Estevan considered for solar power

[greybeard]

This is has the charts to compare different sources of power at different times of the year;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor
Nothing is perfect, but solar is far from it.
Expect less than 20% capacity much of the time.
Fits very well in areas that need a lot of air conditioning peak periods.
Lots of good links at the bottom that take you to more good links.

[oneoff]

tweety...tweety... tweety

What you say contradicts chucks evidence so badly that I don't know which side you are on (or both)...or neither

No energy is free of costs. No energy is even nearly free of costs. While Solar can and does work a fraction of the time the nature of the beast is that it doesn't work at all in darkness as an example.

During "half the day" its literally in the way of getting the job done; its not running the show; its causing infrastructure that could be running almost continuously and smoothly to be idled ....then ramped up to nearly maximum output then slowed to a crawl all depending on that weather front; that blizzard; that eclipse; that brownout; that nightfall; that shock that strains equipment and strains boilers that don't respond instantaneously like sunlight and environmental conditions can turn on a dime.

We just don't have the hydro resources to meet our needs in Sask. No one, not even tweety would support flooding every river system valley (and in any event it wouldn't work for a host of reasons in Sask); next to no one would want nuclear power plants and thats a current fact. Whilst wind has a better expected uptime than solar; you know the wind isn't always going to turn those blades. We don't even know when the wind will blow; just as we have no clue when the sun will shine at any minimum intensity.

We rely on the backup; and thats our own very limited hydo supplies; some wind at times; some solar if its worth the trouble and problems; some emergency Manitoba Hydro supplies as a last resort (if its available in the long term and if we're smart)....but our own base load supply needs absolutely has to be in place if we are to have control of our electrical power destiny.

We can't abuse the work horses....they don't deserve to be labelled dirty and polluting....we should respect and appreciate what they were and what they still are called on to do. Sure improve their efficiency; do the best to fix their shortcomings and consider them assets during their life span.

There are costs in decommissioning. Big costs. Some will remember the Estevan Generating Station. It took years to clean that site up. It should be respected ...like any old fire engine that did its duty to the utmost of its ability; during the time it carried the load. Not just remembering it as a dirty old coal burner. It does a disservice to our ancestors that did the best they could with what was at hand and the cards they were dealt. It takes years of clean up efforts; even more stringent standards as time progresses.

The Estevan Generating Station replacements weren't made to the same standards; and todays replacements will be to yet higher standards on all counts. Shand has 99% fly ash control, sulphur scrubbing and 50% cleaner burnt nitrogen emissions. Sask Power is trying carbon capture and utilizing the product CO2 with very limited success. Thats unfortunate; but were're investing in amine labs etc to try to overcome particular problems not yet resolved.

But for example; If they'd allow filling everyone's MIG welder CO2 cylinder with some of the extra product they give away then maybe it would be a lot easily to swallow the cost over runs and engineering oversights and goofups that are bound to happen in most ambitious cutting edge attempts.

We can't switch over to perfect overnight. We can and will work towards it..

We'll find that efforts to switch before its proven and ready and integrated into what we still need .....will cause multiple times more grief than if we had maintained the status guo.

And tweety I am not advocating continuing on with only every old obsolete old way of operation forever. Develop some respect for that which will be around for some time yet; instead of demanding it all be thrown out...right now.... whilst the hopeful replacement is in its infancy.

[oneoff]

AND THEN SOME NONSENSE ABOUT FUSES AND POOH POOHING FIRE CHIEFS CONCERNS ETC


Here are some distracting thoughts for solar panel owners of all stripes.

How do you turn off a solar panel; or actually a couple hundred connected in parallel and series.

Fires occur in houses and they aren't all electrical and caused by solar panels (but solar panel fires are theoretically possible) Heck even remember Smart meters and thats a relatively uncomplicated comparison.

Well anyways a house catches fire from whatever source and the fire department arrives.

How do they handle a situation where the solar panels may very well be still live and some responder could very well get electrocuted. So sit and wait while the structure burns; till a plan develops and reinforcements arrive For starters who are the reinforcements.?

Got to have everyone prepared for knowing how to disable those panels on the roof. And the fire chief and home owners and "myself " and even "tweety" just may not even yet have run across that scenario. Heck there may not even be an all inclusive answer.

[tweety]

Now its just completely ridiculous. An inline fuse ffs.

Thank goodness our generation will be long dead before energy really becomes an issue.

[burnt]

Now its just completely ridiculous. An inline fuse ffs.

Thank goodness our generation will be long dead before energy really becomes an issue.

Wow. Talk about something going right over someone's head? LOL!

The reality is that solar panels cannot be shut off - they generate some level of electricity as long as there is some light. And while that level of electricity may so low as to be unviable for running anything, it sure as heck will still electrocute a person!

In simplest terms - for you tweety - there is no fuse or off button on the generation side of things.

Our local fire departments have stated that this is indeed a problem and are working on developing special fire-fighting capabilities for when these rooftop-equipped structures burn - and they have.

When a nearby, large shed with rooftop panels burned recently, the fire department said they had no trouble finding the place since the thick, black smoke from the panels was visible from10 miles away. So at one point after that, the fire dep't wouldn't turn the hoses on if a PV system was in play, for obvious reasons. (So what does your insurance company say to that, LOL!?)

[URL="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/rooftop-solar-panels-pose-dangers-ontario-firefighters-say-1.1700070"]http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/rooftop-solar-panels-pose-dangers-ontario-firefighters-say-1.1700070[/URL]

So yes tweety, in this context your "generation" comment provides a shocking element of hilarity...

[farmaholic]

Sounds like we may need a solar panel panel to solve all the pitfalls exposed in this early generation power generation using photovoltaics in our cold Canadian weather whether we like it or not.

[oneoff]

Finally figured out that "ffs" above comment. Not demanding the language police clamp down or anything like that;

And is only taken as attempting to express your near ultimate frustration at my absurd comments that do not sit well with you.


Am I mistaken in that analysis? Or just like myself; when I only rarely for instance write say "for f's sake" are we both fairly near "shaking your head" or boiling point on that particular issue.

Your success ratio lately brings up again that old quote about never engaging a skunk in a pissing match and similarly
Don't argue with an idiot....they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with their experience.

Never did ascribe to wanting to be a writer, but if putting in some "......"'s in some "sentences" becomes acceptable maybe I will do more of it.

Other points of view challenge me. Your point of view amazes me.

[oneoff]

WAITING PATIENTLY TILL JAN 16 and decided to call in at Head office Sask power in Regina




Not a word from Sask Power about their potential calculation error.

Repeated attempts at accessing powerhousesolar.ca "Live Tracker" have all failed. Website is fast.. "LIve Tracker" doesn't now work period. (Sent them an "error ticket")

[chuckChuck]

I still have not heard from Sask Power either.

You cannot install a grid tied solar system in Saskatchewan or probably anywhere without an automatic switch to shut it off when the grid is off.

I am not sure how risky they are when they are not feeding the grid. But simply having production switched to going to a ground may solve the problem during fires.

If you ask insurance companies what the cost of insurance is for roof top panels that would give you some kind of idea of their risk assessment.

There will be no issue like this with ground mount systems.

If Germany gets up to 40 Gw from solar they must have figured the risk out as they use a lot of roof top.

Either gas or hydro are good to pair with wind and solar. Saskatchewan already has a lot of gas plants. Only 40% of our electricity comes from coal.

If 1600 Mw of wind is installed by 2030 coal will be only 25% more or less by 2030.

[oneoff]

Probably should have quit a LOSERr