Solar cheaper than nuclear
in [Design]
|
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 10 Aug 2010 17:45 On 10/08/2010 19:30, Charlie E. wrote: > On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:02:15 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax > <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 10/08/2010 16:26, Jim Thompson wrote: > >>> >>> The naivete, and ignorance (�), of tree-huggers is stunningly >>> profound. >>> >>> I suspect it's because they're not engineers... they think arm-waving >>> and warm and cuddly feelings are what make things work. >>> >>> ...Jim Thompson >> >> So you have some reason for believing that solar panels are going to >> remain at around $400 per sq m when at least one company is >> manufacturing them at a third of that price? And that manufacturing cost >> will never fall below that value? > > Dirk, > Yes, the panels MAY drop in price, by a third or even more. > > The mounting hardware and similiar infrastructure won't drop that > much, if at all. True. That price will come to dominate. > Installation for them will only go up, at least for a while. > > Inverters and other grid tie or other uses SHOULD go down, but they > haven't yet! Well, we know where the prices are heading by looking at a mature comparable technology that is being mass manufactured - PC PSUs. I have seen retail 200W PSUs for $10 > BTW, the trend in industry for residential panels is to include the > inverter and grid tie equipment ON THE PANEL! That way, the actual > interconnections are all done as standard electrical connections as > per NEC, meaning a standard electrician can wire them up without a lot > of special training. Also makes passing code easier. I think that is definitely the way to go for small domestic installations. > But right now, as a home owner, I can't buy Nanosolar panels. They > are shipping everything they can produce either to Germany or to large > industrial installations. When their production increases to the > extent that they can sell to residential installers, MAYBE we will see > less expensive home panels... > > Charlie The price reductions will be small over the next few years, then precipitous as over capacity hits. Right now just about everyone is getting into PV manufacture. And selling all the can make very profitably. Installed PV capacity worldwide doubled in 2009 (in the worst recession for 70 years!) -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 10 Aug 2010 17:46 On 10/08/2010 20:43, Paul Keinanen wrote: > On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 09:13:22 -0500, "Tim Williams" > <tmoranwms(a)charter.net> wrote: > >> >> It's not true that they do it "no problem". The French have been putting >> it off just as long as we've been putting off Yucca mountain. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meuse/Haute_Marne_Underground_Research_Laboratory >> Locations proposed in the 90's, repository licensed by 2015, operation >> expected by 2025 (as if). > > In Finland, the Onkalo repository > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo#Onkalo_waste_repository is quite > generally accepted. It is currently owned by Fortum (operating two > PWRs) and TVO operating two BWRs and one EPR PWR _still_ under > construction. > > Recently, the Finnish parliament granted two new reactor licenses, one > for TVO and one for Fennovoima, but not for the third applicant > Fortum. > > The only "problem" we have is that the Onkalo owners TVO and Fortum > are not currently willing to accept the nuclear waste from the > Fennovoima reactor, which is to be built in a few years. > Maybe Finland should be smart and produce electricity for all of Scandinavia? Or is cheap hydro plentiful? -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 10 Aug 2010 17:48 On 10/08/2010 20:11, Paul Keinanen wrote: > On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 00:17:51 -0700, CIC<cicel(a)iinet.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 09:43:09 +0300, Paul Keinanen<keinanen(a)sci.fi> >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 23:06:11 -0700, CIC<cicel(a)iinet.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 08:39:04 +0300, Paul Keinanen<keinanen(a)sci.fi> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 19:21:19 -0700, CIC<cicel(a)iinet.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I don't believe there >>>>>> will be any distance transmission of energy, the way we do it today. >>>>> >>>>> If you intend to use unpredictable sources, such as wind energy, you >>>>> definitely are going to need a much larger and stronger transmission >>>>> network to even out the local production variations. >>>>> >>>>> For wind energy, be prepared to transfer energy at distances that are >>>>> similar to the size of a large high or low pressure area. The wind is >>>>> blowing around the center of the high or low pressure area, but there >>>>> is no wind in the center. >>>> >>>> That is why they are placed in areas where there is a predictable wind >>>> pattern, which it happens to be near a large city, most of the time. >>> >>> Perhaps on the trade wind coasts you might a capacity factor CF up to >>> 50 %, in other areas 20-40 %. >>> >>> A 3 MW nominal power turbine with CF=33 % would produce only 24 MWh >>> each day on average. >> >> >> Right. The coastal areas are the best, but there are some very good >> inland wind corridors were have been placed. >> >> http://www.nrel.gov/wind/systemsintegration/images/home_usmap.jpg >> >> http://www.energy.ca.gov/wind/overview.html > > From that site, I found for year 2001 > http://www.energy.ca.gov/reports/2003-01-17_500-02-034F.PDF > which seems to be the newest production statistics available. Look at > Table #5, which gives the capacity factors CF for areas