The Green's unrealistic, impractical and idealistic vision for solar power

[JohnO]

Not only is it a pipe dream, it is damaging - to the environment, the economy and people.

http://pc.blogspot.co.nz/2016/08/sun-sets-on-solar.html

[Rich80105]

It talks of the crony capitalism of the USA - not New Zealand. Here
our most common renewable energy is from water and wind.
Of course in New Zealand we have the water based energy companies
fighting off solar by upping the price for making a connection to
self-generated energy, and lowering the price they are prepared to pay
for that energy - demonstrating that unfair market practices (promoted
by our current National-led government as a "competitive"model) are
more to blame for any problems than solar energy not being a practical
alternative to fossil fuel for other countries.

Dream on, JohnO


On Tue, 9 Aug 2016 15:31:31 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
wrote:

[JohnO]

On Wednesday, 10 August 2016 15:42:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
> It talks of the crony capitalism of the USA - not New Zealand.

The point you are either too stupid or too dishonest to grasp is that renewable energy in the form of solar is uneconomic and either fails or drives up prices, regardless of country.

> Here
> our most common renewable energy is from water and wind.
> Of course in New Zealand we have the water based energy companies
> fighting off solar by upping the price for making a connection to
> self-generated energy, and lowering the price they are prepared to pay
> for that energy - demonstrating that unfair market practices (promoted

And what *authoritative* source do you have for that allegation?

> by our current National-led government as a "competitive"model) are
> more to blame for any problems than solar energy not being a practical
> alternative to fossil fuel for other countries.

The point you are apparently too stupid to grasp is that solar generation by power companies is uneconomic. Did you not read the article or did it have too many big words for you to understand it?

[Unknown]

JohnO <john...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, 10 August 2016 15:42:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
>> It talks of the crony capitalism of the USA - not New Zealand.
>
>The point you are either too stupid or too dishonest to grasp is that
>renewable energy in the form of solar is uneconomic and either fails or drives
>up prices, regardless of country.
>
>> Here
>> our most common renewable energy is from water and wind.
>> Of course in New Zealand we have the water based energy companies
>> fighting off solar by upping the price for making a connection to
>> self-generated energy, and lowering the price they are prepared to pay
>> for that energy - demonstrating that unfair market practices (promoted
>
>And what *authoritative* source do you have for that allegation?
>
>> by our current National-led government as a "competitive"model) are
>> more to blame for any problems than solar energy not being a practical
>> alternative to fossil fuel for other countries.
>
>The point you are apparently too stupid to grasp is that solar generation by
>power companies is uneconomic. Did you not read the article or did it have too
>many big words for you to understand it?

Now Johno that is a little hard (no pun intended) but your comments are correct
- I know rather more about solar power than casual observers and in the New
Zealand environment the solar (electric as opposed to heating) industry is not
going to prosper much longer. Wind is the main contender and fortunately we
will never have to face the decision to use nuclear energy or not. The big
issue with so called sustainable electrical energy is storage. Wind, solar and
hydro energy do not have built in storage so you need ti use it or lose it.
That is slowly being addressed with much more effective batteries (which bring
their own problems with disposal issues). We could be diverting surplus power
to lifting water back into the dams but that is a fairly significant
investment. Overall we are very well off by world standards - something like
80% sustainable whilst Australia is less than 20%. Rich is wrong again. Solar
will live for a while but is never going to be long term unless there is a
major scientific breakthrough.

>
>>
>> Dream on, JohnO
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 9 Aug 2016 15:31:31 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Not only is it a pipe dream, it is damaging - to the environment, the
>> >economy and people.
>> >
>> >http://pc.blogspot.co.nz/2016/08/sun-sets-on-solar.html

Tony

[Rich80105]

Where do you think I was wrong, Tony?

[Unknown]

Here you are

"Of course in New Zealand we have the water based energy companies
fighting off solar by upping the price for making a connection to
self-generated energy, and lowering the price they are prepared to pay
for that energy - demonstrating that unfair market practices (promoted

by our current National-led government as a "competitive"model) are
more to blame for any problems than solar energy not being a practical
alternative to fossil fuel for other countries."

You are full of it - no evidence, just unfounded opinion.

>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dream on, JohnO
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 9 Aug 2016 15:31:31 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >Not only is it a pipe dream, it is damaging - to the environment, the
>>>> >economy and people.
>>>> >
>>>> >http://pc.blogspot.co.nz/2016/08/sun-sets-on-solar.html
>>
>>Tony

Tony

[Liberty]

On Tue, 9 Aug 2016 20:51:01 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <john...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, 10 August 2016 15:42:05 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
>> It talks of the crony capitalism of the USA - not New Zealand.
>
>The point you are either too stupid or too dishonest to grasp is
that renewable energy in the form of solar is uneconomic and either fails or drives up prices, regardless of country.
>
>> Here
>> our most common renewable energy is from water and wind.
>> Of course in New Zealand we have the water based energy companies
>> fighting off solar by upping the price for making a connection to
>> self-generated energy, and lowering the price they are prepared to pay
>> for that energy - demonstrating that unfair market practices (promoted
>
>And what *authoritative* source do you have for that allegation?

Has to be Richbots arshole as he is talking shit as usual.
>

[victor]

On 10/08/2016 7:24 p.m., Tony wrote:
snipped


I don't get the either or arguments.
Renewable energy will come from many sources simultaneously

[Rich80105]

I saw a small part of an episode of "The Block", and notes that at
least one of the finished apartmenht was descrivbed as being energy
efficient - and that it had solar panels.

[Unknown]

Of course people are still installing PV; that doesn't mean that it is the best
or that it will remain viable. Right now the pay back takes many years because
of the high installation costs. As I pointed out the game changer will be
storage. Wind energy is cheaper per household than PV and produces no hazardous
waste (unlike PV). The battery revolution is beginning right now. Google Tesla
for one of many initiatives.
There is no "either or argument" - simply what are the best future options and
I am one of many who believe that PV is not the best future option.
We haven't seen anything yet in NZ - Micro grids and the like will become
common in the next decade (there already are some) and the economy of scale
they provide is also driven by better battery technology.
Tony

[JohnO]

LOL - Dickbot's idea of proof - "I saw it on The Block" !!!

But Dickbot unwittingly just proves my point: Those panels are sponsored product. They are not paid for by the house's team themselves.

[victor]

Here's a future direction

http://www.theage.com.au/wa-news/worldfirst-trial-lets-wa-residents-sell-their-own-excess-solar-power-20160815-gqt423.html

[Unknown]

Indeed, it is a form of micro grid as previously mentioned. There are some
micro grids in New Zealand, usually installed when a developer builds a number
of houses in a new subdivision.
Tony

[JohnO]

That's clever.

However there's still the underlying problem that at today's prices, solar is still more expensive that just buying from the power companies, so the neighbour buying your excess would only be mitigating your loss.

[Unknown]

It is clever but not new. I don't know where the first one was installed, it
might have been Perth, but there are some here and I suspect in other countries.
Tony

[victor]

It isn't a micro grid.

[Unknown]

Oh but it is.
Tony

[victor]

On 16/08/2016 4:16 p.m., Tony wrote:

> It is clever but not new. I don't know where the first one was installed, it
> might have been Perth, but there are some here and I suspect in other countries.
> Tony
>

No the blockchain isn't new. What's your point ?
That its not new ?
Great thanks for the contribution

[Unknown]

You are welcome - the report said "World-first trial" which is not true in
terms of the technology. It may be new in terms of the size but I doubt it.
Tony

[Rich80105]

I don't know why you are worrying about solar power, Tony. The
economics are all against it:
https://act.greenpeace.org/ea-action/action?ea.client.id=1939&ea.campaign.id=52200&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=promo&utm_term=fbSolarEX001&utm_campaign=Climate&__surl__=IgOkg&__ots__=1471577358587&__step__=1

[Unknown]

If you had bothered to read the thread you would have noticed that I am
suggesting that there is no future for PV (Solar Power). And that has
absolutely nothing to do with the innacurately entitled "solar tax". It is to
do with far better existing and future energy technologies.
Tony

[Rich80105]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 22:38:06 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net

Well in the meantime if it had any future teh existing electricity
companies are doing their best to shut it down.

As for future technologies, they may affect the future productivity of
solar generation of course, but the one that shold really make a
difference is the future technology that will allow New Zealand to get
rid of all pests with just a few millin a year - National is onto the
reliance on future technology too!

[Unknown]

So?

>
>As for future technologies, they may affect the future productivity of
>solar generation of course, but the one that shold really make a
>difference is the future technology that will allow New Zealand to get
>rid of all pests with just a few millin a year - National is onto the
>reliance on future technology too!

Meaningless drivel but I said "existing" and future. Wind and hydro are in
place now and they are improving dramatically every year but the big change in
the future will be storage which is one if the very few advantages PV has today.
Tony

[victor]

On 19/08/2016 3:30 p.m., Rich80105 wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 16:05:58 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
> net dot nz> wrote:
>
>> victor <us...@example.net> wrote:
>>> On 16/08/2016 4:16 p.m., Tony wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is clever but not new. I don't know where the first one was
>>>> installed, it might have been Perth, but there are some here
>>>> and I suspect in other countries. Tony
>>>>
>>>
>>> No the blockchain isn't new. What's your point ? That its not new
>>> ? Great thanks for the contribution
>> You are welcome - the report said "World-first trial" which is not
>> true in terms of the technology. It may be new in terms of the size
>> but I doubt it. Tony
>
> I don't know why you are worrying about solar power, Tony. The
> economics are all against it:
> https://act.greenpeace.org/

The innovation is the peer to peer market, not the technologies of
generation and storage.

[Unknown]

I do not agree. PV technology is currently obsolescent, something may come
along to change that but I believe it to be unlikely.
The technological changes that are imminent include better wind turbine designs
and dramatically improved storage.
Tony

[victor]

You can use power ledger to trade that power too
ITS NOT ABOUT THE FUCKING SOLAR

[Unknown]

Well done - you finally caught up it never was about the PV, it was alwaya
about better options.
Tony

[victor]

On 19/08/2016 9:40 p.m., Tony wrote:

> Well done - you finally caught up it never was about the PV, it was alwaya
> about better options.
> Tony
>

Power Ledger will get used to trade power generated by PV panels too.
Which helps their return and reduces the need for buffer storage, so
good news

[Unknown]

Yes it is, I am still not convinced of the long term viability of PV but am
happy that people are working at it.
Tony

[Rich80105]

I am currenlty in Tasmania and have been surprisedathowmany buildings
have solar panels. I don't know if theyhave the same issues as NZ:
https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles/grid-tied-pv-systems?gclid=CKD8jbfU0c4CFQGbvQodhmgDjw

I suspect the Green Bill would have had better success if it only
required say 95% of the wholesale price, or 100% plus an account fee
of a maximum level. There is no doubt that we do not have a truly
competitive market for hydro alternatives, leading to suboptimal
incentives for innovation.

[Unknown]

The issue has nothing to do with the government, the Greens or Labour. It is
totally to do with whether PV technology has a future.
Tony

[Rich80105]

On Sun, 21 Aug 2016 00:03:40 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net

Why is that, Tony? My understanding is that those with their own hydro
source have similar difficulties with power companies in feeding power
back to the grid - which has discouraged some of that development.

[george152]

On 8/21/2016 5:03 PM, Tony wrote:

> The issue has nothing to do with the government, the Greens or Labour. It is
> totally to do with whether PV technology has a future.
> Tony
>

And it hasn't.
The main time that we need electricity is at night and in the winter.
Both preclude the use of PV produced electricity.
It's okay only during the day to assist the load but can never be used
as the base load.
Unless your technology is one lightbulb, a radio/TV and a charger for a
cellphone

[Pooh]

Still doesn't help anyone during bad weather or at night. One of the
major drawbacks that people like Rich, Labour/Green and the loopy left
fail to comprehend. On top of that of course is we have so many houses
in NZ that are built so they can't be used to collect solar power apart
from first thing in the morning or last thing at night. On top of which
much of New Zealand isn't in a position to gather enough solar energy
for their own needs because we're outside the best area of the earth for
using solar power...

Pooh

[Pooh]

Got anything to support this bullshit Rich? Or will you just continue to
repost the pointless and useless cites from your marxist mates as per usual?

> As for future technologies, they may affect the future productivity of
> solar generation of course, but the one that shold really make a
> difference is the future technology that will allow New Zealand to get
> rid of all pests with just a few millin a year - National is onto the
> reliance on future technology too!
>

Need more than some global warming to improve benefits of solar power in
county's like New Zealand Rich. You'll need to move us further north as
well.

We're better off concentrating on wind and water generation as so much
of the world is doing these days.

Pooh

Pooh

[Pooh]

Another comprehend fail from Rich. Energy efficient is far more than
solar panels. They'd have been better off putting up a windmill and
tying Rich and his Labour/Green mates to it to provide constant wind for
it. They could probably use their hot air to warm the apartment during
the winter.

Pooh

[Pooh]

Storage is VERY important victor because then you get to be able to use
the energy you've gathered while the sun shines when it's not available.
I'd have thought even a non-comprehending marxist like you might
understand that concept.

Pooh

[Unknown]

PV, in my opinion and the opinion of others with far more expertise than mine
has a very limited future in this country. That is not true of all countries
and Australia may be one of those. PV's future or otherwise is simply a matter
of technology - nothing more. What do you fail to comprehend about such a
simple statement?
Tony

[Pooh]

Wonder if Rich will backup his claims of how wonderfull solar power is
by installing it and going off the grid. He could always install a pedal
generator to power his bridge when the sun goes down :)

Pooh

[Unknown]

The point that so many people miss is that with solar power you really cannot
go off grid at all unless you invest in significant storage and almost
certainly over-invest in PV. The vast majority of PV suppliers oeverestimate
the amount of PV panels that a house needs which makes it actually less viable
than it should be - it simply compounds the issue.
I know a retired nuclear engineer who has for years esposed the value of
nuclear energy - he no longer does so because he is firmly of the opinion that
it is now too expensive and wind energy is the medium term future. The problem
with those that believe PV is the future for NZ is that they are simply too
entrenched in that opinion to do the research, a bit like people who are too
entrenched in their political opnions to consider that their favourite party
may be flawed.
Tony