🚀 go-pugleaf

In sci.physics jg <jg@nospam.com> wrote:
> On 9/03/2013 7:17 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> In sci.physics jg <jg@nospam.com> wrote:

<snip>

>>> Yes it's a problem, as all methods of generation have problems.
>>>
>>> But not a big enough problem that solar isn't still a very useful tool
>>> in producing electricity.
>>>
>>> Typically a house produces 1kWh for 6 hours, when no one is home it goes
>>> to the main user - industry, which operates mainly at those same hours.
>>
>> Peak electrical demand occurs in the late afternoon and doesn't go
>> away until well after sunset.
>>
>> The main users are households and lighting in general.
>>
>> Here is an example for California:
>>
>> http://www.caiso.com/SystemStatus.html
>>
>> This is typical no matter what the area.
>>
>>
>>
> The highest peak demand happens at night, for about 4 hours.
> 
> The system has to provide 3/4 of that demand for about another 12 hours 
> in daylight, then much less for the remaining 8 hours.

That ratio is highly seasonly dependant.

In the summer the evening/night demand goes way up with everyone turning
on the house A/C and stays up until close to midnight.

> Would if solar panels could cover all demand and better if it was at 
> peak, but they do contribute for 6 hours if not at the highest demanding 
> 4 hours of day.

The problem is solar contributes nothing useful during the peak demand.

Now if solar were really extremely cheap compared to gas, then it might
be worth something to run it during the day and turn off the gas 
generators, but solar is not cheaper than gas by a long shot.

> Solar water heaters for instance do a better job of that.

Water heating is a trivial electricity consumer.

> They are only part of the answer, but fossil fuels are the question.

That makes no sense what so ever.



-- 
Jim Pennino