Solar PV News

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Can someone explain how this works, if the poles and lines to my house are the problem how does energy get to my house and bypass the weak infrastructure.

At the smallest level, if the line from your house goes down, you are disconnected from the grid.
So, to have power you need your own power, like solar PV, a battery, a generator, or some combination.

But it's not always the line from your house. It's a line on your street, or on a larger street to which you're on a sidestreet and so on towards the major backbone of the grid.

With distributed generation resiliency comes from the fact that if you have local generation in a smaller group of connect nodes, like a street, or neighborhood, or village etc, that can "island" and operate even if wider connection to grid goes down.

Also, there are potential benefits in the cost of transmission capacity.

Demand varies minute by minute, day to day and seasonally. In a fully-centralized system, the capacity of any transmission line has to be able to handle peak demand across that line. So, the grid operator has to anticipate demand, and may need to overbuild capacity for future demand growth.

In a distributed system, growth in local demand would affect a smaller part of the grid, particularly in the case where you have additional housing development, as each house would have solar PV to generate some or all of its electricity.

Plus, batteries have significant potential to reduce transmission costs, because batteries can be placed beyond bottlenecks in transmission capacity, charged at times of low demand, and discharged during periods of high demand.

The falling cost of solar PV and batteries are dramatically changing what's economically feasible.

 

[Merrill]

So would this be considered a micro-grid system.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Yes, these are interconnected microgrids that are all connected to the main grid, but can operate on their own for large periods of time if needed. This "islanding" could go into effect any time there's an elevated risk of fire.

 

[Merrill]

Yes, these are interconnected microgrids that are all connected to the main grid, but can operate on their own for large periods of time if needed. This "islanding" could go into effect any time there's an elevated risk of fire.

Thanks for the clarification, I’m a bit skeptical since our power is from Pacific Graft and Extortion. Unfortunately our power companies are a monopoly and no one overseas them so getting the correct things done almost never happens (except raising rates)!

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Thanks for the clarification, I’m a bit skeptical since our power is from Pacific Graft and Extortion. Unfortunately our power companies are a monopoly and no one overseas them so getting the correct things done almost never happens (except raising rates)!

For now, utilities and govts can do whatever they like since homeowners are essentially at their mercy. That will be changing very soon as Tesla leads the charge into the next phase of home battery storage. Why do you think the stock price keeps tickling $1000?

A year or two ago, it was $30k for a 10kW solar array, plus $15k for 2 Powerwalls. Tesla brought the solar piece of that down to $24k and I bet the Powerwall cost will be cut in half by this time next year. Easier and cheaper mainstream access to these products means people all over CA will be leaving the grid over the next few years. This increases costs dramatically for those left behind, and forces already overdue regulatory action.

Basically.....they have have all the power from 1885 til 2020, but there will be a tipping point in 2020/2021/2022/2023 where homeowners start to dictate policy. Your power decisions will come first, then they're given the opening to offer you cheap electricity to fill the gaps.

Utilities were designed to be your servant, not the other way around.

 

[Merrill]

I agree, things cannot continue as they are I think big changes are in the future. As you say once solar and batteries become more affordable that will change the landscape.

 

[mspohr]

Solar could be installed on coalfields in West Virginia if The Nature Conservancy succeeds

Solar could be installed on a coalfield in West Virginia if The Nature Conservancy’s plans are realized.

The conservancy is seeking a decommissioned mine site to purchase or lease, and is working with West Virginia’s Coalfield Development Corporation to secure funding to develop a site with large-scale solar energy, forestry, and infrastructure for tourism.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Solar could be installed on coalfields in West Virginia if The Nature Conservancy succeeds

Solar could be installed on a coalfield in West Virginia if The Nature Conservancy’s plans are realized.

The conservancy is seeking a decommissioned mine site to purchase or lease, and is working with West Virginia’s Coalfield Development Corporation to secure funding to develop a site with large-scale solar energy, forestry, and infrastructure for tourism.

