79 replies to this topic

[Mullerstainz]

Thanks Besoeker

[Mullerstainz]

Data from 2011 IEA statistics report that the amount of electricity produced by solar PV and solar thermal is 63,348 GWh, increasing compared to 2008 data (12,900 GWh). Unfortunately also coal and natural gas data are increasing, oil data doesn’t. In 2008 1111 TWh were produced by oil, in 2011 there was a slight decrease to 1057 TWh. For the future we must set a clear direction: an increase of energies such as hydro, solar and wind energy and a decrease of energy usage as coal, natural gas and petroleum. All this will have a cost that can be reduced by a conversion project of non-renewable to renewable power plants instead of a total replacement one.

The solar PV pioneers countries are Germany and Spain, while solar thermal is not developed to the level of photovoltaic. What remains to be defined is the timing of this transition. Solar energy will grow very fast times definitely, faster than all other sources of energy. Proportionately the increase in using its price will continue to fall. As a result the construction of works will be much cheaper but will prove even more beneficial than the other sources because the only current problem of solar is the price. We have to wait a few more years before the sun reaches a price that allows for an exponential increase of facility construction, meanwhile, we have the duty to reduce the use of coal and oil with other renewable sources such as hydroelectric and wind power.

[eds]

U.S. Solar Industry Continues to Boom
There are now over 9,370 MW of cumulative solar electric capacity operating in the U.S.
. . . 450 MW, came online throughout Q2 2013, in the utility market.
. . . A solar project will have been installed, on average, every 4 minutes in the U.S.

Falling Costs Make Solar More Affordable Than Ever.
The average cost of a completed PV system dropped by 11% over the past year.
. . . Solar panel has declined by 60% since the beginning of 2011.

Another Record Year of Installations
4,400 MW of PV are forecasted to come online throughout 2013, which represents
. . . 30% growth over 2012 installation totals.
2013 will be a record year for CSP as over
. . . 900 MW are expected to be commissioned by years end.
Cumulative PV capacity is projected to surpass
. . . 10 GW by years end.

Problem: Below is the most important pie chart you will see today.
. . . every second, we put more CO2 into the air . . . (can we really AFFORD that?)

Solution: In just one second, the sun produces enough energy,
. . . to power everything on earth for 500,000 years . . . (can we really NOT AFFORD that?)

2013-11-05 Source:  Solar Industry Data  US National Solar Database

Attached Files

•  PieChartClimate.jpg   33.13K   0 downloads
•  url.jpg   15.39K   0 downloads

[Mullerstainz]

We can’t afford more emissions of GHG but first of all earth can’t afford that. Almost every year 12,300 tons of GHG are emitted and there only one solution: reduce the cause of all this, i.e. coal, oil and natural gas usage in electricity production (the sector where energy demand is highest). It sounds repetitive but it’s our duty. There are different ways to accomplish the goal:

  - Reduce the usage of fossil fuels replacing the power generated with renewables.

         - Constructing new renewable power plants.

         - Converting non –renewable into renewable power plants.

  - Reduce the usage of fossil fuels replacing the power generated in smaller proportions giving up to a certain amount of electricity.

Costs vary depending on the different models of subdivision of electricity produced by fossil fuels. In this scenario there’s another source of energy: nuclear, in fact 76% of electricity French production is from nuclear. Its cost is relatively low but there’s a pollution problem regarding nuclear, i.e. nuclear waste. At last, another source of energy: biomass (198 TWh were produced in 2008 by biomass).

[eds]

The largest difference between Solar in Germany VS U.S.,
. . . is the Time and Fee's for permitting (Softcost).
The DOE is starting the process, of SLASHING THE RED TAPE on Solar.

