Trying to math this out. Avg solar panel is 2Msq in size. 165W/m2 panel = 330w/day = 120.45 kwh/yr (est)
one panel crucially requires 20g (.643015 troy oz) of silver with 55,942M troy oz worldwide (est)
I think that means world can make 87B panels supplying: 10.5T kWh = 10.5B mWh = 10.5M gWh = 10.5K tWh
Except the world generated approx 17k tWh in 2020 alone. So (if I'm doing this right) there isn't remotely enough silver in the world to replace all energy sources with solar.
Those panels will also require at least 174B sq meters of land.
Meanwhile, the auto industry itself needs 55M oz of silver annually
Also of note in the production process no one talks about is what the quartz is fused with. The output is always referred to as metallurgical silicon or something the like. They never say metallurgical coal. 2 parts to 1. Also a significant portion of this high grade quartz comes from a single source in NC.
I am a big fan of Eliyahu M. Goldratt, read all the books he wrote multiple times, watched all the videos. If only he was alive he would have a field day with the crazy we have these days.
He also did have a video recorded lecture where he explained about 2008 while it was happening. Specifically on the issue of “if the end customer (of a supply chain) has not bought, then no one (in that supply chain) has sold.” During the same time where most companies were not taking on new orders, disposing of their existing inventories, being scared that sometime in the future buyers will be gone - all of which caused a huge supply issue. Right after the crisis weaned off, these same companies had to scramble to hire back the laid off workers and contend with a huge backlog of orders while their raw material inventories were completely dry. Bullwhip effect at its finest.
I downloaded the report and had a look. For New England, they expect that 100% SWB system would comprise of 87GW of solar, 27GW of wind resulting in a total of 3.8x generation capacity relative to current peak electricity demand. When capacity factors are about 25%, that'd barely able to produce the required amount of total electricity.
However, they think that they only need 1,232GWh worth of storage, which is enough for 89 average demand hours. That doesn't even start to address solar seasonality.
When I toured several Chinese solar panel plants over 10 years ago, the land for the plants had been donated by the local authority and they also were not paying for electricity at all, as a strategic industry the gov't was giving them power for free.
Pretty lame rationale for why China's involvement in solar production doesn't mean solar + storage is following an S-curve. The fact is, there is an arms race for solar R&D around the world -- every major research institute has programs for solar energy engineering, precisely because there are short term and long term gains to be had. Yes, China has used cheap labor and stolen intellectual property, but *now that solar PV is cheap* and *can be paired with 4-hour storage* its global adoption will only sharply increase by 2030 and beyond. Especially places with abundant sunlight and high demand charges. It's not like China is absorbing billions in losses just to turn around and jack the price up for the next decade.
The second point is valid: "Left unstated in [RethinkX's] analysis is where all the polysilicon will come from, how the new capacity will be constructed in time, or how trying to procure it from the market won’t drive prices sky high." I had this same thought reading their report. My understanding is they're assuming Wright's Law; that is, all things being equal, as global manufacturing capacity doubles, the price will continue to drop. The U.S. can completely stay out of manufacturing, and we may still see a modest 12% price decline per year by 2030. Consider an additional fact that this article misses: solar generation has *zero marginal cost*, meaning, it's basically free to operate a solar system because the sun is free. This makes solar not only more attractive to investors (faster ROI) but curtailing solar (throwing away the excess energy not used) doesn't undermine the cost of operation. This make solar fundamentally different than coal and natural gas. Overbuilding solar capacity beyond what anyone ever thought was possible will drive the S-curve adoption.
The third point is a strawman. So lame! RethinkX's modeling is only showing the economic feasibility of 100% solar, wind, and batteries *for the electricity sector* by 2030. Of course it is energy intensive to manufacture and install SWB. The idea is to clean up the electricity grid first, and then move to the more-difficult-to-decarbonize sectors, like manufacturing and industry. Someone wasn't paying attention to the scope of RethinX's report! (Derp)
I agree that China is a wildcard and the year 2030 my be a bit optimistic for 100% SWB, partly for reasons this article points out. RethinkX also doesn't even consider the impact of distributed solar and battery usage, which may make up 1/4 of all solar capacity by 2030. But, by 2040 it's a certainty that almost all of the primary energy sources for the electricity grid in the U.S. will be solar, wind, and batteries (for economic reasons alone).
