Enphase Battery?

[emartin00]

85% of all Power production in the US is from coal and nuclear. To covert even half of that over to RE would make the cost of space travel look like a dime store purchase.

I'm afraid your facts are pretty out of date. Coal and nuclear only make up about 60% of power production as of 2013. That continues to decrease every year as well.

[SunEagle]

I'm afraid your facts are pretty out of date. Coal and nuclear only make up about 60% of power production as of 2013. That continues to decrease every year as well.

Sorry. I meant to say that fossil fuel instead of just coal.
Electric production in the US for 2013
Coal = 38.44%
Nat Gas = 27.66%
Nuclear = 19.18%

Total for those 3 = 85.9% ~ 870GW

Hydro = 6.53% or ~79GW
Other RE = 6.16% ~ 75GW
Petroleum = 0.66%
Misc = 0.33%
Import = 1.14%

That 85% is still a very big number to convert to RE which is currently only about 13% of the total.

"The share of coal and nuclear in power generation is much higher than their share in installed capacity, because coal and nuclear plants provide base load and thus are running longer hours than natural gas and petroleum plants which typically provide peak load, while wind turbines and solar plants produce electricity when they can."

[Samsolar]

US numbers as a whole are interesting, but Hawaii is the one with the big RE goals. According to the EIA, they are 75% oil, 15% coal (no new plants can be built) and the rest RE. When you look at how locked in they are with oil and the volatility of oil prices over the years/decades, the momentum behind getting away from oil is pretty clear.

[SunEagle]

US numbers as a whole are interesting, but Hawaii is the one with the big RE goals. According to the EIA, they are 75% oil, 15% coal (no new plants can be built) and the rest RE. When you look at how locked in they are with oil and the volatility of oil prices over the years/decades, the momentum behind getting away from oil is pretty clear.

Hawaii has a big problem due to the cost of using oil to generate.

They need to find less expensive ways and RE should provide them some relief and less dependance on fossil fuels.

But to go 100% RE even in 30 years is unrealistic and IMO more of a political stunt to convince the populace that their state government is looking to reduce electric costs as well as CO2 emissions. Both those will be a tough nut to crack.

[russ]

US numbers as a whole are interesting, but Hawaii is the one with the big RE goals. According to the EIA, they are 75% oil, 15% coal (no new plants can be built) and the rest RE. When you look at how locked in they are with oil and the volatility of oil prices over the years/decades, the momentum behind getting away from oil is pretty clear.

Sounds cool - using the flashy words such as momentum is meaningless in itself - there must be something to give momentum to. Hawaii legislators are making a political stunt and nothing more as of today.

[russ]

I'm afraid your facts are pretty out of date. Coal and nuclear only make up about 60% of power production as of 2013. That continues to decrease every year as well.

With natural gas picking up the difference - unless you want to chatter about the fraction of one percent solar PV makes.

[donald]

Here are some costs for some utility scale solar projects from the end of last year:

http://www.solarplaza.com/article/top-5-cheapest-solar-kwhs-in-the-world

If you want to add utility scale batteries, pick a cost. At $200/kwh and a ten year life its less than $.06/kwh

The NREL high % RE scenario has significant gas plant capacity that is infrequently used. The gas plants could recharge batteries, in the same way it is done today off grid.

These numbers are far ahead of projections. I have a 2008 study that has utility scale solar at $.12 in 2030.

[SunEagle]

Here are some costs for some utility scale solar projects from the end of last year:

http://www.solarplaza.com/article/top-5-cheapest-solar-kwhs-in-the-world

If you want to add utility scale batteries, pick a cost. At $200/kwh and a ten year life its less than $.06/kwh

The NREL high % RE scenario has significant gas plant capacity that is infrequently used. The gas plants could recharge batteries, in the same way it is done today off grid.

These numbers are far ahead of projections. I have a 2008 study that has utility scale solar at $.12 in 2030.

You are misinterpreting the cost of those pv systems. That is what the builder got in a PPO contract to sell the power generated. That is how they got the investors to help build them.

