Posted on 11/18/2014 5:04:20 AM PST by Prophet2520
Although our array was designed to generate 30% of our electricity requirements, we are pleased to report that in reality it generates more than that and on very sunny days, we become a net exporter of clean green electricity.
(Excerpt) Read more at select-renewables.co.uk ...
Tell me, how are those SOLYNDRA loans paying off?
“No. That is not how it is done.
Fast starting Gas Turbines and the like are used to ramp up and down with load changes. “
In some cases you are right. That is kind of an over generalization but my statement was a generalization and simplification as well. I have no interest in debating how centralized power plants work or are designed. My point is that energy storage is increasingly being considered as important at the grid level.
Here is a starting point on that if anyone is interested.
http://energy.gov/oe/downloads/grid-energy-storage-december-2013
Thorium reactors.
But hey, we can’t have THAT now.
And let’s not forget fracking.
Can’t have that either.
After the false claim you made to justify your position. Okay, moving on...
My point is that energy storage is increasingly being considered as important at the grid level.
Where economic, it is great, provided done with additional tax-payer subsidy. But often it is too expensive to compete with something like a 60% efficient combined cycle Natural Power Turbine than can begin to produce power in minutes.
So how many MWH/$?
The link was for 2010 data, so let us compare what those two energy sources produced in 2010.
Coal produced 11,847,290 Thousand Megawatthours
All non-hydro renewables produced 167,173 Thousand Megawatthours
Solar (thermal and voltaic) produced 423 + 789 = 1,212 Thousand Megawatthours
http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_1_1
http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_1_1_a
So the $1,358 million subsidy in coal technologies is 8,724,072 MWH per dollar.
The $1,134 million subsidy in coal technologies is 1,069 MWH per dollar.
Looks to me like the Solar Subsidy is over 8 thousand times greater.
how many respiratory deaths and how much mercury poisoning did the solar cause?
Interesting how you want to keep changing subjects when challenged.
House fires due to shorting panels.
And you can’t throw water on it, you’ll get electrocuted if it completes a circuit.
And it is quite nice that you will write off a major portion of power generation in America.
All for pie in the sky promises that are always “ten years off”.
Yes, interesting that.
On your new subject:
Solar Panel Makers Continue To Ship Tons Of Toxic Waste Thousands Of Mile Away
http://www.businessinsider.com/solar-panel-makers-grappling-with-waste-2013-2#ixzz3JS9nehyF
Don’t get me wrong. I understand all forms of energy have problems. I am an electrical engineer, specialized in power systems. There is always a trade-off of utility, efficiency, cost, waste, etc.
We are an energy-hungry society. I’ve installed solar panel and wind turbine for industrial facilities, where it made sense, typically remote locations. As far as I am concerned, there is nothing wrong with solar, wind, energy storage, distributed generation, etc.
Where I do have a problem is government selection of the winners and losers in the market place, the handing over of tax payer funds to pay off the larger campaign contributors. I want that side of it to end, and I want it to end for all, including the industries that hire my services.
"Abound Solar, which recently went bankrupt [as of 2012], took $400 million in energy loans even while they knew their panels went on fire when exposed to the sun."
Another solar power success story just like Solyndra.
Lost money, to a company that was producing crap panels, and the taxpayers will never see that 400 million again.
The point: Government should not be in the business of picking winners and wasting taxpayer money on BS.
Do you understand that the power at the meter is priced at retail, but the power being generated by these solar arrays is worth far less than retail? Net metering is the law here in Virginia and it unfortunately represents another undeserved subsidy for unreliable and off peak home-generated solar power (in addition to the federal tax credits).
I would simply not rather pay 14 cents for someone's unreliable solar power that is delivered when my grid doesn't need it (except in summer). I would rather pay the 4 cents for wholesale power from a reliable generator, plus the extra 4 cents to get the power to my house (line losses). It's just a better deal.
I can understand though that in some circles "Green" power is considered virtuous and worthy of such subsidies. You may disagree but you should state your views up front and not hide behind bogus economic arguments.
Let us not forget: the costs associated with “green tech” are often far higher, and any toxic substances associated with the manufacture of same are somehow miraculously “clean”.
Who you calling "ignorant" n00b?
Who you calling "ignorant" n00b?
“Interesting how you want to keep changing subjects when challenged.”
The amount of power produced per dollar spent is an interesting point. But the amount of dollars it costs to kill thousands of people and poison the planet with mercury is not at all unrelated. It is integrally related and ignored by all anti-solar folks. You are simply putting money ahead of human lives. Try cleaning all the mercury dumped in every body of water, and reimbursing every family of those who died prematurely from dirty energy particulates. Then we can have a real conversation about relative costs.
We have a watermelon in our midst...how quaint.
I was responding to your comments. You seem to ignore the responses when challenged.
We disagree one the amount and effect of pollution from coal power plants.
You have a nice day.
Cheers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.