PV Solar now cheaper than Nuclear

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Ready2plugin said:
Gavin said:
My panels just got turned on yesterday....yeah....meter spinning backwards this morning when I got up to head to work...so fun to see that.

:)


Gavin

Congratulations! I had mine installed at the end of last year. Loved looking at the meter going backwards, unfortunately they have since upgraded my meter to a “smart meter” and the digital readout is not nearly as fun. Now I just enjoy looking at my electricity bill, or lack thereof!

Nice.... My Solar Facility went online in March and I haven't missed a day where I haven't gone online to check production numbers.
I guess the same can be said of this Leaf Forum from the date I posted my reservation deposit. Arrgh.....

I have noticed that I am totally depressed when we have a cloudy or rainy day in Phoenix but not the same way as everyone else. I look at diminished solar production on these days.

God forbid I pray for long sunny days, no rain clouds, and continued drought for my own personal gain. Shame on me !!!

Cheers
 
Carlos said:
God forbid I pray for long sunny days, no rain clouds, and continued drought for my own personal gain. Shame on me !!!

Cheers
Yes, shame on you ;) Remember that cooler/wetter days have benefits: less energy needed for 1] cooling; 2] pumping water (irrigation); 3] less cleaning due to dust & pollen (allergies, asthma, other medical issues (heat stroke etc you get the idea)); ...

Looking forward to some cooling off :p
 
Ha...its funny how that happens :)

We have 310 sunny days a year, so usually I'm quite happy to get some clouds and rain...but ever since out system went on line, well we have been in our monsoon season (came late)...so it has been afternoon clouds rolling in around 2 pm....damn...that is like 4 or 5 hours of decreased production...grrrrrrrr

I'm sure fall and winter will more than make up for it...heck in winter, since we get some really sunny and cold days, and the electrons flow better in the cold, well I've been told that there might be some days when my system makes more energy than the inverters can convert from DC to AC so I might get some "clipping" of power...heck I won't mind if the system is producing at top ability...so bring on those sunny days with the temps in the teens...

:)

Not that Phoenix ever sees the teens...other than obnoxious ones hanging around Mill Avenue District
 
Gavin said:
We have 310 sunny days a year, so usually I'm quite happy to get some clouds and rain...but ever since out system went on line, well we have been in our monsoon season (came late)...so it has been afternoon clouds rolling in around 2 pm....damn...that is like 4 or 5 hours of decreased production...grrrrrrrr

Now everyone can understand why we don't have much PV in "Sunny" Seattle.

ps : Not that I need PV - it is far more efficient to subscibe to "green" power at a 10% premium.
 
Yeah, I belong to the Blue Skies program here...you pay a bit more, but it helps fund our wind power...still I have this south facing roof that begs for solar panels...making all or most of the power we use from my roof is actually pretty sweet...knowing that charging my LEAF will be 100% clean energy is crazy cool...

But yes it wouldn't be as useful in Seattle...though I've only been to Seattle twice and both times (about 4 days total) were sunny and no rain...so that was nice.

Gavin
 
Follow up analysis:

http://blog.cleantechies.com/2010/08/23/nuclear-vs-solar-clash-of-the-numbers/
 
lne937s said:
Follow up analysis:

http://blog.cleantechies.com/2010/08/23/nuclear-vs-solar-clash-of-the-numbers/

I don't know what the nuclear costs assume - but they have various ways of cheating. The biggest is
- Assume government will insure nukes. Without this not one plant will be built anywhere in the world.
- Use "overnight" costs i.e. assume you get to deliver power one day after you get funded. This obvious nonsense is used since the financing of a project with 5 to 10 year gestation period usually kills the project.

ps : On the PV side people assume they can use the grid as the giant battery and don't have to worry about energy storage.
 
evnow said:
ps : On the PV side people assume they can use the grid as the giant battery and don't have to worry about energy storage.

Up to about 25% of electricity generation, you don't need to have any storage for Solar. Solar tends to produce during the day, especially when it is sunny (when air conditioners strain the grid in the US). As such, Solar tends to offset peak usage.

Nuclear tends to offer base load- and can't easily adjust to demand. If you size it large enough to cover peak load, you will be wasting electricity off-peak and need storage. It doesn't need any storage untill ~50% of the mix.

There is also the option of shunting the excess energy (which happens a lot now). However, in the US, storage will not be an issue untill there has been a dramatic increase in the amount of nuclear and solar in the grid...
 
lne937s said:
Up to about 25% of electricity generation, you don't need to have any storage for Solar.

Only because you can use the grid as a giant battery with NG giving you all the control needed.

In anycase, these are the things to look for when we see pv vs nuke. Expect Pro-PV analysists to hammer nuke on finance & insurance costs, look for pro-nuke people to hammer PV on fluctuations and need for energy storage.
 
garygid said:
I suspect that PV Inverters (DC to Grid AC) should automatically scale back production of AV if the Grid Voltage rises "too" high, right?

I don't think that's possble, unless they "shunt" some of the power to "load banks", or shutdown some of the array strings by removing the inverter load from them (which is wastefull). If there was excess energy (not likely to happen), it could/should be used to "pump" water uphill for storage (a form of battery).
 
garygid said:
The Inverter can decide how much current to draw from the solar panels, and thus control how much AC current (and thus power) it feeds back "into" the Grid.

Even so, that would just reduce use of renewable energy - not store that energy for later use.
 
garygid said:
The Inverter can decide how much current to draw from the solar panels, and thus control how much AC current (and thus power) it feeds back "into" the Grid.
IIRC, to the inverter, the "Grid" is really the transformer on the pole followed by the substation transformer. Both are extremely low impedance relative to the inverter, so the inverter can always adjust the voltage and sync the phase to just feed power into the "Grid", assuming the house does not present a larger load.
 
While it's possible to design an inverter to regulate the amount of AC power it produces from PV panels, the only situation that I've seen this done is in off-grid setups to avoid overcharging batteries.

I believe that some SMA inverters will look at the AC frequency and adjust output based on that.

http://www.sma.de/en/products/knowledge-base/sma-inverters-as-grid-managers.html

For example, some can be configured to reduce output if the grid frequency rises above 60Hz - this typically indicates an oversupply of power on the grid.

Of course, this isn't optimal - in general wind/solar generation is throttled only as a last resort as it has the lowest running cost - everything else typically will cost more so it's more cost effective to throttle down any fuel burning plants first.

It will take some time for enough renewable generation to show up on the grid to incur frequent throttling - when that happens expect demand for storage devices to take off. At that point it won't take long for smart-grid EVs to show up - in aggregate there will be a ton of battery capacity available if they are plugged in.
 
Hmmmm, I don't see why. The automatic control systems and human operators who manage the grid control frequency within tight limits, but they are often playing 'catch up' in one direction or another. Frequency will often run low for extended periods of time during daytime peak low periods, and then will intentionally be run high overnight to compensate.

Also, from the system operators point of view, residential PV output is not generation, which they control to manage frequency and voltage. It's negative load that fluctuates like all other load, and what the operators see and have to contend with is the total load on the system net of any residential PV.

Certainly you wouldn't want residential PV generation to cut back just because system frequency went above 60 Hz.

garygid said:
I suspect that PV Inverters (DC to Grid AC) should automatically scale back production of AV if the Grid Voltage rises "too" high, right?


Wind generation is already being throttled at times in some places, because it is the last resort in localized situations where it is the wind output that is overloading the lines and there simply are no fossil units that could be curtailed to relieve the overloads. Transmission systems are designed to meet (in most places) summer peak loads, when maximum generation is required, with lesser attention paid to winter peak loads and summer 'shoulder' peaks. They are not designed with consideration given to minimum load periods, which is when wind generation tends to generating the best.

Also, the best places for wind generation tend to be places where there is not much existing generation, transmission, or load. So again, in certain places and at certain times, even though there may not be much wind capacity in comparison to total system capacity, there is more wind generation than can be used and no non-wind generation to back down. It's not a big problem yet, but it is happening and will only happen more often in more places as wind capacity becomes a larger piece of the generation mix.

In the upper midwest, the need to back down wind generation is already happening enough that the regional transmission operator is preparing proposals to submit to the Fededral Energy Regulatory Commission to make wind generation automatically dispatchable, under the control of the system operators, so that wind farms can be easily backed down when system conditions call for it.

drees said:
While it's possible to design an inverter to regulate the amount of AC power it produces from PV panels, the only situation that I've seen this done is in off-grid setups to avoid overcharging batteries.

I believe that some SMA inverters will look at the AC frequency and adjust output based on that.

http://www.sma.de/en/products/knowledge-base/sma-inverters-as-grid-managers.html

For example, some can be configured to reduce output if the grid frequency rises above 60Hz - this typically indicates an oversupply of power on the grid.

Of course, this isn't optimal - in general wind/solar generation is throttled only as a last resort as it has the lowest running cost - everything else typically will cost more so it's more cost effective to throttle down any fuel burning plants first.

It will take some time for enough renewable generation to show up on the grid to incur frequent throttling - when that happens expect demand for storage devices to take off. At that point it won't take long for smart-grid EVs to show up - in aggregate there will be a ton of battery capacity available if they are plugged in.
 
Grid frequency is controlled, and high or low frequency, by itself, does not mean over or under generation. That is usually observed as over or under VOLTAGE in the system.
 
This should help the CA power mix a bit when completed. I know of another solar plant and a wind turbine plant going
in near the central coast. It will be interesting to watch the power mix get greener.

http://www.earthtechling.com/2010/10/1000-mw-solar-project-gets-final-nod/
 
c1987 said:
This should help the CA power mix a bit when completed. I know of another solar plant and a wind turbine plant going
in near the central coast. It will be interesting to watch the power mix get greener.
Yep, and you can watch it (in near real time) here:
http://www.caiso.com/outlook/SystemStatus.html

They include real time wind power and yesterday's renewable power charts. I'm hoping they also include real time solar power as some of these new big solar plants come on line.

I still have to wonder how much rooftop solar isn't included on those charts...
 
Nuclear powered Leaf? Worse than renewable, better than coal?

I found this article on Thorium in Popular Mechanics when I went to read their article on the Leaf. Supposedly the reason we use uranium today is the 1950's need to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons. Thorium is 3-4x more plentiful, produces 200x more energy per ton, produces much less radioactive waste, and is useless for making weapons. Instead of waste that has to be safely stored for 10,000 years, waste from thorium reactions would be dangerous for "only" 600-700 years. It sounds much better. Good enough? I don't know.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/sci...ruth-about-thorium-and-nuclear-power?click=pp
 
Back
Top