Viability Of Solar Power As Grid Baseline

[Singular Intellect]

*shrugs* I think I've made my position clear that solar power is going to quickly (relatively) and easily meet the entire planet's energy needs.

The death of political will for nuclear power is of absolute zero concern to me. If anything, it's actually a positive thing.

[Crossroads Inc.]

*shrugs* I think I've made my position clear that solar power is going to quickly (relatively) and easily meet the entire planet's energy needs.

The death of political will for nuclear power is of absolute zero concern to me. If anything, it's actually a positive thing.

Um... No, no you haven't.
We've had this discussion before. Solar will not meet the Earths power needs, not now, not for... Perhaps ever.
Solar Is a very fickle power source, you need to build solar collectors in Space to truly get 24/7 power production. Something I don't see us doing for a long time.
Also to say """The death of political will for nuclear power is of absolute zero concern to me. If anything, it's actually a positive thing.""" is very short sighted view to take.
As I said early, the loss of Nuclear is essentially a win for Coal and Oil. Yes, as nuclear interest goes down, there will be lots of "talk" about alt fuels, but guess what, Coal and Oil is cheaper and faster.

[Simon_Jester]

*shrugs* I think I've made my position clear that solar power is going to quickly (relatively) and easily meet the entire planet's energy needs.

The death of political will for nuclear power is of absolute zero concern to me. If anything, it's actually a positive thing.

I shouldn't have to say this, but...

Stop to consider the consequences of your being wrong about things like this. What if you, who are far from the most informed person in the world on the matter of solar cells, are simply wrong? Or overoptimistic? Has this never happened to you before?

Wouldn't it then be a pity if one of our backup plans disappeared?

[Sky Captain]

*shrugs* I think I've made my position clear that solar power is going to quickly (relatively) and easily meet the entire planet's energy needs.

It would be possible only if solar cells become as cheap as paper and dirt cheap means of storing megatons worth of energy are developed. To reliably supply Europe with solar power would require huge solar farms in Sahara. Placing vital infrastructure in such remote and politically highly unstable ready to explode region = Bad Idea. Most of the Europe gets good sunshine only in spring and summer so local solar plants are not an option to generate reliable power year round.
In most of the Europe, especially near sea and Ocean wind power easily outperforms solar. A good sited wind turbine can reach capacity factor 0,3 to 0,4 while solar panels typically have 0,1 - 0,15 capacity factor.
The energy storage of required scale still remains unsolved. Currently most cost effective and most widely deployed method is pumped storage, but to store energy on such huge scale would require nearly every mountain valley to be turned into storage basin.

[Singular Intellect]

Stop to consider the consequences of your being wrong about things like this. What if you, who are far from the most informed person in the world on the matter of solar cells, are simply wrong? Or overoptimistic? Has this never happened to you before?

Wouldn't it then be a pity if one of our backup plans disappeared?

What in the world makes you think my opinion is that fucking important? My opinion in based upon the large amounts of information I've read and observations of what is going on in the solar power industry. If it turns out I'm wrong? Then I will admit it, even if at the moment I am as convinced I'm right as I would be predicting a apple hitting the floor if I dropped it.

As for 'proving' my assertions, it's becoming obvious to me that until people's homes are running off of 100% solar power generated electricity, most will simply not accept it's not only a viable means of meeting all energy needs, but the absolute best one. Evidence will be effectively handwaved away. I easily could point to upcoming examples like solar powered smart phones that will utilize nanotechnology designed solar collectors built into the touch screen, expected to be on the market next year. I can hear the excuses/dismissal already: "those are tiny electrical devices with little power consumption, it's a gimmick more than anything", with the actual point completely going over people's heads, which is the infrastructure and technological advances to mass produce that kind of technology is already well established. I could cite multiple articles about full spectrum solar cells having been developed that are so advanced they're capable of producing power from the residual heat radiating from the planet well after the sun has gone down (never mind other sources). 'Cloudy day' objections are a fucking joke. People are simply too ignorant of the scientific facts and assume the tiny portion of the visible spectrum of light/radiation our eyes detect is the end all be all of solar power generation. I could cite multiple articles on exponential progress of solar power installations and developments, radical advances in power storage technologies, advancements like even the magnetic properties of light being tapped as power sources, multiple projections of grid parity for solar power in just a few years (and then becoming cheaper), areas where solar power is already cheaper than conventional power generation, etc, etc. It'll all be hand waved away, it's not sitting on people's desks, therefore it's stuck in a lab somewhere and won't see the light of day for a couple more decades or maybe never. I've heard it all before.

I fully expect this quote to play out exactly: "A new idea is first condemned as ridiculous and then dismissed as trivial, until finally, it becomes what everybody knows." -James, William

Nevertheless, I'm not intent on hijacking the thread, so I will cease pursuing and arguing the tangent. I'm merely pointing out I'm not worried about the damage to nuclear's reputation in the slightest. My primary concern would be how smooth the current transition period is going to be as our fossil fuel infrastructure begins it's death throes and is replaced by a vastly superior solar one.

