of planning, but that's another issue that applies to the waste disposal of all products.
Maximum load for a local area will be the hottest minute of the worse day of the summer.  The grid has to be able to supply that period even if it's only for minutes.  So on those hot minutes, let's say in north America, the entire continent will need maximum supply.  Everyone pretty much will be using all their air conditioners, offices in cities will be filled, etc.  It's at that time that all the solar cells will be maxed out for their local use.  Unless they over-designed the quantity of cells and wind for other regions, there won't be anything left for the other regions.  So you'd have to overbuild all the non-fossil fuel generation.

Of course even if you could over-design and double up on the cells at great cost, the other factors are not in place and are impractical as well.  Where would you run cables?  From Europe?  The entire northern hemisphere will be maxed out. Arguing that we might have efficient batteries in enough quantities in the future isn't practical either.  In any case, they don't exist.  So my point is still true.  You need fossil fuel plants to back up solar and wind.  If not to 100%, then to still a very large percentage.  Or you'd have to double up green supply to provide power to other areas even if it was capable of transmitting power that far.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10684
    • Flicker photos
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2207 on: September 19, 2020, 02:46:05 am »

One clarification.  You don't need fossil fuel backup.  Of course you could use nuclear, water, hydro, etc as well as fossil fuel to back up green.

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10292
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2208 on: September 19, 2020, 11:38:26 am »

Maximum load for a local area will be the hottest minute of the worse day of the summer.  The grid has to be able to supply that period even if it's only for minutes.  So on those hot minutes, let's say in north America, the entire continent will need maximum supply. 

Wow! So when it's hot in North America, it's hot over the entire North American continent at the same time. That should make it easier to plan for such conditions.  ;)

Isn't there a 3 hour time difference between the West coast and East coast of North America? When everyone is cooking their evening dinner at 6pm-7pm on the East coast, in homes and restaurants, it should be 3 to 4pm on the West coast when the sun is still shining bright and delivering power along the HVDC lines from West to East to meet the increased demand in the East. Likewise, when everyone is cooking breakfast on the West coast at 6 to 7am, it should be 9 to 10am on the East Coast when everyone has finished breakfast and is travelling to work in their electric car, or train or bus.

Whilst it's true that battery storage is currently expensive, hydro power is very efficient. Using the excess power in the grid from all sources, including wind and solar, to pump water back into the dam, is an excellent way of efficiently storing energy to meet peak demand.

The technology of HVDC transmission is also improving. The latest technology is described as UHVDC (Ultra-High-Voltage).

"China currently leads in the construction of HVDC transmission lines in the world today. China has also successfully implemented ultra‐high‐voltage direct current (UHVDC) transmission lines in recent years (rated at 800 kV and above).

China is currently planning to build the Changji‐Guquan UHVDC link between Xinjiang regions in the northwestto Anhui province in the eastern region of China. The UHVDC line is expected to be rated at 1100 kVvoltage, 3000 km in length, and 12 gigawatt (GW) of transmission capacity. When completed, this project is expected to set world records for HVDC lines in terms of voltage level, transmission capacity, and line length." 


https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/electricity/hvdctransmission/pdf/transmission.pdf
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10684
    • Flicker photos
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2209 on: September 19, 2020, 11:57:52 am »

Wow! So when it's hot in North America, it's hot over the entire North American continent at the same time. That should make it easier to plan for such conditions.  ;)

Isn't there a 3 hour time difference between the West coast and East coast of North America? When everyone is cooking their evening dinner at 6pm-7pm on the East coast, in homes and restaurants, it should be 3 to 4pm on the West coast when the sun is still shining bright and delivering power along the HVDC lines from West to East to meet the increased demand in the East. Likewise, when everyone is cooking breakfast on the West coast at 6 to 7am, it should be 9 to 10am on the East Coast when everyone has finished breakfast and is travelling to work in their electric car, or train or bus.


