In one way, the cost of solar ($/kWh generated) is not important. Intermittency is the killer. The capacity factor for solar has to be under 50% even in the best desert sites, and it is more likely 25% or less in those sites. This means that every kW of solar requires a kW of conventional power. In fact, the conventional power will have to supply the great majority of the demand, and solar will be just an occasional supplement.
Because of its rapid response capability, the usual primary source coupled with supplemental solar/wind is a natural gas-fueled turbine. However, the turbine must be run at low power levels continuously even when solar/wind is online. This means that solar/wind continuously emits carbon dioxide.
At present, solar/wind is a tiny portion of our electric supply, and the required “backup” comes out of the system surplus. Obama is greatly reducing that surplus, and his actions will gradually reveal the problems with wind/solar. Chief among them is the distribution network instability cause by wind/solar intermittency. The German experience is the wind/solar creates serious stability problems when it reaches about 4% of total supply.
The ice cores at Lake Vostok and the recent global warming show that temperature increases lead carbon dioxide increases. The increased CO2 is likely due to ocean outgassing. We are in the process of wrecking out economy because of a New Age superstition.
What makes you think that a gas turbine must be run constantly, Bob Sykes?
My understanding was the opposite. I thought they could easily be switched off, because they function like a jet engine. Most of the cost of gas power is the cost of the gas itself, so the additional cost of backup turbines is not vast.
Sykes is right. Find and talk to an “operator” of an electric utility. My wife’s cousin is married to one and he will talk you ear off on the folly of solar & wind integration with the power net: politics not prudent power engineering.
Two points:
1) unlikely rosy scenario for decrease in cost and increase in efficiency of solar cells, time will tell;
2) solar may work if the arrays of solar cells are in near earth orbit.
Looks like you’ll pay about $1000/kW for your peaking turbine. I haven’t read this carefully, but believe it includes the generator and auxiliary equipment.
If you run it at full capacity for 1000 hours/year on average (remember, this is just for backup when the solar doesn’t sol or the wind doesn’t blow), and you pro-rate the costs (simplistically) over 10 years, then the capital cost is 10 cents per kWh. Add 2 or 3 cents for operations & maintenance, then you’ll need to add in the cost of the fuel.
It’s definitely a mistake to equate one kWh of solar energy with one kWh of reliable, baseline energy from coal, gas, nuclear, etc. — but it’s also a mistake to conclude that it’s therefore useless. Long before we had a grid, we used intermittent wind power to pump water, for instance. Cheap solar would be disruptive in Clayton Christensen’s original sense:
Generally, disruptive innovations were technologically straightforward, consisting of off-the-shelf components put together in a product architecture that was often simpler than prior approaches. They offered less of what customers in established markets wanted and so could rarely be initially employed there. They offered a different package of attributes valued only in emerging markets remote from, and unimportant to, the mainstream.
Peak demand is not only usually during the day, but usually near noon.
If solar could be used to blunt the peak, conventional plants could be run near capacity significantly more, causing a price drop disproportionate to the direct supply increase.
To flesh out the “disruptive” scenario: if solar is unsuitable for the grid (as Dan says), yet becomes very cheap, then homes & industries start to work with two kinds of power: cheap, unreliable power to be used opportunistically as it arrives, and expensive, reliable grid power for essentials & emergencies. That doesn’t simply mean a partitioning of today’s uses into the two buckets, it potentially means new uses happening, and some old routine uses becoming luxuries. (Think of people abandoning broadcast TV or five-nines-reliable landline phones for cheap, flexible but less dependable alternatives).
There are a few “if”s there, it seems to me just as likely that either solar does get integrated with the grid, or else never becomes so cheap as to be a large proportion of supply, but in between, that window does exist.
Gaikokumaniakku: Geometry can be taught in many ways. Knowledge of proofs might be more useful than knowing the volume of a sphere. A bigger problem is that school is intended to reinforce the social order. If schools taught students how to resist cops and lawyers, government would find maintaining power to be more difficult. Another angle is skills versus facts. I probably don’t need to know the year in which Shakespeare wrote (a fact) but I certainly do benefit from understanding how Shakespeare...
Isegoria: Excellent example, Bob. I’m reminded, oddly enough, of how Musk calculated that on a good day he made a hundred command decisions as he walked the floor of his Tesla factory: “At least twenty percent are going to be wrong, and we’re going to alter them later,” he said. “But if I don’t make decisions, we die.”
