
64% of new energy from Solar Power in Q1 is not enough - acusticthoughts
http://electrek.co/2016/06/12/64-of-new-electricity-in-q1-came-from-solar-power-is-it-enough/
======
samcheng
A few interesting tidbits from the table in the article:

1) Coal is seeing a dramatic decline! The decrease in electricity generated by
coal in 2015 was four times the increase in renewable (wind+solar) electricity
generated. In fact, it was more than all other electricity increases combined.
This is great for the environment, and not just from a carbon perspective,
also from an ash and air pollution perspective. (But unfortunately bad for the
areas where coal mining is the sole economic driver)

2) The total amount of electricity generated actually declined significantly
(~5%) in 2015. Since we're not seeing a dramatic economic crash, does this
point to efficiency gains, weather, or something else? Hopefully, we'll begin
realizing more 'negawatts' \- the most efficient watt-hour of electricity is
the one that is never produced.

3) From a PV perspective, I live in an area attractive to solar power both
physically and economically, yet only a handful of my neighbors have installed
solar panels. There's still a LOT of room to grow!

~~~
teslaberry
2) we ARE SEEING A DRAMATIC ECONOMIC CRASH IN THE WEST.

electricity rates in europe have skyrocketed and this is part of the
artificial scarcity of electricity , and the suckout of savings that is
draining the european economy by rising costs (electricity costs as input to
industrial goods) and declining supply ( of money that could have been spent
or saved and reinvested in other things other than ridiculous high cash
payments for electricity)

~~~
samcheng
This was a table of electricity generated in the United States; unemployment
is at its lowest since 2008, with GDP growth at 2.2% - not shrinking.

It's more likely that the drop in electricity generation was weather related,
but I don't have the data on hand to prove that.

------
teslaberry
the smartest energy investors from the green energy bubble which burst 3 YEARS
AGO NOW, have all basically concluded that we are not YET at the tipping
point, accelerating up the curve, of scaling the construction of industrial
solar .

perhaps the cheerleaders who pout about our 'slow' progress are doing us a
service by trying to motivate us. but i also see them as pesky and annoying.

while some measure of r&d benefits from the feedback loop of failure to
industrialize or failures learned from in the industrialization of extant
technologies, ------the reality is that basic r&d needs to be done. much much
more of it.

pushing relentlessly for industrialization at a stage in time where the
technology IS NOT YET READY TO SCALE RELATIVE TO OUR EXISTING BASE---------is
just foolishness and a waste of money.

BETTER TO SPEND THE MONEY IN R&D, THAN TO WASTE TOO MUCH OF IT ON NON-
SCALEABLE SYSTEMS.

------
dmritard96
"this summer we might see clear oceans in the Arctic." \- this is absolutely
terrifying.

~~~
Gibbon1
That made me remember the last time I read of some guys trying to reach the
north pole. They almost died because the sea ice they were on broke up.

------
wereHamster
Original title: 64% of new electricity in Q1 came from Solar Power – is it
enough?

------
supercarrot
"China aims to have 100 gigawatts (GW) of wind power capacity by 2020, and the
nation’s leaders plan to expand installed solar capacity to 20 GW during the
same period. These are truly astonishing goals, and, if China even comes close
to accomplishing them, it will become the world’s renewable energy leader. But
there is a problem. Total Chinese electricity generation capacity is 900 GW
currently; with seven percent [GDP] growth, that means the nation’s
electricity demand in 2020 will be something like 1800 GW. Wind and solar
together would supply less than seven percent of that. The only thing likely
to boost that percentage much would be a dramatic reduction in growth of
energy demand to, say, two percent annually."

I like this from The End of Growth (2011) by Richard Heinberg.

As much as the numbers are incredible we are really undermining the amount of
energy produced by fossil sources.

Similar problem with nuclear.

Are we really on the exponential road to sustainability? I hope so.

~~~
greglindahl
This quote isn't recent, is it? Because it takes 10 years of 7% growth to
double[1], and China's economy is becoming less energy intensive over time, so
no, it's not going to double power usage in 4 years.

1:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_72](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_72)

~~~
supercarrot
2011\. I'll edit it.

