Look - I KNEW all that in 1986 and it has nothing to do with my question. We have not moved on since Chernobyl. Depressingly even the AP1000 design mostly dates back to before 1986.
But this is not a physics problem; there are hundreds of storage technologies that could work
It's merely a mostly in place distribution problem if the scales ever reach that high (which is unlikely) given that the USA has an enormous grid spanning several time zones. An afternoon peak matches midday maximum solar output somewhere else.
In the mean time, a lot of manufacturing has become automated, which made it cheaper to return it to the USA.
And cheaper again to automate it where it already is. Once you sell the farm and the price goes up what do you use to buy it back? Getting things back will be hard and may not happen at all so the hope is some new industry will appear and make everything all right. That's not my personal opinion, I'm a bit more pessimistic, but that's what they teach MBAs that think enough to consider such things.
Oh really? How many US nuclear reactors were built after 1986 then?
Personally I think this stupid head in the sand attitude is holding nuclear back. You can't talk about nuclear safety without being branded a heretic (eg. the people running the thorium project a few years ago) so improvement is very slow.
Your previous arguments have seemed to imply that nothing would need to be done.
Nothing would need to be done until we get a vast amount of generating capacity from these things - and then it makes more financial sense to do something than not. It's still a very long way away even in your Hawaii example (10% of some unspecified number isn't it?) and it's unlikely to ever happen beyond mainly low density residential areas in the tropics and maybe subtropics.
you're still making silly assumptions about my position
Fair enough, I'll stop speculating as to exactly why you are making up very stupid lies to make solar look bad if you'll tell me why you are doing it.
the technical problems listed in the links
When you understand them you'll see why they don't matter. It's not a difficult system to understand and you'll be able to get most of it from two of my posts. If that's not enough wikipedia is a good starting point these days.
Never been to the USA have you, good chap? Due to zoning laws there is a history of separating housing and industry as much as possible, generally with commercial stuck in between.
Sorry to ruin your petty patronising game but substations cover large areas. Electrically those places miles apart are adjacent.
replace that system that's been in place since 1902
You are not that stupid and ignorant. Please stop pretending to be so stupid and ignorant.
You know, maybe you should stop assuming what you think I know/think/imagine.
When you show signs of knowing as much about this topic as you pretend and start actually getting things right then I'll be able to take you at your word. Until then all I can do is attempt to correct delusions and warn others that you are so full of shit that you are overflowing. All this shit of truth taking a back seat to political dogma really pisses me off. It's a very Soviet way of doing things.
There's a bit of corruption being uncovered in the ruling party in Australia this week. Turns out you can get a lot of access during a tendering process for a gift valued at $3000. It's a bargain since getting a Mayor to listen cost $5000.
That's a very "special" excuse for why it's perfectly fine to avoid tax, not put money in the collection plate etc. That "large group of people" is not allowed to get in charge for very long by a wide variety of mechanisms in any state. The equivalent of the United Fruit Company calls in their friends as soon as such a situation is threatened.
Your "argument" does not work if retail and industry are anywhere near the houses you describe which is why your pretence is very stupid.
I'm not going to say that their installs will cover 100% of their daytime need
Then what exactly is your problem? Why are you stirring up fear with your "As long as you don't have so many people install solar that power flows in reverse through switching yards"? Why can't you see that because the transistor was invented such a thing is not going to happen unless it is seen as a desirable thing by whoever controls the network? Even before the transistor it was possible but a bit more expensive to do so may have actually required some modifications - but these days it's built in to existing equipment.
The only downside here is less profits for electricity monopolies that have raised the local price of electricity to such a high level that it becomes financially viable for consumers to spend a lot of money for the capital cost of their own solar panels. It is capitalism in action. Keep that in mind when next time someone feeds you one of these utterly stupid political talking points.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that a solar generating unit can't just be taken off the grid like any other unit when the desired capacity is reached. What did you think those very expensive controllers that come with mains connected solar panels do? If it was a taxpayer owned utility in those islands they would be cheering on the situation since they could save a lot of expensive fuel costs. It's only a compliant because it's a commercial enterprise seeing a reduction in profits. People still want power at night so the company is not doomed but they do not want to lose the profits they currently have - it's harder to gouge on low volume than high.
All of that should be very obvious once you know that there is zero threat of "overload" or whatever you have been imagining.
If we ever do get to the point where an area can supply your mythical 120% then that is actually very good news. Then instead of not accepting excess from panels beyond the 100% in the substation area it becomes financially viable to put in some gear to move the excess across to the next substation,. So once again, instead of creating problems it's reducing others. I can't see it happening soon at full peak load anywhere even if it may be able to work at 6am in Oahu in a few years. If it can happen there, good luck, I think they burn oil there so taking units off line means you can stop feeding them expensive fuel and get them up pretty quick when you need them later.
