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.
Yep and most utilities are not going to invest money in a plant to only run half the time.
Of course they will. Utility scale PV solar has now reached the point that it can compete directly with the operational cost of natural gas. At this point the utility will simply use PV solar when available and in as much quantity as it is available idling the gas plants. It may well be rational to completely equal the fossil fuel capability though you still maintain the capability of turning it on when the need arises.
As the technology improves and cost drops it may well become viable to create hydrogen as well as electricity. At this point you would have both mobile and storage capability.
As to subsidies understand what happened to Solyndra. They were bulldozed by subsidies from China to its solar PV suppliers. And the Chinese subsidies have been very effective. China effectively controls the industry. Locally we get to install Chinese made gear.
Not all bad. We are now reaching prices that will enable full use of solar. Basically as it becomes cheaper than the variable cost of gas you use all you can when you can.
I read an interesting article and wind. It showed that one limitation is that wind power comes when it wants to not when you need it. The cherry picked graph show a peek output event happening at minimum consumption. Ramping up and down N plants is costly, coal is a bit more flexible, natural gas in gas turbines has the fastest response time. But gas turbines is the most costly fossil fuel option.
Without a continent way to store the power renewables aren't that nice an option. For home use solar is nice but you need batteries. Solar hot water can be done passive without very much cost at least in the summertime.
It's not surprising you left out the role of government.
Additionally, I'm still wanting to know if you favor hidden taxes on gas or if you prefer the taxes are visible by just a visible collection at the pump.
The role of government was mentioned as the "I" and was the result of being lobbied.
So you want the people rather than the corporations paying the taxes for gas while they continue to get subsidies?
"For direct land-use requirements, the capacity-weighted average is 7.3 acre/MWac, with 40% of power plants within 6 and 8 acres/MWac. Other published estimates of solar direct land use generally fall within these ranges. "
I don't pretend to understand all of the report, but 7.3 acres/MW means, to replace a large coal fired plant of 1000MW capacity, it will take 7300 acres of land. I think that may be a problem.
free radical hydrocarbons, O3, NOx, water vapor to make the chemistry work, particulates to act as a reaction surface, and UV to pump the chemical reactions.
Absent from the list is CO2. Chemically stable and not reactive.
Yet, there is a lot of smog in developing countries and even a bit still in America. Lower emissions and you lower pollution and mitigate adding more greenhouse gases. Therefore, lowering co2 also lowers immediate effects of air pollution like smog. Understand what is going on?
the issue with wind is it is unreliable to a greater extent than any other renewable (at least in most parts of the US), Hydro, solar etc. Load leveling is the largest issues for overland windfarms, while places like the North Sea and Martha's Vineyard Sound are shallow waters and consistent winds, geographically, wind is not really great for being the backbone of the Power grid the "on March 23rd" part is sort of the issue with wind.
For wind you don't need strong wind, you need consistent wind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianEcon
I read an interesting article and wind. It showed that one limitation is that wind power comes when it wants to not when you need it. The cherry picked graph show a peek output event happening at minimum consumption. Ramping up and down N plants is costly, coal is a bit more flexible, natural gas in gas turbines has the fastest response time. But gas turbines is the most costly fossil fuel option.
Without a continent way to store the power renewables aren't that nice an option. For home use solar is nice but you need batteries. Solar hot water can be done passive without very much cost at least in the summertime.
Wind blows most at night during off peak hours and solar produces the most energy during the peak energy use. Efficiency gains are being made using big data to analysis wind and solar activity and to predict it.
Renewable energy implementation is just really getting started.
Let's be honest. Renewables are pretty much feel-good solutions that are not adequate technologies to fill our power requirements. As we start putting millions of electric cars on our roads, power needs are only going to grow more quickly.
Groups have latched onto green energy because they know its easy to exploit. These companies suck in billions in subsidies and some have already dried up and blown away. Being green companies give them a shield to deflect criticism -- they're in it for the money as much as Exxon or BP, but they get a pass for being green, regardless that they really don't contribute any significant amount of power to the grid.
They will always be at best, supplemental energy sources. I'm not saying we shouldn't support them (I'd love to have solar on my house if it financially made sense), but they're hardly the eco-friendly good guys they market themselves as.
Rather than pouring money into these dead-end technologies, we should be funding research on exciting new ones like Thorium, which can theoretically yield as much power as a nuclear plant but without the risk of meltdown and the dangerous radioactive byproduct. Other countries have started building Thorium reactors to see if the tech is viable, but we're too busy funding windmills that kill thousands of birds and make bats' lungs explode if they get too close.
My husband has a volt which he plugs into our normal electrical outlet in the garage every day. Our electric bill has increased very little. He can drive for probably over 300 miles without filling the gas tank. Nothing wrong with that.
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.
