Renewable Energy + Battery Storage = Fossil Fuels Obsolete, Even Natural Gas

TacoMac

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Tell that to Georgia power, trying to get their nuclear project shut down because it's billions over budget and decades behind schedule.

Time to do your own homework instead of letting industry lobbyists tell you what to think.
Click to expand...
There's a good reason for that: the design was changed several times.

Originally, it was supposed to be a standard power plant much like the other nuclear plants designed and built in the 60's. Then it went to an upgraded design that was a bit more efficient. Then there was a complete halt at the federal level of all nuclear plant construction. By the time that was undone years later, they had to go back and redo a great deal of work that sat out in the weather rusting the entire time.

Then by the time they got that back up to speed, there was another moratorium handed down by the Federal Government. By the time that expired, they decided to upgrade the plants to a molten salt reactor.

The problem isn't the construction. The problem is all the politics with it's on again off again on again battles primarily caused by big coal and big oil. They don't want nuclear power plants coming in and making them obsolete. They want nuclear on the sidelines until they sell every single pound of coal and gas they have no matter what the costs are to the environment or humanity.
 
Bugeye

Bugeye

Well-Known Member
I'm seeing active solar panels on tons of homes now, especially new builds. It must be getting far more cost effective. I'm curious how much they generate on an overcast day?

I think the newer solar tiles that are also roofing material are brilliant, but better yet are passive solar designs specific to location needs. Combine with passive cooling design and your furnace/AC needs are probably a fraction of trad buildings.
 
Justin-case

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
Bugeye said:
I'm seeing active solar panels on tons of homes now, especially new builds. It must be getting far more cost effective. I'm curious how much they generate on an overcast day?

I think the newer solar tiles that are also roofing material are brilliant, but better yet are passive solar designs specific to location needs. Combine with passive cooling design and your furnace/AC needs are probably a fraction of trad buildings.
Click to expand...
You should wait for a cloudy day and touch your tongue to wires from a solar array to find out.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Bugeye said:
I'm seeing active solar panels on tons of homes now, especially new builds. It must be getting far more cost effective. I'm curious how much they generate on an overcast day?

I think the newer solar tiles that are also roofing material are brilliant, but better yet are passive solar designs specific to location needs. Combine with passive cooling design and your furnace/AC needs are probably a fraction of trad buildings.
Click to expand...
Overcast day? It all depends.

One of the features to look for in a small home solar setup is a charge controller component that works well in low light conditions. Outback brand charge controllers were the balls when I set mine up many years ago, by now it's probably a common feature with other brands. Outback called it "MPPT" , maximum power point tracking. They claim a 30% increase in captured power with this feature.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
ginjawarrior said:
It's not a perfect solution but it is a small one

One power station taking up tens of acres of land will effortlessly provide power that you'd need thousands of wind turbines or square miles of land for solar to get the same results...
Click to expand...
If every house produced enough electricity by PV to be "off-grid", with thermal solar tubes for heating then the remaining demand becomes far less dramatic.

If every large business similarly produced their electricity by PV/thermal on their premises (could even sell some to the grid) it's once again reduced.

You can fill the shortfall with whatever other method you want, but you can't deny solar panels (with storage and inverter) can directly produce immense amounts of electricity on a large scale.
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
If every house produced enough electricity by PV to be "off-grid", with thermal solar tubes for heating then the remaining demand becomes far less dramatic.

If every large business similarly produced their electricity by PV/thermal on their premises (could even sell some to the grid) it's once again reduced.

You can fill the shortfall with whatever other method you want, but you can't deny solar panels (with storage and inverter) can directly produce immense amounts of electricity on a large scale.
Click to expand...
god your so cool when you talk this way..
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
If every house produced enough electricity by PV to be "off-grid", with thermal solar tubes for heating then the remaining demand becomes far less dramatic.

If every large business similarly produced their electricity by PV/thermal on their premises (could even sell some to the grid) it's once again reduced.

You can fill the shortfall with whatever other method you want, but you can't deny solar panels (with storage and inverter) can directly produce immense amounts of electricity on a large scale.
Click to expand...
Good points.
Decentralized power is the way to go with energy production and with human relationships.
 
choomer

choomer

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
It doesn't make sense to combine wind turbines with wild bird refuges. But underwater is another story.
Click to expand...
It does if you use VAWT instead of HAWT technology.

Both soaring birds and wind turbines like windy areas for the same reasons.
Birds have had that reason for millennia. Wind turbines have had it for decades at the most.

I'm just saying that using a different technology could allow both to share the same optimal environment.
Could you please explain how VAWT tech would endanger the birds?
 
ginjawarrior

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
If every house produced enough electricity by PV to be "off-grid", with thermal solar tubes for heating then the remaining demand becomes far less dramatic.

If every large business similarly produced their electricity by PV/thermal on their premises (could even sell some to the grid) it's once again reduced.

You can fill the shortfall with whatever other method you want, but you can't deny solar panels (with storage and inverter) can directly produce immense amounts of electricity on a large scale.
Click to expand...
it is still a drop in the ocean as to what is needed. im all for things like solar roofs and stuff

but roof top solar PV is one of the most inefficient ways to get power

when i said you would need the entire state of arizona that would need to be solar thermal towers and heliostats

you could probably at least double that area for just solar roof top.

saying you can fill the shortfall from what ever other method you want but the shortfall is still the majority of your power needs

and the whole point of this thread was to try to pretend that everything is all sorted and a couple of batteries and solar panels later we wouldnt need coal or gas or nuclear.


and it simply isnt sorted yet
 
ginjawarrior

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
doublejj said:
try the California coastline.....
"A vast field of radioactive debris from Fukushima that is approximately the size of California has crossed the Pacific Ocean and is starting to collide with the west coast."...
https://www.globalresearch.ca/28-signs-that-the-west-coast-is-being-absolutely-fried-with-nuclear-radiation-from-fukushima/5355280
Click to expand...
that is a very poor source...
you'd be more credible posting links from infowars or naturalnews rather than globalresearch

just looking at the first 1 or their "28 signs" it says in the article that it isnt radiation
 
doublejj

doublejj

Well-Known Member
ginjawarrior said:
you mean the reactor that faced aone of the biggest earthquakes ever recorded?

that same reactor that then got hit by a fucking tsunami?
Click to expand...
yeah those ones........earthquakes and tsunami's happen naturally on this planet and we should prepare for them by not building random nuclear bombs across the countryside to explode at the first occasion. :roll:
 
ginjawarrior

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
doublejj said:
yeah those ones........earthquakes and tsunami's happen naturally on this planet and we should prepare for them by not building random nuclear bombs across the countryside to explode at the first occasion. :roll:
Click to expand...
oh come on now seriously??

a nuclear reactor is not the same thing as a nuclear bomb

they wont ever detonate like a nuclear bomb would

earthquakes and tsunamis like what happened at fukishima are a very slight risk

people still live next to the coast even tho this century hundreds of thousands of people have died because of tsunamis

people still live on earthquake zones even though earthquakes have killed hundreds of thousands of people

fukishima killed nobody yet for some strange reason you think thats the thing you need to be scared of
 
doublejj

doublejj

Well-Known Member
ginjawarrior said:
oh come on now seriously??

a nuclear reactor is not the same thing as a nuclear bomb

they wont ever detonate like a nuclear bomb would

earthquakes and tsunamis like what happened at fukishima are a very slight risk

people still live next to the coast even tho this century hundreds of thousands of people have died because of tsunamis

people still live on earthquake zones even though earthquakes have killed hundreds of thousands of people

fukishima killed nobody yet for some strange reason you think thats the thing you need to be scared of
Click to expand...
Yeah nothing to see here, situation normal fukishima.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top