Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Another great example of how solar is advancing fast.
Semprius Stacked Solar Cell Reaches Close to 50 Percent Efficiency
The link: Solar thermal magazine
I think were putting the carriage before the horse. We can make the cheapest, most powerful and most efficient photovoltaic arrays, but if we cant store the energy efficiently, it becomes very limited and inefficent.
Lets say they do come up with better battery technology/energy storing capabilities in the future. The hydro, nuclear, and coal plants will also utilize the technology, making solar....well, pretty obsolete, imo. As of now, these power plants delivering electricity to millions of homes produce a "use it or lose it" energy; they too are looking for ways to store electricity in mass amounts.
How many panels, what square footage would they have to cover on the roof to make enough electricity to power- an air conditioner, a water heater, an electric range/oven, a clothes dryer, [all 220V] a refrigerator, microwave oven, TV, stereo, computer, vacuum cleaner, and all the INCANDESENT light bulbs?
And how many of my south side of house trees would I have to remove?
Lets say they do come up with better battery technology/energy storing capabilities in the future. The hydro, nuclear, and coal plants will also utilize the technology, making solar....well, pretty obsolete, imo. As of now, these power plants delivering electricity to millions of homes produce a "use it or lose it" energy; they too are looking for ways to store electricity in mass amounts.
Actually its the opposite that is happening. Solar is advancing at a exponential rate and becoming cheaper then fossil fuels and nuclear. In fact if you look at the news reports the utility companies are worried about what solar will mean for their future. They should be worried because the price and size of solar panels continue to come down more and more houses will get them essentially leaving the grid. Its not going to happen in the next 5 years but you will see some major changes in the next 15 and to be honest that is just a hop skip and jump away.
How many panels, what square footage would they have to cover on the roof to make enough electricity to power- an air conditioner, a water heater, an electric range/oven, a clothes dryer, [all 220V] a refrigerator, microwave oven, TV, stereo, computer, vacuum cleaner, and all the INCANDESENT light bulbs?
And how many of my south side of house trees would I have to remove?
Honestly today I would not install solar panels on my house. Yes I know people are doing it but they are just not quite there yet. Both in cost and size of the panels. However by 2020 that will all change as the size of the panels will go down significantly as well as the cost. Then you just have fixed cost that will be cheaper then anything the utility could charge you then it will be well worth it. Oh ya and its better for the environment.
You do realize that solar energy is stored for later use don't you?
Yes but that's not what you posted and these systems are not cost competitive even before you factor in storage. Small scale or large scale storage is very expensive and introduces inefficiencies. For example one idea for large scale is by running pumps to pump water uphill into an artificial dam. The water is then used to run generators during the night. Now you need water, an artificial dam and there is massive amount of wasted energy for both the pumps and the generators used to convert that back to power.
You can avoid all that wasted energy and expense by using the grid as your "storage". For large scale you just put it in to be consumed and for the small scale homeowner you put energy into the grid when you have excess and take it out when you need it. That has expenses as well especially on the consumer end because the grid is not free and power companies are beginning to charge fees since the normal rate structure cannot accommodate this. It's still far cheaper and more efficient than batteries. Doing it this way however makes them reliant on base load generated by traditional fossil fuel, nuclear, and hydro.
In the short term future this is the only way these systems can ever be made cost competitive and I only say short term because you never know what the future holds. I doubt they will ever be anything but supplementary because they will be superseded by other tech like geo thermal which can operate like traditional power plant.
Last edited by thecoalman; 04-29-2014 at 03:25 AM..
How many panels, what square footage would they have to cover on the roof to make enough electricity to power- an air conditioner, a water heater, an electric range/oven, a clothes dryer, [all 220V] a refrigerator, microwave oven, TV, stereo, computer, vacuum cleaner, and all the INCANDESENT light bulbs?
And how many of my south side of house trees would I have to remove?
If you know what your average use is there is calculators available but if you have net metering in your state it really doesn't matter and you can just supplement. If you have the up front money between the tax breaks and the green credit you can have a pay back in as little as 7 or 8 years but that is only because someone else is paying for it.
FYI 240V is irrelevant, power consumption is determined by wattage. A 1500 watt electric heater uses the same amount of power and produces exactly the same amount of heat whether it's 240 or 120.
Amps * Volts = Watts
The advantage with higher voltage electric is the reduction in amps which allows for smaller electric wires. That's why overhead power lines are so high voltage.
Yes but that's not what you posted and these systems are not cost competitive even before you factor in storage. Small scale or large scale storage is very expensive and introduces inefficiencies. For example one idea for large scale is by running pumps to pump water uphill into an artificial dam. The water is then used to run generators during the night. Now you need water, an artificial dam and there is massive amount of wasted energy for both the pumps and the generators used to convert that back to power.
You can avoid all that wasted energy and expense by using the grid as your "storage". For large scale you just put it in to be consumed and for the small scale homeowner you put energy into the grid when you have excess and take it out when you need it. That has expenses as well especially on the consumer end because the grid is not free and power companies are beginning to charge fees since the normal rate structure cannot accommodate this. It's still far cheaper and more efficient than batteries. Doing it this way however makes them reliant on base load generated by traditional fossil fuel, nuclear, and hydro.
In the short term future this is the only way these systems can ever be made cost competitive and I only say short term because you never know what the future holds. I doubt they will ever be anything but supplementary because they will be superseded by other tech like geo thermal which can operate like traditional power plant.
Why do you guys always want to give a lecture that has little or nothing to do with the post you are supposedly responding to?
What I said is that "they generate power day and night using solar energy," (yes, solar radiation). Where in all that do you address anything i said that is "not what I posted?" You tried to deny the validity of my post using non-relevant nonsense.
Last edited by blktoptrvl; 04-29-2014 at 06:01 PM..
What I said is that "they generate power day and night using solar energy," (yes, solar radiation).
The only PV cells I'm aware of that could generate power at night was the ones in Spain where they were hooking up diesel generators to them to take take advantage of the generous feed in tariff. Yes, that actually happened.
This appears to be solar thermal and generally speaking that is problematic in colder climates, the generation capacity at night is the result of storage capacity and not actually generation.
Quote:
If the research team had hit their original density goals, the final stored power could be as much as double the amount achieved today. Kucharski claimed that the azobenzene could be stored in liquid form and charged in a closed-loop gravity-fed system. “It would also enable charging by flowing the material from a storage tank through a window or clear tube exposed to the sun and then to another storage tank, where the material would remain until it’s needed,”
This is basically what you are doing now with many thermal systems, it's nothing new, matter of fact the same thing is used in coal stokers and other solid fuel heating appliances to heat domestic hot water going back to the horse and wagon days. The difference here is they appear to have been able to improve the efficiency of the storage medium.
You tried to deny the validity of my post using non-relevant nonsense.
You first said this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by blktoptrvl
Solar plants make power day and night sunny and cloudy.
Then you changed it to this:
Quote:
You do realize that solar energy is stored for later use don't you?
Perhaps you misspoke or have slightly different definition of these words than me but make and store have two completely different definitions IMO.
Stored however certainly has no ambiguity and my reply was almost entirely devoted to the expensive nature of storage. How is that non relevant?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, that actually happened. 
