Solar power is getting cheaper every year
- Thread starter HTSS_TR
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Shannow
http://www.forbes.com/sites/judeclemente...m/#52ffa51fe96b
Quote:
California’s SB 350 requires the state to procure 50% of electricity from renewable energy and double energy efficiency savings by 2030. And the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s “Clean Power Plan” wants states to “to act more like California.”
Yet, beyond power rates 45% above the U.S. average, California has another problem that makes it less of a model than some proclaim. California now imports 33% of its electricity supply from fast growing neighbors, with about 65% of that coming from the Southwest and 35% coming from the Northwest. These numbers increase most in summer months when air conditioning loads peak. Imports have been rising rapidly: in 2010, California “only” imported 25% of its power.
California is well known for its anti-business, Toyota headquarter in California for many years just moved to Texas few months ago.
We don't have new power plants nor new oil refineries forever. It is so difficult to get any permit to build anything here.
We pay about 15-25 cents more per gallon of gas compares with others because we use special blend that cost more to refine. Since no new oil refinery was build for more than 30 years here, we are barely make enough gas to meet demand on good day, anything happen gas price shoots up 50 cents over night because supply shortage. The reason we need special blend is to combat pollution.
Same for power plant, if you look at linked chart below you will see that power consumption increase slowly every year, but internal generation didn't increase at all. Nobody wants to go though much headache to deal with California redtape.
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html
You should notice these items:
Total power from coal(in-state and import) was reducing by half from 27,000 GWH in 2000 to 13,000 GWH in 2014 while the total power increased by 50,000 GWH from 246,000 GWH to 296,000 GWH.
Wind was 3,600 GWH in 2010 increased 3 times to 13,000 GWH in 2014
Solar was 860 GWH in 2010 increased more than 10 times to 10,500 GWH in 2014
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
But this is off topic. This thread is about a company builds a 800 MW solar farm somewhere in Dubai and agree to sell to DEWA (Dubai Electricity and Water Authority) at a rate of 2.99 cent a KWh without string attached and no subsidies. Actually, the only string is both parties agree to this price for a period of time, most likely 20-30 years.
How can they sell solar power that cheap without subsidies ? I don't know !
My guess is the company that builds this solar farm must get some form of subsidies under the table somehow.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/judeclemente...m/#52ffa51fe96b
Quote:
California’s SB 350 requires the state to procure 50% of electricity from renewable energy and double energy efficiency savings by 2030. And the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s “Clean Power Plan” wants states to “to act more like California.”
Yet, beyond power rates 45% above the U.S. average, California has another problem that makes it less of a model than some proclaim. California now imports 33% of its electricity supply from fast growing neighbors, with about 65% of that coming from the Southwest and 35% coming from the Northwest. These numbers increase most in summer months when air conditioning loads peak. Imports have been rising rapidly: in 2010, California “only” imported 25% of its power.
California is well known for its anti-business, Toyota headquarter in California for many years just moved to Texas few months ago.
We don't have new power plants nor new oil refineries forever. It is so difficult to get any permit to build anything here.
We pay about 15-25 cents more per gallon of gas compares with others because we use special blend that cost more to refine. Since no new oil refinery was build for more than 30 years here, we are barely make enough gas to meet demand on good day, anything happen gas price shoots up 50 cents over night because supply shortage. The reason we need special blend is to combat pollution.
Same for power plant, if you look at linked chart below you will see that power consumption increase slowly every year, but internal generation didn't increase at all. Nobody wants to go though much headache to deal with California redtape.
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html
You should notice these items:
Total power from coal(in-state and import) was reducing by half from 27,000 GWH in 2000 to 13,000 GWH in 2014 while the total power increased by 50,000 GWH from 246,000 GWH to 296,000 GWH.
