An Unhealthy Obsession With Solar

Australian politicians and the press seem to have an obsession with solar power. The way the popular press tells it, solar will single handedly move us off fossil fuels and in particular the dreaded coal to the brave new world. But taking my time to try to understand the exponential growth of solar has left me with a feeling that this belief may not seem to be all that it is. Like other renewables such as  wind, there are still significant obstacles to be overcome for more extensive and large scale deployment of solar and for that matter many other renewable sources. 

What makes me a bit skeptical is that these obstacles are not being brought to open debate but swept aside in the rush to promote solar. As I have said in my earlier posts, I am a firm believer in renewables but I just want to try to be open and objective and while having solar panels on my rooftop is my megre contribution to the climate movement, it behoves me to try to gain a proper understanding of the issues at hand.

Solar proponents are quite open in discussing the issue of intermittency. This issue stems from the fact that, simply put, the sun does rise at dawn and sets at dusk each day and therefore means that solar is unable to generate electricity at night. Add to this, cloud cover and inclement weather and this reduces even the hours available when the sun is technically in the sky. It therefore makes a great deal of sense that battery storage is being held out as the solution to this problem. Store electricity when it is being generated in excess of immediate use for later use when the sun is not shining. 

While much has been made of Tesla (and they are certainly not the only manufacturer, just the most well marketed) the fact still remains that we are still quite some years away from economical large scale battery storage which constrains their use in the immediate and short term future for large scale storage. Current innovation in this area is most likely to result in the uptake of battery storage for small scale use predominantly in the residential market. This will certainly contribute to lowering the amount of electricity puchased by residential users from retail energy companies, a fact that they are well aware of.

As far as I can determine, there are currently no major projects to store electricity any where in Australia. I do not know whether this is becuase of technical or economic constraints. It should be noted that electricity storage is actually neutral in the sense that it does not matter what source the electricity is generated from. Once generated it is indistinguishable from all other sources and this is actually a good thing. The number of high profile solar farm projects is well reported but almost nothing is being reported about large scale battery or any other form of electricity storage which is significant in its deathly silence. 

The next issue is one of capacity. This simply means that solar PV panels can only generate a proportion of the maximum rated output throughout the day. This is easy to see for yourself. Just check your solar converted panel and you will almost never find that the output is close to the maximu rated output of the system you installed. The IReNA (International Renewable Energy Agency) estimates that in Northern Europe solar has an average capacity of just 15%.   This problem gets worse the further away you get from the Equator. We are fortunate that in Australia that we are blessed as the sun baked country but nevertheless, we cannot get carried away with the reported outputs of electricity that are being quoted for new large scale solar farms. It does not take a genius to figure out that our average effective capacities far exceeds the 15% for Northern Europe. But for comparison sake, the IReNA reports that coal plants typically operate between 70-80% of capacity.

Another obvious issue is seasonality, which to be fair, all the suppliers of solar systems I evaluated before installing my system told me about, even producing charts showing the impact on electricity generation of the seasons in different parts of the Australia. 

So what does all of this mean to a non engineering person like me? I certainly have not changed my view on the benefits of solar but this view is a very limited view affecting only the electricity I do not have to purchase from the energy companies and the excess electricity I sell back to them. But in attempting to learn about the broader implications for energy generation and consumption in Australia from a amateur point of view, I have found that solar electricity only accounts for a very small, albeit growing proportion of the total electricity generated in the country. While it is growing very fast, it still accounts for only 2% of total electricity produced in Australia and has a long way to go for it to even reach half of the 85% of total electricity currently being generated from fossil fuels. 

This should not discourage people from installing solar systems for their homes especially as costs continue to fall. For me the logical question to ask is whether we have an unhealthy obsession with just this one source of renewable energy. We should demand that the government take steps to invest in all technologies that will move us away from high polluting fossil fuel sources but we need a balanced approach that considers all forms of renewables, including, whether we like it or not, nuclear. To do this we need to have a open and balanced public debate on all options and not just solar even though solar appears to be the leading candidate at the present time. So let us collectively move forward objectively by having greater transparency and less bias in the media so that we can make more informed decisions about our future.  

 

Does Everyone Mean The Same Thing When We Talk About Renewable Energy

The word "renewable energy" is used by politicians, the media and scientists in a way that implies that everyone is talking about the same thing. But is this really true and what are its implications for the way that we discuss and debate what to do about climate change.

Forget about the detailed and technical definitions used by energy industry specialists. To the man in the street and the ordinary voter, lets just use the standard definition from the Oxford Disctionery: "Energy from a source that is not depleted when used, such as wind or solar power"

The Department of Industry Innovation and Science publishes a yearly report called the Australian Energy Statistics Update. The latest one was published in August 2015 covering the year 2013-2014

Ask most people what they think renewables means and, like me they are most likely to mention wind and solar and some might even extend it to wave and others will also pick hydro. This is probably the most common understanding of what sources come under the umbrella renewables.

ENERGY PRODUCTION

The proportion of total energy produced from renewable sources currently stands at  a paltry 1.8% and growing at a rate of 4% from the previous period. 

Coal continues to account for the lion's share of energy production coming in at 66% followed by gas with 13%. 

It is important to remember this huge disparity when it comes to trying to put some context and understanding the ongoing debates about renewable energy from a lay person's perspective.

