Parking lots for Solar Energy?

[KrisZ]

Nobody is suggesting you should be able to just pull the battery out of an EV and hanging it on the wall. Perhaps it's only the individual cells themselves which are repurposed. This should be easier to accomplish if automakers stick with a standardized form factor.

It's not as pie in the sky as you wish it to be.

Talking economics is another thing. I'll be happy to talk about economics. We can start with the trillions of BORROWED dollars spent since the Eisenhower Administration fighting and/or supporting pariah regimes located in oil producing countries so the rest of the world can drive around on cheap fuel. Other than the dead and disabled we have yet to experience the financial costs of this economic policy.

It’s all done on borrowed money, that’s how central banks work. You buy groceries, gas, batteries, EVs, everything on borrowed money, everything.

And it is a pie in the sky, it absolutely is. Electricity is not a “free” resource, it’s not an environmentally friendly resource and it definitely cannot replace fossil fuels. The wishing is on your side, I’m a realist.

Somehow every shortcoming for batteries or solar is met with “new tech” and “innovation” will solve it down the road. How come the same logic cannot apply to gas and oil?

 

[4WD]

In practice, that's not going to work. While it sounds fantastic on paper, the limited amount of cycles left, high rate of failure, myriad different form factors and sizes of cell and waste of resourced used to implement this scheme will make it untenable. We'd be far better served focusing on recycling these cells and reducing the mining for new ones.

Yup, EPA will be on that like paint on primer - so the dirty work gets shipped overseas via oil burners

 

[OVERKILL]

Does it matter? What if it's used to recharge storage or offset some energy consumption used to power the building?

https://investors.mgmresorts.com/in...me-Power-To-13-Las-Vegas-Resorts/default.aspx

That's an interesting headline (I have not read the article) but the Las Vegas strip uses massive amounts of power after the sun goes down, so this sounds a bit like an offset scheme.

Only way I can see this being beneficial is if that power results in holdbacks at the Hoover Dam. Lake Mead would benefit greatly from this, though I understand agriculture is the primary driver of excess outflows, not power generation.

 

[4WD]

It’s all done on borrowed money, that’s how central banks work. You buy groceries, gas, batteries, EVs, everything on borrowed money, everything.

And it is a pie in the sky, it absolutely is. Electricity is not a “free” resource, it’s not an environmentally friendly resource and it definitely cannot replace fossil fuels. The wishing is on your side, I’m a realist.

Somehow every shortcoming for batteries or solar is met with “new tech” and “innovation” will solve it down the road. How come the same logic cannot apply to gas and oil?

It can - the energy companies have often said bring us a level playing field and we can play fair …

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

In practice, that's not going to work. While it sounds fantastic on paper, the limited amount of cycles left, high rate of failure, myriad different form factors and sizes of cell and waste of resourced used to implement this scheme will make it untenable. We'd be far better served focusing on recycling these cells and reducing the mining for new ones.

What if form factors are standardized? What of repurposing the good cells and recycling the others?

 

[KrisZ]

What if form factors are standardized? What of repurposing the good cells and recycling the others?

Again “what if”, you may as well have said “just imagine”.

If you did that, then car companies would complain that they cannot innovate better range and faster charging times.

 

[OVERKILL]

What if form factors are standardized?

While that would make it more plausible, I'm not sure how likely that is. Many manufacturers are using pouch, one is using prismatic (but switching to cylindrical) and a couple are using cylindrical, but really only one large company (Tesla). And they are using different sizes of cylindrical at this juncture.

What of repurposing the good cells and recycling the others?

I am including that. At this point, you are completely disassembling the packs (expensive, time consuming) and then weeding out which cells meet the threshold for "acceptable". But you have no way of knowing how long those cells are going to last. They have just as many hours/miles/cycles on them as the rest of the pack and the cells that didn't pass, so the rate of failure is going to be very high.

It just doesn't strike me as very practical or cost effective. We'd be better served just working on really good recycling of them IMHO.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

It’s all done on borrowed money, that’s how central banks work. You buy groceries, gas, batteries, EVs, everything on borrowed money, everything.