Wind was 3,600 GWH in 2010 increased 3 times to 13,000 GWH in 2014
Solar was 860 GWH in 2010 increased more than 10 times to 10,500 GWH in 2014
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
But this is off topic. This thread is about a company builds a 800 MW solar farm somewhere in Dubai and agree to sell to DEWA (Dubai Electricity and Water Authority) at a rate of 2.99 cent a KWh without string attached and no subsidies. Actually, the only string is both parties agree to this price for a period of time, most likely 20-30 years.
How can they sell solar power that cheap without subsidies ? I don't know !
My guess is the company that builds this solar farm must get some form of subsidies under the table somehow.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: bvance554
You linked a page from 'thinkprogress' as your source, therefore your information is at best unreliable, but more likely completely bogus.
The economictimes.indiatimes.com is completely bogus too ? Did you do any search before making that call about thinkprogress ?
Quote:
Dubai set the global record last month by announcing an 800 MW solar power project would generate electricity at Rs 2.2 per unit (2.99 cents)
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/indu...ow/53110633.cms
Another bogus news from unreliable source ?
Quote:
When Dubai announced last month that an 800 MW solar power project there would generate electricity at Rs 2.2 per unit (2.99 cents), it created a global record of sort. However, no matter how hard we try, it seems pretty unlikely that India would ever be able to achieve such low prices using the current set of technologies, mainly because of the high cost of finance and expectations of high return that people have from their investments in the said sector.
http://www.businessinsider.in/india-solar-power-tariff/articleshow/53115610.cms
You linked a page from 'thinkprogress' as your source, therefore your information is at best unreliable, but more likely completely bogus.
The economictimes.indiatimes.com is completely bogus too ? Did you do any search before making that call about thinkprogress ?
Quote:
Dubai set the global record last month by announcing an 800 MW solar power project would generate electricity at Rs 2.2 per unit (2.99 cents)
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/indu...ow/53110633.cms
Another bogus news from unreliable source ?
Quote:
When Dubai announced last month that an 800 MW solar power project there would generate electricity at Rs 2.2 per unit (2.99 cents), it created a global record of sort. However, no matter how hard we try, it seems pretty unlikely that India would ever be able to achieve such low prices using the current set of technologies, mainly because of the high cost of finance and expectations of high return that people have from their investments in the said sector.
http://www.businessinsider.in/india-solar-power-tariff/articleshow/53115610.cms
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
CT8, Do you understand this paragraph "Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA) received a bid this year for 800 megawatts at a jaw-dropping “US 2.99 cents per kilowatt hour.” Two other bids were below US 4 cents/kWh, and the last two bids were both below 4.5 cents/kWh — again all of these bids were without subsidies!" ? Someone builds a 800 megawatts solar farm and sells electricity to DEWA (Dubai Electricity and Water Authority) at a rate of 2.99 cent a KWh without string attached and no subsidies.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
And someone else needs to provide that 800MW for the 16+ hours of the day that the solar isn't producing 800MW...what's so difficult about that ?
OR as per my post that you quoted but don't seem to have addressed...
* they have to install 2,400MW of solar panels (more actually);
* plus 1.3GW of storage (batteries and the like)...
Which in and of themselves use about 25c/KWh round trip lifecycle cost to store and release that energy.
While solar is a disruptive technology, it CAN be cheap...when a country ends up solar renewable, it HAS to be expensive.
You are confusing.
DEWA signed an agreement to purchase 800 megawatts from a solar farm for 2.99 cents per KWH.
I know that DEWA needs a lot more than 800 MW 24/7, how do they incorporate this time limit power during the day and nothing at night is their problem or their benefit I don't know.
They must have other sources and it is possible that Dubai is in desert and they need more power during daytime and less power at night.
You know very well that a power company has many people working 24/7 monitoring power consumption every minute, and they know when is peak power and when is low demand. They have more than 1 standby power plants to be ready in case it it is needed.
One thing you need to remember is that power companies are multi-billions dollar companies, they know how to run their businesses better than you and me and all members of this forum.
If you ask anyone who has experience in buying/distributing power for some power company that if they can buy 800 megawatts of clean power at 2.99 cent per KWH during daytime only, what would that person say ? Don't buy it because blah blah blah or buy even more if available ?
CT8, Do you understand this paragraph "Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA) received a bid this year for 800 megawatts at a jaw-dropping “US 2.99 cents per kilowatt hour.” Two other bids were below US 4 cents/kWh, and the last two bids were both below 4.5 cents/kWh — again all of these bids were without subsidies!" ? Someone builds a 800 megawatts solar farm and sells electricity to DEWA (Dubai Electricity and Water Authority) at a rate of 2.99 cent a KWh without string attached and no subsidies.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
And someone else needs to provide that 800MW for the 16+ hours of the day that the solar isn't producing 800MW...what's so difficult about that ?
OR as per my post that you quoted but don't seem to have addressed...
* they have to install 2,400MW of solar panels (more actually);
* plus 1.3GW of storage (batteries and the like)...
Which in and of themselves use about 25c/KWh round trip lifecycle cost to store and release that energy.
While solar is a disruptive technology, it CAN be cheap...when a country ends up solar renewable, it HAS to be expensive.
You are confusing.
DEWA signed an agreement to purchase 800 megawatts from a solar farm for 2.99 cents per KWH.
I know that DEWA needs a lot more than 800 MW 24/7, how do they incorporate this time limit power during the day and nothing at night is their problem or their benefit I don't know.
They must have other sources and it is possible that Dubai is in desert and they need more power during daytime and less power at night.
You know very well that a power company has many people working 24/7 monitoring power consumption every minute, and they know when is peak power and when is low demand. They have more than 1 standby power plants to be ready in case it it is needed.
One thing you need to remember is that power companies are multi-billions dollar companies, they know how to run their businesses better than you and me and all members of this forum.
If you ask anyone who has experience in buying/distributing power for some power company that if they can buy 800 megawatts of clean power at 2.99 cent per KWH during daytime only, what would that person say ? Don't buy it because blah blah blah or buy even more if available ?
I'm running on wind power
Not cause I'm a greenie but I get it for 7.99 KWH and I conserve everything I can.
Hate waste!
Not cause I'm a greenie but I get it for 7.99 KWH and I conserve everything I can.
Hate waste!
Cost of the solar panels is now well under a dollar a watt. The installation cost is a big multiple of that and needs to be addressed.
Utilities are learning how to capture the tax credit through the orders of compliant local regulators.
Utilities are learning how to capture the tax credit through the orders of compliant local regulators.
Originally Posted By: Vern_in_IL
We are going to put those miners back to work.
I much rather have coal power, than nuclear... when New Madrid faults big league, coal won't kill us.
There are more nuclear residuals released from coal than all the nuke plants accidents combined. Coal will kill you, you just don't know it ...
We are going to put those miners back to work.
I much rather have coal power, than nuclear... when New Madrid faults big league, coal won't kill us.
There are more nuclear residuals released from coal than all the nuke plants accidents combined. Coal will kill you, you just don't know it ...
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2015
Owners of BEV in Western States can sleep well knowing they use cleaner sources of electric to charge their batteries. Especially these states: CA, NV, ID, OR and WA.
Originally Posted By: eia.gov
Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2015
Coal = 33%
Natural gas = 33%
Nuclear = 20%
Hydropower = 6%
Other renewables = 7%
.Biomass = 1.6%
.Geothermal = 0.4%
.Solar = 0.6%
.Wind = 4.7%
Petroleum = 1%
Other gases =
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3
Shannow,
I said Western States residence has cleaner sources of electricity, this is based on 33% of all electricity generated in US in 2015 was coal.
The US map above showed very little power plant in Western States use coal.
California alone used 297 thousand Gigawatt Hours of electricity of all types in 2014. In-state and import coal power totaled 13.5 thousand Gigawatt Hours, 4.5% of total.
4.5% is small compares with 33% of the nation power generated by coal.
Western states have cleaner sources of electricity isn't exaggerated by any mean.
Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2015
Owners of BEV in Western States can sleep well knowing they use cleaner sources of electric to charge their batteries. Especially these states: CA, NV, ID, OR and WA.
Originally Posted By: eia.gov
Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2015
Coal = 33%
Natural gas = 33%
Nuclear = 20%
Hydropower = 6%
Other renewables = 7%
.Biomass = 1.6%
.Geothermal = 0.4%
.Solar = 0.6%
.Wind = 4.7%
Petroleum = 1%
Other gases =
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3
Shannow,
I said Western States residence has cleaner sources of electricity, this is based on 33% of all electricity generated in US in 2015 was coal.
The US map above showed very little power plant in Western States use coal.
California alone used 297 thousand Gigawatt Hours of electricity of all types in 2014. In-state and import coal power totaled 13.5 thousand Gigawatt Hours, 4.5% of total.
4.5% is small compares with 33% of the nation power generated by coal.
Western states have cleaner sources of electricity isn't exaggerated by any mean.
Most roadblocks to solar in the US comes from the utilities not wanting to give up their market share. They get the rules changed and it makes solar too expensive. This is happening big time out west.
How Economics Finally Brought Community Solar to IREA
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/arti...amp;bid=1463769
My uber-conservative utility, Intermountain Rural Electric Association (IREA) has been against solar since before I moved into the service territory in 2007. IREA's long-serving general manager, Stanley Lewandowski Jr., would include climate change denial leaflets in the envelope along with the monthly electric bills.
Now he is gone, and attitudes seem to be changing towards solar. With a new general manager, a couple of forward thinking board of directors and a handful of active IREA owners/members, the solar landscape has changed and now includes a large solar project.
Currently IREA has 550 MW of installed electrical generating capacity, about 270 miles of transmission lines and many more of distribution. Residential users account for about 65 percent of electricity demand. Like most rural electrical utilities, there are few customers per mile. At the end of 2014 there were 354 solar electric systems, end of 2015 had 1,087 and currently there are 1,250 totaling 7.1 MW out of 152,300 total customers. IREA’s perspective has been that net metering is a subsidy paid for by other ratepayers. Unfortunately, in a mis-guided attempt to recoup this perceived subsidy, since the beginning of the year IREA has placed a load factor adjustment (LFA) on all new customers including new PV. I expect that many people will soon be clamoring as to their unfair bottom line monthly bills compared to their neighbors.
How Economics Finally Brought Community Solar to IREA
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/arti...amp;bid=1463769
My uber-conservative utility, Intermountain Rural Electric Association (IREA) has been against solar since before I moved into the service territory in 2007. IREA's long-serving general manager, Stanley Lewandowski Jr., would include climate change denial leaflets in the envelope along with the monthly electric bills.
Now he is gone, and attitudes seem to be changing towards solar. With a new general manager, a couple of forward thinking board of directors and a handful of active IREA owners/members, the solar landscape has changed and now includes a large solar project.
Currently IREA has 550 MW of installed electrical generating capacity, about 270 miles of transmission lines and many more of distribution. Residential users account for about 65 percent of electricity demand. Like most rural electrical utilities, there are few customers per mile. At the end of 2014 there were 354 solar electric systems, end of 2015 had 1,087 and currently there are 1,250 totaling 7.1 MW out of 152,300 total customers. IREA’s perspective has been that net metering is a subsidy paid for by other ratepayers. Unfortunately, in a mis-guided attempt to recoup this perceived subsidy, since the beginning of the year IREA has placed a load factor adjustment (LFA) on all new customers including new PV. I expect that many people will soon be clamoring as to their unfair bottom line monthly bills compared to their neighbors.
Does your utility bill shows the split between generation and delivery?
Once the solar powers become cheaper than the delivery charges, then it would not matter how the utility companies generate the power aka from coal, gas, water, wind, nuclear etc. That is the tipping point.
