Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Thursday October 05 2017, @07:33AM   Printer-friendly
from the forecast-cloudy dept.

Solar power grew faster than any other source of fuel for the first time in 2016, the International Energy Agency said in a report suggesting the technology will dominate renewables in the years ahead.

The institution established after the first major oil crisis in 1973 said 165 gigawatts of renewables were completed last year, which was two-thirds of the net expansion in electricity supply. Solar powered by photovoltaics, or PVs, grew by 50 percent, with almost half of new plants built in China.

"What we are witnessing is the birth of a new era in solar PV," Fatih Birol, executive director of the IEA, said in a statement accompanying the report published on Wednesday in Paris. "We expect that solar PV capacity growth will be higher than any other renewable technology through 2022."

Solar Grew Faster Than All Other Forms of Power for the First Time
International Energy Agency

Solar power will only work until the sun burns out, but dinosaurs are forever.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday October 05 2017, @07:14PM (4 children)

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Thursday October 05 2017, @07:14PM (#577582) Journal

    I don't think so because there's a feedback loop involved with this. The more people who go off-grid or, worse, feed power back into the grid that the utility has to buy, the smaller the pool of grid customers who share the cost of maintaining the grid and the profits of the utility. So each time a guy cuts the cord, there's even more reason for the next guy to cut the cord.

    Utilities are trying to cope by switching plants to natural gas they can spin up or down quickly, but a lot of baseload is still provided by coal that has to keep burning whether people want those watts or not.

    Micro-grids might replace larger ones because it is useful to avoid single points of failure, load balance, and all that, but the days of giant grids are probably numbered.

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Thursday October 05 2017, @10:04PM

    by jmorris (4844) on Thursday October 05 2017, @10:04PM (#577666)

    The more people who go off-grid or, worse, feed power back into the grid

    Nobody is going off the grid, at least not in numbers that aren't rounding errors. What they do is, as you note, feed into the grid whether the grid needs it or not and demand to be paid above market rate for the privilege of telling their friends and neighbors they are greener than thou. The problem should be obvious. Each install increases both the taxes and utility bills of the remaining unsubsidized customers. Soon a breaking point will come, but before that economic break hits we probably hit the tech one. Solar is the least useful electricity source, it isn't base load and it isn't peaking power either. As soon as enough solar is connected that the gap is often filled between base and current load something has to give, the grid simply won't be able to accept additional solar in those periods. But because it is erratic it will shift more of the total daily generation to the most expensive peaking sources. This means the payments / credits going to the people with panels will have to start dropping, stretching the repayment period out, or even more subsidies and higher taxes / borrowing.

    but the days of giant grids are probably numbered.

    Averaging the load out for peaks scales in efficiency with size of grid so the more erratic sources of generation (i.e. alt energy) are connected the more you gain from a bigger grid. Alt energy is GOOD for big electric in that aspect.

    All this alt energy is just green egoboo and feasting off the taxpayer until somebody solves the storage problem. Solve that and a lot of this stuff actually gets worth discussing on the economic merits.

  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday October 06 2017, @05:59AM (2 children)

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Friday October 06 2017, @05:59AM (#577836) Homepage
    If people who feed into the grid and get paid for that are not paying for access to the grid, then the market is broken.

    However, the market is broken anyway because of subsidies that artificially distort it.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday October 06 2017, @08:15AM (1 child)

      by Phoenix666 (552) on Friday October 06 2017, @08:15AM (#577882) Journal

      Electricity bills are broken down into the kwh's you use, and the fees for distribution (paying for the grid). Generally the kwh's you use constitute the greater share of the bill. If the utilities rebalance that such that they can keep charging you a net positive for them when you produce more electricity than you use, then you have even more incentive to sever that grid tie. After all, why should you be giving the grid free power, or rather, power that you have to pay to give them?

      In either case the feedback loop remains and the customers who have not yet severed their grid ties will have ever increasing incentive to do so.

      The East Germans taught us all a very powerful, very fundamental lesson when they defeated an undefeatable, totally repressive system by voting with their feet and leaving for West Germany. We need to do the same with our power needs (and many other things besides), and vote with our feet. Just pick up our ball and go home.

      --
      Washington DC delenda est.
      • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday October 08 2017, @05:23AM

        by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Sunday October 08 2017, @05:23AM (#578786) Homepage

        Absolutely. We've been told we need it, it was true in the past, but times and technology change. I love the community-based services I rely on here, but that's because I'm in a town centre, and I certainly wouldn't want to impose my preferences on the greater public. Those who no longer have the actual *need* for a centralised supply should indeed deshackle themselves with an appropriate amount of middle-finger waving.

        --
        Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves