News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by throwaway894345 on Sunday February 21, 2021 @11:46AM (#26214899)
Desert solar is certainly going to be part of the story, but I can’t imagine that we can feasibly power the whole country with desert solar alone, and I don’t think residential solar will be a significant contributor because you lose the efficiencies of scale afforded by acres and acres of collocated, homogeneous, ground-level panels for construction, maintenance, and operation. Consider even the overhead of dealing with thousands of individual property owners rather than a single land owner (if that—the utility may own the land for a solar farm outright).
Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by nicoburns on Sunday February 21, 2021 @05:03PM (#26217705)
> I don’t think residential solar will be a significant contributor because you lose the efficiencies of scale afforded by acres and acres of collocated, homogeneous, ground-level panels for construction, maintenance, and operation.

But what you lost in scale you gain in:

- Lack of distribution costs. Roof-top solar (esp. when combined with storage) can be consumed at the point of generation.

- Distribution of maintenance costs. Right now the biggest cost is installation. But it doesn't seem at all infeasible that this could be simplified to the point that it is something that people could easily install themselves.

Places like Germany already have somewhat significant contributions from rooftop solar.

Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by throwaway894345 on Sunday February 21, 2021 @05:53PM (#26218182)
> Lack of distribution costs

What are the "distribution costs"? Presumably any cost besides the cost of infrastructure to connect to the grid are negligible, and you have to pay the infrastructure cost anyway (or rather, if you pay to over provision on production and storage such that you can be truly off-grid, then you're going to be paying far more than the infrastructure costs).

> Distribution of maintenance costs. Right now the biggest cost is installation. But it doesn't seem at all infeasible that this could be simplified to the point that it is something that people could easily install themselves.

I doubt it. First of all, making plans based on some unknown innovation seems, uh, unwise to put it nicely. Secondly, it's very unlikely that such an innovation would reduce the cost of rooftop solar but not farmed solar. Thirdly, such an innovation seems very unlikely since we already have ubiquitous tasks that every home needs (electrical, plumbing, roofing, dry-wall) for which we still hire professionals--the ubiquity hasn't manifested an innovation that lowers the technical barrier enough that we all do these things ourselves.

Moreover, economies of scale work in the other direction. It's much cheaper to maintain a single 1MW solar farm than it is to maintain 50 20KW rooftop installations.

However, we don't need to speculate about tradeoffs. According to https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/what-is-a-solar-farm-do-i-..., rooftop solar costs 2-3 times as much as farmed solar, so it seems the economies of scale dwarf any advantages rooftop solar might convey.

> Places like Germany already have somewhat significant contributions from rooftop solar.

If I'm understanding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany correctly, solar only accounts for 8.2% of German electrical capacity and of that 14% comes from rooftop solar. So something like 1% of Germany's capacity comes from rooftop solar?

Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by afterburner on Sunday February 21, 2021 @11:55AM (#26214979)
All those individuals will respond to the incentive of cheaper energy bills by installing roof solar voluntarily. Provided their government doesn't pass pro-fossil fuel legislation that actively punishes that decision, as some have.
Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by EricE on Monday February 22, 2021 @02:13PM (#26229033)
Voluntary installation was driven by subsidies.

Once the subsidies dried up, the snake oil salesmen came out. Timeshare hawkers are evil, but they have NOTHING on rooftop solar companies.

And in Nevada the regs changed and now people aren't getting paid for what they generate at anywhere near the same level which further levels the "value proposition".

Home solar was always propped up and if adoption has dropped off significantly in climates that are prime for it - it has zero chance elsewhere in the country.

Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by throwaway894345 on Sunday February 21, 2021 @01:48PM (#26215983)
I’m not talking about persuading people to install solar, I’m talking about the sheer bureaucratic work (on the part of the utility) to manage contracts with thousands of property owners instead of just one. Similarly, the overhead of servicing thousands of roof-top installations (scheduling appointments, driving to sites, climbing onto the roof, etc) versus a single contiguous site at ground level. I don’t think residential solar is a major feature of any serious green energy plan, and for good reason.
Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by FooHentai on Sunday February 21, 2021 @03:04PM (#26216601)
I don’t follow. You could make the same argument about communal water heating versus having a heater in each home, yet of course such a position would be absurd.

Millions of individual homes running their own solar, even with everybody hooked up for exporting, is quite feasible. It’s happening today.

Having it be an arrangement where a power provider owns and maintains the panels isn’t necessary or desirable. Lease-to-own or outright purchase by homeowners works fine.

Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by throwaway894345 on Sunday February 21, 2021 @05:22PM (#26217873)
> You could make the same argument about communal water heating versus having a heater in each home, yet of course such a position would be absurd.

If we could cheaply and efficiently transport hot water over miles and miles like we can with electricity then communal water heating would be much more common. Note that communal water heating is fairly normal (i.e., not "absurd") in large apartment, condominium, and commercial office buildings (one large boiler providing hot water for all tenants).

> Millions of individual homes running their own solar, even with everybody hooked up for exporting, is quite feasible. It’s happening today.

The question isn't whether there's an issue hooking individual residential solar installations up to the grid--no one disputes that. The relevant question is how expensive is it to build and maintain tens of millions of individual rooftop solar installations versus several orders of magnitude fewer, larger installations. According to https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/what-is-a-solar-farm-do-i-..., it would cost at least ~$2.8M to generate 1MW via rooftop solar systems while it would cost only about ~$1M to generate the same amount of energy via solar farm.

Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by rhodozelia on Sunday February 21, 2021 @07:40PM (#26219026)
Given that residential customers pay quite a bit more than the wholesale rate for power rooftop solar must be an investment that pays for itself or nobody would do it!
Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by throwaway894345 on Sunday February 21, 2021 @08:24PM (#26219515)
No one is disputing that it pays for itself, but that doesn’t mean it competes with farmed solar.
Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by rhodozelia on Sunday February 21, 2021 @08:42PM (#26219695)
Uh ... it does compete with farmed solar? Anyone deciding whether to buy power from the utility or generate their own is doing the analysis to see which “wins” the competition.
Re:Activists who embrace nuclear power by throwaway894345 on Sunday February 21, 2021 @09:15PM (#26219979)
I wouldn’t call 2-3X the price “competition” and whether people were buying rooftop solar doesn’t refute the cost analysis.