Interesting. Former surface mines might not have enough good soil for farming, and generally they're away from typical locations for urban centers. Using the land productively while helping it recover would be good.

 

[mspohr]

Warren Buffett Is Not the Answer to California’s Energy Grid Problems


And while Buffett’s company has used its profits from its more cost-effective, renewable-energy investments to help shore up its coal stock, and dragged its heels decommissioning outdated infrastructure in Oregon, it’s also surged prices on ratepayers far beyond competitors. Oregon Pacific Power (which is what PacifiCorp goes by in the state) customers saw their electricity bills increase by 61 percent between 2006 and 2014, a trend beginning the year after Buffett took over the utility. According to the Sierra Club, Pacific Power customers saw a greater rate increase than customers of any other major utility in the six states that Pacific Power serves. The company, which at one point was the largest coal operator in the American West, lagged behind for years as renewable energy flourished everywhere else in Oregon. So despite the recent announcement of firm commitments to wind down its coal plants, it held onto them long past their point of being price competitive, and merely upped the costs for ratepayers to make up the difference.

While Berkshire Hathaway Energy’s holdings have been slow to adapt to environmental dictates in some places, they’ve acted as a powerful opponent to them in others. In Nevada, NV Energy, another Buffett company, lobbied the state’s public-utility commission to radically redefine the state’s net metering provision, which allowed homeowners with rooftop solar to sell their excess power back into the grid. Rooftop solar had been booming in Nevada at the time, but, at NV Energy’s behest, the commission slashed payments to solar homeowners by half and raised fees. That decision effectively wiped out the rapidly growing industry. Legislative action and public outcry led NV Energy to bring back net metering, but its take-up has been slow relative to other regions, suggesting that the strangling in 2016 had an impact in stunting the growth of rooftop solar.

So Berkshire Hathaway has pursued renewable energy only when market conditions have proven maximally favorable, while frequently using its winnings to prop up coal outfits and lobby against green-energy initiatives across state lines. When taken as a whole, its forward-thinking reputation reads more like public relations than visionary corporate guardianship.

 

[mspohr]

New type of indoor solar cells for smart connected devices

new indoor photovoltaic cells that can convert up to 34 per cent of visible light into electricity to power a wide range of IoT sensors. The team has designed novel dye-sensitised photovoltaic cells based on a copper-complex electrolyte, which makes them ideal for harvesting indoor light from fluorescent lamps and LEDs.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

500W 72 cell panels are here. That's a lotta juice.

Anyone know about how much these cost when ordering for a massive utility project?

How will the new generation of 500 watt panels shape the solar industry?

 

[mspohr]

500W 72 cell panels are here. That's a lotta juice.

Anyone know about how much these cost when ordering for a massive utility project?

How will the new generation of 500 watt panels shape the solar industry?

I'm interested but as a small residential user, not for me. I think they are probably more expensive but hoping to make up the difference in lower racking and inverter costs.

That change will not be industry-wide. The residential solar market will see little direct impact as these modules become commercially available — as 72-cell modules have always been too large to be practical for home installations where roof space is limited, work spaces are angled and workers have to be able to carry the modules individually up ladders. Anything beyond the standard 1-meter by 1.6-meter 60-cell module is too cumbersome.

 

[SageBrush]

I think they are probably more expensive but hoping to make up the difference in lower racking and inverter costs.

I'll guess that inverter and rack costs are about the same; but the cost savings are in wiring and clamps. That is materials; the larger savings would be if labor time can be shortened.

My experience volunteering on residential PV projects never included carrying panels up ladders. We rented a small mobile scaffold. Two people on the ground, two on the scaffold and two on the roof. The panel was easily handed off by each pair of people in two steps up to the roof. A 500 watt panel would not be a problem so it amounts to ~ 15 lbs more weight than the current generation.

 

[mspohr]

Warren Buffett trying to kill solar competition again.

