Grid-tied solar

[dave1949]

I doubt Tesla can be bothered drilling down to customers individual circumstances, so only you can do that for yourself. That said, there's plenty of info out there, if motivated.

Here's but one example, loaded with assumptions (there's no other way), and from an admitted investor in both Tesla and SolarCity:

Tesla Powerwall & Powerblocks Per-kWh Lifetime Prices vs Aquion Energy, Eos Energy, & Imergy | CleanTechnica

A motivated consumer doing the most rudimentary online research may find other, already available, batteries with significant characteristics worth considering too.

You assume a lot about my level of motivation. It's something I definitely want to understand but there's no rush. The article is helpful, thanks.

 

[dave1949]

This is tangentially related to solar PV in that if the energy demand scenarios play out as predicted, solar has a bright future in the coming decades--as it should.

Since 1970 Shell Oil has had a team of futurists who create several scenarios for the future as it relates to the oil/energy business.

A short video by the VP who leads the futurist team; Jeremy Bentham:
Shell?s Jeremy Bentham explains latest energy predictions - Shell Global

A NYT article discussing Shell's scenarios:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/18/m...-region&region=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well


New Lens Scenarios - Shell Global
What might lie ahead 50 years from now… or even in 2100? We consider two possible scenarios of the future, taking a number of pressing global trends and issues and using them as “lenses” through which to view the world.

The scenarios provide a detailed analysis of current trends and their likely trajectory into the future.

They dive into the implications for the pace of global economic development, the types of energy we use to power our lives and the growth in greenhouse gas emissions.

The scenarios also highlight areas of public policy likely to have the greatest influence on the development of cleaner fuels, improvements in energy efficiency and on moderating greenhouse gas emissions.

Mountains

The first scenario, labelled “mountains”, sees a strong role for government and the introduction of firm and far-reaching policy measures. These help to develop more compact cities and transform the global transport network. New policies unlock plentiful natural gas resources – making it the largest global energy source by the 2030s – and accelerate carbon capture and storage technology, supporting a cleaner energy system.

Oceans

The second scenario, which we call “oceans”, describes a more prosperous and volatile world. Energy demand surges, due to strong economic growth. Power is more widely distributed and governments take longer to agree major decisions. Market forces rather than policies shape the energy system: oil and coal remain part of the energy mix but renewable energy also grows. By the 2070s solar becomes the world’s largest energy source.

 

[MossRoad]

... solar has a bright future ....

It better....

 

[TomSeller]

It better....

It can't very well have much of a cloudy future.

 

[Egon]

It better....

Will it get too bright?

 

[dave1949]

Ha Ha. I figured someone would have fun with the bright future comment. Actually, I don't know how a warming planet will affect cloud cover and general moisture haze in the air. Both would considerably reduce solar PV output.

If the scenario that has increased reliance on natural gas with carbon capture and storage happens, and assuming the demand for NG could be met through fracking, how does that work out? I would think only certain areas have the needed geology to support pumping CO2 underground. Does that limit the locations of NG-fired power plants? If it does, it means NG plants have some of the same cost constraints that wind turbines have in regards to transmission lines along with pipelines.

If the CO2 is not stored after capture it could be used to feed algae stocks. Several projects are trying that out but I don't think anyone has a commercially viable system yet. Probably at the right carbon price it could be done. Compressed CO2 is what dry ice is made from but eventually it "melts" and the CO2 returns to its gaseous state.

 

[houstonscott]

Ha Ha. I figured someone would have fun with the bright future comment. Actually, I don't know how a warming planet will affect cloud cover and general moisture haze in the air. Both would considerably reduce solar PV output. If the scenario that has increased reliance on natural gas with carbon capture and storage happens, and assuming the demand for NG could be met through fracking, how does that work out? I would think only certain areas have the needed geology to support pumping CO2 underground. Does that limit the locations of NG-fired power plants? If it does, it means NG plants have some of the same cost constraints that wind turbines have in regards to transmission lines along with pipelines. If the CO2 is not stored after capture it could be used to feed algae stocks. Several projects are trying that out but I don't think anyone has a commercially viable system yet. Probably at the right carbon price it could be done. Compressed CO2 is what dry ice is made from but eventually it "melts" and the CO2 returns to its gaseous state.

Report: Foreign Countries Altering Weather Data to Show Warming Give the warming CO2 thing a rest, it's a hoax! HS

 

[MossRoad]

Will it get too bright?

So bright you'll have to wear shades!

 

[MossRoad]

Report: Foreign Countries Altering Weather Data to Show Warming Give the warming CO2 thing a rest, it's a hoax! HS

Give the Newsmax thing a rest, it's a bigger hoax!

 

[Redneck in training]

Ha Ha. I figured someone would have fun with the bright future comment. Actually, I don't know how a warming planet will affect cloud cover and general moisture haze in the air. Both would considerably reduce solar PV output.

If the scenario that has increased reliance on natural gas with carbon capture and storage happens, and assuming the demand for NG could be met through fracking, how does that work out? I would think only certain areas have the needed geology to support pumping CO2 underground. Does that limit the locations of NG-fired power plants? If it does, it means NG plants have some of the same cost constraints that wind turbines have in regards to transmission lines along with pipelines.

If the CO2 is not stored after capture it could be used to feed algae stocks. Several projects are trying that out but I don't think anyone has a commercially viable system yet. Probably at the right carbon price it could be done. Compressed CO2 is what dry ice is made from but eventually it "melts" and the CO2 returns to its gaseous state.

Often the off or accompanied natural gas is is pumped at great expense (several billion USD) back underground to boost oil flow. I was working in UAE last year on commissioning of a gas plant project and learned that GASCO has a plant extracting CO2 and using that to boost oil flow instead of off gas. They told me that it is cost effective because it cost less than the market value of the gas.
GE, Hyundai and others have a research of CO2 extraction and storage in progress. CO2 is a byproduct of production of ammonia and it combined with ammonia can be turned into urea crystals (fertilizer).