3 ms·
But if the price keeps falling for electricity generation, isn’t there some sort of break-even point where you overcome the increased distribution costs?
by jdauriemma 5y ago
But if the price keeps falling for electricity generation, isn’t there some sort of break-even point where you overcome the increased distribution costs?
- xyzzyz 5y agoThis is not about distribution. When sun is not shining, there is no solar energy to distribute. You can build as much solar as you want, but you won’t get any electricity from it during the night. Peak demand, however, is right after sunset, and only slowly peters out until midnight. Where are you going to get energy during that time? If you build enough wind all across the country, so that it is by itself enough to cover the peak demand even during low wind conditions, then it could work — but it’s cost prohibitive, and you wouldn’t then build any solar anyway (if wind was enough to cover peak demand in the evening, it would also be enough to cover demand during the day, no solar necessary). In practice, until cheap storage is invented, and as long as nuclear energy is eschewed, renewables will be paired up with fossil, and prices will stay up.
- ncmncm 5y agoCheap storage is already invented, many times over. But it needs to be built out. That is delayed in part because prices are falling so fast; waiting means you get it cheaper. But most storage techs are very cheap or free to operate, so any built today will stay in use.
- zdragnar 5y agoIf the sun isn't shining and there isn't sufficient buffered storage (batteries, etc) then even if the solar panels are a penny each, their kwh costs are infinite until the sun shines again. If you can cover 95% of the time but still need a natural gas power plant for the last 5%, you haven't saved any money except the cost of the natural gas itself. In the US, it is stupid cheap, so you haven't saved much at all.