Whilst it's true that battery storage is currently expensive, hydro power is very efficient. Using the excess power in the grid from all sources, including wind and solar, to pump water back into the dam, is an excellent way of efficiently storing energy to meet peak demand.

The technology of HVDC transmission is also improving. The latest technology is described as UHVDC (Ultra-High-Voltage).

"China currently leads in the construction of HVDC transmission lines in the world today. China has also successfully implemented ultra‐high‐voltage direct current (UHVDC) transmission lines in recent years (rated at 800 kV and above).

China is currently planning to build the Changji‐Guquan UHVDC link between Xinjiang regions in the northwestto Anhui province in the eastern region of China. The UHVDC line is expected to be rated at 1100 kVvoltage, 3000 km in length, and 12 gigawatt (GW) of transmission capacity. When completed, this project is expected to set world records for HVDC lines in terms of voltage level, transmission capacity, and line length." 


https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/electricity/hvdctransmission/pdf/transmission.pdf
You're picking the wrong times by using 7AM times in the early morning when it's cooler and nobody's at work yet. Change that to the worse time for electricity needs. When it's noon in California on the west coast, it's 3pm on the East Coast.  That's the hottest parts of the day when air conditioners will be maxed out.  There's no reserve.  Look at California now.  They're having blackouts because it's so hot.  Because they've shut down many fossil fuel plants in an ill advised action to go green, they've starved their own grid. Where would the energy come for them to ship electricity to the East Coast when they don't even have enough for their own use?

Sure, some electricity is moved around on non-extreme days and times. But to have the kind of spare capacity to ship to other areas on the worse day and worse time of that day means duplicating power sources.  That means providing more solar and wind plants above those needed locally. Or duplicating power from fossil.

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10292
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2210 on: September 19, 2020, 08:47:17 pm »

Dear me! The Canadian prairies have been getting colder during the past 30 years, by a whopping 2 Degrees Centigrade, which is greater than the claimed rise in average global temperatures since the industrial revolution.  :o

"During the grain growing months of May-July, the mean temperature on the Canadian prairies has cooled down by 2C in the last 30 years. The cooling appears to be most certainly linked to diminishing solar activity as the Sun approaches a Grand Solar Minimum in the next decade or so. This cooling has led to a reduction in Growing Degree Days (GDDs) and has also impacted the precipitation pattern. The GDDs in conjunction with mean temperature and precipitation are important parameters for the growth of various grains (wheat, barley, canola etc.) on the prairies."

https://www.opastonline.com/storage/2020/09/is-diminishing-solar-activity-detrimental-to-canadian-prairie-agriculture-eesrr-20-.pdf

Didn't President Trump say recently, Itll start getting cooler. You just watch.   ;D
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10292
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2211 on: September 20, 2020, 12:15:03 am »

You're picking the wrong times by using 7AM times in the early morning when it's cooler and nobody's at work yet.

I was merely giving an example of the fluctuation in electricity demand across large areas which have different time zones.

Quote
Change that to the worse time for electricity needs. When it's noon in California on the west coast, it's 3pm on the East Coast.  That's the hottest parts of the day when air conditioners will be maxed out.


Okay, I will. Give or take up to 3 hours difference, the greatest demand for electricity occurs during the main part of the day when most people are sitting in air-conditioned office, or retirement homes, or working in factories.
To meet this demand in a reliable way, one builds hundreds of baseload coal-fired, gas-fired, or nuclear power plants. Unfortunately, during the night very little power is needed. Gas-fired power plants can more easily be switched on and off according to demand for electricity, but coal-fired and nuclear can't. The power output can be scaled down, but the plants are still running.

My impression is, from various reports I've read, most coal-fired and nuclear power plants tend to run at an average of 50% capacity during each 24 hour period. What a waste! You complain about the necessity to have double the quantity of solar panels to meet peak demand, yet ignore the inefficient idleness of baseload power plants during the night.

