Fantastic news!
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-17/what-just-happened-to-solar-and-wind-is-a-really-big-deal
QuoteWhat Just Happened in Solar Is a Bigger Deal Than Oil Exports
The impact: $73 billion in new investment in the U.S.
The clean-energy boom is about to be transformed. In a surprise move, U.S. lawmakers agreed to extend tax credits for solar and wind for another five years. This will give an unprecedented boost to the industry and change the course of deployment in the U.S.
The extension will add an extra 20 gigawatts of solar power—more than every panel ever installed in the U.S. prior to 2015, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF). The U.S. was already one of the world's biggest clean-energy investors. This deal is like adding another America of solar power into the mix.
The wind credit will contribute another 19 gigawatts over five years. Combined, the extensions will spur more than $73 billion of investment and supply enough electricity to power 8 million U.S. homes, according to BNEF.
"This is massive," said Ethan Zindler, head of U.S. policy analysis at BNEF. In the short term, the deal will speed up the shift from fossil fuels more than the global climate deal struck this month in Paris and more than Barack Obama's Clean Power Plan that regulates coal plants, Zindler said.
This is exactly the sort of bridge the industry needed. The costs of installing wind and solar power have dropped precipitously—by more than 90 percent since the original tax credits took effect—but in most places coal and natural gas are still cheaper than unsubsidized renewables. By the time the new tax credit expires, solar and wind will be the cheapest forms of new electricity in many states across the U.S.
The tax credits, valued at about $25 billion over five years, will drive $38 billion of investment in solar and $35 billion in wind through 2021, according to BNEF. The scale of the new projects will help push costs down further and will stimulate new investment that lasts beyond the extension of the credits.
Few people in the industry expected a five-year extension. Stocks soared. SolarCity, the biggest rooftop installer, surged 34 percent yesterday. SunEdison, the largest renewable-energy developer, climbed 25 percent, and panelmaker SunPower increased 14 percent.
Congress is expected to vote by the end of this week on the tax credits as part of a broader budget deal that also lifts the 40-year-old ban on U.S. oil exports. Oil producers have lobbied for years to lift the ban, but it isn't likely to significantly affect either consumption of oil or deployment of renewables. Leaders from both parties reached an agreement on the bill late Tuesday.
The 30 percent solar tax credit was set to expire next year and will now extend through 2019 before tapering to 10 percent in 2022. The wind credit had expired at the end of 2014, and the extension will be retroactively applied from the start of 2015 through 2019, declining in value each year.
Wind power has had an especially tumultuous relationship with U.S. lawmakers, who have kept the industry's credits alive through a disruptive ping-pong game of short-term extensions every year or two. "You open manufacturing plants and then you close them. And then you open them and you close them," BNEF's Zindler said. "It's economically inefficient. This will give them a good five-year line of sight on what the market will look like, and that's really important."
Good.
Hey Spicey...might this create: Green Jobs?
At the recent conference I attended the solar and wind people are pretty damn salty these days, they know they are about to make billions. They knew even if the tax credit went away they were in great shape.
We need more nuclear.
I can imagine solar being quite useful in parts of the USA. eg Texas in summer when the need for aircon and lots of sunshine coincide. In the UK solar's contribution is confined to periods of well below peak demand, so it just undercuts baseload producers at those times.
Yeah, I think the real breakthrough for solar will come when we finally, if ever, develop a very efficient means of being able to store energy in a somewhat dormant state (which really, is why fossil fuels have served us so well) for long periods of time.
What we really need are energon cubes.
Wow even Bloomberg is using clickbait-style headlines now? :bleeding:
What's wrong with "Congress to extend green energy tax credits"?
Solar panels on the roof is a big boom here. A fad, even. It's too bad all the solar companies are crap because I'd be investing in it otherwise.
Quote from: celedhring on December 22, 2015, 03:38:10 AM
Wow even Bloomberg is using clickbait-style headlines now? :bleeding:
What's wrong with "Congress to extend green energy tax credits"?
Yeah, not to mention hyperbole. I am not sure why extending an existing tax credit can be characterized as "an unprecedented boost to the industry".
"Unprecedentedly boost solar energy with this one weird trick"
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 22, 2015, 12:04:18 PM
Quote from: celedhring on December 22, 2015, 03:38:10 AM
Wow even Bloomberg is using clickbait-style headlines now? :bleeding:
What's wrong with "Congress to extend green energy tax credits"?
Yeah, not to mention hyperbole. I am not sure why extending an existing tax credit can be characterized as "an unprecedented boost to the industry".
