Rooftop Pv installers in Sydney area

[Trevor Wilson]

Essentially you're saying that the predictions of falls in prices arises
not from falling costs of production of the dominant existing technology,
but from assumed drops in the production costs of one or other of a
variety of new thin film technologies. Well, it might happen, but it's far
from being a sure thing.

**NO. I said nothing of the kind. I said that supply - demand issues will
dictate the pricing. At present, demand outstrips supply. It's basic
economic theory. The "new thin film technologies" have been around for
awhile. They're not 'vapourware'. As supply increases, prices will fall. As
prices fall, demand increases, thus tempering supply and, in turn, prices.
It's all in my old school economics text books.

Handing out taxpayer dollars to the manufacturers of existing technology
cells is certainly a waste of money.

**Why? Is it better to continue to hand out taxpayer money to the coal
producers?

 

[Sylvia Else]

The backup issue is a load of wank, since solar cell owners will be
drawing on the grid when demand is low, such as night time. Coal fired
generators are at their maximum efficiency under full load, anything
less is losing money.

Coal fired stations run pretty much at full power all the time anyway,
because they have the lowest marginal cost. But they're also expensive
to build, so they don't get built unless the baseload power demand
ensures that they'll be able to run all the time.

It's natural gas and other types that are brought on and off line as
demand varies.

The backup issue arises because there has to be capacity available in
the system to supply power to the owners of PV cells whenever the latter
happen not to be generating power.

Another way of seeing how this impacts on electricty costs is to
consider the effect that the existence of PV cells has on generation
investment decisions. Because the cells displace generating capacity
when the sun is shining, they reduce the proportion of the time that
generating capacity is used. This shifts investment decisions towards
plant that has a lower capital and higher operating cost. The total cost
of power from such plant is higher, and that higher cost has to be born
by the power consuming community.

Sylvia.

 

[Sylvia Else]

**NO. I said nothing of the kind. I said that supply - demand issues will
dictate the pricing. At present, demand outstrips supply. It's basic
economic theory. The "new thin film technologies" have been around for
awhile. They're not 'vapourware'. As supply increases, prices will fall. As
prices fall, demand increases, thus tempering supply and, in turn, prices.
It's all in my old school economics text books.

One would expect the supply to ramp up pretty quickly if there was a
significant buck to be made. If that's not happening, it must be because
the price is being dictated by manufacturing cost, not by demand.

Prices drop when supply increases, but supply only increases if it's
financially worthwhile.

**Why? Is it better to continue to hand out taxpayer money to the coal
producers?

I don't see any proposals to subsidise domestic coal powered generators,
nor to let consumers sell power from their domestic coal powered
generators back to the grid at inflated prices.

Sylvia.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

One would expect the supply to ramp up pretty quickly if there was a
significant buck to be made. If that's not happening, it must be because
the price is being dictated by manufacturing cost, not by demand.

**Once again: We're not manufacturing lead/acid batteries. Silicon fab
facilities are VERY expensive to build. A decision to build may result in
the facility being operational several years down the track. Additionally,
since the need to produce cheap PV cells is contingent upon fossil fuel
prices being high, there has been no real necessity to ramp up production
'till recently. Combine that with the stranglehold that BP has held over the
industry for many years and you have a recipe for slow development. BP's
stranglehold is faltering (thanks to Chinese production), so we may see some
big changes soon.

Prices drop when supply increases, but supply only increases if it's
financially worthwhile.

**Of course. You also need to keep in mind that BP has had defacto control
over the PV cell industry for a long time.

I don't see any proposals to subsidise domestic coal powered generators,
nor to let consumers sell power from their domestic coal powered
generators back to the grid at inflated prices.

**Coal producers have, for a very long time, been using the infrastructure
provided to them at taxpayer expense (road, rail, ports system). They have
also been allowed to pollute, unhindered, for a long time. It is only fair
to provide similar incentives to other, less polluting, industries.

 

[David L. Jones]

Is that the best you can offer? If you have nothing to say, why not just
say nothing?

I didn't have to offer any more, I was agreeing with Trevor's comprehensive
reply.

Dave.

