Big increase for US solar in 2016: Report

[Pitt Gorilla]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/12/big-i...-2016_report_1

The U.S.'s solar power capacity continues to grow after more than two gigawatts (GW) of solar photovoltaic (PV) installations took place during the second quarter of 2016, according to a report released on Monday.

The latest U.S. Solar Market Insight Report from GTM Research and the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) stated that the installations represented a 43 per cent increase compared to the second quarter of 2015.

"We're seeing the beginning of an unprecedented wave of growth that will occur throughout the remainder of 2016, specifically within the utility PV segment," Cory Honeyman, associate director of U.S. solar research at GTM Research, said in a news release.

Solar is becoming an increasingly important part of the world's renewable energy mix. In 2014 the International Energy Agency stated that the sun could be the planet's biggest source of electricity by 2050.

"With more than 10 gigawatts of utility PV currently under construction, the second half of this year and the first half of 2017 are on track to continue breaking records for solar capacity additions," Honeyman added.

The report found that utility scale installations represented 53 percent of all installed PV in the first half of 2016, with an extra 7.8 GW set to come online in 2016.

"Solar works in all 50 states and this report proves that what many would consider non-traditional markets are now firmly a part of the clean energy movement," Tom Kimbis, SEIA's interim president, said.

"While it took us 40 years to hit 1 million U.S. solar installations, we're expected to hit 2 million within the next two years," Kimbis added. "That record-breaking growth is made possible by solar's cost-competitiveness and the vast benefits it provides consumers, our nation's economy and environment."

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan

Sure, the batteries make sense in a few niche places.

Yup. For now. Just like solar used to be. Now solar works in all 50 states. Batteries soon will too. As Hamas said, Moore's Law.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by beach tribe

So, I would imagine it would be smart to invest in Solar?

I've never invested and know next to nothing about the stock market, but have recently decided to start educating myself in prep to get started.

Would this be a promising opportunity to begin that venture with?

I think that's a tough question to answer. On the one hand, the trend is solidly pointing in the direction of renewable energy, so one would think that solar and wind companies are only going to get bigger in the coming years.

On the other hand, as some have alluded to, the industry has been heavily supported by government subsidies in recent years, and it's likely that at least some companies might be in financial trouble quickly if those subsidies went away.

I think that solar and wind as TECHNOLOGIES are poised for rapid growth, but that doesn't necessarily mean that individual BUSINESSES are stable enough to survive on their own.

[Nickhead]

Originally Posted by scho63

So government should FORCE solar on corporations even if it costs them 5 x's as much as traditional?

Not feasible, not reasonable, not democratic and not capitalist.

Corporations by nature will seek the best and most cost effective solution. If solar doesn't cut it they will look at other options.

the government forces you to: pay taxes, carry health insurance, car insurance, do the speed limit, take care of your kids. why not force an over rich corporation to pay for solar. its not like they are paying THEIR taxes

the government could easily offset solar costs for benefits down the track.

[GloucesterChief]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

at the cost of being able to set our tap water on fire and risking contaminating our water table permanently

Amazingly enough there are places where oil and natural gas seep out of ground naturally. Parts of PA have recorded instances of water being light on fire since the 1700s long before there was any fracking or even oil wells there.

As for renewables, those rare earth metals for batteries and solar panels. Well, they have to be mined and they come from mines like this:

[GloucesterChief]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan

I would say it is on life support in Europe also. Germany is closing all of their nuclear plants. The recent plants that are under construction (with the newer style technology) are way over budget even by nuclear power plant standards.

The UK is contemplating approving a plant that is already estimated to cost $20 billion (this is before overruns).

France: 77% Nuclear.
Germany is closing their nuke plants not because they are losing money or not cost effective but by pure government fiat driven by hysterical overreactions to Fukushima.
Sweden is looking to online more nuclear power and it already provides 40+% of their power.
Finland is getting 30% of its power from nuclear and is looking to online two new reactors.
Spain is looking to build more nuke plants as their experiment with solar was costly and didn't provide power.

Not in Europe:

South Korea wants to build more nuclear reactors and they get a third of their power from nuclear.
Japan is reonlining their nuclear plants after shutting them down after Fukushima.

Basically, you have countries decomissioning nuke plants to appease hysteria not because they are inefficient or of any danger.

[Nickhead]

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief

Amazingly enough there are places where oil and natural gas seep out of ground naturally. Parts of PA have recorded instances of water being light on fire since the 1700s long before there was any fracking or even oil wells there.

As for renewables, those rare earth metals for batteries and solar panels. Well, they have to be mined and they come from mines like this:

pos rep... i always rail about how 'recycling plants' are ran off coal, neglected to think the production of solar devices does the same.

its very scary to think no matter how green the tech, the tech is produced by coal.

[Gonzo]

If you all are interested in a complete and total FUBAR regarding energy issues, check out what's happened here in cluster****, Nebraska with our Nuclear plant up in Ft. Calhoun.

Quick synopsis...
Floods hit,
Almost a half a billion spent by our publicly owned power company to repair nuke plant.
Can't fix it for shit but they had it up and running for a little bit. **** it, shut it down because Derp.

[Gonzo]

Meanwhile, if you drive across Iowa, you'll see thousands of windmills.
Drive across ****ville, you'll see a few hundred in "testing areas."

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief

France: 77% Nuclear.
Germany is closing their nuke plants not because they are losing money or not cost effective but by pure government fiat driven by hysterical overreactions to Fukushima.
Sweden is looking to online more nuclear power and it already provides 40+% of their power.
Finland is getting 30% of its power from nuclear and is looking to online two new reactors.
Spain is looking to build more nuke plants as their experiment with solar was costly and didn't provide power.

Not in Europe:

South Korea wants to build more nuclear reactors and they get a third of their power from nuclear.
Japan is reonlining their nuclear plants after shutting them down after Fukushima.

Basically, you have countries decomissioning nuke plants to appease hysteria not because they are inefficient or of any danger.

Ok, life support was a bit of an exaggeration, but I would still say it is in retreat.

I'm not knee-jerk opposed to nuclear, but I don't think there are very many countries that can build both safe and economical plants. New plants in the US are very expensive and despite spending billions, we still don't have a long term plan for the waste outside of knowing it will be many billions more.

Japan can't run a safe system and I thought that long before Fukushima. Neither can Russia and, given the level of general corruption, I expect big problems from China someday. I don't have warm, fuzzy feelings about South Korea building a lot of plants either.

I thought it was dumb of German to take so many plants off line that otherwise would have years of service. Yes, it was a reaction. Political backlash is a big part of the problem with nuclear.

France is the one country that seems to do a good job, but I am skeptical that they will maintain their 75% at a reasonable cost going forward. EDF, the main French company, is struggling to build the new designs.

Let's look at one of the plants they are trying to build in Finland:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_(n..._.28Finland.29

First concrete was poured for the demonstration EPR reactor at the Flamanville Nuclear Power Plant on 6 December 2007. As the name implies this will be the third nuclear reactor on the Flamanville site and the second instance of an EPR being built. Electrical output will be 1630 MWe (net)[6] and the project involves around €3.3 billion of capital expenditure from EDF.
...
In September 2015 EDF announced that the estimated costs had escalated to €10.5 billion, and the start-up of the reactor was delayed to the fourth quarter of 2018.

The Hinkley POint plant in the UK is a boondoggle and they haven't even started construction. Even though the gaurentees are unreal, EDF was so worried about, their board barely approved the project.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkle..._power_station

The construction cost was given by EDF as £16 billion in 2012,[66] updated to £18 billion in 2015. (And this is before cost overruns...)

In February 2016, EDF again delayed a final decision on proceeding with the project, disclosing that the financial agreement with CGN was yet to be confirmed. EDF, which had recently reported a 68% fall in net profit, was still looking at how it would finance its share of the project. With EDF's share price having halved over the preceding year, the cost of the Hinkley Point C project now exceeded the entire market capitalisation of EDF. EDF stated that "first concrete", the start of actual construction, was not planned to begin until 2019

The National Audit Office estimated that, with UK wholesale electricity prices having fallen to £45/MWh, the additional cost to consumers of 'future top-up payments under the proposed HPC CfD have increased from £6.1 billion in October 2013, when the strike price was agreed, to £29.7 billion in March 2016',[9] a quadrupling of the projected costs to consumers. As such the fixed strike price of HPC subjects the consumers to a risk that they will not benefit from future reductions in electricity prices.

In August 2016, CEO Henrik Poulsen of DONG Energy argued that the UK's future energy needs can be covered with accelerated construction of cheaper offshore wind farms instead of Hinkley Point C. Poulsen state that wind farms could currently undercut HPC's strike price with £85/MWh, while others in the industry believe that by the mid-2020s the electricity price from offshore wind farms would reach £80/MWh.

On 10 August 2016, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard of the Daily Telegraph wrote that, with growth in energy storage, 'there ceases to be much point in building costly "baseload" power plants such as Hinkley Point. Nuclear reactors cannot be switched on and off as need demands - unlike gas plants. They are useless as a back-up for the decentralized grid of the future, when wind, solar, hydro, and other renewables will dominate the power supply'.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan

New plants in the US are very expensive

The tech is not expensive. The self-imposed governmental documentation and compliance procedures are expensive.

[DaFace]

Anyone catch the Tesla/SolarCity solar roof unveiling? It looks pretty damn nice. I'll be curious to see what the costs really are, but I'm due for a roof in the next 3-5 years probably and will have to at least dig into this as an option.



In short for those who don't want to take the time to watch, there are 4 different styles to choose from and operate at up to 98% efficiency of a normal solar panel. In theory the cost of solar roof will be less than the cost of new normal roof PLUS electric costs over expected life (so still a big up-front investment that is probably justified through financing). Regardless, they look fantastic.





https://www.tesla.com/solar

[Mr. Laz]

You would think that Musk would be a better speaker.

Get the man a teleprompter or something


terrible

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

You would think that Musk would be a better speaker.

Get the man a teleprompter or something


terrible

In a weird way, it's actually a feature I like about him. He's not in it to be a salesman. He's in it to put something so awesome in front of you that it sells itself.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by DaFace

In a weird way, it's actually a feature I like about him. He's not in it to be a salesman. He's in it to put something so awesome in front of you that it sells itself.

Yea, that's probably why they do it that way.


He really is a lead innovator of our time.

We need more like him.

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

You would think that Musk would be a better speaker.

Get the man a teleprompter or something


terrible

I love it. I hate polished salesman. Can't trust them. I prefer someone who tells me what they know, and verifies information in real time. It's easier to tell if you're getting greased.