Renewable Energy - Solar, amazing growth in this sector

[hollywood]

In 2015, there were more solar-electric panels (energy wise) installed in the US every 3 weeks, than was installed in the entire year of 2008.

In 2015, the total amount of solar-electric installed in the US every 3 weeks was equal to the total avg output of any of the nuclear power plants operating in the US. (So, in the coming year, this is the equivalent of building and bringing on-line 17 nuclear power plants.)

For those in school now, or looking for a trade industry to work in or an energy sector to invest - if you're not looking at solar-electric you are almost certainly going to miss the boat.

 

[Ostatedchi]

Last I saw, solar power was approx .2% of all energy production in the US. It has no where to go but up and isn't terribly cost effective.

 

[NeekReevers]

In 2015, there were more solar-electric panels (energy wise) installed in the US every 3 weeks, than was installed in the entire year of 2008.

In 2015, the total amount of solar-electric installed in the US every 3 weeks was equal to the total avg output of any of the nuclear power plants operating in the US. (So, in the coming year, this is the equivalent of building and bringing on-line 17 nuclear power plants.)

For those in school now, or looking for a trade industry to work in or an energy sector to invest - if you're not looking at solar-electric you are almost certainly going to miss the boat.

How dependent is the sector on government subsidies directed towards clean energy?

I did some research on installing a system at my home a couple of years ago. It wasn't close to being cost competitive.

 

[N. Pappagiorgio]

Solar power makes sense in one state, Hawaii, without subsidies. Hopefully the technology improves in the future.

 

[hollywood]

Prices for solar have dropped 70% since 2009. The thinking is that it will continue to drop significantly. At this point, the expense of installation, permitting, etc. is more than the panels. So as the efficiency of scale with more and more companies entering the market to handle installation there really should be little standing in the way of prices continuing to fall.

On larger commercial scale installations, the payback period and ROI is well within what businesses accept as doable.



http://news.nationalgeographic.com/energy/2015/10/151002-solar-energy-sees-eye-popping-price-drops/

 

[long-duc-dong]

Prices for solar have dropped 70% since 2009. The thinking is that it will continue to drop significantly. At this point, the expense of installation, permitting, etc. is more than the panels. So as the efficiency of scale with more and more companies entering the market to handle installation there really should be little standing in the way of prices continuing to fall.

On larger commercial scale installations, the payback period and ROI is well within what businesses accept as doable.



http://news.nationalgeographic.com/energy/2015/10/151002-solar-energy-sees-eye-popping-price-drops/

Let us know when you you're finished installing them on your home. Be interested to know the cost and process.

 

[Headhunter]

To me the big question is the life of the panels doesn't seem long enough to justify the cost.

I'm all for renewables if they are cost effective and don't require government money. I find it a little ironic that the greens have been pushing wind and it is extremely bad for wild life.

 

[ThorOdinson13]

Hopefully the technology improves in the future.

It's not capable of improving. The panels already take in 100% of what is available. I think the only improvement available really is in storage. Panels will never be able to take in more than they already do as I understand it. When we build we are going to add some to the roof to cut costs and sell back anything we may not use but I was disappointed to find out that the panels will never be able to be improved. The biggest advantage now is the affordability factor as wood pointed out.

 

[ThorOdinson13]

Well, a lot of repetiveness in there. That's what I get for starting and answer, walking away, then starting again.

 

[The Duke]

Are standard panels utilizing heat as well as light energy? I thought we were very close to a tipping point in terms of i) improved technology and ii) decreasing costs. I think this will be a viable option in the very near future in many areas of the southwest US.

 

[ThorOdinson13]

H

Are standard panels utilizing heat as well as light energy? I thought we were very close to a tipping point in terms of i) improved technology and ii) decreasing costs. I think this will be a viable option in the very near future in many areas of the southwest US.

Hmm, good question. I thought so.

 

[windriverrange]

No kidding headhunter, if Oil companies were killing birds of prey at the rate wind turbines do every lib on the planet would be crapping a brick. Bunch of freakin hypocrites!

