Renewable energy is working

[wmw999 2,452]

The eighth most solar-powered state (by percentage, obviously) is sunny tropical Massachusetts. There are 14,000 solar jobs here -- it's number two. According to the Solar Energy Industries Association. Since it's an industry panel, like the coal industry panel, that makes it reliable, right?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Phil1111 1,149]

China is also moving slowly to more modern building standards. Most older builings are uninsulated. New buildings are poorly insulated.

According to a report by the US Department of Energy
[3], a building with fiberglass insulation in the mild re-
gion can reduce its energy use by 50% compared with an
uninsulated building. Accordingly, China could reduce
its annual coal consumption by about 200 million tons by
introducing the use of insulation to Canadian standards in
buildings...

As per the results of the US Department of Energy’s
study (Table 1) [6], and based on China’s housing de-
velopment from 2008 to 2010 [7], theoretically China
could reduce its annual coal consumption for the pur-
poses of heating and cooling from the current 400 million
tons per year to 200 million tons per year by introducing
the use of insulation in buildings.
The installation of insulation in buildings requires only
a one-time investment on the part of the builder or owner,
yet the positive effects on the environment are long term.
A one-time insulation investment will provide a 50-year
payback. China would save a total of 10,000 million tons
of coal during the next 50 years if Canadian standard
insulation was introduced to China’s buildings today (50
years  200 million tons per year).

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262070232_Using_Insulation_in_China%27s_Buildings_Potential_for_Significant_Energy_Savings_and_Carbon_Emission_Reductions

Current China power supply
http://ceenews.info/en/power-statistics-china-2016-huge-growth-of-renewables-amidst-thermal-based-generation/

[airdvr 210]

wmw999

The eighth most solar-powered state (by percentage, obviously) is sunny tropical Massachusetts. There are 14,000 solar jobs here -- it's number two. According to the Solar Energy Industries Association. Since it's an industry panel, like the coal industry panel, that makes it reliable, right?

Wendy P.

Well it's great that there are lots of jobs in solar but it's a bit misleading.

It sounds as if solar is booming in Massachusets. from the link...

Solar Installed: 1,487.0 MW (406.1 MW in 2016)1
National Ranking: 7th (8th in 2016)
State Homes Powered by Solar: 244,000
Percentage of State’s Electricity from Solar: 5.61%2
Solar Jobs and Ranking: 14,582 (2nd in 2016)3
Solar Companies in State: 433 companies total; 86 Manufacturers, 181 Installers/Developers, 166 Others4
Total Solar Investment in State: $4,468.02 million ($921.12 million in 2016)
Price Declines: 64% over last 5 years
Growth Projections and Ranking: 2,532 MW over next 5 years (ranks 6th)

The last census put the total number of homes in MA at 2,443,580. Using those numbers slightly less than 1% of the homes in MA are powered by solar. I understand that businesses are also powered by solar. But a blanket statement that says "renewable energy is working" in places like MA, when only 1% of the homes are powered by solar and 5% of the states energy needs are being met by solar is a bit premature. There is a ton of subsidies in those numbers.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[billvon 2,997]

>State Homes Powered by Solar: 244,000

>The last census put the total number of homes in MA at 2,443,580. Using those
>numbers slightly less than 1% of the homes in MA are powered by solar.

That's 10% not 1%.

> There is a ton of subsidies in those numbers.

Yes, as there is in coal and nuclear.

[billeisele 130]

don't know about the others but NC has an RPS and net metering, it forces the utility to install solar regardless of the economics, and to buy solar generation at unreasonable prices (net metering)

the excess cost - that cost of solar that is above the current avoided cost - is passed to all customers in rates, socializing the uneconomical generation source

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[billeisele 130]

and YES the subsidy issue makes all this difficult to analyze

the worst most obvious and easiest to fix subsidy is net metering, a few states are trying to fix it and the solar peeps are screaming worse than the dems over crooked Killary

they know that if people understood that issue they would vote to get rid of net metering

it's easy to understand: electricity is a bundled product, the kWh cost (let's pick 12 cents) includes all costs, generation, transmission, distribution, taxes, metering, etc., in this example the cost of the actual electricity is 4 cents, the other costs do not go away unless the customer disconnects from the grid

net metering requires the utility to pay 12 cents for solar generation, that's just crazy when it only costs the utility 4 cents to generate a kWh

thus the solar generator is getting an 8 cents subsidy per kWh which is paid by all other customers, the cost is socialized

yes I've left out a lot of details to make this easy but that is the concept

some areas have decided to raise the base monthly charge to cover the "hardware" costs and that eliminates the subsidy, the current data shows that cost is approximately $60-$80, I'm sure it ranges wider than that but that is the basic idea

the thread topic is about - does it work, yes, technically it works but the economics are widely dispersed based on regional differences

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[TriGirl 319]

billvon

>1 -- Florida does not have this (at least, not last time I checked. Would be pleased
>to hear if that has changed)

Not sure which utility you are with but this is from FPL:
==========================================
Net metering allows FPL customers who connect approved, renewable generation systems, such as solar panels, to the electric grid to buy and sell electricity to FPL.

I'm on TECO (house in Tampa). Haven't been able to do the search recently....
because as I also mentioned, each home owner should do their own cost-benefit analysis, and what they can afford. I've recently done some other work on the house, which has combined to reduce the power requirements dramatically. When I have more people living in the house in the future, I'll look into the solar upgrades at that time.

See the upside, and always wear your parachute! -- Christopher Titus

Shut Up & Jump!

[billvon 2,997]

Quote

I've recently done some other work on the house, which has combined to reduce the power requirements dramatically.

Use reduction/efficiency improvements are almost always cheaper than installing solar - every $1 you spend on efficiency saves you $2 on solar. (Used to be $1 saves $5, but solar has gotten much cheaper.) So the order you are contemplating makes the most sense; reduce usage first, then if you go solar later it's much cheaper.

[DJL 235]

billvon

Quote

I've recently done some other work on the house, which has combined to reduce the power requirements dramatically.

Use reduction/efficiency improvements are almost always cheaper than installing solar - every $1 you spend on efficiency saves you $2 on solar. (Used to be $1 saves $5, but solar has gotten much cheaper.) So the order you are contemplating makes the most sense; reduce usage first, then if you go solar later it's much cheaper.

Selective reduction/efficiency improvements to a point of diminishing return.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[billvon 2,997]

>they know that if people understood that issue they would vote to get rid of net metering

Hmm. Even in Nevada, where APS has been shouting quite loudly that net metering is causing rates to go up, most people want net metering. Last July in a poll, 59% of Nevadans thought "the state should bring back net metering to allow better rates for rooftop solar customers.” Only 16% opposed it.

>it's easy to understand: electricity is a bundled product, the kWh cost (let's pick
>12 cents) includes all costs, generation, transmission, distribution, taxes,
>metering, etc., in this example the cost of the actual electricity is 4 cents, the
>other costs do not go away unless the customer disconnects from the grid

Here in CA, you can do net metering down to zero - but if you go beyond that you only get avoided costs (in our case about 3 cents/kwhr.) Seems fair.

Not surprising that the utilities are screaming about it - it hits their bottom line. Heck, if utilities could outlaw LED and CFL bulbs they'd do that too, because when people reduce energy consumption they make less money. (And I am sure they would argue they'd then have to raise everyone else's rates to compensate.)

However, utilities are public monopolies, so the public gets a say in how they are run.

[billvon 2,997]

>Selective reduction/efficiency improvements to a point of diminishing return.

Right. Incandescent to LED's always saves you money. CFL to LED still saves a little money but with much longer payback times. New fridge definitely saves money very quickly if your fridge is more than 10 years old - but if it's 5 years old it may never save. Converting from electric to gas heat is a big savings, but converting from heat pump to gas heat is less so.

At the point where the returns start to get out 30 years in the future, solar becomes a better investment than new reductions in energy usage.

