General discussion about sustainability of solar and other renewable energy sources

Status
Not open for further replies.
nitin_g3

nitin_g3

Herald
I was thinking that is it even possible to fulfil energy requirements completely by solar in a country or at very large scale.
We know that solar panels generate electricity during day time only.
What about night time?
And if solar can't fulfil energy requirements during night, how can we totally depend on solar?

If we look at other renewable sources like wind energy then we'll have to setup enough wind mills to fulfill energy needs at night.
And if we end up setting up enough wind mills which can fulfil energy requirements at night then there will be very less need of solar.

Is there any model in which there are no fossil fuel based power plants and which fully supports total energy requirements of a country?

This is an open forum and everyone is welcome to share their thoughts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xkcd0137
Solar panels plus a big enough battery bank is more than enough to run a household. You just have to oversize your installation to take into account cloudy days etc.
One would still have to rely on fossil fuels for industries and bigger transport. For metros and cities which haven't been developed properly, the solar generation will have to be done off site. Already we are seeing so many advances in battery tech. Recently both Bill Gates and Mukesh Ambani invested in a battery tech company which might have solution for grid level storage of electricity. Tesla has already installed their Mega batteries which are meant for grid-level installation in Australia and will be installing one in Texas soon. There is one airport in India which now fully runs on the solar power it produces. With solar becoming cheaper and mainstream, we will also save massive amounts which are usually spent on grid setup in rural areas. It would be much cheaper to install a solar system than to a lay a line for the government as well. I live in Himachal, which is an electricity surplus state and has the cheapest rates in the country, but I will be moving to solar as well, thanks to the subsidy. Even if there wasn't subsidy I was contemplating going for solar once solar products became even more cheap because of better (no voltage drops) and cleaner (hydroelctricity has it's own demerits and ecological costs) electricity production.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xkcd0137, dafreaking, Soyab0007 and 3 others
Very informative post @rdst_1
Thanks for sharing the knowledge. I wasn't aware of advancements in grid level energy storage. This would be a huge leap if we can store that much amount of electricity.
 
Tech for luddites has interesting videos on the topic. Check her channel out. The answer is a combination of renewable resources and nuclear energy.
 
Nuclear energy is the way forward (for now) that’s capable to meet energy requirements (24/7/365) without having the need to having huge tracts of land otherwise would be taken up for solar or wind.

But then there is public perception of them being unsafe which will not make it main stream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stronk
There is this interesting series of 4 small videos made by the 'Physics Girl' on youtube that I just came across today. It talks about Hydrogen (because Toyota sponsored it), but also talks about CSP or Concentrated Solar Power which was a new concept for me.


Someone mentioned about Nuclear waste and I remember reading it somewhere recently that in the recent new tech related to Nuclear Energy, they have reached insanely low levels of nuclear waste. But yes, nuclear energy will always be inherently dangerous and the main issue is that if an accident was to occur, then damage is not confined and it spreads to a much larger area.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stronk
I was waiting for the graphene battery which Samsung announced last year. After that, no news,
has watched several videos of graphene technology and it's far better than lithium batteries. Lightweight, can have more capacity

Why does Graphene technology doesn't take off?

4fe5esfs.PNG
 
  1. Implementing solar/wind energy at national grid level is nothing like writing an essay on green energy in school.
  2. There's a limit on how much solar or wind energy you can add to grid. Energy sources need to be reliable. They shouldn't under produce or over produce. They should reliably spin up or down according to needs. You really can't expect solar or wind to completely replace traditional ways. Solar can't produce energy in monson or when it's night. Similar things are true for wind. Talking about energy store for a nation like India is as relevant as walking on the Venus.
  3. Solar for grid is one of the expensive ways to make energy and we as a developing nation can't afford it. We are already paying most expensive Californian rates in India. But we are not earning californian salaries here in India. China has one of the cheapest rates in the world. You can't go green with expensive rates. There are industries like Tata, bajaj, birla, mahindra etc whoever needs to liquefy metals or handle high energy chemical reactions like making cement, they will never stop using coal for their energy needs if the rates don't go down. Rates are so retard high that, if there weren't any regulation or control, most of the industries instead of purchasing electricity from govt, would rather run diesel generators because it's cheaper. Most industrious state of India, Maharashtra, taxes the industry for running their own gensets even in case of load shedding. We are at this stupid level of expensiveness. You can't make it more expensive by increasing solar.
  4. 'Coal India': the company Gen Z never heard of. Until recently this company was theeee faacking biggest company in India. Please read correctly, I didn't say 'one of the biggest'. Today you casually say how much ambanis' influence politicians. Coal India was so frighteningly big that it could chew ambanis for breakfast. Do you expect, they never influenced politicians? Indian oil which was a second for the longest time and it wasn't even close second. Majority of top 10 companies ever ruled Indian industries are specialist in making CO2. If you think they don't influence policy makers then you must be a gen alpha.
  5. Solar at home level, on the other hand, is a cheat code. Did you enjoy GTA san andreas cheat code or counter strike low gravity cheat codes? I'll bet you'll enjoy solar on your terrace ten times more. It's so cheap that it pays for itself in 2 years. And next 50 years is pure profit. We are going EVs route for our next vehicles, no one can deny that. Having solar today, makes your home air conditioned, cooks you food and it also charges your vehicle. Best time to get it is today because of the subsidies. Subsidies are going to run out. You are directly competing Tatas, ambanis at their own game. They can pay policy makers and they will indeed overturn the subsidies. They have invested billions to run their business, you won't be allowed to destroy their livelihoods for long. It has already happened in some countries, don't expect it will never happen in India.
  6. Nuclear is only green and renewable of the traditional reliable methods. India practically has infinite supply of Thorium. First reactors made were based on thorium and not uranium. You can't make atom bomb out of thorium reactor, is the sole reason why they never caught on. Nuclear energy is very expensive in short term but if talking about long term it's one of the cheapest if not the cheapest. Nuclear plants look like a small IT companies. That big fat chimney from Chernobyl or dark series is not an accurate representation of nuclear plants today. Nuclear is more green than solar, wind or hydroelectric. Yes, hydroelectric dams aren't green. They are always, without mistake, built by submerging a forest. So they do cause a net positive carbon emission. Hydroelectric dams do make good batteries for solar but then again our country is one third of that china and will have higher population than china in a year. Where are we going to put them?
  7. All energy creation methods create some waste more or less. Nuclear, solar, wind, coal, gas. It's called entropy. When you extract energy from stuff, the stuff remains, it only moves to lower energy state, less usable state. Manufacturing of solar panels or building hydroelectric dam do create waste. It's important how we manage it. Waste from coal plants is released directly in the air and 3 lakh people die every year as a result. I haven't heard nuclear waste killing anyone. Until we become proficient at fusion energy, we need to use fission energy if we ever want to call ourselves a super power.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: frozenscotch, kalph09, nitin_g3 and 1 other person
Very informative and well written @lockhrt999.

Also wanted to point out that here in Rajasthan the solar installation pays for itself in about 5 years and not just 2 years which may be the case in other states with high subsidy and other factors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrkLord
Man, if one can afford a solar panel grid in their homes, they should go for it. I'm not asking people to take out loans for it. But, if they are comfy with money, there should go for it. Education in India is not very good. But nearly every person who has passed 12th grade knows about climate change and ways an individual can help combat it. Although changes in policies much more aligned with combating climate change will be more effective but that is a topic for another day. People are not going to leave their jobs, their responsibilities to go petition lawmakers for better energy solutions. But what they can do is fitting their homes with solar grid and rain water harvesting equipment. This might sound like a school essay. But one doesn't need phd level arguments for something so blatantly in our faces.
 
lockhrt999 said:
  1. Implementing solar/wind energy at national grid level is nothing like writing an essay on green energy in school.
  2. There's a limit on how much solar or wind energy you can add to grid. Energy sources need to be reliable. They shouldn't under produce or over produce. They should reliably spin up or down according to needs. You really can't expect solar or wind to completely replace traditional ways. Solar can't produce energy in monson or when it's night. Similar things are true for wind. Talking about energy store for a nation like India is as relevant as walking on the Venus.
  3. Solar for grid is one of the expensive ways to make energy and we as a developing nation can't afford it. We are already paying most expensive Californian rates in India. But we are not earning californian salaries here in India. China has one of the cheapest rates in the world. You can't go green with expensive rates. There are industries like Tata, bajaj, birla, mahindra etc whoever needs to liquefy metals or handle high energy chemical reactions like making cement, they will never stop using coal for their energy needs if the rates don't go down. Rates are so retard high that, if there weren't any regulation or control, most of the industries instead of purchasing electricity from govt, would rather run diesel generators because it's cheaper. Most industrious state of India, Maharashtra, taxes the industry for running their own gensets even in case of load shedding. We are at this stupid level of expensiveness. You can't make it more expensive by increasing solar.
  4. 'Coal India': the company Gen Z never heard of. Until recently this company was theeee faacking biggest company in India. Please read correctly, I didn't say 'one of the biggest'. Today you casually say how much ambanis' influence politicians. Coal India was so frighteningly big that it could chew ambanis for breakfast. Do you expect, they never influenced politicians? Indian oil which was a second for the longest time and it wasn't even close second. Majority of top 10 companies ever ruled Indian industries are specialist in making CO2. If you think they don't influence policy makers then you must be a gen alpha.
  5. Solar at home level, on the other hand, is a cheat code. Did you enjoy GTA san andreas cheat code or counter strike low gravity cheat codes? I'll bet you'll enjoy solar on your terrace ten times more. It's so cheap that it pays for itself in 2 years. And next 50 years is pure profit. We are going EVs route for our next vehicles, no one can deny that. Having solar today, makes your home air conditioned, cooks you food and it also charges your vehicle. Best time to get it is today because of the subsidies. Subsidies are going to run out. You are directly competing Tatas, ambanis at their own game. They can pay policy makers and they will indeed overturn the subsidies. They have invested billions to run their business, you won't be allowed to destroy their livelihoods for long. It has already happened in some countries, don't expect it will never happen in India.
  6. Nuclear is only green and renewable of the traditional reliable methods. India practically has infinite supply of Thorium. First reactors made were based on thorium and not uranium. You can't make atom bomb out of thorium reactor, is the sole reason why they never caught on. Nuclear energy is very expensive in short term but if talking about long term it's one of the cheapest if not the cheapest. Nuclear plants look like a small IT companies. That big fat chimney from Chernobyl or dark series is not an accurate representation of nuclear plants today. Nuclear is more green than solar, wind or hydroelectric. Yes, hydroelectric dams aren't green. They are always, without mistake, built by submerging a forest. So they do cause a net positive carbon emission. Hydroelectric dams do make good batteries for solar but then again our country is one third of that china and will have higher population than china in a year. Where are we going to put them?
  7. All energy creation methods create some waste more or less. Nuclear, solar, wind, coal, gas. It's called entropy. When you extract energy from stuff, the stuff remains, it only moves to lower energy state, less usable state. Manufacturing of solar panels or building hydroelectric dam do create waste. It's important how we manage it. Waste from coal plants is released directly in the air and 3 lakh people die every year as a result. I haven't heard nuclear waste killing anyone. Until we become proficient at fusion energy, we need to use fission energy if we ever want to call ourselves a super power.
Click to expand...
I didn't understand what you were trying to say about Coal India and Indian Oil which are both government companies. They will have no lobbying powers as the govt already owns them so they can already do what they want with them as has been recently shown when they were made to deplete their vast cash reserves by the govt.

