The two most recent sets of titles left me scratching my head for answers.
The first, from the Export-Import Bank on June 1, describes a bluff President Biden made in his recent address to the League of Conservative Voters : in Angola.
The giant solar park will not only "guarantee access to clean energy sources in Angola," the bank said, but will also help "Angola meet its climate commitments."
This title reminds me of one from two years ago. "USA Approves Massive Solar Power Project in California Desert". I learned that Angola, despite being fairly close to the equator, has temperatures that rarely exceed 90 degrees (Fahrenheit). By comparison, the average high temperature in Blythe, California (the city closest to the solar park) between June and August is over 100°F. In the desert, the number can be even higher, which is much higher for panels. self.
Why is it so important?, you ask.
This is the second series title.
The European Conservatives said on June 17 that "Britain is turning to coal because it is too hot for solar panels." Yes, the article goes on to say that "suppliers have no choice but to start burning coal again" because "there is not enough wind to produce a good output from the turbines and it is too hot for the solar panels to work efficiently." ". emphasis added. ]".
So I came to the previous two stories. On June 12, the headline in Canada's Western Standard magazine read: “Wow! UK Switches to Coal Power After Solar Panels Wither in a Record Heat." The article notes that temperatures in Blighty have reached 30C (hit 86F), increasing demand for electricity from a nearby coal-fired power plant that reopened only during the Russia-War Ukraine prevented from demolition has become
It was The Telegraph that argued that high-temperature solar blackouts were the "way out." Apparently solar panels are tested at least 25C in the UK. For every one degree increase in the temperature of the solar cell (not the air) above this level, the efficiency of the solar cell decreases by 0.5. percent.
In direct sunlight, Alastair Buckley, professor of organic electronics at the University of Sheffield, explained to the Telegraph that when the cell temperature rises to 60 °C or even 70 °C (158 °F), on an overcast day, the cell can become 25% at most. less efficient." After dark or overcast days, the reduction in solar energy is much greater.
The Western standard adds that "it all boils down to the laws of thermodynamics." As the temperature rises, the electrons can bounce too far and reduce the voltage or amount of electricity generated. Canada cited San Diego-based CED Greentech, the largest provider of solar energy in the United States, to confirm Buckley's remarks.
According to CED Greentech, "As the temperature of a solar cell increases, its current output increases exponentially, while the output voltage decreases linearly. In fact, they say, the voltage drop is so predictable that it can be used to measure temperature with precision.
I went back and saw the ExIm Bank press release promising "over 500 megawatts of renewable energy per day" [at an unspecified cost to consumers]. I am surprised. “Is this an estimated capacity or an actual number? And what happened at night?
And yes, Los Angeles alone uses about 8,000 MW/day, or 22,000 gigawatt hours per year.
Robert Bryce, in "Let Them Eat Solar Panels" , commenting on the extension of the ExIm Bank, points out that more than 60% of Angolan's 32 million people have no access to electricity and are a former Portuguese colony (and notorious for being the country's main supplier of slaves). America) has not made a "climate commitment".
On the other hand, Bryce noted, ExxonMobil is considering investing $15 billion to build new offshore oil fields in the oil-rich country, which already exports 47,000 barrels per day to the United States in Angola as well as 11.3 billion cubic meters of natural fuel. water. gas production in 2020 is 1,900 million cubic meters for 2016.
But I digress. Reuters reports that the $550 million Crimson Solar Project, on 2,000 acres of federal land west of Blythe, is being built on land allocated for renewable energy development under the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan.
The Biden administration says the solar park will power 90,000 homes, thanks in part to battery storage systems. But the contractor (Sonoran West Solar Holdings) calls it a 350MW power plant with an additional 350MW of battery storage, which will only power an average of 47,000 homes per year.
Is the Biden administration falsifying the numbers ?
Does Sonora tacitly accept that solar power provides about half the electricity at most?
Do these numbers take into account the underproduction received on hot sunny days (many of which are in the desert)?
Does California have a plan to compensate for night, cloudy or very sunny, or unscheduled maintenance (for example, when a storm covers the board with dust)?
And finally, if solar cells become more inefficient as solar cell temperatures rise, how much additional capacity must be installed ( and how much storage capacity must be reserved) to ensure normal power flow? end users day and night in summer and winter.
It's "beyond fairness" just to ask these questions of those who don't have answers.
But aren't we the ones paying the bills and the victims of poor planning?
Duggan Fanakin is a senior policy analyst at the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow and writes frequently on public policy issues.