 

[Mr.T]

**Coal producers have, for a very long time, been using the infrastructure
provided to them at taxpayer expense (road, rail, ports system). They have
also been allowed to pollute, unhindered, for a long time. It is only fair
to provide similar incentives to other, less polluting, industries.

No, it is only fair to make them ALL pay the total cost to the country as a
whole, including any effect of mitigating pollution, so the cheapest most
effective solution can win out in the end.
That will NOT be solar panels on house roof tops, but MAY be large solar
panel arrays connected to the grid. (or more likely a combination of *large*
solar, wind, tidal etc. solutions, rather than individual flea size
installations)

The current government rebates simply create a market for far less effective
solutions, which entail far higher installation and maintenance costs per
kWHr.
Once again it is simply Government wasting taxpayers money in an attempt to
APPEAR to be doing something!

MrT.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

No, it is only fair to make them ALL pay the total cost to the country as
a
whole, including any effect of mitigating pollution, so the cheapest most
effective solution can win out in the end.
That will NOT be solar panels on house roof tops, but MAY be large solar
panel arrays connected to the grid. (or more likely a combination of
*large*
solar, wind, tidal etc. solutions, rather than individual flea size
installations)

**True.

The current government rebates simply create a market for far less
effective
solutions, which entail far higher installation and maintenance costs per
kWHr.

**Agreed. It is a really dumb idea, inhereted from the Howard government.
I'm all for solar cells, but they need to be in large arrays.

Once again it is simply Government wasting taxpayers money in an attempt
to
APPEAR to be doing something!

**Yep. Rudd is just as guilty as Howard.

 

[terryc]

**You'll need to wait a little (or a lot) longer. As electricity costs
rise (as they will surely do)

So the current contract offer from Integral energy to lock my current
prices for two year is a good bet?

as and PV cells continue to fall in price,

Basically, they are not falling significantly. PVs require a humoungous
factory and no one has stumped up the money for that set up unless an
existing factory has closed down.

**Don't expect massive increases in outputs from panels (of a given
size). Expect to see panels fall in price and better resistance to
shadowing.

This little boxen isn't claiming to increase panel output, Just rejig the
wiring to cut out low performing panels (shade?)

 

[terryc]

There's a lead-acid battery in pretty much every
land-vehicle that's built. Yet they're still expensive. Some things just
cost a lot to make.

Far different beasts. Car lead acids are not power system lead acids.

 

[terryc]

Essentially you're saying that the predictions of falls in prices arises
not from falling costs of production of the dominant existing
technology, but from assumed drops in the production costs of one or
other of a variety of new thin film technologies. Well, it might happen,
but it's far from being a sure thing.

When did the price drop occur from the realisation that PV does not need
the same high quality silicon as ICs? Or has no one ever built a factory
to manufacture LowQ silicon for PV?

 

[Trevor Wilson]

So the current contract offer from Integral energy to lock my current
prices for two year is a good bet?

**Maybe. I doubt electricity will be falling in price anytime soon.

Basically, they are not falling significantly. PVs require a humoungous
factory and no one has stumped up the money for that set up unless an
existing factory has closed down.

**China is. However, most of it's production will be soaked up internally.

This little boxen isn't claiming to increase panel output, Just rejig the
wiring to cut out low performing panels (shade?)

**Yep. There are a couple of system around, but they tend to be variations
on the same theme. Instead of using a handful of large slices, manufacturers
split the panel into dozens (or hundreds) of smaller cells. Thus, if the
panel is partially shaded, it may still deliver it's full Voltage, albeit at
lower current.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

When did the price drop occur from the realisation that PV does not need
the same high quality silicon as ICs? Or has no one ever built a factory
to manufacture LowQ silicon for PV?

**The silicon required to produce PVs needs to be of very high quality, if
efficiency is to be maintained.

 

[terryc]

Coal fired stations run pretty much at full power all the time anyway,

Err, AFAIK, they do not. It isn't unusual for a significant amount of
capacity to be off line for maintenance. In fact, it is essential for
reliability.

 

[Sylvia Else]

Err, AFAIK, they do not. It isn't unusual for a significant amount of
capacity to be off line for maintenance. In fact, it is essential for
reliability.

Full time when they're available to be scheduled. Other capacity spends
much of its time available to be scheduled, but off line, because its
marginal cost of operation exceeds that of the coal fired plants.

Sylvia.

 

[terryc]

Full time when they're available to be scheduled. Other capacity spends
much of its time available to be scheduled, but off line, because its
marginal cost of operation exceeds that of the coal fired plants.

So. They would not have been built if there wasn't a gap in the market
that coal could not fill. It is the same for PV on suburban rooftops.
They can fill gap in the market.

The clouds part over the suburb of wankerville and all those coddled
house mums wack on the aircon. If we wait for the centralised generators
like hydro, ICE's, etc to kick in, we can have minutes of low power.

Now, if some of those roofs have PV installations, their output varies
with the sunshine and they are right on the spot to provide power where
and when needed, actually before it is needed.

You need to get off the mindless repetition of jargon. It isn't an
argument.

 

[Mr.T]

**Maybe. I doubt electricity will be falling in price anytime soon.

I think the "soon" is redundant.

MrT.

 

[Sylvia Else]

So. They would not have been built if there wasn't a gap in the market
that coal could not fill. It is the same for PV on suburban rooftops.
They can fill gap in the market.

There isn't so much a gap, as a distortion. Without massive subsidies
only a few green enthusiasts would get further than noting the price.

The clouds part over the suburb of wankerville and all those coddled
house mums wack on the aircon. If we wait for the centralised generators
like hydro, ICE's, etc to kick in, we can have minutes of low power.

Now, if some of those roofs have PV installations, their output varies
with the sunshine and they are right on the spot to provide power where
and when needed, actually before it is needed.

And when the clouds close over again, the PV output drops, but the
airconditioners are still on until said coddled house mums get round to
turning them off, thus leading to a power shortfall.

In reality, of course, the situation isn't like that. Clouds do not part
over large areas at once, and people do not react instantly. What
happens is that as the load increases the frequency tends to drop.
Generators providing frequency control (a special service for which they
get paid) then increase their output to maintain the frequency. They can
do that very rapidly because the generators are already rotating at the
correct rate. Essentially they just open the throttle to prevent the
generator from slowing down.

Sylvia.

 

[Davo]

I don't see any proposals to subsidise domestic coal powered generators,
nor to let consumers sell power from their domestic coal powered
generators back to the grid at inflated prices.

Sylvia.

Verve Energy in Western Australia is about to be subsidised to the tune
of $700 million. They have been made, by law, to sell their electricity
at below cost. Having run up a huge debt the state government has to
bail them out. You can build your own coal fired generator and sell it
to Western Power for 10/11 of what you would otherwise pay for it. At
quantities above 1 megawatt you can negotiate better rates.

 

[Davo]

Coal fired stations run pretty much at full power all the time anyway,
because they have the lowest marginal cost. But they're also expensive
to build, so they don't get built unless the baseload power demand
ensures that they'll be able to run all the time.

It's natural gas and other types that are brought on and off line as
demand varies.

The backup issue arises because there has to be capacity available in
the system to supply power to the owners of PV cells whenever the latter
happen not to be generating power.

Another way of seeing how this impacts on electricty costs is to
consider the effect that the existence of PV cells has on generation
investment decisions. Because the cells displace generating capacity
when the sun is shining, they reduce the proportion of the time that
generating capacity is used. This shifts investment decisions towards
plant that has a lower capital and higher operating cost. The total cost
of power from such plant is higher, and that higher cost has to be born
by the power consuming community.

Sylvia.

I only know about the West Australian grid where the base load is
determined on economics, and gas, being cheaper than coal, will be burnt
before coal. Gas gets a pretty good deal in WA due to various historical
political reasons. So when the load drops it's a battle between the coal
fired generators to see who gets dropped off. The so called "back-up
issue" isn't an issue because there's plenty of spare capacity at night
when industry is sleeping.

 

[Davo]

Full time when they're available to be scheduled. Other capacity spends
much of its time available to be scheduled, but off line, because its
marginal cost of operation exceeds that of the coal fired plants.

Sylvia.

It's desirable as a producer to run at full capacity but it's the spot
market that determines who actually runs. The customer wants the
cheapest energy and doesn't particularly care about the producers
problems. In fact producers in Western Australia get fined tens of
thousands of dollars per hour for unscheduled outages, and that's in
addition to having to pay another supplier to cover your shortfall.