Well it's only a a mater of time now that solar-battery storage is base load technology.
The key is cheaper and more efficient battery technology, such as zinc bromide gel batteries or something similar.
Edit...seems to be a similar topic on HW. Though, I don't know what's heavy about energy. 
I take it you were watching
www.abc.net.au/catalyst/battery-powered-homes/11016162
last night. 
Sometimes Catalyst, the ABC science program, takes 30 minutes to get across 5 minutes of information. Did I hear them say " the average family uses 20,000 watts per day " ?
Select to expand quoteIan K said..
Sometimes Catalyst, the ABC science program, takes 30 minutes to get across 5 minutes of information. Did I hear them say " the average family uses 20,000 watts per day " ?
With my ear canals closing over I find I use plenty of 'What's" every day. Probably not 20 000 though.
Select to expand quoteIan K said..
Sometimes Catalyst, the ABC science program, takes 30 minutes to get across 5 minutes of information. Did I hear them say " the average family uses 20,000 watts per day " ?
It's not always about the hard information, it's about creating a story, giving examples, talking about options - so that everyone can understand.
It's also great that we have an ABC that does such programming. Over in commercial land you can see the 56th way of searing a scallop, or the 124th way of tiling a bathroom, or the 425th way of surviving a desert island.
So is that all you can add? A footnote about the programming?!
And just before Catalyst they had Choice on 7.30 Report saying that conversion to solar/battery/wind/alternatives (& feeding back to grid) would require approx 20 years to recover cost.....but most of the equipment involved had max warranty (sometimes related to life expectancy) of only 10 years.
So, caveat emptor! 
Select to expand quoteAdriano said..Ian K said..
Sometimes Catalyst, the ABC science program, takes 30 minutes to get across 5 minutes of information. Did I hear them say " the average family uses 20,000 watts per day " ?
It's not always about the hard information, it's about creating a story, giving examples, talking about options - so that everyone can understand.
It's also great that we have an ABC that does such programming. Over in commercial land you can see the 56th way of searing a scallop, or the 124th way of tiling a bathroom, or the 425th way of surviving a desert island.
So is that all you can add? A footnote about the programming?!
Sometimes Catalyst is OK, but if the story is thin they still spin it out for 1/2 an hour. Back in the day the ABC did more for science. You don't think this bloke would arc up watching Catalyst?
Select to expand quoteWineman said..
And just before Catalyst they had Choice on 7.30 Report saying that conversion to solar/battery/wind/alternatives (& feeding back to grid) would require approx 20 years to recover cost.....but most of the equipment involved had max warranty (sometimes related to life expectancy) of only 10 years.
So, caveat emptor!
That would be pretty accurate for much of the componentry, although most solar panel warranties range between 15-25yrs. Our PV solar at home paid for itself over 7 years - which seemed like a long time (at the time), especially with the knowledge that the money would have been better spent in a high-yield investment. The upside is that it was installed >10yrs ago - so has been slowly returning a profit of around $180 per qtr since that period. Our new 'off-grid' system will cost approximately double of what connecting to the grid would (rural block). Based on an estimated usage, the added cost we are up for will be covered in <8 years, based on current electricity costs (which I doubt will remain static).
20kw is nuts! If your family Mcmansion is running off that, then you are one of the reasons that we need change sooner than later. I'm all for sustainable living (and work with many alternative designs & ideas every day), but the first step is to acknowledge that we can live on a smaller footprint. Walking around your home in the middle of winter in your singlet & shorts with the heater blazing, or having 5 TVs running all at the same time with every light on in your house is just a slap in the face of the environment. An 8kw system supported with gas cooking and energy-efficient appliances will cover most medium-large family homes.
It's very close to a century since electricty became mainstream in this country (although available from the 1880s). I can only imagine people having this conversation around 100 years ago and some of the 'issues' raise in regard to the cost of grid-connect vs the cost of oil & animal labour.
Good home design with cross-ventilation, insulation, passive solar will get you some of the way - the rest is about the adjustments you need to make to your 'comfort-levels' re; putting on a jumper instead of the heater, shedding a layer instead of using an AC, turning lights off - or put sensors on them when not in the room, ventilate your home for to allow a cool breeze, then block the hot sun during warm periods etc. These can't always be done (with many still living in homes that simply don't allow such luxuries), but those that can afford the change should imo.
Select to expand quoteSailhack said..
