I don't think anyone with any sense is mandating that solar be the only power source. The problems with lots of discussions like this, people seem to think the topic of the current conversation is going to be the only solution on the table.
can you show us the reports that show battery prices are not falling? Every report i see on batteries, the price is falling as more and more companies provide competition. here is one https://thinkprogress.org/char...
I'm hoping to see local microgrids serving the local area but connected to the grid as a backup. Once every house etc has its own battery storage and an EV and they are all linked into a microgrid, you then have huge distributed storage capacity on tap. Centralisation is a "all eggs in one basket" risk.
I doubt people will leave the grid, they may leave the utilities. the grid will have to be maintained so you create microgrids that just serve the local areas and they then take responsibility (or just pay for maintenance of it) for the local grid and its connection to the major grid to draw power if required.
"Its only drawbacks are political in nature (well-heeled environmental lobbies)." - you haven't thought this through, pollution is a huge drawback and thats just from digging it out of the ground, transporting and burning it. and don't fall for the "clean" coal scam - its not really and its expensive to even attempt to do. http://ngm.nationalgeographic....
Why are you banking on solar being the only way of generating power? there will a lot of ways of generating power such as wind, hydro, nuclear. you should never put all your eggs in one basket although its a good troll ploy to do it in a post to try and be negative about something.
Can't read the nationalreview link, just get error 502, the cyprus is just a rant and does not list any pollution created during power generation by turbine or solar panels. Please identify the pollution created during power generation by turbines and solar, maybe you misunderstand what i actually mean.
someone falling off a roof is a human accident, again nothing to do with power being generated by the panel. Why not include all the human error accidents by fossil fuel workers in comparison e.g. oil tanker crashes/sinkings, gas/oil/petrol explosions/fires.
"Solar power is expensive, unreliable, toxic, and just generally a bad idea. " - new tech so a bit more expensive at the moment, very reliable, want to explain toxicity of fossil fuels in comparison, panels/batteries are 95% recycleable so a damn good idea whereas fossil fuel is single use in burning and produces pollution in every step of its life.
"Nuclear power is ten times safer, ten times cleaner, ten times more reliable, and just generally a better idea ten times over." its safe until you have an accident, its a single point of failure, the fuel is not safe to handle, its a fine target for a missile (or a terrorist) if you end up in a war, nuclear fuel, when expended, needs to be buried somewhere safe and hope it doesn't leak. Its not as good as you think and it costs an absolute fortune to build and just wait until your government (i.e. out of your pocket) is charged for the decommission of an old reactor.
of course not. its a new 21st century clean power generation infrastructure replacing the old subsidised fossil fuel method so it "new" and "new" infrastructure, particularly on this scale, is always expensive at first. If its was a subsidy for cupcakes then I'd agree with the original posters comment.
Once a new tech is up and running then yes. but not when they are trying to get something as large as a power generation market off the ground to create thousands of jobs, utopia does not exist i'm afraid
Explain how a wind turbine or a solar panel generating electrical energy is creating pollution. You can make that claim during the production of turbines/solar panels because anything that currently uses fossil fuelled power to manufacture will create some pollution until such time all/most power is generated with renewables. Pretty much 95% of a solar panel and batteries can be recycled so not much has to be disposed of. Nuclear is fine until your have an accident.
who is going to refuel, maintain and monitor them etc ? is it done by magic or perhaps the mythical magical being in the sky points its finger at them and its all done.
I expect some will make that mark and longer ( https://cleantechnica.com/2015... ) and some will be lower - nothing is perfect and totally predictable when dealing with electro-mechanical devices. Its like saying on the last day of its 25 year predicted lifespan, it will not turn again on the 1st day of its 26th year.
in the same way they get oil from the the north sea platforms - build a pipeline of some sort, lay a cable (how do you think they started to get telegraph messages between the UK and USA?
world and not just local climate is affected by fossil fuel pollution and thats a lot worse problem, in fact there is a whole branch of science dedicated to trying to stop the pollution hence the move to clean renewable power generation.
