5 ms·

I'm the only person I know who doesn't like solar power. The lifespan of panels and batteries are both too limited - they will require complete replacement at t

I'm the only person I know who doesn't like solar power. The lifespan of panels and batteries are both too limited - they will require complete replacement at too high a frequency for a society. In contrast, I'd like to see wind turbines continue to evolve - so that they can be maintained over many lifetimes. Seems like a no-brainer -- but I'm the only one I ever hear saying that.

philipkglass 9y ago
Solar modules have no moving parts to fail or maintain. Their median and p90 lifetimes easily surpass the same measures for mechanically complex wind turbines. And if you are more interested in future possibilities than the current state of things, I believe that judicious materials selection and design to minimize thermal-electrical fatigue can produce modules with median working lifetimes in excess of 50 years.
pjc50 9y ago
This is definitely a "yes and" situation. Both are viable and useful, and somewhat complementary. Both the panels and the turbines have a lifespan of 20-25 years. Turbines also have a range of nasty mechanical failure modes. Batteries are still not feasible for mass grid deployment or as a replacement for backup gas.
epistasis 9y ago
>they will require complete replacement at too high a frequency for a society. This is a completely subjective and vague statement. However if we start to quantify it with economics costs, it turns out to be wrong. The lifetime cost of solar is very cheap. And the lifetime of turbines is not a huge amount longer than PV panels.
stephengillie 9y ago
Solar doesn't work as well in WA State as in other areas. For that reason, we've been using hydroelectric for decades.
- techsupporter 9y ago
  A common misconception. Solar does work in Washington, both halves of it, and a lot of people are installing it here. We get more sun than solar-happy Germany and it is more efficient here than in sunny-but-hot Phoenix because cooler panels work better. Hydro is cheap and plentiful and built before solar systems were even technically feasible. (FWIW, "we" is also a misnomer. PSE gets the majority of its power from coal and natural gas[3], while Seattle City Light is overwhelmingly hydro[4], as is Snohomish PUD[5].) 0 - http://www.seattle.gov/light/solarenergy/ http://www.seattle.gov/light/solarenergy/ 1 - http://www.pugetsoundsolar.com/solar-in-seattle.html http://www.pugetsoundsolar.com/solar-in-seattle.html 2 - http://www.seattlepi.com/realestate/article/Solar-power-a-harder-sell-in-Seattle-1840996.php http://www.seattlepi.com/realestate/article/Solar-power-a-ha... (Pointing out that the relative low cost of power means the payback for solar is longer, not that it is less efficient) 3 - https://www.pse.com/aboutpse/EnergySupply/Pages/Electric-Supply.aspx https://www.pse.com/aboutpse/EnergySupply/Pages/Electric-Sup... 4 - http://www.seattle.gov/light/FuelMix/ http://www.seattle.gov/light/FuelMix/ 5 - http://www.snopud.com/PowerSupply.ashx?p=1105 http://www.snopud.com/PowerSupply.ashx?p=1105
wongarsu 9y ago
Lifespans of panels and batteries is limited, but so is the lifetime of everything else. Current panels are designed for ~15-20 years lifetime. Wind turbines are designed for 20 years lifetime. Coal power plants are designed for 30 years lifetime. Of course solar panels pretty much need to be completely replaced while wind turbines and coal plants can be refurbished, but isn't that mainly because solar panels require next to no permanent structures? Refurbishing wind turbines is a thing because support infrastructure and the towers are already standing. Refurbishing coal plants is a thing because they are very complex and buildings are expensive. Solar power consists of next to nothing except the panels, the batteries and a few cables.
- cesarb 9y ago
  > Solar power consists of next to nothing except the panels, the batteries and a few cables. You forgot the inverter, the supports, and optionally the solar tracker. Also, batteries are optional; many installations, including in the megawatt range, don't have them. In fact, it's better to treat battery storage as something completely separate from solar power, since it can also be used with wind, or even with other sources like thermal.
  - wongarsu 9y ago
    >You forgot the inverter, the supports, and optionally the solar tracker That's why I said "next to nothing", not "nothing". You're right that in a grid-connected setup you won't have batteries in the setup. Ideally, you don't want batteries anywhere in the grid and instead do pumped hydroelectric storage, but that's not possible everywhere.
toephu2 9y ago
Nothing lasts forever. How many products can you name that last 30+ years w/ minimal maintence?
corford 9y ago
Slightly OT but until about 4 hours ago I was all in on solar, wind, modern battery tech, tesla etc. Having just watched Cowspiracy and What the Health back to back on Netflix I'm going to become a vegan and stop getting excited about anything else Without drastically reducing animal agriculture, all other efforts at global sustainability seem almost pointless (and rather expensive, both in terms of capital and time).
- lovemenot 9y ago
  Beware of the shiny new idea syndrome. I don't doubt your sincerity, but positive effects of our actions are best measured in decades of commitment. Being all-in on renewables, then losing interest in favour of something better does not bode well imho.
  - corford 9y ago
    Stop getting excited and not doing are two different things :) Of course I'll continue recycling, using renewables and making sensible transportation choices. There's no negative with any of that, so why not. It's just hard to get excited about the impact of it all when one considers the sheer numbers behind animal agriculture. Should also note: both films are very persuasive - plan to spend a few weeks now fact checking before I dive in to a vegan existence.
    - lovemenot 9y ago
      There are substantial personal negatives with such actions. They tend to accumulate over time. Which is not to say don't do any of this, rather I wish to warn you about the difference between sprints and marathons. Be prepared for the latter, unless you are just following a fad.

philipkglass 9y ago

Solar modules have no moving parts to fail or maintain. Their median and p90 lifetimes easily surpass the same measures for mechanically complex wind turbines. And if you are more interested in future possibilities than the current state of things, I believe that judicious materials selection and design to minimize thermal-electrical fatigue can produce modules with median working lifetimes in excess of 50 years.

pjc50 9y ago

This is definitely a "yes and" situation. Both are viable and useful, and somewhat complementary. Both the panels and the turbines have a lifespan of 20-25 years. Turbines also have a range of nasty mechanical failure modes. Batteries are still not feasible for mass grid deployment or as a replacement for backup gas.

epistasis 9y ago

>they will require complete replacement at too high a frequency for a society. This is a completely subjective and vague statement. However if we start to quantify it with economics costs, it turns out to be wrong. The lifetime cost of solar is very cheap. And the lifetime of turbines is not a huge amount longer than PV panels.

stephengillie 9y ago

Solar doesn't work as well in WA State as in other areas. For that reason, we've been using hydroelectric for decades.

techsupporter 9y ago
A common misconception. Solar does work in Washington, both halves of it, and a lot of people are installing it here. We get more sun than solar-happy Germany and it is more efficient here than in sunny-but-hot Phoenix because cooler panels work better. Hydro is cheap and plentiful and built before solar systems were even technically feasible. (FWIW, "we" is also a misnomer. PSE gets the majority of its power from coal and natural gas[3], while Seattle City Light is overwhelmingly hydro[4], as is Snohomish PUD[5].) 0 - http://www.seattle.gov/light/solarenergy/ http://www.seattle.gov/light/solarenergy/ 1 - http://www.pugetsoundsolar.com/solar-in-seattle.html http://www.pugetsoundsolar.com/solar-in-seattle.html 2 - http://www.seattlepi.com/realestate/article/Solar-power-a-harder-sell-in-Seattle-1840996.php http://www.seattlepi.com/realestate/article/Solar-power-a-ha... (Pointing out that the relative low cost of power means the payback for solar is longer, not that it is less efficient) 3 - https://www.pse.com/aboutpse/EnergySupply/Pages/Electric-Supply.aspx https://www.pse.com/aboutpse/EnergySupply/Pages/Electric-Sup... 4 - http://www.seattle.gov/light/FuelMix/ http://www.seattle.gov/light/FuelMix/ 5 - http://www.snopud.com/PowerSupply.ashx?p=1105 http://www.snopud.com/PowerSupply.ashx?p=1105

wongarsu 9y ago

Lifespans of panels and batteries is limited, but so is the lifetime of everything else. Current panels are designed for ~15-20 years lifetime. Wind turbines are designed for 20 years lifetime. Coal power plants are designed for 30 years lifetime. Of course solar panels pretty much need to be completely replaced while wind turbines and coal plants can be refurbished, but isn't that mainly because solar panels require next to no permanent structures? Refurbishing wind turbines is a thing because support infrastructure and the towers are already standing. Refurbishing coal plants is a thing because they are very complex and buildings are expensive. Solar power consists of next to nothing except the panels, the batteries and a few cables.

cesarb 9y ago
> Solar power consists of next to nothing except the panels, the batteries and a few cables. You forgot the inverter, the supports, and optionally the solar tracker. Also, batteries are optional; many installations, including in the megawatt range, don't have them. In fact, it's better to treat battery storage as something completely separate from solar power, since it can also be used with wind, or even with other sources like thermal.
- wongarsu 9y ago
  >You forgot the inverter, the supports, and optionally the solar tracker That's why I said "next to nothing", not "nothing". You're right that in a grid-connected setup you won't have batteries in the setup. Ideally, you don't want batteries anywhere in the grid and instead do pumped hydroelectric storage, but that's not possible everywhere.

toephu2 9y ago

Nothing lasts forever. How many products can you name that last 30+ years w/ minimal maintence?

corford 9y ago

Slightly OT but until about 4 hours ago I was all in on solar, wind, modern battery tech, tesla etc. Having just watched Cowspiracy and What the Health back to back on Netflix I'm going to become a vegan and stop getting excited about anything else Without drastically reducing animal agriculture, all other efforts at global sustainability seem almost pointless (and rather expensive, both in terms of capital and time).

lovemenot 9y ago
Beware of the shiny new idea syndrome. I don't doubt your sincerity, but positive effects of our actions are best measured in decades of commitment. Being all-in on renewables, then losing interest in favour of something better does not bode well imho.
- corford 9y ago
  Stop getting excited and not doing are two different things :) Of course I'll continue recycling, using renewables and making sensible transportation choices. There's no negative with any of that, so why not. It's just hard to get excited about the impact of it all when one considers the sheer numbers behind animal agriculture. Should also note: both films are very persuasive - plan to spend a few weeks now fact checking before I dive in to a vegan existence.
  - lovemenot 9y ago
    There are substantial personal negatives with such actions. They tend to accumulate over time. Which is not to say don't do any of this, rather I wish to warn you about the difference between sprints and marathons. Be prepared for the latter, unless you are just following a fad.