

Spain has found a controversial way to boost solar adoption











Comments     Threshold


RE: Smart but not so...
By Golgatha on 5/13/2009 9:09:59 AM , Rating: 2
Now if I could install enough solar on my roof and sell the excess capacity back to my power company at 7x their rate, you better believe I'd adopt solar power in a hurry.

RE: Smart but not so...
By Belard on 5/13/2009 9:34:46 AM , Rating: 1
Heres the thing...

1 - Solar Tech is improving very quickly. In another 3~5 years, it SHOULD be just as cheap as coal.

2 - If its cheap, unlike a power plant (coar / nuke) Anyone can buy it and install it on their roof or their yard. Remember on DT - they're's tech that'll allow your windows to be solar collectors.

3 - it creates NO (or little) pollution, other than manufactering the solar collectors.

4 - If many people buy their own, it reduces the drain on the electrical system

5 - if everyone has one, it can help re-charge their electric cars. Because AS OF NOW, eletric cars STILL require power from Coal / Nuke plants which generate pollution / waste.

6 - we WILL run out of coal or have to dig even deeper and we WILL run out of gas. The Sun and Win, those aren't going anywhere soon. And we need OIL for grease/lube for electric motors and airplanes / space craft engines.

RE: Smart but not so...
By FITCamaro on 5/13/2009 10:50:53 AM , Rating: 2
By the time we have to worry about running out of coal, we will almost certainly have perfected fusion.

And if you want to buy solar cells for personal use fine. But YOU pay for it. If I buy a home in an area where solar cells would be practical, I'd consider putting them up myself so I wouldn't have to pay a power bill and to add value to my home.

RE: Smart but not so...
By Keeir on 5/13/2009 3:04:01 PM , Rating: 2
Here's the Thing


This has been said for more than 25 years. In reality, it appears that Solar is at least 5 times as expensive as coal. Which the US doesn't even really build all the often because its (coal) is considered more business expensive than natural gas. There is no rational, logical, or scientific reason to believe that Solar, a technology that has existed for well over 50 years will suddeny drop in price 50% a year for the next few years.


Only when combined with an adquate electrical system. I see it quite differently. Increased home usage of Solar/Wind will lead to additional inconsistencies and uncertainities in the level of power required at any one particular hour. While not "overcomable", planning for Sun and Wind patterns will make grid control more expensive and result most likely in additional margin being built in the amount of power being generated... adding expense as wasted power goes up. Its not really a "slam dunk" in terms of lower the stress on the electrical system.

RE: Smart but not so...
By Solandri on 5/13/2009 4:00:08 PM , Rating: 2

Current mass-market solar panels are about 15%-20% efficient. Solar has been able to piggyback on the enormous advances in semiconductor manufacturing by the computer industry, so I doubt you'll see much reduction in their manufacturing costs due to high adoption of solar. So you're left with efficiency as the only means of improving price.

If solar currently costs about 5x as much as coal, then making it just as cheap as coal would require panels which are 75%-100% efficient. The chances of us reaching that point in 3-5 years is virtually nil. I'd reckon we're several billion times more likely to be hit by a planet-killing asteroid in the next 3-5 years than for solar to reach the cost of coal.


Without ginormous batteries to store that solar energy during the day (when you're at work) so you can use it at night (when there's no sun), the house will still need to be hooked up to the grid and we will still need coal/nuke power plants.

And windows that are solar collectors mean no (or less) light gets into your house. Kinda pointless to turn your windows into solar collectors if it forces you to turn the lights on inside the house during the day.


I dunno about you, but I drive my car to work during the day. Installing a solar powered car recharging system at home isn't going to do me any good because my car isn't there most of the time the sun is up.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for alternate energy. But a lot of the proponents of solar are advocating it simply for the sake of it being alternate energy. They're putting very little thought into how practical it is. Of the alternate energy technologies I've seen, I would rank them from most practical to least as: hydro, geothermal, biofuels (use plants as solar collectors!), maybe fusion, and way down the list wind, and dead last solar.

RE: Smart but not so...
By greylica on 5/13/2009 7:06:40 PM , Rating: 2
Some Facts:

A 65cm X 100cm solar panel will only generate (in very sunny days) 85W X 12V~14V in 5~6 hours a day.
We have to use static sealed batteries to store that energy.
In My Apartment, I have 6 windows available to install those solar panels.
Then I could have in a sunny day, (assuming 85W x 5 H X 6 Panels) 510W/H X 12V~14V.
This will give me 2550W X 12V~14V per day at maximum.

Cost to implement (here, but converted to U$):
4950 U$.

Then, what can I do with this little amount of energy ?
Using 12V Led Lamp, equivalent to a 100W incandescent lamp
will consume 6W per lamp directly in 12Volts. I use 8 here, and will assume 2 Hours for each.
Then 96 W (I will assume 100). Using an inverter, will lost between 15~20% of the energy,
2550w-100w (Lamps) = 2450w -20% (inverter)= 1960W available in 127Volts
PC + Monitor (idle) 120W
PC + Monitor (Gaming, or rendering 3D anims (My work)) 300W
6~7 hours a day work

Now, the worst part...

Assuming 0,45 cents per KW Here,using 2550W (brute energy)
as directly generate by the panels each day
Will give me 1,1475 U$ per day in full usage
(all lamps, my PC )

30 days = U$ 34,425 each month

4950 U$ to implement divided to 34,425=143 month

WOW - Error, it´s not 4 years, it´s 12 years !

OK, but they raise the cost of energy every 2 years...

Using the last downgrade in my pocket they
did here in Brazil (20,19 %) will cut the
time to recover the cost near 7~8 years.

Those panels last 20 years, the rest of recoverable costs
will be used to battery maintenance when needed.
(every 5 years)

This way, I will have at least 8 Years
to recover my pocket, using those
speculative calculations.

But the pleasure to not give the money

RE: Smart but not so...
Assuming 0,45 cents per KW Here,




But the pleasure to not give the money


RE: Smart but not so...
By highlandsun on 5/14/2009 12:07:58 AM , Rating: 2
You don't necessarily have to have batteries on-site, though that might make some other things easier. You can sell your excess electricity back to the utility companies during the day, and then buy it back at night. That's the ultimate in perfect investments - buy low, sell high - demand and prices are higher by day, lower by night...

By the way, thin film silicon solar panels are transparent. The notion that putting panels over all your windows is going to keep your house dark is pretty silly. In regions where there's a lot of sun exposure, where it's worthwhile to mount these panels, you're going to be doing yourself a favor because it will reduce the light from intense levels to moderate levels, and it will reduce heat buildup as well, thus lowering your cooling costs at the same time.

As for solar and recharging electric cars - I guess that's questionable. I think one of the ideal targets for solar installation is to cover over parking lots. That would help reduce the occurrence of urban heat islands as well. If your workplace is progressive, this may work out for you. And even if not, you still have the advantage of being able to sell any excess electricity back to the utility companies.

Maybe you think you've thought about this more than other people, but I don't think you've thought it through enough yet.

RE: Smart but not so...
1->sounds familiar as other have said






