Electric Propulsion Reality Check
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_naDg-guomA
Forum Discussion
Mex,
Let me start out by saying it is better to conserve power than to generate it.
Solar was at about 1% of power production in the world, in 2018. 227 Gigawatts so far. In 2017 that number was 98 Gigawatts. China has more solar power than Germany now.
The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) performed a meta-analysis of studies that examined the long term degradation rates of various PV panels. They found that the 1% per year rule was somewhat pessimistic for panels made prior to the year 2000, and today’s panels, with better technology and improved manufacturing techniques, have even more stamina than their predecessors. For monocrystalline silicon, the most commonly used panel for commercial and residential PV, the degradation rate is less than 0.5% for panels made before 2000, and less than 0.4% for panels made after 2000. That means that a panel manufactured today should produce 92% of its original power after 20 years, quite a bit higher than the 80% estimated by the 1% rule.
That implies that after 40 to 50 years output is going to be 20% lower. It doesn't mean the panels will "roll over and play dead". The thickest panels are about 10 thousands of an inch thick.
Bulk storage for electricity is now sitting at $187 per megawatt.
I don't understand why small 64 kilowatt batteries cost 25 times that figure when their storage capacity is 16 times smaller.
My "out of pocket" consumption of power from Feb 11 to May 10 was just 245 KWH. Let's say it is double that number. Even a lowly power wall would give me 2.5 days of storage assuming 5.5 KWH of use per day.
Am I an advocate for solar generated power. You Bet I Am.
Is solar power a disruptive technology? Absolutely.
Let me start out by saying it is better to conserve power than to generate it.
Solar was at about 1% of power production in the world, in 2018. 227 Gigawatts so far. In 2017 that number was 98 Gigawatts. China has more solar power than Germany now.
The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) performed a meta-analysis of studies that examined the long term degradation rates of various PV panels. They found that the 1% per year rule was somewhat pessimistic for panels made prior to the year 2000, and today’s panels, with better technology and improved manufacturing techniques, have even more stamina than their predecessors. For monocrystalline silicon, the most commonly used panel for commercial and residential PV, the degradation rate is less than 0.5% for panels made before 2000, and less than 0.4% for panels made after 2000. That means that a panel manufactured today should produce 92% of its original power after 20 years, quite a bit higher than the 80% estimated by the 1% rule.
That implies that after 40 to 50 years output is going to be 20% lower. It doesn't mean the panels will "roll over and play dead". The thickest panels are about 10 thousands of an inch thick.
Bulk storage for electricity is now sitting at $187 per megawatt.
I don't understand why small 64 kilowatt batteries cost 25 times that figure when their storage capacity is 16 times smaller.
My "out of pocket" consumption of power from Feb 11 to May 10 was just 245 KWH. Let's say it is double that number. Even a lowly power wall would give me 2.5 days of storage assuming 5.5 KWH of use per day.
Am I an advocate for solar generated power. You Bet I Am.
Is solar power a disruptive technology? Absolutely.
