excoriator
Madrigal Member 
nearly a genius
Posts: 37,165
|
Post by excoriator on Mar 9, 2015 21:37:54 GMT
This is the rate at which the world's solar power industry is growing. cleantechnica.com/2015/03/09/utility-scale-solar-power-capacity-doubles-2014-reach-36-gw/I think the tectonic plates of the energy market are shifting. So does the Financial Times it seems: blogs.ft.com/nick-butler/2015/03/08/can-solar-transform-the-energy-market/ I was struck by Mt Butler's description of the difference between those who work in the existing utilities who simply cannot understand that the technology on which their existence is based is on its way out, and those at universities with no such preconceptions being able to see with crystal clarity that new techniques and thinking will sweep it all away. I have seen something like this before. The company for which I worked for a quite a large part of my career once employed tens if not hundreds of thousands of people making telephone exchanges. The internet destroyed it overnight. The Liverpool factory, when I first knew it, employed 15,000. It was a reasonable sized town of people spending all their working hours to produce buildings full of relays and electromechanical selectors. They were replaced by units the size of small suitcases - internet routers, made by machines in vast quantities. The buildings remain in Liverpool, updated with plate glass in the vain hope of attracting someone to make things in them - but largely empty. Tombstones to a defunct technology. The big utilities and their enormous power stations are heading the same way.
Here's another interesting article on the manpower employed in the solar power business in teh US. They already exceed the number employed in teh coal industry!
www.computerworld.com/article/2870954/solar-industry-jobs-are-growing-at-20-times-the-national-rate.html
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 10, 2015 11:09:03 GMT
The electricity actually produced by these gadgets is typically only 10% of their maximum capacity, so don't get too excited about what massive solar arrays can actually deliver. - Wind turbines operate at around 30% of maximum capacity
- PV operates at around 10%
- Hydro operates at around 50%. Courtesy of Lancs County Council. |
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 10, 2015 11:17:32 GMT
What a topsy -turvey word you and the other Greens inhabit, exco! Only in "renewable energy" circles could such an appalling low level of labour force productivity per megawatt hour of electricity produced actually be BOASTED ABOUT! Did you bother to ascertain how many are employed in the US coal industry and what the electricity output per man employed is, bozo? Read this, bird brain There are approximately 174,000 blue-collar, full-time, permanent jobs related to coal in the U.S.: mining (83,000), transportation (31,000), and power plant employment (60,000). (See below for details on each sector.) The U.S. civilian labor force totaled 141,730,000 workers in 2005; thus, permanent blue-collar coal industry employees represent 0.12% of the U.S. workforce.[1] (Compare this percentage with the 1.89% of U.S. workers who worked in coal mining alone in 1920.)
www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_and_jobs_in_the_United_States So, a considerable improvement in productivity in coal since 1920! Who knew? According to Singh & Fehrs' 2001 analysis of Energy Information Administration data, the average coal-fired power plant - per megawatt of peak capacity - employs 0.18 people in operations & maintenance on a permanent basis.[12] Thus, the average 300 MW coal-fired power plant would employ 54 people in operation & maintenance on an ongoing basis. This corresponds closely with the Energy Information Administration's assessment that, in 1997, the average 300 MW coal-fired power plant had 53 employees www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_and_jobs_in_the_United_States ------- According to The Solar Foundation, there are now nearly 174,000 solar workers in the U.S., a more than 20% increase over employment totals in 2014. These workers are employed at 6,100 businesses in every state.
www.seia.org/research-resources/solar-industry-data In 2013, energy sources and percent share of total electricity generation in the USA were Coal 39%
Natural Gas 27%
Nuclear 19%
Hydropower 7%
Other Renewable 6%
Biomass 1.48%
Geothermal 0.41%
Solar 0.23%
Wind 4.13%
Petroleum 1%
Other Gases < 1%
www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3 Given the happy coincidence that similar numbers of people (174,000) are employed in the coal and the solar sectors in the USA the difference in productivity could not be more stark! It takes as many people to produce solar’s contribution of 0.23% of total electricity production as it does to produce coal’s 39% contribution. And this is a source of PRIDE? Exco, your claims for Green energy become more and more remote from reality! Get a grip man. |
|
excoriator
Madrigal Member
nearly a genius
Posts: 37,165
|
Post by excoriator on Mar 10, 2015 11:25:23 GMT
What a topsy -turvey word you and the other Greens inhabit, exco! Only in "renewable energy" circles could such an appalling low level of labour force productivity per gigawatt hour of electricity produced actually be BOASTED ABOUT! Did you bother to ascertain how many are employed in the US coal industry and what the electricity output per man employed is, bozo? It doesn't matter. If you are looking for support from ordinary working people, a big employer is a good thing, although I believe it is due more to the huge rate of expansion of the industry more than anything else, and will tail off eventually. |
|
excoriator
Madrigal Member
nearly a genius
Posts: 37,165
|
Post by excoriator on Mar 10, 2015 11:37:22 GMT
The electricity actually produced by these gadgets is typically only 10% of their maximum capacity, so don't get too excited about what massive solar arrays can actually deliver. - Wind turbines operate at around 30% of maximum capacity
- PV operates at around 10%
- Hydro operates at around 50%. Courtesy of Lancs County Council. Well, there have been days when 80% of electricity in Germany has been supplied by solar power. Efficiency doesn't matter much when you don't have to pay for the energy. As a matter of interest the most inefficient form of thermal power production is nuclear at a few percent, but it really doesn't matter much as there is so much available and the fuel costs so little. (Excluding waste management of course) You have no idea what is meant by efficiency in the case of windmills, by the way. What you are talking about is effectiveness I think, when you talk about them only delivering a third of their maximum design output. And Solar power is not always used to produce electricity. I suspect most solar power plants in the world are designed to produce hot water for domestic use. The efficiency of those is probably a lot higher than the 10% figure you have for photovoltaics. Whilst 10% may be true of older installations you can expect double this from the latest ones which by the way cost less. Not that it matters much if the energy is free anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 10, 2015 11:51:31 GMT
Read this, bird brain There are approximately 174,000 blue-collar, full-time, permanent jobs related to coal in the U.S.: mining (83,000), transportation (31,000), and power plant employment (60,000). (See below for details on each sector.) The U.S. civilian labor force totaled 141,730,000 workers in 2005; thus, permanent blue-collar coal industry employees represent 0.12% of the U.S. workforce.[1] (Compare this percentage with the 1.89% of U.S. workers who worked in coal mining alone in 1920.)
