Slashdot Mirror


Tokelau Becomes First Country To Go 100% Solar

First time accepted submitter zonky writes "Tokelau has become the first country in the world to go 100% solar power generation, moving away from their entirely diesel power supply, which formerly supplied the energy needs of the 1400 residents of their small south pacific Island Nation. From the article: 'All three atolls in the South Pacific dependency, a New Zealand territory, will have their own solar power system by the end of October, despite a slight delay switching on the first system.'"

27 of 252 comments (clear)

  1. Hawii by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It is amazing that the USA is NOT investing more into getting Hawaii moved onto AE for energy and tesla is not pushing their car there.
    The reason why is because right now, nearly ALL of Hawaii's energy is from oil.
    Tesla could jump the production line to an easy 30K or even 40K for the model S and would still sell 100% of those cars on Hawaii.
    Oddly, Hawaii is setting up free electrical charging posts.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Hawii by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The cheapest Tesla car starts at ~$50k, not really within reach of the average citizen.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:Hawii by adolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I doubt that's true after you factor the fact that virtually everything has to be shipped in. So, they may make more money nominally, but I doubt it goes as far as you expect.

      Almost everything I buy in the continental US is shipped/flown in, as well, from sardines to salmon, mandarins to garlic, as well as small appliances and almost everything electronic (including wire), and of course cars.

      It seems to me that the only thing I routinely spend my money on that is produced domestically is gasoline (which may or may not be made from domestic crude), warm-blooded meat, and [some] vegetables.

      Everything else comes over on a boat or a plane.

      Hawaii may not be as relatively bad off as you implicitly suggest.

    3. Re:Hawii by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://www.bestplaces.net/cost_of_living/state/hawaii

      According to that page, the cost of living is over 75% higher then average for the US mainland. I was told when i vacationed there 20 some years ago, it was because everything is shipped in.

    4. Re:Hawii by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      One of Hawaii's major economic activities is tourism. I imagine they are very concerned about anything which might alter their postcard-perfect natural landscape. When the tourist trade is responsible for nearly a fourth of the state GDP, much caution is exercised in anything which might impact it.

    5. Re:Hawii by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's trying, but there's a number of roadblocks, mostly regulatory. There's a big paperwork backlog - 3/4ths of the permit applications in Honolulu are for rooftop solar installs. Also, it was just recently that they overturned the law banning more than 15% of the grid's capacity to be from home rooftops without getting an explicit exception (it's now 25%). Before that, you had to do a long interconnect impact study for each install. Getting paid for sending power back into the grid is fairly new itself, less than a year old. On the commercial side, the utilities are building most of their new capacity as renewables, but they don't want to toss away their investment on older generation hardware. So overall it's just moving at a snail's pace.

      --
      The chloride owes the sodium money.
    6. Re:Hawii by cvtan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Lots of low-income people in Hawaii. Schools are cash starved. Go to the library in Mountain View and you will find computers that should be in a museum. Watching tourists spend money in Honolulu gives a false impression. People I know with solar power do it for green "feel-good" reasons, not to save money. Many wind turbines on the southern point of the Big Island stand idle and rusting. The geothermal energy plant suffers reliability problems, has not expanded much and is required by contract to sell electricity at the same rate as the oil-fired generated plants.

      --
      Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
    7. Re:Hawii by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      It might be because I'm a techie, but I don't have any problems with tastefully done solar panels

      Me neither.

      Plus, if I lived in Hawaii, I'd hardly even use electricity. My ukulele doesn't plug in and the only juice sitting in a hammock requires is pineapple. And how would you even install AC outlets in a little grass shack?

      I'd catch my own tuna for sushi and rarely wear clothes and me and my wahine would watch the humuhumunukunukuapua go swimming by...

      I'm sorry, I drifted off for a minute there.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    8. Re:Hawii by geekmux · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The cheapest Tesla car starts at ~$50k, not really within reach of the average citizen.

      Add 10 years worth of ever-rising gas prices to that cost, and that sticker becomes a hell of a lot less shocking to the average citizen (especially if free electrical charging posts are available in the area)

      Add mass-production to that model and drop the cost by $10 - $15K.

    9. Re:Hawii by Rei · · Score: 3, Informative
      --
      The chloride owes the sodium money.
    10. Re:Hawii by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Almost everything I buy in the continental US is shipped/flown in

      Most of your food is grown domestically, not just meat. Vegetable oil comes from corn, soybeans, or canola, all three of which we export megatons of, most vegetables are grown here as well.

      Copper, gold, bauxite, and other mined materials also come from here. The US is blessed with an abundance of raw materials. Your wire and pipes are likely produced domestically (I used to work at that factory). "Japanese" and "Korean" autos are built in the US, as well as domestic models.

      US manufacturing's death has been greatly exaggerated.

  2. It helps... by bky1701 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    that they are a pacific island with a population of 1400.

    Not that far from saying something like Sealand is the first nation to adopt bitcoin as a national currency, which I am sure they would if they thought they could profit off it.

    1. Re:It helps... by tinkerton · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's like saying Tokelau is the first village to go solar but then it wouldn't be news.

    2. Re:It helps... by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Besides, while they may be the first to be essentially 100% solar, they're far from the first to go essentially 100% renewable. Here in Iceland we're essentially 100% geo and hydro for our electricity. Yeah, we're only 320,000 people, but we produce 2/3rds as much power as Ireland (which has 15 times our population). A huge amount of electricity per-capita goes to industry (it's so cheap, electricity-intensive industries like aluminum come here). Of the three aluminum smelters in the country, even the smallest uses more power than all the homes and businesses combined. And we're only at something like 20% of our hydro capacity, 25% of our known conventional geo capacity (plus, geo's not been nearly well enough explored, this doesn't count enhanced geothermal, it doesn't count low-temperature geothermal, and it doesn't count geothermal straight from lava**), the largest wind turbine in this super-windy country is only 30kW, and wave and tidal (there are big waves and tides here) are completely untapped.

      Note that electricity isn't the only form of energy that people use. Like I'm sure is the case with Tokelau, we import almost all of our fuel (although there's some new biofuels plants going online which should start to change that here). Also, most of our primary energy is heat. Geothermal currently makes up only a quarter of our electricity production, but it's 2/3rds of our primary energy production (most of it being low temperature geo which we've done nothing to produce electricity from - the water comes out of the wells at usually 100-140C and gets blended with cold water down to the 80C distribution temperature - power is so cheap and abundant here that nobody can justify the cost to generate power from low temperature geo). Fossil fuels (mainly oil) make up about 20% of our primary energy consumption.

      Having such a high percent of our primary energy production as heat, not transportation fuels or electricity, certainly is unusual, but then again, we love us some hot water and use it aplenty ;) Also, the geothermal heat displaces electric and/or oil/natural gas room and water heating in homes and businesses.

      ---

      ** It was actually discovered by accident that we can produce geo straight from lava when a geo well at the Krafla volcanic system accidentally drilled into the lava dome. The lava backed up the well a couple dozen meters and then stopped. At first considering the well a loss, they decided to try to turn it into a production well, and it turned out that it actually works. ;)

      --
      The chloride owes the sodium money.
    3. Re:It helps... by Rei · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It has to do with the fact that hydrogen fuel is a stupid idea, and while the concept that it is never really sank in, the effects of it (aka, the lack of nearly any hydrogen vehicles, let alone affordable ones) did. So Iceland has been pushing a bit more toward EVs, although not hard yet. I plug my car in the EV charging station at Kringlan - but that's the only one I know of (I'm sure there are more, but they're not common).

      It'll come in time.

      --
      The chloride owes the sodium money.
  3. Soon to become 100% hydro by Sussurros · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sadly Tokelau will be the first nation to go under the waves when the waters rise. I've met a few Tokelauans and they are uniformly terrific people. Their culture will pretty much vanish when migrate to New Zealand.and their kids become Kiwis (New Zelanders - the fruit is named after the people who are named after the bird).

    --
    I said - don't look Ethel!..., but it was too late..., she'd already looked.
    1. Re:Soon to become 100% hydro by LabRatty · · Score: 3, Funny

      And an easy, tasty treat.

      http://slightlyodd.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/How_to_prepare_a_kiwi.jpg

      They have taken the attribution off the image and reposted it, swiped from on old tshirt http://www.globalculture.co.nz/

  4. Cost by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well PV actually is quite cost effective against the carbon alternatives in this case. Not only is the country small making this project quite easy, but it's in the middle of nowhere so shipping costs for carbon based energy sources were equal to the cost of energy itself. One article mentioned that they were spending $800000 on shipping $1m worth of diesel every year.

    I can see how solar PV could pay for itself quite quickly in this case.

    1. Re:Cost by hankwang · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Look up how much energy is used to produce one square centimetre of a solar panel."

      This argument gets really old. Maybe you can provide that number yourself, with a reference. The 1st time I looked it up (ca 2003), energy parity was reached in 1-2 years depending on the local insolation.

    2. Re:Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, exactly the same "power will fail" scenario will happen if someone uses all the diesel before the supply ship arrives, or the generator fails or...
      Redundancy is a good thing in any critical infrastructure.
      On the other hand, on-going cash-flow requirements for fossil fuel are dealt with quite nicely by doing this.

    3. Re:Cost by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sorry but that's a load of crap. Solar panels don't require any maintenance unless you live in a very dirty environment and even cheap inverters will still outlive the return on investment duration. If your inverter breaks more often then once every 5 years then you need to seriously question about what brands you buy.

      Also you've clearly never lived on a small island in the pacific have you? I have. The expectation was quite simple. At 10pm the power went out. If we were lucky there would be blackouts at dinner time too. This isn't some high tech civilisation who cry bloody murder when their broadband connection goes down.

      Also cost effective is not questionable, not in the slightest. The case has been made. The plant cost $7.5m the annual expenditure on diesel is $1.8m. It would be paid off within 4 years without any kind of subsidy or assistance, except in this case the NZ government is providing the money. The country has just managed to pocket $1.8m / year which is 2/3rds of their national budget. That sounds like cost effective to me.

  5. It's a closed system by Hazelfield · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The news isn't that it's a country - which it's not - but that an entire island, cut off from mainland grid, is able to use solar power as its only means of generating electric power. This makes it very interesting, and I would like to know a lot more about what their grid looks like, how they handle peaks and lows in solar output (like day and night), and so on.

  6. Re:not a country by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

    You are reading it wrong. Currently they don't have electricity 24/7 because they don't run the generators all night. Once solar is running they will have electricity available all the time thanks to battery storage.

    It also means they are not reliant on incoming shipments of diesel to keep the lights on, and their power system is now distributed and far more redundant than when it was reliant on a small number of generators.

    Overall this is a huge upgrade for them.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  7. "A lot of maintenance" by Kupfernigk · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think last year I had to hose off some bird poop once. And nobody I know has had an inverter fail. I would just mod you down, but I'd like to call attention to the fact that solidraven is full of bird poop.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  8. Re:pointless achievement by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Informative

    They spent about $2,000,000 a year on fuel. They won't anymore.

  9. More solar bashing by Grayhand · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm always shocked at the venom aimed at solar and wind power on Slashdot. I can't think something much geekier or high tech than solar cells. I constantly see posts about how wildly impractical they are and how they create more CO2 than coal power with no facts to back any of it up. The fact is, and yes I have run the numbers, without government subsidies the payback is no more than 5 to 7 years and depending on location and power needs it can be less. With subsidies depending on the area it's usually 3 to 5 years for payback. Considering bank interest is at best a couple of percent it's a staggering return on your investment considering they'll likely power your house for 30 years, 25 to 35 depending on how much excess capacity you initially install. They will continue to produce usable power for another 15 to 25 years. I've never seen evidence suggesting that enough solar cells to power your house releases more CO2 to make than 30 years of coal based electricity. If there's actual data I'd love to see it! As to wind power contributing as much as coal fire I can firmly call bullshit on that one since I can assemble a windmill out of scrap parts and an alternator out of a junk car. The technology isn't that different than a portion of what runs your car so there's simply no way a wind mill large enough to power a home takes more CO2 to produce than a car. Also once it's set up it contributes no CO2. Localized solar cells require no infrastructure saving a massive amount of resources needed to support power line and substations. Also substations use large amounts of PCBs, a very bad thing to have laying around. The argument always descends into a "nuclear good" "solar bad". Ignoring all the problems we've had with nuclear and I'm not talking about just Russia and Japan, we have our own places like Hanford. Even under the most ideal situation with flawless performance nuclear needs a massive distribution network. Also as much of the east coast found out this summer when it goes down vast areas are screwed. Guess what happens when your neighbors solar cells stop working? You still have AC like the rest of the neighborhood with solar cells. No one is suggesting we dump all other forms of energy and focus on solar although I've heard people try to claim we should drop everything in favor of nuclear. The flaw in that plan being without a massive infrastructure of breeders and reprocessing plants that don't exist we run out of fuel for the reactors in something like 40 years if we switched over entirely. Let's drop the my teams better than your team approach to solving the energy crisis and use what works best in each situation. Lets give them credit for what they are doing switching to a sustainable solution that works for them. I noticed multiple well modded posts saying what they did doesn't count. Personally I think it counts for a lot. They are leading by example and the least we can do is not whine about it!