You have to remember those systems were able to get the 30% FED tax rebate along with other incentives or tax reductions from the state to build it there just to increase employment. But that won't happen in every state.

No question that the cost per watt goes down when you build the super pv arrays but will they continue to be cost affective once all the incentives go away?

Heck in Florida it is like pulling teeth from a gator to get the POCO's to invest in large arrays. It was only after a lot of bad press about the Sunshine state not having any type of solar incentive programs that the POCO's decided to build a few. But even then we may never catch up to what New Jersey has installed because the POCO's here know the cost to generate power from PV is more expensive then Nat Gas.

[Samsolar]

Sounds cool - using the flashy words such as momentum is meaningless in itself - there must be something to give momentum to. Hawaii legislators are making a political stunt and nothing more as of today.

The momentum is going into getting away from oil. If coal and nuclear are out, what are you left with? LNG and RE. LNG might still have a play for Hawaii, but there are a huge number of hurdles and they would still be tied to outside markets with no control.

You seemingly skipped over post #36 or perhaps just ignored it? Just to summarize, what you are calling a stunt has been going on with goals being set and met for a number of years. While anyone can argue if this is the best direction for them going forward, it is pretty hard to argue with what has actually happened over the past few years. Don't let that dissuade you from trying though.

[J.P.M.]

Howdy,

I had a look at that 100% RE target and had a bit of a laugh at first. Then I started to think about the price of power over there and the very long pie in the sky timetable for it and thought you beauty the incentive is going to be there for a bunch more solar to be installed, happy days

I wonder if /how much anyone in Hawaii has given attention to the virtues of perhaps finding ways to use less energy rather than or before blindly paying justifiably high prices to generate it.

[SunEagle]

I wonder if /how much anyone in Hawaii has given attention to the virtues of perhaps finding ways to use less energy rather than or before blindly paying justifiably high prices to generate it.

+1. As I have said many times. Getting the US populace to reduce their electrical consumption at night is the first barrier to overcome to be able to increase power generation from RE sources. The less used means the less "storage" required.

[donald]

I wonder if /how much anyone in Hawaii has given attention to the virtues of perhaps finding ways to use less energy rather than or before blindly paying justifiably high prices to generate it.

I expect that Hawaiians are by far the lowest energy users of any state. Are the vast number of efficiency requirements in vehicles, lighting, and appliances that have been mandated by the federal government not enough? We don't even get to wash clothes in hot water anymore.

[donald]

You are misinterpreting the cost of those pv systems. That is what the builder got in a PPO contract to sell the power generated.

Yes, I know. We are talking about the cost of electricity, aren't we? There have been some unbelievably low bids late last year, and this year. Perhaps these costs are "artificially low", although I'm not sure what that means.

[SunEagle]

Yes, I know. We are talking about the cost of electricity, aren't we? There have been some unbelievably low bids late last year, and this year. Perhaps these costs are "artificially low", although I'm not sure what that means.

Not sure either. Certainly the purchaser is getting a deal at 5 to 6 cents/kWh. So the seller must be also getting something in the deal.

Maybe like a car dealership. If they can clear the lot of a certain number of new cars they get a big bonus from the manufacturer. That way they can sell each car at a minor profit but overall the make out with the bonus.

Maybe the company that is selling the power gets some money incentive as long as they have a signed contract for a specific number of years and kWh amount sold. Those are the details that will not make the light of day so how they can make a profit will stay a mystery to us.

[J.P.M.]

I expect that Hawaiians are by far the lowest energy users of any state. Are the vast number of efficiency requirements in vehicles, lighting, and appliances that have been mandated by the federal government not enough? We don't even get to wash clothes in hot water anymore.

No hot water for clothes? Oh the humanity !!

I've always washed clothes in cold water and I ain't dead or infected yet. I shower on .8 GPM shower heads w/Navy buttons for shutoffs and don't stink much. I shave using cold water and don't look like I got in a face fight with the cat. I'm a libertarian by nature, but if the gov. didn't mandate some stuff, social entropy would be free to improve the gene pool and the great unwashed masses would be less massive through natural selection of the less stupid.