PDA

View Full Version : Peru To Provide Free Solar Power To Its Poorest Citizens - good idea or statism?




Lord Xar
07-25-2013, 03:35 PM
http://cleantechnica.com/2013/07/15/peru-solar-power-program-to-give-electricity-to-2-million-of-poorest-peruvians/

Good government, socialism, statism etc.... your thoughts?

Energy and Mining Minister Jorge Merino said that the program will allow 95% of Peru to have access to electricity by the end of 2016. Currently, approximately 66% of the population has access to electricity.

“This program is aimed at the poorest people, those who lack access to electric lighting and still use oil lamps, spending their own resources to pay for fuels that harm their health,” said Merino.

The first phase of the program, called “The National Photovoltaic Household Electrification Program” was initiated on Monday (July 8) in the Contumaza province, where 1,601 solar panels were installed. These installations will power 126 impoverished communities in the districts of Cupisnique, San Benito, Tantarica, Chilete, Yonan, San Luis, and Contai.

The program plans to install about 12,500 solar (photovoltaic) systems to provide for approximately 500,000 households at an overall cost of about $200 million. Peru is the third-largest country in South America, with a population over 24 million. It has average solar radiation levels which can reach 5 kWh per m2 a day in the Sierra (foothill of The Andes). Peru is also home to the first major PV installation in Latin America.

This follows Peru’s public commitments to accelerate renewable energy development, as reported here previously by CleanTechnica. Meanwhile, in the United States, Americans for Prosperity – a political lobbying group founded by billionaire fossil fuel industrialists Charles and David Koch — is currently lobbying the Georgia state legislature to reject a plan requiring Georgia Power, one of the largest energy utilities in the American Southeast, to buy more solar energy.

WM_in_MO
07-25-2013, 03:37 PM
On the scale of Tyranny it ranks pretty low since it is simply robbing one group to benefit another

JCDenton0451
07-25-2013, 03:43 PM
One word: TVA

It's the same idea basically. Some say TVA worked, helped pull many Southerners out of poverty. TVA is the kind of socialism that even Republicans can love.

Keith and stuff
07-25-2013, 03:49 PM
This follows Peru’s public commitments to accelerate renewable energy development, as reported here previously by CleanTechnica. Meanwhile, in the United States, Americans for Prosperity – a political lobbying group founded by billionaire fossil fuel industrialists Charles and David Koch — is currently lobbying the Georgia state legislature to reject a plan requiring Georgia Power, one of the largest energy utilities in the American Southeast, to buy more solar energy.

That's awesome since solar power tends to be way less efficient than typical forms of electricity.

eduardo89
07-25-2013, 04:31 PM
That's awesome since solar power tends to be way less efficient than typical forms of electricity.

It's less efficient in that energy output is much lower than energy input. Most solar panels on the market are only about 10% efficient or so. The most efficient ones top out at 20%. That said, since the energy input is free and unlimited, it's hard to compare with the efficiency of a gas or coal fired power plant.

Another problem with solar panels is you get DC output and almost everything runs on AC as well as the high upfront cost and the fact that they only work during the day.

The Free Hornet
07-25-2013, 04:49 PM
Another problem with solar panels is you get DC output and almost everything runs on AC as well as the high upfront cost and the fact that they only work during the day.

Good short article on the subject:


Energy Debate Redux: Will the Grid of the Future Run on DC Power?

“Within the next 20 years we could definitely see as much as 50 percent of our total [electricity consumption] be made up of DC consumption,” according to Greg Reed, director of the Power & Energy Initiative at the University of Pittsburgh. “It’s accelerating even more than we’d expected,” Reed told MIT Technology Review in April 2012.

http://theenergycollective.com/jessejenkins/236951/got-solar-panel-then-wire-dc-circuit

If I were going "off grid", a DC only system would be a strong consideration. Why convert solar from DC to AC just to convert back to DC for PCs, phones, tablets, routers, LED lighting, et cetera.

Many vacuum cleaners use batteries (DC) - like a Roomba. AFAIK, fridges can run off natural gas or propane. If you only needed AC on occassion, then a generator would suffice.

The more I think about it... if I were building a house today, it might have a second set of wires for DC. Fuck AC (no offense Tesla - you da man! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla)).

Peace Piper
07-25-2013, 06:01 PM
That's awesome since solar power tends to be way less efficient than typical forms of electricity.

Quick- tell Germany

http://bilder.t-online.de/b/60/03/13/80/id_60031380/tid_da/solaranlagen-soweit-das-auge-reicht-solarpark-auf-flugplatz-neuhardenberg-.jpg

Neuhardenberg Solar Park is 145 MW photovoltaic, and Europe's largest solar power station, located at the former Neuhardenberg military airport


Solar power in Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany

Germany is one of the world's top photovoltaics (PV) installers, with a solar PV capacity as of 2011 of almost 25 gigawatts (GW). As of 31st of October 2012, there were 31.62 GW of photovoltaics connected to the electrical power network. The German solar PV industry increased to about 7.6 GW in 2012, and solar PV provided 18 TWh (billion kilowatt-hours) of electricity in 2011, about 3% of total electricity. Some market analysts expect this could reach 25 percent by 2050. Germany has a goal of producing 35% of electricity from renewable sources by 2020 and 100% by 2050.

A feed-in tariff is the most effective means of developing solar power. It is the same as a power purchase agreement, but is at a much higher rate. As the industry matures, it is reduced and becomes the same as a power purchase agreement. A feed-in tariff allows investors a guaranteed return on investment - a requirement for development. A primary difference between a tax credit and a feed-in tariff is that the cost is born the year of installation with a tax credit, and is spread out over many years with a feed-in tariff. In both cases the incentive cost is distributed over all consumers. This means that the initial cost is very low for a feed-in tariff and very high for a tax credit. In both cases the learning curve reduces the cost of installation, but is not a large contribution to growth, as grid parity is still always reached.

http://www.aee-ag.eu/uploads/tx_sbportfolio/20111103_aee_ref_solar_senftenberg_park_cpr_03.jpg
Solarprk Senftenberg

http://www.renewbl.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/lieberose-solar-park-firstsolar.jpg
Solarpark Liberose

The US was building these:

http://topnews.in/usa/files/us-drone_9.jpg

While Germany was building these:

http://www.deutsche-eco.de/index.php?rex_resize=370w__110930_luftaufnahme_1__ bearbeitet_webanwendung.jpg

Germany: A Place known for Suntans and Bikinis.

The dirty secret is that if Germany could do it We could do it better.

But it would fark up the 100 year plans of utilities. So it's not discussed. So most people don't know that Germany leads the world in Solar Photovoltaics. At 50 degrees North latitude.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3d/SolarGIS-Solar-map-Germany-en.png/426px-SolarGIS-Solar-map-Germany-en.png

Keith and stuff
07-25-2013, 06:11 PM
Quick- tell Germany

http://bilder.t-online.de/b/60/03/13/80/id_60031380/tid_da/solaranlagen-soweit-das-auge-reicht-solarpark-auf-flugplatz-neuhardenberg-.jpg

Neuhardenberg Solar Park is 145 MW photovoltaic, and Europe's largest solar power station, located at the former Neuhardenberg military airport

[INDENT]Solar power in Germany
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany[/]

Fair enough. I don't know much about what they are doing in Germany. Maybe this works well in other countries. In the US it tends to be highly subsidized by government welfare. I have a family member with a solar farm. Without tons in welfare, the project never would have happened. New England is the regional of the country most concerned about environmentally friendlyish energy. That means rates are expensive up here compared to most of the country. It is a seriously problem, though it does make for cleaner air.

One Last Battle!
07-25-2013, 06:17 PM
One word: TVA

It's the same idea basically. Some say TVA worked, helped pull many Southerners out of poverty. TVA is the kind of socialism that even Republicans can love.

The TVA isn't a great example of environmental success though, what with being responsible for one of the biggest environmental disasters in the US and all.

catfeathers
07-25-2013, 06:30 PM
I wonder how well it's working for them in Germany. When I lived there if it started raining you could expect rain for days.

mczerone
07-25-2013, 06:36 PM
If the goal was to help the poor, why not directly give them cash? Why not give them tax breaks if they installed solar panels?

This is just another crony-crapitalism game that helps one govt-favored firm get rid of excess inventory at a price no private consumer was willing to pay. And Peru's govt is stealing from people to make it happen.

eduardo89
07-25-2013, 06:37 PM
If the goal was to help the poor, why not directly give them cash?

Because they wouldn't spend it on this.


Why not give them tax breaks if they installed solar panels?

Because the poor don't pay taxes and solar panels have an enormous up-front cost.

angelatc
07-25-2013, 06:42 PM
A feed-in tariff allows investors a guaranteed return on investment - a requirement for development.

Socializing the losses, privatizing the profits.

And I don't care that the panels only capture 10% of the energy. That's a red herring. How much does it cost to produce a single unit of power, conventional vs solar?

eduardo89
07-25-2013, 06:44 PM
Socializing the losses, privatizing the profits.

And I don't care that the panels only capture 10% of the energy. That's a red herring. How much does it cost to produce a single unit of power, conventional vs solar?

It really depends. Solar is about $0.60 per watt, but has a lot of advantages in no long-term fuel costs and savings in infrastructure costs.

angelatc
07-25-2013, 06:50 PM
It really depends. Solar is about $0.60 per watt, but has a lot of advantages in no long-term fuel costs and savings in infrastructure costs.

I seriously don't believe tha there are any advantages. For one thing, the panels don't even last long enough to recover their cost. The batteries are expensive, short-lived and require tons of maintenence.

If there were an economic advantage, they wouldn't need to promise investors a guaranteed profit.

angelatc
07-25-2013, 06:52 PM
Solar still costs $156.90 per megawatt-hour, more expensive than coal at $99.60 per megawatt-hour, and natural gas at $65.50 to $132 per megawatt-hour, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. http://theweek.com/article/index/245686/the-3-biggest-obstacles-to-a-solar-energy-boom

angelatc
07-25-2013, 06:56 PM
And this seems to indicate that the infrastructure isn't compatible with solar: http://jrse.aip.org/resource/1/jrsebh/v5/i3/p032702_s1?isAuthorized=no