www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_and_jobs_in_the_United_States So, a considerable improvement in productivity in coal since 1920! Who knew? According to Singh & Fehrs' 2001 analysis of Energy Information Administration data, the average coal-fired power plant - per megawatt of peak capacity - employs 0.18 people in operations & maintenance on a permanent basis.[12] Thus, the average 300 MW coal-fired power plant would employ 54 people in operation & maintenance on an ongoing basis. This corresponds closely with the Energy Information Administration's assessment that, in 1997, the average 300 MW coal-fired power plant had 53 employees www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_and_jobs_in_the_United_States ------- According to The Solar Foundation, there are now nearly 174,000 solar workers in the U.S., a more than 20% increase over employment totals in 2014. These workers are employed at 6,100 businesses in every state.
www.seia.org/research-resources/solar-industry-data In 2013, energy sources and percent share of total electricity generation in the USA were Coal 39%
Natural Gas 27%
Nuclear 19%
Hydropower 7%
Other Renewable 6%
Biomass 1.48%
Geothermal 0.41%
Solar 0.23%
Wind 4.13%
Petroleum 1%
Other Gases < 1%
www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3 Given the happy coincidence that similar numbers of people (174,000) are employed in the coal and the solar sectors in the USA the difference in productivity could not be more stark! It takes as many people to produce solar’s contribution of 0.23% of total electricity production as it does to produce coal’s 39% contribution. And this is a source of PRIDE? Exco, your claims for Green energy become more and more remote from reality! Get a grip man. |
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 10, 2015 11:53:14 GMT
Yeah yeah yeah, exco! only Green Luddites think productivity doesn't matter in a world of global competition. Europe is a continent in economic decline. Ever wondered why, exco? Because people with a mindset like yours have weaselled their way into positions of influence.
Those solar "industry" wages are paid for by grossly inflated price fixing by the crony capitalists in government and by massive subsidy. Those "well-paid" jobs will not survive the removal of subsidy either in the USA, Germany or here.
What a prat!
|
|
excoriator
Madrigal Member
nearly a genius
Posts: 37,165
|
Post by excoriator on Mar 10, 2015 12:02:18 GMT
Productivity has been, traditionally, a great thing if you are a factory owner. Not quite so good for the workers.
However, I believe we should consider replacing the workforce entirely with machines.
However, as we seem to want to adhere to the cycle "Workers are paid to produce stuff. Stuff is sold to Workers" I see no alternative to paying people for not working - perhaps something along the lines of the Greens idea of paying benefits to everyone whether they need it or not.
Whether you call this 100% productive or 0% productive is up to you.
You have clearly only the most simplistic view of what productivity is and whether it is important.
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 10, 2015 13:20:00 GMT
So what?
This says nothing about the PROPORTION of installed capacity solar actually produced as electricity. Since solar only produces 10% of nameplate capacity how many hectares of solar panels were needed to produce that mythical 80% on that particular sunny day in Germany? How many efficient thermal power stations had to be throttled back to make way for that surge of solar electricity? How much of that 80% had to be exported to neighbours to avoid unbalancing the German grid?
Your posts are nothing but Green spin, exco. We NEVER get the full unvarnished story. You are a liar.
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 10, 2015 13:29:50 GMT
You were the one who brought up the matter of "green jobs", exco, another Green myth.
I was the one who did the maths!
I showed that 174,000 solar workers only produced 0.23% of the USA's electricity whereas the same number of coal workers (and that Includes those producing for export as well as domestic consumption) produced 39% of the nation's electricity.
0.23% solar electricity generation
versus
39.00% coal fired electricity generation
No competition!
These cost and productivity differences MATTER, bozo! We live in the Capitalist Real World not Green LaLaLand.
I'd keep quiet at this appalling rate of solar productivity if I were you, exco. It is nothing to crow about. You might as well set 174,000 to work cleaning each others windows - the economic impact would be the same - zilch!
|
|
excoriator
Madrigal Member
nearly a genius
Posts: 37,165
|
Post by excoriator on Mar 10, 2015 13:37:33 GMT
THE German FIT has been so popular and has gone on for so long that PV is now common on domestic roofs in the country. I would not be too surprised to find renewables exceeding demand soon in that country.
I think it is at that point that they will turn serious attention to methods of storage. One interesting method I came across somewhere recently is to store energy by freezing water into ice. You extract power from temperature differences not high temperatures on their own, and it is perfectly possible to store and retrieve energy from a lower temperature than ambient as easily from a higher temperature than ambient.
There are numerous schemes that use ice to store energy for air conditioners of course, but using it to store electricity is a new development and one that I think could be worth pursuing.
But the point is that more and more people are wanting to rid themselves from the pollution oil and coal and gas involve, the majority of people in this country are strongly behind renewables, and increasingly investors are turning away from oil, gas and coal as a way of making money. Fracking is unpopular EVERYWHERE as far as I can see, and it is perfectly clear that fossil power is reaching the end of the road.
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 10, 2015 13:38:53 GMT
Precisely, aka money making scams.
|
|
