• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Solar panels cause climate change

Lord of Planar

Lord of Planar

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
66,501
Reaction score
22,160
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I read about this concept about wind mills, and advocate such usage to change the deserts, but now there are studies confiming my suspicions:

Impact of solar panels on global climate

The last part of the abstract:

We find that solar panels alone induce regional cooling by converting incoming solar energy to electricity in comparison to the climate without solar panels. The conversion of this electricity to heat, primarily in urban areas, increases regional and global temperatures which compensate the cooling effect. However, there are consequences involved with these processes that modulate the global atmospheric circulation, resulting in changes in regional precipitation.
Click to expand...
 
Oh dear lord.. :doh :lamo
This is hardly comparable to the effects of fossil fuels.
 
David_N said:
Oh dear lord.. :doh :lamo
This is hardly comparable to the effects of fossil fuels.
Click to expand...

Not saying it it. With droughts being blamed on greenhouse gasses, look what else is coming along.
 
David_N said:
Yes.. very modest effects that entirely depend on if we adapt solar energy as the main major player.
Click to expand...
You say that like we have a choice!
Organic oil production will get more expensive and slow down,
The energy to replace what we do with oil must come from somewhere.
Nuclear is a good choice, but solar energy is a lot more likely.
(Wind is just a form of solar)
Now that we have a way to store and accumulate the energy, solar and wind not
only become viable, but likely.
 
[h=2] 1 million German households had power shut off in last three years due to green energy cost[/h]
How much further backward do things have to get?
In the great industrial nation of Germany power companies are going broke, and 350,000 households are getting their electricity turned off each year because they can’t afford the bills. In a nation of 82 million, power companies are issuing some 6 million threats to cut electricity.
Pierre Gosselin no trickszone: Socially explosive German homes losing power
From Speigel:
“Over the past three years it all totals to be a whopping 1.025 million households.”
“Spiegel writes that the price of electricity in Germany has doubled since 2002 in large part because of the renewable energy feed-in surcharge. Private households are the hardest hit; they have to pay some 45% more than the EU average (while German power producers get 30% less than the EU average)! The government-interfered market is grotesquely distorted.”
It is not only Germany’s power companies who are bleeding to death financially, but so are many private citizens, who are unable to pay for their power. A shocking situation in one of the world’s most technically advanced nations.
 
Here we model the effects of an idealized large-scale application
Click to expand...

I think I will be happy to face the consequence of ideal solar pannels.
 
[h=2] Climate Spectator bites the dust[/h]
Shucks. A few days before the giant UNFCCC starts in Paris, Climate Spectator has been closed. (Didn’t know it existed? It was a part of the Business Spectator). Maybe Big Renewables is not doing such a roaring big business?
You can see how active and non-stop the pro-green energy message was, thanks to Google caching of The Climate Spectator. That was yesterday. For some odd reason the headline link to it is already gone, obliviated already and fed through to the mother-publication by default. Typically, the more popular articles got 5 – 10 comments, the rest, zero. To get the flavor, see “Going off grid” — where Tristan Edis argues that all that solar energy you make will be wasted (and it will cost you a lot of money too). He seems to think that intermittent unreliable energy is “useful” to the Grid, and there’s no sense in the article that I can see of the waste of the Grid’s resources and energy in accommodating his surplus.
The collapse of the Climate Spectator is of course, framed by some as “Murdoch strikes again”. Presumably Murdoch acquired it in 2012 and has been waiting all this time to fulfil his evil plan…
The Climate Spectator was part of suite of news website that came with the acquisition of Australian Independent Business Media by News Corp in 2012….
It’s a conspiracy you know. Though the love media, like Fairfax, have also been cutting other journalists. Coincidence?
Editor, Tristan Edis let slip that he sometimes cursed the competition from The Conversation:
“The Conversation has also added a new insightful set of voices, even though I often cursed it for taking away several learned voices of friends and long-time colleagues I would have preferred to have been writing for Climate Spectator exclusively.
Yet again the government funded groups help drive out the free market competitor that provides the same service at no expense to the taxpayer.
It’s tough competing with the ABC, SBS, and The Conversation.
The Climate Spectator may be just another victim of Big-government.
h/t to Jim S.
 
[h=2] Green Electricity in Denmark, Germany, costs three times as much as US[/h]
It’s a bit costly trying to control the weather:​
“Germany has been paying over $26 billion per year for electricity that has a wholesale market value of just $5 billion (see here).”​
That’s $21 billion that could have been spent on health or education that was used instead to feed the Green Machine.
A few handy facts to memorize. The cost of electricity per kilowatt-hour:
Denmark, 42c; Germany 40c, and the USA, 12.5c.​
Wind and solar power supplies 28% of electricity in Germany (is it really that high?) This is what Australia is aiming for?

