Why Not More Solar Energy?

[Crazy chef 1]

Hi fellows,may you can assist me with this question.in a country were you have approximately 300 days of sun( please no wheater statistics at this point,just guessing)why not more people use solar cells to produce their energy?is it the high cost of purchase? I just bought a new house and I would really like to invest the extra cash to save it in long term.sorry I am not living in Phuket but I post it here because I assume this forum has the most readers.may the mod's can move it to a forum where I got a chance to get many( useful) replies. Cheers

[Crazy chef 1]

Sorry typo- mean't Pattaya forum not Phuket.

[Rimmer]

Moving to General Forum

[jbrain]

The reason is that solar energy is not profitable yet if it isn't subsidized. You can buy cheaper electricity from the power company as it would cost you to generate yourself if you calculate all your expenses, and that is if you don't have the bad luck that some panels get damaged as they are very fragille.

In Europe previously it was heavily subsidized by the governments, which has scaled back now, and you can sell your " overproduction " back to the electricity company.

Here in Thailand there is none of this.

Also note that since the subsidizing has stopped in the western world, almost every solar company is in bad papers, where the biggest one in the world Suntech Power has defaulted last week.

Maybe in 10 years but not yet.

Edited April 15, 2013 by jbrain

[FunFon]

Very high up-front capital expense, competely uneconomic, only a relatively wealthy idealist would consider it - or for PR purposes - unless you're so far off the grid it would cost you more money to get mains power lines out to your property.

And even then will only power maybe a tenth of what you're used to, to run heavy loads like A/C or other motors and heat production you'll want a generator anyway.

If you are off the grid, then a combined solar/battery bank and decent generator is completely do-able, but only economic if the land is very very cheap specifically due to your distance from civilisation.

We invested 30K AUD to be power self-sufficient in the Oz outback, and four years later had a mandatory assessment of 20K more to pay our share of running the mains power lines past our property, no option to opt out. Bloody unfair that, ended up actually hooking up once it came time to replace the battery bank since at that point it just didn't make sense anymore.

Good preview of the world to come when energy prices start to reflect their true value/scarcity though, really learn to appreciate all the infrastructure required to enable you just flip a switch and WOW there's the lights!

Not something anyone should take for granted. . .

[daoyai]

Solar is pretty common in remote hilltribe villages now, they just need 1 light per home and a little for tv. The downside has always been storage for night use, deep cycle batteries are expensive and need maintainence, then you need an inverter for ac power.

Some sunny U.S. locations have a system where the homeowner is hooked to the grid and also to solar panels, if the production of elec. exceeds current need the meter runs in reverse , adding power to the grid and reducing the bill.

This system is workable as there are no batteries involved and the consumer has access to high power of the grid. The real success story of solar for the time being is water heating.

I lived off grid for 25+ years, the panels work for decades, a small Honda generator for back up, you are good to go. A gas refrigerator is a must.

Edited April 16, 2013 by daoyai

[Dancealot]

Solar energy would be devestating for Shell's - and BP's profits.

Ask yourself why the electric car (which has been around for some 60 odd years) has not replaced the fossile fuel car decades ago?

The large industrialist company's have put a hold on it's developement.

[BookMan]

Solar energy would be devestating for Shell's - and BP's profits.

Ask yourself why the electric car (which has been around for some 60 odd years) has not replaced the fossile fuel car decades ago?

The large industrialist company's have put a hold on it's developement.

Indeed, it is in their interests to hinder development on other possible energy sources. Don't forget Coal mining companies!

For sheer power of energy, nothing yet comes close to oil.

[Dancealot]

A history lesson.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car

If development was encouraged the last 100 years we would all be flying in DeLoreans by now.

Quite common these days in The Netherlands (see wiki article pic). Everyone is charging up on the street.

Edited April 16, 2013 by Dancealot

[apetley]

Solar energy would be devestating for Shell's - and BP's profits.

Ask yourself why the electric car (which has been around for some 60 odd years) has not replaced the fossile fuel car decades ago?

The large industrialist company's have put a hold on it's developement.

The electric car is a techical cul de sac that should have died a death many years ago.

Renewable generated hydrogen is the way to go. You do not even have to build expensive hybrids as it can be used in existing internal combustion engines.

[ignis]

Have no idea about Solar, just appears to be a good idea........ Even in the UK they were building new [council houses or what every the new name is] with Solar panels lining the roof = over the year it cost the tenants nothing in electric, in the summer the 2nd meter was selling power to the grid...

Here a friend looked into it when building in BKK, and worked out it was to expensive.......... another friend in Phuhet has there roof lined with panels on there apartment block = very hot water in all the apartments, she say's it has more than paid for itself......

Also down that way but on the East side, often stay at a big Hotel, the large car park has covered parking on these roofs are many [250] Solar panels, is also fed into the grid... in talking a while ago they said the electric bill is less that 1/3 of what is used to be.......

Guess if you are 20 something and will be living there for 50 odd years you would make a big saving.. I did look into it a few years ago, for my house was 300,000 + baht, so on a single house at my age would never pay for its self.

[FunFon]

Again, it's got a very long way to go before being cost-effective in locations anywhere close to mains power lines.

All the success stories are subsidised experiments or PR exercises - which is great, should be more - but don't think it makes any economic sense unless you need to/want to live out in the bush where there won't be any power line for decades.

Campervans and yachts are good use cases.

-

Little details followup - the yes very expensive deep-cycle batteries are usually available second-hand at periodic auctions from telcos, and will even then often last 3-6 more years of regular use if properly sized and maintained.

AC conversion is very wasteful, better whenever possible to use lights and electronics designed for DC in the first place, like dichroic halogen bulbs and automotive AV gear.

Extreme reduction and conservation in usage has to be combined with alternative production for any alternative energy to make sense in practice.

[apetley]

I was toying with the idea of going solar, and wind!, but a quick calculation was that it would take over 20 years to see a return on the investment.

Maybe worth it from an ethical standpoint but for me the economics aren't worth it now.

[mogandave]

Solar energy would be devestating for Shell's - and BP's profits.

Ask yourself why the electric car (which has been around for some 60 odd years) has not replaced the fossile fuel car decades ago?

The large industrialist company's have put a hold on it's developement.

Yes, the large industrialist companies are too stupid to make money selling electric cars and electricity to run them.

[Dancealot]

Solar energy would be devestating for Shell's - and BP's profits.

Ask yourself why the electric car (which has been around for some 60 odd years) has not replaced the fossile fuel car decades ago?

The large industrialist company's have put a hold on it's developement.

Yes, the large industrialist companies are too stupid to make money selling electric cars and electricity to run them.

It is more complicated then that.

You see, what will happen to all the Oil Sheiks and Carribean oil exploiteurs not to mention the russians who thrive and also depend on this macro economic system.

You just cant say: "Ok guys! Oil is out and elec is in!" It doesnt work like that. A big part of the world economy depends on it.

To proof my claim a small example:

Rumours are that the entire world's oil supply will be depleted in 20 or 30 odd years. Now.... My question is: Where are all the electric vehicles?

The world economy, the industrialist, the banks, "They don't care if the world will be destroyed by their system"

Hope explained myself better now

Edited April 16, 2013 by Dancealot

[BookMan]

Solar energy would be devestating for Shell's - and BP's profits.

Ask yourself why the electric car (which has been around for some 60 odd years) has not replaced the fossile fuel car decades ago?

The large industrialist company's have put a hold on it's developement.

Yes, the large industrialist companies are too stupid to make money selling electric cars and electricity to run them.

It is more complicated then that.

You see, what will happen to all the Oil Sheiks and Carribean oil exploiteurs not to mention the russians who thrive and also depend on this macro economic system.

You just cant say: "Ok guys! Oil is out and elec is in!" It doesnt work like that. A big part of the world economy depends on it.

To proof my claim a small example:

Rumours are that the entire world's oil supply will be depleted in 20 or 30 odd years. Now.... My question is: Where are all the electric vehicles?

The world economy, the industrialist, the banks, "They don't care if the world will be destroyed by their system"

Hope explained myself better now

It is a complicated issue

At the moment, Oil is used to make and power just about everything we use in modern society. There is not a power source that is able to replicate the sheer performance power of oil and that could readily replace everything that relies on oil for its manufacture.

With BIG oil and BIG manufacturing, there is vested interest in keeping the status quo. Oil is remarkably cheap for what it does and is currently in abundant supply.

As DAL states, it is most likely we will run out of enough oil to feed the worlds consumption in the very near future. At that time I am sure there will be other power sources developed, but none will likely match the power of oil.

[bunta71]

Solar power comes in many forms, not just photovoltaic cells.As previously mentioned, solar hot water heaters are 100% cost effective and yes it is ridiculous to not be using everywhere already. The anti solar propaganda started with Ronald Raygun. He literally destroyed a new vibrant industry of appropriate technology within days of being sworn in. I had at the time designed and built a small passive greenhouse in Palmer Alaska with a design temperature of -26F. It heated the cabin 100% using zero electricity or other means of power. Some of the design techniques have been around for centuries. i.e. cliff dwellers in many parts of the world had figured out the correct thickness of the stone walls to store just the correct amount of heat without overheating while radiating the heat back into the rooms at night. This cabin was a demonstration of low cost housing using locally available renewable resources. The cabin won an award from the U.S. Department of Energy. The pace of design and ingenuity was vibrant and exciting to some of us. Then comes along Ronnie Raygun. Within a month he completely wiped out all federal funding for anything dealing with appropriate technology...tax incentives, grants,and the resource that most solar pioneers had used to obtain climatical data, called SERI or solar energy research institute. The icing on the cake was the start of a propaganda campaign focusing on only the fact that photovoltaics were not cost effective. That propaganda worked and is prevalent to this day as evidenced by some of the posts here. The Republicans DO NOT want you heating your home for free and the oil and coal industries spend lots of money to hide reality. If one designs an energy efficient home, reducing the needs for energy, photovoltaics are already cost effective. San Diego County has required all water heaters to be solar for almost 30 years now. Never was fond of propoganda whether coming from North Korea or Faux News. Here are a few photos of the small cabin in Palmer before the earth berm and sod roof and the Beadwall insulating the greenhouse. What a feeling to wake up the the most natural, comfortable warmth and did I mention FREE?...

Edited April 16, 2013 by bunta71

[rsokolowski]

I was toying with the idea of going solar, and wind!, but a quick calculation was that it would take over 20 years to see a return on the investment. Maybe worth it from an ethical standpoint but for me the economics aren't worth it now.

That sounds about the right amount of time to see a return on investment. The problem is that the solar cells are only good for about 25 years, so right about the time you pay off the initial investment, it is time to buy all the equipment again. No thanks. The only reason it makes sense in the west is that your investment is subsidized by the government. No subsidy=no value, unless it is a religious experience for you (i.e. helping to save mother earth).

[rsokolowski]

Solar energy would be devestating for Shell's - and BP's profits.

Ask yourself why the electric car (which has been around for some 60 odd years) has not replaced the fossile fuel car decades ago?

The large industrialist company's have put a hold on it's developement.

Yes, the large industrialist companies are too stupid to make money selling electric cars and electricity to run them.

If there is money to be made, someone will sell it guaranteed. If there isn't money to be made the government will have to subsidize it to make it worthwhile and get people to buy something that is not worthwhile..

[mogandave]

Solar energy would be devestating for Shell's - and BP's profits.

Ask yourself why the electric car (which has been around for some 60 odd years) has not replaced the fossile fuel car decades ago?

The large industrialist company's have put a hold on it's developement.

Yes, the large industrialist companies are too stupid to make money selling electric cars and electricity to run them.

It is more complicated then that.

You see, what will happen to all the Oil Sheiks and Carribean oil exploiteurs not to mention the russians who thrive and also depend on this macro economic system.

You just cant say: "Ok guys! Oil is out and elec is in!" It doesnt work like that. A big part of the world economy depends on it.

To proof my claim a small example:

Rumours are that the entire world's oil supply will be depleted in 20 or 30 odd years. Now.... My question is: Where are all the electric vehicles?

The world economy, the industrialist, the banks, "They don't care if the world will be destroyed by their system"

Hope explained myself better now

What percentage of oil is burned in cars? I think significantly less than half is used for transportation in the US, and that includes trucks, air and rail.

More oil has to be burned to generate the additional power electric cars will need, then the cars burn directly, so i think your argument is silly.

Been a lot of electric cars come and gone without a viable option.

[Dancealot]

What percentage of oil is burned in cars? I think significantly less than half is used for transportation in the US, and that includes trucks, air and rail.

More oil has to be burned to generate the additional power electric cars will need, then the cars burn directly, so i think your argument is silly.

Been a lot of electric cars come and gone without a viable option.

Your opinion is noted Mogandave. I can live with that.

[bunta71]

I was toying with the idea of going solar, and wind!, but a quick calculation was that it would take over 20 years to see a return on the investment. Maybe worth it from an ethical standpoint but for me the economics aren't worth it now.

That sounds about the right amount of time to see a return on investment. The problem is that the solar cells are only good for about 25 years, so right about the time you pay off the initial investment, it is time to buy all the equipment again. No thanks. The only reason it makes sense in the west is that your investment is subsidized by the government. No subsidy=no value, unless it is a religious experience for you (i.e. helping to save mother earth).

Please explain about the returns on a $100 solar hot water heater if you will....

[apetley]

Yes you can make a solar water cheaply, made one myself a while ago. Trouble is the amount of hot water we use in Thailand is negligible.

My next house will be designed with more consideration for energy saving but my present home would require a huge investment to go green.

The amount I would need to spend on panels and battery storage are just not economical enough now although I wish it were.

[Kitsune]

To have a go at alternative energy sources, Thailand has to be able to keep its green activists alive.

Unfortunately there seems to be a mysteriously high rate of murders in this field.(20 in 10 years).

So may be not a good subject to be debated openly

http://www.radford.edu/~wkovarik/envhist/GlobalWitnessChart.2002-2011.jpg

[Tep]

Thailand has no feed in tariff to subsidise residential or roof top solar photo voltaic or PV. The Energy Regulatory Commission just started working on it this year and will maybe issue the regulation later this year or next year

[yoslim]

Yes it's all the evil oil companies, easy to run the airbus a380 on electric power

and how do you produce the electricity to power all the cars in the west, with coal fired plants or by adding more nuclear reactors ?

[mogandave]

I was toying with the idea of going solar, and wind!, but a quick calculation was that it would take over 20 years to see a return on the investment. Maybe worth it from an ethical standpoint but for me the economics aren't worth it now.

That sounds about the right amount of time to see a return on investment. The problem is that the solar cells are only good for about 25 years, so right about the time you pay off the initial investment, it is time to buy all the equipment again. No thanks. The only reason it makes sense in the west is that your investment is subsidized by the government. No subsidy=no value, unless it is a religious experience for you (i.e. helping to save mother earth).

Please explain about the returns on a $100 solar hot water heater if you will....

$100 is a tank on the roof.

I use a lot more electric cooling air than heating water. I have a water cooled heat excanger that gives me all the hot water I can use for free.

[ARGUSEYE]

Recently I read in a magaziine, hard facts:

If you would have the latest electic car,( you are a hardcore greenie), you would need 80 standard solar panels in your garden and the sun must shine on them for one week in the English summer, that would charge your green electric car enough to drive 200 kms

Anymore questions??

[apetley]

Yes it's all the evil oil companies, easy to run the airbus a380 on electric power

and how do you produce the electricity to power all the cars in the west, with coal fired plants or by adding more nuclear reactors ?

There is a British company, ITM, that has a solution to produce hydrogen from renewable sources.

In the not so distant future it will be cost effective to generate and store your own hydrogen that can be used to power your car and home.

[bunta71]

Yes the needs in Thailand are different. Good to hear more people are having questions and hopefully people continue to question the status quo. We will always have many needs for oil. Unfortunately heating homes with oil is not. With about one hours education, it is easy to build homes in Thailand that cool themselves. Just requires a little gumption and the attitude that one can forego the sheep and get stuff done...The appropriate technologies are like a tidal wave coming to your neighborhood soon. Being an American, it saddens me to see other countries forging ahead with appropriate technology while we still buy the party line...at least some do not