Also, check out the video on CSP that I have posted above which shows how modern solar plants are working towards and also successfully implementing storages for their solar plants so it's not too far a stretch to have grid level solar plants. Sure, maybe India doesn't have such vast land tracts available but in India, we can at least go ahead and help reduce the load on the grid by using our rooftops to produce as much electricity from solar as we can. There is an estimate that just the landmass available in Sahara desert is enough to produce enough solar energy for the whole world. With the research and advancements in solar and energy storage tech we are seeing these days, it might be totally feasible to efficiently and cheaply transfer solar generated power in the coming decades.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrkLord
www.dw.com

Nuclear radiation in the deep blue sea – DW – 03/11/2020

The nuclear disaster at Fukushima sent an unprecedented amount of radiation into the Pacific. But, before then, atomic bomb tests and radioactive waste were contaminating the sea — the effects are still being felt today.
www.dw.com www.dw.com
This may sound unrelated but waste management and recycling are equally important for green energy. If you cannot then they are no different from the traditional sources. Solar and wind may be mainstream but they are yet to solve the problem of storage and transmission.
I recall seeing a video where a guy converted his entire home off grid to obtain electricity from green sources. I will try and search for that video as it was pretty instructive.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DrkLord
ibose said:
www.dw.com

Nuclear radiation in the deep blue sea – DW – 03/11/2020

The nuclear disaster at Fukushima sent an unprecedented amount of radiation into the Pacific. But, before then, atomic bomb tests and radioactive waste were contaminating the sea — the effects are still being felt today.
www.dw.com www.dw.com
This may sound unrelated but waste management and recycling are equally important for green energy. If you cannot then they are no different from the traditional sources. Solar and wind may be mainstream but they are yet to solve the problem of storage and transmission.
I recall seeing a video where a guy converted his entire home off grid to obtain electricity from green sources. I will try and search for that video as it was pretty instructive.
Click to expand...
That has been done by a lot of people. One company even repurposes old Tesla batteries for home usage. The same guy who runs that company has his whole house off grid and he even charges his two Teslas from his solar panel. So after his initial investment he doesn't have to pay for the next 20 odd years for either his house needs or his transport.
Also, Tesla had released just a few years ago that they have achieved nearly 100% recyclability in their battery design and they even released their battery designs for everyone to use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ibose and DrkLord
DrkLord said:
Nuclear is the way to go.
Click to expand...
I put more thought into this and have come to a new understanding: solar is the way to go. But I wonder why people push for nuclear, is it because its output can be ramped up and down as per demand and for solar it can't?
Is it because it generates employment for many years to come, from building the infra, to operating it, to maintaining it?
 
DrkLord said:
I put more thought into this and have come to a new understanding: solar is the way to go. But I wonder why people push for nuclear, is it because its output can be ramped up and down as per demand and for solar it can't?
Is it because it generates employment for many years to come, from building the infra, to operating it, to maintaining it?
Click to expand...
Current issue with solar are 2 pronged -
a) It needs lot of area and there still are vagaries due to cloud cover etc.
b) Storage of solar energy for later use at night. Lots of work is being done in this regard.

On both these points, nuclear energy is better. Apart from the inherent danger of nuclear energy, it is one of the better sources. But in a populous country like India, this danger increases because if something was to go wrong, then it will affect 10 times more people than it would elsewhere. Also, it will also make the whole area it affects uninhabitable for years. In a country like India, which already doesn't have a lot of land, that would have lot more bitter consequences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stronk and DrkLord
If you're looking for home use, an on grid system is great. Just link to the grid in hours when electricity is not being produced by solar. You can get away without the expense of batteries. If you fall in the higher slabs and have roof space, its a no brainer. Return on investment is approx 25-35% on investment, every year, for 25 years, depending on what size you install. Its lower for bigger installs but in the long terms they are much more profitable as they produce more and for much longer. And your energy needs will only grow.

Unfortunately the prices are going up right now. So if you can wait a year, things will be much better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lockhrt999
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom