All Hat No Cattle

I know I rant about solar, but when you see it working next to you every single day, and then have people lying that solar will never work, well...

Even the military believes in it . Our local Nellis AFB built a 140 acre solar array on base. Why? Because they are producing electricity at 2.2¢ a kw.

So if we use solar during the day, and natural gas at night, the only fuel costs that the utilities have will be gas. They will like that. Because, of course, solar energy is FREE. You just have a one-time build-out cost for the convertors, to convert solar energy to electric energy. And then you never have to buy fuel again, for the life of the collectors.

And that is how NV Energy can sell BEV power for 5¢ a KWH. They are paying 2.376¢ for it. That looks like a 100%+ mark up to me.

Nellis AFB pic.

Krakken

Yeah, it's hard to beat the variable cost of solar (below is the cost without any energy credits, so you can see that subsidies are not what is driving the adoption of solar specifically or renewables generally - the technology has matured and it fully pays for itself).

https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyi...h=45d777c62c84





And, with electric vehicles connected to the grid and dynamic rates, you have part of the solution to offset the intermittent availability of renewable power. It's a nice combo.

Krakken

One more interesting point. Renewables are an emerging technology and costs are still decreasing rapidly. Non-renewable energy generation is mature and costs are stable or increasing. Again, the market is driving the adoption to renewables. Protecting the climate is important, but the free market is making the decision to adopt renewables. This is the result of continued investments in the renewable technologies over the past ~12 years.

Even if you hate the climate, as long as you like money, renewables are the way to go. It is cheaper to save the environment than to ruin it.
https://www.fortune.com/videos/watch...2-0f7a996dd518

Bob Reynolds

Renewables include hydro-electric, a proven, time tested technology where geography permits and is over half of the 21% in 2020. Solar and wind, currently around 10%, may well grow in the way predicted but will be accompanied by corresponding growth in fossil fuel generation, most likely natural gas, to provide the required backup power unless US consumers can be convinced accept rolling blackouts, something I can confidently predict they will not do. As for what happens beyond 2040, who knows? Certainly not the people making these predictions. We'll see.

Krakken

What do you base that prediction on? The intermittency of power sources is being addressed already by multiple solutions: 1) increased grid interconnections, 2) dynamic pricing, 3) dynamic and scheduled usage, 4) grid scale storage solutions, 5) localized storage solutions (like EVs). This is happening already today. And these solutions are beneficial by themselves, as the duck curve of power usage can be flattened and expensive peaker generation capacity is needed less and these solutions increase the grid reliability and efficiency. I assume you do not work in the power industry but you should read up. Lots of exciting things happening.

All Hat No Cattle

And there it is. I know that there is a lot of fossil fuel propaganda out there, but folks, use common sense.

I bought a 100 watt solar collector from Harbor Freight a few years ago, to trickle charge my dual large boat batteries all year around. The array was about $130, with the 20% off coupon.

Since then, I have not spent a penny charging those batteries, 365 days a year. Because solar energy is FREE. And the fossil fuel people can't stand that. Why are all the energy utilities in sunny places from California to Nevada, Texas, and Florida investing hundreds of millions of $ building solar arrays? Because the energy to power those arrays is FREE.

How can fossil fuel compete with that? Free natural gas or coal for the utility companies?

Remember, this is what the coal companies are saying today. Do you believe it?

Bob Reynolds

I am aware of the developments you cite. Rationing and other grid management strategies are only required if the underlying source is unreliable and intermittent. The biggest issue here is that solar and wind are simply not economically viable compared to fossil fuels. Forcing their adoption for idealogical reasons will lower our standard of living. As this becomes apparent solar and wind will be relegated to applications where they actually make sense. Again, just my prediction.

Krakken

Sorry, what you are stating is simply not true. Utilities are going to renewables because they are the best financial solution, accounting for total cost, including intermittency in source. And, this gives businesses and consumers with flexibility the opportunity (not this is NOT rationing) to save a lot of $$ while keeping reliability for those who need constant high power levels. This is not forcing. It is free market at its best. When my Rivian has 185kwh, I will happily let others use some of this power and make some $$ off it (or, I can keep all the power and reduce load on the grid). Others who need this energy can get it (reliability) for a much lower cost than $9/kwh (efficiency).

And as I showed in a separate post, renewables are already cheaper than non-renewables and they are still decreasing in cost (renewables are projected to cost an additional 50% - 75% less in 10-20 years.)

Anyway, feel free to check back in 5, 10, and 20 years and see how your predictions turn out.

Bob Reynolds

Duplicate

Bob Reynolds

The expansion of the the solar and wind industry is driven by government incentives and subsidies all over the world. Technology arguments aside, this is definitely not the free market at work. Not even remotely.