Of course we will one day be able to run our society off wind and solar, or what's left of it after the collapse brought on by a rushed attempt to run a modern economy on an unreliable power grid supplied by nothing but wind and solar. By then societies power requirements will be very modest. If a power line and a substation would have appeared suddenly in the middle of a feudal village it would have been no benefit to the villagers nor would it probably benefit future villagers if this transition to renewable energy sources is rushed and very likely bungled. What could possibly go wrong.
Common sense is the REAL restraint. Remove that and all things are possible.
The real opportunity will be in distribution of European plumbing supplies when every winter going forward necessitates replacing burst pipes in condo towers.
The fallacy of climate change and the externalities associated with the fraud will likely climax by 2025; especially if the leftist regime is voted out. A nice cold late winter may catch many by surprise, because, you know climate change will destroy us within ten years, and temps keep increasing. What a study this decade will make for future historians writing papers on the foolishness of mankind to come to the brink of ruin, not by the myth that is climate change (Climate has been "changing", since the first day of it's existence), but by the complete lack of investment in traditional fuels to power a very power hungry world. Fertilizer is rising, 2022 food prices will spike, pipelines are being decommissioned in the West, and Putin is laughing and ready to give the screws to the Europe by simply regulating the flow of NATGAS. May be time to learn Russian; not Chinese. Anyway. Another gem by the chicken. Thank you for your efforts!
For that video… Tell me you don’t understand economics without telling me you don’t understand economics. Lol
Trying to math this out. Avg solar panel is 2Msq in size. 165W/m2 panel = 330w/day = 120.45 kwh/yr (est)
one panel crucially requires 20g (.643015 troy oz) of silver with 55,942M troy oz worldwide (est)
I think that means world can make 87B panels supplying: 10.5T kWh = 10.5B mWh = 10.5M gWh = 10.5K tWh
Except the world generated approx 17k tWh in 2020 alone. So (if I'm doing this right) there isn't remotely enough silver in the world to replace all energy sources with solar.
Those panels will also require at least 174B sq meters of land.
Meanwhile, the auto industry itself needs 55M oz of silver annually
Also of note in the production process no one talks about is what the quartz is fused with. The output is always referred to as metallurgical silicon or something the like. They never say metallurgical coal. 2 parts to 1. Also a significant portion of this high grade quartz comes from a single source in NC.
I am a big fan of Eliyahu M. Goldratt, read all the books he wrote multiple times, watched all the videos. If only he was alive he would have a field day with the crazy we have these days.
He also did have a video recorded lecture where he explained about 2008 while it was happening. Specifically on the issue of “if the end customer (of a supply chain) has not bought, then no one (in that supply chain) has sold.” During the same time where most companies were not taking on new orders, disposing of their existing inventories, being scared that sometime in the future buyers will be gone - all of which caused a huge supply issue. Right after the crisis weaned off, these same companies had to scramble to hire back the laid off workers and contend with a huge backlog of orders while their raw material inventories were completely dry. Bullwhip effect at its finest.
C'mon, Doomie if we let you peck at the fermented corn what will you really say?
I downloaded the report and had a look. For New England, they expect that 100% SWB system would comprise of 87GW of solar, 27GW of wind resulting in a total of 3.8x generation capacity relative to current peak electricity demand. When capacity factors are about 25%, that'd barely able to produce the required amount of total electricity.
However, they think that they only need 1,232GWh worth of storage, which is enough for 89 average demand hours. That doesn't even start to address solar seasonality.
When I toured several Chinese solar panel plants over 10 years ago, the land for the plants had been donated by the local authority and they also were not paying for electricity at all, as a strategic industry the gov't was giving them power for free.