And it is a pie in the sky, it absolutely is. Electricity is not a “free” resource, it’s not an environmentally friendly resource and it definitely cannot replace fossil fuels. The wishing is on your side, I’m a realist.

Somehow every shortcoming for batteries or solar is met with “new tech” and “innovation” will solve it down the road. How come the same logic cannot apply to gas and oil?

The question is whether wind, solar, batteries, etc. are comparatively more friendlier than oil/nat gas. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition which is so often used as justification for a particular position. Mining is dirty, regardless of whether it's coal, uranium, or lithium. It's not a secret.

The automotive and power generation industries have been trying to eek out greater efficiency for decades. On almost a weekly basis someone on BITOG is complaining about CVT's, 9 speed transmissions, GDI or god forbid TGDI. All of these technologies revolve about increasing the efficient use of gasoline while simultaneously meeting consumer demand yet nothing but whining. BITOGers looking down on the concept of re-refined motor oil is another.

NatGas and Oil aren't going away but their shortcomings are well documented hence the push to reduce the number of point sources of CO2/Methane emissions in addition to reducing total emissions. Every home, vehicle, business, and network is a point source in some degree.

 

[KrisZ]

The question is whether wind, solar, batteries, etc. are comparatively more friendlier than oil/nat gas. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition which is so often used as justification for a particular position. Mining is dirty, regardless of whether it's coal, uranium, or lithium. It's not a secret.

The automotive and power generation industries have been trying to eek out greater efficiency for decades. On almost a weekly basis someone on BITOG is complaining about CVT's, 9 speed transmissions, GDI or god forbid TGDI. All of these technologies revolve about increasing the efficient use of gasoline while simultaneously meeting consumer demand yet nothing but whining. BITOGers looking down on the concept of re-refined motor oil is another.

NatGas and Oil aren't going away but their shortcomings are well documented hence the push to reduce the number of point sources of CO2/Methane emissions in addition to reducing total emissions. Every home, vehicle, business, and network is a point source in some degree.

I agree with this and solar and wind can definitely be a viable substitute. However the question that I don’t think has been answered is, what percentage of solar/wind electricity production is viable and beneficial?

From the sidelines I believe the push looks like it’s aimed at 100% “renewable” which in itself is a very loose term, and it does seem like an all or nothing type deal. That’s how I see it at least.

 

[PandaBear]

View attachment 129885

I grew up in one of those. It is not that bad if you are used to it.

One of my friend left the suburb in Australia because it is too boring, and he can't stand having to drive 30 mins to get a pack of cigarettes. These high rise cities can be quite fun as you can just walk out of your door and be in a movie theater or a selection of 30 different cuisines around the world within 3 mins, or order some sort of food delivery from a seafood supplier to a restaurant to cook then deliver to your door with no extra fee.

Can't sleep? You can find entertainment or comfort food all the way till 1am.

I didn't know a noodle place and a tofu place near my apartment was actually one of the best IN THE WORLD until recently. Going to one in a suburb? You would think the chefs should be sent back to school.

 

[Slow Car Sport Mode]

Nuclear power.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Now if the casinos were not so dark and dingy, they wouldn’t have to light them up during the day. $10 bucks on red!

 

[brianl703]

It just doesn't strike me as very practical or cost effective. We'd be better served just working on really good recycling of them IMHO.

A friend of mine had access to a bunch of old laptop batteries and mined them for good 18650 cells and made a powerbank out of them.

Probably not practical outside of the hobbyist world.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

I agree with this and solar and wind can definitely be a viable substitute. However the question that I don’t think has been answered is, what percentage of solar/wind electricity production is viable and beneficial?

From the sidelines I believe the push looks like it’s aimed at 100% “renewable” which in itself is a very loose term, and it does seem like an all or nothing type deal. That’s how I see it at least.

IMO it's largely a regional question like it is with every other form of power generation. When reading about renewables I almost always find the words "energy mix" or "mixed generation strategy" are also used. In California for instance almost every newly built single family home comes with solar panels. Just think about that for a moment. That's part of their strategy. It wouldn't work in Green Bay and nobody is saying it should.

