Solar roadways

[RoyGBiv]

All true, RoyGBiv, but when the ROI isn't there even with the incentives, you have to wonder what the motivation is for continuing to offer them.

100% Agree...

The incentives we offer today are entirely political and waste resources that should be applied elsewhere to greater benefit.

There's zero reason my tax dollars should go to offset the cost of anyones Prius, don't get me started on the Chevy Volt.

[cb1000rider]

I haven't heard that perspective. I smell a little slant there:
1) "[speaking of wind turbines]... hiding the fact that their actual output will waver between 100 per cent of capacity and zero. In Britain it averages around 25 per cent; in Germany it is lower, just 17 per cent."

I dunno how "hidden" that is.. Turbines work when there is wind. You're not getting 100 output out of solar or wind 24/7/365.

Apparently Germany has older turbines, much less efficient than the rest of Europe.

Here's what strikes me as a valid technical issue:

One is that it becomes incredibly difficult to maintain a consistent supply of power to the grid, when that wildly fluctuating renewable output has to be balanced by input from conventional power stations. The other is that, to keep that back-up constantly available can require fossil-fuel power plants to run much of the time very inefficiently and expensively (incidentally chucking out so much more “carbon” than normal that it negates any supposed CO2 savings from the wind).

So is the point of this article that we shouldn't use renewable energy because it causes a greater variation in demand within the grid? Meeting a great variation is probably fairly inefficient, but I'd wonder if it's as expensive as not having that renewable power at all. There certainly is some inefficiency in having power plants fired up and simply waiting to meet demand that isn't there yet. That's absolutely true.

Currently, especially in Texas, we have predictive demand models that largely follow temperature trends. In high temps and low temps, there is a high demand on the grid. These temperatures are somewhat predictable within a bound of days. I'd say that we can use the same sort of weather models to predict the availability of solar power. We know when it's going to be cloudy. Also remember that in Texas, the need for more power in the grid on hot days will directly correlate with the availability of solar power.

Wind, I can't speak to so much, but I do know that we have predictive wind models, just like rain models. I use them as a pilot to look at future weather conditions.

Maybe those predictive windows aren't enough.... But basically, I think it's a problem that isn't insurmountable.

[steveincowtown]

These wouldn't work where I live.

My 3/4 Ton Mega Cab cast far to big of a shadow.

[Jaguar]

Not saying it is impossible, CB, just saying there is way more to integrating solar and wind into the grid than most people realize. I support the development of new technologies, I just don't want them subsidized by tax money for widespread use when the ROI is 10-30 years and the new sources cannot be incorporated into the old system smoothly. I keep hearing this "yeah for Germany" on facebook and have to wonder if their adaptation was premature.

Batteries are the last big stumbling block - giant, inefficient, toxic batteries. Until that issue is resolved (which I believe it will be, someday) all this talk is just pipe dreams.

[RogueUSMC]

When there is an over abundance of power, have the transformers reroute some to a circuit that the other end of the pair is dangled into the Rio Grande...while that circuit is hot, folks will have to find another way to cross that doesn't involve swimming...

[Abraham]

For some reason this reminds me of the question: What did Socialists use before candles?

Electricity!

Viva Solyndra!

[cb1000rider]

Jaguar,
Certainly there is a big gap between where we are now and actually having the majority of our power come from renewable sources. You pointed out a very important point - which is that renewable power isn't usually "on demand" capable. Batteries may be the answer, but right now it might be more cost effective to overbuild renewables versus trying to store it. The issues you've cited are real, but we're not any where close to Germany in the USA and those issues don't affect residential installation. Germany's situation is different from the USA - their costs of energy is much higher than ours, so they've been more "encouraged" to move along the way of technology.

I'm more pointing to encouraging people to use appropriately sized solar arrays for their stuff at home where it makes financial sense. Currently, you can absolutely take advantage of the fact that your neighbors use more power than they generate and put in an array large enough for you home. When you're under low usage, that excess power goes to your neighbors - and typically you get paid for it. I won't put in batteries for my clients - I tell them to sell it back to the grid.. And before you think I'm simply trying to supplement my own income - I've turned down all solar jobs this year - no real dog in this hunt.

I'm not for tax breaks. I don't care if you're poor or wealthy. When we've got a balance budget, a paid off deficit, and a surplus, then we can talk about prioritizing tax breaks. However, I think that subsidizes are what make this technology feasible in the USA. Without those subsidies, we couldn't buy panels at $1/watt.... So long term, I think that was the right call. They need to be phased out, but that's another discussion.

People don't like change. Remember when we all had big cars that got 10 mpg? Left to our own devices and barring an increase in the cost of fuel, we'd still be driving 'em... These days, my car actually costs less to drive than a motorcycle in terms of costs per mile... Yea, it may suck the joy out of life driving it, but it's great financially.

[Abraham]

cb1000rider,

"I won't put in batteries for my clients - I tell them to sell it back to the grid.."

If I understand your point (and perhaps I don't...) you are willing to dictate to your clients, with a recognized potential loss of business, how they have to handle their excess electricity?

They have to sell it rather than store it if they cared too?

Is this based on your sense of morality / global warming or what...?

Thanks!

[WildBill]

For some reason this reminds me of the question: What did Socialists use before candles?

Electricity!

Viva Solyndra!

[ss1088]

http://youtu.be/H901KdXgHs4

This link pretty much sums up all the problems with this idea.

[cb1000rider]

If I understand your point (and perhaps I don't...) you are willing to dictate to your clients, with a recognized potential loss of business, how they have to handle their excess electricity?
They have to sell it rather than store it if they cared too?
Is this based on your sense of morality / global warming or what...?
Thanks!

Global Warming? I thought that didn't exist on this forum?

No, it's not a moral thing. It's not me telling anyone what to do. It's mostly a decrease-my-headache thing. I generally don't charge for "service calls", so I don't want them, and I don't want them impacting my "real job". Adding batteries guarantees service calls and I think that if I installed it, I should support it.

The other reason is that for most clients the end goal is getting the return on that solar investment as quickly as possible. In order to do that, they should use the grid as a "battery" - as long as they use more power than they produce overall, there is no waste or need to store. Batteries are expensive, need to be temperature monitored, can leak, can out-gas, etc.

For those clients that want solar to power their home in the event of a grid failure, I recommend a grid disconnect (transfer switch) and a generator. That way their solar system has a power that it can sync with.

I don't do wind largely for the same reason - I want to do installs, not maintain moving parts and batteries.

I probably would help a client that wanted to be 100% off grid via batteries, but true off-grid is a bit of a special case.