Tag Archives: PV Solar

Solar v Corn to Ethanol

Writing for “Virginia Mercury,” Ivy Main says,

What is certain is that improvements in wind, solar, battery storage and electric vehicles will continue these technologies’ march to dominance, while fossil fuels become niche. Concerns about the land needs of renewable energy are overblown; you could power the entire U.S. with solar panels on just one-third of the more than 30 million acres currently devoted to growing corn for climate-unfriendly ethanol. Indeed, solar doesn’t even have to displace farming. Agrivoltaics is already making solar and agriculture compatible and creating money-saving synergies.

I am sure she is correct. Consider the the logistics and life cycles of the PV Solar and Corn to Ethanol systems and the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The 2nd law basically “The entropy of the universe increases.” (Entropy is randomness or disorder. And this is high school physics.)

Imagine a building w a solar roof. The sun shines on the roof, and it powers the building (except at night or when it’s raining or snowing). One stop shopping.

Imagine a corn to ethanol operation.

Plant corn.
Apply fertilizer.
Apply pesticides.
Repeat 2 and 3 as needed.
Harvest the corn.
Process it into ethanol.
Ship the ethanol to a facility where it is mixed into gasoline.
Ship the gas-methanol mixture to gas stations.
Repeat.

Not quite as simple.

Solar modules generate electricity by converting photons into electric current.
Ethanol farms convert photons into corn, which must be harvested, then processed. Growing the crop probably uses fertilizer and pesticides, because the corn to ethanol operations are probably not organic farms. The tractors required for planting, harvesting, etc require fuel, maintenance. The factories in which the corn is transformed into ethanol require power and maintenance, and if they have moving parts, lubricants. Transporting the ethanol requires tankers, pipelines, etc.
Solar is one step. Corn to ethanol is multiple steps. Entropy is created, energy is lost in each step. (Energy is also lost in solar when 1) the direct current generated by a PV solar module is inverted into DC and 2) the electricity travels thru transmission lines.)
And PV Solar works with low maintenance for 20 to 30 years. While corn to ethanol planting, harvesting, processing need to be repeated every year.

Moore's Law Applied to Solar Power

Does “Moore’s Law” hold for Solar Power?

In New Jersey, between 2001 and 2010, we went from a total of six systems with a combined capacity of 9.0 KW to about 7000 systems with a combined capacity of 211,000 KW or 211 MW. This is illustrated below.

Solar Capacity, NJ, 2001 to 2010. Increase from 9 KW in 6 systems to 211 MW, or 211,000 KW in 7000 systems

Increase from 9 KW in 6 systems to 211,000 KW in 7,000 systems. Copyright, 2010, L. J. Furman. All Rights Reseved.

This is the “hockey stick” curve of exponential growth typical of positive feedback mechanisms. I expect this kind of growth to continue for the next few years as prices drop, until solar meets 25% to 35% of New Jersey’s needs. This would be another 2500 to 3500 systems and about 200 additional MW in 2011 and 4000 to 5000 systems of 300 to 500 MW in 2012 , and brings me back to “Does ‘Moore’s Law,’ or a corollary, apply to PV Solar?” or “Is this a bubble?” Continue reading →

Saving the Economy, Part Deux

Tweet In Part 1, I criticized “How to Really Save the Economy“, an op-ed in the New York Times, published Sept. 10, 2011. So how do we really save the economy?

“One of the best kept secrets in New York City,” I wrote, “is the existence of a 40 kilowatt (KW) photovoltaic solar array on the Whitehall Street terminal of the Staten Island Ferry,” pictured above, and first covered in Popular Logistics in 2007, here.

There are 90,000 public schools in the United States. Suppose we were to install a 40 KW solar energy system on each of them. PV solar modules require very little maintenance over their 35 to 45 year life expectancy. My initial thought was $5 per watt or $5,000 per kilowatt, but $4,000 per kilowatt is more realistic for the near term price of solar, particularly at the utility scale. This is where we expect the cost of solar in the Q4 2012 timeframe, without subsidies.

At $4,000 per KW of nameplate capacity, each of these 90,000 systems would cost $160,000. This 3.6 gigawatts of distributed daylight-only capacity would cost about $14.4 billion.

