Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
"Solar power, once so costly it only made economic sense in spaceships, is becoming cheap enough that it will push coal and even natural-gas plants out of business faster than previously forecast.
That’s the conclusion of a Bloomberg New Energy Finance outlook for how fuel and electricity markets will evolve by 2040. The research group estimated solar already rivals the cost of new coal power plants in Germany and the U.S. and by 2021 will do so in quick-growing markets such as China and India."
My neighbors just put in 26 solar panels which look to be 3 1/2 ft. by 5 ft. which is large compared to others around here. I don't know what he paid but this is a traditional 1970s 3 bedroom rancher with single garage. I do wonder how well they do in a location where it rains or is dark and cloudy at least 80% of the days of the year.
Geez Anna I hope you don't live in a place where it is rainy, dark and cloudy 80% of the time. I'd go banana's! I would also think that trying to produce solar energy via panels under those conditions would be exceedingly inefficient. For more info:
"my electric bill has doubled in the last 3 years"
@Maurice- I'm sorry, but that's clearly not possible, as the government has repeatedly assured us that there is no inflation. SF garbage bills are due to increase by 14% (!!) next month, but that obviously is also due to something (not yet identified) other than inflation.
As near as I can decipher the 'energy efficiency charge" in MA is a fee used to reduce future energy costs by investing in energy saving infrastructure now. Don't ever forget Maurice that they are out to get you.
Here in MN all of my utilities have only gone up with time and my only savings are realized when I use less. I recently dropped my phone land line which reduced my phone/internet service bill by $103/mo (not a misprint). My igloo used electric baseboard heaters prior to replacing my dysfunctional gas heating unit with a new gas forced-air furnace. Savings amounted to $250-300/mo on my electric bill but my gas bill took back $100 of that. I still heat with wood when I can. I rarely if ever have any use for air conditioning. Shade trees keep the domicile tolerable.
Geez Anna I hope you don't live in a place where it is rainy, dark and cloudy 80% of the time. I'd go banana's! I would also think that trying to produce solar energy via panels under those conditions would be exceedingly inefficient.
Well maybe not 80% but not as low as 65% either as this article says unless they mean peeks out for just a second at a time between waves of clouds. I would never have chosen to live here but circumstances sometimes don't give you a choice.:
Bellingham, Washington, often comes out near the top when magazines rate America's "most liveable" cities, but it ranks No. 1 in a new list -- U.S. places that get the least sunshine during the year.
The sun is out only 35 percent of the time in the city at the Northwest corner of America's "lower 48" states.
ac power coming in from the street is pretty tightly regulated, filtered, close tolerances as to frequency and amperage and voltage, all that good stuff, for driving motors and safely distributing power throughout structures. Overkill and wasteful just to convert it back to simple heat, esp of large spaces (not stovetops quite as much). And of course typically real expensive.
@Catch22 - I can only surmise that someone clearly objects to a well-mannered, clearly labeled 'off-topic' discussion that garners more curiosity (views) than the usual post. Or maybe it has something to do with fighting back against climate change etc., and bringing down coal. Lets ask the shadow.
@davidrmoran- Yes, I caught that but gave you some slack.
I suppose that you could say that there are tolerances for current, in that if the draw is heavily excessive for any distribution circuit something's gonna blow on the supply side.
The Bloomberg projection comes as a great surprise. Several relatively recent studies, that are only a few years dated, painted a far less optimistic perspective for solar energy production and acceptance. Here is a Link to one such study that seems relatively exhaustive, at lease by the measure of someone not involved in the energy production business:
That report concluded that the USA is an energy rich nation with adequate energy reserves that should survive for hundreds if not thousands of years. I don't worry much given that timeframe.
The report also indicated that solar costs to produce useable energy are substantially higher than the more conventional sources like coal. Here is a brief summary of the conclusions presented in the referenced document:
. "Solar power provides 0.3 percent of our total energy. • Solar power produces 0.2 percent of our central station electricity. • Solar power is expensive—new photovoltaic solar is twice as expensive as new natural gas, and new thermal solar is almost four times as expensive. • Solar power producers receive subsidies of $24.34 per megawatt hour of electricity produced."
Much of what appears in the reference seems to be back-stopped with authoritative statistics and careful analyses. Has there been a significant technical or production breakthrough in the Solar arena in the last few years?
I am not aware of any major changes in the Solar disciplines, but slow progress to drive down costs and improve conversion effiency are heavily funded. I hope these huge expenditures deliver positive outcomes, but it is uncertain and therefore any projections that are years away are risky. I rate these projections as guesstimates.
For example, Elon Musk is developing and introducing roof tiles with integrated solar conversion units. He plans the first installations in the next few months. I wish him success. Historically, solar panel efficiency has degraded rapidly with exposure to the elements. He believes otherwise for his tiles. Also, his tiles will be very expensive. Many unknowns!
Regardless, please visit the document Link I provided. It will inform and expand any debate over the timeframe and costs of Solar conversion unit expansion.
Here's an article on Lazard's latest "LCOE" (levelized cost of energy) analysis, with a link to the full report. Summary quote:
Lazard’s annual LCOE study, released last week, is widely read in the power sector. The latest edition shows continued cost declines for alternative energy technologies, indicating their enhanced competitiveness without subsidies.
The report shows wind as clearly the cheapest form of new elec generation, with more or less a tie for second between utility-scale solar (both crystalline and thin-film) and nat gas. Rooftop solar leads in cost reduction, 26% between 2015 and 2016; the article says scale is the reason rooftop's not up there with the leaders.
If you're interested in this stuff, Utility Dive is a terrific source.
Ive had solar since 2010, and I have paid maybe $25 -$50 per year for electric since. I do live in a state that gets 300+ days of sun a year (NM) and my roof faces south, ideal situation. Im getting $.13 per kw hour I generate, but that expires in 2020. Then a lower rate. Unfortunately, I may or may not get investment back when I sell the house, because only a few people in my neighborhood have it, so it may not get appraised in. But enjoying no electric bills in summer vs the $150 per month I was paying before has been nice. I also got a great tax credit when it was installed which brought the actual cost down 50%.
Years ago lived in Cleveland, cloudy 7 months per year at minimum, would not have worked as well, but for people in the SW or Florida, its great
IER was founded in 1989 by Robert L. Bradley Jr. in Houston, Texas. Bradley, who previously worked as Enron’s public policy analysis director, secured funding to make IER a full-time organization.
Robert L. Bradley Jr., is... an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
[IER has] ... received funding from ExxonMobil, the American Petroleum Institute...and Peabody Energy.
IER has been described as a front group for the fossil fuel industry, since it has accepted financial donations from firms in that sector.
Another unbiased and evenhanded information source from ol' MJG.
In another life (my wife and I retired over 20 years ago), my wife occasionally was tasked to help clean the solar panels on the farms that were constructed in the Southern California desert between LA and Las Vegas.
It was a most dreaded arduous work assignment. Her assessment at that time was that the solar panels suffered many weather-induced problems that degraded the solar panel's efficiency. This was a casual observation that she made a long time ago that I reported without any supporting documentation. I trust her judgment based on her scientific education and job experience.
Since you challenged that assessment, I searched the Internet for a product manufacturer to get their assessment of amy degradation or maintenance issues. My search was certainly not exhaustive since this matter is of no major concern for me. Anyway, here is a Link that I quickly uncovered:
Solar panels still have big-time efficiency degradation issues coupled to air exposure. On randomly timed trips to Las Vegas, we frequently see repair and maintenance crews still scurrying about these huge solar structures. These devices will need constant inspection and work when installed on home rooftops.
MJG if I had read that in 2010, might not have put them up, but so far so good. Since I have been getting checks from PNM at a consistent rate, I guess they are fine. No trees anywhere near them, so leaves etc do not interfere. I will be getting their regular maintenance done soon, so hope all is well on my roof
@MJG: Surely you must be joking with that self-serving sales pitch from "Legend Solar". First they denigrate virtually every aspect of the technology, then they offer to sell you a wonderful system that presumably eliminates all of those alleged problems.
Did you even bother to read the whole thing? They're a "legend" all right.
"Legend Solar uses leading, state-of-the-art technology to combat these common problems and provide solar customers with the best, most reliable systems in the industry. Legend Solar uses panels that don’t have moving parts and are built to withstand even the harshest environments, allowing our systems to work for upwards of 50 years."
"Legend Solar uses panels that don’t have moving parts" Implying that other installers do? What parts are supposed to move, exactly?
"are built to withstand even the harshest environments" Implying that other installations aren't?
"allowing our systems to work for upwards of 50 years." Suggesting that other systems don't?
Come on MJG, this is total crap, even for you. Please, no glittering generalities without substance!
The energy document that I referenced is impressive in my assessment. It seemed to be very inclusive and comprehensive. It cited an endless list of references after each major section. Its explanations were clear and concise with a number of graphs well integrated into the presentation. Overall, I believe it is a fair and honest summary of the energy marketplace.
When reading the document, I,detected no political bias. That might just be me since I support no political parties. For example, I voted for Clinton in the recent election, but I think the President is performing better than I expected. Surprises happen! You guys often suggest political motives to most everything. I don't. I am apolitical and I try to post in the same way.
What specifically is wrong with the document I referenced? Please give a specific error that you observed in the material. Please, no glittering generalities without substance!
>> How much does it cost you to maintain the panels, and how often do they need to be cleaned ?
Huh?
Zero and never are the answers.
My 6kW installation is 6y old.
We do try and shovel or rake the snow off them, though it's usually gone in a little while if we don't.
One of the better decisions I have made.
@MJG, all the data show that your wife's 'judgment' is weak.
The installer link you gave is from a company that after going on about it gives a 25y guarantee (standard, same as mine) and projects 50y usage. Perhaps you did not read to the end. And I guess you did not read the link I provided.
You guys sound kneejerk-reactionary. Where do you think we should get energy? From Ted's generous healthcare fairy?
Comments
https://tonyseba.com/portfolio-item/clean-disruption-of-energy-transportation/
https://understandsolar.com/solar-panels-and-clouds/
@Maurice- I'm sorry, but that's clearly not possible, as the government has repeatedly assured us that there is no inflation. SF garbage bills are due to increase by 14% (!!) next month, but that obviously is also due to something (not yet identified) other than inflation.
Here in MN all of my utilities have only gone up with time and my only savings are realized when I use less. I recently dropped my phone land line which reduced my phone/internet service bill by $103/mo (not a misprint). My igloo used electric baseboard heaters prior to replacing my dysfunctional gas heating unit with a new gas forced-air furnace. Savings amounted to $250-300/mo on my electric bill but my gas bill took back $100 of that. I still heat with wood when I can. I rarely if ever have any use for air conditioning. Shade trees keep the domicile tolerable.
Overkill and wasteful just to convert it back to simple heat, esp of large spaces (not stovetops quite as much). And of course typically real expensive.
Regards,
Ted
You noted: "Time for the sun to set on this thread !
And the your reason would be................ ???
Hang in there,
Catch
I suppose that you could say that there are tolerances for current, in that if the draw is heavily excessive for any distribution circuit something's gonna blow on the supply side.
The Bloomberg projection comes as a great surprise. Several relatively recent studies, that are only a few years dated, painted a far less optimistic perspective for solar energy production and acceptance. Here is a Link to one such study that seems relatively exhaustive, at lease by the measure of someone not involved in the energy production business:
http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/IER_HardFacts_2015_3.pdf
That report concluded that the USA is an energy rich nation with adequate energy reserves that should survive for hundreds if not thousands of years. I don't worry much given that timeframe.
The report also indicated that solar costs to produce useable energy are substantially higher than the more conventional sources like coal. Here is a brief summary of the conclusions presented in the referenced document:
. "Solar power provides 0.3 percent of our total energy.
• Solar power produces 0.2 percent of our central station electricity.
• Solar power is expensive—new photovoltaic solar is twice as expensive as new natural gas, and new thermal solar is almost four times as expensive.
• Solar power producers receive subsidies of $24.34 per megawatt hour of electricity produced."
Much of what appears in the reference seems to be back-stopped with authoritative statistics and careful analyses. Has there been a significant technical or production breakthrough in the Solar arena in the last few years?
I am not aware of any major changes in the Solar disciplines, but slow progress to drive down costs and improve conversion effiency are heavily funded. I hope these huge expenditures deliver positive outcomes, but it is uncertain and therefore any projections that are years away are risky. I rate these projections as guesstimates.
For example, Elon Musk is developing and introducing roof tiles with integrated solar conversion units. He plans the first installations in the next few months. I wish him success. Historically, solar panel efficiency has degraded rapidly with exposure to the elements. He believes otherwise for his tiles. Also, his tiles will be very expensive. Many unknowns!
Regardless, please visit the document Link I provided. It will inform and expand any debate over the timeframe and costs of Solar conversion unit expansion.
Best Wishes
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Institute_for_Energy_Research
Re the 'author':
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/331615-trump-picks-renewable-energy-policy-skeptic-to-lead-doe-office
>> solar panel efficiency has degraded rapidly with exposure to the elements.
