green power solar is

[Old Koreelah]

...one thing about solar farms is they must shade an awful lot if ground - wonder what the environmental impact is (disclaimer - too lazy to do research and I know some sun gets through)

Good point, Jerry. I doubt it would have any more impact than covering that ground with a crop or forest.

 

Ideally, most PVs should be on rooftops- producing power close to the point of consumption, reducing installation costs, and avoiding covering up any more productive land.

 

 

[facthunter]

The nett effect is zero. (Unlike coal or nuclear where you are unlocking extra energy and dispersing it in a closed system). The solar energy captured by the panels is all used up in a way that the final form is low temperature heat energy. I've said this before.... Look up "heat...entropy". Sunlight can produce extreme high temperature energy. The most versatile form where you can synthesise things..Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...Sunlight can produce extreme high temperature energy. The most versatile form where you can synthesise things..Nev

Exactly true Nev, but you're battling against a lot of entrenched ignorance that can't imagine solar power producing enough energy to drive industry. I've been struggling with that since the 80s, when I taught a course I'd designed called "Solar Future". The limitations to how we use solar power are mostly in our heads. Only Luddites think we'll still need coal to produce steel.

 

 

[facthunter]

WE are battling a concerted attempt by monied Vested Interests in Coal, OIL and unconventional GAS, CSG. and networked supply methods where profits are guaranteed and large , and they want it kept that way.

 

The only natural gas is F@rting, (or methane, Marsh gas) but NATURAL sounds like "Well THAT can't do any harm can it?" CO2 is food for plants .That's loosely true too, but misleading as no plants are suffering from lack of it and extra amount may produce growth that is out of balance, (like excess nitrogen {in compound form}).

 

There is NO limit to the amount of solar you can safely use. You can waste it without a problem as it's coming to the earth anyhow. You can concentrate it with Lenses, Mirrors and fibre optics. The sky's the limit. as they say. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

Concentrate solar energy with mirrors onto a tank of salt, which will heat up and stay hot so that it can heat water to produce steam and drive a turbine. In other words replace a coal fired boiler with a solar, salt heated one. It has been done I believe in Spain. Nobody in any position of authority wants to know about it. It is much easier to let the coal barons, dig up good agricultural land to sell coal.

 

From what I see of coal mining it is a one off operation that leaves a desert.

 

 

[facthunter]

It's rarely even attempted to be restored( if that is possible). Aquifers and groundwater polluted forever practically or giant holes left which they will probably use for landfill one day. That's not desired either. Hidden pollution for ages after. It's not reasonable to do permanent damage and just leave it when it suites you. Why is mining given such latitude. Easy. They bribe. Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Yenn that technology might be a good way to extend the life of some old coal-burning power stations that have reached their use-by date. The generating and distribution infrastructure is still there and might get a new lease of life if powered by concentrated solar. I believe Liddel in the Hunter Valley had a trial solar array to pre-heat the water. I'd suggest the disused coal burner in SA might be a good place to try this- plenty of sunny days.

 

Unfortunately, for anyone to invest in this sort of project requires vision and a government committed to renewable energy- but this is Australia.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I used to work in the nuke industry many years ago and was staggered at the opposition to it, when considering the ecological damage wrought by fossil fuels compared to accidents including Chernobyl and TMI (Fukushima hadn't happened by then, but my guess is it wouldn't change much). Yes, the fallout of a nuke issue is intense although concentrated and dilutes as it spreads - but longer lasting - no question - but the overall impact on the earth's ecology is in general a lot less and it contributes less to deaths as well. However, the background radiation levels in atmosphere are undeniably higher and of course, if too many accidents happen, the scales will tip the other way (and there's the question of what to do with the waste - re-open Sellafield I say and make more volatile fuel - way to go... pls take that with a touch of sarcasm).

 

Although I may (should I push) have a vested interest in the resurrection in nuclear generation plants in the UK, I think it can be part of a bigger mix, that sees the retirement of fossil fuel. There is no need for nukes to be as expensive as it is, especially with the scalability and "plug and play" type technology that is small module reactors. However, it is part of a mix that supplements renewables and should see fossil be retired.

