Green Energy Revolution Megathread

[dps]

There's an interim goal for 2025, which is less than 8 years off - very quick if you consider lead times to construct power generation and distribution facilities.  That would require very immediate significant action to meet.  2045 is not that far off either.  Power purchase agreements often contemplate 20 year terms, following a planning and construct time of several years.

You're implying a relationship between proposed bill and new capacity construction which is not warranted given the information contained in the article.

Don't think he is.  He's just saying that unless other significant action is taken right away to do something to implement the goals set out in the bill, then the bill is indeed just PR.

[grumbler]

There's an interim goal for 2025, which is less than 8 years off - very quick if you consider lead times to construct power generation and distribution facilities.  That would require very immediate significant action to meet.  2045 is not that far off either.  Power purchase agreements often contemplate 20 year terms, following a planning and construct time of several years.

You're implying a relationship between proposed bill and new capacity construction which is not warranted given the information contained in the article.

Don't think he is.  He's just saying that unless other significant action is taken right away to do something to implement the goals set out in the bill, then the bill is indeed just PR.

So long as we ignore the meaning of "PR," that might indeed be said.  I'd argue that the contention that "the bill is indeed just PR" is true only so long as that is it's intent.  If there is intent, even frustrated intent, to meet the goal, then it is not "just PR."

[crazy canuck]

When I hear "X just wants PR" I hear "it's just talk and won't happen." Is that what you're saying?

What I'm saying is if it happens, it won't be because of this bill.

Yeah, there is a much better chance of this happening with the do nothing option 

[dps]

There's an interim goal for 2025, which is less than 8 years off - very quick if you consider lead times to construct power generation and distribution facilities.  That would require very immediate significant action to meet.  2045 is not that far off either.  Power purchase agreements often contemplate 20 year terms, following a planning and construct time of several years.

You're implying a relationship between proposed bill and new capacity construction which is not warranted given the information contained in the article.

Don't think he is.  He's just saying that unless other significant action is taken right away to do something to implement the goals set out in the bill, then the bill is indeed just PR.

So long as we ignore the meaning of "PR," that might indeed be said.  I'd argue that the contention that "the bill is indeed just PR" is true only so long as that is it's intent.  If there is intent, even frustrated intent, to meet the goal, then it is not "just PR."

Let's put it this way, then:  if they pass a bill setting a goal, but take no action to do anything to implement polices to reach that goal, then passing the bill might have well just been a PR move, no matter how sincerely they would like to meet the goal.

[grumbler]

Let's put it this way, then:  if they pass a bill setting a goal, but take no action to do anything to implement polices to reach that goal, then passing the bill might have well just been a PR move, no matter how sincerely they would like to meet the goal.

This is true;  talk without action has the same result whether or not action was intended.  However, I don't think it useful to declare that all talk without immediate action is PR.  Goal setting is important and can motivate subsequent action that would be rejected unless it was designed to meet a goal.

[jimmy olsen]

I guess he felt his previous work just wasn't good enough.

Tesla's model S already has a range of 210-315 miles, triple that and you get a range of 630-945 miles which blows even fuel efficient cars out of the water.
https://news.utexas.edu/2017/02/28/goodenough-introduces-new-battery-technology

Lithium-Ion Battery Inventor Introduces New Technology for Fast-Charging, Noncombustible Batteries

Feb. 28, 2017

AUSTIN, Texas — A team of engineers led by 94-year-old John Goodenough, professor in the Cockrell School of Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin and co-inventor of the lithium-ion battery, has developed the first all-solid-state battery cells that could lead to safer, faster-charging, longer-lasting rechargeable batteries for handheld mobile devices, electric cars and stationary energy storage.

Goodenough's latest breakthrough, completed with Cockrell School senior research fellow Maria Helena Braga, is a low-cost all-solid-state battery that is noncombustible and has a long cycle life (battery life) with a high volumetric energy density and fast rates of charge and discharge. The engineers describe their new technology in a recent paper published in the journal Energy & Environmental Science.

"Cost, safety, energy density, rates of charge and discharge and cycle life are critical for battery-driven cars to be more widely adopted. We believe our discovery solves many of the problems that are inherent in today's batteries," Goodenough said.

The researchers demonstrated that their new battery cells have at least three times as much energy density as today's lithium-ion batteries. A battery cell's energy density gives an electric vehicle its driving range, so a higher energy density means that a car can drive more miles between charges. The UT Austin battery formulation also allows for a greater number of charging and discharging cycles, which equates to longer-lasting batteries, as well as a faster rate of recharge (minutes rather than hours).

Today's lithium-ion batteries use liquid electrolytes to transport the lithium ions between the anode (the negative side of the battery) and the cathode (the positive side of the battery). If a battery cell is charged too quickly, it can cause dendrites or "metal whiskers" to form and cross through the liquid electrolytes, causing a short circuit that can lead to explosions and fires. Instead of liquid electrolytes, the researchers rely on glass electrolytes that enable the use of an alkali-metal anode without the formation of dendrites.

The use of an alkali-metal anode (lithium, sodium or potassium) — which isn't possible with conventional batteries — increases the energy density of a cathode and delivers a long cycle life. In experiments, the researchers' cells have demonstrated more than 1,200 cycles with low cell resistance.

Additionally, because the solid-glass electrolytes can operate, or have high conductivity, at -20 degrees Celsius, this type of battery in a car could perform well in subzero degree weather. This is the first all-solid-state battery cell that can operate under 60 degree Celsius.

Braga began developing solid-glass electrolytes with colleagues while she was at the University of Porto in Portugal. About two years ago, she began collaborating with Goodenough and researcher Andrew J. Murchison at UT Austin. Braga said that Goodenough brought an understanding of the composition and properties of the solid-glass electrolytes that resulted in a new version of the electrolytes that is now patented through the UT Austin Office of Technology Commercialization.

The engineers' glass electrolytes allow them to plate and strip alkali metals on both the cathode and the anode side without dendrites, which simplifies battery cell fabrication.

Another advantage is that the battery cells can be made from earth-friendly materials.

"The glass electrolytes allow for the substitution of low-cost sodium for lithium. Sodium is extracted from seawater that is widely available," Braga said.

Goodenough and Braga are continuing to advance their battery-related research and are working on several patents. In the short term, they hope to work with battery makers to develop and test their new materials in electric vehicles and energy storage devices.

This research is supported by UT Austin, but there are no grants associated with this work. The UT Austin Office of Technology Commercialization is actively negotiating license agreements with multiple companies engaged in a variety of battery-related industry segments.

[viper37]

a battery that works in the cold, that's pretty great!

[jimmy olsen]

This could really help accelerate the already blistering pace of solar installation. I'm just eyeballing it, but a skyscrapper could easily install ten to twenty times as much solar capacity as what they could put on their roofs if they replace all their windows.

http://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/8152/researchers-develop-technology-for-affordable-solar-windows

Researchers Develop Technology for Affordable Solar Windows

Dawn Allcot

22 February 2017

Solar energy provider SolarCity has already developed aesthetically pleasing solar roof tiles. But the next step in solar could be even more seamless and efficient: Solar windows.

Windows have long been the primary tool of passive solar applications, harnessing the power of the sun for natural light and warmth during the day. Now, researchers at the University of Minnesota and University of Milano-Bicocca have developed technology that could transform ordinary looking windows into active solar arrays. The windows use high-tech silicon nanoparticles embedded in the glass as efficient luminescent solar concentrators (LSCs), which collect the useful frequencies of light. Photovoltaic cells hidden in the window frame then convert that light into useful energy to power homes and businesses.

The Next Frontier in Renewable Energy Technology

These photovoltaic windows can increase a building's capacity for energy generation, expanding solar capabilities beyond the rooftop in an aesthetically pleasing manner. Passsersby will see no difference between PV windows and regular windows.

Silicon Particles Make Solar PV Windows Affordable, Environmentally Safe

Prior research to integrate solar concentrators and solar cells into building design used complex nanostructures based on cadmium, lead, or indium. The prior two are potentially toxic, while the latter is rare and expensive. Silicon, on the other hand, is abundant, affordable, and non-toxic.

How It Works

"At this size, silicon's properties change and it becomes an efficient light emitter, with the important property not to re-absorb its own luminescence. This is the key feature that makes silicon nanoparticles ideally suited for LSC applications," said University of Minnesota mechanical engineering professor Uwe Kortshagen, in an article on the University of Minnesota website. He is the inventor of the process for creating silicon nanoparticles and one of the senior authors of the study.

The silicon nanoparticles are produced in a high-tech process using a plasma reactor and formed into a powder.

