Interesting articles on EV, utilities, renewables and their impacts

[J.P.M.]

the birds that can avoid being fried will survive to pass on their genes... geosynchronous satellite systems beaming down microwave energy will increase the carnage...

Its clear that no viewpoints are being changed here. My primary focus for viewpoint evolution is my children who see the tangible benefit of our 4KW array and, like all youth, are not constrained by the wisdom of their elders (myself included). For myself and for them, its on to AC coupling and maybe even micro-grids next.

Could you please explain to me how you know that no opinions have been changed here ?

On another point, what about someone else's children who are also not constrained (or protected) by the wisdom of (all) elders (yourself included), and are exposed to the tangible detriment of living in an environment that must for example, deal with exposure to the perhaps not so beneficial effects of the environmentally unfriendly byproducts and waste from alternate energy products, the output of which your children enjoy ? Who speaks for them ? Do you ?

Pardon me if I suggest your focus seems just a bit parochial.

I'm a big fan of appropriate technology, but I dismounted my high horse of moral superiority after working with a lot of well meaning, very smart people who are constructively trying to make the world a better place by meeting energy needs and working to make the process as environmentally benign as practical.

I don't agree with many of their big oil/big nuke attitudes, but those folks probably forgot more about practical, workable environmentalism than most tree huggers will ever be able to imagine. I only wish they'd be a little more proactive in using more of their abilities to make some of the more workable benefits a reality.

I'd suggest talking to a few of the more thoughtful of them whose primary focus is something other than incendiary invective.

[kwilcox]

the birds that can avoid being fried will survive to pass on their genes... geosynchronous satellite systems beaming down microwave energy will increase the carnage...

Its clear that no viewpoints are being changed here. My primary focus for viewpoint evolution is my children who see the tangible benefit of our 4KW array and, like all youth, are not constrained by the wisdom of their elders (myself included). For myself and for them, its on to AC coupling and maybe even micro-grids next.

[J.P.M.]

I have to agree with Russ that solar is out of reach for most folks, although it probably should be accessible if built on new homes and buried in the overall mortgage cost. Although, those solar leases are making going solar pretty cheap (but not really cost competitive...). As for electric cars, we're at best 10 years away from being cost competitive with ICE. That being said, batteries have come a long way since I've been following the technology (30 years), and with the amount of research money going into it now, the cost/KWh should decrease fairly quickly.

I'm an optimist. I hope that I'll be able to use batteries in my house to store electricity in my lifetime.

On the subject of solar farms, they just found out that the new one at Ivanpah is smoking birds out of the sky at a pretty impressive rate. No technology is perfect...

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...n-kay-melchior

I think I heard about the desert fried bird as far back as SEGS 1 in Daggett, CA in the late '70's/early '80's. Not only not perfect, some things never change, including bird intelligence.

[JCP]

I have to agree with Russ that solar is out of reach for most folks, although it probably should be accessible if built on new homes and buried in the overall mortgage cost. Although, those solar leases are making going solar pretty cheap (but not really cost competitive...). As for electric cars, we're at best 10 years away from being cost competitive with ICE. That being said, batteries have come a long way since I've been following the technology (30 years), and with the amount of research money going into it now, the cost/KWh should decrease fairly quickly.

I'm an optimist. I hope that I'll be able to use batteries in my house to store electricity in my lifetime.

On the subject of solar farms, they just found out that the new one at Ivanpah is smoking birds out of the sky at a pretty impressive rate. No technology is perfect...

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/385723/dead-bird-steamers-california-solar-plant-jillian-kay-melchior

[Sunking]

I disagree with the contention that something nasty must happen to provide power. That's a 20th century paradigm.

From a Solar perspective alone, the amount of energy reaching the surface of the Earth is so vast that in one year it is about twice as much as will ever be obtained from all of the Earth's non-renewable resources of coal, oil, natural gas, and mined uranium combined (here's my source for that statement: Stanford University GCEP).

