US Solar Makes Up Over Half Of New Generating Capacity

[ScienceRocks]

US Solar Makes Up Over Half Of New Generating Capacity

US Solar Makes Up Over Half Of New Generating Capacity

September 8th, 2014 by Joshua S Hill

The US solar industry has enjoyed a relatively strong quarter in the first half of 2014, despite trade disputes endangering projects currently in the pipeline.


New figures from GTM Research and the Solar Energy Industries Association’s Q2 2014 U.S. Solar Market Insight report show that the US installed 1,133 MW of new solar PV capacity in the second quarter of this year, pushing the cumulative operating capacity for PV and concentrating solar power (CSP) to 15.9 GW.

The most impressive numbers, however, are the shares of new US electric generation capacity across the first half of 2014. Total solar installed capacity for the period represented 53% of all new electricity generating capacity, beating out all competitors by a healthy margin.



“Solar continues to soar, providing more and more homes, businesses, schools and government entities across the United States with clean, reliable and affordable electricity,” said SEIA President and CEO Rhone Resch.

“Solar continues to be a primary source of new electric generation capacity in the US,” added Shayle Kann, Senior Vice President of GTM Research. “With new sources of capital being unlocked, design and engineering innovations reducing system prices, and sales channels rapidly diversifying, the solar market is quickly gaining steam to drive significant growth for the next few years.”




Nothing will quite match the fourth quarter of 2013 in terms of overall installations, given the number of trade disputes and the dissolving of many of the subsidies that pushed such growth, however GTM still contends the last two quarters have been strong ones for the US solar industry. PV installations reached 1,133 MW in the second quarter, and while there were no new CSP installations, during the first quarter of the year the sector celebrated the installation of the largest ever CSP project, the 392 MW Ivanpah project, and the second phase of Genesis Solar’s second 125 MW phase.

California once again topped the charts of installations during the first two quarters of 2014, accounting for more than 50% of installations for the fourth consecutive quarter.

Solar is kicking ass.

 

[MaxGrit]

Oooooo Solar Subsidies oooooO

 

[ScienceRocks]

Oooooo Solar Subsidies oooooO

Solar is getting close to grid parity. You think everything else doesn't get subsidies?

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

I use solar to run my wells. Our power utility just jacked our prices up by 20%. I'm going to set up a much bigger solar grid next year. Solar makes sense for many Americans living in areas where the end justifies the means. As to the mega-solar projects, I think the jury is still out on those. We have one of the country's biggest here in the San Luis Valley. Large solar projects involve some complex science and they're not without their own detrimental effect on the environment, especially their gluttonous use of water for cooling. If people are concerned, they should do some homework. Overall, solar gets a passing grade from me.

 

[RGR]

US Solar Makes Up Over Half Of New Generating Capacity

US Solar Makes Up Over Half Of New Generating Capacity
Solar is kicking ass.

What is it up to now? 1% of total capacity? 2?

Yep…pretty kick ass….coming from Matthew, who is undoubtedly using coal, nuke and natural gas fired electricity to claim that solar is kicking ass. Pretty funny if you think about it.

 

[chikenwing]

US Solar Makes Up Over Half Of New Generating Capacity

US Solar Makes Up Over Half Of New Generating Capacity
Solar is kicking ass.

What is it up to now? 1% of total capacity? 2?

Yep…pretty kick ass….coming from Matthew, who is undoubtedly using coal, nuke and natural gas fired electricity to claim that solar is kicking ass. Pretty funny if you think about it.

Not to mention where all the equipment is coming from. solar is good for some,but its nowhere near grid parity.

 

[whitehall]

Interesting mix of words. What does the claim "US solar makes up over half of new generating capacity" actually mean. Surely it doesn't mean that solar energy supplies over half of energy. The carefully crafted sentence is intended for low information lefties.

 

[Camarozz]

Oooooo Solar Subsidies oooooO

Solar is getting close to grid parity. You think everything else doesn't get subsidies?

What do you mean "parity"

And no, not everything is subsidized the same. For example, or wind turbine system is subsidized by 50%, the government (all of us) literally pay half of the generating costs so that the wind turbines can break even and cimpete with local generation. Then on top of that, we have to take our power off the market so the dirty wind power can take over.

Dirty as in hard to regulate on the system.

And if we are in dire need of all this power, why do we literally have to give our power away when the wind blows.

I have to ask, is that fair?
Doesnt that seem like a horrific waste of money?

Oh, just so u know, i work in hydro power generation, the wind turbines are not of our project.

 

[Camarozz]

Interesting mix of words. What does the claim "US solar makes up over half of new generating capacity" actually mean. Surely it doesn't mean that solar energy supplies over half of energy. The carefully crafted sentence is intended for low information lefties.

I suspect of all new generation plants,

 

[flacaltenn]

Oooooo Solar Subsidies oooooO

Solar is getting close to grid parity. You think everything else doesn't get subsidies?

Grid parity my ass. It works about 6 hours a day AT BEST...
It's a PEAKER technology to relieve summertime peak demand.
Good for 15 or 20% of the daytime peak..

 

[Old Rocks]

Well now, isn't that a good thing? After all, 15% to 20% of peak need is a substancial amount of energy. Then again, a lot of work ongoing on grid scale strorage. And that will change the whole equation on renewables.

 

[Camarozz]

Well now, isn't that a good thing? After all, 15% to 20% of peak need is a substancial amount of energy. Then again, a lot of work ongoing on grid scale strorage. And that will change the whole equation on renewables.

Honestly, I suspect that number is incorrect; however even so when we cannot sell energy on the grid (per federal mandate) because the solar plant is generating, how is that fair? Where is the demand?

So far, I see no advantage to large scale solar.

 

[flacaltenn]

Well now, isn't that a good thing? After all, 15% to 20% of peak need is a substancial amount of energy. Then again, a lot of work ongoing on grid scale strorage. And that will change the whole equation on renewables.

Well there ya go. But 6 hours a day does not make it "AN ALTERNATIVE" does it? And it means that solar should be charged for the idled REAL plants -- on the days it doesn't work. Or for the idled plants that carry humanity thru the OTHER 18 hours a day.

There is no "grid storage" solution to turn an energy source with a 25% delivery schedule and a limited geographical range into a 24/7/365 "alternative"..

 

[flacaltenn]

Well now, isn't that a good thing? After all, 15% to 20% of peak need is a substancial amount of energy. Then again, a lot of work ongoing on grid scale strorage. And that will change the whole equation on renewables.

Honestly, I suspect that number is incorrect; however even so when we cannot sell energy on the grid (per federal mandate) because the solar plant is generating, how is that fair? Where is the demand?

So far, I see no advantage to large scale solar.

You are correct. The cost of idling plants SHOULD be charged to renewables.
After all folks are paying for TWO energy generators to do the same job..

That number is based on MANY examples of what the summer GRID demand is during the NOON peak versus what it is at night.

From numbers at Cal-ISO, the grid demand at 10PM is 80% of what it is at daytime peak. That means that you will always require an 80% RELIABLE baseline supply from other sources even with 20% solar peaking during the day in the summer. And in REALVILLE, you need 100% grid supply for those days when solar doesn't work..

 

[Camarozz]

Well now, isn't that a good thing? After all, 15% to 20% of peak need is a substancial amount of energy. Then again, a lot of work ongoing on grid scale strorage. And that will change the whole equation on renewables.

Honestly, I suspect that number is incorrect; however even so when we cannot sell energy on the grid (per federal mandate) because the solar plant is generating, how is that fair? Where is the demand?

So far, I see no advantage to large scale solar.

You are correct. The cost of idling plants SHOULD be charged to renewables.
After all folks are paying for TWO energy generators to do the same job..

That number is based on MANY examples of what the summer GRID demand is during the NOON peak versus what it is at night.

From numbers at Cal-ISO, the grid demand at 10PM is 80% of what it is at daytime peak. That means that you will always require an 80% RELIABLE baseline supply from other sources even with 20% solar peaking during the day in the summer. And in REALVILLE, you need 100% grid supply for those days when solar doesn't work..

There are a number of issues I have with requiring our system to include solar and wind. Neither of the later will ever pay for themselves, and the fact that we literally have to GIVE power away when the wind blows. So, here is the deal, we generate power, we sell power locally and all across the NW, northern California, even some of the other western states. We are not paid by you and me from our taxes to sell this power, we generate and sell it at a profit to pay our bills and help with upgrades.

Now, add in this solar and wind generation, with NO extra demand and the fact that now our generation is given away, doesnt it seem like a super stick to your ribs that we are paying for the power, AND on top of that paying to have them generate the power, a double dipping of sorts, when we could just keep the other power and pay less over all?

doesnt that just seem super ridiculous to pay twice for the same power you could have at the initial price?

It boggles my mind that people are into this debacle, and tout it as "good for us"; I call bull.

 

[Camarozz]

Well now, isn't that a good thing? After all, 15% to 20% of peak need is a substancial amount of energy. Then again, a lot of work ongoing on grid scale strorage. And that will change the whole equation on renewables.

Well there ya go. But 6 hours a day does not make it "AN ALTERNATIVE" does it? And it means that solar should be charged for the idled REAL plants -- on the days it doesn't work. Or for the idled plants that carry humanity thru the OTHER 18 hours a day.

There is no "grid storage" solution to turn an energy source with a 25% delivery schedule and a limited geographical range into a 24/7/365 "alternative"..

I cannot imagine the battery source required to make solar and wind viable 24/7

The only one that comes close is the SW solar generator where they focus the suns beams at a focal point to basically boil water and run steam turbines. Now that one makes sense; they can nearly generate power all day long with their heat storage capacity.

 

[mamooth]

Burlington, VT, population 42,000, now gets all of its energy from renewable sources, the first city of that size in the USA to achieve it. On average, that is. Some days they have to buy fossil fuel power, other days they export excess renewable power.

In Vermont a milestone in green-energy efforts - Metro - The Boston Globe

 

[elektra]

I use solar to run my wells. Our power utility just jacked our prices up by 20%. I'm going to set up a much bigger solar grid next year. Solar makes sense for many Americans living in areas where the end justifies the means. As to the mega-solar projects, I think the jury is still out on those. We have one of the country's biggest here in the San Luis Valley. Large solar projects involve some complex science and they're not without their own detrimental effect on the environment, especially their gluttonous use of water for cooling. If people are concerned, they should do some homework. Overall, solar gets a passing grade from me.

How about some pics, brand names, specs on the pumps, stuff like that, it would be relevant.

 

[elektra]

Burlington, VT, population 42,000, now gets all of its energy from renewable sources, the first city of that size in the USA to achieve it. On average, that is. Some days they have to buy fossil fuel power, other days they export excess renewable power.

In Vermont a milestone in green-energy efforts - Metro - The Boston Globe

Vermont gets "All its power from alternative power", except the days it don't?

You have your cake and can it it too.

Even when alternative energy fails, it works.

And that is how the activist spreads the propaganda, by lies, qualified with the truth in the fine print.

 

[elektra]

Well now, isn't that a good thing? After all, 15% to 20% of peak need is a substancial amount of energy. Then again, a lot of work ongoing on grid scale strorage. And that will change the whole equation on renewables.

Well there ya go. But 6 hours a day does not make it "AN ALTERNATIVE" does it? And it means that solar should be charged for the idled REAL plants -- on the days it doesn't work. Or for the idled plants that carry humanity thru the OTHER 18 hours a day.

There is no "grid storage" solution to turn an energy source with a 25% delivery schedule and a limited geographical range into a 24/7/365 "alternative"..

I cannot imagine the battery source required to make solar and wind viable 24/7

The only one that comes close is the SW solar generator where they focus the suns beams at a focal point to basically boil water and run steam turbines. Now that one makes sense; they can nearly generate power all day long with their heat storage capacity.

Yea, ivanpah, which failed and now runs on natural gas all day and all night, extensively covered in these threads.