Graph from Forbes (link below)

Europe is a “green energy” basket case. Washington Post
Europe’s Energy and Electricity Policies are a Bad Model, Jude Clement, Forbes
Keep reading →
 
[h=2] Nevada reversal: solar earnings rate drops from 12c to 2c — May “destroy rooftop solar power”[/h]
[h=3]If only solar generation was affordable?[/h] In Nevada there is a lot of sunlight and a lot of solar panels, but they generate electricity at a cost of 25 – 30c per kWhr. With subsidies and tax benefits, the cost “falls” to 15c. (In this context, the word “falls” means “is dropped on other people”.) But the retail rate for electricity is 12.5c. So having solar panels doesn’t help you much unless you can sell that excess electricity, which the state of Nevada was buying at 12.5c. That price sounds fine and dandy til we find out that they could have bought the same electricity at wholesale rate of around two cents.
So Nevada has decided that’s what the state will pay… 2c, not 12.5c. The latest decision is to apply normal free market rules. Nevada will now pay wholesale rates for electricity. No more shopping for boutique electrons.
Taking into account all the tax cuts, subsidies and total costs, who would have thought that paying 15 times the wholesale rate for electricity would be economically unsustainable?
[h=1]Battles Over Net Metering Cloud the Future of Rooftop Solar[/h] One of the fastest-growing markets for residential solar, Nevada is the first state to drastically revise its policies on net metering—wherein owners of residential solar arrays are compensated for the power they send onto the utility power grid, usually at retail rates. All but a handful of states have instituted net metering. Claiming that these fees represent an unfair transfer of costs to the utilities and non-solar customers, utilities have mounted a well-funded campaign to reduce or eliminate the payments. The Nevada Public Utilities Commission concurred, calling on utilities to cut the compensation for solar providers from retail to wholesale rates.
Naturally, this has been a campaign by utility companies. Residents would not be expected to protest against high electricity prices.
Not surprisingly, the solar industry disagrees. Calling the net metering decision “unethical, unprecedented, and possibly unlawful,” SolarCity CEO Lyndon Rive predicted that it will “destroy the rooftop solar industry in one of the states with the most sunshine.”
Rive missed how people who want fair market rates for solar power are not just unethical, and unlawful, but ugly selfish and funded by fossils. Listen to Leonardo, whatever you do, don’t date them.
Events in Nevada, though, could signal a major reshaping of the eonomics of solar power for homeowners. The retail rate of electricity in Nevada is 12.39 cents per kilowatt-hour; the wholesale price for electricity in the region that includes Nevada averaged around two cents per kilowatt-hour in December. According to a report from Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, the cost of a residential solar system has fallen to around 25 to 30 cents per kilowatt-hour.
 
Jack Hays said:
[h=2] Nevada reversal: solar earnings rate drops from 12c to 2c — May “destroy rooftop solar power”[/h]
[h=3]If only solar generation was affordable?[/h] In Nevada there is a lot of sunlight and a lot of solar panels, but they generate electricity at a cost of 25 – 30c per kWhr. With subsidies and tax benefits, the cost “falls” to 15c. (In this context, the word “falls” means “is dropped on other people”.) But the retail rate for electricity is 12.5c. So having solar panels doesn’t help you much unless you can sell that excess electricity, which the state of Nevada was buying at 12.5c. That price sounds fine and dandy til we find out that they could have bought the same electricity at wholesale rate of around two cents.
So Nevada has decided that’s what the state will pay… 2c, not 12.5c. The latest decision is to apply normal free market rules. Nevada will now pay wholesale rates for electricity. No more shopping for boutique electrons.
Taking into account all the tax cuts, subsidies and total costs, who would have thought that paying 15 times the wholesale rate for electricity would be economically unsustainable?
[h=1]Battles Over Net Metering Cloud the Future of Rooftop Solar[/h] One of the fastest-growing markets for residential solar, Nevada is the first state to drastically revise its policies on net metering—wherein owners of residential solar arrays are compensated for the power they send onto the utility power grid, usually at retail rates. All but a handful of states have instituted net metering. Claiming that these fees represent an unfair transfer of costs to the utilities and non-solar customers, utilities have mounted a well-funded campaign to reduce or eliminate the payments. The Nevada Public Utilities Commission concurred, calling on utilities to cut the compensation for solar providers from retail to wholesale rates.
Naturally, this has been a campaign by utility companies. Residents would not be expected to protest against high electricity prices.
Not surprisingly, the solar industry disagrees. Calling the net metering decision “unethical, unprecedented, and possibly unlawful,” SolarCity CEO Lyndon Rive predicted that it will “destroy the rooftop solar industry in one of the states with the most sunshine.”
Rive missed how people who want fair market rates for solar power are not just unethical, and unlawful, but ugly selfish and funded by fossils. Listen to Leonardo, whatever you do, don’t date them.
Events in Nevada, though, could signal a major reshaping of the eonomics of solar power for homeowners. The retail rate of electricity in Nevada is 12.39 cents per kilowatt-hour; the wholesale price for electricity in the region that includes Nevada averaged around two cents per kilowatt-hour in December. According to a report from Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, the cost of a residential solar system has fallen to around 25 to 30 cents per kilowatt-hour.
Click to expand...
While solar has fallen in price quite a bit, and is viable depending on perspective,
The process of net metering has always been untenable from an accounting standpoint.
It basically requires the utility to pay it's sales price, for it's own product.
This extracts all of the profit and overhead, so the utility will loose money for each KW purchased.
Solar is viable without it, it just needs better marketing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom