Electric Propulsion Reality Check

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.

MEXICOWANDERER wrote:

Where do the panels and batteries come from?

Probably a more important question might be: "Where do the panels and batteries go when they're replaced?"

Nyet...

On a hot day transit from open prairie to airport concrete. It doesn't take genius-level observation to detect fifteen to twenty degrees of genuine unneeded environmental heating.

One billion-plus solar panels? From whom? Fifty billion batteries? From whom?

Don't screw this up with a mythical pro-coal hole card. People who generate extra aces to supplement their argument do so because of thin ice. My point of view is a question outside the realm of dismal rhetoric.

Where do the panels and batteries come from?

MEX, panels last 30+ years by warranty. And the cost keeps dropping so your next set in 35 years could be half the cost.

How long does a coal plant last when it is the high cost supply of power?

As for the panels creating heat... the heat is already the natural power hitting the earth. Grab onto that tailpipe if you want to feel the added heat from petrol.

Bobbo,

Last time I looked nearly all buildings had roofs. While an office tower won't get much--yet it will get some energy.

Bobbo wrote:

pianotuna wrote:
Why do you believe that solar generated power has to include hundreds of miles of transmission lines?

Because I can't foresee acres of solar panels in downtown Los Angeles.

pianotuna wrote:
Why do you believe that solar generated power has to include hundreds of miles of transmission lines?

Because I can't foresee acres of solar panels in downtown Los Angeles. The places where industrial levels of solar are generated is where they have miles and miles of empty space to cover with panels. The places where that power is used is in densely packed population centers. Those two are usually hundreds of miles apart.

I can't wait until the Solar Social Warriors start trying to put solar farms in wetland areas and rile up the Environmental Social Warriors.

maillemaker wrote:
The future is electric. One of the biggest upheavals coming is the cheap commuter electric car. Elio Motors (scam) and Ampere Motors are the cusp of this sort of thing. Most people are going to have some kind of "armored electric golf cart" for commuting. It will have a range of 100 miles and cost less than $10K.

This statement I fully agree with. However, the EV Social Warriors seem to think that electric will replace ICE. It has been said many times, already, in this thread. EV will have a very large presence, soon, but ICE will always be around. It will never be one or the other. It will always be a combination of the two.

maillemaker wrote:
if they are able they will have a traditional vehicle for play or trips to grandma's house or utility work.

This is exactly my point, an ICE is necessary for some trips. An EV just won't do some things. It won't do what I need right now.

MEXICOWANDERER wrote:


How much pollution is created to manufacture a ton of steel? Answer? Lots.

It wasn't long ago that the feel good government and the lemmings turned in usable cars in the cash for clunkers scam. The fools couldn't even imagine that all that steel, aluminum, plastics and other materials needed to be once again produced and manufactured using considerable energy. Of course the claim of recycling the "clunkers" will be an excuse by some.

Rare earth metals are not used in alternating current electric motors. The Tesla model S has AC motors.

Shipping expended solar panels and solar batteries back to china must involve profit. The profit must be added or titanic amounts expired material will be added to our toxic landfill burden.

Recycling one billion panels every 10-20 years is only free in what's-left-of-their-mind-dreamers.

The uneducated No-Bad-Days dreamers are a major cause of economic disasters in this country. It's not that they do not think, it's that they chop off idealism minus the inevitable negative points that must be considered.

This is too similar to Herb Tarlick's salesmanship for me to ignore. Both sides of the aisle grease their objectives but the GREEN CON ARTISTS are too much to bear. Because they will chop my basic standard of living into living in freeway landscaping.