Josh Wolfe of Lux is right. Nuclear needs a rebrand as "elemental energy."
Pretty lame rationale for why China's involvement in solar production doesn't mean solar + storage is following an S-curve. The fact is, there is an arms race for solar R&D around the world -- every major research institute has programs for solar energy engineering, precisely because there are short term and long term gains to be had. Yes, China has used cheap labor and stolen intellectual property, but *now that solar PV is cheap* and *can be paired with 4-hour storage* its global adoption will only sharply increase by 2030 and beyond. Especially places with abundant sunlight and high demand charges. It's not like China is absorbing billions in losses just to turn around and jack the price up for the next decade.
The second point is valid: "Left unstated in [RethinkX's] analysis is where all the polysilicon will come from, how the new capacity will be constructed in time, or how trying to procure it from the market won’t drive prices sky high." I had this same thought reading their report. My understanding is they're assuming Wright's Law; that is, all things being equal, as global manufacturing capacity doubles, the price will continue to drop. The U.S. can completely stay out of manufacturing, and we may still see a modest 12% price decline per year by 2030. Consider an additional fact that this article misses: solar generation has *zero marginal cost*, meaning, it's basically free to operate a solar system because the sun is free. This makes solar not only more attractive to investors (faster ROI) but curtailing solar (throwing away the excess energy not used) doesn't undermine the cost of operation. This make solar fundamentally different than coal and natural gas. Overbuilding solar capacity beyond what anyone ever thought was possible will drive the S-curve adoption.
The third point is a strawman. So lame! RethinkX's modeling is only showing the economic feasibility of 100% solar, wind, and batteries *for the electricity sector* by 2030. Of course it is energy intensive to manufacture and install SWB. The idea is to clean up the electricity grid first, and then move to the more-difficult-to-decarbonize sectors, like manufacturing and industry. Someone wasn't paying attention to the scope of RethinX's report! (Derp)
I agree that China is a wildcard and the year 2030 my be a bit optimistic for 100% SWB, partly for reasons this article points out. RethinkX also doesn't even consider the impact of distributed solar and battery usage, which may make up 1/4 of all solar capacity by 2030. But, by 2040 it's a certainty that almost all of the primary energy sources for the electricity grid in the U.S. will be solar, wind, and batteries (for economic reasons alone).
What a great piece! Doomberg, you made my day!
Of course we will one day be able to run our society off wind and solar, or what's left of it after the collapse brought on by a rushed attempt to run a modern economy on an unreliable power grid supplied by nothing but wind and solar. By then societies power requirements will be very modest. If a power line and a substation would have appeared suddenly in the middle of a feudal village it would have been no benefit to the villagers nor would it probably benefit future villagers if this transition to renewable energy sources is rushed and very likely bungled. What could possibly go wrong.
Common sense is the REAL restraint. Remove that and all things are possible.
The real opportunity will be in distribution of European plumbing supplies when every winter going forward necessitates replacing burst pipes in condo towers.
The fallacy of climate change and the externalities associated with the fraud will likely climax by 2025; especially if the leftist regime is voted out. A nice cold late winter may catch many by surprise, because, you know climate change will destroy us within ten years, and temps keep increasing. What a study this decade will make for future historians writing papers on the foolishness of mankind to come to the brink of ruin, not by the myth that is climate change (Climate has been "changing", since the first day of it's existence), but by the complete lack of investment in traditional fuels to power a very power hungry world. Fertilizer is rising, 2022 food prices will spike, pipelines are being decommissioned in the West, and Putin is laughing and ready to give the screws to the Europe by simply regulating the flow of NATGAS. May be time to learn Russian; not Chinese. Anyway. Another gem by the chicken. Thank you for your efforts!
I too will listen to the chicken if he continues to wear a tie
Swear to God, if I see the Blockbuster-Netflix example pulled up one more time I am jumping through the window!
Fatties are the worst am I right?