Bob Sykes: I once had a family doctor who commented that doctors knew when to to add new prescriptions but not when to stop old ones.
Isegoria: Bryan Caplan is definitely allergic to shared culture. On the other hand, I don’t think our public schools have been working hard to assimilate everyone into our shared culture in a long, long time. I was just reading Charles Murray’s Coming Apart, and that is one of his main points: The main vehicle for nineteenth-century socialization was the reading textbook used in elementary school, the variants of which were modeled on the overwhelmingly most popular series, the McGuffey Readers. They...
Phileas Frogg: Caplan is one of the most hit/miss popular academics today. He goes from cogently and insightfully detailing the flaws and issues with a complex system or behavior, to proposing the most obviously asinine and unworkable solutions imaginable to anyone with practical experience in that field, to slipping a totally original and unlooked for consideration into the mix that gives you pause, all within the span of a small handful of pages, only to do it again a few pages later. Reading Caplan...
Bob Sykes: One argument in favor of Emily et al is social cohesion and group self-identification, national-building. Caplan seems to think humans are identical, interchangeable atoms, without history or culture. Or is he just furthering the usual sabotage of the surrounding, somewhat alien, culture in which he is embeddded
David Foster: “The great 20th-century composer Igor Stravinsky wrote, in The Poetics of Music, “You cannot create against a yielding medium.” Stravinsky’s innovations were nothing if not revolutionary, but he knew that he could not have produced them if he had not been constrained by the traditions of music and the mathematical strictures of tone. “Let me have something finite, definite,” he wrote. “My freedom will be so much the greater and more meaningful the...
Jim: “They were free to imagine and play and invent and write,” he said. “They were inventing one thing after another, after another, after another and for an engineer, what more can you ask for?” That’s the worst imaginable environment for engineers, who invariably need to be held down and whipped with soapful socks like Private Pyle at boot camp.
Jim: Yet maintaining the universalist, human-rights based legal infrastructure constructed after the Second World War takes priority over addressing these issues. The fact that this infrastructure was created for an entirely different world, where there was much less international migration, and where “asylum seeker” meant a political dissident from the Eastern Bloc, does not matter. If the post-WWII occupational court infrastructure were universalist, it would be possible for Englishmen to immigrate to...
Isegoria: That’s exactly the kind of thing he’s talking about, Phileas. I don’t want to share too many lengthy excerpts from a brand new book, but I’m happy to pique everyone’s interest.
Phileas Frogg: Looking forward to reading more excerpts, I thoroughly enjoyed, “The Sports Gene,” so much so that I went and bought a copy a few years ago. I expect some similarly provocative and interesting fodder from this one. On the topic of the book, whenever I was struggling to write a drum part for the band I played for in college, I would begin systematically taking pieces of my kit away until I developed something that worked, and then slowly add pieces back in. Limiting myself...
Jim: Phileas Frogg: Then we are substantially in agreement, our only meaningful divergence being that I reflexively view utility from the perspective of the world-controllers, as opposed to from the citizen-subjects. The major difference, then, is not moral righteousness or justice or other such thing, but the habitual understanding that the perpetuation of a system, any system, is owing, ultimately, to the perspective of its managers, formal or informal, that the purpose of a system is what it does…and...
Jim: Free men do not live subject to video surveillance or electronically locked buildings.
Bob Sykes: If you want a career in education, engineering, medicine, law, business, or the sciences, an accredited degree is mandatory. The days when you could just sit in the back of the room and listen ended long ago, even for state schools. At most schools, private and public, key cards of some sort are needed to get into most buildings, and surveillance cameras are everywhere.
Isegoria: Wow, times have changed! The recent Brown University shooting footage revealed that security cameras are common now, but the idea of locking a college down is really foreign to me.
Gaikokumaniakku: Historical perspective: Although the doctrine that the sea by its nature must be free to all was eventually upheld, most commentators did recognize that, as a practical matter, a coastal state needed to exercise some jurisdiction in the waters adjacent to its shores. Two different concepts developed—that the area of jurisdiction should be limited to cannon-shot range, and that the area should be a much greater belt of uniform width adjacent to the coast—and in the late 18th century these...
Gaikokumaniakku: Middle-aged people can wonder whether they will live long enough to see the collapse of the AIPAC-USA-Epstein coalition. Meanwhile, even if the coalition is ultimately doomed, it is still effective enough to drag out the war in Iran and Lebanon.
Gaikokumaniakku: “We can’t just wish or manifest our way to crazy performance, despite what some in the self-help world may say.” Magness has a tendency to generalize too far from very limited evidence. If wishing/manifestation always worked like Aladdin’s Lamp, of course we would see everyone re-making the world into their own versions of the Arabian Nights. Conversely, if mainstream scholars were honest about paranormal topics, Steve Magness would not have a “performance coaching”...
Dan Kurt: Fellow classmate from Ivy during 1960s contacted me to say he was shocked, shocked to discover on visiting the campus EVERYTHING was locked down, security was obvious, and cameras watched over all. As to the schooling, he told me that the number of lectures given to students had decreased substantially per course since our time there.
Handle: Colleges do card now. The last five campuses I’ve been to all had many buildings with secure entry that require tapping student or staff identity cards on some RFID sensor panel to disengage the automatic lock on the doors. Even state schools that explicitly provide free “audit” access to classes for certain groups like the elderly still require more than the professor’s mere permission and one must apply for to get one of those IDs and, as I understand it, there is some...
In one way, the cost of solar ($/kWh generated) is not important. Intermittency is the killer. The capacity factor for solar has to be under 50% even in the best desert sites, and it is more likely 25% or less in those sites. This means that every kW of solar requires a kW of conventional power. In fact, the conventional power will have to supply the great majority of the demand, and solar will be just an occasional supplement.
Because of its rapid response capability, the usual primary source coupled with supplemental solar/wind is a natural gas-fueled turbine. However, the turbine must be run at low power levels continuously even when solar/wind is online. This means that solar/wind continuously emits carbon dioxide.
At present, solar/wind is a tiny portion of our electric supply, and the required “backup” comes out of the system surplus. Obama is greatly reducing that surplus, and his actions will gradually reveal the problems with wind/solar. Chief among them is the distribution network instability cause by wind/solar intermittency. The German experience is the wind/solar creates serious stability problems when it reaches about 4% of total supply.
The ice cores at Lake Vostok and the recent global warming show that temperature increases lead carbon dioxide increases. The increased CO2 is likely due to ocean outgassing. We are in the process of wrecking out economy because of a New Age superstition.
What makes you think that a gas turbine must be run constantly, Bob Sykes?
My understanding was the opposite. I thought they could easily be switched off, because they function like a jet engine. Most of the cost of gas power is the cost of the gas itself, so the additional cost of backup turbines is not vast.
Sykes is right. Find and talk to an “operator” of an electric utility. My wife’s cousin is married to one and he will talk you ear off on the folly of solar & wind integration with the power net: politics not prudent power engineering.
Two points:
1) unlikely rosy scenario for decrease in cost and increase in efficiency of solar cells, time will tell;
2) solar may work if the arrays of solar cells are in near earth orbit.
Looks like you’ll pay about $1000/kW for your peaking turbine. I haven’t read this carefully, but believe it includes the generator and auxiliary equipment.
If you run it at full capacity for 1000 hours/year on average (remember, this is just for backup when the solar doesn’t sol or the wind doesn’t blow), and you pro-rate the costs (simplistically) over 10 years, then the capital cost is 10 cents per kWh. Add 2 or 3 cents for operations & maintenance, then you’ll need to add in the cost of the fuel.
It’s definitely a mistake to equate one kWh of solar energy with one kWh of reliable, baseline energy from coal, gas, nuclear, etc. — but it’s also a mistake to conclude that it’s therefore useless. Long before we had a grid, we used intermittent wind power to pump water, for instance. Cheap solar would be disruptive in Clayton Christensen’s original sense:
Peak demand is not only usually during the day, but usually near noon.
If solar could be used to blunt the peak, conventional plants could be run near capacity significantly more, causing a price drop disproportionate to the direct supply increase.
To flesh out the “disruptive” scenario: if solar is unsuitable for the grid (as Dan says), yet becomes very cheap, then homes & industries start to work with two kinds of power: cheap, unreliable power to be used opportunistically as it arrives, and expensive, reliable grid power for essentials & emergencies. That doesn’t simply mean a partitioning of today’s uses into the two buckets, it potentially means new uses happening, and some old routine uses becoming luxuries. (Think of people abandoning broadcast TV or five-nines-reliable landline phones for cheap, flexible but less dependable alternatives).
There are a few “if”s there, it seems to me just as likely that either solar does get integrated with the grid, or else never becomes so cheap as to be a large proportion of supply, but in between, that window does exist.