20kw is nuts! If your family Mcmansion is running off that, then you are one of the reasons that we need change sooner than later. n homes that simply don't allow such luxuries), but those that can afford the change should imo.
Checked the transcript, but don't panic, they most likely meant kilojoules. 20kW would be nuts.
(or maybe kilowatt hours? What a strange unit of energy? But it's even more most likely that that is what they meant, working backwards from the number).
It's interesting that they didn't mention the Snowy scheme back pumping stations, the same concept as recharging batteries, maybe they felt it would have detracted from the story.
"
NARRATION
The average family uses 20 to 40 kilowatts of energy a day, and for most, the peak time is early evening. If you switch to what's called a 'time of use tariff', which many energy retailers now offer, then you can use your battery during the peak hours when electricity is expensive. "
^^^ 20kw might be right then, my apologies. My estimated use is about 6kw, but that is a small, very energy-efficient office/studio build (>8 stars), so would be well below the average.
Select to expand quotesotired said..evlPanda said..Adriano said..
Well it's only a a mater of time now that solar-battery storage is base load technology.
It's great if you live in a house with a north facing roof. Many of us don't. I live in a high-rise.
The same program talked about having solar with strata living schemes. There is an area in a suburb of Perth where they are trialling this.
The future is high-density development. The roof area on a 30 story building is paltry for the number of occupants.
Select to expand quoteWineman said..
And just before Catalyst they had Choice on 7.30 Report saying that conversion to solar/battery/wind/alternatives (& feeding back to grid) would require approx 20 years to recover cost.....but most of the equipment involved had max warranty (sometimes related to life expectancy) of only 10 years.
So, caveat emptor!
Market analysts always overestimate the numbers when it comes to new emerging technology. Always. They overestimate upfront costs, they underestimate returns and they always take a conservative approach to what's just around the corner. Meanwhile in the actual energy market, things are happening faster than those analysts and naysayers realise. Then we have the stupid politicians. They're a lost cause. The energy crisis is coming in the developed world, but it's victim will be coal.
Select to expand quoteevlPanda said..
sotired said..
evlPanda said..
Adriano said..
Well it's only a a mater of time now that solar-battery storage is base load technology.
It's great if you live in a house with a north facing roof. Many of us don't. I live in a high-rise.
The same program talked about having solar with strata living schemes. There is an area in a suburb of Perth where they are trialling this.
The future is high-density development. The roof area on a 30 story building is paltry for the number of occupants.
Maybe that's a big part of the future but not the major part - yet. Medium density more likely.
The roof is not the only way to produce PV energy.
Panels get more efficient. They are available as cladding, inter-layers in glass, paint and sandwich panels. Batteries will bet more efficient and will be integrated into the building fabric.
How much facade area does a 30 storey residential tower have? A high rise development uses far less energy per dwelling because it shares energy systems.
Naysayers. You'll see!
Select to expand quoteAdriano said..
evlPanda said..
sotired said..
The future is high-density development. The roof area on a 30 story building is paltry for the number of occupants.
How much facade area does a 50 storey residential tower have?
Naysayers. You'll see!
Residential towers mostly have a glass facade. That is going to be hard to change. All of the apartments will have some common internal walls, your one wall to the outside world will feature windows. It all helps but as Sotired implies there will be a demand for residential power generated remotely for a while yet. What will be interesting is the economics of maintaining the poles and wires of the grid on the income from a decreasing net power output.
Yes Ian towers do, but it sounds like you haven't heard of photovoltaic building materials, including glass.
Also, a lot of a high rise's facade is opaque, like the spandrels between floors that can be anywhere up to 1.0m high. Standard PV or thin film cladding PV systems can be used there too. Lend Lease is one of the big guys going hard on this stuff.
www.dupont.com/solar-photovoltaic-materials.html
onyxsolar.com/standard-photovoltaic-glass.html
www.aeol.com.au/databases/news/agl_and_bovis_lend_lease_bring_f.htm
Yes adrian, but it sounds like you haven't heard of power generating vegetables, including potatoes.
What is the current efficiency of photovoltaic glass? For a roof mounted system, at current efficiencies you need a 3 kw system, 21 sq metres of panel per household. That's at the best orientation, the roof, the south side wall is not much use at all. You might have a taller residential tower to your north and anyway in summer your north wall is useless. Getting a residential tower completely off the grid won't be easy.
Your problem is that your 30 story tower might be able to be made using solar PV walls, but it's likely to be in a development with other buildings just as big providing shade for most of the day.