[K. A. Pital]

radical advances in power storage technologies

Those would be quite useful for all types of power, not just solar, because power losses due to the very nature of electricity until this day remain a great problem. A truly radical breakthrough with practical usefulness would be adopted in the matter of a few years.

The fact that this has not happened yet means either there's no radical advances or they are still in infancy. The latter is an optimistic view; humanity has been struggling for an entire century with power storage problems, and so far we're advancing slowly.

The very fact that most electromobiles can't push their storage volume to more than 100-200 km per one charge (and hydrocarbons can offer between 800 and 1000+ km per one full tank) is indicating that even the most advanced storage technologies are not good enough.

[PeZook]

Split from here, to give Singular Intellect an excellent opportunity to present some interesting new information on solar power, so that we can have a good quality discussion on new developments in the field.

[Zaune]

I easily could point to upcoming examples like solar powered smart phones that will utilize nanotechnology designed solar collectors built into the touch screen, expected to be on the market next year. I can hear the excuses/dismissal already: "those are tiny electrical devices with little power consumption, it's a gimmick more than anything", with the actual point completely going over people's heads, which is the infrastructure and technological advances to mass produce that kind of technology is already well established.

What does "Nanotechnology designed" even mean?

I could cite multiple articles about full spectrum solar cells having been developed that are so advanced they're capable of producing power from the residual heat radiating from the planet well after the sun has gone down (never mind other sources). 'Cloudy day' objections are a fucking joke. People are simply too ignorant of the scientific facts and assume the tiny portion of the visible spectrum of light/radiation our eyes detect is the end all be all of solar power generation. I could cite multiple articles on exponential progress of solar power installations and developments, radical advances in power storage technologies, advancements like even the magnetic properties of light being tapped as power sources, multiple projections of grid parity for solar power in just a few years (and then becoming cheaper), areas where solar power is already cheaper than conventional power generation, etc, etc.

Please do so. Preferably with at least one source other than the website of a company trying to sell solar panels. A peer-reviewed scientific journal would be preferable.

It'll all be hand waved away, it's not sitting on people's desks, therefore it's stuck in a lab somewhere and won't see the light of day for a couple more decades or maybe never. I've heard it all before.

And this is unreasonable, without a working prototype to demonstrate?

[Sky Captain]

Those fancy super efficient solar panels also tend to use all sorts of rare earth metals which are in short supply. Advanced batteries also require expensive components. There is a reason why pumped storage remains the most cost effective way of storing energy on large scale. Concrete, steel and water is cheap and plentiful and that plus suitable place is all you need to build and operate dam. Pumped storage plant also don't suffer performance degradation after many cycles. As long as turbines are properly maintained it will be as good after 40 years as it was when newly built.

[Darth Tanner]

We might as well put all our eggs in the fusion basket. The research for that is always undergoing a radical advance but somehow we still appear to be fifty years away from a practical application despite them saying the same thing fifty years ago. Just because tech is under development does not mean it will deliver anything like what is expected from it or to the time schedule the scientists tell the people financing them.

Evidence will be effectively handwaved away.

You haven’t actually produced anything to wave at, the fact some tech might be in development to improve solar tech does nothing to display its actual capabilities in terms of cost to mwh on a national grid production level. Crap about mobile phone chargers is pretty pathetic in comparison.

But just out of interest mobile phone solar chargers are already widespread, you can buy them on Amazon and I have just ordered a unit to help charge my Kindle while camping. The affect that is going to have on industrial scale energy production is insignificant seeing as the scale of the units in question is irrelevant in terms of industrial demand.

A new idea is first condemned as ridiculous and then dismissed as trivial, until finally, it becomes what everybody knows

It’s almost like the countries of the world need some proof of the feasibility of a product before investing billions in it. Fancy that.

[Rabid]

I just have to say that Thermal Solar ( [1] [2] ) allow you to produce electricity even at night, although in reduced quantity.

However I don't think Solar will be a "baseload" energy source anytime source. Because to be viable, a "green power" policy always has to use a cocktail of different energy sources anyway (a bit of solar, a bit of wind, a bit of hydraulic, etc...). And I think we will still need thermal plants (like gas turbines) in the foreseeable future, if only to supplement all the other energy source in case of demand peak.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Just because I can see where this thread is headed... I would like to jump in before the Dogpile becomes TOO much to say that Solar Power IS A good source of clean energy.

There are several ways you can use the sun for power, weather it is directly converting Light into Electricity, heat into steam power, or a mix of the two. Solar Power can be done anywhere with large amounts of sun and, who knows, there may come a day when we can put mile wide colelctors in orbit for round the clock power.

