Solar Is Now Cheaper Than Coal, Says India Energy Minister (climatechangenews.com) 314
An anonymous reader cites a report on Climate Change News: India is on track to soar past a goal to deploy more than 100 gigawatts of solar power by 2022, the country's energy minister Piyush Goyal said on Monday. Speaking at the release of a 15-point action plan for the country's renewable sector, Goyal said he was now considering looking at "something more" for the fast-growing solar sector. "I think a new coal plant would give you costlier power than a solar plant," he said. "Of course there are challenges of 24/7 power. We accept all of that -- but we have been able to come up with a solar-based long term vision that is not subsidy based." In the past financial year, nearly 20GW of solar capacity has been approved by the government, with a further 14GW planned through 2016 according to the Union Budget.More details here. "I met this man in Meghalaya, who has a solar set-up for his homestay. He mentioned that only the initial setting up costs you much," Deepika Gumaste, a travel writer told Slashdot. "But once you have set it up, the operating costs are not much and more importantly, the environmental costs also go down. Good on your pockets too in the long run." It is worth pointing out that India is currently among the handful of nations that is increasing its coal consumption, according to a Guardian report from late last year. Also see: India aims to become 100% electric vehicle nation by 2030.
But Still (Score:3, Insightful)
...a large majority of their population is shitting in the bushes.
Seems to me some priorities are a bit off.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What's the name for this fallacy again?
Re: (Score:2)
Europe was the same, some people had electricity while others had latrines.
Cheap and clean energy benefits everyone.
Re: (Score:3)
Cheap and clean energy benefits everyone.
Cheap, clean, dependable...
Pick two... I have not seen anything that says you can have all three, and that is the problem... it is the 800lb gorilla in the living room that no one wants to talk about...
Re:But Still (Score:5, Interesting)
Much of the population is shitting in the bushes due to cultural heritage. You can't simply build toilets and call the problem solved. There's years of teaching people how to act hygienically.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not the entire earth but the section around the bushes.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, it's good fertilizer. Used for centuries... also by The Martian.
Much better than the usual agricultural chemicals (which do poison the earth).
So, they can't have electricity until we train them to shit indoors? It's called imperialism.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you say that? Finding a lower cost of energy support an energy intensive infrastructure seems like they are the same goal.
Plumbing takes electricity to keep water pressure, in these small pips so they won't need to build giant aqueducts to keep all the water moving downhill.
Another nice thing about solar, is that it doesn't need large expensive plants. So they can be better distributed without a huge infrastructure.
Re: (Score:3)
As everyone knows, a government can't possibly address more than one issue at a time...
Re: (Score:2)
My home has a private well. When the power goes out, I will get 1 good flush (From what is in the tank). The faucets will have perhaps a few seconds of pre existing pressure in them.
Municipal Water Supply has backup energy from backup generators. Also its distance means it may not be in your black out area.
Re: (Score:2)
They also have water pumps around the city for normal usage. They've fitted all home water pipes with a long range radio that can give real time water usage from around the city. Th
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You need to get a storage tank for your water system. It has many benefits, including less wear and tear on your appliances and your well pump. The former is because they are manufactured with certain assumptions about pressure in the system. The latter is because pumps are designed to run for a period of time and you wear them out with constant short cycling, rather than doing fewer long cycles.
Re: (Score:3)
"Municipal Water Supply has backup energy from backup generators. "
and the pesky little fact that there are millions of gallons stored up in the air inside of water towers.
You do know that that is exactly what those are used for right? Emergency storage and to even out demand. in most cities they have at least 4 hours of storage up in the air.
Also most city water filtration plants have DUAl 7,200 volt lines coming in from two separate parts of the city as well as huge generators to keep running, but the
But not at night (Score:2, Insightful)
But not at night
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
With coal, you can make it night all the time [citylab.com].
Re: (Score:2)
I'm convinced that human beings don't really make this brain-dead comment. There is obviously some auto-repsponder software built into the ./ message system that does that, since even in jest, this sort of comment is too old and tired to repeat.
Human history is practically based on things where nature didn't co-operate and we told Nature to take a hike.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you charged your electric car during the day in which case it could give a few percent of it's storage back at night, with led lights, TVs etc you wouldn't need much.
Re: (Score:2)
Good thing we sleep at night! You lackwit!
More and more of the workforce is working at night. We live in a 24/7/365 economy now.
Re:But not at night (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure, if you ignore all the external costs of coal.
Re: (Score:3)
Or, to put it another way, you're willing to keep subsidizing, and likely at ever growing rates, the profits of the owners of fossil fuel stocks.
May not continue for the long-term (Score:5, Informative)
Solar may be in some contexts cheaper, but that may not continue for the long-term. Solar power experiences value deflation, where the more solar power there is, the less it is worth (because unlike conventional power sources, it all peaks at the same time). This can lead to serious limits on how much solar a given area is likely to have http://www.vox.com/2016/4/18/11415510/solar-power-costs-innovation [vox.com]. Either the cost per a panel needs to go down by a lot, or the storage and transmission costs need to improve by a lot. The last link includes an estimate that in order to really get solar to succeed one needs an approximate cost of around $0.25 per watt. If one improves batteries and transmission that may not be necessary, especially if we have enough other sources of power, such as wind, nuclear, hydroelectric (which unfortunately has probably gotten close to its peak in much of Europe and North America), tidal, and geothermal. Nuclear is going to definitely be a part of any long-term solution, but one has silly things now like Sweden trying to give up all fossil fuels at the same time they phase out nuclear power http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/sweden-first-fossil-fuel-free-country-in-the-world-a6684641.html [independent.co.uk] and they call that "green."
At least in most places, we're very far from where solar can be even without improved transmission and storage. In much of the US, you can get home solar and have it pay back in a few years. The solar panel cost guide is a good place to start http://www.solarpanelscostguide.com/ [solarpanelscostguide.com]. Or, if you want to help other people out while helping the environment you can donate to Everybody Solar http://www.everybodysolar.org/ [everybodysolar.org] which helps get solar panels for non-profits like schools, homeless shelters and science museums. Every little bit helps.
Re: (Score:2)
Except it doesn't peak everywhere at the same time. When it's dark in Connecticut, it could be still broad daylight in San Diego. Considering the fluctuation in power usage over the 24 hour day, I'm not sure having localized drops in power-generation is necessarily a bad thing.
Anyway, technology will increasingly make this a minor i
Re: (Score:2)
Except it doesn't peak everywhere at the same time. When it's dark in Connecticut, it could be still broad daylight in San Diego.
Right this is why transmission is so important: if one can transmit power efficiently then areas with excess power can transmit it elsewhere. Unfortunately, that's in practice really tough. Right now, the US has three major grids: East, West and Texas. In practice there's almost no interconnection between these grids. And Texas sometimes has more wind power than they can use in parts, but can't actually give it to the other grids. This leads to weird things like the cost of electricity in Texas briefly goin
Re: (Score:2)
That's very interesting, but it ignores the fact that newer natural gas plants can be flexible. They can ramp up production quickly and can be cost effective operating only 30% to 70% of the time. California uses natural gas plants for b
Re: (Score:3)
When it's dark in Connecticut, it could be still broad daylight in San Diego.
Yep, now explain how you plan to move the power from Connecticut to San Diego and I'll be a bit more impressed.
Please note the existing lack of national power grid between the two places and the transmission losses going that far.
Side note: There are many hours when it is dark in both places, or when it is snowing in Connecticut while cloudy in San Diego.
Re: (Score:2)
one needs an approximate cost of around $0.25 per watt
Just wondering where you got this number? I did a detail analysis about ten years ago along with simulations and real-world data and came up with the same number (actually I think it was $0.261 or something). I think that was to be competitive with hydro (the least expensive). Just out of curiosity, I'd like to see their methodology.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:May not continue for the long-term (Score:4, Insightful)
They are planning solar thermal, which works 24/7. Also, they plan to only sell electric vehicles eventually, and the purchase price of those is expected to pass petrol cars around 2025. There will be lots of used but perfectly good batteries for something by then too.
Your entire argument is based on old (even by today's standards) technology never improving.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Solar thermal involves storing heat in something like a molten salt tank and releasing that heat later to generate electricity when the sun is down. This wastes energy -- direct use of the heat would produce more electricity in total over a day cycle but peaking over a shorter period of time.
Most of the solar thermal plants that have been constructed to date use thousands of heliostat mirrors to concentrated light on a tower-mounted heat store. The tower has to be very strong to carry the mass of the heat s
Electric Cars (Score:2)
Yeah, if only we had some sort of distributed load shifting infrastructure in everybody's home... Maybe like 400,000 or so to kick things off.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or we need a smart grid that rewards people for conserving during times of high demand and low supply, and that creates the proper incentive for people to shift their energy-intensive tasks to times of high supply and low demand. The technology already exists, but the politics are taking their time to catch up.
