Is the Solar Industry in Germany Losing Its Shine

[russ]

Of course the grid has to have the capacity to supply power when the sun isn't shining. But it had enough to supply my needs the day before I installed solar and the exact same capacity the day after I installed the solar and stopped using as much from the grid. Why do they have to build NEW capacity watt for watt for my solar install? I understand that they can't get rid of peaker capacity watt for watt for my solar but adding more over and above what they had before I reduced my usage - just don't see it.

It is not like the demand is decreasing in most locations - the demand continues to climb.

The only time your scenario works is if the system capacity is overbuilt.

The peaker plants are expensive power added in the mix as well - nothing like combined cycle efficiency.

[Ian S]

OK, I've found a paper on the APS website here - pdf format. It'll take awhile to look over.

[bonaire]

I am open to listening and learning about someone else understanding of the subject.

If it is not one watt for one watt, did he give you his answer as to how much it is and why he felt this way?

I have an opportunity to see the guy and other engineers April 30 at a MAREA meeting. I'll see what I can produce.

There are also some studies that indicate TOU rate plans help reduce the peak demand points in the grid demand curve which is one key metric that they seem to care about. The transmission network seems to be designed around the top eight peak demand days of the year. The APS study reads ok but is now four years old and probably need refreshing to today's data and deployment profile.

This Hawkins study done for CA indicates that forecasting out to 2020 does not mean a watt for watt reserve but rather more stringent regulation and a certain amount of fast reaction standby and/or storage. It's a few years old and so, needs updating with current numbers.

http://www.narucmeetings.org/Presentations/Hawkins.pdf

[SunEagle]

I have an opportunity to see the guy and other engineers April 30 at a MAREA meeting. I'll see what I can produce.

There are also some studies that indicate TOU rate plans help reduce the peak demand points in the grid demand curve which is one key metric that they seem to care about. The transmission network seems to be designed around the top eight peak demand days of the year. The APS study reads ok but is now four years old and probably need refreshing to today's data and deployment profile.

This Hawkins study done for CA indicates that forecasting out to 2020 does not mean a watt for watt reserve but rather more stringent regulation and a certain amount of fast reaction standby and/or storage. It's a few years old and so, needs updating with current numbers.

http://www.narucmeetings.org/Presentations/Hawkins.pdf

Ok. Fair enough for me to wait and see what the new data comes up with. I just know that Florida probably uses more energy than it can produce. Especially since the Nuke plant up in Crystal river went off line due to the Utilities incompetence. They have had to purchase power from other Utilities which sometimes comes from out of state to cover their customers.

I would hazard a guess and say that the state that the Utilities when Ian lives probably purchases power from Texas but he and most others would not be privy to this information. The Utility is only obligated to provide the power not tell you where it comes from.

I wonder if anyone has up to date data showing what the USA non renewable generating (actual on line not just built) capacity as compared to the consumption. I have no doubt that there is enough to cover the renewable generation watt for watt for now but solar and wind generation can be installed much quicker than a non renewable generating plant. That is why the Utilities must plan ahead and stay ahead of the demand. They can only purchase from Canada if they can't produce enough themselves. That is too thin of a life line.

[russ]

I would hazard a guess and say that the state that the Utilities when Ian lives probably purchases power from Texas but he and most others would not be privy to this information. The Utility is only obligated to provide the power not tell you where it comes from.

Actually Arizona supplies a lot of power to southern CA. Big coal deposits and power plants in the four corners area I believe.

[russ]

2011 Renewable Energy Data Book

From NREL -

• The installed global renewable electricity capacity nearly doubled between 2000 and
2011, although renewable energy is a relatively small portion of total energy supply both
globally and in the United States.
• Renewable electricity represented nearly 13% of total installed capacity and more than
12% of total electric generation in the United States in 2011. Installed renewable electricity
capacity is more than 146 gigawatts (GW).
• In 2011 in the United States, wind and solar photovoltaics (PV) were two of the fastest
growing electric generation technologies. In 2011, cumulative installed wind capacity
increased by nearly 17% and cumulative installed solar photovoltaic capacity grew more
than 86% from the previous year

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/54909.pdf

[Sunking]

• Renewable electricity represented nearly 13% of total installed capacity and more than
12% of total electric generation in the United States in 2011. Installed renewable electricity
capacity is more than 146 gigawatts (GW).

That statement is so unrealistic I am not sure where to start. In the USA Re accounts for 8%, and 90% of that is from Hydro Electric, followed by Wind, and Solar PV accounts for less than 1% of that sliver of 8%. So small it is insignificant and adds no capacity. NREL is making that up.

[russ]

That statement is so unrealistic I am not sure where to start. In the USA Re accounts for 8%, and 90% of that is from Hydro Electric, followed by Wind, and Solar PV accounts for less than 1% of that sliver of 8%. So small it is insignificant and adds no capacity. NREL is making that up.

Dereck - Read something for a change rather than just start to rattle off. The documents is not making anything up.

You have to read all the way to page 10 to see they say 0.4%

[SunEagle]

Dereck - Read something for a change rather than just start to rattle off. The documents is not making anything up.

You have to read all the way to page 10 to see they say 0.4%

Russ

That was very informative. I saw that there was some Tidal energy production but is was much much smaller than PV which even though it seems to be growing in leaps and bounds still a very small slice of the pie.

