You must log in or register to comment.
That’s not at all what MIT is talking about here. This goes into detail around the challenges tied in rolling out grid scale solar in a way that aligns with supply and demand curves, and how to make sure we’re able to capture overproduction so that we can use it when not enough is being produced. It’s a complex shift to work out in our over 100+ year grid production structure, and has been an ongoing discussion across the energy sector. But you know…memes and shit.
“For years, mankind has yearned to destroy the Sun.” - CM Burns.
of course it’s a furry shitposting about it.
They aren’t wrong though, storage technology is only starting to come to market in significant enough capacity to be beneficial.
And for storage plants to be financially viable energy costs during the day need to be really cheap, so they can raise them at night and make a significant enough profit to break even.
MIT thinking they’re Doc Ock
The problem with solar panels is that they produce energy the most when you least need it, and they produce the least when you most need it. Fuck the market. It’s a resource storage and production management problem.
Before commenting, you should know there are 2 types of solar panels:
- the ones owned by people (which may or may not feed into the grid)
- the ones owned by corporations
The article is probably about the 2nd kind (if you can only sell energy when there is a surplus, your company will fail), while the twitter user makes it seem like the 1st kind was meant. We probably need to built more of both types. Identify what type the other commenters are talking about before getting in any arguments here.
The real issue isn’t the overproduction per se, but that we (globally speaking) don’t have enough cheap scalable responsive distributed storage. I’m writing this from a privileged position since Switzerland has loads of dams and can pump water during such peaks. But it’s clear that’s not the solution everywhere. I hope a good cheap mass producible battery tech with less rare earth metal requirements comes along soon.
that’s a ridiculous argument tho. of course you can. just very selectively choose who you sell solar panels to
yeah the new it only have like a billion other stocks for these scumbags to get rich off of and short into the ground
Nonsense. Just build a Dyson sphere around it and be the sole owner of the entire star’s energy.
Having the cost of power go to zero is a bit of a problem if selling power is your business model, so it’s not exactly ideal for solar providers.
This is idiotic. The fact is your electricity transmission system operator has to pay a lot of money to keep the grid stable at 50 or 60Hz or your electronics would fry. With wind and especially with solar power, the variable output is always pushing the frequency one way or another, and that creates a great need for costly balancing services. Negative pricing is an example of such a balancing service. Sounds good, but for how long do you think your electricity company can keep on paying you to consume power?
You’re answering the wrong questions. I don’t think people are assuming that it’s simple to manage the power grid (if so, they shouldn’t be…) but rather why are we locked into a system that lets business profit motive be responsible for the continued existence of the ecosystem.
This whole thread has way too many people who see the price as some kind of made up number that dictates how people behave, rather than recognizing that the price is a signal about the availability of useful real-world resources.
Even if the prices were strictly mandated by a centrally planned tariff that kept the same price throughout the day, every day, we’d still have the engineering challenge of how to match the energy fed into the grid versus taken out of the grid.
The prices are just a reflection of that technical issue, so solving it still needs to be done.
Just have few percent of spare capacity. If suddenly it will become too sunny, you can just disconnect solar cells. If not sunny enough, then connect them back.
Obviously I’m talking only about day - the only time when solar panel output can fluctuate.
sounds more like we should just change away from a shitty system that needs to be a specific frequency. If only there was an alternative…
Sure, but for all the times my electricity goes negative for half an hour, the monthly bill indicates that is vastly outweighed by all the times that it isn’t.
With wind and especially with solar power, the variable output is always pushing the frequency one way or the other, and that creates a great need for costly balancing services.
Speaking as a flashlight enthusiast…there’s many different ways to get a constant and consistent current. Sure we’d need to scale it up from a pocket-sized device to a whole fucking power grid, but with a big enough driver with the right arrangement of capacitors and all that, you’d easily be able to get a totally consistent current out of wind or solar
Why isn’t this as easy as storing some of that excess energy in a home battery and letting the rest down in a wire into the ground? Then if it’s smart enough it could only give back energy when needed.
Amazing! Every word of what you just said is wrong.
You’ll need to be more specific.
People also don’t realize that too much power is just as bad as too little, worse in fact. There’s always useful power sinks: pumped hydro, batteries, thermal storage, but these are not infinite.
Solar panels are easily disconnectable. Unlike conventional power plants it does not have spinning rust, that can walk away entire building.
Stupid question but can we not like, make toggleable solar panels? Like if I Just pull the plug extracting power from a solar panel does it explode or break or something?
Not really. You can discharge into the ground, but for large installations even the ground has a limited (local) capacity.
- Unplug solar panel array
- Less electricity being generated
- …
- Profit (for the power company)
My understanding is that most large solar arrays don’t have this capability in any sort of automatic way, and at these levels of power it’s a bit more complicated than “just unplug it”.
most large solar arrays don’t have this capability in any sort of automatic way
Look at this “manual” unplugger:
and at these levels of power it’s a bit more complicated than “just unplug it”.
Unplug many.
“Everything is so fucking simple that I can easily figure out the solutions to giant societal problems with 15 minutes of googling” is the dumbest take I’ve heard all day. Granted it’s only 6am but still.
Maybe you’re not fucking Sun Tzu, Einstein and Jesus rolled in to one and there might be the occasional issue that’s slightly more complicated than your armchair quarterback solutions.
Christ you people piss me off.
This seems like a massive oversight on behalf of the park designers.
One of many issues caused by the assumption that solar would only ever be a minor part of the grid.
Could they not just break the circuit for the panel, and stop it feeding back into the mains?
Yeah. My understanding is that most large solar complexes don’t have this capability, at least not in any efficient automatic way, but most home solar systems do.
I have no idea what i am talking about… But what would happen if you pulled a black tarp over the panel? Could even be automatic like the blends on a building. And even partial.
That’s extremely expensive and not really scaleable.
You’re telling me a toggleable panel that flips when it needs to is too expensive? You’re already installing the panels. You’re already doing all that. The only difference is the material on the back side of the panel and of course some sort of crank and shaft to rotate it.
Or if only there was some sort of powered component that could rotate it when it reached the capacity you know since the name of the game is power
In addition to what allero said, you seem to only be considering future installations rather than existing ones. Retrofitting existing equipment is massively more expensive than changing a design prior to building it.
Solar panels are very cheap, and any modification, even just a moving cover, greatly ramps up prices. No, really.
We just need a lot of panels to generate significant amounts of electricity, which would necessitate a large cover or a lot of mechanisms - which would get expensive on that scale.
Every time someone mentions “oh no solar is producing too much energy” I think of this deranged Forbes article from a few years back.
alt-text
Microsofts billionaire founder Bill Gates is financially backing the development of sun dimming technology that would potentially…{blahblah global cooling}
This is obviously in the context of attempting to mitigate global warming, which was caused by… you guessed it, mostly fossil fuel use.
Nobody is proposing blocking out the sun like Mr. Burns. More like reflecting a tiny percentage of solar radiation to prevent our oceans from boiling or once-in-a-century superstorms that, oh I don’t know, flood the mountains of Tennessee from becoming yearly occurrences.
This sounds like the start of a sci-fi apocalypse novel
Or Highlander 2 lol (don’t watch it, it’s horrible)
The “problem” of negative energy costs is easy to solve, but quite costly.
Build water desalination/carbon capture and storage/hydrogen generation plants that only run when the price goes below 0; even though these are very energy intensive, they would help stabilize the grid.
Then build more solar; you want to try to have the daytime price stay in the negative as often as possible.
Build water desalination/carbon capture and storage/hydrogen generation plants that only run when the price goes below 0; even though these are very energy intensive, they would help stabilize the grid.
Basically opportunistic energy consumption.
you want to try to have the daytime price stay in the negative as often as possible.
That’s not exactly conducive towards people building more solar.
The solar isn’t the goal; the energy is enabling the value in other parts of the economy.
In fact; energy supply is so important to the reasonable functioning of the economy. It should be taken out of the profit driven cycle of business.
Look at what happened with WPI in Ohakune and PanPack when energy prices sky rocketed a few months back.
The solution we’re using instead of course, instead of all that environment crap you suggested, is running huge crypto farms only during the hours when the energy is in surplus.
So if a large region (say europe, or USA + canada) is cloudy and without wind, then all transactions must stop and the remaining countries are susceptible to represent over 50% of the hashing capacity. A perfectly sound system I’m eager to see.
To be fair; this is a valid use case.
If you are a solar power producer; rather than offering your energy at -ve rates; run a crypto farm when the output is too high. This is far better than running the same farm on coal.
But it would be better going into something useful.
I want to pre-empt the argument from the Bitcoin people that while this is a logically sound argument for how Bitcoin mining could potentially help the environment by making renewables more economically feasible, using this argument to describe Bitcoin mining electricity usage is completely invalid—Bitcoin mining as it exists today does not merely use excess renewable energy; it consumes energy even in times of demand when it could be given to residential, commercial, or industrial customers. Without the excess demand from today’s Bitcoin mines, the capacity that is freed up can be used to close fossil fuel power plants.
CCS would be much better than bitcoin; even though CCS is very inefficient; if the power price is effectively -ve; that means that you are only paying maintenance costs to run your CCS
To be clear, Bitcoin mining will never help the environment. There are ways to reduce it’s negative effects though
The actual problem with painel solars, is that they require an existing infrastructure to sync with the AC grid but if that infrastructure fail, or just get out of sync, it could trigger every painel solar fail safe making the damage 10x worse especially if the infrastructure depends on the solar panels to supply most of the energy
This is a solved problem.
DC-AC conversion is pretty well understood, as is electrical protection, grid frequency matching inverters are available “off the shelf” for small units and are made to order in the MW range.
In NZ we have a DC link between the islands, there have been equipment failures over the years disabling the link, but grid frequency events are not an issue. The link has been in place for almost 60 years.
Also the distributed nature of generation makes cascade failure extremely unlikely. If you have an issue in one solar farm; another solar farm a few km away is extremely unlikely to have the same issue.
