Here is what the acolytes of solar power don't want you to know...

self | July 15, 2003 | Boot Hill

[Boot Hill]

Here is what the acolytes of solar power don't want you to know...

These are the essentials you need in order to appreciate the absurdity of using solar cell power systems as any kind of sensible alternative. After you read this, ask yourself again how much sense solar power really makes.

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO THE SUN'S ENERGY WHEN
WE USE SOLAR CELLS TO GENERATE ELECTRICITY:

	SOURCE	LOSS - %	POWER - W/m2
1.	solar constant	--	1370W
2.	atmosphere	27	1000W
3.	clouds	21	790W
4.	sun angle1	49	403W
5.	night2	50	201W
6.	cell efficiency3	85	30W
7.	dust/reflection4	10	27W
8.	packaging5	20	22W
9.	DC to AC inverter	25	16W
10.	storage	30	11W
Source Notes: 1.   Calculated for both hour angle and a latitude angle of 37º. 2.   See link. Continental U.S. average sunshine is 4.8 kilowatt-hours/       square meter/day, or 200 watts/square meter. That value is nearly       identical with total losses shown for items 1-5 above. 3.   See table on linked page. 4.   Dust, bird droppings, scratches, etc. estimated to be about 4%.       Reflections, per Fresnel's Law, would be another 6%. 5.   See link for data sheet on typical solar panel. Data shows an       overall efficiency of 10.3%, at nominal conditions. This is       nearly identical with total losses shown for items 6-8 above.

Net efficiency = 11.4 Watts/m² or a mere 0.83% (!)

But read on, it gets worse.

• The current average rate of U.S. energy consumption is about 3.3 trillion Watts. Based on the above efficiency data, we would need to cover the entire state of New Mexico with solar cells just to generate this amount of energy!   [+]

• And because of the 2% annual growth rate in our energy consumption, in only 35 years we would also have to cover the entire state of Arizona as well!   [+]

• And the irony is that the environmentalists, who are so obsessed with the use of solar power now, would be the first to scream bloody murder at the idea of such large areas of wild lands being permanently covered over with solar generating plants!   [+]   [+]   (Note: Both articles are written by the same author!)

• Worse still, the entire world-wide production of photovoltaic (PV) cells is so small (300 MW) that it can't even keep up with the annual U.S. growth rate in energy consumption (66,000 MW), much less produce enough PV cells to supply the base amount of energy that we currently use (3,300,000 MW). To do that, PV cell production would have to ramp up over 100,000%!   [+]   (Scroll down to chart)

• The initial capitalization cost of a solar PV generating plant is at least 10 times the cost of a large conventional plant. And that is exclusive of the mammoth land acquisition costs necessary to accommodate the vast expanse of solar cells.

  Here is an example:
  Siemens Solar (now Shell Solar) produces a popular line of large solar arrays intended for commercial, industrial and consumer applications. A big seller is their SP-150, supposedly a 150 watt unit that measures 1.32 square meters. The problem is, it only produces 150 watts under carefully controlled laboratory conditions where the incident light intensity is boosted to 1000 watts per square meter (unrealistically high, see items 2 and 3 in above table) and the PV cells are artificially cooled to 25º C. But when Shell tests that same unit under more realistic conditions of 800 watts per square meter and little cooling for the PV cells, the output drops to 109 watts. When sun angle and night time are factored in (see items 4 and 5 in above table), the average level of power production drops to a piddling 28 watts. (That is only 21 watts per square meter(!) which is nearly identical to the value shown for item 8 in the above table.)   [+]   [+]

  In quantity, this unit sells for $700. That calculates out to $25 per watt. By way of comparison, the initial capitalization cost for a conventional power plant is on the order of $0.75 to $1.00 per watt. That makes the solar "alternative" 33 times more expensive than the conventional power plants of today, and we haven't even figured in the additional cost of the inverters and power storage systems that solar needs (or the land acquisition costs).

  Solar proponents would be quick to point out that, while the capitalization costs may be higher for solar, they don't need to purchase the expensive fossil fuels that conventional plants use. While that is true, what they aren't telling you is that the cost of financing the much higher initial debt load for solar, is greater than the cost of the fuels that conventional plants use. (TANSTAAFL !)

• PV cells have a limited lifetime. As a consequence, manufacturers offer only limited warranties on power output, some as short as 20 years.   [+]

• A violent storm, such as a hail storm, can decimate a solar power plant. A storm covering only one square mile (the size of a small 50 MW solar plant) could destroy a half billion dollars in solar panels.

• PV cells have a nasty little habit of loosing conversion efficiency when you put them out in the warm sunlight. A hot day can lower the output power by up to 20%!   [+]

• A solar PV generating plant is not without maintenance. How are you going to wash the tens of thousands of square miles of PV cells of the dirt, dust and bird droppings that will collect over time? How will they be kept free of snow and ice during winter? A 1000 MW solar plant can lose 40 MW of power (retail value, about $50 million per year) by failing to keep the PV cells clean of dirt. Losses would be even greater for snow and ice.

• Solar PV generating plants incur inefficiencies quite foreign to conventional power plants. First, there is no need for energy storage in a conventional plant, as night time doesn't affect generating capacity. Second, there is no need for an inverter to change DC to AC. The inverter is a bigger deal than it first appears to be, because the inverter for a public utility must produce a very pure sine wave and that is much harder to do while still maintaining high conversion efficiency.

• The consumer that purchases a solar power generating system for home installation pays only a small fraction of its real cost, often as low as only 25%. That is because every sale is subsidized by direct payments of your tax dollars and by the government placing un-funded mandates on utility companies, requiring them to push the solar power "alternative". These unfunded mandates are re-paid by the rest of us in the form of higher utility bills.   [+]

Is there any use for solar power that makes sense?
Yes, solar power makes sense in those limited applications where the customer does not have convenient or economic access to the power grid, such as with remote country or mountain top homes. It is also useful for powering mobile or portable equipment such as utility, emergency, scientific devices, etc., where it is not otherwise feasible to hook to the power grid.

But other than those narrow exceptions, it makes no economic, engineering, ecological or practical sense to use solar power as a replacement for, or even as a compliment to, conventional power plants. Solar may have its' own specialty niche, but in no way does that rise to the level of an "alternative" to conventional power plants.

[biblewonk]

Not good with numbers are you.

[SierraWasp]

And you're not good with paying attention to who posted the numbers and started this thread! You are really starting to embareass yerself!!!

[newgeezer]

Not good with numbers are you.

Where windpower is concerned, he doesn't know sh*t from Shinola.

But, he's self-confident and comfortable. That's all that really matters to the true FRetards. The earth is flat, and no one's going to tell them any different. ;O)

[biblewonk]

Atleast I'm not lying to Freepers with false numbers.

[SierraWasp]

"That's all that really matters to the true FRetards."

Oh my... an attack on ALL Freepers? Oh... that mistake wasn't nice at all!!!

[SierraWasp]

You really are a Christshun, aren't you?! (note you tagline)

Hey Boot! Yew better git over here... you're under a feeble attack!!! (I know how you like swattin flies)

[newgeezer]

Oh my... an attack on ALL Freepers? Oh... that mistake wasn't nice at all!!!

I didn't attack all FReepers. Only the FRetards. They're a small but vocal subset.

Sheesh. What a maroon.

[farmfriend]

I may not know the numbers but I do know this:

If it was truely fessible out here, the Greens would be doing it. They ain't which tells me it won't work.

[SierraWasp]

"What a maroon."

Well, I can see this conversation is over. I don't have the patience to deal with name calling and personal attacks and deliberate attempts to disrupt with pure unadulterated bull splat, so you two have fun playing with yourselves and your windmills. I have more interesting things to accomplish!!! Bye.

[biblewonk]

If it was truely fessible out here, the Greens would be doing it. They ain't which tells me it won't work.

I thought the "greens" were all about trying to do things that are not "fessible". Would you call Shell and GE "Greens". They are investing heavily into wind because it is the coming thing. People love it and are sick of slash and burn energy policy.

[biblewonk]

Now there's some good news!

[SierraWasp]

("From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." -- Karl Marx)"

Aren't most tag lines sorta "words to live by?" (strange)

[SierraWasp]

I know how to "get you're goat!" (just find out where you tied it!)

[null and void]

They are investing heavily into wind because it is the coming thing. People love it and are sick of slash and burn energy policy.

Really? The Audibon Society calls them the "Cusinarts of the air" because of the high rate of bird kills. The Limosine Lib-uh-rhuls on Cape Cod don't want to have to look at them in their backyard.

I have a solar array. My neighbors don't have to hear the swish swish of mutiple swords of Damocles over their heads at all hours, nor do they have to hear gears grinding, and generators whirring, I don't cast flickering shadows on their property, and I don't chop up their TV signals.

[biblewonk]

Really?

Yes.

Interesting to hear that you have some solar panels. You must have a lot of money to spend on electricity or you are very into producing your own renewable energy.

[BOBTHENAILER]

It's hard to believe this crappola is creeping into FR like the incursion of GANG-GREEN into our society in general, but it is, sadly.

Great line. I've got something saved somwhere on wind, so I'll try to find it and be back.

[null and void]

You must have a lot of money to spend on electricity or you are very into producing your own renewable energy.

At the time I acquired them, yes. Since then I've been unemployed for the past 10 months.

When I'm back in the work force (The 28th is my target start date on a consulting gig) I'd love to become a net producer, but the State of Grayout Davis forbids my making money at it, indeed, there is a scheme to TAX solar power...

So, how much power does your personal wind system generate?

[BOBTHENAILER]

Oil and Gas vs. Wind and Solar Energy: A nationally organized advocacy effort seeks to prohibit oil and gas exploration in key prospective areas. Proponents favor using renewable energy resources instead, particularly wind and solar systems, believing they are more environmentally benign and less polluting. While increased use of home solar systems would likely be well received by communities, their cost (about $20,000 for a 2,000 sq. ft. home) is out of reach for typical homeowners. At the community level, it would be difficult to overstate the complexities of siting, permitting, legal challenges and construction problems associated with large commercial wind or solar installations.

Paul K. Driessen of Fairfax, Virginia calculates that producing 50 megawatts of electricity from photovoltaics would mean covering 1,000 acres with solar panels. To produce the same amount of electricity with wind towers (100-200 feet high) would require some 4,000 acres. By comparison, less than half an acre would be required to produce 50 megawatts of electricity from oil, or 2 to 5 acres for natural gas.

This is from a study on ANWR, FYI

[SierraWasp]

"...so I'll try to find it and be back."

Thank you. Good!

Hay Ernesto! Do you remember that article frum a few months ago about SMUD (Sacramento Municipal Utilities District) having to give up on their stupid "Solar Program?" Could you maybe find that and link it here?

Unfortunately, we must battle the frontiers of ignorance right here on our own FreeRepublic.com!!! Although, I'm sure that no matter how convincing the data are, some of these anti-matter, whistful vista folks from IA will continue to sew their wilted wishful non-thinking theories to anyone who will listen/read them.

farmfriend... why do you attract these types? (grin)

[SierraWasp]

Oooops! Dere it is!!! SLAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM............DUNK!!!