Re: (Score:2)
(because unlike conventional power sources, it all peaks at the same time)
This isn't true if you have a geographically-large grid.
The Eastern-US grid stretches from eastern Montana to the Texas panhandle to Louisiana (bypassing most of Texas) to Florida to Maine.
Yes, sometimes it is sunny or cloudy across the entire area, but most of the time it's not.
The Western-US grid stretches basically from El Paso, Texas, north to Canada and west to the Pacific coast. Thanks to the mountains, there are large variations in weather across this region on any given day.
On the other hand, the "
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pole shift (Score:2)
I was just thinking what a shame it is that the Americas have a long north-south aspect ratio. If we could just rotate the planet axis so that the north-south axis of the Americas aligned with the east-west equator we could have rolling generation across dozens of time zones. I suppose other countries might object to this pole shift, though they might make nice ski resorts for us.
More seriously, it seems like europe and aisa do have more time zones all together. Do they share solar power across their bor
Re: (Score:2)
Europe's grid is pretty interconnected. But Europe is small. Central Asia is _much_ less connected.
Cost comparison mostly irrelevant (Score:4, Insightful)
China is building 210 new coal plants... (Score:2)
There have been mixed messages coming from China lately. The countryâ(TM)s carbon emissions may be declining more than a decade earlier than anticipated, thanks in part to reductions in coal power. And yet, China is planning 210 new coal-fired power plants despite existing overcapacity. Why?
http://bit.ly/1qCWXzc [bit.ly]
Is China doubling down on its coal
power bubble?
Over 210 new coal-fired power plant projects being permitted in China -
Version updated in Feb 2016
http://bit.ly/1Shj4Gf [bit.ly]
Question is and always has been STORAGE (Score:5, Insightful)
Not cheapness, but storage.
Have a cheap, easy way to store energy for days without leakage? You just became the next Rockefeller / Carnegie/ Vanderbilt / Gates.
Laptops, phones, electric cars, solar panels companies, and nuclear power companies (they can't transmit the power very far so the plants are uncomfortably close to cities) will beat your door down trying to shove money.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And as solar becomes more widespread, there will be plenty of money to be made in storage, so the techniques will be developed.
Ahh yes, the... "someone will invent the solution" line...
Where is our Fusion power again?
Just because there is a need for better storage doesn't mean it will be found, or found cheaply.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because there is a need for better storage doesn't mean it will be found, or found cheaply.
Here's a recent example. https://www.sciencedaily.com/r... [sciencedaily.com]
Sadoway and Ouchi stress that these particular chemical combinations are just the tip of the iceberg, which could represent a starting point for new approaches to devising battery formulations
This is not fusion. Solutions to storage are within reach, but they were never developed because there simply was no need. And in addition to these storage methods, there's still a lot we can with smart grids in combination with electric cars, and flexible manufacturing around cheap energy.
Re: (Score:2)
This is not fusion. Solutions to storage are within reach, but they were never developed because there simply was no need.
When I was 10 years old, Fusion was just 20 years away.
Now that I'm 40, Fusion is 30 years away.
You claim solutions to storage are within reach, great, call me when you have them. Until then, you can't plan for them.
And in addition to these storage methods, there's still a lot we can with smart grids in combination with electric cars, and flexible manufacturing around cheap energy.
Just because something is technically possible, doesn't mean it will happen. Our current power grid is old and there is little interest in changing it. Politics and economics cannot be ignored.
Re: (Score:2)
When I was 10 years old, Fusion was just 20 years away.
Now that I'm 40, Fusion is 30 years away.
That's because already-low funding dropped even more. See this chart formerly featured on /. [imgur.com] . "Fusion in 20 years" was never going to happen at actually funded levels, but might have with several proposed funding plans.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you think of a better incentive than making a shitload of money?
It's not like there needs to be a particularly high tech solution.
'Pumped gravel' looked interesting. There are many hills that would accommodate two gravel piles and a circular electrified train track.
And we don't have to wait for solar to drive daytime costs down. There is money to be made with the current on/off peak prices. All theoretical solar shingles would do is change the scheduling. There might be a bad few years with equal
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. I'm unsure of why people think this complaint is valid. it's almost like someone saying "Until cars can go 100mph, there's no use for cars, so we should stick with horse and buggy!"