I am trying to remember the name of the visionary who pointed that out.
Once the solar powers become cheaper than the delivery charges, then it would not matter how the utility companies generate the power aka from coal, gas, water, wind, nuclear etc. That is the tipping point.
I am trying to remember the name of the visionary who pointed that out.
Quote:
It is worth remembering that U.S. solar power bids include the 30 percent Investment Tax Credit. According to one analysis, NV Energy’s “$.0387/kWh would potentially turn into about $.07/kWh if we backed out the 30% Federal Tax Credit and 60% depreciation in Year One.”
The bids seen around the world this year without subsidies or incentives are even more stunning. Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA) received a bid this year for 800 megawatts at a jaw-dropping “US 2.99 cents per kilowatt hour.” Two other bids were below US 4 cents/kWh, and the last two bids were both below 4.5 cents/kWh — again all of these bids were without subsidies!
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Most roadblocks to solar in the US comes from the utilities not wanting to give up their market share. They get the rules changed and it makes solar too expensive. This is happening big time out west.
As stated in the linked article, the low(est) rate in US was 7 cents per kWh without subsidies, while it is 3 cents in Dubai.
How a third party can build a solar farm in Dubai and sell the electricity to Dubai power company at 3 cents/kWh, and it is more than double that in US ?
3 cents/kWh is very close to whole sale price of coal power, is it about 2 cents/kWh ?
It is worth remembering that U.S. solar power bids include the 30 percent Investment Tax Credit. According to one analysis, NV Energy’s “$.0387/kWh would potentially turn into about $.07/kWh if we backed out the 30% Federal Tax Credit and 60% depreciation in Year One.”
The bids seen around the world this year without subsidies or incentives are even more stunning. Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA) received a bid this year for 800 megawatts at a jaw-dropping “US 2.99 cents per kilowatt hour.” Two other bids were below US 4 cents/kWh, and the last two bids were both below 4.5 cents/kWh — again all of these bids were without subsidies!
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Most roadblocks to solar in the US comes from the utilities not wanting to give up their market share. They get the rules changed and it makes solar too expensive. This is happening big time out west.
As stated in the linked article, the low(est) rate in US was 7 cents per kWh without subsidies, while it is 3 cents in Dubai.
How a third party can build a solar farm in Dubai and sell the electricity to Dubai power company at 3 cents/kWh, and it is more than double that in US ?
3 cents/kWh is very close to whole sale price of coal power, is it about 2 cents/kWh ?
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
What is the Investment Tax Credit for new coal and nuclear plants? Would it be the same as for solar?
I guess not I was just thinking of the normal business tax credits on new equipment.
http://energy.gov/savings/business-energy-investment-tax-credit-itc
http://www.section179.org/section_179_deduction.html
What is the Investment Tax Credit for new coal and nuclear plants? Would it be the same as for solar?
I guess not I was just thinking of the normal business tax credits on new equipment.
http://energy.gov/savings/business-energy-investment-tax-credit-itc
http://www.section179.org/section_179_deduction.html
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Shannow,
I said Western States residence has cleaner sources of electricity, this is based on 33% of all electricity generated in US in 2015 was coal.
The US map above showed very little power plant in Western States use coal.
Then look at where Ca is getting it's electricity from...
again, there's an extension lead running to the neighbour's yard.
To use one of your recent analogies, you've got your ZEV in your shed running, but the extension lead to the generator that is running in your neighbour's.
Shannow,
I said Western States residence has cleaner sources of electricity, this is based on 33% of all electricity generated in US in 2015 was coal.
The US map above showed very little power plant in Western States use coal.
Then look at where Ca is getting it's electricity from...
again, there's an extension lead running to the neighbour's yard.
To use one of your recent analogies, you've got your ZEV in your shed running, but the extension lead to the generator that is running in your neighbour's.
Originally Posted By: SHOZ
Most roadblocks to solar in the US comes from the utilities not wanting to give up their market share. They get the rules changed and it makes solar too expensive. This is happening big time out west.
How Economics Finally Brought Community Solar to IREA
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/arti...amp;bid=1463769
My uber-conservative utility, Intermountain Rural Electric Association (IREA) has been against solar since before I moved into the service territory in 2007. IREA's long-serving general manager, Stanley Lewandowski Jr., would include climate change denial leaflets in the envelope along with the monthly electric bills.
Now he is gone, and attitudes seem to be changing towards solar. With a new general manager, a couple of forward thinking board of directors and a handful of active IREA owners/members, the solar landscape has changed and now includes a large solar project.
Currently IREA has 550 MW of installed electrical generating capacity, about 270 miles of transmission lines and many more of distribution. Residential users account for about 65 percent of electricity demand. Like most rural electrical utilities, there are few customers per mile. At the end of 2014 there were 354 solar electric systems, end of 2015 had 1,087 and currently there are 1,250 totaling 7.1 MW out of 152,300 total customers. IREA’s perspective has been that net metering is a subsidy paid for by other ratepayers. Unfortunately, in a mis-guided attempt to recoup this perceived subsidy, since the beginning of the year IREA has placed a load factor adjustment (LFA) on all new customers including new PV. I expect that many people will soon be clamoring as to their unfair bottom line monthly bills compared to their neighbors.
That's what I'm talking about in terms of the utility capturing the tax credit with surcharges.
The regulatory staff will generally argue that solar provides useful load support.
I simply don't understand Vikas argument that incumbent electricity generation must be valued at 0 to compare with solar. The industry views the service as being in three parts: Generation, transmission and distribution. Solar has always had a siting and distribution advantage, but the generation advantage remains elusive.
Most roadblocks to solar in the US comes from the utilities not wanting to give up their market share. They get the rules changed and it makes solar too expensive. This is happening big time out west.
How Economics Finally Brought Community Solar to IREA
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/arti...amp;bid=1463769
My uber-conservative utility, Intermountain Rural Electric Association (IREA) has been against solar since before I moved into the service territory in 2007. IREA's long-serving general manager, Stanley Lewandowski Jr., would include climate change denial leaflets in the envelope along with the monthly electric bills.
Now he is gone, and attitudes seem to be changing towards solar. With a new general manager, a couple of forward thinking board of directors and a handful of active IREA owners/members, the solar landscape has changed and now includes a large solar project.
Currently IREA has 550 MW of installed electrical generating capacity, about 270 miles of transmission lines and many more of distribution. Residential users account for about 65 percent of electricity demand. Like most rural electrical utilities, there are few customers per mile. At the end of 2014 there were 354 solar electric systems, end of 2015 had 1,087 and currently there are 1,250 totaling 7.1 MW out of 152,300 total customers. IREA’s perspective has been that net metering is a subsidy paid for by other ratepayers. Unfortunately, in a mis-guided attempt to recoup this perceived subsidy, since the beginning of the year IREA has placed a load factor adjustment (LFA) on all new customers including new PV. I expect that many people will soon be clamoring as to their unfair bottom line monthly bills compared to their neighbors.
That's what I'm talking about in terms of the utility capturing the tax credit with surcharges.
The regulatory staff will generally argue that solar provides useful load support.
I simply don't understand Vikas argument that incumbent electricity generation must be valued at 0 to compare with solar. The industry views the service as being in three parts: Generation, transmission and distribution. Solar has always had a siting and distribution advantage, but the generation advantage remains elusive.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Shannow,
I said Western States residence has cleaner sources of electricity, this is based on 33% of all electricity generated in US in 2015 was coal.
The US map above showed very little power plant in Western States use coal.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Then look at where Ca is getting it's electricity from...
again, there's an extension lead running to the neighbour's yard.
To use one of your recent analogies, you've got your ZEV in your shed running, but the extension lead to the generator that is running in your neighbour's.
