Solar plus storage, the new least expensive cost of energy

These sales bring the cost of electricity from NET Power's plant down to 1.9¢ per kilowatt hour, Goff said, compared to 4.2¢ for a traditional combined cycle natural gas plant, making this the cheapest source of electricity, and with no carbon emissions.

If the plant in La Porte performs as expected, and as it has so far, this is a real game changer for natural gas. Since the United States is sitting on more natural gas than any country in the world, and it’s getting cheaper to get it out of the ground, this is no small game to change. Net Zero Natural Gas Plant -- The Game Changer
And its footprint is smaller,,,,,,compared to the sq miles of panels needed to equal it
 
We Liberals were always right, while the wingnuts screamed "Solyndra!!!1!!

qQVgqH1.gif
qQVgqH1.gif
qQVgqH1.gif
 
You know why they want storage, not because they produce so much energy that it needs to be stored but so that they can use the storage to clean up the dirty electricity. You can not have such a huge, varying, intermitten source of power on the grid. It destroys the equipment and it is kind of impossible to sell.
 
You know why they want storage, not because they produce so much energy that it needs to be stored but so that they can use the storage to clean up the dirty electricity. You can not have such a huge, varying, intermitten source of power on the grid. It destroys the equipment and it is kind of impossible to sell.

No worries. In 15 years the keyboard nutz will be saying that solar and wind were conspiracies by republicans and big business to get something for nothing.

Low density power generation is a bad bad bad idea on a commercial scale. It will absolutely create far more pollution than it will prevent.

Wait and see.
 
You know why they want storage, not because they produce so much energy that it needs to be stored but so that they can use the storage to clean up the dirty electricity. You can not have such a huge, varying, intermitten source of power on the grid. It destroys the equipment and it is kind of impossible to sell.

No worries. In 15 years the keyboard nutz will be saying that solar and wind were conspiracies by republicans and big business to get something for nothing.

Low density power generation is a bad bad bad idea on a commercial scale. It will absolutely create far more pollution than it will prevent.

Wait and see.
Another very stupid individual. Wind accounted for nearly 4% of total electrical production globally in 2017, and is still increasing rapidly as we post.

Wind
 
You know why they want storage, not because they produce so much energy that it needs to be stored but so that they can use the storage to clean up the dirty electricity. You can not have such a huge, varying, intermitten source of power on the grid. It destroys the equipment and it is kind of impossible to sell.

No worries. In 15 years the keyboard nutz will be saying that solar and wind were conspiracies by republicans and big business to get something for nothing.

Low density power generation is a bad bad bad idea on a commercial scale. It will absolutely create far more pollution than it will prevent.

Wait and see.
Another very stupid individual. Wind accounted for nearly 4% of total electrical production globally in 2017, and is still increasing rapidly as we post.

Wind

Wait and see....
 
You know why they want storage, not because they produce so much energy that it needs to be stored but so that they can use the storage to clean up the dirty electricity. You can not have such a huge, varying, intermitten source of power on the grid. It destroys the equipment and it is kind of impossible to sell.

No worries. In 15 years the keyboard nutz will be saying that solar and wind were conspiracies by republicans and big business to get something for nothing.

Low density power generation is a bad bad bad idea on a commercial scale. It will absolutely create far more pollution than it will prevent.

Wait and see.
Another very stupid individual. Wind accounted for nearly 4% of total electrical production globally in 2017, and is still increasing rapidly as we post.

Wind
Installed capacity is much different than electricity delivered to market. With a capacity factor of 20% you are looking at less than 1%. Add transmission line distance and it drops to less than .5%.

$100 trillion more is what it will cost. A cost that rises exponentially.
 
You know why they want storage, not because they produce so much energy that it needs to be stored but so that they can use the storage to clean up the dirty electricity. You can not have such a huge, varying, intermitten source of power on the grid. It destroys the equipment and it is kind of impossible to sell.

No worries. In 15 years the keyboard nutz will be saying that solar and wind were conspiracies by republicans and big business to get something for nothing.

Low density power generation is a bad bad bad idea on a commercial scale. It will absolutely create far more pollution than it will prevent.

Wait and see.
Another very stupid individual. Wind accounted for nearly 4% of total electrical production globally in 2017, and is still increasing rapidly as we post.

Wind
Installed capacity is much different than electricity delivered to market. With a capacity factor of 20% you are looking at less than 1%. Add transmission line distance and it drops to less than .5%.

$100 trillion more is what it will cost. A cost that rises exponentially.

Wind is collapsing in Germany and in the US on-shore wind still requires massive government intervention as there is no federal right of eminent domain for electric transmission lines
 
Here is what the present cost of energy is according to lazard;

Lazard-Lazard-LCOE-%E2%80%93-what%E2%80%99s-the-cheapest-energy.jpg


Note that thin film utility beats everything but wind. Nuclear, at best, is over 4 times as expensive. However, a new solar plus storage project in California is coming in at less than $20.




ca_0712NID_Solar_Farm_California_online.jpg



A large-scale solar farm in Southern California.

8MINUTE SOLAR ENERGY
Giant batteries and cheap solar power are shoving fossil fuels off the grid
By Robert F. ServiceJul. 11, 2019 , 1:40 PM

This month, officials in Los Angeles, California, are expected to approve a deal that would make solar power cheaper than ever while also addressing its chief flaw: It works only when the sun shines. The deal calls for a huge solar farm backed up by one of the world's largest batteries. It would provide 7% of the city's electricity beginning in 2023 at a cost of 1.997 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) for the solar power and 1.3 cents per kWh for the battery. That's cheaper than any power generated with fossil fuel.

"Goodnight #naturalgas, goodnight #coal, goodnight #nuclear," Mark Jacobson, an atmospheric scientist at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, tweeted after news of the deal surfaced late last month. "Because of growing economies of scale, prices for renewables and batteries keep coming down," adds Jacobson, who has advised countries around the world on how to shift to 100% renewable electricity. As if on cue, last week a major U.S. coal company—West Virginia–based Revelation Energy LLC—filed for bankruptcy, the second in as many weeks.

The new solar plus storage effort will be built in Kern County in California by 8minute Solar Energy. The project is expected to create a 400-megawatt solar array, generating roughly 876,000 megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity annually, enough to power more than 65,000 homes during daylight hours. Its 800-MWh battery will store electricity for after the sun sets, reducing the need for natural gas–fired generators.
/—-/ Get a load of the solar panel scam. Libtards bought into it hook line and sinker. Bwhahahaha Bwhahahaha U.K. Homeowners Discover Solar Panels Don’t Work
 

Forum List

Back
Top