Renewables are coming into grids in a staged fashion, and in the long run, you won't have the monochrome energy system many areas have (the coal-burning power station), you will have a variety of sources; solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, tidal, and along with better energy storage systems (like the "pumped" system
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about you, but most of the day the only power used here is what's required to keep the fridge cold and the occasional running of the furnace blower.
At night when all the residents are home is when peak power is used -- fridge takes more power because it gets opened a bunch, lots of lights on (most are LED now, but I can't stop the others from leaving every. damn. light. on), probably 2 TVs turned on, computers running, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not cheapness, but storage.
Actually, for a long time price was a very real issue. It's still a factor, but less and less as manufacturing and automation improve.
Have a cheap, easy way to store energy for days without leakage? You just became the next Rockefeller / Carnegie/ Vanderbilt / Gates.
I think the name you're looking for is Musk.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I think the name you're looking for is Musk.
The poster above you said "cheap"... nothing Musk is doing is "cheap"...
Those wall batteries? Yea, stupid crazy expensive... call me when a zero gets knocked off the price and then you'll have something.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We don't have any hills here... there aren't any hills for 500 miles... and where is all that water going to come from? Have you done the math on how high you need to lift the water and how much you need, to provide X power?
I did, about a year ago, and the numbers are just nuts.
It sounds great, and in theory it works fine, but it doesn't work at large scale in the real world.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think molten salt thermal storage is the other option I remember hearing talked about. Though that would of course work a lot better with a solar plant that does molten salt to begin with instead of PV cells.
India is great in announcements. (Score:5, Insightful)
100% Electric Vehicles by 2030? (Score:2)
Really? And where exactly is one to find that much raw material for batteries? REMs are not all that cheap, and as demand goes up, the fact that China controls 95% of the world market is going to bite them in the ass.
Solar is not cheaper, (Score:2)
It's not that Solar has become cheaper, but coal is being regulated out of existence.
Some plants have even shut down. If you followed along he law of supply and demand in high school you can see where prices would go.
But a lot more expensive than Natural Gas (Score:2)
Coal will be used for a few existing plants but Natural Gas is the cheap source of power today at least in the US. I am not sure about India
Re:Solar is not cheaper than coal (Score:5, Insightful)
Considering CO2 emissions, I'd say it's hard to find a dirtier energy source than coal. So no, it is not equivalent.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the scientific evidence backs up global warming, but this is slashdot, where idiots and Koch Brothers mouthpieces freely demonstrate their ignorance and/or malevolence.
But hey, prove me wrong, Mr. AC. Where is all the additional energy that increasing concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere going? Where is this magic energy sink that is removing all the additional energy being trapped in the lower atmosphere? Go on, let's hear all about it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Clouds are accounted for in all models, and recent research indicates that the amount of ice in clouds as opposed to water vapor means your much exaggerated albedo effect is even less pronounced.
Your fantasy is crumbling down. The universe doens't give a fuck about the price of gas or how that may hurt your feelings. Be a fucking adult, and not a pathetic child hiding his head and declaring "Nothing's wrong!"
Re: (Score:2)
And yes, there is some feedback loop. Higher surface temperatures will cause more clouds and thus a higher albedo (reflection) of the Earth, but only
Re: (Score:2)
Water vapor produces clouds that lower albedo, but it is itself a greenhouse gas that traps IR. It is, in fact, the dominant greenhouse gas.
In the climate models there are two feedback coefficients. CO2 to H20 vapor level and CO2 to Albedo. By manipulating those two coefficients you can make the model tell you anything you want it to tell you.
The additional greenhouse effect of CO2 alone is insignificant. The only way to tune the models is backcasting, which is tricky as we have no good, old data, or w
Re: (Score:3)
It is clear that it's a bad thing. It will increase ocean temperatures and alter ocean pH levels, causing massive changes to a food source that feeds hundreds of millions of people. It will shift rainbelts, rendering currently arable land far less useful to agriculture (or far more expensive to keep under cultivation), while taking marginal agricultural land completely out of the food supply. It will see a slow but steady inundation of coastal areas, again, effecting hundreds of millions of people. It is al
Re: (Score:3)
In what universe? Fossil fuels are heavily taxed already.