 

[hollywood]

The notion that wind turbines kill birds at some extraordinary rate is so much bull-shit.

There's approximately 250,000 to 348,000 birds killed by wind turbines annually. (that's the low and high sides from various studies.)

House cats kill some 2,400,000,000 annually. Buildings kill 599,000,000 annually. Power line collisions another 200,000,000, with communication towers and power line electrocutions killing another 12,000,000 birds annually. (and with power lines and communication towers, many of those bird victims are likewise "birds of prey" and at numbers that absolutely dwarf anything close to the number of birds killed by wind turbines.)

Oil and Gas? The BLM studies indicate that around 500,000 to 1,000,000 birds are killed in oil and gas fields annually. Coal is even much, much worse accounting for nearly 8,000,000 bird deaths on an annual basis.

There will be some 667 times more birds killed by collisions with cars/trucks this year, than by wind turbines, as that number is around 200,000,000.

BTW, the BP oil spill after being thoroughly reviewed by experts in the field - the estimates are 600,000 dead birds, with the statistical range being between 320,000 to 1,200,000.

 

[ThorOdinson13]

There's approximately 250,000 to 348,000 birds killed by wind turbines annually. (that's the low and high sides from various studies.)

Hmm, more destructive than DDT. Yet DDT is banned. Hope victims of malaria and bed bug infestations are proud.

 

[windriverrange]

nice to see you dive off in one of your normal statistical runs wood. I don't care about housecats, building, cars and power lines. My assertion is that if oil companies (you know energy companies and energy companies only) were killing off birds at the rate wind turbines do they would be getting hammered from every pinko left wing communist bedwetter there is.

It also is axiomatic that the more wind turbines there are the more bird kills will occur, right?

Plus can guarantee that house cats aren't killing birds of prey...geez you spin stuff more than a freaking HRC spokesperson.

So did BP pay anything for that oil spill and killing wildlife?

Your citing a BLM (government run) study as to how many birds get killed on O&G fields. Yea they would be a really reliable group of investigators without any ulterior motive.

Lastly would love to see the citations for the numbers your throwing about in your post, always adds a layer of indisputably you know.

 

[ThorOdinson13]

Coal is even much, much worse accounting for nearly 8,000,000 bird deaths on an annual basis.

Hey now, those canaries have an important job!!!!

 

[windriverrange]

Nice Article...bit long but it actually has some citations.

http://www.aweo.org/problemwithwind.html

 

[hollywood]

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0107491

Peer reviewed scientific article based on US & Canada observations and studies.

 

[The Duke]

Hmm, more destructive than DDT. Yet DDT is banned. Hope victims of malaria and bed bug infestations are proud.

Wasn't DDT the main reason Bald Eagles went on the endangered species list? It was thinning their egg shells?

 

[ThorOdinson13]

Wasn't DDT the main reason Bald Eagles went on the endangered species list? It was thinning their egg shells?

No, there was a ton of alarmism.

http://dwb.unl.edu/Teacher/NSF/C06/C06Links/www.altgreen.com.au/Chemicals/ddt.html

 

[hollywood]

The real reason why efforts to kill mosquitoes with DDT were pretty much stopped (remember, the "BAN" on DDT only applied to the USA, not any other country), was because mosquitoes were becoming completely resistant to the stuff.

In Africa, S. America and other equatorial places, within 3 yrs of the introduction of large scale spraying of DDT (which for certain initially had great impact on reducing mosquito populations) there were numerous species of mosquitoes which already had developed resistance. By the time the ban in the US went into place, the majority of malaria spreading mosquitoes had some or complete resistance to DDT.

The common bed bug is now immune to the impact of DDT for basically the same reason. In the few places around the world that still allow for DDT for malaria prevention, they've moved completely away from wide scale spraying to very specific targeting sprays, such as interior walls in homes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/04/AR2005060400130_2.html