[Ian S]

OK, I've found a paper on the APS website here - pdf format. It'll take awhile to look over.

From section 5.1:

• Solar DE reduces the APS system peak demand and thus reduces the need for APS to add generating resources to meet peak demand growth.

• Capital and fixed operating costs of the avoided generation units are not incurred.

• Demand charges for power purchases that are no longer needed to meet peak demand growth are reduced.

• Solar DE reduces the load requirements on APS, thereby reducing the operation of APS generating units and purchase power resources, which in turn reduces the total cost of fuel, variable O&M, emissions, and power purchases.

• Solar DE resources may increase APS requirements for ancillary services.

The only concern appears to be the last point but in reading the entire section, there is doubt about the magnitude of the effect and certainly no suggestion that newly built watt for watt conventional capacity would have to be added as a direct result of solar addition.

[russ]

From section 5.1:

• Solar DE reduces the APS system peak demand and thus reduces the need for APS to add generating resources to meet peak demand growth.

• Capital and fixed operating costs of the avoided generation units are not incurred.

• Demand charges for power purchases that are no longer needed to meet peak demand growth are reduced.

• Solar DE reduces the load requirements on APS, thereby reducing the operation of APS generating units and purchase power resources, which in turn reduces the total cost of fuel, variable O&M, emissions, and power purchases.

• Solar DE resources may increase APS requirements for ancillary services.

The only concern appears to be the last point but in reading the entire section, there is doubt about the magnitude of the effect and certainly no suggestion that newly built watt for watt conventional capacity would have to be added as a direct result of solar addition.

Sounds like a bunch of PC blather actually.

[bonaire]

This sentence in the study, while a poorly constructed one, makes perfect sense to me:

In the USA Re accounts for 8%, and 90% of that is from Hydro Electric, followed by Wind, and Solar PV accounts for less than 1% of that sliver of 8%.

In other words:
Renewable power is 8% if national power.
Breaking it down, Hydro is 7.2% of national power (90% of 8%)
Finally, Wind and Solar are less than 1% of the 8% (.08 * .01)

Meaning Wind and Solar are ~.08% of national power. Which seems correct in scale.

In the thread about Hawaii's grid under pressure from Solar - there, their grid has reached 15% solar power, something like that? Far cry from under .08% on the mainland for combined wind/solar.

[Sunking]

Dereck - Read something for a change rather than just start to rattle off. The documents is not making anything up.

You have to read all the way to page 10 to see they say 0.4%

Russ my comment was was based on what you printed. It clearly states RE provides 12% of US total production in 2011. At least that is the way I read it.

[SunEagle]

From section 5.1:

• Solar DE reduces the APS system peak demand and thus reduces the need for APS to add generating resources to meet peak demand growth.

• Capital and fixed operating costs of the avoided generation units are not incurred.

• Demand charges for power purchases that are no longer needed to meet peak demand growth are reduced.

• Solar DE reduces the load requirements on APS, thereby reducing the operation of APS generating units and purchase power resources, which in turn reduces the total cost of fuel, variable O&M, emissions, and power purchases.

• Solar DE resources may increase APS requirements for ancillary services.

The only concern appears to be the last point but in reading the entire section, there is doubt about the magnitude of the effect and certainly no suggestion that newly built watt for watt conventional capacity would have to be added as a direct result of solar addition.

That document is very detailed and sometimes hard to follow but it did provide a lot of data.

What I also got out of it is that despite the increase of PV to help offset the daily needs, APS was still going to move forward with their expansion of generating facilities. To help stay in the 15% reserve area they were also going to implement ways to reduce their own energy waste and hopefully reduce the amount of purchased energy.

As you have indicated it doesn't specifically indicate the need for a "watt for watt" coverage but it didn't say that they didn't need to stop expanding their generating systems.

Also this study was done in 2008 where the installed kw amount of Solar was very small as compared to the amount of installed pv during 2010 & 2011 especially in the Southwestern part of the US. In real life I would expect the increase of PV to again have jumped from 2011 numbers so it would be interesting to see which of APS's penetration plans are close to what is happening in real life.

Again I got the drift that APS was not worried in 2008 about supplying power when the pv systems stopped but they also were aware that their 15% reserve could be impacted. Their biggest concern seemed more focused on the amount of money they would need to spend as opposed to the ability to keep the lights on.

[rosstaylor]

Germany has been known as the gold standard for installing panels and producing solar energy. Forget that Germany is at approximately the same latitude as Alaska. It has installed about 30 gigawatts of solar capacity, which is impressive considering that the juggernaut of solar installations in the U.S. has managed a paltry 6.4 gigawatts, tiny by comparison. Everything sounds sweet for the solar industry in Germany, right? Possibly not. The huge growth has caused some problems, very different in nature but nonetheless problems. The first problem is that the work for installers is now beginning to dry up. The second problem is that competition has become even more intense and solar energy parts manufacturers will face even more severe competition. The other problem to hit the news in Germany is the effect on utilities.

More...

Germany is the biggest solar PV sector in the world in terms of installed photovoltaic capacity. It has the largest conversion rate i.e. conversion of solar energy into electricity in comparing to other nations across the world. The many technology utilized in generation of photovoltaic are wafer based, thin film and organic photovoltaic. The country is home to various companies operating in this sector, numerous developers, integrators and installers.