# Huge Solar Fail



## Manonthestreet

After already receiving a controversial $1.6 billion construction loan from U.S. taxpayers, the wealthy investors of a California solar power plant now want a $539 million federal grant to pay off their federal loan. World s largest solar plant applying for federal grant to pay off federal loan Fox News  Only producing qtr of advertised power.....ooooppps


----------



## Mr. H.

This at a time when the EPA is shuttering coal power plants across the country. 
Great strategy, numbnuts prez. Duuuh huuuh...


----------



## Manonthestreet

If it doesnt work in the desert exactly where will it work....


----------



## Old Rocks

*One project not doing so good, but look at these.*

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0

In Texas, Austin Energy signed a deal this spring for 20 years of output from a solar farm at less than 5 cents a kilowatt-hour. In September, the Grand River Dam Authority in Oklahoma announced its approval of a new agreement to buy power from a new wind farm expected to be completed next year. Grand River estimated the deal would save its customers roughly $50 million from the project.

And, also in Oklahoma, American Electric Power ended up tripling the amount of wind power it had originally sought after seeing how low the bids came in last year.

“Wind was on sale — it was a Blue Light Special,” said Jay Godfrey, managing director of renewable energy for the company. He noted that Oklahoma, unlike many states, did not require utilities to buy power from renewable sources.

“We were doing it because it made sense for our ratepayers,” he said.

According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energy is as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.

“It is really quite notable, when compared to where we were just five years ago, to see the decline in the cost of these technologies,” said Jonathan Mir, a managing director at Lazard, which has been comparing the economics of power generation technologies since 2008.


----------



## Treeshepherd

Manonthestreet said:


> If it doesnt work in the desert exactly where will it work....



Last weekend in Santa Cruz I helped my friend install 16 panels on his roof. I guess you could call Santa Cruz a coastal desert. Total capacity at noon on a sunny day will be about 3.1 kilowatts.

He brought me in to be a strong back and a weak mind. But, I learned quite a bit. It's almost plug and play. The connections are designed to snap together. Hooked it up to the Romex and down to the fuse box.

It took a few years of talking, and $10,000. But now he's free. He has purchased his freedom. He makes his own power.

Gigantic stimulus-program solar projects out in the desert are not an appropriate application of solar. Where the interests of progtards and Reptards meet is on the homeowner rooftop. It's up on those composite shingles.

The power companies want to keep sending you a bill every month, whether they're selling alternative energy or coal. The future is in distributed power and the grid equivalent of a mesh network where the excess power you generate flows to your most immediate neighbor in need. Harmonious anarchy.

That's what we're setting up here in California. Solar panels are contagious.


----------



## Manonthestreet

No way you are putting up an array on a house that will power it in full for ten grand.  I follow the prices here, waiting for the ever promised " its going to be cheaper ...." blah blah blah.......try 20 grand ya might be close.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Classic Progressive envirniomental economics: Public losses, private gains


----------



## Treeshepherd

Manonthestreet said:


> No way you are putting up an array on a house that will power it in full for ten grand.  I follow the prices here, waiting for the ever promised " its going to be cheaper ...." blah blah blah.......try 20 grand ya might be close.



He bought 16 LG panels from Korea at $300 a pop. That's $4800. Then we had 16 micro inverters- that's about $2500. Some trunk cable, 30 feet of Romex, an $80 fuse. Permitting. Yeah, he came out at $10,000 for 3.1 kW. He paid me in beer and weed to help install it.


----------



## Old Rocks

Manonthestreet said:


> No way you are putting up an array on a house that will power it in full for ten grand.  I follow the prices here, waiting for the ever promised " its going to be cheaper ...." blah blah blah.......try 20 grand ya might be close.



http://www.wholesalesolar.com/grid-tie-battery-backup.html

Grid-tie Solar Systems with Emergency Battery Backup
Wholesale Solar has designed the following Gridtie Systems with Battery Backup for emergency power outages. Sophisticated Outback Power GVFX3638 vented inverters allow your gridtied solar panels to charge a battery bank, even when the grid goes down.

These systems are designed to power 120-volt circuits only. With the help of a Wholesale Solar technician, you can select the appliances that you want powered during an emergency power outages, and then choose the correct battery bank size. Call us! We are ready to help!

Grid-tie Battery Backup with 6 Astronergy Solar Panels 1,530 120 Not Included up to 208 kWh 6 See Options 1890600
$6,071
Grid-tie Battery Backup with 9 Astronergy Solar Panels 2,295 120 Not Included up to 312 kWh 9 See Options 1890605
$6,731
Grid-tie Battery Backup with 12 Astronergy Solar Panels 3,060 120 Not Included up to 416 kWh 12 See Options 1890610
$7,701
Grid-tie Battery Backup with 15 Astronergy Solar Panels 3,825 120 Not Included up to 520 kWh 15 See Options 1890615
$8,711
1. STC is Standard Test conditions or factory ratings. PTC is

*Really?*


----------



## Old Rocks

Best Solar Panels Wholesale Direct

Wholesale Solar Panels by Manufacturer PVPower.com

Just two sites on the net that offer solar for a lot less than the price you quoted.


----------



## Treeshepherd

My buddy on last weekend's project has no batteries. He's tied into the grid. Battery storage will cost you extra.

Now, I know a lot of people up in Humboldt who are completely off the grid. They run integrated systems comprised of solar panels, wind generators and Pelton wheels. They have deep cell motor home batteries for storage, and gas generators for backup power. That's more my style. Then again, those folks have a very small energy footprint, as do I. I would never need 3.1kW to satisfy my needs.


----------



## Manonthestreet

dontcare wHAT YA CLAIM still call bs.....on powering whole house full time......


----------



## Manonthestreet

especially when a solar road will only power three homes for  million


----------



## westwall

It's impossible to power a home 100% on solar alone.  My solar array provides about 40% of the energy I need, on a good day.  My water wheel on the other hand is very useful providing 60% 24/7 until winter freezes up the creek, then we have to rely solely on grid power which is way cheaper than the generator we have in case there is a grid failure.


----------



## Treeshepherd

It's impossible to power a home on solar if you leave the lights on full-time and have a 5,000 cubic foot refrigerator and wash your kids pajamas every day. 

I know too many people who make alternative energy work to entertain your grumpy, negative, backassward views. We'll move on without you.


----------



## Manonthestreet

Thanks for admitting the fail.  Have a friend who bought 8 high end panels and whirly gig to go with it and full bank of batts.......might run his fridge for two days in an emergency all for 5  grand


----------



## Treeshepherd

It's just unfathomable to me how a right wing conservative would be opposed to producing his own power.


----------



## Manonthestreet

see post above.........when ya have something that actually works let me know


----------



## Treeshepherd

Yeah, we just installed a 3.1kW system. It works. Your next power bill, remember that some people ain't paying no more.

Let us know when you're tired of paying monthly bills to the coal company. That never gets old, right?


----------



## Old Rocks

Manonthestreet said:


> see post above.........when ya have something that actually works let me know


My, what a dumb ass. Deliberatly denying reality.



*Key Findings*

Photovoltaic (PV) installations reached 930 MW in Q3 2013, up 20% over Q2 2013. This represents the second-largest quarter for solar installations in U.S. history
While the utility solar sector represented more than half of new PV capacity installed, the residential market showed significant growth and posted the segment’s largest quarter in history with 186 MW installed  
The non-residential sector has suffered from a number of contracting state markets and we anticipate a flat 2013; however, we expect a strong resumption of growth in 2014
2013 may be the first year in more than a decade in which the U.S. installs more solar capacity than Germany
Blended average PV system prices fell 4.2% in Q3 2013 compared to the previous quarter, reaching a new low of $3.00/W
We forecast that the U.S. will install a total of 4.3 GW of new PV in 2013, up 27% over 2012
The wave of concentrating solar power installations slated for completion at the end of this year kicked off with the 280 MWac Solana project, which came online in October 2013
*Looks like willfully ignorant fools like you will be paying the utilities for decades to come while the rest of us are powering our homes and vehicles ourselves. But you love to give your hard earned to the corperations. Then again, being an extreme 'Conservative', there is a very good chance you are a welfare case.*


----------



## Old Rocks

westwall said:


> It's impossible to power a home 100% on solar alone.  My solar array provides about 40% of the energy I need, on a good day.  My water wheel on the other hand is very useful providing 60% 24/7 until winter freezes up the creek, then we have to rely solely on grid power which is way cheaper than the generator we have in case there is a grid failure.


* And, as usual, Walleyes is lying through his teeth. Completely possible, either with a grid tied system, or a stand alone system.

Solar-powering a House - HowStuffWorks

What would you have to do to power your house with solar energy? Although it's not as simple as just slapping some modules on your roof, it's not extremely difficult to do, either.

How many solar panels do I need on my house to become energy independent MIT School of Engineering

Mailoa would rephrase the question as follows to get at some of the necessary details: “Given my average consumption of X kWh of electricity per year, and the annual average of Y kWh/m2/day of solar insolation, how many solar panels of efficiency Z% will I need to install for my home to become energy independent?”    

The first of those variables is the amount of energy your house uses, which depends on things we’re all pretty aware of—whether you turn the lights off when you leave a room, how much you run your air conditioning unit when it gets hot, etc. The less electricity you use, the fewer solar panels you’ll need.  

Now Walleyes says you cannot completely power your home with solar. MIT says you can. Oh, who to believe.


*


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's impossible to power a home 100% on solar alone.  My solar array provides about 40% of the energy I need, on a good day.  My water wheel on the other hand is very useful providing 60% 24/7 until winter freezes up the creek, then we have to rely solely on grid power which is way cheaper than the generator we have in case there is a grid failure.
> 
> 
> 
> * And, as usual, Walleyes is lying through his teeth. Completely possible, either with a grid tied system, or a stand alone system.
> 
> Solar-powering a House - HowStuffWorks
> 
> What would you have to do to power your house with solar energy? Although it's not as simple as just slapping some modules on your roof, it's not extremely difficult to do, either.
> 
> How many solar panels do I need on my house to become energy independent MIT School of Engineering
> 
> Mailoa would rephrase the question as follows to get at some of the necessary details: “Given my average consumption of X kWh of electricity per year, and the annual average of Y kWh/m2/day of solar insolation, how many solar panels of efficiency Z% will I need to install for my home to become energy independent?”
> 
> The first of those variables is the amount of energy your house uses, which depends on things we’re all pretty aware of—whether you turn the lights off when you leave a room, how much you run your air conditioning unit when it gets hot, etc. The less electricity you use, the fewer solar panels you’ll need.
> 
> Now Walleyes says you cannot completely power your home with solar. MIT says you can. Oh, who to believe.
> 
> *
Click to expand...







Maybe I should have put it this way....if you only have to power a few lights, and a refrigerator, and maybe a computer for a short period of time, and the sun is up 24/7 and there are never storms to block the sun, then yes.  You can power your house with solar.  However, those of us who don't live in small houses, and have freezers, and other large power users, and don't live in the desert, and don't live where there are storms....we can't seem to make solar work. 

How's your solar set up going?  Have you bought your e pickup truck yet?  Have you been able to cash any dividend checks from Ivanpah?  Why is it that they are so far down on power generation?  Why can't they make a 1.6 BILLION dollar solar system work?  Hmmmm?  MIT says it's easy.  So what's the story?


----------



## Old Rocks

Oh my, who to believe, the engineers at MIT, or Walleyes. LOL


----------



## elektra

Old Rocks said:


> Oh my, who to believe, the engineers at MIT, or Walleyes. LOL


Oh my God, its Old Crock, who does not know a thing about anything, last I posted I called you out on the Steel Industry Old Crock claims to have had a career in, Old Crock you know nothing about steel let alone MIT, let alone Solar.

Old Crock hides from most posts that are fact, if Old Crock replies its with an insult. 

I do not need to follow one link or read one of Old Crock's posts to know, that.....

Old Crock is simply a, "CROCK", and yes, I know, "link", well, here you go, the link Old Crock always demands.

Urban Dictionary crock of shit



> crock of shit
> More politely known as "a pile of poo", the term "a crock of shit" derives from an ancient Roman custom that coincidentally took place in Roman times. It referred literally to a pot into which people would excrete if they were particularly bored by whichever freelance philosoper happened to be talking rubbish at the time. The Roman empire employed crock-monitors who were each assigned to a philosopher, and it was their job to monitor the pot (or crock). Should the crock become full, it would be presented to the philospher, who was obliged, by law, to announce that it bore a remarkable resembence to himself, thus proclaiming he was full of crap and was, in fact, talking a crock of shit.


----------



## daveman

Old Rocks said:


> *One project not doing so good, but look at these.*
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0
> 
> In Texas, Austin Energy signed a deal this spring for 20 years of output from a solar farm at less than 5 cents a kilowatt-hour. In September, the Grand River Dam Authority in Oklahoma announced its approval of a new agreement to buy power from a new wind farm expected to be completed next year. Grand River estimated the deal would save its customers roughly $50 million from the project.
> 
> And, also in Oklahoma, American Electric Power ended up tripling the amount of wind power it had originally sought after seeing how low the bids came in last year.
> 
> “Wind was on sale — it was a Blue Light Special,” said Jay Godfrey, managing director of renewable energy for the company. He noted that Oklahoma, unlike many states, did not require utilities to buy power from renewable sources.
> 
> “We were doing it because it made sense for our ratepayers,” he said.
> 
> According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energy is as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.
> 
> “It is really quite notable, when compared to where we were just five years ago, to see the decline in the cost of these technologies,” said Jonathan Mir, a managing director at Lazard, which has been comparing the economics of power generation technologies since 2008.


Projections and wishful thinking.  These projects won't be successful until they deliver on their promises.

And so far, very, very few have.


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> Oh my, who to believe, the engineers at MIT, or Walleyes. LOL








I believe it was MIT engineers who built the failed 1.6 billion dollar Ivanpah solar plant, so clearly they aren't to be listened too.


----------



## elektra

Anybody ever put a dollar amount on the Free Research given to Solar from all our government Universities, such as MIT. 

All that money diverted from stuff like Childhood Cancer research, so that a the Socialists can try a Utopian dream. 

It really is a tragedy, the money wasted, the money unaccounted for, while hunger and poverty get worst because of all these failed ideas.


----------



## Politico

Manonthestreet said:


> No way you are putting up an array on a house that will power it in full for ten grand.  I follow the prices here, waiting for the ever promised " its going to be cheaper ...." blah blah blah.......try 20 grand ya might be close.


It could be done if you live like a Hobbit. That is not the point. Making a logistical comparison between a single home and a power plant is idiotic.


----------



## Saigon

Well, this project seems to work....

*Ivanpah*
BrightSource’s LPT solar thermal system is operating at the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System (ISEGS) in California’s Mojave Desert. Ivanpah, which began commercial operation in 2013, is delivering power to PG&E and Southern California Edison. The project is currently the largest solar thermal power plant in the world. Ivanpah was constructed by Bechtel and is operated by NRG Energy, one of the project's equity investors.

A 377 megawatt net solar complex using mirrors to focus the power of the sun on solar receivers atop power towers.


The electricity generated by all three plants is enough to serve more than 140,000 homes in California during the peak hours of the day.
The complex will reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by more than 400,000 tons per year.
Located in Ivanpah, approximately 50 miles northwest of Needles, California (about five miles from the California-Nevada border) on federal land managed by the Bureau of Land Management.
The facility is comprised of three separate plants built in phases between 2010 and 2013, and uses BrightSource Energy’s LPT solar thermal technology.

Solar Project in California Desert Ivanpah World s Largest Solar Plant

It's also worth keeping in mind that up to 90% of homes in some Mediterranean countries have solar panels. I think the residents of those homes would be surprised to hear that it doesn't work....


----------



## Old Rocks

Our 'Conservatives' are some of the most willfully ignorant people in the world. They beleive that if they cannot see it from their front porch, it does not exist. 

Solar is working all over the world, and is wonderfully scalable from installations measured in wattage, to those measure in multiple megawattage. A, like the one in Texas that will be delivering electricity for less than a nickel a kilowatt, they, and wind, are going to shut down the coal fired plants on simple economics.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0

In Texas, Austin Energy signed a deal this spring for 20 years of output from a solar farm at less than 5 cents a kilowatt-hour. In September, the Grand River Dam Authority in Oklahoma announced its approval of a new agreement to buy power from a new wind farm expected to be completed next year. Grand River estimated the deal would save its customers roughly $50 million from the project.


----------



## Old Rocks

elektra said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my, who to believe, the engineers at MIT, or Walleyes. LOL
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my God, its Old Crock, who does not know a thing about anything, last I posted I called you out on the Steel Industry Old Crock claims to have had a career in, Old Crock you know nothing about steel let alone MIT, let alone Solar.
> 
> Old Crock hides from most posts that are fact, if Old Crock replies its with an insult.
> 
> I do not need to follow one link or read one of Old Crock's posts to know, that.....
> 
> Old Crock is simply a, "CROCK", and yes, I know, "link", well, here you go, the link Old Crock always demands.
> 
> Urban Dictionary crock of shit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> crock of shit
> More politely known as "a pile of poo", the term "a crock of shit" derives from an ancient Roman custom that coincidentally took place in Roman times. It referred literally to a pot into which people would excrete if they were particularly bored by whichever freelance philosoper happened to be talking rubbish at the time. The Roman empire employed crock-monitors who were each assigned to a philosopher, and it was their job to monitor the pot (or crock). Should the crock become full, it would be presented to the philospher, who was obliged, by law, to announce that it bore a remarkable resembence to himself, thus proclaiming he was full of crap and was, in fact, talking a crock of shit.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

My, my. LOL


----------



## mamooth

World's biggest solar farm, 550 MW, goes online in California. It's only world's biggest until next year, when a 579 MW facility also comes online.

Watch the world s largest solar power plant being built Huge farm generates energy for 160 000 homes using nine MILLION panels Daily Mail Online
---
Spanning a huge 9.5 square miles (25 square km) - a third of the size of Manhattan - the Topaz Solar Farm consists of nine million solar panels and has a capacity of 550 megawatts.
---


----------



## westwall

Saigon said:


> Well, this project seems to work....
> 
> *Ivanpah*
> BrightSource’s LPT solar thermal system is operating at the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System (ISEGS) in California’s Mojave Desert. Ivanpah, which began commercial operation in 2013, is delivering power to PG&E and Southern California Edison. The project is currently the largest solar thermal power plant in the world. Ivanpah was constructed by Bechtel and is operated by NRG Energy, one of the project's equity investors.
> 
> A 377 megawatt net solar complex using mirrors to focus the power of the sun on solar receivers atop power towers.
> 
> 
> The electricity generated by all three plants is enough to serve more than 140,000 homes in California during the peak hours of the day.
> The complex will reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by more than 400,000 tons per year.
> Located in Ivanpah, approximately 50 miles northwest of Needles, California (about five miles from the California-Nevada border) on federal land managed by the Bureau of Land Management.
> The facility is comprised of three separate plants built in phases between 2010 and 2013, and uses BrightSource Energy’s LPT solar thermal technology.
> 
> Solar Project in California Desert Ivanpah World s Largest Solar Plant
> 
> It's also worth keeping in mind that up to 90% of homes in some Mediterranean countries have solar panels. I think the residents of those homes would be surprised to hear that it doesn't work....