And on the kilowatt-hours versus kilojoules thing, even I know that one watt equals one joule per second, thus 20 kJ is equal to 0.00555 kwh. That is one spectacularly energy-efficient household.
Select to expand quoteIan K said..Adriano said..Ian K said..
Sometimes Catalyst, the ABC science program, takes 30 minutes to get across 5 minutes of information. Did I hear them say " the average family uses 20,000 watts per day " ?
It's not always about the hard information, it's about creating a story, giving examples, talking about options - so that everyone can understand.
It's also great that we have an ABC that does such programming. Over in commercial land you can see the 56th way of searing a scallop, or the 124th way of tiling a bathroom, or the 425th way of surviving a desert island.
So is that all you can add? A footnote about the programming?!
Sometimes Catalyst is OK, but if the story is thin they still spin it out for 1/2 an hour. Back in the day the ABC did more for science. You don't think this bloke would arc up watching Catalyst?
Because in its asymmetric configuration, the weight of the stick created a greater degree of friction or surface tension on his right finger than the lesser weight of the stick on his left finger. Hence, the left finger was able to move more freely, until a level of equilibrium was achieved in terms of the coefficient of surface tension.
Did anyone see the rest of the show? I'd love to know if I was close?
Australia has the largest area of solar PV in the world and growing massively. We have awesome solar radiation and most panels are on single dwellings and low rise industrial buildings anyway.
High rise is peanuts in comparison to current capacity and developing capacity.
This talk of high rise applications is the typical negative, naysayers argument for inaction and the status quo.
Select to expand quoteevlPanda said...sotired said..evlPanda said..Adriano said..
Well it's only a a mater of time now that solar-battery storage is base load technology.
It's great if you live in a house with a north facing roof. Many of us don't. I live in a high-rise.
The same program talked about having solar with strata living schemes. There is an area in a suburb of Perth where they are trialling this.
The future is high-density development. The roof area on a 30 story building is paltry for the number of occupants.
For highrises the windows glass will be used as the solar panels in the future.
My sons godfather, prof.at Edith Cowan Uni is working on it.
He is on YouTube somewhere. Just can't be bothered looking for a link ATM.
Select to expand quote
Just about every block of flats in Perth has car parking with cover like this. Bloody brilliant if you had battery storage on site and could recover costs through the strata selling the power to users.
Just seems like such a winning principle, all the issues with manufacturing costs etc aside. Hopefully the prof with the zinc n gel idea gets to commercialise it in aus and not bought out!!!
Problem is - when people extol the wonderful virtues of these things they never add up the whole deal and tell us.
How much energy to mine the stuff, make the actual panels, what is their lifespan, how much evergy to replace them.
Same for the batteries.
If they are recycled it takes a HEAP of energy to cut up and melt bits and reproduce, particularly to recycle battery cells as you are getting a spent item that released it's energy in a chemical reaction that runs "downhill" and now you are trying to make it go uphill again by adding a lot of energy (not talking about recharging batteries here I am talking about recycling them to regain the original elements from a fkd cell)
It is not free power forever from the sun as there is the input required to make the cells and batteries, install them, replace.
I look forward to the whole calculation...........
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said...
Problem is - when people extol the wonderful virtues of these things they never add up the whole deal and tell us.
How much energy to mine the stuff, make the actual panels, what is their lifespan, how much evergy to replace them.
Same for the batteries.
If they are recycled it takes a HEAP of energy to cut up and melt bits and reproduce, particularly to recycle battery cells as you are getting a spent item that released it's energy in a chemical reaction that runs "downhill" and now you are trying to make it go uphill again by adding a lot of energy (not talking about recharging batteries here I am talking about recycling them to regain the original elements from a fkd cell)
It is not free power forever from the sun as there is the input required to make the cells and batteries, install them, replace.
I look forward to the whole calculation...........
Naysayer
^^^ No I am NOT a naysayer.
What I say is every time any alternative energy comes up, they say we can power the whole city with 'technology X'
BUT that is how much energy they put out compared to how much the city uses. I have never yet seen them talk about how much energy is used in producing the solar panels and batteries (for example). Shall we use solar powered trucks and cranes and ships and.... etc in mining the relatively rare ores used to produce them?
And as Rails said, the batteries can cost more energy to produce than they provide so we have to recycle. I don't see the power requirements for the recycling included in the sums.
Nuclear.