As an aside that may help with understanding, windmill farms and in some cases large arrays of photovolatics are made up of lots of little electricity generating units that are connected to the grid as required and disconnected when not needed. That's the only reason why windmills are in the mainstream of electricity generation at all - you need another 1.5MW so you connect another expensive and tiny windmill but the alternative is spending hours warming up 250MW of cheap coal capacity that devours fuel at a tremendous rate so at low demand costs a hell of a lot more per MW than a few little windmills. Rooftop solar is designed to be operated the same way with the excess generation capacity. Too much power? Stop it sending excess to the grid. The people living under it won't even notice unless they are getting paid for whatever they feed back into the local power network.
An invented problem is being used as a means to halt a threat to sales. A threat to the profits of a power utility which has a monopoly in an area of a few thousand people is not something that should hold back an energy source globally. Besides, it's not as if they don't already have to generation capacity to take up the slack at times of low photovoltaic output. I suggesting reading a paper and seeing whether it actually supports your point or not before linking it as if it's some sort of trump card in a silly game. I didn't look at whatever is on facebook but the NREL study does not support your point at all. It just shows a different load profile as expected because photovoltaics are dealing with daytime peaks as they should.
I suggest you read what I've written some posts above and attempt to understand it instead of playing silly games trying to cherrypick things that look a little like your skewed view of this system. It is a very simple system and you can understand it if you try.
Since in hindsight destruction to drive down the sale price was the aim (and removing competing technologies to Winphone another aim) any time would have been too late to stop Elop from destroying it all completely.
One hundred fucking percent of residences. Did that make the point clearly enough so you can't pretend to not get it this time? Stop pretending to be too stupid to breath and take this seriously.
Do you believe that Nokia was naive when Elop was hired
I believe some of Nokia's board members got kickbacks starting from just before they hired Elop since among many other things that explains why they didn't throw Elop out for performance far worse than what they threw out the previous CEO for. Nokia was an enormous company, yet it was the first CEO gig for Elop. That smells pretty funny on it's own.
Unfortunately, Maemo/Meego plan was internally fought over by the Symbian team, creating unnecessary, unhealthy competition inside Nokia and delaying success of any of them
Management is in place to deal with such things and earlier management said to retire Symbian and migrate to the newer system. Then Elop came in and pinned all hopes on a frankly utter crap Microsoft OS which MS abandoned not long after. Then they scrambled to do a second port to the newer and very different MS OS.
Slashdot Mirror
You must be lots of fun at parties. Do you do balloon animals as well?
Look - I KNEW all that in 1986 and it has nothing to do with my question.
We have not moved on since Chernobyl. Depressingly even the AP1000 design mostly dates back to before 1986.
It's merely a mostly in place distribution problem if the scales ever reach that high (which is unlikely) given that the USA has an enormous grid spanning several time zones. An afternoon peak matches midday maximum solar output somewhere else.
And cheaper again to automate it where it already is. Once you sell the farm and the price goes up what do you use to buy it back? Getting things back will be hard and may not happen at all so the hope is some new industry will appear and make everything all right. That's not my personal opinion, I'm a bit more pessimistic, but that's what they teach MBAs that think enough to consider such things.
I'd say that selling the farm in that sector made the economy far more fragile than it used to be and not less fragile.
Apparently it's a bit wet. Synroc can deal with that situation but not conventional vitrified waste.
Oh really? How many US nuclear reactors were built after 1986 then?
Personally I think this stupid head in the sand attitude is holding nuclear back. You can't talk about nuclear safety without being branded a heretic (eg. the people running the thorium project a few years ago) so improvement is very slow.
Nothing would need to be done until we get a vast amount of generating capacity from these things - and then it makes more financial sense to do something than not. It's still a very long way away even in your Hawaii example (10% of some unspecified number isn't it?) and it's unlikely to ever happen beyond mainly low density residential areas in the tropics and maybe subtropics.
Fair enough, I'll stop speculating as to exactly why you are making up very stupid lies to make solar look bad if you'll tell me why you are doing it.
When you understand them you'll see why they don't matter. It's not a difficult system to understand and you'll be able to get most of it from two of my posts. If that's not enough wikipedia is a good starting point these days.
Sorry to ruin your petty patronising game but substations cover large areas. Electrically those places miles apart are adjacent.
You are not that stupid and ignorant. Please stop pretending to be so stupid and ignorant.
When you show signs of knowing as much about this topic as you pretend and start actually getting things right then I'll be able to take you at your word. Until then all I can do is attempt to correct delusions and warn others that you are so full of shit that you are overflowing.
All this shit of truth taking a back seat to political dogma really pisses me off. It's a very Soviet way of doing things.
There's a bit of corruption being uncovered in the ruling party in Australia this week. Turns out you can get a lot of access during a tendering process for a gift valued at $3000. It's a bargain since getting a Mayor to listen cost $5000.
Wrong, sociopaths are the real problem. Look it up and see if it fits you for not wanting to help others out.
That's a very "special" excuse for why it's perfectly fine to avoid tax, not put money in the collection plate etc. That "large group of people" is not allowed to get in charge for very long by a wide variety of mechanisms in any state. The equivalent of the United Fruit Company calls in their friends as soon as such a situation is threatened.
Google can try to register as a charity like all the others providing services and see how far it gets.
The difference is that in Australia a gift of an expensive bottle of wine to the right person will make the tax problems go away.
Then what exactly is your problem? Why are you stirring up fear with your "As long as you don't have so many people install solar that power flows in reverse through switching yards"? Why can't you see that because the transistor was invented such a thing is not going to happen unless it is seen as a desirable thing by whoever controls the network? Even before the transistor it was possible but a bit more expensive to do so may have actually required some modifications - but these days it's built in to existing equipment.
The only downside here is less profits for electricity monopolies that have raised the local price of electricity to such a high level that it becomes financially viable for consumers to spend a lot of money for the capital cost of their own solar panels. It is capitalism in action. Keep that in mind when next time someone feeds you one of these utterly stupid political talking points.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that a solar generating unit can't just be taken off the grid like any other unit when the desired capacity is reached. What did you think those very expensive controllers that come with mains connected solar panels do?
If it was a taxpayer owned utility in those islands they would be cheering on the situation since they could save a lot of expensive fuel costs. It's only a compliant because it's a commercial enterprise seeing a reduction in profits. People still want power at night so the company is not doomed but they do not want to lose the profits they currently have - it's harder to gouge on low volume than high.
All of that should be very obvious once you know that there is zero threat of "overload" or whatever you have been imagining.
If we ever do get to the point where an area can supply your mythical 120% then that is actually very good news. Then instead of not accepting excess from panels beyond the 100% in the substation area it becomes financially viable to put in some gear to move the excess across to the next substation,. So once again, instead of creating problems it's reducing others. I can't see it happening soon at full peak load anywhere even if it may be able to work at 6am in Oahu in a few years. If it can happen there, good luck, I think they burn oil there so taking units off line means you can stop feeding them expensive fuel and get them up pretty quick when you need them later.
As an aside that may help with understanding, windmill farms and in some cases large arrays of photovolatics are made up of lots of little electricity generating units that are connected to the grid as required and disconnected when not needed. That's the only reason why windmills are in the mainstream of electricity generation at all - you need another 1.5MW so you connect another expensive and tiny windmill but the alternative is spending hours warming up 250MW of cheap coal capacity that devours fuel at a tremendous rate so at low demand costs a hell of a lot more per MW than a few little windmills. Rooftop solar is designed to be operated the same way with the excess generation capacity. Too much power? Stop it sending excess to the grid. The people living under it won't even notice unless they are getting paid for whatever they feed back into the local power network.
An invented problem is being used as a means to halt a threat to sales.
A threat to the profits of a power utility which has a monopoly in an area of a few thousand people is not something that should hold back an energy source globally. Besides, it's not as if they don't already have to generation capacity to take up the slack at times of low photovoltaic output.
I suggesting reading a paper and seeing whether it actually supports your point or not before linking it as if it's some sort of trump card in a silly game. I didn't look at whatever is on facebook but the NREL study does not support your point at all. It just shows a different load profile as expected because photovoltaics are dealing with daytime peaks as they should.
I suggest you read what I've written some posts above and attempt to understand it instead of playing silly games trying to cherrypick things that look a little like your skewed view of this system. It is a very simple system and you can understand it if you try.
Since in hindsight destruction to drive down the sale price was the aim (and removing competing technologies to Winphone another aim) any time would have been too late to stop Elop from destroying it all completely.
Obviously not. Retail and industry exist. Please stop pretending to be stupid and take this seriously.
One hundred fucking percent of residences. Did that make the point clearly enough so you can't pretend to not get it this time? Stop pretending to be too stupid to breath and take this seriously.
I believe some of Nokia's board members got kickbacks starting from just before they hired Elop since among many other things that explains why they didn't throw Elop out for performance far worse than what they threw out the previous CEO for.
Nokia was an enormous company, yet it was the first CEO gig for Elop. That smells pretty funny on it's own.
Management is in place to deal with such things and earlier management said to retire Symbian and migrate to the newer system. Then Elop came in and pinned all hopes on a frankly utter crap Microsoft OS which MS abandoned not long after. Then they scrambled to do a second port to the newer and very different MS OS.
No. Elop did some active wrecking. A trust fund baby that never turned up for work would have done better.