  You idiot!   That's the 1.6 BILLION dollar project that has failed that we are talking about nimrod!

Here are some links to get you caught up to the real world.   I thought you claimed to be a "journalist"?..

*VIDEO: Ivanpah solar power plant not generating as much power as expected*
VIDEO Ivanpah solar power plant not generating as much power as expected - Electric Light Power

The Ivanpah concentrated solar power plant in the California Mojave desert near Primm Nevada is not producing nearly as much electricity as predicted. Natural gas, not the heat of the sun, is being used more than originally projected to power the turbines. CSP works by reflecting the heat of the sun from heliostat mirrors to a central tower to run the turbines. *Ivanpah has produced a mere 25% of expected electricity since December 2013 when it began production, a dismal result indeed*. - See more at: Ivanpah solar power plant generating way less power than expected Politics in the Zeros

Ivanpah solar power plant generating way less power than expected Politics in the Zeros


"Factors such as clouds, jet contrails and weather have had a greater impact on the plant than the owners anticipated," the agency said in a statement.
It could take until 2018 for the plant backed by $1.6 billion in federal loan guarantees to hit its annual peak target, said NRG Energy Inc., which operates the plant and co-owns it with Google Inc. and BrightSource Energy.
"During startup we have experienced ... equipment challenges, typical with any new technology, combined with irregular weather patterns," NRG spokesman Jeff Holland said in a statement. "We are confident that Ivanpah's long-term generation projections will meet expectations."
The technology used at Ivanpah is different than the familiar photovoltaic panels commonly used for rooftop solar installations. The plant's solar-thermal system — sometimes called concentrated-solar thermal — relies on nearly 350,000 computer-controlled mirrors at the site, each the size of a garage door."

Ivanpah Solar Plant Lags In Early Production



There you go genius.  Get caught up.  Your fundamental lack of knowledge on something so easily researched demolishes whatever credibility you thought you had.  Jesus wept man...how can you be so grossly incompetent!


----------



## westwall

mamooth said:


> World's biggest solar farm, 550 MW, goes online in California. It's only world's biggest until next year, when a 579 MW facility also comes online.
> 
> Watch the world s largest solar power plant being built Huge farm generates energy for 160 000 homes using nine MILLION panels Daily Mail Online
> ---
> Spanning a huge 9.5 square miles (25 square km) - a third of the size of Manhattan - the Topaz Solar Farm consists of nine million solar panels and has a capacity of 550 megawatts.
> ---






And how much do you want to bet that it performs just as shitty as Ivanpah does?


----------



## mamooth

Back in reality, a place far from Denierstan, the clean energy loan program has made profits for the government.

After Solyndra Loss U.S. Energy Loan Program Turning A Profit NPR
---
Overall, the agency has loaned $34.2 billion to a variety of businesses, under a program designed to speed up development of clean-energy technology. Companies have defaulted on $780 million of that — a loss rate of 2.28 percent. The agency also has collected $810 million in interest payments, putting the program $30 million in the black.
---


----------



## westwall

mamooth said:


> Back in reality, a place far from Denierstan, the clean energy loan program has made profits for the government.
> 
> After Solyndra Loss U.S. Energy Loan Program Turning A Profit NPR
> ---
> Overall, the agency has loaned $34.2 billion to a variety of businesses, under a program designed to speed up development of clean-energy technology. Companies have defaulted on $780 million of that — a loss rate of 2.28 percent. The agency also has collected $810 million in interest payments, putting the program $30 million in the black.
> ---







Sure they have.  They have had to resort to robbing Peter to pay Paul, just like GM had to borrow money from the government to pay off the government loans.  Really, mammy.  If you are going to make your arguments this poorly you should just quit.  You're losing it.


----------



## mamooth

Yet I'm not the one inventing a new conspiracy theory to cover for his old conspiracy theory getting debunked.

Your anti-renewable vendetta keeps looking dumber. Do you plan to cling to it forever, or will you be staging a stealthy retreat from it soon? I'd suggest the latter. Don't worry, I won't hang it over your head.


----------



## Manonthestreet

Germany building coal plants as quick as they can cause ....solar and wind fail.....ooooopppps


----------



## westwall

mamooth said:


> Yet I'm not the one inventing a new conspiracy theory to cover for his old conspiracy theory getting debunked.
> 
> Your anti-renewable vendetta keeps looking dumber. Do you plan to cling to it forever, or will you be staging a stealthy retreat from it soon? I'd suggest the latter. Don't worry, I won't hang it over your head.





I don't have an "anti-renewable" agenda.  I do have a anti-inefficient, anti-corruption agenda though.  Solar power exists purely because of tax payer dollars.  If they were gone, so would the solar industry be gone.  The same go's for wind and all the other renewable projects.  The people who are funded by those tax dollars are cronies of the politicians in power.  That is what I am against.


----------



## Old Rocks

westwall said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet I'm not the one inventing a new conspiracy theory to cover for his old conspiracy theory getting debunked.
> 
> Your anti-renewable vendetta keeps looking dumber. Do you plan to cling to it forever, or will you be staging a stealthy retreat from it soon? I'd suggest the latter. Don't worry, I won't hang it over your head.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have an "anti-renewable" agenda.  I do have a anti-inefficient, anti-corruption agenda though.  Solar power exists purely because of tax payer dollars.  If they were gone, so would the solar industry be gone.  The same go's for wind and all the other renewable projects.  The people who are funded by those tax dollars are cronies of the politicians in power.  That is what I am against.
Click to expand...