The Koch brothers' profit or profit margin doesn't change much if the US government imposes additional taxes on oil and
Re: (Score:2)
Well, considering the number of human beings already being affected by rising sea levels, I think you're wrong on that score, not to mention those who already being affected by changing precipitation patterns. And those in marginal economies are going to be the first to get hit very hard, and guess what, a lot of them will do what human beings have been doing for the entire history of genus Homo, getting up and moving, which will begin to hit more developed nations, and ultimately the First World, where you
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
FTFY
Re:Solar is not cheaper than coal (Score:4, Insightful)
When you consider that each has about the same environmental impact, one is not really cheaper than the other. You're just playing a game of whack-a-mole with the pollution.
With coal, you're polluting at the generation site.
And how! like the whole landscape is removed. and also when you burn it. Even if you manage to scub some of it you still got a lot of heavy metals to deal with. And then of course there's the CO2 released. Don't forget shipping it takes fuel as well.
With solar, you're polluting at the manufacturing site. But, make no mistake, growing silicon consumes a ton of energy, a ton of water,
What's a ton of energy? Could we perhaps get this energy from say, the sun? And the water, it's still water when you got done right? didn't do the old E=MC^2 vanishing act. You just borrowed it like rented beer. So yeah maybe this month you could not water your crops. That is an impact.
I don't doubt there's a toxic load from solar cells. I'd believe much of it is hidden unaccountable in China. But I'm not persuaded by your grab-ass cost benefit analysis. I'm also inclined to believe solar cell manufacture can over time become cleaner but how do we make coal much cleaner.
Real issues with wind and solar (Score:4, Interesting)
NREL forecasts that if we build a modern grid and implement smart metering then we can potentially beat the problems of regional and daily variability in Solar and wind. But short of that these will cap the amount of this that can be deployed in the intial stages.
If you don't do that then you can run into a problem where you need to have energy sources spooled up but not producing to cover short falls, expected and unplanned.
Thus what we need is a breadbasket of many different renewable energies including geothermal, ocean, hydro. We may need things like the thermal-solar plants not just for their own power production but as batteries to store energy from PV solar and wind.
If we just keep pushing the thread on the cheapest possible renewables (PV solar and wind) we will be building a fragile system.
Germany discovered that it's tax incentive system didn't adequately take those effects into account. As a result it's actually shifting from nuke and natural gas to coal in a race to the bottom to have the cheapest form of neccessary backup power. It appears that they may stall out on further deployment until they can remedy the right balance.
the US has the advantage of a much larger mass and many time zones (not to mention more sun-- germany is compared to alaska). Thus we can buffer across this range if we build the grids. And smart metering can be more effective if we can use it across many regions as well. Smart metering offfers an approach to buying time and smoothing surge demands to allow other systems to spool up.
So the risk we face with something like a carbon tax or other flat incentives for solar and wind is that there's no inherent balancing of the funding across the breadbasket of sources, many of which might not be competitive in terms of KW/hr.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Most smart meter plans don't have you unable to use appliances at some times of day but rather if you want, you have to pay more. Not the same thing.
That works when you have coal and natural gas as your backup power source.
It doesn't if you go to the all wind/solar dream of some people. It has been suggested over and over that a "Smart Grid 2.0" would be able to turn your appliances on and off as power demand ebbed and flowed, which would probably be needed based on a wind/solar only grid.
It is also worth noting that I pay 10 cents per KWh now and I can use my stuff any time of the day or night, the price is the same. You're suggesting that I switch t
Re: (Score:3)
Large grids pretty much buffer local variations out.
Perhaps, but only if the grids are redesigned and rebuilt. Even then the grids aren't as large as you might think.
Texas is largely on its own grid, and likes it that way. We have stable power prices, stable power delivery, and don't have to deal with other state government whims.
Your water heater can pause for a while and pocket a rebate to boot.
That would require a new hot water heater, and it would require that I WANT it to pause. We have 2 hot water tanks, 50 gallons each, because this is a large house with 4 bathrooms and 5 people. At times, we'll have all 4 showers
Re: (Score:2)
Your wife couldn't accommodate a 'start later' button on the dishwasher? It's not like people don't know the difference between dinner and dishwasher runs.
The Germans are switching away from natural gas to avoid funding the Russians. Also of mostly German descent, cousins are honest with me. There is still much tension between Germany and Russia. Paying $0.50 kwh is a price they figure they can afford to pay, already manufacturing successfully with higher costs. Better then being beholding to Russia, muc
Re: (Score:3)
Your wife couldn't accommodate a 'start later' button on the dishwasher?
Of course she could, she could also hand wash them...
Why should she have to?
It is also worth noting that we do an average of 2 dishwasher loads a day, on the weekend sometimes 3 loads.
You can't timeshift them all, she often does the dishes during the day so they are clean when the kids get home.
There is still much tension between Germany and Russia.
Yes, completely unrelated issue (or maybe not)... This is why Germany should have nuclear weapons, it removes Russia from being a threat while not having to depend on other nations (America) to come to their defense
Re: (Score:2)
A 'Start later' button doesn't imply no 'Start now' button. Most houses are good with one load/day and don't even fill that.
Paraphrasing a friend during the 1980s: 'Star wars is a good idea because it makes the Russians shit themselves. you want to make the Russians really shit? Send the Germans a 1000 tons of Steel and a ton of weapons grade plutonium.'
Re:Solar is not cheaper than coal (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I think you dropped this.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Solar is not cheaper than coal (Score:5, Insightful)
With solar, you're polluting at the manufacturing site.
You don't have to.
But, make no mistake, growing silicon consumes a ton of energy
Cost of silicon is now 40 cents per Watt peak. The cost of the energy to grow the silicon is included in that.
and then by the time you mine enough lithium to keep the country going at night,
You wouldn't use lithium for large scale static batteries, but cheap molten salt.
Re: (Score:2)
Cost of silicon is now 40 cents per Watt peak. The cost of the energy to grow the silicon is included in that.
Thanks for that very informative number. Help me understand what that means as it strikes me as too low.
Suppose electricity from a wall plug is 10 cents/KWHr and I could replace that with rooftop at 40cents/Watt (peak) how long would it take me to ammortize that fixed cost?
40cents/W = $400/KW
so it seems like in 4000 hours I wold have paid for my panel. Now that's 4000 peak hours. Lets say we get about 4 peak hours per day. That would be then 1000 days or a little under 3 years to pay for it. And that i
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for that very informative number. Help me understand what that means as it strikes me as too low.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/... [bloomberg.com] Of course, in real life, you also need to pay for the rooftop installation, and the power inverters for your grid hookup.
Re: (Score:3)
And the panels, the cost of SI is the cost of the cells in the panels, not the bottom line price.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Get out FA reader. We don't like your kind.
Re: (Score:2)
so it seems like in 4000 hours I wold have paid for my panel. Now that's 4000 peak hours. Lets say we get about 4 peak hours per day. That would be then 1000 days or a little under 3 years to pay for it. And that ignores all the energy I would get outside those 4 hours, which presumably is probably about an equivalent amount all total.
This seems to be way faster payback than I would expect it to be.
Yep, you found the problem...
I also pay 10 cents per KWh and my payback period for putting solar on the roof is more than 15 years, and that is assuming net metering is guaranteed to stay for 15 years (which is not actually guaranteed)
The panels are indeed pretty cheap, at about a buck a watt, or less, depending on what you buy.
The panels could be FREE, and it still is only marginally worth doing, because of the cost of putting them on the roof, the inverter, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
I seriously doubt you're going to be easier on the environment than coal.
based on what facts?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That all sounds great, if most of them weren't propaganda pieces with little basis in reality.
For example:
India is on track to soar past a goal to deploy more than 100 gigawatts of solar power by 2022
Great, wonderful... maybe that'll power all the air conditioners that Indians generally don't have (but some do I suppose).
It will help with daytime peak power, and that's a good thing. But the assumption seems to be among many people that if they can do that, they can just go ahead and go all wind/solar.
---
What is missing is the big picture conversation. Lots of stories posted about specific detail
Re: (Score:2)
The changes required to hold global temps below 2c rise over 1800 are simply not going to happen, they are way, way too extreme.
Probably true. But maybe we can keep it below 3C rise, or 4C rise, while at the same time shifting away from finite fossil fuels. And you can't make a big step without starting with a smaller one.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably true. But maybe we can keep it below 3C rise, or 4C rise
I don't think we'll hold to 4c either, the numbers are what they are...
Pulling numbers from the climate scientists who have been warning us from years, what I see is that the proven reserves of coal, oil, and natural gas in the ground is now over 3 trillion tons worth of CO2. We can emit, give or take, half a trillion tons more CO2 and have a better than 50% chance to hold under 2 degrees C.
But those 3 trillion tons of CO2 are already accounted for on the balance sheets of the world, from Saudi Aramco to E
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They aren't, and most of those are old enough to be archived... actually, they all are...