4 ms·

Fascinating how the 2008 book estimates a maximum renewable generation of 18 kWh per day per person, of which solar PV generating a maximum of 2 kWh per day per

Fascinating how the 2008 book estimates a maximum renewable generation of 18 kWh per day per person, of which solar PV generating a maximum of 2 kWh per day per person at relatively high cost. Fast forward to 2023 and you can easily generate a yearly average of 2 kWh per day from a single 550W panel in most of the US - and the panel costs under $200 (!) and if you install an actual house setup, more than 1 panel, you can very doably generate an average of >18 kWh per day. It's actually incredible how fast the tech has changed, when you look back!

jillesvangurp 3y ago
Some people actually saw this coming. The author fell in the trap of assuming nothing would change or improve. Which is interesting as a thought experiment but otherwise a bit flawed for making any kind of projections. There's a reason we have had so much progress in the last fifteen years: fifteen years ago, investments in this area had been ramping up for a while already. Those investors were making calculated bets on things improving massively. And they weren't wrong. There are some good reasons to continue to be optimistic about the next 27 years (until 2050). That's almost twice the amount of time since the original article from 2008. I expect grid storage is going to be massively successful as prices drop. There are a lot of different solutions emerging currently; many of which are not dependent on any scarce resources. Then learning effects applied to solar and wind should result in more cost reductions. Finally, industrial use of energy is likely to start changing as well. Industrial heating is a big topic with lots of possible solutions.
alextingle 3y ago
The book is about the UK, not the US. The UK has much, much less solar potential than the US. The southern most point of Great Britain is further north than the northern most point of the contiguous USA. And it's really, really rainy here too.
- owenversteeg 3y ago
  I'm very aware, I live on a boat in the Netherlands part of the year and it is off-grid, powered by solar :) You can generate a yearly average of 1.6 kWh per day in London from that single 550W panel, which is only 20% less than the 2 kWh per day I mentioned for the US. As I mentioned the panel is only $200 so if you need more power you can simply put up a few more. Also, obviously, there is a significant range depending on location in both the UK and the US: - in Yuma, AZ you will generate 3.19 kWh per year average (and the lowest, December is only 74% of peak in May!) - in Seattle, WA you will generate 1.95 kWh/day average (with winter 27% of peak) - in Oban, Scotland you will generate 1.35 kWh/day average (with winter 10% of peak) - in London you will generate 1.6 kWh/day average (with winter 17% of peak) The nice thing about solar, though, is that you can just overpanel for whatever your needs are. When the panels are so cheap, under $200 for a giant panel, you can just throw up some more panels and bam, you have enough solar year round. Obviously there are places far enough north to get too much darkness and snow to make year round solar realistic but even in most of the UK it is totally realistic to run off solar year round.

jillesvangurp 3y ago

Some people actually saw this coming. The author fell in the trap of assuming nothing would change or improve. Which is interesting as a thought experiment but otherwise a bit flawed for making any kind of projections. There's a reason we have had so much progress in the last fifteen years: fifteen years ago, investments in this area had been ramping up for a while already. Those investors were making calculated bets on things improving massively. And they weren't wrong. There are some good reasons to continue to be optimistic about the next 27 years (until 2050). That's almost twice the amount of time since the original article from 2008. I expect grid storage is going to be massively successful as prices drop. There are a lot of different solutions emerging currently; many of which are not dependent on any scarce resources. Then learning effects applied to solar and wind should result in more cost reductions. Finally, industrial use of energy is likely to start changing as well. Industrial heating is a big topic with lots of possible solutions.

alextingle 3y ago

The book is about the UK, not the US. The UK has much, much less solar potential than the US. The southern most point of Great Britain is further north than the northern most point of the contiguous USA. And it's really, really rainy here too.

owenversteeg 3y ago
I'm very aware, I live on a boat in the Netherlands part of the year and it is off-grid, powered by solar :) You can generate a yearly average of 1.6 kWh per day in London from that single 550W panel, which is only 20% less than the 2 kWh per day I mentioned for the US. As I mentioned the panel is only $200 so if you need more power you can simply put up a few more. Also, obviously, there is a significant range depending on location in both the UK and the US: - in Yuma, AZ you will generate 3.19 kWh per year average (and the lowest, December is only 74% of peak in May!) - in Seattle, WA you will generate 1.95 kWh/day average (with winter 27% of peak) - in Oban, Scotland you will generate 1.35 kWh/day average (with winter 10% of peak) - in London you will generate 1.6 kWh/day average (with winter 17% of peak) The nice thing about solar, though, is that you can just overpanel for whatever your needs are. When the panels are so cheap, under $200 for a giant panel, you can just throw up some more panels and bam, you have enough solar year round. Obviously there are places far enough north to get too much darkness and snow to make year round solar realistic but even in most of the UK it is totally realistic to run off solar year round.