*Once again, Walleyes resorts to lies to cover the fact that he is against any kind of energy that does not use fossil fuels. *

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0

And, also in Oklahoma, American Electric Power ended up tripling the amount of wind power it had originally sought after seeing how low the bids came in last year.

“Wind was on sale — it was a Blue Light Special,” said Jay Godfrey, managing director of renewable energy for the company. He noted that Oklahoma, unlike many states, did not require utilities to buy power from renewable sources.

“We were doing it because it made sense for our ratepayers,” he said.

According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energy is as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.

*Given coal and gas also get subsidies, wind and solar are going to push both out of the market in the coming decade. Grid scale batteries will see to that.

Oncor proposes giant leap for grid batteries Dallas Morning News

Oncor, which runs Texas’ largest power line network, is willing to bet battery technology is ready for wide-scale deployment across the grid.

In a move that stands to radically shift the dynamics of the industry, Oncor is set to announce Monday that it is prepared to invest more than $2 billion to store electricity in thousands of batteries across North and West Texas beginning in 2018.
..........................................................................................
The Dallas-based transmission company is proposing the installation of 5,000 megawatts of batteries not just in its service area but across Texas’ entire grid. That is the equivalent of four nuclear power plants on a grid with a capacity of about 81,000 megawatts.

Ranging from refrigerator- to dumpster-size, the batteries would be installed behind shopping centers and in neighborhoods. Statewide, Oncor estimates a total price tag of $5.2 billion. A study commissioned by Oncor with the Brattle Group, a Massachusetts consulting firm that provides power market analysis for state regulators, says the project would not raise bills. Revenue from rental of storage space on the batteries, along with a decrease in power prices and transmission costs, should actually decrease the average Texas residential power bill 34 cents to $179.66 a month, the report said.
*


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet I'm not the one inventing a new conspiracy theory to cover for his old conspiracy theory getting debunked.
> 
> Your anti-renewable vendetta keeps looking dumber. Do you plan to cling to it forever, or will you be staging a stealthy retreat from it soon? I'd suggest the latter. Don't worry, I won't hang it over your head.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have an "anti-renewable" agenda.  I do have a anti-inefficient, anti-corruption agenda though.  Solar power exists purely because of tax payer dollars.  If they were gone, so would the solar industry be gone.  The same go's for wind and all the other renewable projects.  The people who are funded by those tax dollars are cronies of the politicians in power.  That is what I am against.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Once again, Walleyes resorts to lies to cover the fact that he is against any kind of energy that does not use fossil fuels. *
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0
> 
> And, also in Oklahoma, American Electric Power ended up tripling the amount of wind power it had originally sought after seeing how low the bids came in last year.
> 
> “Wind was on sale — it was a Blue Light Special,” said Jay Godfrey, managing director of renewable energy for the company. He noted that Oklahoma, unlike many states, did not require utilities to buy power from renewable sources.
> 
> “We were doing it because it made sense for our ratepayers,” he said.
> 
> According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energy is as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.
> 
> *Given coal and gas also get subsidies, wind and solar are going to push both out of the market in the coming decade. Grid scale batteries will see to that.
> 
> Oncor proposes giant leap for grid batteries Dallas Morning News
> 
> Oncor, which runs Texas’ largest power line network, is willing to bet battery technology is ready for wide-scale deployment across the grid.
> 
> In a move that stands to radically shift the dynamics of the industry, Oncor is set to announce Monday that it is prepared to invest more than $2 billion to store electricity in thousands of batteries across North and West Texas beginning in 2018.
> ..........................................................................................
> The Dallas-based transmission company is proposing the installation of 5,000 megawatts of batteries not just in its service area but across Texas’ entire grid. That is the equivalent of four nuclear power plants on a grid with a capacity of about 81,000 megawatts.
> 
> Ranging from refrigerator- to dumpster-size, the batteries would be installed behind shopping centers and in neighborhoods. Statewide, Oncor estimates a total price tag of $5.2 billion. A study commissioned by Oncor with the Brattle Group, a Massachusetts consulting firm that provides power market analysis for state regulators, says the project would not raise bills. Revenue from rental of storage space on the batteries, along with a decrease in power prices and transmission costs, should actually decrease the average Texas residential power bill 34 cents to $179.66 a month, the report said.*
Click to expand...





The only liar here is you.  The fossil fuel "subsidies" are the normal tax abatements that ANY business gets.  The renewable energy sector would cease to exist the second the taxpayer money was taken away from it.  The only effect that taking away the rebates to the fossil fuel industry would be to see our energy rates go up.  And not by that much either.  If you take away the extra taxes we have to pay to the energy companies that they have to give to the feds to support the crap, the rates would be lower.

See how that works?


And I love how you blissfully ignore the toxic impact that 5000 megawatts of batteries would have on any area where they are manufactured and emplaced.  Talk about a brainless fool.  You truly take the cake.


----------



## Decus

Isn't Ivanpah the solar plant that:

received a $1.6 billion dollar federal loan and is now asking for a $500 million dollar grant to help pay pay down the federal loan?
the solar plant that is producing less than 50% of it's promised energy production?
the solar plant that recently asked for permission to use more natural gas to keep it's turbines running so that it could produce energy?
the solar plant that covers some 5 square miles of public lands managed by the federal government?
the solar plant that kills birds at an alarming rate for such an "environmentally-friendly" facility?
Ivanpah is a failure on ohh so many levels.


----------



## Decus

I forgot to mention that Ivanpah is only capable of powering some 170.000 homes. What a waste of resources.


----------



## mamooth

The root of the anti-renewable conspiracy theory seems to be a hatred of success.

That is, their own side always fails, so success makes them look bad, so they have to concoct these ever wilder conspiracy theories to deny the success.


----------



## Decus

If reality disagrees with your hopes than it must be a conspiracy.


----------



## mamooth

Your kook logic is "Ivanpah isn't doing well, therefore all renewables are failing."

That's an amazingly stupid thing to conclude. Do you say it because you're just awful at basic logic, or do you say it because your cult ordered you to?

Not especially important, of course. Reality-deniers like you are just boring, not worth spending excessive time on.


----------



## Decus

I never said all renewables are failing. You really are delusional.

The investments made and promised energy production not achieved are facts regarding Ivanpah's performance and increasingly show it to be a waste of resources and a failure.


----------



## HenryBHough

Imagine what one flock of well-fed sea gulls could to to the output stats in a single low pass.


----------



## westwall

mamooth said:


> The root of the anti-renewable conspiracy theory seems to be a hatred of success.
> 
> That is, their own side always fails, so success makes them look bad, so they have to concoct these ever wilder conspiracy theories to deny the success.









The root of anti-science asshattery is claiming that a total failure is somehow successful.  And you dipshits wonder why the Dems got swept from office....


----------



## westwall

mamooth said:


> Your kook logic is "Ivanpah isn't doing well, therefore all renewables are failing."
> 
> That's an amazingly stupid thing to conclude. Do you say it because you're just awful at basic logic, or do you say it because your cult ordered you to?
> 
> Not especially important, of course. Reality-deniers like you are just boring, not worth spending excessive time on.







Then why post your anti-factual BS?  If we're soooooo unimportant you should feel free to ignore us.


----------



## Old Rocks

Given that the utilities ultra-liberal states of Texas and Oklahoma are investing big in alternatives and grid scale batteries, I would say that the people that matter have felt very free to ignore your ignorant rants.


----------



## elektra

Solar and wind use massive amounts of oil, no wonder the oil companies and places like Texas want them, an increase in oil demand is just more profit.

Biggest things in the world, made with oil.

And yet after all these record breaking massive in size renewable green energy projects, we need more oil, not less?


----------



## Roguewave

Those here and elsewhere making excuses for this colossal rent-seeking boondoggle should take on the points made in two articles by the American Enterprise Institute. In those, math is not your friend. It is spelled out how this project produces electricity at grossly exorbitant rates in comparison with reliable conventional methods even as it must be backed by those reliable methods during times it cannot produce electricity. And that was before the projections for Ivanpah upon which they made their pitch to tap into the public till fell short by 75% in actual practice. This solar tower project was priced at three times the uncompetitive cost of even shore-based wind projects before the real production figures 4X less than promised came in. Abysmal.

A rose by any other name is still a rose. Whatever name you want to call a grant, the $539M now being demanded by the Ivanpah owners from taxpayers to pay off a loan already given them by those same taxpayers merely exposes the financial circle-jerk behind the subsidizing of this Solyndra in the desert.

That the project is now revising its methane burning up by 450% to levels equal to a gas generation power plant of 200 MWh is icing on the cake of critics. You fanboys have a lot more excusing to do.

http://www.aei.org/publication/cali...burning-up-taxpayer-money-land-and-wildlife/q

Chutzpah and Soviet agriculture An update on the Ivanpah solar power monstrosity AEI

Incidentally, even if one buys into the excuses issued for "bad weather" as the cause of the gross shortfall in production, it should be noted they were forewarned by people who lived there that the weather in the area was far from what their "experts" forecasted in planning.

Ivanpah Solar Electric generating System Capacity

Dollars is how we keep score.


----------



## mamooth

Check it out, another one who thinks Ivanpah is the only solar facility in the world.

I suppose they have to deflect somehow from all their failed predictions of doom.


----------



## Roguewave

It is the sine qua non of econuts and largest investment in that solar Renaissance we have been promised since all those puff pieces in Popular Science from the fifties to today. It is your center piece. Google even bought half of the thing, and is now demanding $539,000,000 to keep it limping along. It has made Google a begger. Now that's progress.


----------



## westwall

mamooth said:


> Check it out, another one who thinks Ivanpah is the only solar facility in the world.
> 
> I suppose they have to deflect somehow from all their failed predictions of doom.








Feel free to present evidence that ANY solar plant is producing as much energy as they claimed they would.  mamooth


----------



## mamooth

Nice red herring, Westwall. Was there a point to it? Solar is still succeeding whether or not solar plants achieve 100% of rating all the time.

Oh, I see the point of it now. You're deflecting from the sad failure of all your predictions of doom. Carry on.


----------



## elektra

mamooth said:


> Nice red herring, Westwall. Was there a point to it? Solar is still succeeding whether or not solar plants achieve 100% of rating all the time.
> 
> Oh, I see the point of it now. You're deflecting from the sad failure of all your predictions of doom. Carry on.


Solyndra?


----------



## Spare_change

Treeshepherd said:


> Manonthestreet said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it doesnt work in the desert exactly where will it work....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Last weekend in Santa Cruz I helped my friend install 16 panels on his roof. I guess you could call Santa Cruz a coastal desert. Total capacity at noon on a sunny day will be about 3.1 kilowatts.
> 
> He brought me in to be a strong back and a weak mind. But, I learned quite a bit. It's almost plug and play. The connections are designed to snap together. Hooked it up to the Romex and down to the fuse box.
> 
> It took a few years of talking, and $10,000. But now he's free. He has purchased his freedom. He makes his own power.
> 
> Gigantic stimulus-program solar projects out in the desert are not an appropriate application of solar. Where the interests of progtards and Reptards meet is on the homeowner rooftop. It's up on those composite shingles.
> 
> The power companies want to keep sending you a bill every month, whether they're selling alternative energy or coal. The future is in distributed power and the grid equivalent of a mesh network where the excess power you generate flows to your most immediate neighbor in need. Harmonious anarchy.
> 
> That's what we're setting up here in California. Solar panels are contagious.
Click to expand...


You probably want to talk to your friend -- especially, given that the state of California has suspended construction of solar energy sites while a complete environmental assessment is completed (it seems the solar panels reflect heat that has been, literally, cooking birds that fly over).

In addition, virtually every city in California has a law that says you can't produce 100% of your own energy needs - that you are required to purchase a certain percentage of your energy (depending on the city) from the local power company. This is done in order to help them offset the infrastructure costs of their power generation and distribution systems.

Your friend is a lawbreaker ----


----------



## westwall

mamooth said:


> Nice red herring, Westwall. Was there a point to it? Solar is still succeeding whether or not solar plants achieve 100% of rating all the time.
> 
> Oh, I see the point of it now. You're deflecting from the sad failure of all your predictions of doom. Carry on.









Yes, the point is that NO solar plant, anywhere on the planet, is producing as much energy as you all claim they will.  NOT ONE!  That is the very definition of epic fail.  And where have I ever predicted "doom"?   That's your schtick.


----------



## Old Rocks

elektra said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice red herring, Westwall. Was there a point to it? Solar is still succeeding whether or not solar plants achieve 100% of rating all the time.
> 
> Oh, I see the point of it now. You're deflecting from the sad failure of all your predictions of doom. Carry on.
> 
> 
> 
> Solyndra?
Click to expand...

Whippet.


----------



## Old Rocks

US Solar Industry Continues Rapid Growth

First, Telsa Motors announced that it would build a new factory in Nevada, employing 6,500 workers.  Then Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vowed to hold a vote later this year on green energy tax credits.  That important announcement was quickly followed by news that the U.S. solar market hit a major milestone in the second quarter of this year with more than half a million homes and businesses now generating solar energy.

According to GTM Research and the Solar Energy Industries Association’s (SEIA) Q2 2014 U.S. Solar Market Insight Report, the U.S. installed 1,133 megawatts (MW) of solar photovoltaics (PV) in the second quarter of this year.

The residential and commercial segments accounted for nearly half of all solar PV installations in the quarter. The residential market has seen the most consistent growth of any segment for years, and its momentum shows no signs of slowing down.

Across the United States, cumulative PV and concentrating solar power (CSP) operating capacity has reached nearly 16 gigawatts (GW), enough to power more than 3.2 million homes.

*Looks like someone failed to tell the solar industry that they are failing.*


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> US Solar Industry Continues Rapid Growth
> 
> First, Telsa Motors announced that it would build a new factory in Nevada, employing 6,500 workers.  Then Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vowed to hold a vote later this year on green energy tax credits.  That important announcement was quickly followed by news that the U.S. solar market hit a major milestone in the second quarter of this year with more than half a million homes and businesses now generating solar energy.
> 
> According to GTM Research and the Solar Energy Industries Association’s (SEIA) Q2 2014 U.S. Solar Market Insight Report, the U.S. installed 1,133 megawatts (MW) of solar photovoltaics (PV) in the second quarter of this year.
> 
> The residential and commercial segments accounted for nearly half of all solar PV installations in the quarter. The residential market has seen the most consistent growth of any segment for years, and its momentum shows no signs of slowing down.
> 
> Across the United States, cumulative PV and concentrating solar power (CSP) operating capacity has reached nearly 16 gigawatts (GW), enough to power more than 3.2 million homes.
> 
> *Looks like someone failed to tell the solar industry that they are failing.*








And the TAXPAYERS of Nevada are on the hook for 1.5 BILLION to build his giga-factory.  Solar is an industry that can only exist with massive taxpayer support you twit.  You could remove every fossil fuel tax break (and they are tax breaks, not subsidies as you asshats always claim) and they would still be producing a product that the world needs.  We would all pay a few pennies more a gallon but they would still be here.

Take away the taxpayer dollars, and the solar industry collapses in a New York minute.


----------



## Roguewave

Old Rocks said:


> US Solar Industry Continues Rapid Growth
> 
> ...The residential and commercial segments accounted for nearly half of all solar PV installations in the quarter..*.*



If it was not "residential and commercial segments" which accounted for the other more than half of solar PV installations, then who was it? Martians?


----------



## Old Rocks

Utility scale projects like the one in Texas that will be selling power for the next 20 years for less than coal or gas can produce it.


----------



## Spare_change

Roguewave said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Solar Industry Continues Rapid Growth
> 
> ...The residential and commercial segments accounted for nearly half of all solar PV installations in the quarter..*.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it was not "residential and commercial segments" which accounted for the other more than half of solar PV installations, then who was it? Martians?
Click to expand...


It was you, silly .... government subsidies were greater than individual purchases of solar PV installations ... if it wasn't for your tax dollars, the industry would be dead.


----------



## Spare_change

Old Rocks said:


> Utility scale projects like the one in Texas that will be selling power for the next 20 years for less than coal or gas can produce it.


... which STILL will not recover the cost to the government. Government subsidies are NOT free, and need to be included in your analysis.

NICE investment, he says .... tongue firmly planted in cheek.


----------



## Old Rocks

Hmmmmmm.....................  The government in the US has always done the initial funding for new projects. From the canals in the period immediatly after we became a nation, to the establishment of the internet, government research and early investment has always been there.


----------



## Spare_change

Old Rocks said:


> Hmmmmmm.....................  The government in the US has always done the initial funding for new projects. From the canals in the period immediatly after we became a nation, to the establishment of the internet, government research and early investment has always been there.



Unequivocally false. 

The government has funded projects that were in their own best interest ... they do not fund projects developed by individuals that are focused on providing a service to the public. Pretty sure that the government didn't fund Henry Ford's development of autos, the oil business, Edison's light bulb, or television - the list can go on and on. The government HAS been the customer for some innovation development, but, in general, the investment risk of those has been borne by the developer, not the government. 

The "global warming" industries is a new trend in government investment - and advocacy - for personal gain.

Unquestionably, some government projects have had spin-offs that have benefited the economy, but those are accidental events.


----------



## Old Rocks

Spare Change, you are so full of shit. Every major government project has had people that made fortunes off of it. From the Trans-continental railroad, to the Apollo Project. And many have been total failures at achieving their stated objectives, yet resounding successes when viewed from the perspective of impact on history. Corp of Discovery was one such project. Did not achieve it's major objective, cost over ten times as much as projected, and came in late.


----------



## Spare_change

Old Rocks said:


> Spare Change, you are so full of shit. Every major government project has had people that made fortunes off of it. From the Trans-continental railroad, to the Apollo Project. And many have been total failures at achieving their stated objectives, yet resounding successes when viewed from the perspective of impact on history. Corp of Discovery was one such project. Did not achieve it's major objective, cost over ten times as much as projected, and came in late.



LOL --- nothing like changing horse in mid-stream, huh?

First, you claim (post 68) that the government has always "done the initial funding for new projects". I, of course, responded that you were totally inaccurate, that, in fact, most 'new projects' were funded privately. (Take a look at who funded the Eads Bridge in St. Louis, for example .... or maybe, the Spruce Goose ... or virtually any advance in the aviation industry for the first 75 years).

The federal government ONLY funds projects in which they will receive a tangible benefit. They are NOT in the R&D funding business, unless it pertains to a federal government goal (Apollo Project is a good example). In truth, government funding is a relatively new concept - your reference to the Trans-Continental Railroad, while inaccurate, is a more telling example of how it used to be done.

The Trans-Continental Railroad was funded by private interests, though there was MINOR involvement by the federal government.

