walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
I heard
Germany is burning lignite for base load now. They jumped in bigtime. Shutting down nukes, going to solar and wind, now lignite.?
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
- Thread starter dxmnkd316
- Start date
- Status
Germany is burning lignite for base load now. They jumped in bigtime. Shutting down nukes, going to solar and wind, now lignite.?
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
Per the EIA data again, an average oil well produces about 404 barrels per day, and each barrel is about 1.7MWh, so that's about 690MWh per day, or an average power of 28MW. Typical solar insolation in the US is around 6 KWh/m2/day, so if your cells are 50% efficient (generous), then you'd need 61 *acres* of solar cells to replace a single oil well. The solar energy produced is also incredibly hard to store or transport (compared to oil), so if you lose another 50% in storage and transport losses, it would actually take 122 acres of solar to replace an average oil well.
The real estate needs of solar are just ridiculously high when compared to fossil fuels. There's no way we can/would pave Nevada with solar cells, which is what it would take.
For oil, it's built in to the price you pay at the pump - the companies pass those costs on to consumers. On the other hand, if you price out adding solar to your existing home, then you're only accounting for the cost of the equipment itself (i.e. the oil derrick). That's why just looking at the price of the solar equipment is not an apples-to-apples comparison.
Per the EIA data again, an average oil well produces about 404 barrels per day, and each barrel is about 1.7MWh, so that's about 690MWh per day, or an average power of 28MW. Typical solar insolation in the US is around 6 KWh/m2/day, so if your cells are 50% efficient (generous), then you'd need 61 *acres* of solar cells to replace a single oil well. The solar energy produced is also incredibly hard to store or transport (compared to oil), so if you lose another 50% in storage and transport losses, it would actually take 122 acres of solar to replace an average oil well.
The real estate needs of solar are just ridiculously high when compared to fossil fuels. There's no way we can/would pave Nevada with solar cells, which is what it would take.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
Wireless energy, baby. Put a collector the size of an umbrella close enough to the sun and you've got an angle greater than Nevada. Then just beam it home.
(Any problem can be solved by positing a sufficiently magical technology.)
Wireless energy, baby. Put a collector the size of an umbrella close enough to the sun and you've got an angle greater than Nevada. Then just beam it home.
(Any problem can be solved by positing a sufficiently magical technology.)
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
"magical technology" and fusion.
Kep really can bend physics and dx is Marty McFly's "Professor".
Wireless energy, baby. Put a collector the size of an umbrella close enough to the sun and you've got an angle greater than Nevada. Then just beam it home.
(Any problem can be solved by positing a sufficiently magical technology.)
"magical technology" and fusion.
Kep really can bend physics and dx is Marty McFly's "Professor".
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
As I said: storage.
Storage solves the cloudy, windless day issues for solar and wind.
Storage allows for local generation (no transmission losses).
As I said: storage.
Storage solves the cloudy, windless day issues for solar and wind.
Storage allows for local generation (no transmission losses).
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
I haven't looked deeply into it, but don't the panels usually just go on the existing roof anyway? I probably wouldn't be buying the vacant lot next door just to switch to solar. Of course an industrial application would require exponentially more space.
I haven't looked deeply into it, but don't the panels usually just go on the existing roof anyway? I probably wouldn't be buying the vacant lot next door just to switch to solar. Of course an industrial application would require exponentially more space.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
You can, but they are much more costly to install and maintain.
Plus, is your roof engineered for the extra dead load (pure weight) and live load (stress of the wind on solar panel) of the panels up there?
You can, but they are much more costly to install and maintain.
Plus, is your roof engineered for the extra dead load (pure weight) and live load (stress of the wind on solar panel) of the panels up there?
And when you have to replace the roof, then what?
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
Be prepared to write a not just a big check but a really big check (move panels, reinstall roof, reinstall panels).
Be prepared to write a not just a big check but a really big check (move panels, reinstall roof, reinstall panels).
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
I realized that I was most of the way there with my calc, so I just rounded it out. All figures per various EIA sites:
Annual electricity production in the US = 4.1e9 MWh, or an average of 467,230 MW. If we use my earlier figure of 28MW per 122 acres, we'd need 2.04M acres of panels, which is roughly 2.6 RIUs*.
If we repeat the calculation for all energy usage in the US, that's 86.91 quadrillion BTU per year, which averages out to 2.9 million MW. At 28MW per 122 acres again, that's 16.3 RIUs, which is just a little smaller than West Virginia - and next above that on the list is South Carolina. So I probably had some slight differences in my assumptions last time, and the South Carolina result is to replace *all* energy with solar, not just electricity.
*RIU = Rhode Island Units = 1212 mi2.
Unfortunately for 5mn_Major, facts have an anti-solar bias....