But, as with so many things, it is not all or nothing. SI's problem has been to think that Solar Power will fit ALL the needs of mankind at the expense of everything else. This is what is going to be the issue here. For everyone else, I hope we can agree that Solar Power IS useful, but as used in a mix of other forms of energy.

[Rabid]

As far as replacing fossil fuels goes, there is unfortunately no "one size fits all" solution, something as convenient as Petroleum or Coal that can be burned everywhere, everytime.

This is a reality someone has to accept in order to move on and design a sane energetic policy. You have to diversify your portfolio of energy sources.

[PeZook]

Just FYI, I will not let it turn into a dogpile. The topic is genuinely interesting and I will keep it clean.

[someone_else]

The topic is genuinely interesting and I will keep it clean.

Just a question, is the topic for more general discussion about how to do without fossils and nuclear or is it limited to discuss the "Viability Of Solar Power As Grid Baseline"? C'ause that it's basically a Singular Intellect's optimistic (and slightly myopically focused) view Vs everyone else saying "nono".
Which isn't something overtly interesting, in my humble opinion.

[PeZook]

The topic is genuinely interesting and I will keep it clean.

Just a question, is the topic for more general discussion about how to do without fossils and nuclear or is it limited to discuss the "Viability Of Solar Power As Grid Baseline"? C'ause that it's basically a Singular Intellect's optimistic (and slightly myopically focused) view Vs everyone else saying "nono".
Which isn't something overtly interesting, in my humble opinion.

Singular Intellect claims to have a bunch of interesting articles and information about the new generations of solar cells, which does sound interesting and IMHO warrants discussion.

If the thread fails, well, there are options to deal with it, but I want to see what develops.

[Sky Captain]

In countries loacated at lower lattitudes with large sunny deserts solar thermal can supply part of electricity. If you have nearly every day sunny then energy storage requirements become less since you have to only outlast the night. There already are solar thermal plants in operation that use molten salts as energy storage medium and can run for few hours from heat stored in molten salt tanks. If cost per MW when factoring in capacity factor and cost of molten salt storage system come close to cost of new nuclear plant then solar thermal can be viable in suitable locations.

Howewer in Northern Europe where there is next to no direct sunlight for half of the year solar thermal power likely never will be cost effective because of physical limitations. Best application of solar energy there would be to supplement heating of buildings and to provide hot water. Systems to do that are simple, relatively cheap and ready to mass produce not like some exotic laboratory level technology. Heating consumes large amount of energy and even if some 20 - 30 % of required heat could be provided by solar energy it would save huge amount of fossil fuels.

[Rabid]

^ To complement what the previous poster said, if you travel in Germany (which isn't a country particularly renowned for its sunny climate you have to admit), depending on the region/Lander (Frankfurt-am-Main and Kassel from what I know), on a very large number of houses you can see solar heater or solar cells. It seems to already be very widespread there. And it also begin to be widespread in France to have a solar heater or solar cells on ones roof.

[Singular Intellect]

I'd love to go about submitting sources and info for this thread, but I am literally running out shortly for May long weekend (camping), so I won't be participating during that time.

So long as the thread is around when I get back, I'll be glad to engage more in the discussion and provide sources for my claims.

I can submit a quick link here for a very interersting video on the solar power revolution that is currently underway. Presumably it goes without saying this isn't the entirely of sources I have on hand or have read up on, nor is it intented to be a one shot 'convincing' source either.

Cya guys after the weekend.

[Zaune]

Well, that goes some way towards answering my questions, but it still glosses over the problem of output dropping in certain environmental conditions where demand will stay constant, or even increase in certain circumstances. I don't have figures for the energy density of current-generation battery technology, but I'd be very surprised if it were practical to store enough to cover the kind of shortfalls one can expect from a typical northern European winter.
And the program fails to specify if that "area the size of France" that could supply our planet's entire energy needs accounts for transmission fall-off, which in the absence of room-temperature superconductors is going to be a serious problem.

[Chardok]

I've always wondered why in the hell we didn't do things like utilize what we got and suck heat out of it for power generation - to wit: even on a cold day, find some black asphault, and note that it's usually much warmer than the surrounding air. we have MASSIVE heat islands in the form of concrete buildings, millions of miles of roads that suck up and hold on to even the smallest amount of heat. Why not run little pipes through the roads and use them to remove the heat from them and deliver them to some sort of central...you know, power-making joint? like a frickin' earth-radiator that simply harvests the heat energy all the time? you could use that to at least supplement coal burning for steam generation.

[Sea Skimmer]

I've always wondered why in the hell we didn't do things like utilize what we got and suck heat out of it for power generation - to wit: even on a cold day, find some black asphault, and note that it's usually much warmer than the surrounding air. we have MASSIVE heat islands in the form of concrete buildings, millions of miles of roads that suck up and hold on to even the smallest amount of heat. Why not run little pipes through the roads and use them to remove the heat from them and deliver them to some sort of central...you know, power-making joint? like a frickin' earth-radiator that simply harvests the heat energy all the time? you could use that to at least supplement coal burning for steam generation.

Because that would all be expensive as hell, leak like crazy from the millions of miles of tiny pipes (think about what happens when that road gets torn up for repair to replace a water main...), and not produce very energy out of that investment at aall. Geothermal and similar heat difference energy generation like this works; but the efficiency of heat generated power is highly dependent on the difference in temperature available. An 100 degree road and say 45 degree cooling water is just not going to work that well for making electrical power. In some weather conditions you may have no temperature difference, like a cool early morning, and thus no power at all. If you want power from a building, hang solar panels on it and give it better insulation to keep down the heating and cooling bill.

This is why when we make steam engines ect… we aim for the highest pressures and hottest temperatures we can manage. Likewise this is why you normally find geothermal power stations only around active volcanic regions.

Solar baseline grid power can only work with a major overcapacity of grid generation or storage, which will be absurdly expensive. It will in fact heavily favor coal power since coal is balls cheep to buy on demand and run the coal plants harder whenever a major storm or that pesky night thing make solar worthless for a while.

[madd0ct0r]

Solar baseline grid power can only work with a major overcapacity of grid generation or storage, which will be absurdly expensive. It will in fact heavily favor coal power since coal is balls cheep to buy on demand and run the coal plants harder whenever a major storm or that pesky night thing make solar worthless for a while.

I'm not so sure. What are we expecting to happen to the base load capacity requirement? It might go up, it might decrease but I doubt it'll stay constant.

Going back to the solar charging smart-phone SI mentioned at the start of the thread.

That's couldn't have been done 5 years ago. Not only because the Solar Collectors were a bit crap, but also because the phone needed much more energy to do less. You can take a modern computer chip and underclock it to make it more much more efficient and still more powerful then a chip from a few years ago.

Stuff is getting more efficient. There's also ideas like smart-grids. Imagine using the voltage cycle fluctuations of AC current to transfer information. what sort of information?
"Power levels low. All devices with an urgency rating of less then 3.5 please turn your selves off for 15 min."
and everybody's garden fountain, deep freeze and fully charged laptop stop drawing power for 15min.

Solar is progressing in leaps and bounds. But our use of electricity is getting more intelligent, and as cost goes up, this will improve further.

[Darth Tanner]

I'm not so sure. What are we expecting to happen to the base load capacity requirement? It might go up, it might decrease but I doubt it'll stay constant.

Energy demand is almost guaranteed to rise and worse its almost guaranteed to raise during peak hours because that’s when people use their increasingly power hungry home and office electrical equipment and machinery. Efficiency is a great way to minimise this but without an even more painful recession than the one we just had we are not going to see any drops in demand for power.

"Power levels low. All devices with an urgency rating of less then 3.5 please turn your selves off for 15 min." and everybody's garden fountain, deep freeze and fully charged laptop stop drawing power for 15min.

Wouldn't that require that all those devices have sufficient computing power to not only monitor their energy supply for those signals but to operate a logic engine to make such decisions. I'd think that would cost quite a lot in terms of money to install and energy to run for a rather small efficiency saving. Not to mention pissing people off as their stuff turns off at random without their knowledge. Interrupting the supply to major users (aluminium factory for example) is already standard practice and that can help balance the demand/supply of a grid but costs a fortune in compensation to the factories you have to shut down.

That's couldn't have been done 5 years ago.

From what I can tell of simple google searches the solar panel on these new phones is not enough to keep the phone active forever, it simply tops the battery up or charges it while turned off. They still require mains charging to actually run on a day to day basis. Not to mention most people will keep their phone in their pocket. Simple USB solar cells with a battery that you could plug a device into to charge it up while out camping have been around for a while, I’d imagine these are simply far more efficient in terms of cost and weight.

[madd0ct0r]

well, in the UK the peak period is changing. (it's still during the day though, but happily that works for solar )

as the seasons get hotter, the load is moving from heating in the winter to AC in the summer, actually ironing out the base load slightly. Obviously, this is only going to apply to temperate places.

The kind of chip for the smart grid would need about as much power as a birthday card. Compared to a freezer or an AC unit, we're talking small change. very small change.

As for pissing people off, well, that's where 1) intelligent design is needed (a freezer turning off for 15min is not a big deal. Somebodies desktop or TV would be near the top of 'pissed off' spectrum) and 2) THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS IN A BROWN OUT.
(approx once a fortnight where i live now.) It's not ideal, and it only happens when you're really determined not to use fossils, but it might be coming your way in the future.

EDIT: "people keep their phone in a pocket"
yah. bugger. conceded