79 replies to this topic

[Mullerstainz]

Hy everyone; I'm new member of the forum.

Electricity is an important, essential, part of our life. From the moment we turn on the light in the morning to the evening when street lights turn on to the next morning, electricity is determining for us. There are different way to produce electricity, by converting the energy of many kinds of sources (oil and coal = chemical energy, Sun = thermal energy, wind = kinetic energy) into electric energy. Since the discover of oil, fossil fuels are the most used sources of energy in power generation.

Objectively fossil fuels are “easy” sources: if we burn a piece of coal, energy is right in front of us, we can feel the heat on our skin. It’s more difficult to produce energy from wind or Sun but it isn’t just the difficulty, the fact that makes oil, coal and natural gas the most used is the reduced cost. Obviously we can’t expect an inexpensive energy source and non-polluting too. Oil, coal and natural gas are cheap but very polluting. It’s a known fact. Paradoxically the less polluting are the most expensive sources, like solar PV, solar thermal, wind and hydro.

We must understand that environment must be protected preventing the construction of coal and oil power plants instead of fixing the problems created by these power plants. Every year approximately 12.3 billion tons of greenhouse gases are emitted by fossil fuels power stations. It’s our duty to start a transition, slow but effective, from non-renewable sources to renewable ones. It will cost more but sometimes, the right way isn’t the inexpensive one. This is what’s exposed in the file attached.

Attached Files

•  Reduce the use of oil and coal for the good of the environment.pdf   254.81K   7 downloads

[eds]

Mullerstainz, on 31 October 2013 - 09:52 AM, said:

Obviously we can’t expect an inexpensive energy source and non-polluting too. Oil, coal and natural gas are cheap but very polluting. It’s a known fact. Paradoxically the less polluting are the most expensive sources, like solar PV, solar thermal, wind and hydro

1st off your "PDF" file, when downloaded, comes with a warning sign,
. . . that it may be contain harmful content.
2nd Solar is near the Tipping Point, of being so cheap,
. . . that they can't make enough quality product to keep up with demand.
. . . (See article on the main blog page of this web site)
http://www.altenergy...t.com/page/blog

[Mullerstainz]

If opening the file it's a problem I can paste the entire text to the topic. Anyway... I can garantee you that the file doesn't contain any harmful contents.

Solar isn't the only renewable source on this planet and it isn't the cheapest one. If you do some maths the cheapest between renewables is hydro and the second in wind. Basing on their prices we can produce electricity in the right proportions.

[Shortpoet-GTD]

Mullerstainz, on 31 October 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

If opening the file it's a problem I can paste the entire text to the topic. Anyway... I can garantee you that the file doesn't contain any harmful contents.

Opening it is a problem, but please don't post the entire article. Google goes nuts over stuff like that.
Just the link-easy opening link, that is.
And thanks for that. I know it's well intentioned but you're preaching to the choir.

[Mullerstainz]

There's another problem: apparently I can't post web links 'cause a message says I haven't got quality posts.

[eds]

ECOLOGY: Solar radiation is by far the most important source of energy,
. . . for it represents 99% of the energy balance of our planet.
. . . Even energy furnished by fossil fuels,
. . . is nothing more than solar energy in storage.

The ecosystem is composed of 4 fields in strict interaction with one another:
. . . . . . air,
. . . . . . water,
. . . . . . earth, and
. . . . . . life.
They are called respectively:
. . . . . . atmosphere,
. . . . . . hydrosphere,
. . . . . . lithosphere, and
. . . . . . biosphere.

To understand the finite nature of the ecosystem,
. . . one might imagine a bottle containing water, air, rocks, and a thin film of life.
. . . When exposed to the sun, the bottle becomes the seat of great activity.
The sun's rays, striking it at different angles and in different spots,
. . . cause inequalities of temperature and convection currents,
. . . that produce movements of the air and the water .
(The same thing happens on earth:
. . . similar differences of temperature,
. . . . . . set in motion formidable masses of air and water and produce,
. . . . . . winds, rain, waves, and currents.)

But there is a price on everything.
. . . Accelerating the economic machine,
. . . means pumping more energy from a depleting reservoir and
. . . dumping more waste and heat into the environment.
Here lies the fundamental difference between the ecological machine and the economic machine.
. . . The basis of ecology is an irreversible flow of solar energy in unlimited quantity and
. . . a permanent recycling of materials;
. . . the basis of the economy is an irreversible flow of fossil energy from a limited source and
. . . an irreversible flow of materials from a nonrenewable reservoir of resources.

2013-10-31 Source:  Sun

Attached Files

•  planetary-energy.png   115.77K   1 downloads
•  Ecosystem.GIF   13.98K   1 downloads
•  SolarEnergy.GIF   14.56K   0 downloads
•  Economy.GIF   18.96K   0 downloads

[eds]

According to Deutsche Bank,
. . . with Global PV prices falling and Grid costs rising,
. . . Solar panel "Demand" should begin to out strip "Supply" in 2014,
. . . which leads to "Explosive" growth in "Demand" upon "Convergence."

According to China,
. . . Fossil Fuel Pollution is out of control and
. . . they have started to Ban it in certain Cities.

If you look at what other countries are doing,
. . . you may be surprised by some Solar Facts.

Nexus is looking at a 50% increase in demand for
. . . . . . Energy,
. . . . . . Water, and
. . . . . . Food.
India is building Energy generating Solar panels,
. . . over water canals, to save Water and
. . . use it to irrigate more fields and grow more Food.

Solar is so affordable, that the poor in India,
. . . are making a business out of recharging cellphones,
. . . from batteries powered by Solar panels.

Attached Files

•  SolarPVOutlook.jpg   99.87K   0 downloads
•  ChinaPollution.jpeg   4.14K   0 downloads
•  SolarFacts.jpg   271.25K   0 downloads
•  Nexus.jpeg   11.06K   0 downloads
•  India-Solar.jpg   42.73K   0 downloads
•  IECs.jpg   128.45K   0 downloads

[Shortpoet-GTD]

Mullerstainz, on 31 October 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

There's another problem: apparently I can't post web links 'cause a message says I haven't got quality posts.

Newcomers are put on temporary link suspension. It's everyone, not just you.
We don't want spammers.
As soon as you get a few more posts under your belt, you can post links; no worries.
And welcome to the forums.

[Mullerstainz]

Thanks Shortpoet-GTD;

[Mullerstainz]

According to IEA only 0,064% of world electricity is produced by solar PV and solar thermal, a very low value that must be increased ‘cause solar is the cleanest between energy sources but presents a disadvantage: right now it’s really expensive. Taking as examples Toul-Rosières Solar Park (annual production: 1,182 GWh, construction cost: $ 593.57 million) and Navajo Generating Station (coal fired, annual production: 16,952 GWh, construction cost: $ 650,000,000), the ratio cost/production (how many dollars are necessary to produce 1 GWh) of coal fired power station is lower than solar one, respectively 504.000 $/GWh and 38.000 $/GWh.

In the future solar will be less expensive of course but now it sounds too much expensive. Solar is a good non-polluting energy source but there are other renewable energy sources less expensive like wind and hydro. Still, it’s necessary to start a transition, from non-renewables to renewables that we should started years ago because pollution will continue to increase with the actual subdivision of electricity production. Therefore it’s necessary to understand the current economic and environmental situation and decide how to reduce the use of coal and oil in electricity production and in what proportions increase the use of renewable energy sources.

[eds]

Toul-Rosières Solar Park, built on an airbase,
. . . but it looks like the cost, included some Non-Solar expenses:

"It renewed the air base completely by demolishing 280 buildings,
. . . removing asbestos from around 170 buildings and
. . . clearing approximately 8,000t of polluted soil."

Source: Construction

Attached Files

•  ToulSolarphotovoltaicpark.jpg   122.78K   0 downloads

[Mullerstainz]

Perhaps Toul-Rosières wasn’t the best example, but there are several power stations which ratio cost/production is high, such as Solana Generating Station. In December 2010, Abengoa (power plant’s owner) received a $1.45 billion loan guarantee to support construction of the plant (Reuters). The plant’s annual production is 944 GWh, so the ratio is 1.530.000 $/GWh.

Solar right now is expensive compared to other energy sources. It doesn’t mean we mustn’t construct more plants, on the contrary we must construct more solar plants but at the same time we must increase hydro and wind.

[eds]

Solana Generating Station looks like the cost, included some Non-Solar expenses:
. . . "the first U.S. solar plant with molten salt thermal energy storage."

Source: Energy Storage

Attached Files

•  solana-graphic-1.jpg   71.89K   0 downloads

[Mullerstainz]

Here there’s a list of solar PV power stations with annual production and construction cost data.

1. Mildura Solar Concentrator Power Station (a.p. 270 GWh, construction cost: $388,500,000)

2. California Valley Solar Ranch (a.p. 550 GWh, construction cost: $1.6 billion)

3. Agua Caliente Solar Project (a.p. 626 GWh, construction cost: $1.8 billion)

4. Antelope Valley Solar Ranch (a.p. 623 GWh, construction cost: $1.38 billion)

In the costs there are included non-solar facilities but the construction cost still remains high, too high to encourage the construction of more solar plants.

[Mullerstainz]

The most serious form of pollution is caused by the combustion of coal to produce electricity. The values of pollution of fossil fuels are exposed below:

- Coal: 9,066 million tons of greenhouse gases
- Oil: 1,230 million tons of greenhouse gases
- Natural gas: 2,072 million tons of greenhouse gases

Data obtained by multiplying IEA electricity composition by source data for ratio production/pollution of a “model” power plant.

