Solar to provide 20% of energy by 2027

[Sunking]

There was some talk of gas turbines back then. Don't know what the energy mix looks like now.

Do not think NG fuel is doable on a island unless they are blessed NG wells. NG is not an ideal fuel for rail, truck, or ship transpiration. You would have to liquify the gas (LNG) using cryogenic refrigeration and shipped in cryogenic sea vessels. CNG is out also as the volume would be astronomical and no ship large enough to be of much use.

Funny thing is the USA is the world leader in NG production, and we export most of it to Europe in cryogenic ships. Hawaii best source of RE is wind. So much of it they could easily generate a large percentage of the their electric power pretty much round the clock. Problem is they do not want to see wind farms, spoils the beauty.

[J.P.M.]

Certainly part of HI's high electric cost but not the biggest reason IMO. If you look at Hawaii's Fuel mix it is just over 72% diesel, solar is actually pretty low except on Maui wind generation. Fuel source is not all that important, it is generation and distribution. The state of Hawaii power consumption is tiny as a whole which could easily be generated by a single small generation plant. You get the point as that is impossible to implement over 8 Islands.

Now Hawaii is unique in the fact it has optimum condition for 3 out of 4 RE sources. Wind is the biggest, nothing in the way of the constant brisk trade winds. Geo Thermal is next in potential largest source. Solar does well but somewhat limited in the tropic with daily rains and Rainy season. The only source they lack which is the largest RE producer in the world is Hydro. They have the rain, just not the land to spare even if rivers and streams existed to support it.

I suppose economies of scale have a lot to do with it. It's probably not cost justifiable or practical to build coal /gas or Nuke fired plants for a smaller and/or distributed demand spread over 8 or more islands.

I designed some pretty big silencers for a diesel fired power plant on Kauai in the late '80's. The owners ( at the time Kauai Electric) were required to meet some pretty hefty noise abatement requirements. Perhaps (but maybe not) the only silencers that also needed to be designed for a wind load due to height - about 102 ft. at the top of stack if I remember correctly. I think there's still some pictures of them on the net somewhere. Back then, most of Kauai's power was diesel generated. I think the units I worked on went derelict or were retired some years ago. There was some talk of gas turbines back then. Don't know what the energy mix looks like now.

[SunEagle]

The labor cost is going to drop as well. Compare the US to Germany. In 2013 PV systems (installed) were twice as expensive in the US as in Germany. The module prices were almost the same - but labor and permitting costs (as well as permitting delays, which increases cost) were 2-3x higher in the US. Note that the labor itself was not cheaper in Germany - it was just that they took 5-10 times longer to install systems in the US (75 vs 7.5 hours for installation on average.)

Streamlining the permitting process will certainly help. Improving installation times will help as well, and this will be aided by simplified racking/module/interconnect systems.

Agreed there. Real time pricing will help quite a bit, but storage and base load generation will still be required. (Which is why 20% is a pretty reasonable goal.)

I agree that in some places 20% is a reasonable goal to hit. But some people think a much higher % is possible. They are dreaming even if the cost of solar hits $0/watt.

It just isn't sustainable to meet the US consumption needs 24/7 even with storage. We still need a 2nd, 3rd & 4th type (at least one being base) of generation along with storage and a way to conserve or load shed if the demand gets too high or parts of the country may go dark.

[jflorey2]

The cost of solar cells can drop to $0.20/watt but will still be overshadowed by the labor cost to install a system

The labor cost is going to drop as well. Compare the US to Germany. In 2013 PV systems (installed) were twice as expensive in the US as in Germany. The module prices were almost the same - but labor and permitting costs (as well as permitting delays, which increases cost) were 2-3x higher in the US. Note that the labor itself was not cheaper in Germany - it was just that they took 5-10 times longer to install systems in the US (75 vs 7.5 hours for installation on average.)

Streamlining the permitting process will certainly help. Improving installation times will help as well, and this will be aided by simplified racking/module/interconnect systems.

and the low percentage (~33%) of when it actually produces electricity during the day.

Agreed there. Real time pricing will help quite a bit, but storage and base load generation will still be required. (Which is why 20% is a pretty reasonable goal.)

[Sunking]

And HI's high R.E. fraction being mostly possible by the high cost of the competing fuel, with most all of that differential fossil fuel cost compared to fuel costs on the U.S. mainland due to fuel transportation costs..

Certainly part of HI's high electric cost but not the biggest reason IMO. If you look at Hawaii's Fuel mix it is just over 72% diesel, solar is actually pretty low except on Maui wind generation. Fuel source is not all that important, it is generation and distribution. The state of Hawaii power consumption is tiny as a whole which could easily be generated by a single small generation plant. You get the point as that is impossible to implement over 8 Islands.

Now Hawaii is unique in the fact it has optimum condition for 3 out of 4 RE sources. Wind is the biggest, nothing in the way of the constant brisk trade winds. Geo Thermal is next in potential largest source. Solar does well but somewhat limited in the tropic with daily rains and Rainy season. The only source they lack which is the largest RE producer in the world is Hydro. They have the rain, just not the land to spare even if rivers and streams existed to support it.

[J.P.M.]

The cost of solar cells can drop to $0.20/watt but will still be overshadowed by the labor cost to install a system and the low percentage (~33%) of when it actually produces electricity during the day.

Sure solar is a great way to generate electrical power but it is not and will never be the only way. You have to have more than one or even two ways to provide power 24/7/365 to the customers.