"Unprecedented" is obviously wrong; however the extension is a pretty big deal for the industry.
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2015, 11:05:58 PM
Hey Spicey...might this create: Green Jobs?
At the recent conference I attended the solar and wind people are pretty damn salty these days, they know they are about to make billions. They knew even if the tax credit went away they were in great shape.
So the credits are too big, and the same could have been achieved with smaller credits.
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2015, 11:05:58 PM
Hey Spicey...might this create: Green Jobs?
Damned straight. And Spiessyndra Industries is fully prepared to get its hands on some of that government sugar.
I still feel Norway's clean, non-polluting oil would be preferable.
Quote from: Norgy on December 22, 2015, 03:13:57 PM
I still feel Norway's clean, non-polluting oil would be preferable.
I'd prefer if the US would invest in clean, non-polluting Alberta oil sands oil. :(
I'd rather burn some sweet Gaia-loving Venezuelan oil than either of those inferior choices.
Nothing wrong with good old Chinese coal.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 07:49:24 PM
Nothing wrong with good old Chinese coal.
You don't have a place to plug in your car.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 22, 2015, 08:03:06 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 07:49:24 PM
Nothing wrong with good old Chinese coal.
You don't have a place to plug in your car.
Hong Kong's electricity generators burn coal :contract:
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on December 22, 2015, 03:08:15 AM
I can imagine solar being quite useful in parts of the USA. eg Texas in summer when the need for aircon and lots of sunshine coincide. In the UK solar's contribution is confined to periods of well below peak demand, so it just undercuts baseload producers at those times.
I've considered putting solar panels on my roof for this reason, but a) as mentioned a lot of the dealers/people involved always seem a little shady (heh), and b) the homeowners association might freak out. I haven't asked, but they seem like excitable types. I need to move out into the sticks or something to get away from those weirdos. There are several houses out on the edges of Helotes (a town just outside San Antonio that I live right next to) that have these big solar array type things lined up on their property. Not huge solar farms or anything crazy like that, but much more than what you could put on your roof.
Most people live in high rise buildings here, so solar panels or whatnot are not realistic in Hong Kong. The only individual decision that is relevant is if we buy cars that run on electricity or petroleum. There is no chance in hell that I'll buy electric.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 08:54:14 PM
There is no chance in hell that I'll buy electric.
No? Any particular reason? They seem kind of interesting, or at least the ones I've seen around here do. Well okay the Teslas I've seen are interesting (they're also extremely fast), even with the kind of weird touch screen that takes up the whole center of the dash board. The Volts look like standard Chevy cars, which aren't interesting, and I haven't really noticed any other ones so I guess they just blend in.
E: If you've never seen one, here's what they look like:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com%2Fimages%2FAuto%2Fizmo%2Fi5300%2F2015_tesla_model_s_dashboard.jpg&hash=edd11684fd1024794ddf9b9b93bfddb96e8060f4)
It's certainly a different approach to the usual knobs and smaller touchscreens and whatnot that would be there in a "regular" vehicle, it's just a little jarring to me, with a big rectangle screen right there.
Quote from: MadBurgerMaker on December 22, 2015, 09:01:05 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 08:54:14 PM
There is no chance in hell that I'll buy electric.
No? Any particular reason? They seem kind of interesting, or at least the ones I've seen around here do. Well okay the Teslas I've seen are interesting (they're also extremely fast), even with the kind of weird touch screen that takes up the whole center of the dash board. The Volts look like standard Chevy cars, which aren't interesting, and I haven't really noticed any other ones so I guess they just blend in.
They are expensive, and there is a lack of infrastructure to support them. I can't recharge them at home. Owners' committee won't install and won't let anybody install such facilities in the carpark. I need to compete with others for the recharge facilities at work or in the malls. In any case, petroleum cost only account for a tiny fraction of the recurrent costs of car ownership. Like, less than 5%.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 09:04:56 PM
They are expensive, and there is a lack of infrastructure to support them. I can't recharge them at home. Owners' committee won't install and won't let anybody install such facilities in the carpark. I need to compete with others for the recharge facilities at work or in the malls. In any case, petroleum cost only account for a tiny fraction of the recurrent costs of car ownership. Like, less than 5%.
Fair enough. If there wasn't a place to charge them over night without a fight, that would be a pretty major deal breaker for me too. I know some of them that even aren't all electric essentially require a house and garage because they have this charging station thing that you have to wire up in there (Audi e-tron). Me, I'm stupidly fanboyishly excited about a possible hybrid F-150 that uses their pretty slick smaller sized ecoboost motor + their new lighter weight aluminum body. :blush: I work like 6 miles from my house and am fascinated by the idea that I might be able to drive there and back on electric only a couple times a week while still having a useful vehicle like my truck.
I'm happy with a used Toyota Corolla that moves.
Question just popped in my head: why has Tesla never done any product placement? Seems like a natural, no?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 22, 2015, 09:18:03 PM
Question just popped in my head: why has Tesla never done any product placement? Seems like a natural, no?
They're pretty pricey still, so maybe that has something to do with it. Regular Joe Sixpack might think it's awesome, but the S is like $70k starting. They also have that SUV type thing with the super slow automatic gullwing doors, but I think that one is expensive too. I want to say Musk has talked about making one that is affordable for regular people, so maybe you'll start seeing them in stuff then. I dunno, maybe the S and the other one will show up in movies or TV shows instead of Lambos or Ferraris or something.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 22, 2015, 02:13:16 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on December 22, 2015, 12:04:18 PM
Quote from: celedhring on December 22, 2015, 03:38:10 AM
Wow even Bloomberg is using clickbait-style headlines now? :bleeding:
What's wrong with "Congress to extend green energy tax credits"?
Yeah, not to mention hyperbole. I am not sure why extending an existing tax credit can be characterized as "an unprecedented boost to the industry".
"Unprecedented" is obviously wrong; however the extension is a pretty big deal for the industry.
Sure. Its an important public policy decision to continue supporting that sector. A good news story could have been written around that theme.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 08:14:13 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 22, 2015, 08:03:06 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 07:49:24 PM
Nothing wrong with good old Chinese coal.
You don't have a place to plug in your car.
Hong Kong's electricity generators burn coal :contract:
Was saying oil is better cause it will power your car.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 22, 2015, 02:15:22 PM
So the credits are too big, and the same could have been achieved with smaller credits.
In fact the industry representatives were recommending the credit be reduced slowly over time. So yeah the credit is probably way too big.
THANKS OBAMA!
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 07:49:24 PM
Nothing wrong with good old Chinese coal.
Well except for the rising costs and infrastructure problems I discussed in the other thread :P
Quote from: derspiess on December 22, 2015, 03:08:33 PM
Quote from: Valmy on December 21, 2015, 11:05:58 PM
Hey Spicey...might this create: Green Jobs?
Damned straight. And Spiessyndra Industries is fully prepared to get its hands on some of that government sugar.
:thumbsup:
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 08:54:14 PM
Most people live in high rise buildings here, so solar panels or whatnot are not realistic in Hong Kong.
They can line high rise windows with transparent solar panels these days.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 23, 2015, 01:47:13 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 08:54:14 PM
Most people live in high rise buildings here, so solar panels or whatnot are not realistic in Hong Kong.
They can line high rise windows with transparent solar panels these days.
I'm sure they can. Just won't make much of a difference. Imagine a 70-storey residential building. Adding a couple of solar panels on top will supply enough electricity for, what, half a family?
Quote from: Monoriu on December 23, 2015, 01:57:01 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on December 23, 2015, 01:47:13 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 22, 2015, 08:54:14 PM
Most people live in high rise buildings here, so solar panels or whatnot are not realistic in Hong Kong.
They can line high rise windows with transparent solar panels these days.
I'm sure they can. Just won't make much of a difference. Imagine a 70-storey residential building. Adding a couple of solar panels on top will supply enough electricity for, what, half a family?
I'm guessing a bit more than that...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcleantechnica.com%2Ffiles%2F2011%2F11%2FSolar-Skyscraper.jpg&hash=9edeb1f70cfc8464362a238c07a3538f91c6ec30)
The technology doesn't exist for now. Even if it does, who is going to pay for the costs of installing them? Replacing my windows is very expensive and troublesome. I, as a home owner, will not agree to this unless there are significant monetary benefits. My electricity bill is not significant enough to justify the costs of replacing my windows.
And then there is the question of the Owners' Committee. They won't let individual owners decide if they'll get their own solar panels. The building will look ugly, decreasing its value. There'll be a vote, and good luck getting half the owners to agree.
Quote from: Malthus on December 22, 2015, 12:07:16 PM
"Unprecedentedly boost solar energy with this one weird trick"
"Coal producers hate these guys"
Quote from: Valmy on December 23, 2015, 01:03:00 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 22, 2015, 02:15:22 PM
So the credits are too big, and the same could have been achieved with smaller credits.
In fact the industry representatives were recommending the credit be reduced slowly over time. So yeah the credit is probably way too big.
Sure the idea is that solar will continue to approach cost parity over time.
But I would be curious who in the industry is talking down the credits. And whether is it out of altruistic concern for the fisc or desire to see smaller competitors flushed out . . .
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 22, 2015, 03:11:03 AM
Yeah, I think the real breakthrough for solar will come when we finally, if ever, develop a very efficient means of being able to store energy in a somewhat dormant state (which really, is why fossil fuels have served us so well) for long periods of time.
What we really need are energon cubes.
On the domestic level, the Tesla Powerwall has problems but it's a step in the right direction.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 23, 2015, 02:53:36 AM
Quote from: Valmy on December 23, 2015, 01:03:00 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 22, 2015, 02:15:22 PM
So the credits are too big, and the same could have been achieved with smaller credits.
In fact the industry representatives were recommending the credit be reduced slowly over time. So yeah the credit is probably way too big.
Sure the idea is that solar will continue to approach cost parity over time.
But I would be curious who in the industry is talking down the credits. And whether is it out of altruistic concern for the fisc or desire to see smaller competitors flushed out . . .
Context is important here Minsky. They thought the credit was expiring. Their response was 'ok we will be fine but the shock to the system would be lessened if it was reduced over time' and they had some suggestions.
Quote from: Monoriu on December 23, 2015, 02:07:14 AM
The technology doesn't exist for now.
For somebody who gets all his industry news from Wikipedia you sure claim expert knowledge on how these things work.
Quote from: Valmy on December 23, 2015, 11:05:29 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 23, 2015, 02:07:14 AM
The technology doesn't exist for now.
For somebody who gets all his industry news from Wikipedia you sure claim expert knowledge on how these things work.
Eh, doesn't Mono have access to Timmy News Service? :hmm:
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on December 23, 2015, 11:07:30 AM
Eh, doesn't Mono have access to Timmy News Service? :hmm:
True :hmm:
Quote from: Brazen on December 23, 2015, 09:16:37 AM
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 22, 2015, 03:11:03 AM
Yeah, I think the real breakthrough for solar will come when we finally, if ever, develop a very efficient means of being able to store energy in a somewhat dormant state (which really, is why fossil fuels have served us so well) for long periods of time.
What we really need are energon cubes.
On the domestic level, the Tesla Powerwall has problems but it's a step in the right direction.
It is...but I was thinking on a more on the macro-level...facilities that could store solar-generated power at levels to supply entire metropolitan regions during hours of darkness when the panels aren't generating anything.
I kinda doubt there will ever be a utility-scale battery. Power storage seems to make more sense at the point of use.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 23, 2015, 03:47:25 PM
I kinda doubt there will ever be a utility-scale battery. Power storage seems to make more sense at the point of use.
Disagree. You lose economies of scale. Plus a utility (or dedicated power trader) will have a better understanding of the wholesale market than an end user.
The only remotely feasible way of power storage is having consumers' cars act as a ginourmous distributed battery. However, the technical requirements for such batteries are still unmet (cost, weight and especially cycle life).
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 23, 2015, 03:51:10 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 23, 2015, 03:47:25 PM
I kinda doubt there will ever be a utility-scale battery. Power storage seems to make more sense at the point of use.
Disagree. You lose economies of scale. Plus a utility (or dedicated power trader) will have a better understanding of the wholesale market than an end user.
Sure, but power stored by the end user is power that got purchased. It will deteriorate when stored and from adding a second transmission cycle and the utility won't want to eat that cost.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 23, 2015, 04:38:50 PM
Sure, but power stored by the end user is power that got purchased. It will deteriorate when stored and from adding a second transmission cycle and the utility won't want to eat that cost.
I don't understand your reasoning.
[Keynesian]
I have a solution, we employ people to build artificial mountains, then some more workers to build pump storage facilities in them. :bowler:
[/Keynesian]
Like I said...we need to develop energon cubes. :P
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fseanblanchfield.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F07%2Fenergon.jpg&hash=823b503d334340f7cfb2e8fc3c4304d06391d70e)
Quote from: Valmy on December 23, 2015, 11:05:29 AM
Quote from: Monoriu on December 23, 2015, 02:07:14 AM
The technology doesn't exist for now.
For somebody who gets all his industry news from Wikipedia you sure claim expert knowledge on how these things work.
I claim no expert knowledge. I simply express scepticism from a user's point of view :contract: