Is solar a good option?

[Hurtlander]

Sorry Hurtlander. I thought that you meant that every hydro need was being met with solar energy, but only the lights and possibly some of the appliances are. Wood provides the heat and hot water for the residence.

I can not see how that combination would meet either the price or "green" standards of Hydro produced electricity. Especially if the lights and fixtures are being jacked up to 110 and 220 Volt with the need to purchase and replace an adequate number of deep cycle batteries at today's prices. I take it that the residence is far removed from the property boundary and that having the hydro poles put in and wire strung must be much more expensive than I thought.

It would be interesting to have an energy installation expert do a cost estimate on the installation and maintenance of the system being used as opposed to a standard hydro hookup with alternate gas or oil heating. Especially of the cost of "to the furnace" wood is factored into the equation.

I thought I made it clear that solar was providing power to everything in their homes except heat. Lots of people up here heat with wood because it free and plentiful. Nobody up here in the North Thompson heats with gas because there simply isn't gas in this area.
As for the price of having wire strung, it's about $10,000.00 per pole.

[Donald G]

by Hurtlander » Yesterday, 9:46 pm

I thought I made it clear that solar was providing power to everything in their homes except heat. Lots of people up here heat with wood because it free and plentiful. Nobody up here in the North Thompson heats with gas because there simply isn't gas in this area.

I was including furnace oil and propane in the word "gas".

The lack of energy to provide heat is one of the main drawbacks to trying to use solar energy for everything in Canada. Few people have access to all but unlimited supplies of free wood.

[Hurtlander]

I was including furnace oil and propane in the word "gas".

The lack of energy to provide heat is one of the main drawbacks to trying to use solar energy for everything in Canada. Few people have access to all but unlimited supplies of free wood.

I suppose if these people wanted, they could have installed propane furnaces since they don't require very much electricity to power the blower motor. But they went with wood because with today's modern high efficiency wood heaters and modern high efficiency home construction, they are able to heat all winter on about two to three cords of wood, and since these are quarter section size properties the wood is in their backyards.

The cost of running in hydro power and the monthly power bills or the cost of solar and the long term maintenance costs are up for debate. But these are wealthy retired academic types that want to live off the grid to prove it can be done...

Here is an example of the battery packs and associated equipment needed to power a house with solar

[Donald G]

Unread postby Hurtlander » 6 minutes ago

The cost of running in hydro power and the monthly power bills or the cost of solar and the long term maintenance costs are up for debate. But these are wealthy retired academic types that want to live off the grid to prove it can be done...

I appreciate what they are doing. Any of the alternative sources of energy are possible if you want to spend enough energy and are not concerned about the carbon release into the atmosphere.

WADR there is no way that the above system could be adapted to a province wide grid. Given the comparative costs of the various ways of producing energy the alternatives to hydro electricity are simply too expensive and/or furthering the carbon in the atmosphere problem.

[I Think]

Have known since the 80's that if the grid was supplying your house it was the cheapest source of electricity available.
Recently this has changed for people in the south because of low cost PV and grid tie inverters.
For us in the north, if the grid comes to your house it is the least expensive way to go.

[maple leaf]

As technologies improve in batteries,solar can be beneficial beyond sunlight hours.

Li-air battery could make oil obsolete in ten years
The Ecologist

23rd November 2015



Sooner than it takes to build a nuclear power station, lithium-air batteries could be helping wind and solar to make coal, oil and nuclear obsolete, say Cambridge scientists. Five times lighter and five times cheaper than current lithium batteries, Li-air would open the way to our 100% renewable future.

The current results are extremely exciting. We are still very much at the development stage, but we've shown that there are solutions to some of the tough problems associated with this technology.
Scientists have developed a working laboratory demonstrator of a lithium-oxygen battery which has very high energy density, is more than 90% efficient over its discharge-recharge cycle, and can be recharged more than 2,000 times.

Lithium-oxygen, or lithium-air, batteries have been touted as the 'ultimate' battery due to their theoretical energy density, which is ten times that of a lithium-ion battery.

Such a high energy density would be comparable to that of gasoline - and would enable an electric car with a battery that is a fifth the cost and a fifth the weight of those currently on the market to drive 400 miles on a single charge - from London to Edinburgh, or from Boston to Washington DC.

Although the energy density remains lower than for oil, the electrical energy is used far more efficiently with very low losses. Typical cars and trucks today waste 75% of fuel energy in heat. Also there is no need for the heavy engines and transmission systems required in oil-powered vehicles.

In fact the Li-air batteries could even be light enough to propel aircraft - weaning the world off one of the most intractable uses of fossil energy as aviation fuel.

This is the first time that any battery technology has even come close to challenging the energy density of petroleum fuels, and therefore represents a major tipping point in the world's energy choices in coming decades.

However, as is the case with other next-generation batteries, there are several practical challenges that need to be addressed before lithium-air batteries become a viable alternative to gasoline.

Now researchers from the University of Cambridge have shown how some of these obstacles may be overcome, and developed a lab-based demonstrator of a lithium-air battery which has higher capacity, increased energy efficiency and improved stability over previous attempts.

A ten year wait - but hang on - that's quicker than building a nuclear plant!

Their demonstrator relies on a highly porous, 'fluffy' carbon electrode made from graphene (comprising one-atom-thick sheets of carbon atoms), and additives that alter the chemical reactions at work in the battery, making it more stable and more efficient.

While the results, reported in the journal Science, are promising, the researchers caution that a practical lithium-air battery still remains at least a decade away.

"What we've achieved is a significant advance for this technology and suggests whole new areas for research", said Professor Clare Grey of Cambridge's Department of Chemistry, the paper's senior author. "We haven't solved all the problems inherent to this chemistry, but our results do show routes forward towards a practical device"

Of course ten years is a disappointingly long time for renewable energy enthusiasts to wait. But significantly, it's about the length of time it takes to build a nuclear power station. Indeed, if you include all the time spent in preparation for new nuclear, it's considerably quicker.

A new report published last week by Lazard on the future of energy storage technologies identifies a levelised cost of $300-700 per MWh stored and re-delivered using Li-ion batteries for a range of applications. Cut that cost down a fifth and we are looking at $60-140.

With ever-falling costs for wind and solar generation (solar is already profitable across much of the US at $100 / MWh), that's enough to make a 100% renewable energy system with battery storage considerably cheaper than new nuclear power costing - based on the heavily subsidised power price planned for UK's Hinkley C reactor - around $145 per MWh.

The result for canny investors will be to make new investments in oil, gas, coal, or nuclear with a multi-decadal payback time look like a serious risk to their financial health.

Key technological challenge for future clean energy systems

Many of the technologies we use every day have been getting smaller, faster and cheaper each year - with the notable exception of batteries.

Apart from the possibility of a smartphone which lasts for days without needing to be charged, the challenges associated with making a better battery are holding back the widespread adoption of two major clean technologies: electric cars and grid-scale storage for solar power.

In the lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries we use in our laptops and smartphones, the negative electrode is made of graphite (a form of carbon), the positive electrode is made of a metal oxide, such as lithium cobalt oxide, and the electrolyte is a lithium salt dissolved in an organic solvent.

The action of the battery depends on the movement of lithium ions between the electrodes. Li-ion batteries are light, but their capacity deteriorates with age, and their relatively low energy densities mean that they need to be recharged frequently.

Over the past decade, researchers have been developing various alternatives to Li-ion batteries, and lithium-air batteries are considered the ultimate in next-generation energy storage, because of their extremely high energy density. However, previous attempts at working demonstrators have had low efficiency, poor rate performance, unwanted chemical reactions, and can only be cycled in pure oxygen.

A whole new chemistry creates long term stability

What Liu, Grey and their colleagues have developed uses a very different chemistry than earlier attempts at a non-aqueous lithium-air battery, relying on lithium hydroxide (LiOH) instead of lithium peroxide (Li2O2). With the addition of water and the use of lithium iodide as a 'mediator', their battery showed far less of the chemical reactions which can cause cells to die, making it far more stable after multiple charge and discharge cycles.

By precisely engineering the structure of the electrode, changing it to a highly porous form of graphene, adding lithium iodide, and changing the chemical makeup of the electrolyte, the researchers were able to reduce the 'voltage gap' between charge and discharge to 0.2 volts.

A small voltage gap equals a more efficient battery - previous versions of a lithium-air battery have only managed to get the gap down to 0.5-1.0 volts, whereas 0.2 volts is closer to that of a Li-ion battery, and equates to an energy efficiency of 93%.

The highly porous graphene electrode also greatly increases the capacity of the demonstrator, although only at certain rates of charge and discharge. Other issues that still have to be addressed include finding a way to protect the metal electrode so that it doesn't form spindly lithium metal fibres known as dendrites, which can cause batteries to explode if they grow too much and short-circuit the battery.

Additionally, the demonstrator can only be cycled in pure oxygen, while the air around us also contains carbon dioxide, nitrogen and moisture, all of which are generally harmful to the metal electrode.

"While there are still plenty of fundamental studies that remain to be done, to iron out some of the mechanistic details, the current results are extremely exciting", said Grey.

"We are still very much at the development stage, but we've shown that there are solutions to some of the tough problems associated with this technology."







http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_r ... years.html

[I Think]

There is talk in electrical utility circles that solar power may soon make peak power prices fall.
For utilities, peak demand is in the afternoon, which is exactly when solar's peak output occurs.
If we graph the drop in battery costs, we can see that soon, major power users may find it cost effective to use batteries to bridge the peak load/peak power expense using batteries charged overnight with lower cost electricity.
WallMart for example is already using solar power/battery storage in a few of its southern stores, to test the economic benefits.

[Smurf]

Hurtlander wrote:

For the most part yes. They are using solar for lighting and running major appliances. I am not an electrical engineer so I don't know all the exact technical details, but these houses each have huge huge banks of battery packs and inverters to provide 110V and 220v where needed. Because of our location very few homes have air conditioning, it's a luxury that's only needed for one or two weeks each summer. These houses use hot water in floor heat and hot water radiators, the water is heated with wood heat. For fire insurance purposes they use external wood furnaces, if they plan on being away for a few days in the winter they do need to hire someone to drop by once or twice a day to fill the wood stove and feed the animals.

All sounds good but they are not nearly providing what the normal house needs. Can you imagine if most people in Kelowna turned to wood or oil for hot water and heat. The environmentalists would be haveing heart attacks and the global warming followers would be falling all amongst them. What you are talking about is a very limited solution to a very unique problem, nothing to do with most situations. People in the city don't even like it if you use your fireplace.

[Smurf]

Maple Leaf I notice that no where in that article do the mention Hydro produced electricity. They mention all the more expensive types. It makes me believe that even they do not feel it will replace Hydro for a very long time. As Hurtlander pointed out solar is good in specific applications. I believe you will find these batteries are the same, if they ever become truly viable in large applications. They definitely have promise in specific applications.

[Hurtlander]

All sounds good but they are not nearly providing what the normal house needs. .

Somehow they do manage all their normal household power needs, except for heating. But as I said above, I am not an electrician so I don't understand stand how they make it work.

Can you imagine if most people in Kelowna turned to wood or oil for hot water and heat. The environmentalists would be haveing heart attacks and the global warming followers would be falling all amongst them. What you are talking about is a very limited solution to a very unique problem, nothing to do with most situations. People in the city don't even like it if you use your fireplace.

Some of the new wood burning appliances are surprisingly clean burning, and many environmentalists do consider wood heat to be green because it's a renewable resource. Our municipal hall / government building is heated with a bio-energy system, it uses wood waste (hog fuel) from the local sawmills. What comes out the chimney is so clean that municipality earns carbon credits from the province.

Regardless, I certainly am glad I don't live in the big city....in my neighbourhood it's not uncommon for people to have campfires burning in the backyard on a Friday or Saturday night, even in the winter.

[maple leaf]

We will probably always need Hydro produced power ,but as these alternative get better and better and cheaper,the less we will need to rely on Hydro and won't need the power generated from site C.It wasn't very long ago the nay sayers claimed solar wasn't viable for the reason you can't get charge from it at night and now with the improvements in battery technology it is becoming possible to store enough charge to be able to use at night.These systems are being improved all the time and getting better all the time.

A nondescript black briefcase sits propped open on one of the shelves at the Solar Store in Calgary. More Bond gadget than bag, this solar powered attaché case can run a flat screen TV for up to six hours.

It's just one of the green energy solutions on display at what is billed as Western Canada's first solar showroom. And the Solar Store's general manager, Denis Benoit, says Calgary is the perfect place for solar power to shine.

"Southern Alberta has some of the best solar resources in Canada," he says. "Calgary gets an average of 333 days of sunshine per year."


Calgary's first Solar Showroom1:07

What's more, Benoit says capturing that energy is easier and cheaper than most people think. A simple solar kit that would keep the lights on and provide hot water for two people costs as little as $5,000, with more elaborate systems climbing upwards of $50,000.

He also feels that the NDP government's decision to move the province away from coal and towards cleaner forms of power generation could create a boom in the province's solar industry.

"One of the big reasons the NDP is going towards this new model is to reduce the amount of pollution that is being created, and these systems are a big step towards that."

In November, Alberta announced plans to phase out the use of coal-powered electricity generation by 2030, a daunting task in that more than half of Alberta's electricity currently comes from coal.

The plan is to shift that burden onto natural gas and renewable sources of energy like wind and solar, something that could force the cost of electricity up, making personal solar power more attractive to Albertans.

"One of the real advantages to these types of systems is that once you pay for it there are no additional costs. So your price today is fixed and once that is done, even if electrical costs go up, your price to generate the power you are producing does not."

Benoit says that the average solar package will pay for itself in energy savings in about 10 to 15 years, a timeline that could improve if the government begins offering incentives for people to embrace solar power.

Incentives make sense, acknowledges Tom Jackman of the Green Building Technologies program at Calgary's Southern Alberta Institute of Technology.

"A little bit of carrot and stick, a little bit of initiative on the incentive side and a little bit more of a cost on the polluting side and solar will really become a big energy source in Alberta," he says.

Tom
Tom Jackman stands in front of a solar panel at the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology's Centre for Green Building Technologies. (Erin Collins/CBC)

Alberta has also announced that it will implement an economy wide carbon tax, which is another reason why Alberta's solar industry is poised to take off, Jackman says.

"The whole industry has been waiting for awhile, but certainly in the short term the interest has increased dramatically."

What's more, he says it isn't just retailers like the Solar Store anticipating a boom.

"We are seeing an awful lot of students just coming by and asking about solar and how can they get more training, and they tell me they know it's going to be a big thing."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/c ... -1.3406230

[Smurf]

Hurtlander is there any chance you can find out the cost of installing one of those systems and the life expectancy of the battery banks. I would be quite interested how many average people could afford it. I would like to know what actual pay back time is.

I am looking at some new Lithium Ion batteries for my motorhome but the 12 volt 75AH I want would would be about $1000.00 each. Still investigating and thinking about it.

[Omnitheo]

How do those batteries compare to the new Tesla batteries?

https://www.teslamotors.com/en_CA/POWERWALL

[Donald G]

Given the following article I would be a bit skeptical about about paying the $9,000.00 American to rent each Tesla Battery on a nine year lease. The information indicates that they do not work that well with solar energy at the present time and unless you already have a guaranteed source of electricity to charge it on a daily basis it may pose problems. But if you already have a source of daily 24 hour electricity why would you want batteries.

Not sure on the car application aspect.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... with-solar

[I Think]

Omni asks;

How do those batteries compare to the new Tesla batteries?

Omni, the batteries Smurf mentions are the same or similar to the Tesla batts, Tesla is not on the front of the development curve, but is bringing the price down rapidly. Prices for Li batts are approaching $300/KW. The cost of batteries is falling very quickly.