[Phil1111 1,149]

TriGirl

***>1 -- Florida does not have this (at least, not last time I checked. Would be pleased
>to hear if that has changed)

Not sure which utility you are with but this is from FPL:
==========================================
Net metering allows FPL customers who connect approved, renewable generation systems, such as solar panels, to the electric grid to buy and sell electricity to FPL.

I'm on TECO (house in Tampa). Haven't been able to do the search recently....
because as I also mentioned, each home owner should do their own cost-benefit analysis, and what they can afford. I've recently done some other work on the house, which has combined to reduce the power requirements dramatically. When I have more people living in the house in the future, I'll look into the solar upgrades at that time.

Florida power battles:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39258421

[billeisele 130]

billvon

Not surprising that the utilities are screaming about it - it hits their bottom line.
*yes it impacts the bottom line, and because they are regulated those costs are passed to other customers, they are screaming because for decades the fundamental premise was that shared costs are shared and customers pay their fair share based on the costs they impose on the utility, that's the fundamental issue with net metering, the unrecovered costs from the solar customers are passed to non-solar customers, and what's starting now is the costs to stabilize the grid due to the impact of solar are passed to all customers

Heck, if utilities could outlaw LED and CFL bulbs they'd do that too, because when people reduce energy consumption they make less money.
*that is just a silly statement, below your normal intelligent answers, energy consumption is down for lighting and appliances but what we're seeing is a huge rise in plug loads with big TVs, DVRs, etc., overall per household consumption is down, it's mitigated by economic development and customer growth, our state is lucky in that regard, it would be interesting to know how this is being handled in states with negative growth

However, utilities are public monopolies, so the public gets a say in how they are run.
*yes, the public is represented by the regulators, and the public is free to say whatever they want, utility accounting is quite complex and frankly beyond the comprehension of most (mainly because they just won't take the time to understand it), the simple answer is: without proper margins debt costs increase and stock value declines, if this continues prices rise, it's a constant balancing act to maintain a sufficient profit to attract investors while maintaining reasonable rates

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[billvon 2,997]

Quote

and because they are regulated those costs are passed to other customers, they are screaming because for decades the fundamental premise was that shared costs are shared and customers pay their fair share based on the costs they impose on the utility, that's the fundamental issue with net metering, the unrecovered costs from the solar customers are passed to non-solar customers, and what's starting now is the costs to stabilize the grid due to the impact of solar are passed to all customers

Yep. All utility consumers benefit from lower cost solar - but there will be additional costs as well to handle the additional DER's.

Quote

that is just a silly statement, below your normal intelligent answers, energy consumption is down for lighting and appliances . . .

. . . resulting in higher operating costs per kwhr due to the reduced load overall (fewer plants running at peak efficiency.) And utilities then, again, share those costs among all consumers, even those who did not increase energy efficiency. But we see this as a good thing as well, and thus encourage it.

Quote

without proper margins debt costs increase and stock value declines, if this continues prices rise, it's a constant balancing act to maintain a sufficient profit to attract investors while maintaining reasonable rates.

Agreed. And utilities that are able to integrate a lot of low-cost solar into their grids will do better than utilities that do not have the skill/technology/infrastructure to do so, since their costs will be lower. As this happens, other utilities will learn from the winners.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Yep. All utility consumers benefit from lower cost solar

Unfortunately not the case in Ontario, but that is a different subject.

[DJL 235]

"The United States' ability to attract renewable energy investment has been tarnished by the shift in energy policy under U.S. President Donald Trump, putting China and India on top, a report by British accountancy firm Ernst & Young said earlier this month."


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-solar-wto-idUSKBN18P1JL?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=592c62cf04d301712e882758&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[billvon 2,997]

Quote

"The United States' ability to attract renewable energy investment has been tarnished by the shift in energy policy under U.S. President Donald Trump, putting China and India on top, a report by British accountancy firm Ernst & Young said earlier this month."

More JOBS! JOBS! JOBS! for China and India!

