Posted on 11/19/2007 6:11:05 AM PST by Uncledave
Thanks. The original report it came from is no longer at
http://www.nrel.gov/gis/il_solar_pv.html
which is a little frustrating.
As I suspected, though, it purports to show the “total” solar radiation available. Using a standard of 12% efficiency like Nanosolar PV cells, and their 6.5kw/m2/h number, that would still give 780wh per square meter in Arizona, which is 50% higher than I’ve seen before.
And the graph says it includes cloud cover, water vapor, sun angle, etc. adjustments already. If you believed this graphic, then even the state along the Canadian broder would manage 500wh per square meter per day.
Meaning you’d probably need 10kw capacity = 1,000sf of panels to get you 1,000kwh per month. If Nanosolar cells actually come to market at $0.30 per peak watt, they would become a relatively small part of the total system cost.
Where I could get by with $2,000 in panels you’d need $3,000 in panels. The rest of the system — batteries or grid-tie electronics, inverter, etc. — would make total cost $10,000 and $11,000, I bet.
This is a huge difference compared to today and silicon PV. 10KW of silicon panels would cost $40K.
Energy density is a problem of solar too. If efficiency doesn’t increase, then many applications will remain out of reach of solar.
Exactly. If I was involved in a good thing, I would stick around to reap the windfall.
Seems that there is a crop of modern snake oil "scientists" coming up with "amazing" breakthroughs, sucking up investors with no clue, only to later fizzle out due to .... problem. When one closely looks at the guts of the "venture" claims often include some "breakthrough" that is camouflaged nonsense.
It will be interesting to see what develops here, sounds interesting, seems like more PR than quietly proceeding to have product ready to sell.
I spent $13,000 after tax credits on a thermo-syphonic solar hot water heating system in San Diego. It was supposed to have a 20 year service life. It provided 100% of my hot water needs from March to October. I used it in "pre-heat" mode from November to February. Gas prices never went high enough to amortize the system...assuming that it lasted for the full 20 years. It didn't. It was fully effective for about 6 years, then the calcium in the San Diego water supply corroded the storage tanks, wetted the insulation and made the system unusable. Of course the supplier had gone out of business, so I had no recourse on the "warranty".
I pay about 5 cents per kw-hr right now. Solar has to get a bunch cheaper to make it interesting. I was paying 25 to 30 cents per kw-hr in San Diego (1999/2000), so it would have been more interesting economically and more viable in terms of available insolation.
Most of Michigan gets less than half the solar energy that most of Florida gets. See solar energy map
Domestic prices may go up but on the other hand with less and less foreign oil being consumed the price for that should drop as well with foreign despots licking our hands instead of buying them just to induce us to buy more of their oil. Its no secret that Arab oil interests have shown interest in buying stakes in emerging alternative energy technologies because of America’s past genius in solving past technological problems. They can see the hand writing on the wall when America finally hits about 80 percent of its energy needs being supplied domestically with the other twenty percent remaining “adjustable” as to source, type, and supply(meaning we could do without the Arabs or Venenzuela)
The Zero Sum gain/loss bean counters also never seem to factor in as well the intrinsic costs of BEING INDEPENDENT from other nations, even if Domestic energy sources are a bit more costly to produce! You say that the ratio of (ie cheaper than Domstic)Foreign Oil vs Domestic may have to increase as Domestic supplies would be more expensive to produce. But as alternative sources of energy more and more hit the market...the over-all need for oil from any source will diminish putting downward pressures on all world wide oil prices. That is, not counting the FUD that oil futures speculators love to put out to spook oil prices higher!
I don’t think we’ll ever be free of the need of oil in terms of manufacturing...we get so many use-ful products from it. The advances being made in alternative fuels and energy sources how-ever will certainly give us more leverage in dealing with foreign oil despots, who with these current higher prices are exacting a Dhimmitude Tax on us already!
You’ve suffered from the Binghamton Blahss to, hunh?
I grew up there, finally moved down to Virginia for good.
The kids sure miss the snow, though!
Do they have it in yellow?
I lived in Outer Bingolia for 11 years, with another 14 up in the Finger Lakes region. I miss the snow - but can live without the 16 month winter! ;-P
All this of course assumes that they will actually be able to deliver at the price-point specified, and that the product lasts long enough to be worth installation costs
In more ways than one! Self-generation is also a problem at the distribution level. Any source connected to the grid is a potential hazard to lineman.
Picture the typical storm scenario - wind blows through, knocks down a few trees, lightning strikes and blows the occasional insulator or fuse. The lineman comes out after the storm and sees that a tree had fallen, causing a fuse or circuit breaker a mile away to blow or trip, resulting in a power outage. His job is to get the tree out of the wires and get the wires back up, and then restore power.
But he won't start working just yet - first, he has to open or check open and red-tag all switches that could possibly energize the line he's working on. Pretty routine today, when all possible sources are mapped and are generally few in number. Perhaps two or three switches and he's made it safe to ground the conductors and start working. He will not work without a proper tagging procedure - it isn't safe to do so, and it's in violation with OSHA standards that have been in effect for decades (back when OSHA really meant something).
But wait - what if 2 or 3 or 10 or 50 customers have their own power source. Now, the lineman has a choice. He can go to each home and disconnect the meter, and tag, or he can hang working grounds, potentially damaging any generation or power source that has been inadvertently connected to the damaged part of the distribution system. I know what I'd do if I were a lineman wanting to restore power to my customers.
Incidentally, this problem has cropped up on occasion when people pull out the portable gasoline-powered generator after a storm and proceed to backfeed the distribution lines. Most people don't even think about installing a proper transfer switch to prevent feeding the incoming line, and it's evident that some don't even bother to open the main breaker before connecting their generator.
Yeah, there is conflicting info. Not sure who to believe.
[He says there’s a misconception about a lack of sunlight in the Great Lakes State. “Germany has led the world in solar installations for the last two or three years, and they get fewer hours of insolation, or viable sunlight than we do in Michigan,” said D’Alecy. Michigan gets 80 percent of the solar radiation that Jacksonville, Florida receives.]
From:
http://www.michigan.org/mbr/enewsletter/combo.asp?ContentId=6890C2E7-CBB5-464E-84E9-8CA50F56BF32
Well, at PV is a solid-state technology. No fluids or moving parts to worry about.
I’m still in SoCal, and it kills me to see my AVERAGE rate during the summer run $0.25kwh and my peak $0.35kwh. For a condo with just me living there. A larger home would probably have most of my bill at the higher penalty rates.
Now I’m looking at building a place in the desert where I’d be off-grid, and $50K for a solar PV system is giving me pause. A $10K system would fit my budget much better.
Even if this doesn’t work out, we might be able to use the technology to kill people.
Accidents will happen - and those not back & life scarring will be deadly.
?
Look at even a “southern” city like Atlanta: 3.3 insolation compared to the max at 5.5 (at that only for 4-5 hours per day - from 10:00 until 3:00!): that’s = 60%
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.