diy solar

diy solar

The Renewable Energy Problem.

FilterGuy

Solar Engineering Consultant - EG4 and Consumers
Joined
Nov 26, 2019
Messages
7,870
Location
Los Gatos CA
This high level analysis of the costs and engineering problems renewable energy presents for reliable grid power in California. Even though it is specific to CA... the problems will be the same world wide.


I liken using renewable energy to a 3 legged stool. The legs being: Generation, Storage and Distribution. If you don't have a good balance between the three, it doesn't stand.

Sadly, by the time the discussion gets to Sacramento (State Capital), it is simplified down to "install more solar and shut down all fossil fuel and nuclear plants immediately". That sounds good, but it creates it's own set of problems because we are a long way off from having the distribution grid and the grid level storage technologies (let alone installations) needed for that plan.

Part of the issue is that no one seems to want to add the storage costs to the underlying cost of solar. This creates a misleading narrative about how cheap solar is and that perpetuates the idea the all we have to do is add more solar.

When poorly thought out policies create problems of rolling black-outs, it just gives skeptics more ammunition....and sadly that polarizes things even more.

Here are a few policies that sounds good on the surface but in actuality can create new problems without really solving any old problems:

* San Jose has banned natural gas stoves. That seems great.... less carbon. However, stoves are mostly used in the evening when solar production has dropped off.... consequently, the base load generation problem gets worse and the demand has to be met by natural gas powered peaker plants. In addition, the extra energy cost is going to hurt the lower income communities more than others. There may someday be a time when banning natural gas stoves makes sense.... but not yet.

* California has mandated solar on all new homes. More Renewables sounds great. However, California is already creating more power than it can use during the day. The investment would be better spent on the grid and storage infrastructure to better use the solar that is already in place.... Furthermore, this rule raises the price of housing which is already a huge problem in the state.

* New solar installations still get state and federal subsidies..... This has the same problem as mandating solar on new houses. It would be far better to spend that money on grid and storage infrastructure to better use the solar CA already has.

It is problems like these that make me doubt our politicians have it in them to make good policy. They will only do things that look good, not necessarily what makes sense. What is worse, there seems to be little push back to ask if the policy makes sense.... in fact discussions about what makes sense are actively discouraged. As soon as you question these kind of policies you are labeled as a climate denier and completely dismissed.

I am all in on moving to renewables.... but we need a plan to do it reliably and sensibly. Without such a plan, I fear the problems being created is actually slowing down the progress.
 
The absolute #1 priority is to get to being self sufficient as much as you can. The past several weeks is clear proof the government is failing to provide a basic standard for it's citizens. Look at Cuba and Venezuela for examples of where this could be headed.

If you are not thinking about the list below you need to start to look beyond mainstream media and exercise some critical thinking.
  1. Well water
  2. Solar power
  3. Some form of food production (vegetables, chickens, etc)
  4. Septic
  5. Hard currency (gold, silver, copper, etc)
  6. Medical supplies
  7. Ability to protect your property and family
I am not a doomsday prepper but a concerned citizen.
 
...Part of the issue is that no one seems to want to add the storage costs...
...When poorly thought out policies create problems...
...I am all in on moving to renewables.... but we need a plan to do it reliably and sensibly.
Couldn't agree more! We need to look into the Biden energy plan and provide feedback ... the version last June was really poorly thought out (possibly helped along by fossil fuel industry) as there was nothing/little for storage and seemed a huge waste of $$ (a good chuck buying land). As long as storage isn't there the FERC can't let the fossil plants retire. We've already seen rulings from them forcing renewables to increase their power prices so fossil plants can remain competitive and that's not helping the country. Hopefully if not the U.S., some country will establish a model to be copied (but since we're about to pump a couple trillion dollars into it, it would be nice to get it right).
 
ive been offgrid 8 years,, propane , solar and have propane and diesel generators. best to have redundancy.
and yes the storage/delivery for electricity always cost much more than the manufacturing
 

Who's Who?​


David Huizenga, a chemical engineer, is the current Secretary of Energy and Jennifer Granholm, a lawyer, is the current nominee.
Pity we don't an EE or someone like Will in the job that actually understands electrical power.

Here's a link to the new leadership: https://www.energy.gov/articles/department-energy-announces-new-senior-leaders

Most seem to be lawyers, environmentalists, or biologists....they all look so young .... probably just haven't updated their photos.
Here are the ones I see that have some actual science background that stand out:

Tanya Das - Chief Of Staff, Office of Science
Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from the University of California, Santa Barbara, and her B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Kelly Speakes-Backman, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
Kelly Speakes-Backman most recently served as the first CEO of the Energy Storage Association, the national trade organization for the energy storage industry. Speakes-Backman has spent more than 20 years working in energy and environmental issues in the public, NGO and private sectors. In 2019, she was honored by The Cleanie Awards as Woman of the Year. A B.S. in M.E.

She's interesting as she's worked in Energy Storage, that's a really good sign.

Shuchi Talati - Chief Of Staff, Fossil Energy at U.S. Department of Energy
B.S. in Environmental Engineering and PhD in Engineering

Jennifer Wilcox, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy
Jennifer Wilcox, Matematics & Chemical Engineering, time with and Energy Policy.

Well ladies, we're all depending on you!
 
Last edited:
(but since we're about to pump a couple trillion dollars into it, it would be nice to get it right).
Sadly, I have little hope that the Washington DC Swamp will get it right. Instead, it will be driven by a combination of special interest groups, bought off politicians and things that look good. There will be a lot of wasted money added to the nations debt.
 
Sadly, I have little hope that the Washington DC Swamp will get it right. Instead, it will be driven by a combination of special interest groups, bought off politicians and things that look good. There will be a lot of wasted money added to the nations debt.
That's why I for one want to review the plan and write to my congressman about anything wrong in it. If we all complain loudly with one voice, we can get them to do the right thing. Assuming we can figure it that is.... So tied of politicians being political!
 
Last edited:
Take-Aways:
  • to direct the Secretary of Energy to establish and carry out a comprehensive, nationwide energy-related industries jobs program, and for other purposes.
  • This Act may be cited as the “Blue Collar to Green Collar Jobs Development Act of 2021”.
  • “$100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2021 through 2025.”...
So, $400M of the $1.9T "plan" is in this bill (There's a breakdown of where the rest of the money is going here, $350B to schools, small business assistance, $15 minimum wage, health insurance, stimulus payments, etc.).

So, how does the bill direct them?
  • (A) financial assistance awards, technical assistance, and other assistance the Secretary determines appropriate, to educational institutions and covered organizations and programs, including those serving unemployed energy workers; and
  • (B) internships, fellowships, traineeships, and apprenticeships at the Department of Energy, including at the Department of Energy national laboratories.
Education? In 201.f the guidelines seem to be to provide grants to educational institutions to to develop programs to develop skills for an energy industry workforce? Includes solar, batteries, fuel cell, hydro, wind, geothermal.
 
Last edited:
My first thoughts on this is that I must have missed something. $400M is peanuts. It's okay for what the bill lists... but it's a training program and not making new jobs. The average cost of a single fossil fuel power plant is in the billions. It's about $3M/MW for a solar farm. All well and good to help educational institutions develop new curriculum... but it's not like there are standards to train them on. The June plan sounded much much different.

I must still not be looking at the right stuff.... training people is useless if there are no new jobs for them to get hired to with those skills.
 

H.R.448 - Energy Resilient Communities Act

To direct the Secretary of Energy to carry out a grant program to improve the energy resilience, energy democracy, and security of communities, prioritizing environmental justice communities, and for other purposes.

This looks like a program for the Secretary of Energy to provide up to $10M grants:
(b) Use Of Funds.—An eligible entity may use a grant provided under the program established pursuant to subsection (a) to—
(1) obtain technical assistance to—​
(A) upgrade building codes and standards for resiliency to climate change hazards (including wildfires, flooding, sea level rise, landslides, drought, storms, temperature extremes, and other extreme weather events);​
(B) develop a FEMA Hazard Mitigation Plan to identify and overcome known climate change hazards to critical community infrastructure; or​
(C) conduct a needs assessment of prospective clean energy microgrid projects and, as applicable, design prospective clean energy microgrids, including assistance to address permitting and siting challenges, understand and facilitate financing options, and understand the technical characteristics of clean energy microgrids;​
(2) provide community outreach and collaborative planning with respect to a prospective project described in paragraph (3); or
(3) carry out a project to develop and construct—
(A) a clean energy microgrid that supports critical community infrastructure; or​
(B) a clean energy microgrid for residences of medical baseline customers.​

So, this looks a lot more like a jobs program. Sec 2g talks about using American made goods, 2h about wages. $1.5B per year from 2022 to 2031. So, communities could use this to ramp up storage needs. $10M at any one site isn't a whole lot, and that's 150 activities per year. On the one hand I like that the pie is distributed, on the other hand I don't like we're not addressing the nation's needs holistically. Quite possibly we still don't have the whole picture. Really nice provision in there for tribal and indigenous communities, sure hope some of them are on Will's forums and start looking into it.
 
Last edited:
Haven't seen a bill for it, but a part of the plan is to replace the fleet of federal vehicles (SUVs/trucks) with green vehicles as a commitment to the U.S. automakers for new EV jobs.

As of 2019, the U.S. government owned 645,000 vehicles that were driven 4.5 billion miles consuming 375 million gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel, according to the General Services Administration (GSA). The U.S. government spent $4.4 billion on federal vehicle costs in 2019, the GSA said.

Assuming the average cost of an EV SUV is as low as $50k, that's 645,000 x $50,000 = $3.2 Billion (probably closer to 6) and that doesn't include the infrastructure to support them (e.g., charging stations, hydrogen production/storage). Overall it's probably about the same size as H.R. 448.
 
Don’t stress. Chevron have already perfected the process to create a combustible hydrocarbon gas from hydrogen and captured CO2. This process is energy neutral, but in essence allows renewable energy to be buffered. Excess renewable creates combustible gas that can be used to generate energy when renewables aren’t available.
The main positive is this process is CO2 negative.
While government money is flowing freely into wind and solar power, this technology will remain dormant. In a few years CO2 and energy production in general will be a non-issue.
 
Just heard on the news that "the 1.9T plan passed the House vote and was headed to the senate", so that "plan" must be H.R.1319; the "American Rescue Plan Act of 2021".

That bill is about pandemic relief, no jobs program I saw in it. I suspect my confusion comes from folks calling it the "Biden plan" whereas I was thinking about the June "Biden plan" which had that and a whole lot more. Possibly H.R. 448 is the extent of the renewable energy jobs, or possibly more is coming. If it's just H.R. 448 then its too small to even worry about and won't have meaningful impact to resiliency of the country as a whole (not poo-pooing it, locally it can have a great positive impact - the bill is aimed at helping communities). From the original plan it seemed like the jobs-program would be a major focus to boot-strap the post-pandemic economy and consume a chunk of the $1.9T.
 
ugh try here in Alabama. an extra $25 a month fee to grid tie to the POCO, and if you think thats bad, they put the DP on you on the net metering: about 8cents pKWh to buy from them but when they buy from you its only about 3.5cent pKWh. And this is the CO-OP. I understand AL power is just as bad.
 
I started my first DIY solar project just a little over a year ago after getting an estimate on a grid tie solar system. I was shocked at the price. $36,000+, not including the permitting. The permitting alone is a joke. As mentioned above by offgrider, monthly fee's for grid tie, joke of a KWh selling price, and I would never recoup the costs before having to replace an aging system.

Answer to this is, Do It Yourself. Thanks to Will and everyone else willing to pass on knowledge to us newcomers. It can be done, and surprisingly easy. The permitting problem is solved. I live in the city limits, and permanently installing solar panels requires, permits, inspections, and then yearly system inspection by the local power distribution company at my cost. If I do a ground mount installation, and do not use any kind of footer or permanent mount, they are then technically mobile and not permanent. I am building a steel rack system that will use large base plates with four each 1 inch round and 36" long ground stakes to keep it in place. No permit or inspection required. Off grid system, no permit, inspections or fee's required. A friend of mine is an electrician, and he is babysitting me on this project which will take me until summer to complete.

2KW panel array, four 200Ah LiFePO4 batteries, 24V 3KW Growatt all in one. Once it is in, I will expand with another Growatt and run them parallel to increase capacity. Adding panels in my back yard is easy, plenty of room with great sun. This adventure started with a 100W folding panel and a Jackery 500. Now 1.5 years later, I have three self built mobile systems (1.4KWh, 1,5KWh and 5.7KWh) that I can take with me anywhere. Thanks to Will and everyone else helping us along the way.

I do not rely on our grid anymore. The infrastructure is crumbling around us here in the northeast, and self sufficiency will become more prevalent. I am not a doomsday prepper at all, but after experiencing more frequent and longer outages in recent years, I do not want to be caught in the cold again. Not this year. My furnace kept on running because of the help I got from people like you. Thank you all!
 
I liken using renewable energy to a 3 legged stool. The legs being: Generation, Storage and Distribution. If you don't have a good balance between the three, it doesn't stand.

Fourth leg of the stool: Consumption.

If you allow consumption to peak whenever it wants to, you need generation (including from storage as well as original sources) able to meet peak. So customers must pay for equipment that is underutilized.

Controllable loads can be turned off to shave peaks and turned on to fill valleys. They could be given lower power costs in exchange.

Anyone installing off-grid power should do the same. Surplus power can heat and fill tanks. When there are shortages, some loads can be turned off.
 
ugh try here in Alabama. an extra $25 a month fee to grid tie to the POCO, and if you think thats bad, they put the DP on you on the net metering: about 8cents pKWh to buy from them but when they buy from you its only about 3.5cent pKWh. And this is the CO-OP. I understand AL power is just as bad.

They'll pay (or credit) $0.035/kWh and charge $0.08/kWh? A spread of $0.045/kWh?
That's really not a bad deal. Could you have stored power in a battery for less?

The additional $300/year fee is a drag, though.

For now I pay $120/year fee and buy/sell are same price, but price varies throughout the day.

Depending on your usage patterns, and considering the 12kW you've mentioned on other threads, your best deal may be to just pay to play their game. Or, maybe to configure a zero-export system and try to run your loads while you're producing power. (but not using batteries to shift time of usage.) Systems to do that with batteries are available, but I don't thing the spread is enough in your case to make it worthwhile.
 
"Microgrids" (old news)


"A turnkey solar-powered microgrid system ... can cost up to $45,000 depending on the size of the home"

"Renewable microgrids on a neighborhood level have become increasingly attractive to mitigate costs and ensure reliable energy in areas hit by power outages, said Sharelynn Moore, executive vice president of Bloom Energy, which runs about 100 microgrids in residential neighborhoods across the country. For instance, the company partnered with a real estate developer in 2019 to power a 40-acre mixed-use community in Alhambra, California."

Sharing power within a neighborhood would be an interesting possibility.
Most of systems people here have wouldn't support that unless a single large grid-forming battery system interconnected them.
That might be the way to go, to retrofit this into existing neighborhood systems.

SMA's "Multi Cluster" would have several Sunny Island systems, and on the "grid" connection they interconnect through a controller. That should let them disconnect and run stand-alone when necessary, but share their PV power when connected. What I don't know is how well they work isolating an overloaded island to let the others remain up.

This data sheet has a diagram showing multiple systems supporting a single house, not what I was thinking of. If the islands can have their own PV and disconnect, then it might.

 
Back
Top