[AndyA]

I'm not sure how to get the image to fit properly but the price hits about 37.5.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-1 ... it-gets-be
Most people that believe solar power will save us think that peak demand for electricity is in the heat of the day during summer. This is currently true due to two factors. Firstly the US uses half the worlds total Air Conditioning, so there is extra demand in Summer. Secondly the majority of heating and cooking is done using Natural Gas.
While keeping cool during summer, seems pretty straight forward in a solar PV world, though significant savings could be made here. Keeping warm in winter is not so easy, neither is boiling the kettle for a morning cuppa. Maintaining a current lifestyle with RE is going to require some very significant overbuilding of capacity and a huge amount of storage.

[GHung]

"Maintaining a current lifestyle...." Our lifestyle is quite good with solar providing most of our home's energy. 52 kWH of battery storage and 1600 liters of hot water storage along with a bit of propane for cooking. When the battery gets fully charged, a relay dumps 'surplus' solar to hot water storage in winter and AC in summer. It takes just a little management , actually turning things off, and a little common sense. Passive solar heat is augmented with a moderate amount of wood. Most summer cooling means opening windows and running fans at night to cool the home. Yikes!
Too bad most folk's current lifestyle only involves setting a thermostat and writing a check each month. God forbid they have to take charge of some of these things or put a sweater on, since their current lifestyles are non-negotiable, and their homes and infrastructure are energy black holes by design.

[Newfie]

While it is quite possible to build a zero energy home, it is impossible to convert our existing housing stock.

It is an unfortunate legacy of our past hubris.

Living in a temperate climate is a luxury.

[AndyA]

"Maintaining a current lifestyle...." Our lifestyle is quite good with solar providing most of our home's energy. 52 kWH of battery storage and 1600 liters of hot water storage along with a bit of propane for cooking. When the battery gets fully charged, a relay dumps 'surplus' solar to hot water storage in winter and AC in summer. It takes just a little management , actually turning things off, and a little common sense. Passive solar heat is augmented with a moderate amount of wood. Most summer cooling means opening windows and running fans at night to cool the home. Yikes!
Too bad most folk's current lifestyle only involves setting a thermostat and writing a check each month. God forbid they have to take charge of some of these things or put a sweater on, since their current lifestyles are non-negotiable, and their homes and infrastructure are energy black holes by design.

Very interesting Ghung, how big is your PV system? Do you think that if the average Joe was willing to make a few changes he could afford a similar setup?

[Felloffthepeak]

Check out this article I came across,( http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/ ... s-your-e... ). Should this still be in the works peak demand will be an understatement as few could afford their' current usage.

[Ulenspiegel]

AndyA,

your premises in respect of current lifstyle are the issue:

You fail to provide evidence that high energy consumption is really a prerequisite of high quality of life. Or even one step more abstract, is GDP a useful metrics for quality of life.

I live in a house with very good insulation, my energy consumption for a family of 4 is < 8000 kWh per year, this includes houshold elctricity and power for the heatpump. No additional NG, no oil, (no car).

I will install in a few years 10 kW PV, this will give at least 10000 kWh per year. With a small battery system I hope to reduce then my electricity I have to buy from the utility during winter to less than 4000 kWh.

[GHung]

AndyA asked - "Very interesting Ghung, how big is your PV system? Do you think that if the average Joe was willing to make a few changes he could afford a similar setup?"

We currently have about 6.5 kW of PV; about 3 kW of that is tracking (boosts production about 30%). I designed and built our home to be as passive as possible so the active energy systems are the icing on the cake, so to speak. Why throw a lot of electricity and gas at a structure that can produce a lot of the same end-use energy just sitting there. Passive solar, overhangs designed for seasonal insolence, operable windows situated to catch prevailing winds along with high windows in the living area; exaust warmer air in summer, provide plenty of natural lighting year round. Thermal mass in the floors provides storage and moderation; includes hydronic heating in floors to store and move heat around. Thermal curtains for winter nights and cloudy days help trap heat in winter... all work as a system designed to reduce demand for artificially-derived energy. Throw in a few good habits and behaviors and you've got a livable home with very few inputs.

The problem with 'average Joe's' home is that it was designed to be plugged into the grid with little thought given to orientation or passive design (heating, cooling, lighting), and insulation is often the minimum required by code. That said, the equipment costs for a system like ours would currently be below the average cost of a new car in the US. While permits, installation, etc. add to that cost, it could be covered for about the cost of a couple of trips to Disney World for the family. A grid-tied system with battery storage would be a bit more. I'm convinced that if all of these considerations were #1 - required by code, #2 - designed into the home from the beginning, #3 - location specific, #4 - streamlined by authorities (waving certain fees and connection costs), homes could be built for the same or only slightly more than the thoughtlessly conventional stuctures we see being built today.

Many problems are cultural, systemical, and behavioral. Our markets don't take long-term costs of living in a home, or external costs to the environment (or rising energy costs) into consideration. My wife watches these shows where folks are shopping for their dream home. They never mention energy efficiency or long-term costs to occupy the homes they look at. It's all about the size of closets, the back yard, or the shape of the pool. In our culture of 'disposable homes', resale value is king.

I'm not sure why so-called 'green homes', like the Passive Haus designs, are carrying such a premium (damned expensive). We did it for less (per comparable area) than most similarly sized homes in our region, even accounting for the fact that I did virtually all the work. Significantly less in some cases.

We had to leave for a week a few years back (death in the family) during a cold spell (days around freezing; nights well below that). No one here to fire the wood stove or close the thermal blinds, floor heat turned off. We came home to a house with temps in the low 60s (f). No frozen pipes or other problems; batteries nicely charged, as was the hot water tank (just a big plastic tank, well insulated). Night temps in the house dropped into the upper 50s (I track that sort of thing). Try that in average Joe's house.

Most of all, it wasn't that hard. It's all about priorities.

[AndyA]

AndyA,

your premises in respect of current lifstyle are the issue:

You fail to provide evidence that high energy consumption is really a prerequisite of high quality of life. Or even one step more abstract, is GDP a useful metrics for quality of life.

I live in a house with very good insulation, my energy consumption for a family of 4 is < 8000 kWh per year, this includes houshold elctricity and power for the heatpump. No additional NG, no oil, (no car).

I will install in a few years 10 kW PV, this will give at least 10000 kWh per year. With a small battery system I hope to reduce then my electricity I have to buy from the utility during winter to less than 4000 kWh.

It's hardly surprising I failed to provide any evidence regarding quality of life, as that is clearly not my intention. That is something you wish I had said so you could argue about it, and win. My electricity consumption for 6 people is < 10,000kwh per year, and I use electricity for cooking and some heating, I also use some wood for heating, about 1 cord.

What I clearly did say is that electricity consumption peaks in winter, if you don't use gas for cooking and heating. Which is a time of year when you get bugger all out of solar PV. Which you seem to agree with.

[AndyA]

We currently have about 6.5 kW of PV; about 3 kW of that is tracking (boosts production about 30%).

That sounds like a small system, but still putting out an average of 35kwh/day? Which sounds pretty good. I think you have a great set up, similar to something I'm working on myself.

Many problems are cultural, systemical, and behavioral

Couldn't agree more. The question is, why do people behave the way they do, when it is so destructive? I have come to conclude that it is instinctive, part of natural human behaviour.

[basil_hayden]

The question is, why do people behave the way they do, when it is so destructive? I have come to conclude that it is instinctive, part of natural human behaviour.

Because they can, and when they can't - they won't.

Destruction is in the eye of the beholder, so to speak.

We may be destroying the planet, but a few of us have created much wealth.

Two sides of the same coin.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program.

So, if winter is peak electricity consumption,and this was a peak winter, then electricity consumption may have peaked!

Can't wait for the excuses this summer when the grid shuts down due to too much air conditioning.

You know what this planet needs? One of those "Maximum Occupancy" signs the Fire Marshal posts in public rooms that states the most people that can be in a space based on the number and size of its exits in case of emergency.

[Loki]

Maintaining a current lifestyle with RE is going to require some very significant overbuilding of capacity and a huge amount of storage.

Maintaining the current lifestyle of wealthy countries hasn't been an option for some time.

Overbuilding of renewable capacity is also not an option, nor is storage. We've already proven we don't have the financial and political capital to build renewables at even a modest scale. Wind currently provides ~3% of our electricity in the US, and solar <1%. I doubt very much they'll see double digits by the 2020s.

[KaiserJeep]

California is one place where we are already in double digits for renewable energy. (YES I admit that for 2014 the drought may reduce the hydropower contribution significantly, but that is aside from my point.)

Here in Silicon Valley small solar PV installations cover many residential roofs (including my 2.8 kilowatt installation), medium sized solar PV installations dot commercial rooftops and parking lots (my kid's former high school parking lot is part of a 5.7 megawatt installation in six South Valley high schools) and the large central solar PV (such as the 250 megawatt installation in San Luis Obispo) are all contributing to our renewable energy goals - currently at 22% and rising. But there is a downside, which is the MOST EXPENSIVE retail electrical power in the country.

SmartGrid technology is a reality here in Silicon Valley. If you have a brand new Tesla or other qualifying EV, you can select the PG&E "Electric Vehicle" rate plan which basically allows PG&E on/off control over your off-peak vehicle battery charging. But if you don't hold up your end of the bargain with off-peak charging, you will pay $0.57361/kWh, the highest retail rate in America. That extreme is reached when you sneak a charge during daylight hours, the SmartMeter squeals on you, and you have already exceeded the baseline residential average by 100% and gone to "Tier 3" time-of-day pricing. For this you pay the highest electric rate in the USA.

The problem is that everybody else pays too. The average rate for all power sold in California is 0.19377/kWh, including those consumers below the poverty line, renters, and all lower income consumers.

The average power rate in the USA is $0.117/kWh. California's poor are paying 50% more than average, so that "one percenter" electric consumers can drive such wonderful toys as $100,000 Tesla sedans.

Is this a great state, in a great country, or what? It's not like those EVs really are "zero emission" vehicles - not when we are burning oil and natural gas for 78% of our grid power.

Soon the citizens of the other 49 states will also be enjowing the benefits of renewable energy. Where California goes, others follow. Don't worry, your posterior only hurts once per month.