Forbes: If Solar And Wind Are So Cheap, Why Are They Making Electricity So Expensive?

This is for topical issues effecting our fair world... you can quit snickering anytime. Note: It is the desire of the leadership of SFDebris Conglomerate that all posters maintain a civil and polite bearing in this forum, regardless of how you feel about any particular issue. Violators will be turned over to Captain Janeway for experimentation.
User avatar
BridgeConsoleMasher
Overlord
Posts: 11630
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:18 am

Re: Forbes: If Solar And Wind Are So Cheap, Why Are They Making Electricity So Expensive?

Post by BridgeConsoleMasher »

Robovski wrote: Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:19 pm Accumulators are great where you can have them, much like hydroelectric solutions they require specific circumstances. Power transmission losses means the best we can really do is generate power on a more regional basis when it comes to scale of things like generator plants or accumulators and why we can't just store all the solar and wind being generated when we don't need it but they are at efficient output. You can spread out the storage of power if we have each home with a generation system also have a battery storage and an inverter system (AC power after all), but that is expensive and lots more invested in batteries which still kinda suck. That or we change our expectations from electricity, because we've gotten real used to power at the flick of a switch 24/7.
I did a report once on the island of Lanai, which was bought by Larry Ellison, inventor of Java. Before he took it over there were proposals to build 400 ft wind turbines on a part of the island but the locals weren't having it because they're ugly.

Ellison's plan involved solar fields and one of those pump systems to insure electricity availability which was mentioned earlier in the thread. Interesting development.
..What mirror universe?
User avatar
Robovski
Captain
Posts: 1217
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2017 8:32 pm
Location: Checked out of here

Re: Forbes: If Solar And Wind Are So Cheap, Why Are They Making Electricity So Expensive?

Post by Robovski »

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Thu Mar 28, 2019 11:54 pm
Robovski wrote: Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:19 pm Accumulators are great where you can have them, much like hydroelectric solutions they require specific circumstances. Power transmission losses means the best we can really do is generate power on a more regional basis when it comes to scale of things like generator plants or accumulators and why we can't just store all the solar and wind being generated when we don't need it but they are at efficient output. You can spread out the storage of power if we have each home with a generation system also have a battery storage and an inverter system (AC power after all), but that is expensive and lots more invested in batteries which still kinda suck. That or we change our expectations from electricity, because we've gotten real used to power at the flick of a switch 24/7.
I did a report once on the island of Lanai, which was bought by Larry Ellison, inventor of Java. Before he took it over there were proposals to build 400 ft wind turbines on a part of the island but the locals weren't having it because they're ugly.

Ellison's plan involved solar fields and one of those pump systems to insure electricity availability which was mentioned earlier in the thread. Interesting development.
Personally, I don't find windmills ugly, but that's a matter of taste. I think there is a lot of room for wind/solar electric, solar heating, and even mico hydro schemes for local power generation where circumstances are right. But generally that power needs either a storage method or a grid back up and that grid needs a prime mover power generator like something that ''burns'' stuff to make steam to turn a turbine be that coal, gas, oil or nuclear materials. Unless you are Iceland, where you can use the geothermals on tap.
User avatar
BridgeConsoleMasher
Overlord
Posts: 11630
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2018 6:18 am

Re: Forbes: If Solar And Wind Are So Cheap, Why Are They Making Electricity So Expensive?

Post by BridgeConsoleMasher »

Robovski wrote: Fri Mar 29, 2019 1:08 am
BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: Thu Mar 28, 2019 11:54 pm
Robovski wrote: Thu Mar 28, 2019 9:19 pm Accumulators are great where you can have them, much like hydroelectric solutions they require specific circumstances. Power transmission losses means the best we can really do is generate power on a more regional basis when it comes to scale of things like generator plants or accumulators and why we can't just store all the solar and wind being generated when we don't need it but they are at efficient output. You can spread out the storage of power if we have each home with a generation system also have a battery storage and an inverter system (AC power after all), but that is expensive and lots more invested in batteries which still kinda suck. That or we change our expectations from electricity, because we've gotten real used to power at the flick of a switch 24/7.
I did a report once on the island of Lanai, which was bought by Larry Ellison, inventor of Java. Before he took it over there were proposals to build 400 ft wind turbines on a part of the island but the locals weren't having it because they're ugly.

Ellison's plan involved solar fields and one of those pump systems to insure electricity availability which was mentioned earlier in the thread. Interesting development.
Personally, I don't find windmills ugly, but that's a matter of taste.
Hawaiian's traditionally regard the land as sacred. Might not be a religious thing on Lanai, but whenever you're building anything large and public people are going to protest it.
..What mirror universe?
Post Reply