 

@Old Koreelah & @facthunter: Absolutely correct - it is about preserving profits. While I would never state without evidence that the government or its officials are accepting [illegal] bribes, there is one thing that the government gets from digging up all that carp - revenue in the form of royalties. As I understand it, the system is complex, but ultimately, a lot of government (both state and federal) revenue is derived by a mining royalty scheme and the coffers would be that much barer without them. Call it a bribe if you wish, but it's certainly a vested interest. So, big business (and employers) and big government see a casm and that I fear is too much to-heavy inertia, cosmic forces and short-sightedness to overcome.

 

My point about the shading of solar panels is that there is some ecological cost to all forms of energy production - but it's a bit like the lift/frag curve - it's about finding the right mix at the lowest cost - in this case ecologically economical (in the absence of government support). Think what you may of China, and it no doubt still has it's issues, but its ecological credentials (with a bit of spare cash to invest) is starting to emerge as a beacon against a very dim sea of smog..

 

 

[facthunter]

There's more information coming out all the time. IF you have to start and build a NEW source, Wind is the cheapest

 

.Existing coal that has amortised it's invested cost is cheapest of all, but they are coming to the end of their service lives. (50 years) and are inefficient and polluting. You are not comparing apples with apples with New Vs OLD. New compared with NEW, Coal is still behind Wind and even with battery backup wind's just ahead.

 

Trend for the future is renewables get cheaper still and coal doesn't. If fossil fuel subsidies are withdrawn and any price put on carbon It's dead. No one will invest because of the large. time frame to operate over and carbon targets have to be ignored which may prove difficult. I happen to hope they do go for a target and stick to it.

 

Nuclear may prove worth considering. A fail safe plug in thing must be a possibility. Prices quoted for this stuff is high, and disposal of waste must be considered. If it's close to the users you save transmission costs, and it's more secure, because of that. Nev

 

 

[spacesailor]

A couple of thoughts!

 

Today was a dismal one for solar, Too much smog from the burning off, (three people died from it last year).

 

Solar panel shade should be good in the right place, as it will let the barren earth cool enough for weeds to grow. ( dew dripping off the panels will water the ground)

 

Just my thoughts.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[nomadpete]

Even on a dismal solar day?

 

I have a 3kw grid feed solar system. Recently (mid winter in Tasmania) I braved the cold, grey drizzle to take a look at the inverter. To my surprise it was steadily feeding half a kilowatt to the grid in spite of overcast steady drizzle. Absolutely amazed at the efficiency of current solar panels.

 

True, though, there is a critical cloud density where the panels cease working. But I never expected to see useful energy coming from them while it was raining!

 

 

[facthunter]

It has to be nearly dark before my 4.15 (nominal) Kw shuts off at around 300watts. Nev

 

 

[hihosland]

If we are going to cut back on CO2 production; hot rocks and nuclear fusion look like the future of base load requirements .

 

In the mean time we need something to smooth out the disconnect between the demand and production cycles inherent in wind/solar/tidal.

 

Batteries, hot salt storage, pumped hydro or some other tech

 

 

[Marty_d]

In the mean time we need something to smooth out the disconnect between the demand and production cycles inherent in wind/solar/tidal.

 

Batteries, hot salt storage, pumped hydro or some other tech

All of the above.

 

I don't know why the government hasn't dragged CSIRO and the Productivity Commission into a room and said "Work out the most efficient way to transition us to a low-emission network. Don't worry about the politics, just the science."

 

(Well actually I know why the government hasn't done it, but they bloody well should.)

 

 

[Yenn]

I heard that Collinsville power station in Qld is going to have a solar array. Good to see it going again I was one of the first on site in the mid sixties when we built it.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

<snip>Nuclear may prove worth considering. A fail safe plug in thing must be a possibility. Prices quoted for this stuff is high, and disposal of waste must be considered. If it's close to the users you save transmission costs, and it's more secure, because of that. Nev

Just to clarify, by plug and play, I meant small module reactors can plug into existing generating infrastructure, and that refuelling, which for PWRs usually takes a minimum of 30 days, can be as little as a day (saving generators some £29m per refuelling on average and depending on energy trading volatility). Of course, waste is still the elephant in the room.

 

In theory we could use small module reactors for local energy as they do in military ships and subs, though security arrangements for those would tend to be better than a SMR in the back yard.

