Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (74657)	2/4/2017 11:53:54 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86356

Study: Storing solar power is a bad idea Another story on the same study. Connecting to the grid is more environmentally efficient By Chris Tomlinson, Houston Chronicle Updated 8:12 am, Thursday, February 2, 2017 Photo: Ryan Jones, MB FILE - This Aug. 27, 2015, file photo shows a solar power array that is part of sustainability improvements at the Lamar Buffalo Ranch in Yellowstone National Park, Wyo. In recent years, huge solar and wind ... more Many homeowners dream of installing solar panels on their roof tops, storing the electricity in batteries for nighttime use and then disconnecting from the power grid. It turns out, though, that we're better off staying connected than going it alone. Trying to store that energy in a battery pack actually does more harm to the environment than good, according to a new study by the University of Texas Energy Institute. Using solar panels while remaining on the grid makes much more sense. "The good news is that storage isn't required to make solar panels useful or cost-effective," said co-author Michael Webber, a professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and deputy director of UT Austin's Energy Institute. "This also counters the prevailing myth that storage is needed to integrate distributed solar power just because it doesn't produce energy at night." Researchers took a look at a test bed known as the Pecan Street project in Austin, where 100 homes use solar panels and test the latest energy technology. The study found that homes that stored electricity used between 8 percent and 14 percent more power than those that switched to the grid at night. "The researchers also found that adding storage indirectly increases overall emissions of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide based on today's Texas grid mix, which is primarily made up of fossil fuels," the authors found. "Because storage affects what time of day a household draws electricity from the grid, it also influences emissions in that way."That's because charging and discharging the batteries consumes too much power, the study found. Leveraging renewable sources of electricity to gain the maximum benefit will never be as easy we like. Yes, solar energy is free during the day, and wind energy is free at night, but capturing that energy and delivering it requires complex engineering that can change our calculations. This latest research suggest that burning a fossil fuel like natural gas, in some cases, might be better than trying to store electricity in batteries. But when the sun is shining, or the wind is blowing, those sources of energy are often more affordable than natural gas and have the advantage. A strategy that uses the electric grid to connect the right generation source to electricity consumers at the right time is far more effective at decreasing our reliance on fossil fuels than trying to go it alone. An all of the above strategy, that takes into account pollution, is really the wisest choice. That will change over time, and the grid will need to evolve, but that's the beauty of a capitalist system. Generators and engineers need to compete with each other to improve the efficiency and cost of the available tools. Maybe some day installing a Tesla Power Wall will make sense, but they need to do a lot of work on improving efficiency before we can go "off-the-grid." chron.com