Emerging solar plants scorch birds in mid-air

[birdman]

Yup.  One of our biggest competitive advantages is that, where there are good solar incentives, we can build a solar carport with a final price that's often equal to a regular carport.  Competitors using prebuilt ground mount racking systems are 20-75% higher.

So your competitive advantage is based entirely on charging tax payers to make your product competitive with another product.  That is unfortunately, a sound business model in this sad day and age.

[KD5NRH]

So your competitive advantage is based entirely on charging tax payers to make your product competitive with another product.  That is unfortunately, a sound business model in this sad day and age.

Lots of products have much worse government-imposed business models.  Think about milk, for example; the dairy gets less than ten cents a pound on a good day, and the rest of the >$3 grocery store price for a gallon is complying with .gov requirements, then it gets subsidized heavily for poor folks.

[birdman]

Lots of products have much worse government-imposed business models.  Think about milk, for example; the dairy gets less than ten cents a pound on a good day, and the rest of the >$3 grocery store price for a gallon is complying with .gov requirements, then it gets subsidized heavily for poor folks.

Complying with requirements, or offsetting costs for low-income people is different than an across the board direct subsidy of something in order to make it competitive

[MechAg94]

Wasn't there an article recently about somewhere in Hawaii where they had so much Home solar set up that it was causing problems with the local power utility. 

[HankB]

Lots of products have much worse government-imposed business models.  Think about milk, for example; the dairy gets less than ten cents a pound on a good day, and the rest of the >$3 grocery store price for a gallon is complying with .gov requirements, then it gets subsidized heavily for poor folks.

Ag subsidies and regulations that help keep the price of domestically produced food high are a good part of the reason you see so many imported veggies at the grocery store . . .

[Northwoods]

Well, technically, we ought to have some capacity in plants better suited for peak loading, while nuclear carries the baseload. Current NRC-approved nuke plants aren't great with the big swings in peak loading you commonly see.

I'd like to see the nukes build to over the peak capacity, and then just divert whatever the grid isn't demanding to a plant making synthetic methanol.

Another good idea of birdman's (along with autoclaving the planet ...).

[erictank]

Wind power is unreliable and only cost effective with big subsidies.  You really don't want that as a significant % of your power supply.  To me, it is a niche supply only.

That's exactly what I mean, there. There are (a few, limited) places where it might make sense. Most places, it doesn't, for the reasons you mention.

One of my instructors at North Anna Nuclear Power Plant had a serious mad on for wind as a major contributor to baseload. When he brought up the bit about the power law (where motor speed dropping by a factor of 2 drops power output by a factor of *8*), we pretty much all had to agree that he was right.

I'd like to see the nukes build to over the peak capacity, and then just divert whatever the grid isn't demanding to a plant making synthetic methanol.

Another good idea of birdman's (along with autoclaving the planet ...).

I get tunnel vision sometimes, and focus in too closely. That's a *REALLY* good idea. Ultimately, though, you'd STILL need peaking plants, because the methanol plants kind of become part of the baseload, more or less - they're probably not going to be starting up and shutting down on a whim, while power use out on the grid... does vary that way. I don't think they can, anyways - don't know much about synthetic methanol production.

Got no problem with planning for the future, though. Not like we're ever going to want LESS power to use in our homes and businesses, or ways to make that power portable, which liquid fuel is great for.

[birdman]

That's exactly what I mean, there. There are (a few, limited) places where it might make sense. Most places, it doesn't, for the reasons you mention.

One of my instructors at North Anna Nuclear Power Plant had a serious mad on for wind as a major contributor to baseload. When he brought up the bit about the power law (where motor speed dropping by a factor of 2 drops power output by a factor of *8*), we pretty much all had to agree that he was right.

I get tunnel vision sometimes, and focus in too closely. That's a *REALLY* good idea. Ultimately, though, you'd STILL need peaking plants, because the methanol plants kind of become part of the baseload, more or less - they're probably not going to be starting up and shutting down on a whim, while power use out on the grid... does vary that way. I don't think they can, anyways - don't know much about synthetic methanol production.

Got no problem with planning for the future, though. Not like we're ever going to want LESS power to use in our homes and businesses, or ways to make that power portable, which liquid fuel is great for.

Best peaking plant at that point?  A methanol fueled gas turbine...which, gosh, we already have in spades.
So basically, built nuke to the peak level, run it at that level constantly, divert excess at hourly average to methanol production, accomodate <hour timescale positive demand transients with methanol turbines.

[Scout26]

Peak baseload generally occurs  during daylight hours and drops off dramactially overnight.  That would be the best time for methanol production as there is a tremendous amount of unused capacity.

Also night time is generally when the wind dies (that whole glowing ball in the sky heating the air and making it move thing is missing.)

An aquantance does load balancing for ComEd here in Chicago.  He hates, hate, hates with a blue-white hot passion wind trubines.