[HN Gopher] Why did renewables become so cheap so fast?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Why did renewables become so cheap so fast?
        
       Author : bpierre
       Score  : 36 points
       Date   : 2022-02-26 21:28 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (ourworldindata.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (ourworldindata.org)
        
       | Gravityloss wrote:
       | Quite a lot of repetition in the text.
       | 
       | Why wouldn't the learning curve apply to nuclear power? There the
       | fuel cost is almost negligible. I think the large unit size
       | hampers learning - less iterations per decade.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | pfdietz wrote:
         | Also, some of the parts are mature technology. We already built
         | lots of steam turbines before building them for nuclear plants.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | aaron695 wrote:
        
       | edent wrote:
       | One interesting thing that I didn't see mentioned in the
       | (excellent) article - is that renewables allow for local and
       | hyper-local electricity generation. With any system, there will
       | be transmission loss. But when the solar panels are in the field
       | down the street, or on your roof, that becomes negligible.
       | 
       | It also touches a little on the installation time. Nuclear power
       | stations takes years to build - even after the tortuous planning
       | process. Wind farms are quicker to install. A solar array is
       | almost instantaneous by comparison. The panels on my roof took a
       | week - and most of that was dealing with scaffolding and my dodgy
       | wiring.
       | 
       | If you can install solar panels day-after-day, you benefit from
       | an increased learning rate. And, frankly, the training for how to
       | do it isn't arduous. Nuclear might be the future - but it
       | requires a highly trained workforce and constant maintenance. All
       | of which are expensive.
        
         | tonmoy wrote:
         | Electricity transmission costs are really negligible. You will
         | never be able to produce enough power just from solar panels on
         | your roof, and the cost and complexity of needing to maintain
         | and repair installations at each house may offset the
         | negligible gain obtained from getting rid of the transmission
         | loss
        
           | ianschmitz wrote:
           | There are plenty of people making enough power just from
           | solar panels on their roof.
           | 
           | It doesn't work everywhere of course and requires some form
           | of storage or offsetting by powering the grid during the day.
        
             | tamaharbor wrote:
             | Unfortunately you wind up paying for your local system as
             | well as the grid backup.
        
             | tehsauce wrote:
             | Not if they are using electric air/water heating and
             | driving an electric car.
        
       | rayiner wrote:
       | This is a funny article considering that there's literally a war
       | going on where Germany has been hesitant to oppose Russia because
       | it's move to renewables left it highly dependent on Russian gas.
       | https://fortune.com/2022/02/25/ukraine-anger-sanctions-germa...
        
         | ManuelKiessling wrote:
         | Sorry, what? If we hadn't any renewables at all, we would be
         | even MORE dependent on Russian gas.
        
           | xyzzyz wrote:
           | Yes, if you had no renewables, but closed coal and nuclear
           | plant anyway, you'd be more dependent on Russian gas, sure.
        
           | Ygg2 wrote:
           | Yeah but shutting down nuclear power after Fukushima is akin
           | to jumping of a building in Germany, because these was a
           | tsunami in Jagan.
        
             | nautilius wrote:
             | Fukushima was the latest but hardly the only incident. One
             | of them caused fallout all across Europe. Hint: it was just
             | occupied by Russian forces.
        
         | Melio wrote:
         | Why?
         | 
         | One thing has nothing to do with the other.
         | 
         | Germany is pushing for renewable and has not transitioned to
         | it.
         | 
         | It is depending on Russia for 30% or so in gas. It has this
         | problem because the transition is not done and Fukushima pushed
         | the faster end of nuclear power.
         | 
         | Which is understandable when you remember Tschernobyl and how
         | dense populated Germany is.
         | 
         | I drive by isar nuclear power plant by train since I remember.
         | While it looks interesting it's also frightening when you see
         | how little real knowledge or excercise anyone had when
         | Tschernobyl happened and when Fukushima happened.
        
           | tinco wrote:
           | Why do you mention Chernobyl and Fukushima together?
           | Fukushima basically only did some economic damage, Chernobyl
           | was a catastrophe.
           | 
           | Also given how densely populated Germany is, it's wildly
           | irresponsible that they operate so many coal plants, it's
           | literally killing thousands every year. Even if they had a
           | Chernobyl style disaster every 10 years it would still be a
           | lot safer than the way they're generating power right now.
        
             | fivea wrote:
             | > Why do you mention Chernobyl and Fukushima together?
             | Fukushima basically only did some economic damage,
             | Chernobyl was a catastrophe.
             | 
             | Both Chernobyl and Fukushima were disasters.
             | 
             | It just so happened that Fukushima also was the final
             | straw.
        
         | Gravityloss wrote:
         | Germany has installed renewables, has shuttered nuclear power
         | and increased gas usage.
         | 
         | If it had only installed renewables and also kept nuclear
         | power, the situation would be a lot better.
        
           | ipaddr wrote:
           | For greenhouse gas emissions and this situation with Russia
        
         | rootusrootus wrote:
         | Are you saying that Germany's situation, which seems to have
         | confounding factors, completely refutes the objective price of
         | different energy sources?
        
         | anarazel wrote:
         | The move to renewables in Germany slowed down drastically since
         | the mid 2010s. Largely due to bad policy, not cost development.
         | 
         | In German, but look e.g. at the third graph in
         | https://www.wind-energie.de/themen/zahlen-und-fakten/deutsch...
         | . Shows the total and newly installed wind power (better than
         | the second graph showing the number of new turbines, because
         | turbines have gotten bigger).
         | 
         | For solar, look at:
         | https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/29264/umfrage...
         | the numbers for 2020/2021 unfortunately are missing. They're
         | better, but by far not back to 2010-2012.
        
       | yodsanklai wrote:
       | How much would renewable cost if it wasn't supported by fossil
       | fuel (e.g. for extracting and processing the resources needed to
       | build solar panel)?
        
         | beebeepka wrote:
         | How much would fossil fuels cost if they weren't supported by
         | all kinds of horrible sacrifices we have to make?
         | 
         | Pollution and wars sure are worth it!
        
         | rootusrootus wrote:
         | Does the analysis include those same costs in the fossil fuel
         | price? It takes a _lot_ of oil to find, extract, and process
         | oil.
        
         | fivea wrote:
         | > How much would renewable cost if it wasn't supported by
         | fossil fuel (e.g. for extracting and processing the resources
         | needed to build solar panel)?
         | 
         | I find your comment pointless, given that in a not so distant
         | past the bulk of energy was produced from fossil fuel.
         | 
         | Thankfully, the world is transitioning away from that, and at a
         | considerable speed. We went from propaganda selling the lie
         | that renewables were a passing fad to a point in time where
         | entire countries register days where all their energy needs
         | come from renewables and even overproduce energy, leading to
         | negative energy costs.
        
       | credit_guy wrote:
       | Here's the simplest way to get to net zero: solar, wind,
       | batteries, natural gas, then hydrogen.
       | 
       | Solar and wind are cheap, but intermittent. Batteries can help
       | store energy from day to night. To help store energy from summer
       | to winter, they need to become 1000 times cheaper, which is not
       | going to happen. For that you need peaker plants. Initially
       | methane-based, later they can be converted to hydrogen.
       | 
       | It's as simple as that.
        
         | fivea wrote:
         | > Solar and wind are cheap, but intermittent. Batteries can
         | help store energy from day to night.
         | 
         | You don't need batteries per se, only energy storage systems.
         | 
         | Pumped storage, pressurized air, flywheels, ultracapacitors,
         | and of course chemical batteries. Pumped storage and compressed
         | air systems store orders of magnitude more energy and power
         | than batteries.
        
         | ipaddr wrote:
         | Nuclear power can offer consistent base loads to power grids.
        
       | jdauriemma wrote:
       | Can someone ELI5 why renewables are more expensive for consumers
       | where I live? In Pennsylvania my electric utility allows me to
       | choose my supplier. Invariably, the renewables are more costly
       | than the fossil fuels. What gives? Is this just a regional
       | phenomenon?
        
         | gameswithgo wrote:
         | putting variable inputs like solar and wind on the grid makes
         | the grid more expensive to manage.
        
         | microdrum wrote:
         | Same reason internet bandwidth if more abundant and cheaper
         | than ever, but your Comcast bill seems to actually only go up.
         | 
         | Local rooftop solar, with no reliance on utility monopolies, is
         | the most important thing in the global energy picture, and I'm
         | afraid it isn't even close. And I'm pro nuclear. But it's past
         | time to recognize that it's the distribution monopolists that
         | are the problem. Solar and batteries free you from that.
        
           | jdauriemma wrote:
           | Let's stipulate that I don't know why broadband bills are
           | getting more expensive, if you don't mind.
        
           | dwighttk wrote:
           | That is what 5 year olds around you understand?
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | xyzzyz wrote:
         | Renewables are cheap per kWh, but they are only intermittently
         | available, and since storage is basically nonexistent at grid
         | scale, these kWh are only worth anything if there is demand for
         | them, and are useless when there is demand, but sun is not
         | shining or wind is not blowing. In effect, you still need to
         | have some other way to produce electricity on demand, when
         | there is no renewable supply. What's worse is that if these
         | more flexible sources of electricity (typically coal or gas)
         | cannot compete with renewables when they do produce, they need
         | to charge much more when renewables are out, in order to stay
         | profitable -- otherwise, they'd close, and we'd wouldn't be
         | able to meet the demand at all times. This would result in
         | customers getting disconnected with very little notice, making
         | them very unhappy.
         | 
         | To sum up, it's more expensive, because even as renewables grow
         | in installed capacity, we cannot reduce installed capacity of
         | fossil sources on 1-1 parity, and also we pay more per fossil
         | generated kWh than we used to in all-fossil grid. Cheap grid-
         | scale storage would solve this, but it's no going to happen any
         | time soon.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-02-26 23:00 UTC)