Solar ... In the news

Martyn1981

EDF moves deeper into U.S. solar market

Two questions:-

1. EDF are investing in cheap PV in the states, whilst in the UK, they are to build 'the most expensive building in the World'?

2. Have I missed something?

A renewable energy division of British energy company EDF

Mart.

Cardew

Those who hate environmentalism have spent years looking for the definitive example of a great green rip-off. Finally it arrives, and nobody notices. The government is about to shift £8.6bn from the poor to the middle classes.

Martyn1981 wrote: »

The statement was completely false when it was originally made. The quoted FiT budget of £8.6bn (actually £6.7bn) was to be paid by all consumers from all sectors, not just the poor element of the domestic sector.

Is that really the best you can do to discredit his article? -'Completely false' because you dispute £8.6bn and that not all consumers who pay for the FIT are poor.

Talk about not seeing the big picture! Can't you even understand the principle involved?

Even the most fervent and biased advocate of the FIT subsidy should be able to see that that subsidy is being paid by other electricity consumers, many of whom will be poorer than those receiving that subsidy; and yes that includes pensioners living in an all electric rented flat.

EricMears

Cardew wrote: »

Even the most fervent and biased advocate of the FIT subsidy should be able to see that that subsidy is being paid by other electricity consumers, many of whom will be poorer than those receiving that subsidy; and yes that includes pensioners living in an all electric rented flat.

Very likely, but many of those electricity consumers will also be richer than the FIT claimant.


The whole point is that the levy to subsidise non fossil fuel generation needs to be paid by all electricity consumers - preferably in proportion to their usage - so that it also encourages all consumers to use as little electricity as possible. From that point of view you might want to spare a thought for the suffering of multi-millionaires living in huge houses with astronomical electricity bills ? I'm not of course advocating that we give the rich a discount, just pointing out the logical fallacy of concentrating on the poor.

Martyn1981

Cardew wrote: »

Is that really the best you can do to discredit his article? -'Completely false' because you dispute £8.6bn and that not all consumers who pay for the FIT are poor.

Talk about not seeing the big picture! Can't you even understand the principle involved?

I understand the principle perfectly. The £8.6bn (technically £6.7bn) that Monbiot claimed would be paid by poor households, was/is to be paid by all households, and all sectors.

He claimed that about 3% to 6% of people paid it all (assuming 10% to 20% of households are classed as poor and domestic consumption accounts for ~30% of leccy demand).

So he pretended that 3% to 6% equaled 100%, and that's before we note that something like 20% of installs have taken place on council/social housing rooves, lowering the leccy bills for tenants, without them having to pay any install costs whatsoever.


More importantly, you know all this already. Yet you have repeatedly stated recently that the article is still true. You can no longer pretend that you are simply stupid or misinformed. Instead you are quoting statements that you know aren't true, just to create argument and division.

I believe that action is normally described as trolling?

Cardew wrote: »

Even the most fervent and biased advocate of the FIT subsidy should be able to see that that subsidy is being paid by other electricity consumers, many of whom will be poorer than those receiving that subsidy; and yes that includes pensioners living in an all electric rented flat.

And even the most fervent and biased advocate of nuclear power should be able to see that that subsidy is being paid by all electricity consumers, all of whom will be poorer than those receiving that subsidy; and yes that includes pensioners living in an all electric rented flat.

[Edit: At least PV is Green & Ethical!]

Mart.

Martyn1981

Powervault have launched their MKII model, and it sounds interesting (give or take 5 years).

2, 4 or 6kWh of useable storage.
Able to access smart tariffs to charge from grid.
Able to provide 800W during a powercut from the battery via a dedicated outlet.
Installed in 1hr.
Li-ion model has a life expectancy of 4,000 cycles (14 to 17 yrs).

Bad news, the price is £2.5k to £5k.

Good news, well that's at the end of the article:-

Powervault incorporates smart tariffs into new home energy storage units

Powervault's goal is to install systems in 50,000 homes by 2020, by which time it expects them to retail for less than £1,000. "Ultimately we believe that a Powervault in the home will be as common as a dishwasher," said Warren.

Powervault technical bits and bobs.


Storage, yum yum yum, the response to all those sad people who pretend not to use leccy during daylight, or when the wind is blowing!

Mart.

Cardew

Martyn1981 wrote: »

I believe that action is normally described as trolling?

Somebody asked a question on a forum you dominate - but don't own!


The answer they were given was relevant and suggested a source they should read. The source explained the principal objection to the subsidy; an objection that was valid at the time FIT was introduced, and is valid now.


If you believe that constitutes 'trolling', then you are as mistaken as you are about so many things that require rational thought.

Martyn1981

Cardew wrote: »

The source explained the principal objection to the subsidy; an objection that was valid at the time FIT was introduced, and is valid now.

Then you'll have no problem confirming that Monbiot's claims are still true then:-

1. Only poor households are to pay the FiT budget.
2. That PV is comically inefficient, and generation should be judged on processing efficiences not economics.
3. That PV generation costs 7 to 9 times more than wind and hydro.
4. That Germany reduced its FiT rate in 2010 because it was turning its back on PV, rather than because PV costs were falling.
4a. That Germany reduced the scale of PV rollout from 2010, rather than increased it.
5. That houses don't have to meet minimum efficiency standards to receive FiT.
6. That PV'ers will wire incoming mains to the TGM's and fraudulently earn a fortune.

Well?

Mart.

michaels

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Powervault have launched their MKII model, and it sounds interesting (give or take 5 years).

2, 4 or 6kWh of useable storage.
Able to access smart tariffs to charge from grid.
Able to provide 800W during a powercut from the battery via a dedicated outlet.
Installed in 1hr.
Li-ion model has a life expectancy of 4,000 cycles (14 to 17 yrs).

Bad news, the price is £2.5k to £5k.

Good news, well that's at the end of the article:-

Powervault incorporates smart tariffs into new home energy storage units



Powervault technical bits and bobs.


Storage, yum yum yum, the response to all those sad people who pretend not to use leccy during daylight, or when the wind is blowing!

Mart.

Anyone done a spreadsheet on what price point per kwh and cycles:
Storage becomes cost effective with PV
Storage becomes cost effective with E7

Martyn1981

michaels wrote: »

Anyone done a spreadsheet on what price point per kwh and cycles:
Storage becomes cost effective with PV
Storage becomes cost effective with E7

If the £5k price relates to the 6kWh (useable) model, then you get
500,000p/(6x4,000) = 21p/kWh.

That doesn't sound economical to me for PV, and certainly not for the price margin between low and high tariffs.

So costs need to come down a lot.

If the 2020 £1k price relates to the smaller model, then that might suggest £2k for the bigger model, so
200,000p/(6x4,000) = 8.33p/kWh.

That may be viable for PV, but not sure it works against tariff variants.

So lots to watch, but no instant win, and a frustrating wait.

You might get more use out of the battery via micro cycling, where demand and generation are similar, just fluctuating up and down, relating to lots of small discharges and charges through the day. These might not effect life expectancy of the battery.


More importantly, and moving away from demand side PV dedicated storage, is grid scale storage. This is a lot cheaper, and can be used for all and any generation, simply mopping up excess when spot prices are low. Could be pumped hydro, compressed air, flywheels, power to gas etc, but focusing on battery technology, the Eos Aurora could be as low as low as 1.2p/kWh (see $0.02 near the bottom of this article). 1.2p/kWh = £12/MWh which is less than the current difference between on-shore wind/PV costs and Hinkley costs.

Grid scale storage also works for demand side generation, since higher demand side generation reduces demand on the grid. This would then lead to excess and lower prices, which in turn could lead to grid storage stepping in.

Mart.

michaels

Aren't there transmission efficiency savings in having local storage (I guess especially for PV)?