Take nuclear as an example. It provides about 20 percent of US capacity. There are around 93 reactors in the US today. Want nuclear to provide 40 percent? We're going to need to double the amount of reactors to approx 200. Where are you going to put them? 20 nukes along both coasts, then 20 on the Mississippi river system and 20 along the Great Lakes. What are the chances of that happening and at what cost.

Try having nuclear provide 60 percent. That's another 100 hundred reactors for a total of approx 200 new reactors.

You can see how even daunting the task is to just double US capacity.

 

[Rmay635703]

Wind and solar are terrible for the wildlife. For whatever reason, it’s overlooked.

So are picture windows, semi trucks (and vehicles in general) high rises and even electrical lines,
By far the largest killer of wildlife is farming (not talking the livestock)
but as you say, nobody cares about that.

It is all relative though, cars+buildings still kill more wildlife than nearly every other “manmade” structure (like windmills)
And worldwide agriculture kills billions of wild animals directly/indirectly.

 

[OVERKILL]

IMO it's largely a regional question like it is with every other form of power generation. When reading about renewables I almost always find the words "energy mix" or "mixed generation strategy" are also used. In California for instance almost every newly built single family home comes with solar panels. Just think about that for a moment. That's part of their strategy. It wouldn't work in Green Bay and nobody is saying it should.

Take nuclear as an example. It provides about 20 percent of US capacity. There are around 93 reactors in the US today. Want nuclear to provide 40 percent? We're going to need to double the amount of reactors to approx 200. Where are you going to put them? 20 nukes along both coasts, then 20 on the Mississippi river system and 20 along the Great Lakes. What are the chances of that happening and at what cost.

Try having nuclear provide 60 percent. That's another 100 hundred reactors for a total of approx 200 new reactors.

You can see how even daunting the task is to just double US capacity.

Yeah, the build-rate seems daunting for sure, but Ontario built 20 reactors in ~20 years, and that's just one Canadian province. France built 56 reactors in ~20 years. It's doable, but requires a commitment beyond the election cycle and that's the main problem. This is probably now further complicated by the Canadians just buying Westinghouse, lol.

 

[OVERKILL]

So are picture windows, semi trucks (and vehicles in general) high rises and even electrical lines,
By far the largest killer of wildlife is farming (not talking the livestock)
but as you say, nobody cares about that.

It is all relative though, cars+buildings still kill more wildlife than nearly every other “manmade” structure (like windmills)
And worldwide agriculture kills billions of wild animals directly/indirectly.

The real issue with wind turbines isn't the bird and bat kill rate overall, it's the raptor kill rate. That's where much of the concern has been focused due to low/slow reproductivity and relatively sparse populations.

 

[Shannow]

That's an interesting headline (I have not read the article) but the Las Vegas strip uses massive amounts of power after the sun goes down, so this sounds a bit like an offset scheme.

Only way I can see this being beneficial is if that power results in holdbacks at the Hoover Dam. Lake Mead would benefit greatly from this, though I understand agriculture is the primary driver of excess outflows, not power generation.

It's not...it's "look over there, a bunny"...clearly states in the curtailed headline....

LAS VEGAS STRIP GOES SOLAR: MGM RESORTS LAUNCHES 100MW SOLAR ARRAY, DELIVERING UP TO 90% OF DAYTIME POWER TO 13 LAS VEGAS RESORTS

 

[Shannow]

Or we can keep spending cheap oil and fossil fuels and keep adding to killing the environment and ourselves.

Earth is greener (vegetation cover) than 20 year ago.
Number of people living in on less than $2/day is lowre than it has ever been.

 

[PimTac]

It's not...it's "look over there, a bunny"...clearly states in the curtailed headline....

LAS VEGAS STRIP GOES SOLAR: MGM RESORTS LAUNCHES 100MW SOLAR ARRAY, DELIVERING UP TO 90% OF DAYTIME POWER TO 13 LAS VEGAS RESORTS

It would be interesting to see some numbers on the power generated versus the power consumed. These resorts are massive with thousands of rooms all air conditioned plus everything else electric. When they say “up to 90%” I’m suspicious.