Are Trump supporters tired of all the winning yet?

[yoink 321]

Trump supporters don't care about JOBS.

They care about car-manufacturing jobs. Coal-mining jobs. Or wall-building jobs.

That's about it.


Every other job is probably communist, liberal or both.

[billeisele 130]

billvon

Quote

and because they are regulated those costs are passed to other customers, they are screaming because for decades the fundamental premise was that shared costs are shared and customers pay their fair share based on the costs they impose on the utility, that's the fundamental issue with net metering, the unrecovered costs from the solar customers are passed to non-solar customers, and what's starting now is the costs to stabilize the grid due to the impact of solar are passed to all customers

Yep. All utility consumers benefit from lower cost solar - but there will be additional costs as well to handle the additional DER's.
***that is just a silly statement, below your normal intelligent answers, energy consumption is down for lighting and appliances . . .

. . . resulting in higher operating costs per kwhr due to the reduced load overall (fewer plants running at peak efficiency.) And utilities then, again, share those costs among all consumers, even those who did not increase energy efficiency. But we see this as a good thing as well, and thus encourage it.

Quote

without proper margins debt costs increase and stock value declines, if this continues prices rise, it's a constant balancing act to maintain a sufficient profit to attract investors while maintaining reasonable rates.

Agreed. And utilities that are able to integrate a lot of low-cost solar into their grids will do better than utilities that do not have the skill/technology/infrastructure to do so, since their costs will be lower. As this happens, other utilities will learn from the winners.

no clue what you are smoking to write this BS, there is no such thing as low cost solar when it only operates part of the cycle, in my area the beast systems are available 23%, then the greenies want to suck on the grid, but they don't want to pay for it

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[billvon 2,997]

Quote

no clue what you are smoking to write this BS, there is no such thing as low cost solar when it only operates part of the cycle, in my area the beast systems are available 23%, then the greenies want to suck on the grid, but they don't want to pay for it

Back around 1993 I was working for a tiny company called Qualcomm. We were pushing CDMA as a way to get more capacity out of existing frequency. About once a month someone from another company would write an article about how we were nuts, how no intelligent engineer could think that you could take the same bandwidth and get six time the capacity out of it. It violated the laws of physics, or at least the Nyquist theorem. Power control would never work; they proved it. Viterbi dencoding was just too hard to do; you'd need a computer in your cellphone, and what idiot would want to carry around a 20 pound computer in their phone? I am pretty sure one such article wondered what we were smoking to think up this BS.

Well, if you use a cellphone now you use CDMA. It worked because it was cheaper and faster, even if it was harder. Several of those other companies are now out of business.

Solar is now cheaper than fossil fuels. It is harder to use, because of its low availability. (True of wind and other renewables as well.) There are ways to make it work. The companies that use those methods will make money and succeed; the companies that stick with coal and NG exclusively because it's easier will go out of business as customers flock to the cheaper solutions. That's the way of the world.

[kallend 2,027]

Did some practice instrument approaches into Kankakee (KIKK) this morning. There's a huge new wind farm just southwest of there. Huge windfarm near Lafayette, IN, too.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[JerryBaumchen 1,365]

Hi John,

Quote

Renewable energy is working

Looks like coal is slowly but surely going into the ash heap of history:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/st-louis-long-coal-capital-votes-get-all-its-power-n814861

Jerry Baumchen

[DanG 1]

Fake news. Everyone knows that the spinning blades of a wind farm give pilots vertigo and seizures, and create so much turbulence that nearby airports are unsafe.

- Dan G

[Stumpy 284]

DanG

Fake news. Everyone knows that the spinning blades of a wind farm give pilots vertigo and seizures, and create so much turbulence that nearby airports are unsafe.

Its true, plus they provide thrust to the planet that makes hitting the runway a tricky proposition.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[billvon 2,997]

>Its true, plus they provide thrust to the planet that makes hitting the runway a tricky
>proposition.

So THAT's why it is so hard to figure out exit separation!