“Solar is highly reliable. It can be deployed rapidly and it can be accurately forecast ahead,” said Leonie Greene from the Solar Trade Association lobby group.

In Britain?

25 thoughts on “You what?”

  1. Brazen lies are to be expected from the eco-freaks.

    Purge the Uni’s.

    End state control of the media–ie, the BBC, the cosy world of middle-class Marxist pricks who dominate the media. Abolish –and make illegal–journalism “qualifications”. Lets have journos who have never seen the inside of a socialist finishing school but who learned to find stories by going out and finding them.

    That will sink the bastards.

  2. I sneeze in threes

    Is the apostrophe to indicate a contraction of the word universities and so correctly used? Asking for a friend educated in the 70/80s

  3. The Left throws around accusations of industry involvement in the most absurdly conspiratorial way (“Big Oil”, etc) yet innocently ignore the most blatant industry shilling when it suits them.

  4. One word shoots down the solar business in the UK. Insolation. The UK is not the best place to use solar. Yes, it can use it, but not to do anything useful with.

  5. You can quite accurately forecast what will happen if you fire up a coal or gas-powered power station as well.

  6. If your solar is working, I can forecast that in 10 hours, it won’t be. Extreme accuracy guaranteed.

  7. @ Gamecock – the Grauniad claims “The sun provided more UK electricity from photovoltaic panels than heavily polluting coal-fired plants over a full 24-hour period

    Surely you’re not suggesting they are wrong? We know that Spanish solar panels work during the night – shouldn’t the same apply here?

    I jest….

  8. “The sun provided more UK electricity from photovoltaic panels than heavily polluting coal-fired plants over a full 24-hour period”

    What about when compared to regular coal-fired plants?

  9. They were probably “heavily polluting” due to being ramped up and down whilst trying to balance the frequent output swings of all those “unreliables”. If the nutters running our energy policy were given their marching orders, we could have some of the latest generation “Ultra Super Critical” coal plants the Chinese are building, thereby getting better efficiency, and further reductions in emissions.

  10. On one particularly good sunny day Solar, with 10% of installed capacity and getting automatic preference over fossil fuel stations so all its output is used, produced 4% of UK electricity consumption. So peak output is <40% of nameplate capacity. [< 'cos the other 90% produced 96% of consumption so consumption < capacity]
    Still, that means that on a *good* day solar is better than wind.

  11. @ Dave Ward
    We don’t want coal-fired stations – nuclear for base-load and gas for variable: even the newest, best, coal-fired plants are less good than either.

  12. Gamecock,

    You are on a roll today. The one minor problem I have is with your solar panels not working in 10 hours. I understand what you mean but it is easy to find contradictions to the basic statement. That said the best roof section I have for solar only gets direct sunlight for around 4 hours a day in the winter.

  13. ‘I understand what you mean but it is easy to find contradictions to the basic statement.’

    Well, if it’s easy, let’s here ’em.

  14. ‘Solar, with 10% of installed capacity’

    Is that capacity for the hours it’s possible, or are they so bold as to rate capacity even when the sun doesn’t shine?

    I.e., solar ‘capacity’ must be discounted two thirds from the beginning.

  15. You’re thinking about it too much. I could find a solar panel that is working at 7 am and expect that it will still be working at 5 pm. Avoiding easily contradicted absolutes isn’t always an easy thing.

  16. @ Gamecock
    Capacity is the maximum rate at which it can produce electricity. So windmill capacity is constant whether it’s blowing a hurricane or a dead calm.
    Re-reading the almost illegible print I see that nameplate capacity is “> 9GW” and its peak production is “nearly 30gwh” so not 40% but 15% of rated capacity – total consumption was only one-third of total nameplate capacity according to the Grauniad (I do not think that I believe that).

  17. The original statement was “If your solar is working, I can forecast that in 10 hours, it won’t be. Extreme accuracy guaranteed.” That is an overly broad statement. Given the same weather conditions there will be a point exactly 10 hours apart where a solar panel is producing the same amount of energy. It doesn’t matter that the panel isn’t operating at peak efficiency at the time since the only qualification is that it is working. It is a pedantic argument that has now had far many words wasted. All I’ve learned is how become end up becoming grammar nazis.

  18. I know I’ve left the high northern latitudes but the few occassions, when I remember the sun shining in a clear sky for ten continuous hours, are definitely outliers.

  19. > Yes, it can use it, but not to do anything useful with.
    Ah, but you need to define “useful”. The mistake many of us make is to work on the basis that the useful output of these panels is electricity. Once you understand that the electricity produced is but a byproduct then you’ll understand everything.
    You see, the electricity produced is, just like for windmills, just a byproduct. The real output is the FITs (ROCs for windmills) – ie the real primary purpose for the panels for most people who have installed them is to farm the subsidies.
    Proof of this is to look at the squeals claiming the move will “decimate* the industry” when any reduction in the subsidies** is suggested.
    * Yes, using the incorrect tabloid meaning.
    ** Yes I mean subsidy. It looks like a duck, has feathers like a duck, it walks like a duck, and it quacks – don’t try saying it’s a cat and not a duck.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *