Solar ... In the news

Coastalwatch

A question has just occurred to me. In building a nuclear power station, is the environmental affect of pouring so much concrete a) significant and b) ever debated in the green credentials of nuclear?

From EDF's own figures of CO2 emmisions then I believe purely from the construction side a figure of 6 million tonnes plus was stated. Once complete and generating at full capacity then based on todays Grid emmisions it would take six years to "repay" this debt. Assuming it would be a decade before any generation took place then with the increasing contribution of RE to the mix and hence a cleaner Grid resulting we can but calculate that it would take considerably longer.

In addition the emmisions stated did not include those of contractors vehicles travelling to and from site on a daily basis for the decade or so it would take to construct.

Sadly these figures only exacerbate the already difficult situation regarding CO2 levels now, so to claim the emmisions will be offset in two decades time has a rather hollow ring to it in my very humble view.

In comparison a Wind turbine takes 6 to 8 months to offset it's emmisions and be generating within a year or two of being given the go ahead.

Coastalwatch

Oh well, a glimmer of hope while it lasted I suppose!

Mind you I seem to remember the Theresa May government activating a review into Hinckley C so wasn't holding out too much hope. I wonder how many years it will be until it actually comes on line and what the final cost might turn out to be should the government of the day ever release the figures.

Sizewell C: Government denies new nuclear plant under review.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63507630

Coastalwatch

Isn't it great when a community comes together to organise such an acquisition. Ok, so they couldn't fund it entirely themselves but arranged a bank loan to cover the additional sum required. Good to see protection of biodiversity and wildlife measures maintained along with funds to address fuel poverty.

Makes a refreshing change from recent news where other less well meaning sections of society can only raise objections to any scheme before appreciating the benefits that can be received by adopting a positive, rather than negative view when renewable energy generation schemes get proposed.

Hats off to Sheriffhales and Triodos.

3.2MW Shropshire solar farm comes into 100% community-ownership

The village of Sheriffhales, Shropshire has completed the acquisition of a 3.2MW solar farm to bring the array into 100% community-ownership.

Sheriffhales Community Energy launched a community bond offer earlier this year to raise funds to bring a solar farm on the edge of the village into local community ownership. The bond offer raised £565,000 with a further £3 million secured from a long-term bank loan from the Bristol-based ethical bank Triodos.

“Bringing the solar farm into community ownership will bring an income to the parish that is more than the parish council precept. We will be using those funds to help address some of the challenges we face as a rural community, to tackle fuel poverty and other urgent village needs.”

According to the community organisation, the solar array has exceeded the long-term average generation projects over the last six years by 5% and is generating over £400,000 per year in revenue.

The solar project has a range of biodiversity and wildlife protection measures. For instance, the land under and around the solar panels maintains species of grasses, herbs and wildflowers. Bat and bird boxes are also located around the site.

https://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/3.2mw_shropshire_solar_farm_comes_into_100_community_ownership

Martyn1981

Simply brilliant. Compulsory PV for large parking areas. France is effectively forcing such areas to earn more money from the same land ..... how very dare they!

[One tiny niggle, the article suggests 11GWp of PV is equal to about 10 nuclear reactors. Technically, that's probably reasonable in terms of capacity, but in output, perhaps 1 to 1.5 reactors. But hardly a negative.]


In France, all large parking lots now have to be covered by solar panels

In France, solar just got a huge boost from new legislation approved through the Senate this week that requires all parking lots with spaces for at least 80 vehicles – both existing and new – be covered by solar panels.

The new provisions are part of French president Emmanuel Macron’s large-scale plan to heavily invest in renewables, which aims to multiply by 10 the amount of solar energy produced in the country, and to double the power from land-based wind farms. 

Starting July 1, 2023, smaller carparks that have between 80 and 400 spaces will have five years to be in compliance with the new measures. Carparks with more than 400 spaces have a shorter timeline: They will need to comply with the new measures within three years of this date, and at least half of the surface area of the parking lot will need to be covered in solar panels.

JKenH

I’m all for solar PV on car parks; it’s a great fit with industry, office and school hours but not with peak demand. Why not mandate battery storage at the same time? To me it seems these initiatives are politically motivated instead of being thought through fully. 

2nd_time_buyer

Yes, interesting point about how many nuclear reactors. On one hand solar generates during the day, so I guess 1gwh of day time energy is more useful than 1gwh of night time energy. Perhaps winter GWh might be more valuable than summer, tipping favour towards wind. Increasingly , you might expect "guaranteed" energy such as FF and nuclear to command a higher value than flighty renewables. I am not sure where I am going with this, other we might be moving into territory where all GWh are not born equal.

QrizB

JKenH said:

I’m all for solar PV on car parks...

Yes, me too. It also keeps cars cooler in summer so there's less demand for in-car a/c which will indirectly reduce emissions.

... it’s a great fit with industry, office and school hours but not with peak demand. Why not mandate battery storage at the same time?

If you can persuade EVs to plug in while parked under the canopy, you can (in effect) store in their batteries. No need to add additional stationary batteries to the system. (Not so helpful at weekends and holidays, admittedly.)

Martyn1981

2nd_time_buyer said:

Yes, interesting point about how many nuclear reactors. On one hand solar generates during the day, so I guess 1gwh of day time energy is more useful than 1gwh of night time energy. Perhaps winter GWh might be more valuable than summer, tipping favour towards wind. Increasingly , you might expect "guaranteed" energy such as FF and nuclear to command a higher value than flighty renewables. I am not sure where I am going with this, other we might be moving into territory where all GWh are not born equal.

Yep, all gets complicated and dare I say fun.

Also worth remembering that as this is France, then their PV gen is better / more valueable than ours. In the North they'll roughly match or beat the best we have at around 1,100kWh/kWp pa, and for a south facing array have a roughly 3:1 variance of best month v's worse month. But as you get to the southern border, generation is rising towards 1,500kWh/kWp pa, and the variance has dropped to about 2:1.

In the UK, a good south facing PV system will vary around 4:1 (possibly 3:1 if very steep, winter optimised pitch), and E/W, like mine are about 7:1.

2nd_time_buyer

Then you have the regular Express stories about wind farms having to be shut down because we have too much energy. The same is never said about gas power stations that are not running at full capacity. Hopefully we will move away fairly quickly from overcapacity being a dirty word with respect to renewables. On current trends, overcapacity could well be much cheaper and less damaging to the environment than storage.

JKenH

QrizB said:

JKenH said:

I’m all for solar PV on car parks...

Yes, me too. It also keeps cars cooler in summer so there's less demand for in-car a/c which will indirectly reduce emissions.

... it’s a great fit with industry, office and school hours but not with peak demand. Why not mandate battery storage at the same time?

If you can persuade EVs to plug in while parked under the canopy, you can (in effect) store in their batteries. No need to add additional stationary batteries to the system. (Not so helpful at weekends and holidays, admittedly.)

Interesting idea. Each car parking space could generate around 2.5kW in good weather so potentially 40% of the spaces could be given over to EV charging. It would be attractive to those drivers unable to charge at home and if it were cheap enough could also appeal to those who already have domestic charging facilities. 

The issue might however be how to set the rate for charging. If it were a flat rate all year round then when the sun goes in the car park operator would be subsidising the cost (and increasing day time demand on the grid) or could he turn the chargers off? An ideal situation for smart charging perhaps tailored to the output from the panels with the opportunity for the driver to elect to pay for any electricity at a higher rate when insufficient solar was available (a bit like the options available on a Zappi charger: a) pure solar or nothing, b) a constant charge at minimum 1.4kw increasing when the sun comes out, or c) a full 6.6kw charge.