4 ms·

Not many places to build solar panels in Japan. They tried building on mountain faces but shoddy construction by yakuza linked companies lead to landslides[0]

Not many places to build solar panels in Japan. They tried building on mountain faces but shoddy construction by yakuza linked companies lead to landslides[0] and many dead people a couple of years ago. For the record, I live in a remote mountainous (snowy) region and have panels generating 10kw on my roof. It generates really well 8 months out of the year. 2 months of snow and another couple of months for the rainy season and I’m still generating more than I use in a year. If the govt is willing to reintroduce subsidies and raise the fees in tariffs, a lot more people would be willing to install them. 0: https://m.energytrend.com/news/20210810-22918.html https://m.energytrend.com/news/20210810-22918.html

datameta 3y ago
What about off-shore solar farms? These couldn't trigger the same NIMBY response (which I'm not sure the Japanese good-for-society mindset would have). Some problems would be sea spray corrosion, but that could be obviated by building them high enough. If that is a problem for visual environment preservation, they could be just over the horizon, and all linked to one main power transmission cable.
dragontamer 3y ago
> I’m still generating more than I use in a year But you really depend on the grid for energy storage it seems. There is no technology available to consumers that can load shift and/or store energy for 2 months. In practice, this means you waste your excess electricity (or perhaps, sell it to the grid so that someone else can use it), but then still rely upon Natural Gas peakers for those other two months. > If the govt is willing to reintroduce subsidies and raise the fees in tariffs, a lot more people would be willing to install them. More solar in this scenario means that everyone involved runs out of electricity in those 2 months. A degree of the grid can be solar, but not everybody. We should get as many people on solar as is reasonable, but energy storage (especially on the scale of months) simply is science fiction. Back in the real world, there will be 2 months+ of fossil fuels to support the lifestyle you've chosen. It's better than 12 months of fossil fuels, but we aren't at a technological level where we can ignore the natural gas plants quite yet. But we can mitigate their use.
- galleywest200 3y ago
  > Back in the real world, there will be 2 months+ of fossil fuels to support the lifestyle you've chosen. Nuclear, hydroelectric, etc. Lots of places do not get a majority of their electricity from fossil fuels. Washington (and Canada) use a ton of hydro power. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=WA https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=WA
  - dandy23 3y ago
    And you can pump water up the mountain using solar in the day and use it in the night and on rainy days.
    - dragontamer 3y ago
      Yes, pumped Hydro is good. But in practice, seems to only store energy for "days", not "months". Furthermore, water restrictions (especially in the West) force the dams to release water even when electricity isn't needed. Because people need water to drink. A dam can serve multiple masters... but one of those masters will take priority. In most cases, water-rights will take priority over energy storage. That is to say: we can't store energy reliably in dams that are being used for water rights management. We can release water _and_ generate electricity, but the "choice" as to water rights management vs energy storage is contradictory. Storing energy longer means "not releasing water". While serving the water/drinking needs of the downstream communities means "releasing the water".
      - viraptor 3y ago
        Also during long persistent rain, the higher level may be already full and you can't release water from it without causing (even more) flooding.
      - ricardobeat 3y ago
        Do you have an example of a place where that is a significant issue? The upstream flow is the same as it was before a dam is built. You’d imagine this would only become a problem if nearly the entire flow was being consumed, which is unthinkable.

datameta 3y ago

What about off-shore solar farms? These couldn't trigger the same NIMBY response (which I'm not sure the Japanese good-for-society mindset would have). Some problems would be sea spray corrosion, but that could be obviated by building them high enough. If that is a problem for visual environment preservation, they could be just over the horizon, and all linked to one main power transmission cable.

dragontamer 3y ago

> I’m still generating more than I use in a year But you really depend on the grid for energy storage it seems. There is no technology available to consumers that can load shift and/or store energy for 2 months. In practice, this means you waste your excess electricity (or perhaps, sell it to the grid so that someone else can use it), but then still rely upon Natural Gas peakers for those other two months. > If the govt is willing to reintroduce subsidies and raise the fees in tariffs, a lot more people would be willing to install them. More solar in this scenario means that everyone involved runs out of electricity in those 2 months. A degree of the grid can be solar, but not everybody. We should get as many people on solar as is reasonable, but energy storage (especially on the scale of months) simply is science fiction. Back in the real world, there will be 2 months+ of fossil fuels to support the lifestyle you've chosen. It's better than 12 months of fossil fuels, but we aren't at a technological level where we can ignore the natural gas plants quite yet. But we can mitigate their use.

galleywest200 3y ago
> Back in the real world, there will be 2 months+ of fossil fuels to support the lifestyle you've chosen. Nuclear, hydroelectric, etc. Lots of places do not get a majority of their electricity from fossil fuels. Washington (and Canada) use a ton of hydro power. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=WA https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=WA
- dandy23 3y ago
  And you can pump water up the mountain using solar in the day and use it in the night and on rainy days.
  - dragontamer 3y ago
    Yes, pumped Hydro is good. But in practice, seems to only store energy for "days", not "months". Furthermore, water restrictions (especially in the West) force the dams to release water even when electricity isn't needed. Because people need water to drink. A dam can serve multiple masters... but one of those masters will take priority. In most cases, water-rights will take priority over energy storage. That is to say: we can't store energy reliably in dams that are being used for water rights management. We can release water _and_ generate electricity, but the "choice" as to water rights management vs energy storage is contradictory. Storing energy longer means "not releasing water". While serving the water/drinking needs of the downstream communities means "releasing the water".
    - viraptor 3y ago
      Also during long persistent rain, the higher level may be already full and you can't release water from it without causing (even more) flooding.
    - ricardobeat 3y ago
      Do you have an example of a place where that is a significant issue? The upstream flow is the same as it was before a dam is built. You’d imagine this would only become a problem if nearly the entire flow was being consumed, which is unthinkable.