BBC on Oil - are low prices here to stay

cells

http://energytransition.de/2015/01/pv-silver-lining/

seems a good graph take a few mins to understand it. shows you the problems of PV, even with batteries

also it tries to encourage PV purchases but concludes its not that great at the moment

That is in a nation where electricity costs twice as much, and the feed in tariff is 4-6x its true worth yet the conclusion is still...meh

also highlights how average day output is irrelevant let alone monthly or yearly

michaels

BBC talking about this today:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31040723

Thanks for all the considered input, very interesting.

Anyone looked into natural gas CHP? I was thinking it might be ideal alongside an indoor year-round swimming pool using the leccy to power the mhrv?

Martyn1981

Generali wrote: »

At present it wouldn't really be feasible to live 'off-grid' as battery technology isn't good enough. However I see no reason for battery technology not to continue to get better in leaps and bounds. As much as you seem to hate the idea, for a country like Australia solar power with some sort of storage mechanism is a great solution to our power needs. Anyother method of storage that is used is molten salt:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/molten-salt-storage-gives-push-to-us-solar-power/story-e6frg9df-1226843924302

with that, we go back to a grid system of course. Australia has millions of acres of land that has nil value that could be covered in solar panels very simply.

Regarding this post and comments I meant (but forgot) to mention this article about a proposed giant Australian PV farm. It would be about 4 times bigger than the current record setters in the US.

The article makes similar points to you, and also mentions the cost competitiveness of PV v's fossil fuels:

Under the sun: Australia's largest solar farm set to sprout in a Queensland field

Gemmell, citing deals for 260MW projects in Dubai and power purchase agreements at US 5.84c a kilowatt hour, agrees. “It’s now foreseeable that solar will in the next decade be able to outcompete a very old, fully depreciated coal-fired generator that chugs along at 3 or 4 cents a kWh.”

“Obviously once a project’s been constructed, the cost of fuel is free, it’s sunlight, and Australia is wonderfully geared to some visionary projects to harness those benefits of cheaper, bountiful, reliable sources of power,” Gemmell says.

“We’ve got abundant space, modern infrastructure across the longest continuous grid on the planet, from Cape York to Tassie, and amongst all that space is plenty of sunshine.”

Mart.

cells

The American power purchase agreements are flattered by more accounting tricks and a whole host of 'incentives'. Eg a 30% tax credit.

So invest a billion dollars and get $300m back and do the sums on the $700m


Onshore wind power in the USA is doing much better (amount of energy produced and cost) but even that more cost competitive and effective source falls flat on it face each time the tax credit is removed.

cells

michaels wrote: »

BBC talking about this today:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31040723

Thanks for all the considered input, very interesting.

Anyone looked into natural gas CHP? I was thinking it might be ideal alongside an indoor year-round swimming pool using the leccy to power the mhrv?

Silly BBC just passing on the hopes of a cheerleader

How can batteries ever be cheaper or greener than what is a 5 square mm copper wire that already exists. Aka the last mile of the grid?

Generali

cells wrote: »

Silly BBC just passing on the hopes of a cheerleader

How can batteries ever be cheaper or greener than what is a 5 square mm copper wire that already exists. Aka the last mile of the grid?

Demand for computers was predicted to be possibly as much as one a year. You state all this stuff with absolute certainty: that fossil fuels will be providing all our energy for the next 40 years.

You have no idea where technology will take us over that period but I do know that in 40 years the sun will still be shining.

cells

A poster here posted national grid revenue of £14.8B amd we guesstimated that the grid costs homes 45p a day. I suspected that that figure is too high so I looked up the account just now

£14.8B revenue was indeed correct!

But it breaks down to

£8.04B USA Business (they own gas and electricity grids and power stations over there it seems)

£0.94B UK Gas Transmission
£1.89B UK Gas Distribution

£0.76B in 'other activities' eg selling land and property


And what matter for this discussion is

£3.39B for UK electricity transmission


Now doing the same guesstimate as 30% of that is cost to homes and 27.5m homes gives us 10.1p a day


so the UK grid costs homes 10p a day......

thats what off gridders are trying to solve and save....

cells

Generali wrote: »

Demand for computers was predicted to be possibly as much as one a year. You state all this stuff with absolute certainty: that fossil fuels will be providing all our energy for the next 40 years.

You have no idea where technology will take us over that period but I do know that in 40 years the sun will still be shining.

How do you link the two together?

cells

Generali wrote: »

that fossil fuels will be providing all our energy for the next 40 years.

Fossil fuels don't provide all of our energy now...so won't do in 40 years time

but they will be providing the majority (> 50%) by 2050 of that much I am confident

---

'The sun will still be shining in 40 years time'

Sure but the problem isn't the sun, or even PV tech, but that the planet we live on rotates.

And I'm pretty confident earth will still be rotating in 40 years time

cells

So far we have....

£1.10 a day for the cost of electricity to a home which seems to break down to roughly

£0.10 a day for the Grid

£0.20 a day for Vat & Green subsidy

£0.80 a day for other (power stations their fuel their maintiannce the ppwrr companies their staff and call centres and meter readers and sending out letters and customers that don't pay and...well everything else)

---

From that we can rubbish another green theory...that grid disconnection will force the price of the grid up for the remainder so much as to force everyone else to disconnect....

well if 10% of homes leave the grid, 2.75m UK homes leave, that means the 10p a day grid will cost 11p a day for the remainder....

---

I've said this before and I will say it again. Batteries can never be as green or economic as a national grid. Your homes connection to the grid is 2kg of copper that lasts 200 years and it already exists. The replacement is a 200kg battery that lasts just 2000 cycles (6 years) before you need to scrap it and build a new one. Clearly without even the need to know anytjing about science and technology and business and economics you can bloody conclude a few kg of inert copper wire is going to be a hard tech to best