Solar to provide 20% of energy by 2027

[bernard]

You need a mix of base power along with fast acting. IMO that will include solar, wind, hydro, geo-thermal and hopefully wave. But it should also include fossil fuel and most importantly nuclear power. The percentage of each of those "fuels" will depend on where you live and what makes the most sense to generate and transmit the power that will result in the least chance of any disruption.

To increase solar and RE to a higher % IMO will take decades or certainly not in just a few years.

Thank you for the explanation!
German politicians need to read this whole forum topic. I am not sure what kind of news traveled to the other side of the Atlantic, but in general Germany is regarded as the success story of the RE with its constant closures of nuclear and coal plants. Billions are taken from tax payers each year to promote the green dream of "Germany living on solar and wind ONLY in just a couple of decades".

[DanKegel]

Still we all must learn to conserve and not just increase consumption because we now have "free" energy generation. That kind of attitude will not help meet any RE goal.

Just set the economic incentives properly, and people will adjust their behavior to avoid the waste that matters; that's what realtime pricing is all about. (And it's why flat rate pricing isn't a good idea.)

[J.P.M.]

Then it sounds like my estimates are more pessimistic. Maybe 20% by 2027 is a reachable goal. I certainly hope I can contribute to some of it.

Still we all must learn to conserve and not just increase consumption because we now have "free" energy generation. That kind of attitude will not help meet any RE goal.

If it were truly free, it wouldn't reduce consumption or demand much, if any - only increase use.

Overall however, the key to large solar displacement of current technology does lie in long term, cost effective, scalable (automobile/residential to utility scale) and probably portable electrical energy storage.

To get much beyond about 30 % or so electrical conversion efficiency, sun to conversion device outlet, will take a quantum technology leap. How soon ??

[inetdog]

20% maybe reachable in some states or some countries but I just can't see it being reached in most of the US or world without a lot of help from storage. The weather patterns in the Winter just don't make it an easy goal with limited sun to produce the amount of electricity that some areas consume. Maybe with some major load reductions it can be done but if I was a gambling man I would say some spots could see rolling black outs.

+1

AFAIK the 20% figure, for stability, is an short term limit.
Since production will be much higher in summer than in winter, limiting production to 20% in summer will mean that there is no way that you could average 20% over a 1 year period.
Unless, of course, you have major Northern Hemisphere to Southern Hemisphere ties.

[SunEagle]

Fortunately, power consumption patterns generally follow solar insolation. For example, in the New England ISO area*, during the summer power demand peaks around 2pm at around 28 gigawatts; the peak comes mainly from air conditioning. In the winter, power demand peaks at 10am and 8pm at about 22 gigawatts, which is a 22% lower peak. Thus the New England market could lose ALL 20% of their solar generation during winter and still have the same margins they have now in the winter.

In places like Phoenix, where summer air conditioning loads are much higher (and sunlight is more reliable) the percentages could be higher.

* - from the ISO New England website; can't post the link of course.

Then it sounds like my estimates are more pessimistic. Maybe 20% by 2027 is a reachable goal. I certainly hope I can contribute to some of it.

Still we all must learn to conserve and not just increase consumption because we now have "free" energy generation. That kind of attitude will not help meet any RE goal.

[jflorey2]

20% maybe reachable in some states or some countries but I just can't see it being reached in most of the US or world without a lot of help from storage. The weather patterns in the Winter just don't make it an easy goal with limited sun to produce the amount of electricity that some areas consume.

Fortunately, power consumption patterns generally follow solar insolation. For example, in the New England ISO area*, during the summer power demand peaks around 2pm at around 28 gigawatts; the peak comes mainly from air conditioning. In the winter, power demand peaks at 10am and 8pm at about 22 gigawatts, which is a 22% lower peak. Thus the New England market could lose ALL 20% of their solar generation during winter and still have the same margins they have now in the winter.

In places like Phoenix, where summer air conditioning loads are much higher (and sunlight is more reliable) the percentages could be higher.

* - from the ISO New England website; can't post the link of course.

[SunEagle]

The 20% is notable because that's close to the estimate of how much solar the grid can handle WITHOUT storage (i.e. the solar offsets the daytime peaks in power consumption and does not need storage.) Of course grid scale storage makes any intermittent-renewables plan easier to implement.

20% maybe reachable in some states or some countries but I just can't see it being reached in most of the US or world without a lot of help from storage. The weather patterns in the Winter just don't make it an easy goal with limited sun to produce the amount of electricity that some areas consume. Maybe with some major load reductions it can be done but if I was a gambling man I would say some spots could see rolling black outs.

[jflorey2]

Getting to 20% may be possible if the energy storage technology makes a leap in quality and a major drop in cost.

The 20% is notable because that's close to the estimate of how much solar the grid can handle WITHOUT storage (i.e. the solar offsets the daytime peaks in power consumption and does not need storage.) Of course grid scale storage makes any intermittent-renewables plan easier to implement.

[SunEagle]

I have been called a pessimist by most of my family members so maybe (and hopefully) my estimate of decades is an overestimate.

What I see is that the technology of energy storage has been going on for a long time and while it has made some advancement it still has a long way to go to hit a point where it becomes an affordable commodity for the "masses" just like most household appliances. Sure it is cheaper and has become higher in storage density but look at the cost and the technology needed to keep it from going into thermal run away. IMO it still has a lot more work to go.

Panel efficiency has a long way to go to get to 50%. It was about 10% back in the 70's when I was doing research on them and is still only about 24% now which is 50 year later. How long will it take to get to 40%? And even if it does will it generate enough in the Northern latitudes?

The same with low cost, high efficient transmission lines. Back in the 70's we were looking at super conducting cables. That technology is still way out of reach. What has been improved upon is high voltage DC. What has held that technology is people that do not want those power lines running close to where they live. That limits the ability to get solar (or any RE) from places where is easy to generate (South-West for Solar and the Plain States for Wind) to the East and Northern states where it is consumed.

I have been in the electrical power, control and generation industry for about 45 years. While I do not know everything I can tell you that it takes a lot of power generation to keep the lights on for all the customers. Just like it takes a lot of tools for a carpenter to produce a product it takes a lot of different type of generation technologies to keep the lights on.

You need a mix of base power along with fast acting. IMO that will include solar, wind, hydro, geo-thermal and hopefully wave. But it should also include fossil fuel and most importantly nuclear power. The percentage of each of those "fuels" will depend on where you live and what makes the most sense to generate and transmit the power that will result in the least chance of any disruption.

To increase solar and RE to a higher % IMO will take decades or certainly not in just a few years.

As another member of this forum has posted. Take what you want from what I have posted and scrap the rest.

[bernard]

Hi SunEagle,

I am very interested in your last reply.
Am I allowed to ask, why would it take decades to achieve this, and which one of the upper mentioned aspects (panel efficiency, storage, usage) is currently the most "critical"?

[SunEagle]

Sure, no denying that. Still, if the Oxford study is accurate, a sustained increase of solar's share in the global energy market from 1.1% to 20% over a decade is insane!

Getting to 20% may be possible if the energy storage technology makes a leap in quality and a major drop in cost.

Also anything that finds a way to increase the collection (panel efficiency > 40% or storage < $50/kw) and usage (super conducting transmission lines & trans continental HVDC) helps harvest and distribute the power from one place to another. Those technologies will allow the increase of RE to higher % of power generation across the globe. But IMO they are still decades away.

[Relaxedchap]

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.

Sure, no denying that. Still, if the Oxford study is accurate, a sustained increase of solar's share in the global energy market from 1.1% to 20% over a decade is insane!

[solarix]

As a professional solar installer, I certainly promote and believe in using solar to its fullest extent, but I do admit that this extent is not very far and that solar is not economically viable and practical beyond about 30% of the grid's load. (assuming a miracle doesn't occur in the way of cheap, powerful, reliable battery storage). If you want a sustainable, affordable, low-carbon energy source that Hawaii and everyone in the world can get on board with, I suggest you get to work on the material science engineering needed to bring back Thorium Molten Salt Reactors to viability.

[SunEagle]

Did my homework. As you write, 70+ % of HI power is still oil fired. Some geothermal. Some wind. Some solid waste. Solar < 1% but excluding roof top solar. I did find photos of my silencers - 4 units at Port Allen with helical strakes on the stacks. Don't know how old the flick is however. Sort of like pictures of your kids.

Don't look to hard for more pictures of those stacks. Usually you will find ones of them coming down in a puff of smoke. In fact there is one scheduled near a Tampa generating plant to come down real soon.

[J.P.M.]

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.

Did my homework. As you write, 70+ % of HI power is still oil fired. Some geothermal. Some wind. Some solid waste. Solar < 1% but excluding roof top solar. I did find photos of my silencers - 4 units at Port Allen with helical strakes on the stacks. Don't know how old the flick is however. Sort of like pictures of your kids.