Capital Costs of renewables

great article over at WUWT on the cost of solar and wind

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/...wer-capital-costs-and-effectiveness-compared/


Renewable Energy – Solar and Wind-Power: capital costs and effectiveness compared
Anthony Watts / 2 hours ago November 21, 2014

A comparison of both the Capital Cost and Energy Producing Effectiveness of the Renewable Energy investments of the USA, Germany and the UK.

Guest essay by Ed Hoskins

The summary diagram below collates the cost and capacity factors of Renewable Energy power sources compared to the cost and output capacity of conventional Gas Fired Electricity generation.




US D UK comp

The associated base data is shown below:



In summary, these figures show that these three Western nations have spent of the order of at least ~$0.5trillion in capital costs alone, (conservatively estimated, only accounting for the primary capital costs ), to create Renewable Energy electrical generating capacity.

Nominally, this total nameplate generating capacity at ~153GW should amount to about ~26% of their total electricity generation, were it fully effective. However, because of there is an inevitable ~20% capacity factor applicable across the board for all renewables, the actual cumulative energy output by from these Renewable sources only results in ~5% of the total electricity generation for these nations.

Across the board overall solar energy is about ~34 times the cost of comparable standard Gas Fired generation and 9 times less effective.

data sources for the graphs

United States of America: data available 2000 – 2012

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy14osti/60197.pdf

Germany: data available from 1990 to 2013

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany

United Kingdom: data available 2008 – 2013

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_the_United_Kingdom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

Actually, it's a pretty lousy article. But then it's WUWT, so what can you expect?

Capital costs are only part of the equation. Fossil fuel plants burn fossil fuel, which costs money, in huge and unpredictable amounts. Variable O&M for fossil fuel plants are massive, and for renewables are flat zero. How odd that Honest Ed Hoskins failed to mention that.

Fossil fuels also have huge external costs, which are borne by society as a whole every time you pay your tax bill, your insurance bill, and pretty much everything you buy.

 

Are you saying that fuel costs make coal and natural gas more expensive than wind and solar, or are you not and hoping people might get the wrong impression.

Why I'm I constantly forced to explain the nature of lying to you. Your parents should have done that.

 

Since you imagine what you think I'm saying with great regularity, I'm sure you can imagine what I said there. Or maybe you could just read what I said.

 

I'm not imagining anything I read posts that remind me of my kids trying to lie to me. Kids experiment with other forms of lying when they learn that lies of commission won't cut it. It's up to good parents to teach their kids that a lie is words spoken or written with intent to deceive. You post was written to deceive.

 

I wanted to run my pond pump with solar energy and after endless hours on the internet I could not find a solar solution to my problem. It would have cost me more money for the panels than it cost for my entire system. I must add that I got the blocks for free and the pump for about a hundred bucks. But I still had to buy the cement and the additives to finish. But the solar would not have paid for itself for about fifteen years and I did not have the money to go there. I ran electricity from my box for about a hundred and fifty bucks because I had buy wire and a circuit breaker.

The only solar that would help me would be passive. I have a shed I am going to use for a hatchery and a clear panel or windows would help me gather heat during the day and the water in the tanks would serve to store the heat during the night. Of course the panel would have to a double pane.

So...solar sounds good in theory...but it sucks in practice...at least for me.

 

Passive solar is also maintenance intensive.

 

Capital costs, the cost to construct should not be confused with overall cost, which is the cost of construction and running, which again should not be confused with final cost that is the construction cost, the running and life of the construction.

 

bottom line is that the power grid demands energy 24 and 7 and with the current tech there is no way to harvest and store renewable energy. 10 -25 or 50 years down the road maybe. see my thread on Googles experiment. Google is about as green a company as there is with some of the best electrical engineers in the world and boat loads of money to throw at the problem at it's disposal and if it can't do it I doubt it can be done

 

How do you figure?

 

are you confusing passive solar with thermal solar or solar voltaic.. ? Not sure how passive solar made it into this thread since passive solar does not generate electricity it simply minimizes energy use in a structure. The thread is about costs of electrical generation using various methods not how to design a energy efficient home

 

Post #6:

 

I am not trying to split hairs here but passive solar in that reference does not require any maintenance other than cleaning the windows. Now solar voltaic and solar thermal can be subject to mechanical failures and efficiency degradation

 

There is more to it than that. Unless real expensive materials are used, the piping is subject to corrosion, pumps, replenishment of fluids like in a car, etc.

The Original White House solar unit was passive. I also worked for the Multnomah County Shops as an electronic technician years ago which had some of the roof covered with one. Both of these were removed because of maintenance costs.

Only the frame remains when I took this Google Maps snippet of the Multnomah Count Shop:



The latest view I took now has the PV type installed:



The first ones were not removed to make way for the new ones. The first ones were installed in the 70's and removed in the 80's. The PV is no more than 4 years old I think.

 

interesting, thanks for the correction. I always thought of passive solar as just having a lot of southward facing windows

 

My passive solar was exactly that. I want raise fish that take warm temps and would use a "window" that heats the air during the day and is stored in the water at night. No pipes, no fans, just a shade cloth when it gets to hot. I am using this winter to experiment.

- - - Updated - - -

My passive solar was exactly that. I want raise fish that take warm temps and would use a "window" that heats the air during the day and is stored in the water at night. No pipes, no fans, just a shade cloth when it gets to hot. I am using this winter to experiment.

 

let us know how it works out so far I am stumped on using a combination of passive and solar voltaic to make myself a greenhouse to start seed in. Every combination I try forces me back to the grid if I have more than 12 hours with no sunshine unless I dump a small fortune into deep cycle batteries and high end solar panels. Like Google I am finding it a lot cheaper and easier to just go conventional and use passive to help out as best I can.
You may have mentioned or seen this already but a 55 gallon drum filled with water, painted black and with south ward exposure makes a damn fine heatsink

 

Build a pit greenhouse and let the earth keep it warm.

 

jezuz dude great minds think alike, I was just thinking of that when I was typing the last post seriously that could work. Was also considering using some Mylar mirrors to help heat the 55 gallon drum heat sinks and natural convection circulation or a small solar powered circ pump on a thermostat to heat the "pit". Nothing like a bit of over engineering

Thanks for the suggestion however. This a lot of work for some tomato seedlings I could buy at a nursery but a hell of a lot more fun getting there. Being retired is a blast

 

On the pit idea, issue would be drainage, my lot is too flat to run a drain system

 

I think you will need more than 55 gallons of water and it takes a while for the water to heat up. I have read so many things on solar greenhouses it is ridiculous. When growing tomato seedlings the best thing is timing. To reduce energy use don't start them too early in the year. March works out pretty good for most parts of the country.

I have even read that rabbits in cages under you plant shelves will heat a green house....but I think a wood heater would be better...use the solar energy stored in the wood to heat...and find some old pallets to burn.

If you have a good local library I am sure they will have some good books on green houses....and remember the north side of the greenhouse only loses energy and does not heat...it is better to insulate the north wall and roof.

 

Have you considered a heat sink. The best I know of is salt and a solar concentrator. Solar concentrators are usually dished however ringed mirrors space apart stacked perform equally as well. Stainless Steel is best for holding the salt as it is corrosive. Salt heated to liquid will hold 1300*C for one month. Good luck to your endeavours.

 

on the water @ 8 lbs per gallon 55 gallons = 440 lbs of water. The specific heat of water is 1.0 so to warm or cool 1 pound of water you have to add or remove 1 btu of energy. Just for examples sake lets say the water gets up to 90 during the day and would heat a 50 degree greenhouse at night the water would be able to store over 17,000 btus of heat energy. Solar insolence in my area averages around 4.7 during the spring months. Once again though it just isn't worth it, by the time I build collector plates and everything else it is way more hassle than what I would get in return. I am going to go with a small ceramic heater and a extension cord

 

Or you could use a heating pad on the bottom of your trays and and use plug trays (512 or more seeds in same size as standard tray) and if you put them in an old aquarium at night with a light bulb.
You will have plenty of room for your seedlings at first but they take up room real fast. I use a ceramic heater sometimes myself...the thermostat cuts some cost.

OR you could use a cold frame with about two feet of cow manure (fresh) in the bottom and the manure will heat the frame.

Anyway good luck!!!

 

Solar at best will help with residential power usage. It will NEVER provide enough to even begin to handle commercial power usage. Wind is highly location dependent and like solar its very sporadic and unreliable. Hydrothermal and hydroelectric are both reliable but are location dependent. Nuclear is the only alternative to fossil fuels at this stage in the game. It is reliable and can be built anywhere.