Utah’s largest power company and solar advocates fight over rooftop panels

The future of Utah’s rooftop solar industry, already reeling after an incentive program ended two years ago, rests in the hands of the Utah Public Service Commission as it weighs how much Rocky Mountain Power must pay its solar-equipped customers for the excess power they pump back into the grid.

The monopoly utility, Utah’s largest, sells that power to neighboring homes for about 10 cents per kilowatt-hour, yet it now proposes setting the rate it pays solar-equipped customers for this juice at about 1.5 cents.

 

[miimura]

Is that 1.5 cents Net Surplus Compensation or compensation instead of Net Metering? I think that if there is no net metering, any reimbursement for grid feed-in less than the generation portion of the retail billing is criminal.

 

[mspohr]

Is that 1.5 cents Net Surplus Compensation or compensation instead of Net Metering? I think that if there is no net metering, any reimbursement for grid feed-in less than the generation portion of the retail billing is criminal.

It looks like there is no net metering so the 1.5 cents is total compensation for all exported electricity.

Earlier this year, Vote Solar gathered transmission and export data from 3,300 of Rocky Mountain Power’s solar-equipped customers to craft a proposal it filed Tuesday with the Public Service Commission. The group’s experts analyzed that data to account for the utility’s avoided energy and capacity costs, financial and security risks, and environmental and societal benefits, concluding the “true value” of rooftop solar is 22.6 cents per kilowatt-hour, 14 times higher than the utility’s proposed rate.

More info here: https://votesolar.org/files/2315/83...ve_Testimony_of_Briana_Kobor_3-3-20_Kobor.pdf

 

[miimura]

It looks like there is no net metering so the 1.5 cents is total compensation for all exported electricity.

Earlier this year, Vote Solar gathered transmission and export data from 3,300 of Rocky Mountain Power’s solar-equipped customers to craft a proposal it filed Tuesday with the Public Service Commission. The group’s experts analyzed that data to account for the utility’s avoided energy and capacity costs, financial and security risks, and environmental and societal benefits, concluding the “true value” of rooftop solar is 22.6 cents per kilowatt-hour, 14 times higher than the utility’s proposed rate.

More info here: https://votesolar.org/files/2315/83...ve_Testimony_of_Briana_Kobor_3-3-20_Kobor.pdf

I read most of the PDF you linked above. I applaud the effort, but I don't think there's any chance the PSC will recommend the 22.5 cent Export Credit. More than 12 cents is under "Community Benefits". Is that even within the scope of a PSC's purview? Of course, it all depends on the legislative basis of their mandate. IMHO, this filing is really ample ammunition to reinstate the prior NEM program. The Utility Based Benefits tally of 10.57 cents per kWh is already more than the 10.2 cents per kWh current retail residential rate.

 

[mspohr]

I read most of the PDF you linked above. I applaud the effort, but I don't think there's any chance the PSC will recommend the 22.5 cent Export Credit. More than 12 cents is under "Community Benefits". Is that even within the scope of a PSC's purview? Of course, it all depends on the legislative basis of their mandate. IMHO, this filing is really ample ammunition to reinstate the prior NEM program. The Utility Based Benefits tally of 10.57 cents per kWh is already more than the 10.2 cents per kWh current retail residential rate.

View attachment 518914

I agree. The 22cents is the value. However, the group is arguing for net metering.

 

[gene]

I have spent plenty of time in the arctic playing fiddle with the Inuit and enjoying the land and culture. Nice video here of Deering Alaska trying to kick diesel electrical generation:

 

[SageBrush]

Is that even within the scope of a PSC's purview? Of course, it all depends on the legislative basis of their mandate.

It is a political question. Until recently pollution has rarely been taken into account when discussing value. That has changed even at the federal level since the 'social cost of carbon' is an accepted metric. Under Obama it was ~ 4 cents a kWh and under Trump it is close to zero.