Solar vs natural gas what do you think?

Rambunctious

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
38,586
Reaction score
19,491
Points
1,905
The sun doesn't always shine...one volcanic eruption could stop the world cold if we rely on solar...wake up....you have been conned by the public school system....
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
10,753
Reaction score
2,884
Points
195
The sun doesn't always shine...one volcanic eruption could stop the world cold if we rely on solar...wake up....you have been conned by the public school system....
These people think intermittent power supplies will be able to power us into the future.

We need power to be available 24/7/365

By ignoring nuclear power we are dooming ourselves to once again let China lead the way and to be in position to have the best new nuclear power tech already in place when the rest of the world realizes that wind and solar won't ever be enough to meet our growing power needs
 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
5,319
Reaction score
1,076
Points
140
The sun doesn't always shine...one volcanic eruption could stop the world cold if we rely on solar...wake up....you have been conned by the public school system....
The Sun does, eruptions or no. Wake up... you're late for school..
 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
5,319
Reaction score
1,076
Points
140
You imagine things.

Yes, windmills are powered by the Sun. Where did you think winds came from?
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
40,233
Reaction score
18,308
Points
2,330
Location
Florida
I am an Environmental Engineer. Worked in the field for 30 years. In retirement I did a little consulting.

A few years ago I was involved in a permitting project to do a nuclear energy power plant expansion project in Texas.

The NRC required a section on the evaluation of alternative energy. We did a 250 page section in which we did an economic evaluation of solar, gas, thermal, wind, coal and oil.

None of them could compete with nuclear. Natural gas came in second, oil third and coal forth. No thermal.

Solar and wind were completely out of the picture.

To produce as much energy as the nuclear power plant expansion they would have to cover the entire Texas county in solar collectors.

Wind was just as bad.

Counties in Texas are huge, by the way.

Coal would have come in second, even with stringent environmental controls, except for the fact they would have had to expand the railroad system to deliver the coal.
 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
5,484
Reaction score
2,087
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
I am an Environmental Engineer. Worked in the field for 30 years. In retirement I did a little consulting.

A few years ago I was involved in a permitting project to do a nuclear energy power plant expansion project in Texas.

The NRC required a section on the evaluation of alternative energy. We did a 250 page section in which we did an economic evaluation of solar, gas, thermal, wind, coal and oil.

None of them could compete with nuclear. Natural gas came in second, oil third and coal forth. No thermal.

Solar and wind were completely out of the picture.

To produce as much energy as the nuclear power plant expansion they would have to cover the entire Texas county in solar collectors.

Wind was just as bad.

Counties in Texas are huge, by the way.

Coal would have come in second, even with stringent environmental controls, except for the fact they would have had to expand the railroad system to deliver the coal.
Where did they get the reactor vessel? ...
 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
5,484
Reaction score
2,087
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
No idea. Admit you're more nuts than I am.
Remember, this poster believes Quid Pro Joe only received 15 million votes, the other 65 million are fraudulent ... so it's an easy step for him to believe name-plate capacities are fraudulently given at 4 times the actual output ... for which we now must include Underwriter's Labs as co-conspirators ... every insurance company is actively seeking to be nationalized because corporate profits suck ...
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
9,397
Reaction score
1,062
Points
170
Eilat is not a small town. For it to be 100% solar powered during the day is impressive. I do not agree with his condemnation of gas power. a gas fired plant is not nearly as polluting as coal and solar cannot produce the power at this time to replace conventional power plants www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7YINRaEeNw
I don't see it as an either or thing. Both have pros and cons. One downside of gas is that it is a finite resource.
So you have solar?
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
12,437
Reaction score
1,639
Points
245
Location
Virginia
Eilat is not a small town. For it to be 100% solar powered during the day is impressive. I do not agree with his condemnation of gas power. a gas fired plant is not nearly as polluting as coal and solar cannot produce the power at this time to replace conventional power plants www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7YINRaEeNw
I don't see it as an either or thing. Both have pros and cons. One downside of gas is that it is a finite resource.
So you have solar?
No. It has never been economic for me for a number of reasons, the one being it would take too long for pay for itself, my house will likely be demolished before it does, and the other is we can't sell our electricity back to the utility.
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
55,695
Reaction score
17,816
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
Natural gas. The land mass required to replace fossil fuels with solar is enormous. Solar is an environmental disaster.
 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
5,319
Reaction score
1,076
Points
140
Eilat is not a small town. For it to be 100% solar powered during the day is impressive. I do not agree with his condemnation of gas power. a gas fired plant is not nearly as polluting as coal and solar cannot produce the power at this time to replace conventional power plants www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7YINRaEeNw
I don't see it as an either or thing. Both have pros and cons. One downside of gas is that it is a finite resource.
So you have solar?
No. It has never been economic for me for a number of reasons, the one being it would take too long for pay for itself, my house will likely be demolished before it does, and the other is we can't sell our electricity back to the utility.
Yes, you can. By law. Since March.
Net metering is the system utilities use to credit solar homeowners for the electricity they produce, but don’t use themselves. Current law allows Dominion and Appalachian power to stop allowing homeowners and business to use net metering once solar supplies more than 1% of the electricity on the grid. The amount of electricity that is on the grid is well under 1% in most of Virginia right now. But this will change as VCEA encourages more people go to solar. VCEA ensures new solar customers will be able to net meter. It lifts the cap to 6%. Of this, 1% is reserved for low-income customers.
Other than having too many big trees shading you or needing new roofing (which can also be solar), you can work out a deal that works for you. I did even with big trees all around. Five or six years ago. Haven't regretted it for a second. You can do it!
 
Last edited:

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
10,753
Reaction score
2,884
Points
195
No idea. Admit you're more nuts than I am.
Remember, this poster believes Quid Pro Joe only received 15 million votes, the other 65 million are fraudulent ... so it's an easy step for him to believe name-plate capacities are fraudulently given at 4 times the actual output ... for which we now must include Underwriter's Labs as co-conspirators ... every insurance company is actively seeking to be nationalized because corporate profits suck ...
Wrong , Corky.

I have faith the Americans are stupid enough to vote for a politician of the 2 major parties and that they actually believe their vote matters and that the fuckiong government cares about them.

And unlike you morons I don't make shit up

http://xn--drmstrre-64ad.dk/wp-content/wind/miller/windpower web/en/tour/wres/annu.htm


The Capacity Factor
Another way of stating the annual energy output from a wind turbine is to look at the capacity factor for the turbine in its particular location. By capacity factor we mean its actual annual energy output divided by the theoretical maximum output, if the machine were running at its rated (maximum) power during all of the 8766 hours of the year.
Example: If a 600 kW turbine produces 1.5 million kWh in a year, its capacity factor is = 1500000 : ( 365.25 * 24 * 600 ) = 1500000 : 5259600 = 0.285 = 28.5 per cent.
Capacity factors may theoretically vary from 0 to 100 per cent, but in practice they will usually range from 20 to 70 per cent, and mostly be around 25-30 per cent.
 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
5,484
Reaction score
2,087
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
Wrong , Corky.

I have faith the Americans are stupid enough to vote for a politician of the 2 major parties and that they actually believe their vote matters and that the fuckiong government cares about them.

And unlike you morons I don't make shit up

http://xn--drmstrre-64ad.dk/wp-content/wind/miller/windpower web/en/tour/wres/annu.htm


The Capacity Factor
Another way of stating the annual energy output from a wind turbine is to look at the capacity factor for the turbine in its particular location. By capacity factor we mean its actual annual energy output divided by the theoretical maximum output, if the machine were running at its rated (maximum) power during all of the 8766 hours of the year.
Example: If a 600 kW turbine produces 1.5 million kWh in a year, its capacity factor is = 1500000 : ( 365.25 * 24 * 600 ) = 1500000 : 5259600 = 0.285 = 28.5 per cent.
Capacity factors may theoretically vary from 0 to 100 per cent, but in practice they will usually range from 20 to 70 per cent, and mostly be around 25-30 per cent.
Your math is wrong ... for a name-plate capacity of 600 kW we'd have 5,259,600 kW-hrs per year ... then your ratio would be 1 ... if we choose to shut our power plant down 75% of the time, then of course we'd only see 25% of the output ... duh ... the main reason to shut down is lack of demand ... say 2am on a mild fall early morning ... no A/C, no arc welders, no iron smelting, no cement making ... just a few little children's nightlights running (LED's) ... we're better off running a 50 kW unit and save maintenance costs on the big units ...

The above is true for ALL power plants of any kind ...

Ah ... but solar/wind/hydro shuts down at times NOT of our choosing ... something well known since the first drought at the first earthen dam built by cro-magnon man ... duh ... and solar is the worst ... with a name-plate capacity of 200 W/m^2, we immediately lose half due to night-time, and half again while the sun is low to the horizon ... thus your 25% actual production ...

These people think intermittent power supplies will be able to power us into the future.

No ... this is strictly your own misunderstanding ... I'm glad someone has set your straight ... no one else in the entire world believe solar panels worked at night ... no one else believed wind will work on calm days ... no one else thinks hydro works when the river runs dry ... if you're only listening to the stupidest people you can find, maybe your rhetoric will come off just as stupid ...

I've ran the numbers for solar where I live, and it fails miserably ... no way can I compete with grid power ... the same with wind and hydro locally ... not with the main BPA trunk lines running down to California just a few miles away ... those are connected to a solar farm where it's usually sunny, wind mills where it's usually windy and hydro on a river that has never run dry ... my cost is 6.3¢/kW-hr ... and that river is always running, we always have power ... this cost has been going down as we add more wind and solar, at a time when fossil fuel electricity costs are going up ... our future doesn't depend on the availability of cheap oil ...

What about yourself ... what does your future look like when fossil fuels start running out? ...
 
OP
S

shoshi

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2020
Messages
540
Reaction score
265
Points
483
Let me try to be clear. English is not my first language. I am much interested in solar but I believe gas gives more power than solar can today and gas plants work in any weather day or night. We have much gas from the sea so use it as it is much more clean than coal.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top