_"Unlike the moon project, the building of the railroad was undertaken by private interests, but only after Congress passed legislation to help finance the work.

The leaders of both companies lobbied incessantly for government aid. Their efforts led to the Pacific Railroad Acts of 1862 and 1864, which provided several forms of assistance. Each railroad received its right-of-way along with a land grant of ten alternating sections on both sides of every mile of track (about 12,800 acres per mile); the government retained the sections in between. In addition, the companies received government bonds totaling $16,000 a mile for each twenty-mile section of track completed on the plains. For the plateau between the Rocky and Sierra Nevada Mountains the amount per mile went up to $32,000 per mile and for the mountain regions, $48,000. Each company could also issue its own first mortgage bonds for the same amount as the government bonds, relegating the latter to a second mortgage.


These provisions sound more generous than they were. The land grant ultimately proved valuable to both railroads but played only a minor role in financing their construction. The land was difficult to sell, in large part because it had first to be surveyed, and the overwhelmed government land office issued patents (titles) to parcels at a glacial pace. In the end the land grant helped underwrite Union Pacific construction mostly as collateral for yet another class of securities known as land-grant bonds. The government bonds have often been described as a subsidy or handout to the builders of both railroads, but they were in fact a loan that ultimately had to be repaid. Each company was, of course, responsible for paying interest on its own bonds."_

Financing the Transcontinental Railroad The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History

The same financing model was used up until about the space program ... only now, is the government seen as a large bank that could be exploited with little or no risk.

Have people made fortunes off major projects that have had some level of government investment? Sure - but only after major investments of their own to bring the program spin-offs to market (take a look at the investment involved in computer development, chips, and electronics, for example).

So, you were wrong the first time ... but, once you jumped on the other horse, you were only partially right.


----------



## flacaltenn

Not a lot of new news here. IvanPah solar is still not performing. Big Nat Gas hog in the middle of the desert. They don't even bother anymore to separate the nat gas side from the solar heating side energy generation. 

BUT -- thought I bump the thread because NOW -- even govt officials are ready to call that 170,000 mirror solar Death Ray machine  --- dead...


Obama-Backed Solar Plant Could Be Shut Down For Not Producing Enough Energy

Maybe you don't believe me -- but I actually thought it could work and would lend itself to LONGER periods of solar generation during the day..


----------



## Skull Pilot

The only proper use for solar and wind is for small self funded projects

Neither is suitable for large quantities of reliable power


----------



## flacaltenn

Skull Pilot said:


> The only proper use for solar and wind is for small self funded projects
> 
> Neither is suitable for large quantities of reliable power



Solar's main use in the right geographical region is to be about 10 to 15% Mid-day peaker source to reduce the daytime peak demand by that amount. Can't reduce it FURTHER when the sun is shining. Because Demand is about 80% of daytime peak at 10PM on a summer night.. 

So you can "undersize" your safety margin of Supply by a smidgeon when planning for peak generation and reserves. 

...................... on a GOOD day...


----------



## bripat9643

Manonthestreet said:


> No way you are putting up an array on a house that will power it in full for ten grand.  I follow the prices here, waiting for the ever promised " its going to be cheaper ...." blah blah blah.......try 20 grand ya might be close.


It costs $35,000 for a system that produces enough wattage to power a single blow dryer.


----------



## Old Rocks

Grid tie Solar Power Systems for your home - Grid-tie Home Solar Panel Systems
Qty
Solar Sky 5.2 kW Grid‑Tied Solar System with SMA and 20x Astronergy 260W Panels 1890405 5.2 kW 707 kWh 20 Astronergy 260W panels 1 SMA Sunny Boy 5000TL-US-22 Inverter
$8,951.00

*Shop around, and beat this price. Over the top lies are your business, Pattycake. And for utilities, the prices are coming down even faster.*


----------



## Old Rocks

The prolonged plunge in fossil fuel prices is rippling across the globe. Yet it’s barely put a dent in the booming market for clean energy, heralding perhaps a new era for wind and solar.

Oil prices of less than $30 a barrel—the lowest in 12 years—have shaken stock markets and ravaged the budgets of major producers such as Russia and Saudi Arabia. Along with falling gas prices, they’ve slashed the profits of fossil fuel companies, which are delaying dozens of billion-dollar projects and laying off thousands of workers.

In Texas, home to shale-rich oil deposits, once-crowded trailer parks that housed workers are now largely empty.

But solar, wind, and other clean energy? They’re expanding. Last year, they attracted a record $329 billion in investment—nearly six times the total in 2004, according to a report this month by Bloomberg New Energy Finance or BNEF. Wind and solar also installed a record amount of power capacity.

Why Solar and Wind Are Thriving Despite Cheap Fossil Fuels

*As the price of grid scale batteries comes down, the market for renewables will only increase. *


----------



## Old Rocks

Battery storage is gathering momentum in the U.S. market thanks to rapidly evolving technologies and falling costs.

Batteries are rapidly becoming the dominant form of energy storage both at the grid and end-user levels, and utilities are likely to play an important role in its further growth, according to a new brief from Deloitte’sCenter for Energy Solutions.

“The emergence of battery storage is happening now, is accelerating, and it will get bigger in the next two to five years,” Andrew Slaughter, the Center’s executive director and co-author of “Electricity Storage Technologies, Impacts, and Prospects,” told Utility Dive. 

Utility leaders are increasingly seeing how storage can be “dropped into strategic places in the power system, which means "they are looking at it hard and some are already going to market for storage solutions," Slaughter added. 

Battery storage technology appears to be inching closer to a “sweet spot” that will likely result in falling prices, while accelerating deployment through the end of this decade, Slaughter said. “There are more opportunities for storage emerging due to the confluence of the way the economics are working and the way the grid is developing.”

With the power system diversifying both at the grid and consumer levels, utilities are increasingly seeing that “if you get storage in the right place, it de-stresses the rest of the grid, gives new reliability options, and gives the opportunity to avoid investment in generation,” he added.

A new Moody's Investor Services study foresees a significant market impact, especially since "battery prices have declined more than 50% since 2010,” the report said. “Expanded battery use will be credit negative for U.S. merchant generators…due to the subsequent lower prices for capacity and peak energy. Regulated utilities will see a smaller impact, but will face cost-shifting issues

.Why battery storage is 'just about ready to take off'

*Many utilities are already making plans.*


----------