Where do you get this stuff?
https://cleantechnica.com/2015/10/19/how-long-will-solar-panels-last/
You do know that it is not that we need solar because we're running out of more harmful stuff, right? That's not the reason, you know.
Lazard’s annual LCOE study, released last week, is widely read in the power sector. The latest edition shows continued cost declines for alternative energy technologies, indicating their enhanced competitiveness without subsidies.
The report shows wind as clearly the cheapest form of new elec generation, with more or less a tie for second between utility-scale solar (both crystalline and thin-film) and nat gas. Rooftop solar leads in cost reduction, 26% between 2015 and 2016; the article says scale is the reason rooftop's not up there with the leaders.
If you're interested in this stuff, Utility Dive is a terrific source.
Years ago lived in Cleveland, cloudy 7 months per year at minimum, would not have worked as well, but for people in the SW or Florida, its great
Regards,
Ted
IER was founded in 1989 by Robert L. Bradley Jr. in Houston, Texas. Bradley, who previously worked as Enron’s public policy analysis director, secured funding to make IER a full-time organization.
Robert L. Bradley Jr., is... an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
[IER has] ... received funding from ExxonMobil, the American Petroleum Institute...and Peabody Energy.
IER has been described as a front group for the fossil fuel industry, since it has accepted financial donations from firms in that sector.
Another unbiased and evenhanded information source from ol' MJG.
Thank you for reading and commenting on my post.
In another life (my wife and I retired over 20 years ago), my wife occasionally was tasked to help clean the solar panels on the farms that were constructed in the Southern California desert between LA and Las Vegas.
It was a most dreaded arduous work assignment. Her assessment at that time was that the solar panels suffered many weather-induced problems that degraded the solar panel's efficiency. This was a casual observation that she made a long time ago that I reported without any supporting documentation. I trust her judgment based on her scientific education and job experience.
Since you challenged that assessment, I searched the Internet for a product manufacturer to get their assessment of amy degradation or maintenance issues. My search was certainly not exhaustive since this matter is of no major concern for me. Anyway, here is a Link that I quickly uncovered:
http://www.legendsolar.com/why-solar-panels-degrade-over-time/
Solar panels still have big-time efficiency degradation issues coupled to air exposure. On randomly timed trips to Las Vegas, we frequently see repair and maintenance crews still scurrying about these huge solar structures. These devices will need constant inspection and work when installed on home rooftops.
Best Wishes
Did you even bother to read the whole thing? They're a "legend" all right.
"Legend Solar uses leading, state-of-the-art technology to combat these common problems and provide solar customers with the best, most reliable systems in the industry. Legend Solar uses panels that don’t have moving parts and are built to withstand even the harshest environments, allowing our systems to work for upwards of 50 years."
"Legend Solar uses panels that don’t have moving parts" Implying that other installers do? What parts are supposed to move, exactly?
"are built to withstand even the harshest environments" Implying that other installations aren't?
"allowing our systems to work for upwards of 50 years." Suggesting that other systems don't?
Come on MJG, this is total crap, even for you. Please, no glittering generalities without substance!
The energy document that I referenced is impressive in my assessment. It seemed to be very inclusive and comprehensive. It cited an endless list of references after each major section. Its explanations were clear and concise with a number of graphs well integrated into the presentation. Overall, I believe it is a fair and honest summary of the energy marketplace.
When reading the document, I,detected no political bias. That might just be me since I support no political parties. For example, I voted for Clinton in the recent election, but I think the President is performing better than I expected. Surprises happen! You guys often suggest political motives to most everything. I don't. I am apolitical and I try to post in the same way.
What specifically is wrong with the document I referenced? Please give a specific error that you observed in the material. Please, no glittering generalities without substance!
Best Wishes
>> How much does it cost you to maintain the panels, and how often do they need to be cleaned ?
Huh?
Zero and never are the answers.
My 6kW installation is 6y old.
We do try and shovel or rake the snow off them, though it's usually gone in a little while if we don't.
One of the better decisions I have made.
@MJG, all the data show that your wife's 'judgment' is weak.
The installer link you gave is from a company that after going on about it gives a 25y guarantee (standard, same as mine) and projects 50y usage. Perhaps you did not read to the end. And I guess you did not read the link I provided.
You guys sound kneejerk-reactionary. Where do you think we should get energy? From Ted's generous healthcare fairy?