EDIT: Ooh - just realized that the fun thing is, we'll know who's right within the next few years. If US solar capacity really keeps growing at 30% per year, it would only take until about 2030 to reach the 2.9 million MW needed to replace all of our energy needs. If, on the other hand, solar's practical ceiling is in the 2-3% of total energy usage (as I predict), then we'll see the growth rate start to taper off dramatically soon. If I'm wrong, I'll be the first one on here expressing my amazement and my admiration for the people who made it happen against all odds - it would be a truly monumental achievement.
Sure...for those people fortunate enough to live in a home with enough south-facing roof area to provide for their needs, which is very few people. If you can't provide for all of your needs, you might as well not do it because you will end up paying two infrastructure bills - once for daytime solar and again to keep the lights on at night. If you want to add your own storage for night time (and go completely off grid), then you probably have to triple the square footage of solar panels you need - and there are even fewer people who have that much available roof area.
Exactly my point. You wouldn't want to buy extra property for that purpose, and neither would your utility company. Whether it "passes through" the utility or not, that's extra land that would have to be devoted to your energy needs.
I realized that I was most of the way there with my calc, so I just rounded it out. All figures per various EIA sites:
Annual electricity production in the US = 4.1e9 MWh, or an average of 467,230 MW. If we use my earlier figure of 28MW per 122 acres, we'd need 2.04M acres of panels, which is roughly 2.6 RIUs*.
If we repeat the calculation for all energy usage in the US, that's 86.91 quadrillion BTU per year, which averages out to 2.9 million MW. At 28MW per 122 acres again, that's 16.3 RIUs, which is just a little smaller than West Virginia - and next above that on the list is South Carolina. So I probably had some slight differences in my assumptions last time, and the South Carolina result is to replace *all* energy with solar, not just electricity.
*RIU = Rhode Island Units = 1212 mi2.
Unfortunately for 5mn_Major, facts have an anti-solar bias....
EDIT: Ooh - just realized that the fun thing is, we'll know who's right within the next few years. If US solar capacity really keeps growing at 30% per year, it would only take until about 2030 to reach the 2.9 million MW needed to replace all of our energy needs. If, on the other hand, solar's practical ceiling is in the 2-3% of total energy usage (as I predict), then we'll see the growth rate start to taper off dramatically soon. If I'm wrong, I'll be the first one on here expressing my amazement and my admiration for the people who made it happen against all odds - it would be a truly monumental achievement.
Last edited:
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
It's even fewer nowadays because electric companies demand eastern and western exposures in order to pry more money out of the homeowner's hands for electric cooling costs.
For those that want to cry tin foil, show me a neighbourhood block where at least 15% of the houses have northern exposures. Google Maps will do for your proof.
It's even fewer nowadays because electric companies demand eastern and western exposures in order to pry more money out of the homeowner's hands for electric cooling costs.
For those that want to cry tin foil, show me a neighbourhood block where at least 15% of the houses have northern exposures. Google Maps will do for your proof.
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
Good idea???? No.
@WTOP: Senators pushing to lower interstate truck driver age to 18 http://bit.ly/1dQI0mo
Good idea???? No.
@WTOP: Senators pushing to lower interstate truck driver age to 18 http://bit.ly/1dQI0mo
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
Its Europe. As in, not great sun. As in in terms of latitude, Milan is on par with where the average Canadian lives.
I guess its a horrible technology because it doubles every couple of years. You missed it last time we discussed it...but, what will global sales do between now and 2020?
Its Europe. As in, not great sun. As in in terms of latitude, Milan is on par with where the average Canadian lives.
I guess its a horrible technology because it doubles every couple of years. You missed it last time we discussed it...but, what will global sales do between now and 2020?
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
I thought it already was 18... at least I thought that's the minimum age to get a CDL in NYS... maybe times have changed since 2002.
I thought it already was 18... at least I thought that's the minimum age to get a CDL in NYS... maybe times have changed since 2002.
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
Trucking companies are having a hard time finding drivers - both interstate and local. The unemployment rate for teenagers is 4x an adult with the same level of education right now. It seems like a match made in Elysium.
CDL would still be needed for local trucking, which would be controlled by the State of NY. Interstate trucking would be the perview of Congress.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
I'm surprised auto insurance companies haven't tried to lobby for 25...
I'm surprised auto insurance companies haven't tried to lobby for 25...
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Most solar companies would want a newer roof before install, no sun hitting asphalt shingles means roof lasts longer than the 25 years most panels are warranteed for
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0
Either that, or the shingles ARE the panels.
Either that, or the shingles ARE the panels.
My calcs used US insolation vales, though. Either 1) my data are wrong (show me), 2) you believe that we will keep doubling our solar capacity every couple years, meaning that by 2030 100% of our energy will be solar, or 3) you have to acknowledge that solar capacity won't keep growing at 41% per year over the next 15 years.
Solar is not "terrible technology." But expecting it to be an economically viable utility-scale alternative to fossil fuels is terribly optimistic. We've already put solar cells in a lot of the easy places - it's going to get harder from here on out.
- Status