Slashdot Mirror
Solar Power and Batteries Are Encroaching On Natural Gas In Energy Production (electrek.co)
Socguy writes: The relentless downward march in cost of both solar and battery storage is poised to displace 10GW worth of natural gas peaker plant electricity production in the U.S. by 2027. Already we are seeing the net cost of combined solar and batteries cheaper than the equivalent natural gas peaker plant. Some particularly aggressive estimates from major energy companies predict that we may not see another natural gas peaker plant built in the U.S. after 2020. GE has already responded to the weakness in the gas turbine market by laying off 12,000 workers. Further reading available via Greentech Media.
Cobalt plays a role in the positive electrode of a lithium battery. Lithium air batteries seek to remove that. That said, Li-air batteries seem to still be a ways off. However, there is a good amount of progress in Na-air batteries in that there are solutions providing office building backup power off a series of Na-air batteries. However, Na-air batteries have their own sets of problems and what-not. However, people thinking that grid storage will be nothing but lithium are idiots.
Which is why peakers are being replaced by solar/wind AND STORAGE, which is the focus of the article and is there in the slashdot summary, you muppet.
I'd like to see laws on the books that would require new commercial developments to include solar+battery for each housing unit.
This is one of the dumbest things we could do. In order to make a real change, alternative energy HAS TO ACTUALLY MAKE ECONOMIC SENSE.
It only sounds dumb if you keep ignoring the elephant in the room: external costs.
The economic fact of the matter is, fossil fuels cost us a lot more than the sticker price, and not only in nebulous future climate costs but in real, measurable damage to our health. US coal alone costs $300-500 billion a year, easily doubling the wholesale cost. When you look at the whole picture, it actually made economic sense to get off fossil fuels a long time ago, and what doesn't make sense is why people keep pretending these costs don't exist.
Since it's abundantly clear that the energy market is in no hurry to factor these external costs into their prices, the issue has to be forced - ideally by government evaluating full, levelised costs for all the alternatives then applying a suitable market correction (regulatory mandate, carbon price, cap & trade, whatever suits your politics), or the hard way - let the problem keep getting worse until the pain can no longer be ignored, and hope that the alternatives aren't too unattractive.
We've done exactly this in any number of other industries (sulphur emissions cone to mind), but the energy industry has been pushing back extra hard.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?