Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

50 MW of Solar? Make that 400 MW

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
13 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 13
July 20, 2011
Add in solar's low capacity factor and those numbers don't look quite as good. Also compare wholesale prices to wholesale prices and the price comparison changes. There are reasons solar is a small fraction of 1% of our electric power.
Comment
2 of 13
July 20, 2011
Being able to deliver to customers at .09 per KWH is grid parity from my point of view. It seems many utilities could benefit from locking in a rate like that for the next 30 yrs.
Comment
3 of 13
July 20, 2011
That requires wholesale of less than half of .09. Not possible for solar. that's solar feed in tariffs around the world at several times those numbers. And don't cpunt on 30 year life for those panels. Ir's nuclear plants that go for 60-80 years without decline. solar and wind turbines have much shorter lives.
Comment
4 of 13
July 20, 2011
The problem isn't that solar is too expensive per kWh Rolf, it's that nuclear power and other non-renewable energy sources are being depleted in a relatively short period of history. I won't even get into the environmental issues. If San Antonio develops a rate structure (like a tiered rate or time of use rate), it would be painless now that we are close to grid parity.
Comment
5 of 13
July 20, 2011
The company [PNM] expects that of the 1,153 megawatts of new resources it will need to serve customers by 2030, 611 megawatts, or 53 percent, will come from new natural gas-fired power plants [http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/us/26gas.html?_r=1]; 152 megawatts, or 13 percent, will come from energy efficiency and load management programs; and 390 megawatts, or 34 percent, will come from new renewable energy resources.

Liberal arts 'educated' appear to be providing these numbers.

http://www.prosefights.org/pnmrate/pnmrate.htm#motion3reply
Comment
6 of 13
July 20, 2011
this is basic tech, in response to retail price of KWH, 20 to 30 years the modules can be replaced with less expensive ones and able to generate two to three times the energy.
Comment
7 of 13
July 20, 2011
SOLAR WORKS FOR ME:

http://www.mpsaz.org/rmhs/staff/hljohnson/solar_information/
Comment
8 of 13
July 20, 2011
Hello hijmesa,

Looked at your link.

Fun.

What are the dimensions of each panel I saw at your site?

How many panels?

What is the efficiency of each panel?

How is the efficiency computed?

We're considering photovoltaic solar but want to do some computations in advance of any decision.

bill
Comment
9 of 13
July 20, 2011
bill,
that information is under 'the cost of the PV system'
and here
http://www.canadiansolar.com/en/products/e-modules/e-module-cs6a.html

18 panels
Comment
10 of 13
July 21, 2011
Consumers need to taking advantage of these price drops to install their own rooftop units. It is way more efficient as the transmission distance is greatly shortened. Consumers shouldn't have to pay for the profit and overhead the utility is passing on. It just adds more to the consumer cost burden.

Hopefully these solar farms will screech to a grinding halt when "solar ink" processes (using mass production techniques for the presses) and the drastic cost drops accommodating them begin to surface.
Comment
11 of 13
July 21, 2011
Kfenske, 9 cents/kWh is what San Antonio CPS customers current pay, NOT what this new solar project will deliver. That said, CPS pays a lot more for summer peaking power than baseload, which could tilt the scales in PV's favor.

San Antonio is not ideal for solar due to cloud cover. West TX would be better (as it is for wind), but then you have transmission issues.
Comment
12 of 13
July 21, 2011
Some of these comments show some pretty limited thinking. For one thing, solar panels easily last 30 years with little degradation. For another, nuclear plants take about ten years to build, can be catastrophic if they fail and leave behind radioactive waste that no one has figured out how to dispose of (burying it in a hole doesn't count = stupid, lazy, careless and ignorant). The other costs for non-renewable sources never include cleaning up the environment, ecological damage, chronic health damage (and deaths) from toxic waste. All of which is born by the people.
We should also look in to the importance of diversifying and spreading out our energy supply. Compared to all other forms of energy, renewable energy is the only one that is proving to be safe and reliable. We just need to open people's minds.
Comment
13 of 13
July 21, 2011
Nine Critical Questions to Ask About Alternative Energy

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/052703_9_questions.html

We are looking at photovolatic energy efficiency. And how it is computed.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Steve Leone

View Steve Leone's Profile
About: Steve Leone has been a journalist for more than 15 years and has worked for news organizations in Rhode Island, Maine, New Hampshire, Virginia and California. more »

Advertise With Us

GoGreenSolar.com RES Offshore Total Energy USA HESLIN ROTHENBERG FARLEY & MESITI P.C. AltaTerra Research The Interstate Renewable Energy Council AWS Truepower, LLC
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters