On 30/07/18 18:47, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 13:41:54 +0100
> The Natural Philosopher  wrote:
>
>> On 30/07/18 12:40, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>
>>>  Batteries can do both at utility scale or at domestic scale make
>>> the reliability of the grid far less important.
>>
>> Utter total BOLLOCKS.
>
>  At utility scale they make the grid more reliable because they
> switch in and out far faster and more efficiently than any generator can.
> Proven repeatedly in Australia.
>
>  At domestic scale they make the householder immune to brown out and
> outages short enough not to drain them, proven repeatedly by everyone who
> has domestic power storage (there are a lot these days since Tesla started
> selling powerwalls even though those things are a *lot* more expensive than
> deep cycle lead/acid to put in).
>
>  Now tell my why those two true and proven statements are "Utter
> total Bollocks" - or is it that you are reduced to foul language instead of
> reason.
>
>>>> The cost of a domestic solar panel and enough battery storage for
>>>> winter well exceeds the cost of a nuclear power station and a national
>>>> grid.
>>>
>>>  Why on earth would you want enough power storage for winter ?
>>> That would take four or five megawatt hours of storage.
>>
>> Exactly. Because dear boy the sun dont shine in winter much, if at all.
>
>  Sigh - go look up some figures - the energy production of a solar
> system in December and January is about 20% of that for the same system in
> June and July - at UK latitudes.

No. 10%

http://contemporaryenergy.co.uk/insolation-map/


  So for off-grid winter usage you need a
> system that produces enough energy for your needs at 20% of rated capacity,

10%

> and enough power storage to handle long dull stretches. The usual estimate
> for off-grid usage is at least five days storage.

So in summer its producing 10 times as much as you can use.

And in winter you need a massive expensive battery. And of coure your
coisnumption is higher - need lighst hetaers....

Nope. a part share in a nuke ius WAY chjeaper and uses AY less carbon to
make

>
>  Of course wind generators tend to work better in autumn and spring
> and about the same in summer and winter.
>
>  But I wasn't suggesting fully off-grid I was suggesting local
> storage and generation that reduces grid power usage and provides reliable
> power when the grid does not. For that every little helps.
>
>>>  A few hours storage (say ten to twenty kilowatt hours) and a few
>>> kilowatts peak of panel (just enough that the total collected annually
>>> is close to the total used annually) is enough to make a huge
>>> difference, especially if excess power can be sold (or even given free)
>>> to the grid when the batteries are full.
>
>  Every kilowatt hour that goes into batteries from solar panels is a
> unit that doesn't have to come from the grid with a system as described
> above every day that produces enough energy to last overnight means nothing
> drawn from the grid. Power is only drawn from the grid when the batteries
> are too drained. If the average supply from panels over the year matches
> the drain for the year then in summer the system will be dumping energy or
> pushing it into the grid, in winter it will be getting about half the
> energy from solar and the rest from the grid.
>
>> More bollocks
>
>  Back that up or shut up. I can back up all my statements with facts.

So can I but I cant be arsed. Believers In Renewble Energy dont like facts

Like Germany is the biggest emitter of carbin dioxide in the whole of
Europe, by nation, per capita and per MWh. It is also the most expensive
in terms of domestic electricity and it has the highest percentage or
renewable electricity. And mote nucler power than the UK.




--
“Ideas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

    -  John K Galbraith

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05