Consensus that death by gas and coal pollution was worth it? No, they didn't care (and probably didn't know about the link), industry and wealth was the driving force for using coal in those times, so what if poor people got ill or died, there were many more where they came from. i think i'd prefer renewables as they do not poison, cause oil slicks as a result of tanker accidents, pollute etc etc. Please add to the list of external costs to help the list grow.
1. construction
2. ongoing maintenance
did they compare it to the ongoing maintenance done on petrol refineries/gas/coal/nucleur power stations? i'd be surprised if there wasn't a maintenance program for wind turbines.
"When/if this comes to the USA then I see it as a problem." governments still subsidise decades old energy systems that should be able to stand on their own 2 feet decades ago so why is it different when the energy is renewable?
why do you assume that everyone wants to leave their own country and come to yours? thats the excuse all xenophobes use for emotional effect, the same type of people in the UK say exactly the same thing. The arrogant stance of "we are better than everyone else" is astounding.
"Look at every other country in the world and the USA is the only one that doesn't protect their own people." - every whining, can't take the competition or is not a capable worker in that field says the same thing in every country. its the "i'm native so i should get special treatment and every good job fed to me on a spoon even though i am are not the best candidate" scenario. Its also probable that in IT the most mundane jobs are overpaid since IT became mainstream. Run of the mill IT workers should now get run of the mill pay rates and not specialist pay rates - that boat has sailed.
was that a one off event or an increase in occurrences of heat waves ? i've noticed that here in the Uk the summer heatwave events seem to be very regular now when they used to be a one off event. Probably not hot compared to other places but certainly hotter than the norm
Slashdot Mirror
I think the main annoyance is the expense of the initial installation
I don't think anyone with any sense is mandating that solar be the only power source. The problems with lots of discussions like this, people seem to think the topic of the current conversation is going to be the only solution on the table.
can you show us the reports that show battery prices are not falling? Every report i see on batteries, the price is falling as more and more companies provide competition. here is one https://thinkprogress.org/char...
I'm hoping to see local microgrids serving the local area but connected to the grid as a backup. Once every house etc has its own battery storage and an EV and they are all linked into a microgrid, you then have huge distributed storage capacity on tap. Centralisation is a "all eggs in one basket" risk.
I doubt people will leave the grid, they may leave the utilities. the grid will have to be maintained so you create microgrids that just serve the local areas and they then take responsibility (or just pay for maintenance of it) for the local grid and its connection to the major grid to draw power if required.
"Its only drawbacks are political in nature (well-heeled environmental lobbies)." - you haven't thought this through, pollution is a huge drawback and thats just from digging it out of the ground, transporting and burning it.
and don't fall for the "clean" coal scam - its not really and its expensive to even attempt to do. http://ngm.nationalgeographic....
Why are you banking on solar being the only way of generating power? there will a lot of ways of generating power such as wind, hydro, nuclear. you should never put all your eggs in one basket although its a good troll ploy to do it in a post to try and be negative about something.
What about making a local micro-grid and use the charged batteries in houses and cars as part of the grid when a surge is needed.
Can't read the nationalreview link, just get error 502, the cyprus is just a rant and does not list any pollution created during power generation by turbine or solar panels. Please identify the pollution created during power generation by turbines and solar, maybe you misunderstand what i actually mean.
someone falling off a roof is a human accident, again nothing to do with power being generated by the panel. Why not include all the human error accidents by fossil fuel workers in comparison e.g. oil tanker crashes/sinkings, gas/oil/petrol explosions/fires.
"Solar power is expensive, unreliable, toxic, and just generally a bad idea. " - new tech so a bit more expensive at the moment, very reliable, want to explain toxicity of fossil fuels in comparison, panels/batteries are 95% recycleable so a damn good idea whereas fossil fuel is single use in burning and produces pollution in every step of its life.