This percentage is in some ways misleading because renewables is not relevant in all industries in the same way. For example unless you are talking about sailing ships, wind is not relevant at all when it comes to powering ships and hence including renewables when talking about shipping is somewhat misleading

ELECTRICITY GENERATION

Renewables are probably best viewed in the light of electricity generation because that is where they are more extensively deployed and hence more relevant.

Renewables currently accounts for 14.9% of total electricity generated. It hardly comes as a surprise that fossil fuels account for a whopping 85.1% of electricity generated.

There are no real surprises when looking at the electricity generation by fuel type chart. All the sources a reasonable person could expect are all present and accounted for.

However, I must confess that I had expected to see Wind and Solar occupy a larger percentage that than their meagre 4% and 2% respectively.

It should be also noted that total 

electricity generated has not increased in 2013-2014 but has continued to follow the same same marginal declining trend in 2012-2013. The report attributes this mainly to a combination of more efficient appliances and adoption of solar.

CONSUMPTION

Total energy consumption actually fell in 2013-2014. All major sub-categories fell during the year with the exception of Gas and Renewables.

Renewables make up 5.9% of total energy consumed and grew by 4% from the previous year. This compares with 1.8% of total energy produced. 

So while the portion of renewables in the consumption mix is higher than in energy produced, it is still insignificant especially compared against coal, oil and gas which collectively account for 94% of total energy consumption. 

Looking into the details of renewable energy consumption I was surprised to learn that
the largest sources of renewable energy sources consisted of Biomass which contributes more than half (53%) of renewable energy consumption. I did not even know what Biomass was and a quick return to the Oxford Dictionary quickly provided the answer: Organic matter used as a fuel, especially in a power station for the generation of electricity.

Wind, Solar PV (photovoltaic) and Solar hot water collectively only accounts for 19.6% of total renewable energy consumed.  What this means is that wind and solar is only accounts for only just 1% of total energy consumed in Australia. 

The extremely low percentage that renewables play in the production of energy in Australia is in stark contrast to the attention it is receiving in the media and by politicians.I found this to be surprising given that solar and wind dominate any public discussion.

Hydro and Biomass are hardly even mentioned in the news and climate change commentary.

SO WHAT DOES THIS ALL MEAN

Numbers concerning renewables seem to be hurled with increasing regularity by politicians, the media and both sides of the climate change divide. And yes I grant you that this set of numbers are not the only data around regarding the scope and growth of renewable energy.

And you can argue about how accurate the data is if you want to. But for me a number of things stand out merely from reviewing the data:

1. Renewables does not currently play a major role in the energy industry but it is growing in size and importance. Regardless of whether we look at the renewables category in total energy produced (1.8%), or in total energy consumed (4%) or in the generation of electricity (14.9%) it is small to insignificant.
2. The advantage of this is that there is surely a great deal of upside. It cannot get any more insignificant than it already currently is. And the even better news is that it is growing
3. The real bad news however is that it can only slowly. By this I do not mean percentage wise but in absolute output. The real growth in renewals is undoubtedly from wind and solar, both of which are growing in excess of 25% currently. 
4. As much as we believe and even desire to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels, the cold hard facts is that there is a yawing gap between total coal consumption (1,845 PJ) and total renewables consumption (345 PJ). The current growth in renewables is 4%. Even if we assume a 10% growth in renewables this will add a meagre 34.5 PJ per year. It is going to take a long time to make a dent in replacing coal.
5. As if this were not depressing enough, the major renewable subcategories are not in fact growing but declining. Only Biodiesel, Wind and Solar PV are reported as having double digit growth. Despite their impressive growth rates, they all have a low current base. Even if it were possible to ratchet up the current growth rates of these subcategories to 40% growth per annum, this would only add a mere 24 PJ per year.

For me the data would indicate that getting off fossil fuels is not only going to take a great deal of investment but even if the investment were forthcoming that it will take a long time.

As a consequence, we need to be honest and realistic when we charge into the public arena calling for shutting down coal plants. The simple fact of the matter is that we are physically and economically unable to build new solar and wind capacity quickly enough in a short timeframe to allow us to start shutting down coal fired plants. This problem remains regardless of who is in office in Government.

It also makes sense that we stop exaggerating the viability of solar displacing coal in the near future. Solar, wind and other sources are obviously a step in the right direction but it will take time to build up capacities in these technologies.

If we accept this line of reasoning then it stands to reason that what we really need is a continually evolving monitoring and optimising of the mix of all available sources, nuclear included. It may also point to a need to make better use of coal while reducing its polluting effects because we are going to have to live with it for quite a while yet.

Given what the statistics show, are we setting ourselves up for failure when public figures and the media keep pushing agendas that distort or ignore the underlying numbers. You would be hard pressed to find anyone these days who is not concerned about climate change. This is no longer the issue. What I am uneasy about is the all or nothing approach that is being pushed by many leading public figures in presenting renewables as the only way forward at any cost. This is a very unbalanced approach that ignores the technical and economic realities. 

One has to seriously question wonder why there isn't a more sane and objective discussion and debate going on right now about an optimal mix and its evolution on the basis of practical switching over from fossil fuels over time. 

Energy Tables Source: Licensed from the Commonwealth of Australia under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence. The Commonwealth of Australia does not necessarily endorse the content of this publication.