It seems to make sense to use taxpayer monies to finance these systems; taxpayers pay the electric bills for public schools and other public infrastructure, so rather than pay a utility to burn coal, oil, or gas, or harness nuclear fission, we could buy solar modules, put them on the roof and transform sunlight into electricity. But what are the other implications? What would it give us? And what do we do at night? How much juice do we get?

The US Dept. of Energy’s (DOE) National Renewable Energy Lab’s (NREL) PV Watts solar energy calculator tells you the power you can expect from a given solar system anywhere in the US. Regarding night-time; solar is effective in conjunction with other sources of energy, and other clean, renewable, sustainable sources include wind, geothermal, micro-hydro, biofuel.

Every public school in the country would have a power plant that generates power, during the day, with no fuel cost and no waste., and no associated mining, processing, transportation, fuel costs and no waste management costs. At $5.00 per watt, or $5 billion per gigawatt, the capital costs are lower than the costs of new nuclear and significantly lower than the costs of coal with carbon sequestration, with none of the risks or hazards associated with the systems: no arsenic, mercury, lead, thorium, uranium, zinc, or carbon.

The systems would be tied to the electric grid, after all, while most of their operations are during the day, schools need power at night. If these systems could be disconnected from the electric grid, then we would have 90,000 structures distributed all over the United States, with power during the day in the event of power outages from storms, earthquakes, accidents, etc. Even if we lost 10% of them in a disaster like Katrina, or an event like Irene or the recent earthquake, we would still have 81,000 all over the country. Coupled with efficient refrigeration systems, we would have shelters with power to keep food and medications cold during emergencies; and these would be distributed across the country.

The solar systems would obviously have to be installed here, which would stimulate the economy, and we could even require the components to be manufactured here, further stimulating the economy.

Why not business as usual?

As reported here the North Anna nuclear plants in Virginia were shut down during the earthquake a few days before hurricane Irene. The Dominion plants in Virginia, and the Oyster Creek plant in New Jersey were shut down and the Millstone 2 & 3 plants in Connecticut and the Brunswick plants in North Carolina were brought to reduced capacity during Irene, and the Fort Calhoun plant in Nebraska has been shut down due to flooding, and losing $1 million per day, since June 6, 2011.

In Part 1, I criticized “How to Really Save the Economy, “an op-ed in the New York Times, published Sept. 10, 2011. “The United States,” according to Robert Barro, who teaches economics at Harvard and is a “fellow” at the Hoover Institution, “is in the third year of a grand experiment by the Obama administration.”

“This is inaccurate,” I wrote, Obama is the President, but the US Constitution provides a framework in which power is divided into three branches of the Federal government, and the power of the each of the branches is checked and balanced by the others, and “all power not expressly granted to the federal government is held by the states and the citizens.” It would be more accurate, therefore, to say,

“The United States is in the third year of an experiment in governance between the Obama administration, the Congress, the Judiciary, the Republican Party, various special interests, and the citizens. This appears to be an experiment in governance by not-governing. Due to significant differences of opinion with regards to the direction in which to drive the ship of state, the ship of state appears to be floundering. Governance by not-governing doesn’t work!”

In parts 3 and 4 I hope to present feedback from the telecommunications and wind industries. Meanwhile, another radioactive nail in the nuclear coffin – an explosion in a low-level waste management facility in France killed one person and injured four. DC Bureau, Associated Press reports “An explosion at a nuclear waste facility in southern France killed one person and injured four on Monday. Authorities said there was no radioactive leak, but critics urged France to rethink its nuclear power in the wake of the catastrophe at Japan’s Fukushima plant.The Nuclear Safety Authority declared the accident “terminated” soon after the blast at a furnace in the Centraco site, in the southern Languedoc-Roussillon region, about 20 miles (32 kilometers) from the city of Avignon. One of the injured suffered severe burns…. the body was burned so badly it was carbonized”

Indian Point 1 – A Zombie Nuclear Power Plant

Bucolic? Pastoral? Looks that way, but looks can be deceiving. First of all, there’s Indian Point 1. Then there’s the water issue. Other issues are waste and national security.

Operating Modalities, Copyright, (c), 2011 L. J. Furman

Indian Point 1

Brought online in August, 1962.
Shutdown in October, 1974.
Spent fuel is stored on site.
Scheduled to be closed in 2026.
Operated 13 years.
“Zombie” 52 years.