"The powder is turned into an ink-like solution and then embedded into a polymer, either forming a sheet of flexible plastic material or coating a surface with a thin film," Samantha Ehrenberg, a University of Minnesota mechanical Ph.D. student and another first author of the study.

Funding for the research study includes a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Basic Science Center for Advanced Solar Photophysics, an Energy Frontier Research Center and a grant from the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme. Ehrenberg also received funding from a National Science Foundation (NSF) Fellowship and the Benjamin Y.H. and Helen Liu Fellowship.

The research is published today in Nature Photonics, a peer-reviewed scientific journal published by the Nature Publishing Group.

[jimmy olsen]

Algeria has some big plans

http://allafrica.com/stories/201703060217.html

The country has outlined an ambitious National Renewable Energy Program that seeks to install about 22,000 megawatts (MW) of clean energy by 2030. Nearly 10,000MW of that total would be exported.

[Archy]

With the solar energy don't we have in Europe the problem that we can get dependent on the solar energy from North-Africa, Middle East since in the desserts there's always sun. So just replacing oil with solar energy.

[viper37]

With the solar energy don't we have in Europe the problem that we can get dependent on the solar energy from North-Africa, Middle East since in the desserts there's always sun. So just replacing oil with solar energy.

you got some sun in the summer and in southern Europe.  The North European countries will have some winds all year long.  I think the idea would be to mix & match all energy sources: hydro-power, nuclear power, wind power, solar power and natural gas to heat ourselves in winter, where it's necessary.

If we combine all energy sources to provide mix to every country, we should reduce dependancy on one single source held by one single territory.

[jimmy olsen]

Whether it's Tesla that masters this market or someone else, this is the future of energy.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/08/tesla-battery-packs-power-the-hawaiian-island-of-kauai-after-dark.html

Tesla battery packs power the Hawaiian island of Kauai after dark

Phil LeBeau   | @Lebeaucarnews
8 Hours Ago
CNBC.com

While investors on Wall Street debate whether Tesla's ambitious transformation from electric car maker to sustainable energy company will pay off, its industrial power packs are already having an impact on at least one state.

In Hawaii, the Kauai Island Utility Cooperative (KIUC) is now drawing energy from 272 Tesla power packs to provide electricity after dark. While the island previously relied on solar and other renewable energy during the day, it had no way to store the sun's power after it went down.

Using stored energy from Tesla's power packs is expected to save KIUC 1.6 million gallons of diesel fuel annually, which has traditionally been the way the utility generates power after dark.

Tesla says the power packs will cut KIUC costs per kilowatt hour from 15.5 cents down to 13.9 cents. The 13.9 cents is a fixed price for the next 20 years.

For Kauai, the chance to cut the use and fluctuating costs of diesel fuel is what makes Tesla's energy storage system so attractive. Yet for Wall Street analysts, it isn't enough to convince them that the Tesla's energy initiatives will be enough to move the needle.

"At this time, we ascribe zero value to Tesla shares from this business," Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas told investors. "We take this view due to the uncertain economic and regulatory forces facing the energy business, particularly the solar business."

In an interview with CNBC on Wednesday, Tesla Chief Technical Officer JB Straubel attributed analyst skepticism to the fact that solar and energy storage form a new market.

"I think it is a little difficult to see into the future sometimes and see how it is going to grow," Straubel told CNBC. "There are no immediate comparables that they can look to in the past and show how this growth happened."

But, he added, "the size of the utility grid and the electricity consumed around the world is enormous. That is the market that we are tapping into here."

Straubel also expects the economics of renewable energy to become increasingly favorable over those of fossil fuels.

"The energy markets are obviously volatile," he said. "They will continue to be volatile, and these technologies are coming down in price every single year. So we don't see this changing and the long-term trend is going to be the same."

Shareholders approved a merger between Tesla and SolarCity in November, with Tesla scooping up Elon Musk's solar energy firm for $2.6 billion. But while the company's revenue has grown rapidly over the years, high costs have kept it from earning a profit in all but two quarters.

SolarCity plays a major role in the company's Kauai project. There are nearly 55,000 solar panels spread over 50 acres generating electricity that is stored in the power packs and discharged to KIUC after the sun goes down.

"As a state, we know how to generate power," Hawaii Gov. David Ige told CNBC. "For us, the challenge has been storing that power to use at night. Now we can do that."