We haven't begun to explore the full potential of this fact. The Solar panel technology we're putting on our roofs hasn't changed significantly since the 1960s. That's a travesty and needs to be changed.

Whi is going to pay for it, where does energy come from when there is not sun or wind. Whose property are you going to waste? How are you as a biz going to compete globally with expensive unreliable power.

It is correct panel shave not changed in 50 years. Prices and efficiency have improved, but not the technology. RE cannot every meet base load demands. That has to come from conventional generation and neither solar or wind can replace base load generation and that is a fact Jack.

[SunEagle]

I disagree with the contention that something nasty must happen to provide power. That's a 20th century paradigm.

From a Solar perspective alone, the amount of energy reaching the surface of the Earth is so vast that in one year it is about twice as much as will ever be obtained from all of the Earth's non-renewable resources of coal, oil, natural gas, and mined uranium combined (here's my source for that statement: Stanford University GCEP).

We haven't begun to explore the full potential of this fact. The Solar panel technology we're putting on our roofs hasn't changed significantly since the 1960s. That's a travesty and needs to be changed.

I disagree that the solar industry hasn't changed much since the 1960s. I worked on thin film cells research back in the early 70's and at that time the costs were through the roof with only a 10% to 12% panel efficiency. Even 5 years ago the cost for solar panels was $5/watt. Now it can be purchased for under $1/watt with efficiencies in the high teens pushing into the low 20's. Solar continues to make breakthroughs in efficiency and lowered costs. It just seems to take time for people (and some Utilities) to get on board with getting it installed.

What is a travesty is that the US has the potential to harvest off shore wind energy many times more than what is already being done in the UK and Europe combined, yet due to the many roadblocks put in place by people that don't want to "clutter the horizon" with turbines just about all of those off shore wind projects have been delayed again and again. So even a proven source of RE power like wind can't seem to move forward fast enough because people just don't want them in their backyard or anywhere they think is not a good place.

As for all of that sunlight you mentioned. Even if the installation of Solar systems leaps forward in generating capacity we still do not have the ability to "save" that extra energy the hits the Earths surface all year long and Solar does not generate power at night. To keep the lights on and be able to charge those IPads you still need a mix of RE and "base" power generation. RE can't do it alone.

[russ]

I disagree with the contention that something nasty must happen to provide power. That's a 20th century paradigm.

From a Solar perspective alone, the amount of energy reaching the surface of the Earth is so vast that in one year it is about twice as much as will ever be obtained from all of the Earth's non-renewable resources of coal, oil, natural gas, and mined uranium combined (here's my source for that statement: Stanford University GCEP).

We haven't begun to explore the full potential of this fact. The Solar panel technology we're putting on our roofs hasn't changed significantly since the 1960s. That's a travesty and needs to be changed.

OK - wish in one hand and crap in the other - maybe the university can tell you which will fill up first.

Travesty is a rather silly word when it comes to R&D and the amount of effort that has gone into all forms of RE. Greens like to pretend no one has realized the potential or can see the trees for the forest except them.

Fantastic sums have gone into all sorts of research over the past 30 years - that was well before Obama started throwing money at Solyndra and ordering green fuels for the military. Both of those activities have turned out to be rather stupid.

Reading research university sites is not a good way to see what may come about in the near future - actually it is a better idea of what will likely fail. One program in a thousand (or ten thousand) really has a successful completion. That is research though.

[Rdjntx]

The biggest issue with wholesale solar farming space - the only open spaces big enough to set up a really viable multi megawatt solar farm are out in BFE ... not good when you then have to build the infastructure to get it to the consumer. you build one big enough to make a difference and the greenies get all up in arms because of the damage caused to the enviornment, and no one wants it in their back yard. If you build a mirror collector you have other issues such as pilots blinded by the reflections.

and while you may thing the 20th century paradigm is obsolete, it is still very much the operating mindset. I agree with you that solar development needs to do a better job of R&D.

I disagree with the contention that something nasty must happen to provide power. That's a 20th century paradigm.

From a Solar perspective alone, the amount of energy reaching the surface of the Earth is so vast that in one year it is about twice as much as will ever be obtained from all of the Earth's non-renewable resources of coal, oil, natural gas, and mined uranium combined (here's my source for that statement: Stanford University GCEP).

We haven't begun to explore the full potential of this fact. The Solar panel technology we're putting on our roofs hasn't changed significantly since the 1960s. That's a travesty and needs to be changed.

[kwilcox]

Wow - What part of that can you disagree with - or are you just being green?

I disagree with the contention that something nasty must happen to provide power. That's a 20th century paradigm.

From a Solar perspective alone, the amount of energy reaching the surface of the Earth is so vast that in one year it is about twice as much as will ever be obtained from all of the Earth's non-renewable resources of coal, oil, natural gas, and mined uranium combined (here's my source for that statement: Stanford University GCEP).

We haven't begun to explore the full potential of this fact. The Solar panel technology we're putting on our roofs hasn't changed significantly since the 1960s. That's a travesty and needs to be changed.

[russ]

There's still that nasty issue of how much nuclear fuel is available to mine.

To add fuel (nuclear or otherwise) to this fiery debate: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...batteries-evs/

Total BS written by a fool! How many homes in Europe can even have solar? Lousy winter weather plus storms would call for really large battery banks for every apartment.

Much of Europe lives in condos/apartments where solar isn't even practical and not enough roof space.

Whoever wrote this tripe must have been trying to impress some air headed young gal. Outside of Germany and Spain where the governments threw away immense fortunes chasing the sun PV hasn't even made any real inroads in Europe.

[russ]

I disagree.

Wow - What part of that can you disagree with - or are you just being green?

[SunEagle]

It would not reverse it, and in the very short term it would not even slow it down.
But as some ancient Roman is reputed to have said, a civilized man will planet a tree now that will give fruit and shade to his grandchildren.

Yeah. I saw my typo and changed it. But I do like what you quoted by the ancient Roman.

[inetdog]

The real sad thing is that even if all fossil fuel generation stopped right now along with not driving fossil fuel vehicles it won't reverse Climate Change one bit. Sure there will be less pollutants in the air but the plant's temp will still rise and the weather will continue to change.

It would not reverse it, and in the very short term it would not even slow it down.
But as some ancient Roman is reputed to have said, a civilized man will planet a tree now that will give fruit and shade to his grandchildren.

[SunEagle]

There's still that nasty issue of how much nuclear fuel is available to mine.

To add fuel (nuclear or otherwise) to this fiery debate: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...batteries-evs/

That article is total BS. How many people in the US will ever be able to afford an EV or a small battery system to store energy. The majority of the people here almost live paycheck to paycheck and worry about putting food on the table not how to pay for a battery.

I would think that it is the same in Europe. Did you read today's news concerning the government of France? They all quit. The main reason the politicians left was due to the people being real angry about high unemployment and high cost of living. So who in France can afford an EV?

Sure by 2020 we will have found some type of "battery" to store RE but the people that will be able to afford that battery (stationary or car) will still be in the top 10 to 15% of the populace. If we shut down the majority of fossil fuel or nuclear generating plants and rely only on RE I guess the rest of those poor souls (me included) will just have to light up candles at night because there won't be enough power available.

The real sad thing is that even if all fossil fuel generation stopped right now along with not driving fossil fuel vehicles it won't reverse Climate Change one bit. Sure there will be less pollutants in the air but the planet's temp will still rise and the weather will continue to change.

[JCP]

Why pay twice? A nuke can generate 24 hours a day every day for 50 years and more fuel than man will ever use. . Why pay to add expensive solar or wind with unreliable output only a few hours in a day. You are not saving money and a strong argument for wasting resources.

There's still that nasty issue of how much nuclear fuel is available to mine.

To add fuel (nuclear or otherwise) to this fiery debate: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...batteries-evs/