{"id":2172,"date":"2011-04-18T14:49:50","date_gmt":"2011-04-18T18:49:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2011\/04\/why-solar-cuts-it-better-than-any-other-energy-source.html"},"modified":"2011-04-18T14:49:50","modified_gmt":"2011-04-18T18:49:50","slug":"why-solar-cuts-it-better-than-any-other-energy-source","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2011\/04\/why-solar-cuts-it-better-than-any-other-energy-source.html","title":{"rendered":"Why solar cuts it better than any other energy source"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/a>\nSolar power is the fastest growing industry in the world,\nand south Georgia is an excellent place for it to grow\nand produce jobs, with plenty of rooftops and parking lots\nfor solar panels.\n

\nThis is despite the misinformation\npeople with vested interests in other energy sources put out\nabout solar power.\nAfter Dr. Matthew Richard\n\nmade some points about solar vs. biomass<\/a>,\none of the members of the 6 December 2010 panel that\n\nVLCIA spent more than $17,000 to assemble to defend biomass<\/a>\nresponded that he was in favor of the nearby 300kWatt solar plant, but:\nwell, I’m going to interleave his buts with what he’s ignoring.\n\n\n

    \n
  1. The cost of solar is plummeting<\/strong>\n
    \n    \n<\/a>\nSolar is a lot cheaper than the pollution and foreign war costs of fossil fuels,\n\nwhich are subsidized 12 times as much as renewable energy.<\/a>\nThe panelist said:\n
    \nIf we look at the solar plant, and incidentally, the cost of solar\nis not free, by any stretch of the imagination.\n<\/blockquote>\nFossil fuels are less free.\nBiomass probably doesn’t have the foreign war cost,\nbut it does have pollution costs.\n
  2. Solar installation is a good investment<\/strong>\n
    \n    \n<\/a>\nThe \nWiregrass Solar LLC plant is completed<\/a>,\nwith an actual construction time of around a week.\nThis despite the panelist’s assertion:\n
    \nThe cost of the installation is probably two to three times\nas much as a biomass plant.\n<\/blockquote>\nYes, for rooftop solar installation there is a front-end financing question,\nbut one that’s\n\nalready been solved in California and Oregon.<\/a>\nMeanwhile \nthe Wiregrass Power LLC biomass plant is 7 months behind<\/a>\nand the VDT says VLCIA gave the newspaper a fake timeline.\n

    \n\n<\/a>\nWhat about the huge cost to the Industrial Authority’s reputation\ntheir continued defense of this smoking elephant has given them?\n

    \nCost isn’t all there is to a business case.\nWhen nobody will buy the product of the biomass plant (electricity)\nit’s never going to be built.<\/a>\nMeanwhile, solar installation can provide an increasing number of jobs for many years into the future (see below).\n

  3. The acres needed for solar are already cleared<\/strong>\n
    \n    \n<\/a>\nThis is the silliest objection to solar:\n
    \nThe biggest problem, though, besides the fact that we have 22 acres\nand we would have to put in a plant comparable size would take about\n400 acres.\n<\/blockquote>\nThere are plenty of acres available.\nHouston, which gets less sun than Valdosta, puts solar panels\non rooftops.<\/a>\nAnd put them above parking lots.<\/a>\nIn Texas, they’re going to put them\nat the airport.<\/a>\nPut them in your back yard,<\/a> or on your farm workshop roof (I did).\nThere are plenty of acres available, ready for use for solar power.\nAnd distributing solar panels this way means there’s no need to build\nextra grid connections for them.\nStop thinking about “a plant” and start thinking about deploying solar anywhere there’s sunshine.\n
  4. Baseload power is irrelevant<\/strong>\n
    \nHere is the second silliest objection to solar power:\n
    \nTrying to convert this plant, though, to solar would really, not a practical,\nuh, proposition.\nFor the simple reason, if we’re talking sustainable energy, 24\/7,\nwe’re talking a plant that will run continously and that will provide\nelectricity on a continuous basis.\nProbably 90% of the time it would be running at full capacity.\n<\/blockquote>\nElectricity isn’t used continuously at the same level.\nWhen is the biggest draw on electricity?\nIn the heat of the day in the summer, when the sun is shining the brightest!\nSolar is excellent for peak load in the south.\nOne excuse for building new coal, biomass, and nuclear power plants\nis new power needed for population growth in Georgia.\nFirstly, conservation and efficiency could deal with that.\nSecondly, solar for peak loads can also deal with that.\n
  5. Sunshine is distributed<\/strong>\n
    \nThis objection sounds more serious, but it isn’t:\n
    \nThe other problem, though, is the sun doesn’t shine all the time.\nIt runs about a 17% capacity factor compared to 90%.\nSo we’re really not talking about the same thing.\nSolar is a good thing; we’re all for it.\nBut if you have to recognize its limitations and its capability.\nWe’re talking a baseload plant that’s going to be providing power\non a continuous basis: solar doesn’t cut it.\n<\/blockquote>\nThis is just lusting after burning a tree when there’s a whole forest\nof real clean energy out there.\nThe error is planning for a single plant instead of planning\na renewable energy strategy.\n

    \nNo, not like the so-called “State Energy Strategy”<\/a>\nthat proposes building more natural gas pipelines and even an oil refinery.\nNo, not like the \nCenter of Innovation Energy<\/a> slides that decree that biomass is\nthe only renewable energy for Georgia.\n

    \n\n<\/a>\nYes, like the\n\nHighland Renewable Energy Strategy<\/a>\nwhich examines wind, wave, hydro, solar, etc.;\nwhere they can be produced,\nwhat complications there are (sightlines, wildlife, tourism, power lines, etc.);\nwhich bodies need to be consulted or convinced or otherwise communicated with,\nand so forth.\n58 pages plus another 75 pages of maps, graphs, and analysis, all produced\nby a company in Stromness, Orkney, a town smaller than Hahira.\n

    \n\n<\/a>\nCombine solar panels all over the state with wind farms off the coast and\nin north Georgia, plus energy storage through pumping water uphill,\nspinning flywheels,\nheating salt, compressing air, etc. and pretty soon you’ve got\nbaseload from renewable energy.\nWind is like solar in that\n\nall that is lacking is the political will.<\/a>\nWhat if the wind and sun fail at the same time, due to cloudy still days?\nMaybe keep a few dirty power plants around as backup power.\nWe’ve got plenty of coal plants for that already.\nWith real renewable energy, we could close most of them down,\nand we don’t need any biomass plants.\nWe do need solar.\n

    \nMark Z. Jacobson makes a good case for\n\npowering the entire world with wind, water, and solar.<\/a>\nIn this\n\ndebate over nuclear with Stewart Brand,<\/a>\nJacobson mentions that the studies have already been done\nfor powering California entirely with real renewable energy.\nLet’s do that study for Georgia!\n<\/ol>\nHere are some points the panelist didn’t mention:\n