The California Valley Solar Ranch (CVSR) photovoltaic (PV) generating facility,
. . . in San Luis Obispo County, California,
. . . bringing total electric generating capacity of the plant up to
. . . 250 megawatts,  avoids generating more than

Mullerstainz, on 06 November 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

We can’t afford more emissions of GHG but first of all earth can’t afford that. Almost every year 12,300 tons of GHG are emitted

. . . 336,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions per year, or roughly equal to removing
. . . 63,500 cars from California’s roads, according to estimates provided by,
. . . the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Source:  Solar Ranch

Attached Files

•  Sun.jpg   15.39K   0 downloads
•  carbon-bath.jpg   298.1K   0 downloads

[Mullerstainz]

According to PBL (Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency) in 2011 the tax of emissions of CO2 was 33.9 billion tons. To reduce this number it’s necessary to accelerate the transition non-renewable to renewable immediately. Money can be a brake to the transition so, at the same time, we must find other ways to reduce the cost of construction of power plants. An idea could be the following: converting coal and oil power plants to renewables instead of build new renewable plants and shut down the others.

On an article of CSP World we can see: “The Department of Energy (DOE) of the US has announced the disbursement of $20 million to help integrate concentrated solar power (CSP) systems with fossil fuels power plants”. Some examples in the U.S. are Victorville 2 and Cameo power stations even if the biggest project of integration between solar and fossil fuels is Kogan Creek Solar Boost in Australia. The project will cost $104.7 million. The project involves the installation of a CLFR solar thermal system capable of generating 44 MW electrical at peak solar conditions, for an annual production of 385 GWh.

Compared to Mildura Solar Concentrator Power Station (a.p. 270 GWh, construction cost: $388,500,000), the project of integration is cheaper than the construction of a new plant. Another fact is the following: jobs. If a coal-fired power station is shut down to build a new solar plant, what happens to the people who work in the coal-fired plant? The integration allows to avoid the loss of many jobs.

[eds]

2012 Top Countries with Installed Renewable Electricity.
. . . The US took an "All of the Above" approach.

2013-11-07 Source:  World map of Renewables

[Mullerstainz]

The primarily responsible for GHG emissions is coal combustion in power stations. 41% of world electricity is produced from coal, approximately 8,000 TWh. The greatest brake that stops to shut down all the dangerous plants is money. Coal-fired power plants are the least expensive compared to other power stations. A damage that will be done shutting down a power plant is the loss of jobs but the construction of new renewable power plants will create more jobs.

Taking as example Navajo Power Station (a.p. 16,952 GWh, construction cost: $1.1 billion), to equate the annual production with a power plant like Mildura it will take 63 plants like it, think at the many jobs that will be create. Obviously the cost will be extremely high, but GHG emissions will be nothing. Even if solar plants don’t produce a vast amount of electricity they create many jobs, which is a great advantage in time of crisis.

[Shortpoet-GTD]

I know they always talk about the job losses when shutting down coal plants; but they never talk about
lost productivity from their ill workers, woman (and men) having to miss time from their jobs to take
their asthmatic kids to the doctor repeatedly, other illnesses that cost time missed, or jobs lost
because of those illnesses.
They don't talk about that.
And what of the billions of dollars wasted from the emissions of coal (and other fossil fuels)
that are costing us all with storms, floods, droughts from climate change?
They don't talk about that either.

http://www.altenergy...n-power-plants/

http://www.altenergy...o2-coming-from/

http://www.altenergy...page__hl__china

[Mullerstainz]

EIA (Energy Information Administration) says that in 2006 there were 140.000 people working in coal mining and coal power stations. We can't just shut down all the plants leaving home 140.000 people. First we must assure that there are already new jobs in renewable power plants. But the construction takes time and finding money even more. These are our targets: construction and money. The construction of a plant take some years but this is a long-term project. The biggest problem is always money. Where do we get it in a time of economic crisis? Doing more cuts will bring to a more difficult situation than this one.

The only solution, since we can't cut state budget, is to cut the cost of construction but how? We must increase renewables in right proportions to spare more money and at the same time increase all the kind of energy sources. We must also considerer that when a coal power plant is shut down the cost of coal to burn is deleted and this is a great amount of money.  Approximately Navajo Power Station burns every year 2,082,000 tons of coal, which cost $120,000,000, so in thirty years of activity it will cost $3.6 billion when renewable power plants will cost nothing.  

[eds]

Mullerstainz, on 09 November 2013 - 04:51 AM, said:

The only solution, since we can't cut state budget, is to cut the cost of construction but how? We must increase renewables in right proportions to spare more money and at the same time increase all the kind of energy sources. We must also considerer that when a coal power plant is shut down the cost of coal to burn is deleted and this is a great amount of money.  Approximately Navajo Power Station burns every year 2,082,000 tons of coal, which cost $120,000,000, so in thirty years of activity it will cost $3.6 billion when renewable power plants will cost nothing.  

The 2,250-megawatt Navajo Generating Station, near Page, Arizona (the "SUNSHINE STATE"),
. . . is the largest and DIRTIEST coal plant in the state.
. . . Clean Air Task Force estimates that pollution from Navajo Generating Station contributes to
. . . . . . 16 premature deaths,
. . . . . . 25 heart attacks,
. . . . . . 300 asthma attacks, and
. . . . . . 15 asthma emergency room visits each year,
. . . . . . with total annual health costs of over $127 million.
The Navajo Generating Station is less than
. . . 12 miles from Grand Canyon National Park.
. . . . . . When the wind blows toward the canyon,
. . . . . . . . . the coal plant becomes a major source of industrial haze in the park.
. . . . . . When the wind blows other directions, Navajo’s emissions pollute
. . . . . . . . . 10 protected parks and wilderness areas throughout the Southwest, including
. . . . . . . . . Mesa Verde and Canyonlands national parks.

The ONLY solution, you can think of, is to keep burning coal for 30 more years of activity(pollution)?

How about closing down the Largest & DIRTIEST power plant in Arizona (the "SUNSHINE STATE"),
. . . RE-TRAIN the workers for jobs in renewable energy!

Clean Healthy Jobs VS Dirty Un--Healty Jobs.
That would keep 30 years of the DIRTIEST power plant in Arizona's pollution, out of the air and
. . create 30 years without premature deaths, heart attacks, asthma attacks, save over,
. . $127 million in health costs and clean up the air in National and State parks.

There will be many, many jobs.
Preliminary data collected by California-based Tetra Tech has determined that the
. . . Navajo Nation could help meet the energy demands of the future with a proposed
. . . 4,370-megawatt solar project at the Paragon Bisti Energy Renewable Ranch in the
. . . Eastern Navajo Agency.
It's close to the Bisti 230-kilowatt substation, transmission line and
. . . on the right-of-way of U.S. Highway 371.
The proposed solar project has the potential for "world-class greatness," when
. . . 17,360 acres of the 22,000 acre ranch are producing
. . . 4,370 megawatts of energy from solar panels.
The power produced by the project would nearly equal,
. . . the entire new photovoltaic production in the U.S. this year,
. . . according to the U.S. Photovoltaic Installation Forecast of the
. . . Solar Energy Industries Association.


2013-11-09 Source:  Coal Pollution

Attached Files

•  Bathtub.jpg   298.1K   0 downloads

[Mullerstainz]

I didn’t say to continue burning coal for thirty years. I just said that if in thirty years the plant will be open it will cost $3.6 billion, that we can save if we close it. I'm opposed to coal combustion to produce electricity.

[Besoeker]

Mullerstainz, on 09 November 2013 - 06:24 AM, said:

I'm opposed to coal combustion to produce electricity.

I suppose most on this forum are, hence its name.
However, much as we wish it to be the case, we are not yet in a position of dispensing the burning fossil fuels for power.

[eds]

Mullerstainz, on 09 November 2013 - 06:24 AM, said:

I didn’t say to continue burning coal for thirty years. I just said that if in thirty years the plant will be open it will cost $3.6 billion, that we can save if we close it. I'm opposed to coal combustion to produce electricity.

My mistake
What did you think of the DOE giving $339,414.- to study the Paragon Bisti Energy Renewable Ranch .
. . . The ultimate vision is a multi-phase,
. . . 22,000-acre renewable energy program, principally photovoltaic (PV),
. . . . . . which could ultimately produce over
. . . 4,000 megawatts (MW) of clean solar power, as well as other renewables such as
. . . . . . geothermal, wind and LOTS of JOBS.

The first phase, a preliminary critical issues analysis, has already been completed.
The second phase was the DOE giving $339,414.- for the Feasibility Study(See PDF Below).

2013-11-09 Source:  PDF

Attached Files

•  solar DOE.jpg   34.82K   0 downloads

[Mullerstainz]

Interesting project; the ratio between cost and future production is also lower than other projects and the period of construction is very short, just a year and a half. This is the kind of project that we need. Territories of Arizona are perfect for the construction of solar plants. I think that DOE is doing a very good investment.

[eds]

Mullerstainz, on 09 November 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

the period of construction is very short, just a year and a half.

Your mistake http://apps1.eere.en.../project_id=207
The "year and a half," is just for the Feasibility Study, and  
. . . for some reason, they want to spread construction out over 10 years.

[Mullerstainz]

You're right. Well, in any case it's a good project. I hope they will realize it.

[eds]

My current interest in Solar, was first sparked back in 1973's gas shortage, and
. . . becomes renewed every price spike in oil,
. . . or every time the Grid fails because of,
. . . Hurricane, Blizzard, Ice Storm, Black and Brown out.

There is no shortage of problems in this world,
. . . but every time I trace one back,
. . . . . . somewhere in the mix, I always find "Energy."

Starting with making it's usage more efficient (The US waste's over 1/2 of all it's energy).
Then the BIG picture of the world, some people have it, others don't,
. . . of those that have it, some people waste it and/or pollute with it, others don't,
. . . . . . some energy is too expensive, complex, and central, some are affordable, simple and mobile storage,
. . . . . . . . . some are connected with Poles and Wires, some can be generated and consumed with/without the Grid.

I just want energy that I can:
. . . generate/consume/affordable/simple/mobile storage and that doesn't pollute . . . which is do able,
. . . but a rooftop unit doesn't capture all the SunLight available,
. . . . . . in different seasons, at different times of day, and under variable lighting conditions,
. . . . . . it's not always available where ever you go or need it, and
. . . . . . that's what I'm looking for in a Quality system, to get more "Bang For the Buck!"
. . .

[Mullerstainz]

You’re totally right. I think we are lucky to have these climate conditions. If in a place on earth is night in a different place is day, if in a place there’s cloudy in another there’s Sun that shine and if in a place there’s winter in another there’s summer. Solar is perfect for places with a lot of sunny days so we must learn to produce green energy in these places but most important of all we must learn to share the energy that we produce.

[eds]

The Sun don't always Shine, and
. . . the Wind don't alway blow.
But look at the (1st picture) and you get a feeling,
. . . by adding mobile storage (2nd picture),  
. . . they might complement each other a little (3rd picture) and
. . . smooth out the energy flow, into
. . . distributed, self-consumed energy.

Right now, in the BIG Picture, Centralised Fossil Fuel,
. . . is very Inefficient, Pollutes and wastes a lot of energy,
. . . before it even gets to the consumer(4th picture)and
. . . if more people bought renewables with Storage like Germany (5th picture)
. . . Utilities would face a "Death Spiral" (6th picture)
. . . Which they are beginning to see happen, with their Large Business customers,
. . . who know how to cut business expenses (7th picture).

In the small picture, individual residential homes, (8th picture)
. . . I am beginning to see affordable, quality, renewable systems,
. . . coming to market, that will cause a "Tipping Point" and
. . . is making Utilities extremely nervous,
. . . in countries with high electricity costs (9th picture) and pollution.

Attached Files

•  WindSolar.jpg   27.07K   0 downloads
•  electric-car-batteries.jpg   117.29K   0 downloads
•  solarcar.jpg   12.23K   0 downloads
•  centralisedenergy.jpg   16.08K   0 downloads
•  S&S.jpeg   51.32K   0 downloads
•  death.png   63.95K   0 downloads
•  Business.jpg   123.23K   0 downloads
•  Backup.jpg   24.26K   0 downloads
•  electriccost1.gif   21.36K   0 downloads