The way forward is to develop an integrated grid system across the country and into other countries, which is regulated by modern communication technology. This is sometimes referred to as a 'smart grid'. From Wikipedia:

"A smart grid is an electrical grid which includes a variety of operation and energy measures including smart meters, smart appliances, renewable energy resources, and energy efficient resources."

As you know, I'm not concerned about the effects of rising CO2 levels on climate. I suspect that any negative effects, which cannot be accurately quantified because of the chaotic nature of climate, are outweighed by the positive effects which can be quantified, such as the greening of the planet.

However, I am very concerned about pollution in general and the degradation of the environment. The energy from the sun is totally free. Call it a gift from God, if you like.  ;D

How we harness and use that energy is up to us. We can apply modern research techniques and technology to harness and distribute that energy from the sun and wind more efficiently, or we can remain stuck in our old ways, relying upon the limited resources of coal and oil until the entire world economy begins to collapse due to a lack of energy supplies.

Quote
There's no reserve.  Look at California now.  They're having blackouts because it's so hot.  Because they've shut down many fossil fuel plants in an ill advised action to go green, they've starved their own grid. Where would the energy come for them to ship electricity to the East Coast when they don't even have enough for their own use?

You're confusing political and administrative incompetence with rational, scientific arguments. If they can't ship energy to the East coast, then other areas will ship energy to California. That is the purpose of an integrated, 'Smart' grid system.
Fires in California are not a new phenomenom. Haven't they always occurred in the past? They certainly have in Australia.

This is the major problem as I see it. In order to persuade people to change their old-fashioned habits, and progress towards developing new, cleaner, and unlimited supplies of energy, one has to create the maximum scare about the harmful effects of the old technology. This appears to be working, in the sense that solar energy is becoming cheaper by the decade.

However, in order to create this scare, a lot of misinformation has to be broadcast through the media, such as attributing every extreme weather event, and every major forest fire, to global warming due to anthropogenic emissions of CO2.

One can't have it both ways. A government can't, on the one hand, create a scare about the adverse effects of CO2 on climate, and on the other hand, point out that extreme weather events in the past have been just as severe, when CO2 levels were lower, and that we should spend more money in preparing for a recurrence of such events which are completely natural.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10684
    • Flicker photos
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2212 on: September 20, 2020, 09:25:51 am »

Ray, I don't disagree with most of what you say.  yY original point was only that you won't get people to personally pay for more solar cells than they need to supply their own homes.  So when they're using them to supply electricity for their own homes, there probably won't be anything left to send elsewhere.  I was watching YouTube.  There was a guy with a small farm who was into his 12th year of solar panels.  He still had another 12 years to go to break even.  Frankly, he'll never break even because his system wonl;t last 25 years. And he sells electricity back into the grid to offset his costs.  So that might be an example of how like you say, solar can be distributed to others.  But that means he's only doing it when he's not using it.  I'm not sure how that alleviates the total requirements as Germany has proven with its higher costs for power.

After losing power for 4 days a few weeks ago due to a storm that rolled through here in New Jersey, I'm investigating installing a 22KW natural gas generator.  It would cover just about everything for the house.  I was trying to figure out if it made sense to put in solar instead so I can gain from its use during normal times.  But the solar would have to work at night as well if I lose grid power.  I could add batteries for the solar, but I don't think you can put in enough to run stuff all night.  Otherwise there's no point to put in solar instead of a gas fired emergency generator as far as I can figure.  Any ideas?

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2687
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2213 on: September 20, 2020, 09:44:14 am »


After losing power for 4 days a few weeks ago due to a storm that rolled through here in New Jersey, I'm investigating installing a 22KW natural gas generator.  It would cover just about everything for the house.  I was trying to figure out if it made sense to put in solar instead so I can gain from its use during normal times.  But the solar would have to work at night as well if I lose grid power.  I could add batteries for the solar, but I don't think you can put in enough to run stuff all night.  Otherwise there's no point to put in solar instead of a gas fired emergency generator as far as I can figure.  Any ideas?

It's a multi-variable analysis that changes with time. It depends at least on the price of gasoline and the efficiency/cost of solar, both of which change with time. There is availability of gasoline, solar repair facilities, where you live, etc. These are all decisions that are different for different people in different locations. I don't see the point of being doctrinaire about it.
Logged
--
Robert

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10684
    • Flicker photos
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2214 on: September 20, 2020, 09:49:23 am »

It's a multi-variable analysis that changes with time. It depends at least on the price of gasoline and the efficiency/cost of solar, both of which change with time. There is availability of gasoline, solar repair facilities, where you live, etc. These are all decisions that are different for different people in different locations. I don't see the point of being doctrinaire about it.
Thanks for your ideas.  The reason I'm thinking of solar, is because an emergency generator is very expensive.  But it sits there doing nothing except when you lose grid power.  If I'm going to spend so much, solar seems good except it won't work at night without a lot of batteries which is what I would need if I lose grid power. 

degrub

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1429
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2215 on: September 20, 2020, 11:58:49 am »

Or do what we always do when we loose power during a hurricane for a few weeks here in the swamps .... put screens in the windows, open them, use a hand fan, and persist. Very low cost, very energy efficient, and very reliable !
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10292
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2216 on: September 20, 2020, 12:35:53 pm »

Ray, I don't disagree with most of what you say.  yY original point was only that you won't get people to personally pay for more solar cells than they need to supply their own homes.  So when they're using them to supply electricity for their own homes, there probably won't be anything left to send elsewhere.  I was watching YouTube.  There was a guy with a small farm who was into his 12th year of solar panels.  He still had another 12 years to go to break even.  Frankly, he'll never break even because his system wonl;t last 25 years. And he sells electricity back into the grid to offset his costs.  So that might be an example of how like you say, solar can be distributed to others.  But that means he's only doing it when he's not using it.  I'm not sure how that alleviates the total requirements as Germany has proven with its higher costs for power.

Alan, I have a small PVP system on my roof, covering about 1/8th of the total roof area. It was installed 11 years ago. The incentive was a very generous feed-in tariff which unfortunately will end for me in 2028. The initial installation cost of $3,500 has probably been repaid twice over by now, as a result of my significantly reduced electricity bills, which have sometimes been in credit.

If I had covered my entire roof with solar panels, 11 years ago, I would have made a substantial profit by now. However, the state government no longer provides such a generous feed-in tariff to new installers of solar panels, because so many people were installing more panels than they needed and, in effect, making a good profit by selling electricity at the inflated price of the feed-in tariff, resulting in higher electricity prices for those who did not have solar panels installed.

Quote
After losing power for 4 days a few weeks ago due to a storm that rolled through here in New Jersey, I'm investigating installing a 22KW natural gas generator.  It would cover just about everything for the house.  I was trying to figure out if it made sense to put in solar instead so I can gain from its use during normal times.  But the solar would have to work at night as well if I lose grid power.  I could add batteries for the solar, but I don't think you can put in enough to run stuff all night.  Otherwise there's no point to put in solar instead of a gas fired emergency generator as far as I can figure.  Any ideas?

Since my solar panels are connected to the grid, they don't produce power if there is a grid failure. The following article explains why.

"From a technical standpoint, the electricity generated by your solar panels isn't constant and varies depending on things like time of day, shade and so forth. Similarly, your power needs aren't constant, and will change as you switch appliances on and off.
With the grid active and working, this isn't a problem. The energy from your solar panels combines with energy from the reservoir of the power grid to supply a steady level of power to suit your needs. With the grid off, this isn't possible, so your solar panels shut off automatically to avoid delivering too much or too little power and damaging the electronics in your house."


https://www.finder.com.au/solar-panels-power-outage#:~:text=Only%20solar%20panels%20that%20are,will%20work%20during%20an%20outage.

A bank of back-up batteries would solve the problem, but they are still too expensive. If there is a breakthrough in battery technology, resulting in significantly cheaper, lighter, and more durable batteries, with greater storage capacity, then so many problems with renewables and intermittent energy supplies will be solved.


Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10684
    • Flicker photos
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2217 on: September 20, 2020, 02:01:57 pm »

Or do what we always do when we loose power during a hurricane for a few weeks here in the swamps .... put screens in the windows, open them, use a hand fan, and persist. Very low cost, very energy efficient, and very reliable !
\Convince my wife.   ::)

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 10684
    • Flicker photos
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2218 on: September 20, 2020, 02:11:01 pm »

Alan, I have a small PVP system on my roof, covering about 1/8th of the total roof area. It was installed 11 years ago. The incentive was a very generous feed-in tariff which unfortunately will end for me in 2028. The initial installation cost of $3,500 has probably been repaid twice over by now, as a result of my significantly reduced electricity bills, which have sometimes been in credit.

If I had covered my entire roof with solar panels, 11 years ago, I would have made a substantial profit by now. However, the state government no longer provides such a generous feed-in tariff to new installers of solar panels, because so many people were installing more panels than they needed and, in effect, making a good profit by selling electricity at the inflated price of the feed-in tariff, resulting in higher electricity prices for those who did not have solar panels installed.

Since my solar panels are connected to the grid, they don't produce power if there is a grid failure. The following article explains why.

"From a technical standpoint, the electricity generated by your solar panels isn't constant and varies depending on things like time of day, shade and so forth. Similarly, your power needs aren't constant, and will change as you switch appliances on and off.
With the grid active and working, this isn't a problem. The energy from your solar panels combines with energy from the reservoir of the power grid to supply a steady level of power to suit your needs. With the grid off, this isn't possible, so your solar panels shut off automatically to avoid delivering too much or too little power and damaging the electronics in your house."


https://www.finder.com.au/solar-panels-power-outage#:~:text=Only%20solar%20panels%20that%20are,will%20work%20during%20an%20outage.

A bank of back-up batteries would solve the problem, but they are still too expensive. If there is a breakthrough in battery technology, resulting in significantly cheaper, lighter, and more durable batteries, with greater storage capacity, then so many problems with renewables and intermittent energy supplies will be solved.



The same problem with rebate costs being passed along to grid users occurs here as well.  People generally richer than others get taxpayers to pay for their installations.  Then the additional cost is passed along to poor grid users.  Totally unfair.  It's like what happen with Tesla electric cars.  Affluent people were purchasing $100,000 Tesla cars with taxpayer rebates paid by poorer taxpayers.  So the poor pay for green.  The rich pay less for energy.  Totally upside down policy.

You just reminded me that Generac who makes emergency generators that I'm considering for my home, does have battery backup to a certain extent.  But only to handle a three ton AC.  Mine is 4 ton.   It would be great to purchase one system that would give me solar plus be able to backup for nighttime use so I can operate off grid.

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8847
Re: Extreme weather
« Reply #2219 on: September 20, 2020, 06:11:57 pm »

The same problem with rebate costs being passed along to grid users occurs here as well.  People generally richer than others get taxpayers to pay for their installations.  Then the additional cost is passed along to poor grid users.  Totally unfair.  It's like what happen with Tesla electric cars.  Affluent people were purchasing $100,000 Tesla cars with taxpayer rebates paid by poorer taxpayers.  So the poor pay for green.  The rich pay less for energy.  Totally upside down policy.

Then maybe elect a better functioning government? I know this thread is not about politics, but what you are referring to is local/national energy policy. Change it, before it ruins your current and future life.

Quote
You just reminded me that Generac who makes emergency generators that I'm considering for my home, does have battery backup to a certain extent.  But only to handle a three ton AC.  Mine is 4 ton.   It would be great to purchase one system that would give me solar plus be able to backup for nighttime use so I can operate off grid.

Try reducing your nightly power requirements ...

It's always more efficient to reduce the need for energy, than to reduce the effects of overconsumption. Prevention is better than cure.
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==
Pages: 1 ... 109 110 [111] 112 113   Go Up