4 ms·

The fact that writers are actually having to drill down and do the math and see if Solar Power is less expensive in areas where power is cheap and available is

The fact that writers are actually having to drill down and do the math and see if Solar Power is less expensive in areas where power is cheap and available is mind blowing to me. I find it fascinating, that, by 2017, there will be areas in Hawaii and Australia, in which you can make an argument that Solar Power is now less expensive that grid power. What these authors seem to fail to recognize (or highlight) in their criticism - is that these lines are being crossed 10-15 years ahead of time. Nobody expected parity on these edge cases until at least 2025-2030, and we're going to see it in 2016. And, what they also seem to fail to recognize, is that the curves for solar are going down. This is just the start.

toomuchtodo 12y ago
http://cleantechnica.com/2015/04/13/solar-wind-power-prices-often-lower-fossil-fuel-power-prices/ http://cleantechnica.com/2015/04/13/solar-wind-power-prices-... "Deutsche Bank actually predicts that all 50 US states will be at grid parity by 2016 — that’s next year. (Note that it takes several years to build coal, natural gas, or nuclear power plants.) Deutsche Bank also predicts that ~80% of the global electricity market will be at grid parity by 2017. This is why solar power is scaring coal companies, natural gas companies, and utilities so much, and why you see so many anti-solar myths out there being repeated over and over again… despite being several years out of date."
hueving 12y ago
There isn't any reason for the author to bring up those points because they are irrelevant. This article is about whether it makes sense to buy a tesla battery right now. It doesn't matter if solar will be half the cost in five years. If that's the case, just buy it then when the numbers make sense. Let's say someone wrote an article reviewing a new apartment complex opening in the Tenderloin of SF. If they said that the crime there is terrible so people should look elsewhere, would you be complaining if they didn't provide in-depth projects of potential future crime rates in the same area?
- justonepost 12y ago
  It makes perfect sense to bring it up because the massive disruption this will cause to the global energy economy. Oil, coal, the structure of these are going to be altered massively. Think today how gas is used to blackmail the Ukraine and prop up autocratic political systems. There are very significant implications to all of this. By the time it becomes 'relevant' it will be ancient news to those who appreciate what's going on here.
  - semi-extrinsic 12y ago
    The interesting question for solar power is not "When will stand-alone solar power be cheaper than coal/gas?". It is "How high can we push the fraction of solar power / total power before the power distribution grid fails?". You need base power generation to augment solar/wind, there's not a serious scientist in the world denying that, and the numbers I've heard quoted say you can't average much more than 50-60% solar and wind combined. Right now, Germany is charging ahead on solar. Their current peak record is 50.4% of total power from solar, on a sunny midsummer day with low power usage. Meanwhile, all of their neigbouring countries to the east are doing massive overhauls/reconfigurations of their power distribution grids just to be able to supply Germany with enough base power, mainly from nuclear.
    - ghshephard 12y ago
      The "We can't do everything with solar" was what everyone was saying (correctly) in 2005-2010. But, the entire point of the Powerwall product is that, today (not next year, today), in parts of Australia and Hawaii, it is now less expensive, and more efficient, to go 100% solar. As the prices of batteries drop, and solar becomes more efficient, the number of places where that is true will only increase. From the perspective of watching trends back in 2005, this wasn't supposed to happen until 2025, so it's arriving 10 years early. There's nothing that would prevent a good storage system + wind + power from supplying 100% of the power requirements reliably. You just need to scale your Storage system to handle the periods in which solar/wind aren't driving power. Regarding the Germany Scenario - Let's see how much nuclear they are going to require after they add a few Terrawatt-Hours worth of battery storage to their grid. Finally, commenting on your "so Serious Scientists" - there are a lot of them that have done the calculations and have come to the conclusion that only a solar solution will supply the world with the power it requires so that everyone can have an first-world lifestlye. In particular, check out Nate Lewis's introduction to Solar Energy - https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=385384449#ls=1 https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodca... ,He "provides a beginner's overview of the concepts behind solar energy generation as well as the current state of the art and its potential role in future energy production." It's eye opening - even nuclear power plants don't stand a chance versus solar (which, to be honest, is just harvesting the output of a really, really, really big fusion generator) The missing component has always been storage, and Elon has jumpstarted that conversation. The powerall is interesting, the gigafactory is more interesting, but the fact that he realizes Tesla is only going to be a tiny, tiny element of a much larger industrial transition, is, in my mind, the most important part of this story.
higherpurpose 12y ago
Solar skeptics are fascinating. They've been saying the same thing since solar was $1/KWh and they'll keep saying it until solar is $0.05/KWh. However, that won't stop solar adoption from growing, maybe it will just slow it down slightly. The more solar panels (and now batteries) drop in price, the quieter those voices will become. I think in 10 years they'll all just about shut up.

