Wind Solar unreliable compared to Gas Coal Nuclear - Page 4

 On 9/27/2021 4:31 PM, Dechucka wrote:

Battery storage is chemical energy not solar energy.

  On 28/09/2021 11:16 am, Just Wondering wrote:

Solar energy is a chemical reaction, hey you can claim I'm using nuclear  
power. If it makes you happy to believe that renewable energy can't keep  
going when the sun doesn't and the wind doesn't blow because chemical  
storage is used so be it.

 On 9/27/2021 9:01 PM, Dechucka wrote:

Solar power comes from nuclear fusion, not a chemical reaction.


It's not my "belief", I am describing the science of what
is solar energy.

https://justenergy.com/blog/what-is-solar-energy/   Notice where
it says, "Disadvantages of Solar Energy  It Won’t Work at Night."

 
On 9/27/2021 4:31 PM, Dechucka wrote:

Then you don't understand the formal logic of scientific modeling. The Black  
Box can include internal storage of inputs.


That's irrelevant if the source of that energy is solar.

You can call it whatever you please, but these systems are really defined by  
the scientists and engineers who design and build them.

Solar panels without either storage or a sink like the grid to receive the  
energy are nearly useless, because almost all real-world loads are so  
variable.

I've been experimenting with immediate use of solar power in a freezer with  
a DC compressor. In the middle of the day solar panel output is enough to  
operate the compressor, and the Watt meter on the input to the attached AC  
power supply reads zero.

When the compressor is off the solar current diverts to float charging the  
freezer's backup battery and topping off other spares. Yesterday I checked  
the battery electrolyte and confirmed that the float voltage is enough to  
maintain a full charge but below the gassing level. This is how a UPS or  
exit light maintains its lead-acid battery, with the disadvantage that after  
an outage a full recharge at the float voltage can take a day or more, as  
indicated by the trickle charging current.

When solar current isn't enough the compressor draws the rest from the AC  
supply, shown by the power division on their Watt meters, or if the grid  
fails it draws from the battery.

This meter keeps track of energy into and out of the battery:
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32785159924.html  
and this one monitors power drawn from the the AC line:
https://www.aliexpress.com/cheap/cheap-pzem-061.html  
This PZEM-031 reads DC solar power but it doesn't like the low voltages at  
dawn and dusk so I added a relay that protects it from seeing less than 10V:
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32413784036.html  

That's as close as I get to using all available solar power as it is  
produced.

The other application for immediate use of solar power is heating water, but  
I keep my low voltage solar circuits as isolated from the grid as possible  
for safety. Otherwise it's just a theoretical exercise, not a practical home  
power system.

You can't intelligently discuss energy without an understanding of  
thermodynamics and energy quality, which concerns how easily it can be  
transformed between forms such as the heat of a fire vs electricity or shaft  
rotation. Unfortunately the non-technical general public doesn't seem to  
appreciate the distinction between a primary source of energy like sunlight  
and the secondary means of storing and distributing it, like hydrogen or  
electricity.
https://stem.guide/topic/primary-resources-and-secondary-energy/  

"Totally Solar" refers to the primary source. Secondary conversions don't  
matter.
jsw

 On 9/28/2021 6:55 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:

If that's your position, then ALL energy on the planet is solar
power.  Wind turbines?  Secondary conversion of solar energy.  
Hydroelectric generators?  Secondary conversion of solar energy.
The same is true with combustion of fuel - ANY fuel.  The same
for tidal energy, using oxen to plow a field, slaves to pick
cotton, even nuclear fission plants. All are secondary conversions
of energy where solar energy is the primary source.