Discussion:
No More Solar Bids Without Energy Storage West of the Colorado
(too old to reply)
Unum
2018-05-08 04:20:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/lightsource-solar-bids-energy-storage-west-of-the-colorado

Lightsource tracks the retirement of conventional power plants, Ryzhaya said,
and seeks opportunities to backfill that gap with solar and storage. This
combination is particularly attractive when plants retire in dense urban load
pockets, where permitting a new gas plant would be exceptionally difficult.

"We’re going to places like Kentucky and Kansas and Tennessee, and we’re
putting in solar numbers that they haven’t seen," Ryzhaya said. "They still
think solar costs $100 per megawatt-hour in a PPA, and we’re showing them
numbers that are competitive on day one, not to mention over a 20-year term,
and not to mention that there is virtually no opex; there is no fuel risk.
It’s really eye-opening for customers."
JTEM is right
2018-05-08 18:43:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Anyone remember when CFL lightbulbs started
taking over?

Conventional bulbs were like, what? Maybe
20 cents or so? But a $13 CFL was going to
save you HUNDREDS because they last 20 years
and use so little energy... or so the
promises claimed. But there was no way you
were ever going to break even, not paying the
ridiculous prices they were charging. It
would have been difficult even if they had
miraculously lasted as long as claimed.

We're all experienced with batteries. We all
have a pretty good idea of how long they
last. Tesla's or "Buffering" battery farms
aren't powered by UFO technology. If anything,
your smartphone probably has a significantly
larger investment in battery technology, as
the market is so much bigger and the competition
is so much more fierce.

Will your cellphone battery last 20 years?

Of course not. It won't last 10 years. You know
it, I know it. So, why is anyone suddenly
pretending that they don't know?

Why pretend that we aren't all experienced with
this technology & understand very well what it
can and can't do?

Solar can't do it. Solar isn't doing it and it
won't do it. Period. And neither will wind.

It's just not going to ever happen.






-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/173696141896
Unum
2018-05-08 18:48:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by JTEM is right
Anyone remember when CFL lightbulbs started
taking over?
The usual mindless blabbering. So what 'promises' were broken
that have anything to do with utility-scale storage, fruitcake?

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/lightsource-solar-bids-energy-storage-west-of-the-colorado

Lightsource tracks the retirement of conventional power plants, Ryzhaya said,
and seeks opportunities to backfill that gap with solar and storage. This
combination is particularly attractive when plants retire in dense urban load
pockets, where permitting a new gas plant would be exceptionally difficult.

"We’re going to places like Kentucky and Kansas and Tennessee, and we’re
putting in solar numbers that they haven’t seen," Ryzhaya said. "They still
think solar costs $100 per megawatt-hour in a PPA, and we’re showing them
numbers that are competitive on day one, not to mention over a 20-year term,
and not to mention that there is virtually no opex; there is no fuel risk.
It’s really eye-opening for customers."
JTEM is right
2018-05-09 04:07:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Unum
The usual mindless blabbering.
Thanks for the warning!

And, like I said, this isn't "Unexplored
Territory" for any of us. We're all quite
experienced with batteries. Tesla & pals
don't have access to any top secret UFO
technology. Lithium Ion batteries don't do
magic for them. They work the same way as
they do for you.

We all know that these batteries can't last.
They have to overbuild them, add lots of
extra, unused capacity that can be activated
later as the battery dies. This way it looks
like the battery lasts a long time, but it's
gotten weaker & weaker with use and age.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/173696141896
Unum
2018-05-09 04:17:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by JTEM is right
Post by Unum
The usual mindless blabbering.
Thanks for the warning!
And, like I said, this isn't "Unexplored
Territory" for any of us. We're all quite
experienced with batteries. Tesla & pals
don't have access to any top secret UFO
technology. Lithium Ion batteries don't do
magic for them. They work the same way as
they do for you.
Off into outer space yet again.
Paul Aubrin
2018-05-14 05:44:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Unum
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/lightsource-solar-bids-
energy-storage-west-of-the-colorado
Post by Unum
Lightsource tracks the retirement of conventional power plants, Ryzhaya said,
and seeks opportunities to backfill that gap with solar and storage.
This combination is particularly attractive when plants retire in dense
urban load pockets, where permitting a new gas plant would be
exceptionally difficult.
"We’re going to places like Kentucky and Kansas and Tennessee, and we’re
putting in solar numbers that they haven’t seen," Ryzhaya said. "They
still think solar costs $100 per megawatt-hour in a PPA, and we’re
showing them numbers that are competitive on day one, not to mention
over a 20-year term,
and not to mention that there is virtually no opex; there is no fuel risk.
It’s really eye-opening for customers."
It is a very good decision. Up to now, the variations of solar panel
output put a burden on dispatchable producers. It is up to solar panel
generators to bear the cost of their intermittent behaviour. The actual
cost of solar energy generation is high ($100/MWh in 2017). With
batteries included is even (much) less competitive.
JTEM is right
2018-05-14 13:38:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Aubrin
It is a very good decision. Up to now, the variations of solar panel
output put a burden on dispatchable producers. It is up to solar panel
generators to bear the cost of their intermittent behaviour. The actual
cost of solar energy generation is high ($100/MWh in 2017). With
batteries included is even (much) less competitive.
Alternatives will only ever become
"Competitive" because demand for
fossil fuels is so high. Look at
oil, having grown some 40% in only
eight years, production through the
roof and STILL prices can't tumble.
If populations/economies keep
growing we are guaranteed to see a
crisis as demand outstrips supply.
Add a war involving a producer,
including a civil war/coup, as we
likely wouldn't have to wait for that
energy crisis...
Unum
2018-05-15 21:04:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/lightsource-solar-bids-
energy-storage-west-of-the-colorado
Post by Unum
Lightsource tracks the retirement of conventional power plants, Ryzhaya said,
and seeks opportunities to backfill that gap with solar and storage.
This combination is particularly attractive when plants retire in dense
urban load pockets, where permitting a new gas plant would be
exceptionally difficult.
"We’re going to places like Kentucky and Kansas and Tennessee, and we’re
putting in solar numbers that they haven’t seen," Ryzhaya said. "They
still think solar costs $100 per megawatt-hour in a PPA, and we’re
showing them numbers that are competitive on day one, not to mention
over a 20-year term,
and not to mention that there is virtually no opex; there is no fuel risk.
It’s really eye-opening for customers."
It is a very good decision. Up to now, the variations of solar panel
output put a burden on dispatchable producers. It is up to solar panel
generators to bear the cost of their intermittent behaviour. The actual
cost of solar energy generation is high ($100/MWh in 2017). With
batteries included is even (much) less competitive.
No cite means aubrin is lying as usual.
JTEM is right
2018-05-16 04:18:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Unum
No cite means
We're inside of an ice age. Who gives a shit
about "Global Warming"?




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/173929191603
Paul Aubrin
2018-05-16 15:51:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/lightsource-solar-bids-
energy-storage-west-of-the-colorado
Post by Unum
Lightsource tracks the retirement of conventional power plants, Ryzhaya said,
and seeks opportunities to backfill that gap with solar and storage.
This combination is particularly attractive when plants retire in
dense urban load pockets, where permitting a new gas plant would be
exceptionally difficult.
"We’re going to places like Kentucky and Kansas and Tennessee, and
we’re putting in solar numbers that they haven’t seen," Ryzhaya said.
"They still think solar costs $100 per megawatt-hour in a PPA, and
we’re showing them numbers that are competitive on day one, not to
mention over a 20-year term,
and not to mention that there is virtually no opex; there is no fuel risk.
It’s really eye-opening for customers."
It is a very good decision. Up to now, the variations of solar panel
output put a burden on dispatchable producers. It is up to solar panel
generators to bear the cost of their intermittent behaviour. The actual
cost of solar energy generation is high ($100/MWh in 2017). With
batteries included is even (much) less competitive.
No cite means aubrin is lying as usual.
Usual Unum's ad hominem argument when he finds he has nothing to oppose.

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/68925.pdf
"Based on our bottom-up modeling, the Q1 2017 PV cost benchmarks are
$2.80/Wdc (or $3.22/Wac) for residential systems, $1.85/Wdc (or $2.13/Wac)
for commercial systems, $1.03/Wdc (or $1.34/Wac) for fixed-tilt utility
-scale systems, and $1.11/Wdc (or $1.44/Wac) for one-axis-tracking utility
-scale systems. Overall, modeled PV installed costs continued to decline
in Q1 2017 for all three sectors"

$1.34/kWh for an fixed-tilt utility-scale system is $134/MWh, $280/MWh
for residencial system, can be said expensive, without a doubt. To that
you must add the costs of the storage system required to cope with solar
intermittent behaviour.

Loading...