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.
"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.
There are coal plants if 1000 or 2000 MW. The vast majority are 100 or 200 MW. NV has about 70,000,000 acres. Ten percent likely easily available. So 7,000,000 acres. At 7 acres per MW than NV can do about a 1,000,000 MWs...or about a 1000 gigawatts. Total US consumption is a little more than that.
It is of course more complicated...but the problem is not the generation capability. And it will get better.
There are coal plants if 1000 or 2000 MW. The vast majority are 100 or 200 MW. NV has about 70,000,000 acres. Ten percent likely easily available. So 7,000,000 acres. At 7 acres per MW than NV can do about a 1,000,000 MWs...or about a 1000 gigawatts. Total US consumption is a little more than that.
It is of course more complicated...but the problem is not the generation capability. And it will get better.
You also have all of Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, a good portion of SE California, and most likely the eastern halves of Oregon/Washington and maybe parts of Southern Idaho/Wyoming, along with some parts of Texas and maybe even the western edges of the Great Plains states that could put in a good amount of solar as well. Maybe not the the impressive amounts of the SW states, but that's almost the entire western half of the mainland, minus a few areas.
Of course, not all of Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah can be used for solar because of mountains and NA reservations. But a lot of it can be if there was an economic push for it.
The arguments against renewable cheap energy just continue to get weaker and weaker.. Like saying that solar peaks in the middle of the day, right about the time that peak demand for power arrives. Several countries in Europe are currently getting more than 75% of their power from renewable sources and are on track to be 100% powered in the next few years.
This is an issue that really bugs me. The U.S. could have been the world leader and instead we let the coal and oil companies convince the public that it can't be done, too expensive, our grid can't handle it, etc. etc. etc.
My house is grid tied and has provided 80-90% of my power needs. If I didn't have 3 kids that turn every possible device in the house that uses electricity, I wouldn't pay an electric bill.
And my system is old and outdated. Put the panels up in 2009. I could be getting another 30%+ if I did it today.
No doubt that renewables are the way forward. But like most technological innovations, it is going to change the utility industry in ways which are not expected and it certainly will not look anything like it is today.
My own bet - and I could be completely wrong - is that battery technology and the ability to store renewable generated power is going to be the game changer.
The arguments against renewable cheap energy just continue to get weaker and weaker.. Like saying that solar peaks in the middle of the day, right about the time that peak demand for power arrives. Several countries in Europe are currently getting more than 75% of their power from renewable sources and are on track to be 100% powered in the next few years.
This is an issue that really bugs me. The U.S. could have been the world leader and instead we let the coal and oil companies convince the public that it can't be done, too expensive, our grid can't handle it, etc. etc. etc.
My house is grid tied and has provided 80-90% of my power needs. If I didn't have 3 kids that turn every possible device in the house that uses electricity, I wouldn't pay an electric bill.
And my system is old and outdated. Put the panels up in 2009. I could be getting another 30%+ if I did it today.
Yeah here in Tucson everyone could have solar panels and never pay an electric bill again. Of course, the powers that be would never let it happen. Unless they could find a way to profit off it. If there was a way to improve the battery/storage system of solar, the Southwest could sell the electricity and we could become the new energy capital over Texas. We could produce enough to support places that aren't nearly as sunny as us on top of ourselves.
Roof top solar profits are paid by the American tax payer, and rate payers of the local electric utility. If you cut both of those out roof top solar will end. My electric utility is about to add a flat rate cost to solar customers which will effectively end lease solar in AZ. This is where most of the business was coming from zero down 20 year lease home owner pays about half the electricity cost.
The Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP) is a “NowGen” carbon capture facility that will incorporate CCS technology in a first-of-a-kind commercial power plant. TCEP will capture ninety percent (90%) of its carbon – more carbon than any power plant of commercial scale yet operating anywhere in the world. As a result, TCEP’s carbon emissions will be far lower than those of any existing fossil-fueled power plant.
This can run at night which solar can't obvsouly and wind is unpredictable
Roof top solar profits are paid by the American tax payer, and rate payers of the local electric utility. If you cut both of those out roof top solar will end. My electric utility is about to add a flat rate cost to solar customers which will effectively end lease solar in AZ. This is where most of the business was coming from zero down 20 year lease home owner pays about half the electricity cost.
The Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP) is a “NowGen” carbon capture facility that will incorporate CCS technology in a first-of-a-kind commercial power plant. TCEP will capture ninety percent (90%) of its carbon – more carbon than any power plant of commercial scale yet operating anywhere in the world. As a result, TCEP’s carbon emissions will be far lower than those of any existing fossil-fueled power plant.
This can run at night which solar can't obvsouly and wind is unpredictable
Nonsense. Net metering is a rational way to do it in a whole mess of dimensions. But there are others.
No particular reason you would expect a buyer who uses some occasional energy to pay some premium. So We go around and and work the technology the other way. Basically the solar panel user provides his own energy until he needs more than is available from his system. He then cuts over off the local utility.
Inefficent and cumbersome for some technical reasons but perfectly doable.
And then we require that the local utility transfer power from other sources in to individual customers. That allows the guy with solar array to provide what he can and then buy the rest from the low bidder. And the local untility gets a fee for delievering the power.
The battle here is between the utility and the individual customer. The utility is not remotely interesting in paying a fair fee for power provided. They simply want to buy power from the roof tops dirt cheap. In LA it is clear that the power company claims peak power is worth four or five times as much as off peak. But the utility here proposes to buy it for half the average long term rate. Someone crazy?
Roof top solar profits are paid by the American tax payer, and rate payers of the local electric utility.
A common problem with generalized sweeping statements is that they are usually wrong.
My solar panels were paid by me. No tax-payer paid for my solar panels.
Rate-payers of my local PoCo have not paid a single penny for my solar panels.
Every state is different. How your state does things is different from how my state does things. Around here the governor just shot down a bill to charge rate-payers an extra fee to subsidize a select group of net-metering fools. It sounds like your state already has this kind of extra rate-payer fee, too bad.
Quote:
... If you cut both of those out roof top solar will end.
Hold on.
We do not have either of those fees in this state, yet we still have off-grid homes.
We want electricity for our homes. No state legislative policy is going to change that.
Yep and most utilities are not going to invest money in a plant to only run half the time.
You said it better than I did. Thus I repped thie post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Wind blows most at night during off peak hours...
No. Most wind results in local variations in the sun's heating the ground and therefore is strongest during the day, to the extent there is a diurnal difference.
No. Most wind results in local variations in the sun's heating the ground and therefore is strongest during the day, to the extent there is a diurnal difference.
You got me there, I read the information incorrectly.
Care to address the other things I said?
Last edited by dv1033; 07-23-2016 at 10:23 PM..
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.