1000 TWh produced every year by coal bring to 1,097 million tons of GHG. If we could allocate this amount to renewable energy will reduce pollution of 1.097 billion tons of greenhouse gases per year. It’s an expensive project but it's worth thinkingabout it. Before seeing the hypothetical subdivision here there are some renewable power plants:

- Hydro: Bath County (annual production: 9200 GWh, construction cost: $ 1.6 billion)
- Wind: Capital Wind Farm: (annual production: 1230 GWh, construction cost: $ 283.71 million
- Solar PV: Toul-Rosières Solar Park (annual production: 1,182 GWh, construction cost: $ 593.57 million)

A possible model of subdivision could be 55% hydro, 30% wind and 15% solar. In this model the costs would be:

- Hydro: $ 95.65 billion
- Wind: Capital Wind Farm: $ 69.19 billion
- Solar PV: $ 75.32 billion

The total amount would be 240.16 billion but 1.097 million tons of GHG per year wouldn’t emitted.

[eds]

Mullerstainz, on 03 November 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

Here there’s a list of solar PV power stations with annual production and construction cost data.

1. Mildura Solar Concentrator Power Station (a.p. 270 GWh, construction cost: $388,500,000)

2. California Valley Solar Ranch (a.p. 550 GWh, construction cost: $1.6 billion)

3. Agua Caliente Solar Project (a.p. 626 GWh, construction cost: $1.8 billion)

4. Antelope Valley Solar Ranch (a.p. 623 GWh, construction cost: $1.38 billion)

In the costs there are included non-solar facilities but the construction cost still remains high,
too high to encourage the construction of more solar plants.

It might surprise you, that in general, I totally agree with you,
. . . but the Devil, is in the details.

Unlike the experience in nuclear, gas and coal projects,
. . . Solar costs are actually coming in below target.
Source:  Solar is reaching global tipping point

Commercial and Residential Solar Costs have been dropping as well. (See Chart Below)

Finally, Warren Buffett doesn't seem to think that it's,
. . . "too high to encourage the construction of more solar plants."
He owns 290-megawatt AC Agua Caliente project in Arizona, and
. . . Antelope Valley Solar Plants

Source:  Buffett's Midamerican Energy  Antelope Valley  Midamerica Solar Holdings

Attached Files

•  CostSolar.jpg   145.21K   2 downloads

[Mullerstainz]

Even if the price of solar has dropped a lot compared to the cost/production ratio of oil or coal (respectively 64,000 $/GWh and 48,000 $/GWh) is still very high. It should be considered an additional element: the price of oil and coal. The price of the production of electric energy through the combustion of oil and coal is composed of the cost of the plant and the cost of sources to burn. The prices are shown below:

- Natural gas: 3.43 $/ MMBtu
- Coal: $ 64.58/short ton
- Crude oil: $ 95.03/bbl
Data obtained from Bloomberg

In the next few years the supply of coal and natural gas won’t go down, but oil supply will price, so its price will increase and, consequently, the price of electricity production by oil. In this case we’ll have to fill the 1111 TWh produced by the combustion of oil and it will be an opportunity to increase the use of renewable energy, including solar, although to a lesser extent than those cheaper.

The chart expose supply and demand of crude oil over the years. Supply data obtained from peakoil.nl and demand data from OPEC.

Attached Files

•  Graph.jpg   32.14K   0 downloads

[eds]

Fossil fuel is stored Solar energy

Fossil fuel prices grow higher, weakening world economies.
. . . Renewable energy prices keep going down,
. . . . . . enabling the world economies to grow sustainably.

Source:  Chart  Grid Parity

Attached Files

•  solar-grid-parity-map.png   131.53K   0 downloads
•  CostSolarPower.jpg   111.91K   0 downloads
•  Sun.jpg   10.91K   0 downloads
•  Fuel.jpg   15.67K   0 downloads

[eds]

Solar energy is the most abundant energy resource on earth,
. . . 173,000 terawatts of solar energy strikes the Earth continuously.
. . . That's more than 10,000 times the world's total energy use.
Solar energy effects the wind, the rain, and organic forms of life.
. . . (wind turbines, Hydro and Fossil Fuel energy sources)

It is the single source of energy, that if it disappeared,
. . . would effect life on earth the most,
. . . yet people keep trying to block it out,
. . . by using harmful polluting sources.

Attached Files

•  BeforeAfter.jpg   6.14K   0 downloads

[Besoeker]

Mullerstainz, on 02 November 2013 - 12:49 PM, said:

According to IEA only 0,064% of world electricity is produced by solar PV and solar thermal,

Quote

Solar power accounted for less than 0.2 percent of energy generation in the United States in 2011. Solar power also accounted for 0.5 percent of global electricity demand in 2011.

http://www.c2es.org/...factsheet/solar


And welcome to the forum BTW!