
Is the ‘point’ of solar about to change? - aniijbod
http://www.iijiij.com/2014/04/13/is-the-point-of-solar-about-to-change-016084
======
adaml_623
This is an incredibly lazy blog article. The author hasn't even attempted to
do any calculations he's just contemplating someone else doing them.

I don't think he has thought the problem through or researched it at all.
Reading the wiki article (
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaic_power_station#Sola...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaic_power_station#Solar_array_arrangements)
) shows that people already make the calculations of whether to pay for sun
tracking which gets you an extra 30% energy. Obviously at some point the
tracking mechanism will cost more than 30% of the energy produced. That's the
cut off. And at that point the arrays installed will be fixed non tracking
arrays tilted towards the equator at an angle calculated to get the maximum
energy during the year.

~~~
xxgreg
"get the maximum energy during the year."

There are already countries where the cost of electricity from PV is below the
cost of electricity bought from the grid. In these countries every Watt you
generate yourself saves you money.

These users don't want to get the maximum amount of energy per year, they want
to minimize the amount of electricity bought from the grid. They want to
better match the generation profile of solar to their load profile. i.e.
spread generation across the day - instead of getting it in one big peak in
the middle of the day. To do this - it is already common to install east and
west facing PV.

But I agree lazy journalism - he's speculating about a future which has
already happened in some places.

------
edent
Solar farms already do this. Optimal angle always tracking the sun.

I have panels on my roof in England - today they generated 22.5kWh. That's
roughly 3 times my daily need
[https://mobile.twitter.com/Edent_Solar/status/45541993526384...](https://mobile.twitter.com/Edent_Solar/status/455419935263842304/photo/1)

The issue isn't generation as much as it is storage. My south facing roof
should generate my yearly kWh - but I have no practical way of sorting that
energy. A multi kWh battery like in a Tesla if just far to expensive to stock
in my attic.

~~~
jimktrains2
Very naïve question:

What are the issues with moving a liquid (water?) from a low storage tank (in
say your basement) to a high storage tank (say in your attic) and then at
night let it flow in the opposite direction to produce electricity? I haven't
done the calculations, but would it require too much liquid or maintenance?

I'm also not sure what this would be called? Gravity Battery?

~~~
Houshalter
converting to and from mechanical energy is inefficient. But it has been done
in some places.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_energy_storage_project...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_energy_storage_projects#Gravitational_potential_energy_storage)

~~~
jimktrains2
I mean, I figured it was worse than a battery, but if you can store it much
more cheaply it might have been worth it? EDIT: The link also goes through
some of the pros and cons. Thanks!

And cool, my guess at a name wasn't too far off:)

------
ghouse
Even if the solar modules are free, there is still a cost of equipment,
land/roof, labor, soft-costs, etc.. And if the cost premium of tracking is
outweighed by the the value of the increased production, then tracking will
continue.

In short, there is no one-size-fits-all answer whether tracking is cost-
effective now or with dramatically different module prices.

------
nroose
Sure, the panel is getting cheaper. But transportation, installation, and land
are not. It is still likely that panels will be more cost effective than more
complicated, expensive installations, but probably either oriented to the sun
at noon, and make sure there are as many as possible in that orientation in
the space available. And anyway, it would just be half a pyramid. no point in
orienting them to the north in the northern hemisphere or to the south in the
southern hemisphere.

------
geekam
Can someone point to a source of what "cheap" solar material/panel they are
talking about?

~~~
adaml_623
They are talking about the decreasing cost of solar cells over time.

[http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-
blog/2011/03/16/sm...](http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-
blog/2011/03/16/smaller-cheaper-faster-does-moores-law-apply-to-solar-cells/)

------
blendergasket
Buckminster Fuller style domes sound like a good bet.