[jimmy olsen]

Indian Solar Capacity has tripled in the last three years.

http://m.deccanherald.com/articles.php?name=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.deccanherald.com%2Fcontent%2F600540%2Findia-crosses-10gw-solar-power.html

India crosses 10GW solar power milestone today

NEW DELHI, MAR 10, 2017, (PTI)
DeccanHerald

India's solar power generation capacity has touched 10,000 MW mark today, registering a three time increase in less than three years.

"Bright Future: India has crossed 10,000 MW of Solar power capacity today. More than 3 times increase in less than 3 years," Power, Coal, Mines, New & Renewable Energy Minister Piyush Goyal tweeted.

India solar power generation capacity stood at 2,650 MW on May 26, 2014. India has set an ambitious target of adding 100 GW of solar power generation capacity and 175 GW of overall renewable energy capacity by 2022.

Earlier last month, the lower capital expenditure and cheaper credit had pulled down solar tariff to a new low of Rs 2.97 per unit in an auction conducted for 750 MW capacity in Rewa Solar Park in Madhya Pradesh.

The auction was conducted by a joint venture of Madhya Pradesh government and Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI).

Last year in January, solar power tariff had dropped to a new low, with Finland-based energy firm Fortum Finnsurya Energy quoting Rs 4.34 a unit to bag the mandate to set up a 70-MW solar plant under NTPC's Bhadla Solar Park tender.

In November 2015, the tariff had touched Rs 4.63 per unit following aggressive bidding by US-based SunEdison, the world's biggest developer of renewable energy power plants.

[jimmy olsen]

Haven't heard much from Mono lately. Wonder why? 

That 15% figure seems ridiculously low. Wikipedia already lists that at 23%. Are they not taking China's massive hydro power into account? 
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-energy-renewables-idUSKBN14P06P

China to plow $361 billion into renewable fuel by 2020

China will plow 2.5 trillion yuan ($361 billion) into renewable power generation by 2020, the country's energy agency said on Thursday, as the world's largest energy market continues to shift away from dirty coal power towards cleaner fuels.

The investment will create over 13 million jobs in the sector, the National Energy Administration (NEA) said in a blueprint document that lays out its plan to develop the nation's energy sector during the five-year 2016 to 2020 period.

The NEA said installed renewable power capacity including wind, hydro, solar and nuclear power will contribute to about half of new electricity generation by 2020.

The agency did not disclose more details on where the funds, which equate to about $72 billion each year, would be spent.

Still, the investment reflects Beijing's continued focus on curbing the use of fossil fuels, which have fostered the country's economic growth over the past decade, as it ramps up its war on pollution.

Last month, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the country's economic planner, said in its own five-year plan, that solar power will receive 1 trillion yuan of spending, as the country seeks to boost capacity by five times. That's equivalent to about 1,000 major solar power plants, according to experts' estimates.

The spending comes as the cost of building large-scale solar plants has dropped by as much as 40 percent since 2010. China became the world's top solar generator last year.

"The government may exceed these targets because there are more investment opportunities in the sector as costs go down," said Steven Han, renewable analyst with securities firm Shenyin Wanguo.

Some 700 billion yuan will go towards wind farms, 500 billion to hydro power with tidal and geothermal getting the rest, the NDRC said.

The NEA's job creation forecast differs from the NDRC's in December that said it expected an additional 3 million jobs, bringing the total in the sector to 13 million by 2020.

Concerns about the social and economic costs of China's air pollution have increased as the northern parts of the country, including the capital Beijing, have battled a weeks-long bout of hazardous smog.

Illustrating the enormity of the challenge, the NEA repeated on Thursday that renewables will still only account for just 15 percent of overall energy consumption by 2020, equivalent to 580 million tonnes of coal.

More than half of the nation's installed power capacity will still be fueled by coal over the same period.

(Reporting by Meng Meng and Beijing Monitoring Desk; Writing by Josephine Mason; Editing by Michael Perry and Christian Schmollinger)

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/01/chinese-government-has-ordered-103-planned-coal-plants-to-be-cancelled/

This week, China's Energy Administration issued a directive to cancel planning and construction on 85 coal plants in the country, according to The New York Times. An additional 18 were ordered to be canceled late last year. The 103 plants represent an astounding 120GW of capacity that would have come online for the country in the coming years.

...

[Eddie Teach]

Mono is too busy jet-setting.