and quarters. > The annual CF varies from 9 % to 27 %. > > To get some comparative values for that same era, the corresponding > figures for individual turbines in Finland in the early 2000's > http://virtual.vtt.fi/virtual/proj4/tuulitilastot/turbine.htm are > quite similar. > > With such low capacity factors CF, it should be clear that without the > ability to transfer power from windy areas to calm areas (at least > 1000-2000 km), wind energy is going to be a fringe utility. > Well, in any given European nation that will be true. However, on a larger scale penetration is expected to top out at around 20% of total generating capacity. -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 10 Aug 2010 17:53 On 10/08/2010 22:45, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote: > On 10/08/2010 19:30, Charlie E. wrote: >> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:02:15 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax >> <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 10/08/2010 16:26, Jim Thompson wrote: >> >>>> >>>> The naivete, and ignorance (�), of tree-huggers is stunningly >>>> profound. >>>> >>>> I suspect it's because they're not engineers... they think arm-waving >>>> and warm and cuddly feelings are what make things work. >>>> >>>> ...Jim Thompson >>> >>> So you have some reason for believing that solar panels are going to >>> remain at around $400 per sq m when at least one company is >>> manufacturing them at a third of that price? And that manufacturing cost >>> will never fall below that value? >> >> Dirk, >> Yes, the panels MAY drop in price, by a third or even more. >> >> The mounting hardware and similiar infrastructure won't drop that >> much, if at all. > > True. > That price will come to dominate. > >> Installation for them will only go up, at least for a while. >> >> Inverters and other grid tie or other uses SHOULD go down, but they >> haven't yet! > > Well, we know where the prices are heading by looking at a mature > comparable technology that is being mass manufactured - PC PSUs. I have > seen retail 200W PSUs for $10 > >> BTW, the trend in industry for residential panels is to include the >> inverter and grid tie equipment ON THE PANEL! That way, the actual >> interconnections are all done as standard electrical connections as >> per NEC, meaning a standard electrician can wire them up without a lot >> of special training. Also makes passing code easier. > > I think that is definitely the way to go for small domestic installations. > >> But right now, as a home owner, I can't buy Nanosolar panels. They >> are shipping everything they can produce either to Germany or to large >> industrial installations. When their production increases to the >> extent that they can sell to residential installers, MAYBE we will see >> less expensive home panels... >> >> Charlie > > The price reductions will be small over the next few years, then > precipitous as over capacity hits. Right now just about everyone is > getting into PV manufacture. And selling all the can make very > profitably. Installed PV capacity worldwide doubled in 2009 (in the > worst recession for 70 years!) > Just saw this as an example of what's happening: http://www.physorg.com/news200631202.html "Norwegian company EnSol AS has patented a ground breaking, novel thin film solar cell technology which they seek to develop commercially by 2016. The company is now working with experts in the University of Leicester Department of Physics and Astronomy to develop the revolutionary new type of solar cell material that could be coated as a thin film on, for example, windows in buildings to produce power on a large scale. .... A spokesperson for EnSol AS said: "The basic cell concept has been demonstrated, and it will be the objective of this research and development project to systematically refine this PV cell technology to achieve a cell efficiency of 20% or greater. "A thin film deposition system with nanoparticle source, will be designed and constructed in collaboration with the University of Leicester for the fabrication of prototype cells based on this design. "This experimental facility will be designed to produce PV cells with an active area in excess of 16 cm2 (40 mm x 40 mm) deposited onto standard glass substrates. These prototype cells will subsequently be characterised and tested in collaboration with our academic partners. "EnSol's next generation PV cell technology has tremendous potential for industrial scale, low environmental impact, cost effective production via standard "spray on" techniques."" -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show
From: Joel Koltner on 10 Aug 2010 18:06
"Dirk Bruere at NeoPax" <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:8cdvj2F9hjU1(a)mid.individual.net... > Well, we know where the prices are heading by looking at a mature comparable > technology that is being mass manufactured - PC PSUs. I have seen retail > 200W PSUs for $10 ....although you have to keep in mind that the cost of replacing a PC's PSU is rather less than the cost of replacing a busted solar panel... You can bet that the power supplies used in, e.g., most web servers are rather more durable, reliable and costly than the $10 units. (With Google being a notable exception: They're striving to maintain the highest performance per dollar, and often find that, e.g., "consumer" grade hard drives, motherboards, etc. are still cheaper overall even when factoring in the labor required for replacement -- they can get away with this since they have massive redundancy and many servers can go down without any impact on their service... whereas most people's web sites are not at all redundant and one physical machine going do completely removes their web presence...) ---Joel |