As of now I can think of maybe Hawaii as being the only state that can come close to generating 100% of their electricity from RE. And that would be a mix of solar, wind, geo-thermal, pumped hydro and maybe wave generated. Every other state will have a tough time doing the same unless they find a way to drastically cut their consumption or if someone invents a very cost effective energy storage system (which IMO is years away). If anyone doesn't believe that then they are drinking the cool aid.

And HI's high R.E. fraction being mostly possible by the high cost of the competing fuel, with most all of that differential fossil fuel cost compared to fuel costs on the U.S. mainland due to fuel transportation costs.

The key to safe, practical, and cost effective and thus higher solar penetration will be solving the energy storage question with respect to viability, scalability and cost. Once those matters are addressed successfully, things will get better for R.E. Who knows - Maybe places like HI will serve as storage test beds.

[SunEagle]

That's insane when you consider that the estimated global consumption of solar energy in 2015 was 1.1% The title of the article mentions that solar cell costs are expected to drop by 10% every year, which is pretty awesome in its own right. I don't know if anyone has mentioned this already, but since 2013 solar cells were given a Moore's Law equivalent called Swanson's Law. It states that solar cell costs will decrease by 20% every year global shipments double. If shipments double each year, the cost of solar cells will halve every decade.

The cost of solar cells can drop to $0.20/watt but will still be overshadowed by the labor cost to install a system and the low percentage (~33%) of when it actually produces electricity during the day.

Sure solar is a great way to generate electrical power but it is not and will never be the only way. You have to have more than one or even two ways to provide power 24/7/365 to the customers.

As of now I can think of maybe Hawaii as being the only state that can come close to generating 100% of their electricity from RE. And that would be a mix of solar, wind, geo-thermal, pumped hydro and maybe wave generated. Every other state will have a tough time doing the same unless they find a way to drastically cut their consumption or if someone invents a very cost effective energy storage system (which IMO is years away). If anyone doesn't believe that then they are drinking the cool aid.

[Relaxedchap]

That's insane when you consider that the estimated global consumption of solar energy in 2015 was 1.1% The title of the article mentions that solar cell costs are expected to drop by 10% every year, which is pretty awesome in its own right. I don't know if anyone has mentioned this already, but since 2013 solar cells were given a Moore's Law equivalent called Swanson's Law. It states that solar cell costs will decrease by 20% every year global shipments double. If shipments double each year, the cost of solar cells will halve every decade.

[Carrie Palmer]

http://www.theguardian.com/environme...fall-10-a-year

It is encouraging to see that solar is on course to meet 20 % of global energy needs by 2027 because inspite of huge advances in solar power technology, it only provides a miniscule fraction of total energy produced world wide. Clean Energy is the need of the hour. The developments made in the semiconductor industry have reduce the manufacturing cost of PV Panels which is a good sign. Check for the solar power trends to be watched in 2017 http://www.cestarcollege.com/blog/so...watch-in-2017/ Experts go on to say comfidently that solar power will be cheap as coal with new advances.

[ButchDeal]

I agree. In the beginning it looked like home solar was the direction to go but the cost was almost $10/watt installed price. That shut down a lot of early investors in the solar arena.

It wasn't until later that the POCO's started to get investment dollars to build the big arrays in the SouthWest then more panels were manufactured which drop the panel cost and also since they were higher in wattage that made it less labor intensive (and costly) to install since there were less panels and wiring connections. By then quite a few companies that had invested in the technology were off in other directions.

all true. though I was hitting it from the technology side. They purchased a solar cell/module manufacturing company and put little money into it. Sadly, they dump a lot of money in just before getting out of the market. I live near the old Frederick MD plant site and watched the expansion then demolition of the site.
Technology companies like PV cell manufacturing, require continual and high investment in R&D and they were not willing to do that.
A new CEO was voted in and he demolished and sold off the assets, after making a speech about BP is an OIL company in opposition to the former CEO claim that BP was an energy company.

[SunEagle]

BP started manufacturing solar modules and quickly got behind on technology.
A better fit would have been to install/maintain large utility scale solar, thermal hybrid systems like NRG.

I agree. In the beginning it looked like home solar was the direction to go but the cost was almost $10/watt installed price. That shut down a lot of early investors in the solar arena.

It wasn't until later that the POCO's started to get investment dollars to build the big arrays in the SouthWest then more panels were manufactured which drop the panel cost and also since they were higher in wattage that made it less labor intensive (and costly) to install since there were less panels and wiring connections. By then quite a few companies that had invested in the technology were off in other directions.

[ButchDeal]

Actually both Shell and BP went deep into solar but determined it was not profitable so no longer have much association with it.

BP started manufacturing solar modules and quickly got behind on technology.
A better fit would have been to install/maintain large utility scale solar, thermal hybrid systems like NRG.

[SunEagle]

Exactly. Don't expect them to care about anything but profits; that's how they're built.

Hence, unless they themselves start investing in solar, expect them to oppose policies that will benefit solar.

Actually both Shell and BP went deep into solar but determined it was not profitable so no longer have much association with it.

[DanKegel]

Exactly. Don't expect them to care about anything but profits; that's how they're built.

Hence, unless they themselves start investing in solar, expect them to oppose policies that will benefit solar.

[J.P.M.]

Oil & gas will fight solar and wind tooth and nail

They will simply do what businesses do in a capitalistic system and try to maximize their profitability. They have no personal vendetta - It's nothing personal - just business.