Talk about externalities! “Zombie” since ’74 and scheduled as such for another 25 years, total of 52 years. NRC. What does it cost to maintain and manage as a “zombie?” And who pays? The owners or the taxpayers? And did the plant produce so much power in the 12 years of operation that it will make a profit after 52 years of being managed and serviced?

Indian Point 2

Rated Thermal Power: 3216 MW
Net Electrical Rating: 1032 MW
Water Requirements: 840,000 gallons per minute

Indian Point 3

Rated Thermal Power: 3188 MW
Net Electrical Rating: 1051MW
Water Requirements: 840,000 gallons per minute

(source: Entergy / Indian Point website)

Summary – Indian Point is a 2.083 GW complex. Replacing it with new nuclear would cost about $12 to $18 billion, plus the cost of fuel, security, and the costs of interest during the 8 to 10 years of construction. Replacing it with solar would require about 2 million PV solar panels, at a cost of $8 to $12 billion, or 570 wind turbines at a cost of $4 to $6 billion. 2.0 gw of wind and solar do not require 1,680,000 gallons per minute of cooling water, or even 1.0 gallons per minute. Solar and wind do not require fuel and do not produce waste. Nor do they present national security challenges.

Energy Alternatives

2 Gigawatts
Modality Nuclear Solar Wind
Cost (billions) $12 to $18 $8 to $12 $4 to $6
Fuel Yes No No
Waste Yes No No
Security Hole Huge No No

Cassie Rodenberg at Popular Mechanics: Solar-Powered Circuits Breakthrough – Solar-Powered Circuits Charge by Sunlight in Real-Time

Solar power’s incremental steps forward keep coming faster and faster, and not on a single vector: large arrays to power the grid, specific installations where wiring is inefficient or impractical, and for small devices. Cassie Rodenberg, writing at PopularMechanics.com, writes about another step forward with solar power for relatively small devices. From Solar-Powered Circuits Breakthrough – Solar-Powered Circuits Charge by Sunlight in Real-Time:

Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania unveiled the world’s first solar-powered circuit in a January edition of ACS Nano. The technology shows particular promise for touchscreen devices, which could use the circuits as a direct source for sun-power. Not to be confused with solar cells, which convert sunlight energy to electricity and store it for later, this breakthrough involves circuits—electrical devices that provide paths for electricity to flow. This means that sunlight absorbed by the device can immediately use the energy to power the device.

Here’s how the circuit works: Electrons, here known as surface plasmons, oscillate on tiny molecules called nanoparticles. These plasmons act as a ‘super lenses,’ which gather all solar light hitting the circuit. Once the light’s collected, the particles pose as electrodes to ferry away the electricity for a device to use.

Currently, though, researchers can only produce and harness small amounts of energy from the photovoltaic circuits, nowhere near enough to power consumer electronics. But scientists are sure power production will only increase in the future with creative methods like stacking circuits to absorb and focus more light energy.

Self-charging photovoltaic circuitry might be used in display screen pixels or painted on the outside of iPads and smartphones to scavenge sunlight and charge the devices, according to Dawn Bonnell, a researcher on the project. It also could potentially offer just the right power solution for small robotic devices or help computers operate on light alone.

Cassie Rodenberg, Solar-Powered Circuits Breakthrough – Solar-Powered Circuits Charge by Sunlight in Real-Time, at PopularMechanics.com

Solar Balloons – The Sky’s the Limit

Solar Balloons can power remote areas and quickly provide emergency power in disasters. Joseph Cory, of Geotectura.com, and Pini Gurfil, his research partner in the Haifa Technion, Haifa, Israel, are developing the balloons. Helium balloons floating above the trees or tethered to the roofs of buildings, can provide more power in less space and at lower cost than roof mounted or ground mounted systems. They can also be deployed very quickly in an emergency.

Where conventional PV Solar installations are two dimensional, these are three dimensional.

Initial research, using computer models and a prototype, shows that a 10 foot diameter PV Solar balloon provides the energy of a 269 square foot PV Solar surface. The cost of the balloon is targeted at $4000. The cost of a comparable surface mounted system is estimated to $10,000.

I read about this on Pinkus Javits’ SustainabiliTank blog,Gizmundo,and Israel 21C .