 

 

[facthunter]

Something better must always be available. Cars have come a long way since the first models 120 years ago. People get uneasy when BAD mistakes are made . Like Long Island Chernoble and tha Japanese Sunami result. The accidents are gross neglect in some cases. Chernoble (will never be fixed. It's a complete mess) Nev

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

One of the brilliant things (though it does have perverse side-effects in certain cases) is that human endeavour will (in the absence of politics - corporate or government) seek to solve problems than just live with them. So, yes, something better is available - we just have to harness it (would have said find it, but we already have - not to say we shouldn't search for something better still.. but you get the drift).

 

I was just making the point to ensure I wasn't being misinterpreted.

 

Of course, if you have money to burn, then you could do this for energy: A Chinese city is burning money for power instead of coal. There is a plant in the UK that does a similar thing but for the life of me I can't remember it (is it Oldbury?)

 

@facthunter - hope you're referring to Three Mile Island - been there and got the T-Shirt (literally - though when I suggested they make glow0in-the-dark ones, they didn't see the humorous side of it for some strange reason). Long Island is hopefully still intact (if you have a perverse sense of humour like myself, you may want to use a VPN and listen to the morning radio show on WBAB if it is still the same people as when I used to listen to it... makes our shock jocks look pretty tame)..

 

BTW - if anything, the TMI issue sapped the life out of the place.. Quite seriously, there and Harrisburg (where we were staying) are probably the most boring parts on earth I have been to... And I have stayed a week in Casterton and was able to stimulate the senses..

 

 

[facthunter]

Isn't long Island where they levelled the whole place? Only in America would you do that. .There are a lot of people against Nuclear (OR Nucular as our American friends refer to it as. They also have Aluminum for aluminium. I wonder what chromium is? Chromum? and Cadmum? for Cadmium.

 

Nuclear is quite weird. Fission is what we have now. Heavy elements divide . Fusion is what the Sun has Hydrogen to helium and maybe a few other weird things happening in the middle where there's just a bit of pressure existing in a "goldilocks" sized Star. Nev

 

 

[Bruce]

Where can you buy a fridge which works off gas ( or kero) and really works on a hot day?

 

It was the fridge which stopped me from going off the grid. My experience with a caravan fridge was that they were fine on cold days but no good on hot ones.

 

 

[facthunter]

Electric ovens, direct heating electric hot water, floor heat, radiators, electric Jugs, toasters, ALL pretty bad. Heat pumps for hot water supply and heat /cool unducted split system air conditioners now cheaper than gas for heating. You need insulation and stop air leaks. Some of the caravan fridges are OK if you let air get to the openings. I think you need a good brand and the (extra) battery just makes 24 hours. . Might be OK to have a couple of solar panels helping it in the heat of the day. Nev

 

 

[octave]

Where can you buy a fridge which works off gas ( or kero) and really works on a hot day?It was the fridge which stopped me from going off the grid. My experience with a caravan fridge was that they were fine on cold days but no good on hot ones.

3 way fridges are not very efficient when run on gas, I lived for 20 years with something similar to this Gas Fridge with Freezer Compartment - Arcticold - 280 Litres - Fridges & Freezers quite pricey but pretty efficient

 

 

[Bruce]

Thanks octave. The price of it reinforces my impression that saving the planet is something for rich people.

 

There was a dear old lady in Adelaide who was about the first to drive a Prius. Her name was Barbara Hardy and yes she was a multi-millionaire. But she genuinely did want to save the planet.

 

 

[spacesailor]

The Freezer.

 

Has anyone thought about using liquid carbon-dioxide.

 

It wouldn't take a large drip/ feed to freeze a compartment.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Thanks octave. The price of it reinforces my impression that saving the planet is something for rich people.There was a dear old lady in Adelaide who was about the first to drive a Prius. Her name was Barbara Hardy and yes she was a multi-millionaire. But she genuinely did want to save the planet.

Unf, any new technology, until it has hit economies of scale is usually going to be pretty pricey.. Ahh.. but these aren't really new technology.. Yeah.. but to the average and most populous households, they don't offer anything over the electron-guzzling behemoths now. So why spend the massive amounts to save the planet when we can nurture (or skow the natural entropy of) out bank accounts...