3 ms·

Wouldn't it be more efficient to centralize the generation of electricity and take advantage of economies of scale?

mattnewton 1y ago
Upgrading transmission infrastructure costs a lot of money (and bureaucracy). Especially in Oregon and northern California where the lines probably should be buried to stop risking wildfires. I’m not sure which path is actually more cost effective for solar+battery.
nine_k 1y ago
Solar generation has little economies of scale: PV arrays scale linearly, unlike turbines and electromechanical generators. Batteries also scale basically linearly; maybe you can have a better deal if you buy a truly massive amount of batteries, but I'm not certain it's so dramatic. Transmission costs seem to dominate the price structure; I currently pay a generating company about $0.1 / kWh, and pay Con Ed $0.25 / kWh for transmission of that energy. And this is in dense New York City; in suburbia or countryside the transmission lines have to be much longer. Centralized generation makes sense when the efficiency scales wildly non-linearly with size, like it does with nuclear reactors.
- lostdog 1y ago
  Does solar scale linearly when you have to get onto roofs to install it? And when each roof is available for installation at different times, so only small crews can do it piecemeal?
  - nine_k 1y ago
    It certainly complicates things a bit, but the roofs are independent, so several small teams can independently work in parallel. So yes, it's sort of linear. Building a large solar installation may scale a bit sub-linearly, if you can e.g. order things in bulk at better prices, and have some electric assemblies done at a factory, more efficiently.
dml2135 1y ago
Others have replied saying why this may not be the case, but even if it is — you also need to balance efficiency with other values, such as independence and resiliency. I would gladly trade a bit of efficiency to not be dependent on the grid or on providers who can jack up the price on a whim outside of my control.
dehrmann 1y ago
It's not just the generation; it's also the maintenance. If you own your own rooftop panels and a few go out, it's relatively expensive to bring someone out to replace them...if a mechanically and electrically equivalent replacement exists in 5 years. At utility scale, you're always replacing panels, so you have dedicated staff doing it.
- adgjlsfhk1 1y ago
  solar panels last 25-40 years. mechanically equivalent means "sits on a roof". electrically equivalent just means "connects to a wire".
  - dehrmann 1y ago
    Manufacturing defects happen, trees fall, and panels get dusty. They don't merely "sit on a roof." They're anchored, the anchors have spacing and a form factor, and the anchors pierce the roof's waterproofness. They're not electrically equivalent if they output a different voltage range.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- supertrope 1y ago
  Climbing roofs is in the top 10 deadliest jobs in America. It’s cheaper to drive out into a field and work on ground level equipment than to climb a height.
thelastgallon 1y ago
Centralized generation is the riskiest for any economy. The targets to bomb (or local drones) are very well known and super easy to disrupt the entire economy. Solar on every roof is the most resilient and cheapest form of energy. Centralization leads to economies of lobbying scale, well connected super rich can oil the machinery to suit their purpose, maximize wealth extraction from everyone, resulting in monopolies/oligopolies, laws to remove competition, laws to maximize profit (with pretenses of protecting people). Warren Buffett does not own utilities out of the goodness of his heart, they are such spigots of money with zero competition.
- supertrope 1y ago
  Return on equity for utilities is relatively low due to capital intensity. They make a lot of money in absolute terms because 5% of a huge revenue figure is billions.

Upgrading transmission infrastructure costs a lot of money (and bureaucracy). Especially in Oregon and northern California where the lines probably should be buried to stop risking wildfires. I’m not sure which path is actually more cost effective for solar+battery.

nine_k 1y ago

Solar generation has little economies of scale: PV arrays scale linearly, unlike turbines and electromechanical generators. Batteries also scale basically linearly; maybe you can have a better deal if you buy a truly massive amount of batteries, but I'm not certain it's so dramatic. Transmission costs seem to dominate the price structure; I currently pay a generating company about $0.1 / kWh, and pay Con Ed $0.25 / kWh for transmission of that energy. And this is in dense New York City; in suburbia or countryside the transmission lines have to be much longer. Centralized generation makes sense when the efficiency scales wildly non-linearly with size, like it does with nuclear reactors.

lostdog 1y ago
Does solar scale linearly when you have to get onto roofs to install it? And when each roof is available for installation at different times, so only small crews can do it piecemeal?
- nine_k 1y ago
  It certainly complicates things a bit, but the roofs are independent, so several small teams can independently work in parallel. So yes, it's sort of linear. Building a large solar installation may scale a bit sub-linearly, if you can e.g. order things in bulk at better prices, and have some electric assemblies done at a factory, more efficiently.

dml2135 1y ago

Others have replied saying why this may not be the case, but even if it is — you also need to balance efficiency with other values, such as independence and resiliency. I would gladly trade a bit of efficiency to not be dependent on the grid or on providers who can jack up the price on a whim outside of my control.

dehrmann 1y ago

It's not just the generation; it's also the maintenance. If you own your own rooftop panels and a few go out, it's relatively expensive to bring someone out to replace them...if a mechanically and electrically equivalent replacement exists in 5 years. At utility scale, you're always replacing panels, so you have dedicated staff doing it.

adgjlsfhk1 1y ago
solar panels last 25-40 years. mechanically equivalent means "sits on a roof". electrically equivalent just means "connects to a wire".
- dehrmann 1y ago
  Manufacturing defects happen, trees fall, and panels get dusty. They don't merely "sit on a roof." They're anchored, the anchors have spacing and a form factor, and the anchors pierce the roof's waterproofness. They're not electrically equivalent if they output a different voltage range.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
supertrope 1y ago
Climbing roofs is in the top 10 deadliest jobs in America. It’s cheaper to drive out into a field and work on ground level equipment than to climb a height.

thelastgallon 1y ago

Centralized generation is the riskiest for any economy. The targets to bomb (or local drones) are very well known and super easy to disrupt the entire economy. Solar on every roof is the most resilient and cheapest form of energy. Centralization leads to economies of lobbying scale, well connected super rich can oil the machinery to suit their purpose, maximize wealth extraction from everyone, resulting in monopolies/oligopolies, laws to remove competition, laws to maximize profit (with pretenses of protecting people). Warren Buffett does not own utilities out of the goodness of his heart, they are such spigots of money with zero competition.

supertrope 1y ago
Return on equity for utilities is relatively low due to capital intensity. They make a lot of money in absolute terms because 5% of a huge revenue figure is billions.