toomuchtodo 12y ago

http://cleantechnica.com/2015/04/13/solar-wind-power-prices-often-lower-fossil-fuel-power-prices/ http://cleantechnica.com/2015/04/13/solar-wind-power-prices-... "Deutsche Bank actually predicts that all 50 US states will be at grid parity by 2016 — that’s next year. (Note that it takes several years to build coal, natural gas, or nuclear power plants.) Deutsche Bank also predicts that ~80% of the global electricity market will be at grid parity by 2017. This is why solar power is scaring coal companies, natural gas companies, and utilities so much, and why you see so many anti-solar myths out there being repeated over and over again… despite being several years out of date."

hueving 12y ago

There isn't any reason for the author to bring up those points because they are irrelevant. This article is about whether it makes sense to buy a tesla battery right now. It doesn't matter if solar will be half the cost in five years. If that's the case, just buy it then when the numbers make sense. Let's say someone wrote an article reviewing a new apartment complex opening in the Tenderloin of SF. If they said that the crime there is terrible so people should look elsewhere, would you be complaining if they didn't provide in-depth projects of potential future crime rates in the same area?

justonepost 12y ago
It makes perfect sense to bring it up because the massive disruption this will cause to the global energy economy. Oil, coal, the structure of these are going to be altered massively. Think today how gas is used to blackmail the Ukraine and prop up autocratic political systems. There are very significant implications to all of this. By the time it becomes 'relevant' it will be ancient news to those who appreciate what's going on here.
- semi-extrinsic 12y ago
  The interesting question for solar power is not "When will stand-alone solar power be cheaper than coal/gas?". It is "How high can we push the fraction of solar power / total power before the power distribution grid fails?". You need base power generation to augment solar/wind, there's not a serious scientist in the world denying that, and the numbers I've heard quoted say you can't average much more than 50-60% solar and wind combined. Right now, Germany is charging ahead on solar. Their current peak record is 50.4% of total power from solar, on a sunny midsummer day with low power usage. Meanwhile, all of their neigbouring countries to the east are doing massive overhauls/reconfigurations of their power distribution grids just to be able to supply Germany with enough base power, mainly from nuclear.
  - ghshephard 12y ago
    The "We can't do everything with solar" was what everyone was saying (correctly) in 2005-2010. But, the entire point of the Powerwall product is that, today (not next year, today), in parts of Australia and Hawaii, it is now less expensive, and more efficient, to go 100% solar. As the prices of batteries drop, and solar becomes more efficient, the number of places where that is true will only increase. From the perspective of watching trends back in 2005, this wasn't supposed to happen until 2025, so it's arriving 10 years early. There's nothing that would prevent a good storage system + wind + power from supplying 100% of the power requirements reliably. You just need to scale your Storage system to handle the periods in which solar/wind aren't driving power. Regarding the Germany Scenario - Let's see how much nuclear they are going to require after they add a few Terrawatt-Hours worth of battery storage to their grid. Finally, commenting on your "so Serious Scientists" - there are a lot of them that have done the calculations and have come to the conclusion that only a solar solution will supply the world with the power it requires so that everyone can have an first-world lifestlye. In particular, check out Nate Lewis's introduction to Solar Energy - https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=385384449#ls=1 https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodca... ,He "provides a beginner's overview of the concepts behind solar energy generation as well as the current state of the art and its potential role in future energy production." It's eye opening - even nuclear power plants don't stand a chance versus solar (which, to be honest, is just harvesting the output of a really, really, really big fusion generator) The missing component has always been storage, and Elon has jumpstarted that conversation. The powerall is interesting, the gigafactory is more interesting, but the fact that he realizes Tesla is only going to be a tiny, tiny element of a much larger industrial transition, is, in my mind, the most important part of this story.

higherpurpose 12y ago

Solar skeptics are fascinating. They've been saying the same thing since solar was $1/KWh and they'll keep saying it until solar is $0.05/KWh. However, that won't stop solar adoption from growing, maybe it will just slow it down slightly. The more solar panels (and now batteries) drop in price, the quieter those voices will become. I think in 10 years they'll all just about shut up.