"Nuclear power is ten times safer, ten times cleaner, ten times more reliable, and just generally a better idea ten times over." its safe until you have an accident, its a single point of failure, the fuel is not safe to handle, its a fine target for a missile (or a terrorist) if you end up in a war, nuclear fuel, when expended, needs to be buried somewhere safe and hope it doesn't leak. Its not as good as you think and it costs an absolute fortune to build and just wait until your government (i.e. out of your pocket) is charged for the decommission of an old reactor.
of course not. its a new 21st century clean power generation infrastructure replacing the old subsidised fossil fuel method so it "new" and "new" infrastructure, particularly on this scale, is always expensive at first. If its was a subsidy for cupcakes then I'd agree with the original posters comment.
Once a new tech is up and running then yes. but not when they are trying to get something as large as a power generation market off the ground to create thousands of jobs, utopia does not exist i'm afraid
hardly any poor people benefited in the early days as they couldn't afford it.
Explain how a wind turbine or a solar panel generating electrical energy is creating pollution. You can make that claim during the production of turbines/solar panels because anything that currently uses fossil fuelled power to manufacture will create some pollution until such time all/most power is generated with renewables. Pretty much 95% of a solar panel and batteries can be recycled so not much has to be disposed of. Nuclear is fine until your have an accident.
who is going to refuel, maintain and monitor them etc ? is it done by magic or perhaps the mythical magical being in the sky points its finger at them and its all done.
I expect some will make that mark and longer ( https://cleantechnica.com/2015... ) and some will be lower - nothing is perfect and totally predictable when dealing with electro-mechanical devices. Its like saying on the last day of its 25 year predicted lifespan, it will not turn again on the 1st day of its 26th year.
in the same way they get oil from the the north sea platforms - build a pipeline of some sort, lay a cable (how do you think they started to get telegraph messages between the UK and USA?
world and not just local climate is affected by fossil fuel pollution and thats a lot worse problem, in fact there is a whole branch of science dedicated to trying to stop the pollution hence the move to clean renewable power generation.
Consensus that death by gas and coal pollution was worth it? No, they didn't care (and probably didn't know about the link), industry and wealth was the driving force for using coal in those times, so what if poor people got ill or died, there were many more where they came from.
i think i'd prefer renewables as they do not poison, cause oil slicks as a result of tanker accidents, pollute etc etc.
Please add to the list of external costs to help the list grow.
1. construction
2. ongoing maintenance
did they compare it to the ongoing maintenance done on petrol refineries/gas/coal/nucleur power stations? i'd be surprised if there wasn't a maintenance program for wind turbines.
"When/if this comes to the USA then I see it as a problem." governments still subsidise decades old energy systems that should be able to stand on their own 2 feet decades ago so why is it different when the energy is renewable?
the EU does its best to keep the playing field level in markets, nothing more, nothing less.
I asked a friends Alexa at christmas "Alexa, is amazon a tax avoider?" the reply i got was "i don't understand the question" (or similar)
why do you assume that everyone wants to leave their own country and come to yours? thats the excuse all xenophobes use for emotional effect, the same type of people in the UK say exactly the same thing. The arrogant stance of "we are better than everyone else" is astounding.
"Look at every other country in the world and the USA is the only one that doesn't protect their own people." - every whining, can't take the competition or is not a capable worker in that field says the same thing in every country. its the "i'm native so i should get special treatment and every good job fed to me on a spoon even though i am are not the best candidate" scenario. Its also probable that in IT the most mundane jobs are overpaid since IT became mainstream. Run of the mill IT workers should now get run of the mill pay rates and not specialist pay rates - that boat has sailed.
was that a one off event or an increase in occurrences of heat waves ? i've noticed that here in the Uk the summer heatwave events seem to be very regular now when they used to be a one off event. Probably not hot compared to other places but certainly hotter than the norm