My statement about cleaner sources of electricity in California is based on California Energy Commission report below
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html
California imported 98,000 Gigawatt Hours in 2014, of those amount coal power was 12,400 GWH and instate coal power was 1,000 GWH.
The total coal power we used in California in 2014 was 13,400 out of total 296,800 GWH for 4.5%.
4.5% is very low compares with 33% of total in US, that is why I said we use fairly clean source of power.
Yes, we imported much more power the last few years than in 80's and 90's and early 00's. The reason was the permit to build anything in California is so hard to obtain, also the cost of doing business here is too expensive. The power companies just go the easy way, import electricity from surrounding states and from Mexico. I also hear that few year ago a power company in California built a power plant in Arizona and import back into California, it was easy and cheap that way.
I withdraw this statement "Western States residence has cleaner sources of electricity". I was wrong by looking at the other map and came up with this statement.
I checked individual states and found the official state energy report showed that these states have up to 40% of their electricity generated with coal power plant(s).
As far as I know now, only California out of all western states has power generated by coal at less than 5% of the total consumption.
Yes, when I got my Model 3 I will plug it in an outlet to charge its battery, probably from around 10PM till 7AM to take advantage of the lowest price. Where the power I use come from I have no idea, my power company is SCE(Southern California Edison), they don't tell their customers where they purchased their electricity.
Shannow,
I said Western States residence has cleaner sources of electricity, this is based on 33% of all electricity generated in US in 2015 was coal.
The US map above showed very little power plant in Western States use coal.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Then look at where Ca is getting it's electricity from...
again, there's an extension lead running to the neighbour's yard.
To use one of your recent analogies, you've got your ZEV in your shed running, but the extension lead to the generator that is running in your neighbour's.
My statement about cleaner sources of electricity in California is based on California Energy Commission report below
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html
California imported 98,000 Gigawatt Hours in 2014, of those amount coal power was 12,400 GWH and instate coal power was 1,000 GWH.
The total coal power we used in California in 2014 was 13,400 out of total 296,800 GWH for 4.5%.
4.5% is very low compares with 33% of total in US, that is why I said we use fairly clean source of power.
Yes, we imported much more power the last few years than in 80's and 90's and early 00's. The reason was the permit to build anything in California is so hard to obtain, also the cost of doing business here is too expensive. The power companies just go the easy way, import electricity from surrounding states and from Mexico. I also hear that few year ago a power company in California built a power plant in Arizona and import back into California, it was easy and cheap that way.
I withdraw this statement "Western States residence has cleaner sources of electricity". I was wrong by looking at the other map and came up with this statement.
I checked individual states and found the official state energy report showed that these states have up to 40% of their electricity generated with coal power plant(s).
As far as I know now, only California out of all western states has power generated by coal at less than 5% of the total consumption.
Yes, when I got my Model 3 I will plug it in an outlet to charge its battery, probably from around 10PM till 7AM to take advantage of the lowest price. Where the power I use come from I have no idea, my power company is SCE(Southern California Edison), they don't tell their customers where they purchased their electricity.
Love the concept of solar, but the efficiency just isn't there for me to invest in it. Even the theoretical maximum efficiency of the typical PV cell is way too low in my opinion. I've always had the idea that if I won the powerball or something like that one day, I'd build a 99% off grid home. Solar would probably be the most feasible way to go with that idea currently, but it would be a HUGE up front cost and a very long ROI. Hence why very few "average" people are using solar.
workmate has done an "off grid" grid connected solar and batteries. It's sized for a modest house and he and his wife (both not far from retirement), with grid connect for when he has visitors, and export when the batteries are full.
No change from $40k.
No change from $40k.
Congratulations to CA ^. You get less than 5% of your electricity from coal. You are the cleanest people on Earth, and you can rest easily tonight. Hats off to you guys. You steal your kilowatts from other states just like you do your water. Then you say hey look how awesome we are over here, we got it all figured out. CA is a poor example, of pretty much everything.
- Status
