The year in clean energy: Wind, solar and batteries grow despite economic challenges

"Green" energy has often been heavily subsidized. The article is a bit ambiguous about facts given. For example it says in certain regions solar power has become the least expensive form of power generation. The regions mentioned lead me to think it is cheap because of government programs in place, trying to artificially spur on development in hope that it ultimately lowers cost and institutionalizes these forms of power generation. What do you guys think?
 
"Green" energy has often been heavily subsidized. The article is a bit ambiguous about facts given. For example it says in certain regions solar power has become the least expensive form of power generation. The regions mentioned lead me to think it is cheap because of government programs in place, trying to artificially spur on development in hope that it ultimately lowers cost and institutionalizes these forms of power generation. What do you guys think?
Fossil fuels are also heavily subsidized to reduce the burden of these energies for the poorer consumers while green energy is heavily subsidized to promote its deployment.
 
Gates is funding the HAWT turbine array.

The O-wind
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TNpcJn02CM4

More
Needs lightning protection

Solar news

Green tech
 
Last edited:
I'm not surprised that solar is cheapest "in most countries". If you live near the equator, like most of the world's population does then your solar generation capacity doesn't plummet in the winter. It's us bu66ers in northern lattitudes that strugglee to make it economical.
 
I'm not surprised that solar is cheapest "in most countries". If you live near the equator, like most of the world's population does then your solar generation capacity doesn't plummet in the winter. It's us bu66ers in northern lattitudes that strugglee to make it economical.

There is a way around the myth that solar can only work with the sun shining.

 
Hydrogen in the news again

This idea of a superconductor is wild


Green energy

safe battery
 
Last edited:
There is a way around the myth that solar can only work with the sun shining.

OK - and how much mining and manufacturing (with the pollution attendant thereunto) is needed for building and installing those whomping big (and expensive) molten salt towers?

Also, those giant solar farms still need the transmission infrastructure to get that electric power where it is needed - lots of mining and construction of interstate power line systems, etc. Which adds its own environmental damage and pollution.


Solar is not, and never has been (nor is it likely to be in the near future) nearly as "green" as its pundits claim.

It is, however, worth doing IF a realistic approach is taken.
 
OK - and how much mining and manufacturing (with the pollution attendant thereunto) is needed for building and installing those whomping big (and expensive) molten salt towers?

Also, those giant solar farms still need the transmission infrastructure to get that electric power where it is needed - lots of mining and construction of interstate power line systems, etc. Which adds its own environmental damage and pollution.


Solar is not, and never has been (nor is it likely to be in the near future) nearly as "green" as its pundits claim.

It is, however, worth doing IF a realistic approach is taken.
Plenty of studies have quantified the environmental cost of solar power generation, and it's certainly not zero. In the same sense, electric sars are not 'zero emission' either, so calling them that is quite frankly misleading and unhelpful. Interestingly in the UK wind generators are lower 'net carbon' than solar PV. Comparing solar PV and wind to my thinking mostly favours solar because:
1. Solar works well small scale and incrementally, every land owner can add some incremental capacity.
2. Solar is very, very predicatable on much energy you will get compared to wind.
3. No noise, no dead bats, no impact on aviation or shipping.
4. Solar can be installed closer to point of load. If French policy is adopted and supermarket car parks are covered in PV panels supermarkets could probably be net electricity exporters.

The big down side, what do you do in the winter :(
 
There is a way around the myth that solar can only work with the sun shining.

The Ivanpah Solar Plant is of this type, but requires fossil fuel use in the morning to liquify the salts that are used to harvest the solar power.
 
"Green" energy has often been heavily subsidized. The article is a bit ambiguous about facts given. For example it says in certain regions solar power has become the least expensive form of power generation. The regions mentioned lead me to think it is cheap because of government programs in place, trying to artificially spur on development in hope that it ultimately lowers cost and institutionalizes these forms of power generation. What do you guys think?
The problem with statements that solar is the least expensive form of power generation is that they look at solar in isolation, and do not account for things like grid reinforcement, grid extension, and power storage that these Variable Renewables need.
 
Green energy in the news


Batteries

Seaweed and food
 
The latest in green tech
 
Hydrogen production and more
 
Green tech this week
 
Solar city

Solar tech

Vehicles

More
 
Last edited:
Fuel cell wimpy?--get it a Red Bull (Brad Dourif swears by it)

Hot and cold

Green tech today
 
Energy concerns
 
New power converter
https://techxplore.com/news/2024-04-scientists-high-boost-efficiency-dc.html

New energy handling and more

Tech news

Low power news

Optics sensors and such

You still need hydrocarbons--even for solar
https://phys.org/news/2024-04-hydrocarbon-molecule-supplier-energy-storage.html


The future?
 
Last edited:
Energy news


Solar
 
Last edited:
Energy news


Chemistry

More
 
A biggie:

windows

Electronics for heat

Cement recycling
Perfect for the Moon?

Plastics

hydrogen handling

Green tech today
 
Last edited:
More on cement

Other finds
 
Last edited:
This week
 
The problem with statements that solar is the least expensive form of power generation is that they look at solar in isolation, and do not account for things like grid reinforcement, grid extension, and power storage that these Variable Renewables need.
I would argue that those are improvements that should be made independently of what power source is being used.
 
I would argue that those are improvements that should be made independently of what power source is being used.

But the issue is that only variable-output renewables like solar and wind require grid reinforcement, extension, and power storage.
 
Grid reinforcement and extension is needed wherever you get increased industrial activity, irrespective of the type of power source.
 
But the issue is that only variable-output renewables like solar and wind require grid reinforcement, extension, and power storage.

The need for grid reinforcement first hit the news and politicians' sensibilities with the Northeast Power failure in 1965, which was traced to a trip of one incorrectly set switch near the NY-Ontario border. The cascading failure ended up shutting down power for most of the people in New York, New Jersey, and New England, and parts of Canada. Renewables were not an issue in 1965, nor were they a significant factor in major power failures in 1977, 1982, 1996, 1998, 2003, 2011, or two in 2012. Some politicians blamed the major cold-weather blackout in Texas on renewables, but the real problems included that the Texas grid is largely isolated from the rest of the US and that the Texas grid operators had fatuously dismissed recommendations about upgrading their grid's resistance to weather-related problems.

Renewables are challenging to incorporated into a grid, but I've grown rather fond of breathing and am old enough to remember when the air was often brown.
 
Grid reinforcement and extension is needed wherever you get increased industrial activity, irrespective of the type of power source.

Sorry, I should have phrased that differently:

Variable-output renewables like solar and wind require

A) grid reinforcement above that of normal power sources, as they can go from very low levels of output to very high levels of output in short periods of time. Additionally, compared to normal, reliable sources of power, they require cabling set to the maximum output, despite not achieving that regularly. That adds an extra cost in the entire system, as energy delivered is lower per given power line. Also, all the gubbins that are needed to connect home panels to the grid also could be considered par of grid reinforcement.

B) extension, all the myriad dispersed solar and wind systems have to be connected to the grid.

C) power storage. For when the sun doesn’t shine, and the wind doesn’t blow - either power storage, or rapid ramping power sources are needed.
 
@starviking Quite right, but at the moment the grid has suffered from neglect in many places - worldwide. In these circumstances, grid renforcement is necessary anyway, which offers the opportunity to size the grid for variable-output renewables.
There IS a strong case for using variable-output renewables:
- reducing reliance on dubious regimes who control supply of fossil fuels
- reducing the impact of climate change
- reducing pollution
Adopting renewables doesn't come free, though.
 
PowerFoyle

It sounds interesting, but colour me sceptical.

We have two new solar-powered lights for the front porch of our house, and to get them to work for any significant amount of time we have to shift them around the exterior of the house during the day. Which we can only do at the weekend, as we’re working all day during the week.
 
Harvesting lithium and more

Solar

Wind turbine blades

Mine reclamation

Green Chemistry
 
Last edited:
Two for one solar and more

Chemistry
 
Last edited:
More on green tech

 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom