Fossil fuels are also heavily subsidized to reduce the burden of these energies for the poorer consumers while green energy is heavily subsidized to promote its deployment."Green" energy has often been heavily subsidized. The article is a bit ambiguous about facts given. For example it says in certain regions solar power has become the least expensive form of power generation. The regions mentioned lead me to think it is cheap because of government programs in place, trying to artificially spur on development in hope that it ultimately lowers cost and institutionalizes these forms of power generation. What do you guys think?
I'm not surprised that solar is cheapest "in most countries". If you live near the equator, like most of the world's population does then your solar generation capacity doesn't plummet in the winter. It's us bu66ers in northern lattitudes that strugglee to make it economical.
OK - and how much mining and manufacturing (with the pollution attendant thereunto) is needed for building and installing those whomping big (and expensive) molten salt towers?There is a way around the myth that solar can only work with the sun shining.
https://www.energymatters.com.au/re...-use-molten-salt-as-an-energy-storage-system/
Plenty of studies have quantified the environmental cost of solar power generation, and it's certainly not zero. In the same sense, electric sars are not 'zero emission' either, so calling them that is quite frankly misleading and unhelpful. Interestingly in the UK wind generators are lower 'net carbon' than solar PV. Comparing solar PV and wind to my thinking mostly favours solar because:OK - and how much mining and manufacturing (with the pollution attendant thereunto) is needed for building and installing those whomping big (and expensive) molten salt towers?
Also, those giant solar farms still need the transmission infrastructure to get that electric power where it is needed - lots of mining and construction of interstate power line systems, etc. Which adds its own environmental damage and pollution.
Solar is not, and never has been (nor is it likely to be in the near future) nearly as "green" as its pundits claim.
It is, however, worth doing IF a realistic approach is taken.
The Ivanpah Solar Plant is of this type, but requires fossil fuel use in the morning to liquify the salts that are used to harvest the solar power.There is a way around the myth that solar can only work with the sun shining.
https://www.energymatters.com.au/re...-use-molten-salt-as-an-energy-storage-system/
The problem with statements that solar is the least expensive form of power generation is that they look at solar in isolation, and do not account for things like grid reinforcement, grid extension, and power storage that these Variable Renewables need."Green" energy has often been heavily subsidized. The article is a bit ambiguous about facts given. For example it says in certain regions solar power has become the least expensive form of power generation. The regions mentioned lead me to think it is cheap because of government programs in place, trying to artificially spur on development in hope that it ultimately lowers cost and institutionalizes these forms of power generation. What do you guys think?
I would argue that those are improvements that should be made independently of what power source is being used.The problem with statements that solar is the least expensive form of power generation is that they look at solar in isolation, and do not account for things like grid reinforcement, grid extension, and power storage that these Variable Renewables need.
I would argue that those are improvements that should be made independently of what power source is being used.
But the issue is that only variable-output renewables like solar and wind require grid reinforcement, extension, and power storage.
Grid reinforcement and extension is needed wherever you get increased industrial activity, irrespective of the type of power source.
It sounds interesting, but colour me sceptical.
Yes... a combo of conventional nuclear, thorium nuclear, breeder reactors and underground H-bomb driven fusion. Steady-state fusion when it comes online.You want a combination in case peak oil becomes a thing.