Talk:Solar power/Archive 1

Archive 1

Some tags and suggestions

I'm adding an "Unbalanced" tag to the top of this article, as it focuses too much on PV, and not enough on CSP. The lead provides a good example of this where paragraphs two and three are mainly about PV.

Also, the use of the term "concentrating solar power" is confusing as there are PV concentrating systems as well (eg., Mildura Solar concentrator power station). Why not use the term "solar thermal power", which is more descriptive?

The lage SEGS plant deserves more discussion, but mainly the article is too focused on the USA, and doesn't capture the many interesting solar power things that are happening in places like Spain. The two largest PV power plants, Olmedilla Photovoltaic Park (60 MW), the Puertollano Photovoltaic Park (50 MW), are in Spain, but I can't see where they are discussed. Very few of the solar thermal power plants in Spain are mentioned. I couldn't see where the Andasol solar power station and the PS20 Solar Power Station are discussed.

I'm also adding an "Off topic" tag to the Energy storage methods section. Detailed info about wind power and the Erie Shores Wind Farm is clearly off-topic. The molten salt discussion is more relevant and could be expanded, and plants which use this storage approach mentioned. Mention of wind power and pumped-hydro in the first paragraph of the article is not appropriate. Lead image of the article should focus more directly on solar power. Johnfos (talk) 00:36, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I swapped CSP and PV per your suggestion, but wind and storage are vital to the article, and do belong in the lead - without them solar can only be used as a small supplement, and never reach its potential. 199.125.109.77 (talk) 04:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Reality check: You are User:Apteva, aren't you? The editor who has put this article forward as a GA nominee? You appear to edit under several account names and IP addresses. Johnfos (talk) 05:03, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Most of my edits are as an IP user, I was trying to get them back up to 99% but it is stuck at more like 80 to 85% (sigh). 199.125.109.77 (talk) 15:27, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

External links

I'm concerned that the link at the bottom ""Best Regions for Solar Power in the U.S.". http://windsolarenergy.org/best-regions-for-solar-power.htm." appears to primarily be a promotional conduit for the "earth4energy.com" site, which, by all independent accounts is a "scam" (http://www.nlcpr.com/Deceptions6.php). I've never commented on wiki before, so please excuse if I've violated a wiki protocol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.214.54.170 (talk) 18:15, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I see that you have removed it. However it is the link that is being attacked, not the page. There are often links that are of no control of a web operator that get added for advertising, etc. The page itself, best-regions, however does not tell the whole story - it only explains the region with the most sun, and is only about the U.S., so is more appropriate in the solar power in the United States article, not this article. What it leaves out, is the effect of both the local cost of electricity, and the availability of incentives, which vary widely within the U.S. There is nothing wrong with what you have done - identified a questionable (to you) website, and discussed the removal here. Can't get any better. However, someone has been inappropriately without discussion removing the links to the solar calculators. They are important to the article and should be restored. Both links have been refined per the GA discussion to link directly to the calculators instead of to the whole site. Apteva (talk) 00:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

They are sites that exist to link consumers to vendors/installers/whatever, and accordingly are not to be linked per links to be avoided number 14. - MrOllie (talk) 00:18, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Please, it is a solar calculator, and that is an essential service, and not a "whatever", though I doubt that "whatever" is included in ELNO 14. Apteva (talk) 06:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

pumped hydro-> hydropower

This change was made because hydropower encompasses a wide range of techniques to store potential energy. Pumped-hydro is one way. Another way is to reduce the output of a dam's generators to "save" water in the lake by rising its water level, up to the maximum height of the dam. TeH nOmInAtOr (talk) 01:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

That is ok in the lead, but you realize that can only be used in the rare locations where there is a large local dam; for 90% of the world there is no large local dam and the hydro-storage has to be built from scratch, as pumped hydro-storage. Also, rivers can not simply be shut off at will - they are used for navigation and other purposes, so there are max/min outflows that dams have to adhere to in saving water up to the height of the dam. Not so with pumped storage, where the flow can always go from +/- 100% at any time (until one of the reservoirs is full or empty). Apteva (talk) 12:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Interaction of Solar Power with Grid

If some knows, please talk about the unique considerations regarding solar and the grid. This includes solar's typical capcity factor, availability factor, load, scheduling, inverter issues, etc. This is an important part of considering solar power. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OrganicSolar (talk • contribs) 18:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Selling a point of view.

The opening paragraph sounds like an advocacy piece for solar power. This is an encyclopedia. We need to first describe what solar power is . We can then go on to say how good it is if we attribute those opinions to reliable sources. Lumos3 (talk) 12:54, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

This is much better. Thank you Hamiltonstone. Lumos3 (talk) 09:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

stupid claim

"If it continues to double in use every two to three years, or less, it would become the dominant energy source this century."

The above appears twice in the article. It's asinine to point out that if something maintains an exponential growth rate, it will become very large. The article offers no evidence to suggest solar power adoption will continue to be exponential. In fact, common sense dictates that it's foolish to believe anything can maintain an exponential growth rate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.165.130.59 (talk) 06:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

No Criticism?

Why is there no criticism section at all for solar power? In case you people weren't aware, there are plenty of drawbacks to solar. -_- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.111.116.30 (talk) 08:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Why is this article under semi-protection?

Just wondering...I would like to clarify the bit about RESOP in Ontario which was actually replaced by a new program in the Green Energy Act, which is not quite what the article says. --Julian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.236.136 (talk) 19:30, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

It was targeted for vandalism frequently prior to the most recent semi-protect, though you have to ask the vandals to figure out why (I suspect a combination of high visibility and political relevance). If you'd like to propose an edit, please provide the exact change you would like to make, as well as a reference for it (if it is a factual change, as opposed to a stylistic, grammatical or spelling fix). —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 19:44, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

For help on editing protected (and semi-protected) pages you can also review WP:SILVERLOCK, which refers to using the template {{editsemiprotected}}. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:57, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

{{editsemiprotected}}

The text:

"In Canada the RESOP (Renewable Energy Standard Offer Program), introduced in 2006,[62] and updated in 2009 with the passage of the Green Energy Act, allows residential homeowners in Ontario with solar panel installations to sell the energy they produce back to the grid (i.e., the government) at 42¢/kWh, while drawing power from the grid at an average rate of 6¢/kWh (see feed-in tariff).[63]"

Could be changed to this:

"In Ontario, Canada, the Green Energy Act passed in 2009 created a feed-in-tariff program that pays up to 80.2¢/kWh to solar PV energy producers, guaranteed for 20 years.[r1] The amount scales up based on the size of the project, with projects under 10KW receiving the highest rate. (People participating in a previous Ontario program called RESOP (Renewable Energy Standard Offer Program), introduced in 2006, and paying a maximum of only 42¢/kWh, were allowed to transfer the balance of their contracts to the new FIT program.[r2])"

References: 1: http://fit.powerauthority.on.ca 2: http://fit.powerauthority.on.ca/Page.asp?PageID=924&ContentID=10600

--Julian

Y Done. Added relevant link too. BejinhanTalk 12:41, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. The last sentence appearing after this text now in the article, is redundant, or at least confusing, since the March increase it refers to is the introduction of the FIT that is part of the Green Energy Act.

--Julian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.236.136 (talk) 18:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

The potential of Solar Power

It is misleading to say that solar power has the potential to provide 1000 times the world's energy needs, as it is not possible to intercept all of the sunlight that reaches the Earth's surface.

To provide the world's energy needs, we would need to cover approximately 0.1% of the Earth's surface. (Terrestrial solar flux is around 120000TW, energy demand = 17TW, so with 15% efficiency solar cells, 17/(120000*0.15) comes out at 0.999%. So yes, if we covered all of our land area we could provide 1000 times our energy needs, but this would kill off all life on earth and there would consequently be no energy demand...

Surely it would be more appropriate to assert that solar power can meet our energy requirements with only a 0.1% land coverage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Olliemontague (talk • contribs) 21:27, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

too speculative

The third and fourth sentences are too speculative and should not belong in an encyclopedia article, in my opinion.--68.193.135.139 (talk) 02:49, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The claim about CalTech's achievement is misleading

The article claims that CalTech team achieved between 85% and 90% efficiency. This is misleading. What Caltech team asserts is absorption efficiency not conversion, but this distinction has not been made in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ae2010 (talk • contribs) 05:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 67.214.251.202, 22 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} I have the source needed for the first missing citation; http://www.solar4power.com/index.html

67.214.251.202 (talk) 18:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Not done: Welcome. That source appears to be quoting us. Celestra (talk) 18:58, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Power costs missing

Table showing average cost in cents/kWh over 20 years for solar power panels

	Insolation
Cost	2400 kWh/kWp•y	2200 kWh/kWp•y	2000 kWh/kWp•y	1800 kWh/kWp•y	1600 kWh/kWp•y	1400 kWh/kWp•y	1200 kWh/kWp•y	1000 kWh/kWp•y	800 kWh/kWp•y
200 $/kWp	0.8	0.9	1.0	1.1	1.3	1.4	1.7	2.0	2.5
600 $/kWp	2.5	2.7	3.0	3.3	3.8	4.3	5.0	6.0	7.5
1000 $/kWp	4.2	4.5	5.0	5.6	6.3	7.1	8.3	10.0	12.5
1400 $/kWp	5.8	6.4	7.0	7.8	8.8	10.0	11.7	14.0	17.5
1800 $/kWp	7.5	8.2	9.0	10.0	11.3	12.9	15.0	18.0	22.5
2200 $/kWp	9.2	10.0	11.0	12.2	13.8	15.7	18.3	22.0	27.5
2600 $/kWp	10.8	11.8	13.0	14.4	16.3	18.6	21.7	26.0	32.5
3000 $/kWp	12.5	13.6	15.0	16.7	18.8	21.4	25.0	30.0	37.5
3400 $/kWp	14.2	15.5	17.0	18.9	21.3	24.3	28.3	34.0	42.5
3800 $/kWp	15.8	17.3	19.0	21.1	23.8	27.1	31.7	38.0	47.5
4200 $/kWp	17.5	19.1	21.0	23.3	26.3	30.0	35.0	42.0	52.5
4600 $/kWp	19.2	20.9	23.0	25.6	28.8	32.9	38.3	46.0	57.5
5000 $/kWp	20.8	22.7	25.0	27.8	31.3	35.7	41.7	50.0	62.5

Could we get a citation or is this all original research? --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:40, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Solar power in the United States

The link to http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/pub_summaries/renew_es.html in this section of the article does not justify the figures in that paragraph. First, the link is to an executive summary, but the full PDF is a paper written in Feb 1993 and so has no figures for 2006 or 2003. It does have 17 year old projections for 2010, but these are not much use now. Following the link to the 'main' article at Solar power in the United States gives us an uncited figure of 'less than 0.1%', so I undid the edit by User:125.236.220.152 that had changed this to 0.2%. This is still unsatisfactory. Trying to track down just one reliable figure, I found one source in the linked article, Solar Energy Industries Association, which gets us to http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/news_detail.cfm/news_id=12362 but this gives no percentages, just a total capacity of 9,183 MW in 2008.

Perhaps someone who knows their way around official sources for figures like these can do better, but at the moment the US section here seems to be an unverifiable mess. --Nigelj (talk) 09:40, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

What a mess!

Honestly I don't know how this article has retained its GA status. The article seems to have become a magnet for anything to do with solar, including solar water heating, which is clearly off-topic. I think the discussion of experimental solar is largely non-notable and should also go, to be replaced by a couple of links to sub-articles. The lead section needs to summarize the article, instead of getting hung up on intermittency, which is just one issue among many. The structure of the article needs to be a lot more logical and considerable cleanup is also needed. I've added some tags in an effort to alert readers and provide further guidance. Johnfos (talk) 01:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

One way of dealing with this siuation would be to revert the article back to (close to) where it was granted GA status as it was quite good back then. Another way of moving forward would be for an experienced editor to go through the article and remove extraneous material that just does not belong or is poorly referenced. Comments welcome on how to proceed... Johnfos (talk) 05:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

And surprisingly, its not just this article. The entire subject of solar power on Wikipedia needs cleanup. Serious overlapping exists in many solar articles. I wouldn't mind doing the cleanup, but I just don't have that much time... Worst case, if the cleanup never happens, time travelling back to GA might be the only option... Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 13:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Point taken. Much of the extraneous material here already appears in other articles... I'm going to take the bold step of doing a major revert on the article to bring it back to GA quality. Johnfos (talk) 04:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Capital costs

I just wanted to take issue with the assertion that non-renewable energy forms are paid for as they are used whereas renewable energy has to be paid up front. The comment is misleading as up-front capital costs are a significant part of many non-renewable projects, especially nuclear. Perhaps this can simply be edited straight out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.102.99.38 (talk) 05:42, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Parabolic Trough

In the article, it said:

...the most developed [energy source] is the parabolic trough...

Is that true? I mean where did someone get that imformation. Does that generally mean that the parabolic trough is the most widely used solar energy source? --Michaelzeng7 (talk) 14:16, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually it said that the parabolic trough is the most developed concentrated energy source. So what is the most widely used?--Michaelzeng7 (talk) 14:19, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Sourcing of Solar Energy

I'd like to propose adding another section on the fabrication of solar, and in particular PV, including the damage to the environment that solar causes during the fabrication process. This would allow the article to be better balanced, with a 360deg picture of solar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.217.45.190 (talk) 10:43, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

lots of 2010 figures

There are lots of figures in this article. eg, "The world added about 16 gigawatts of new solar photovoltaic (PV) power in 2010", "global solar PV power to nearly 40 GW", "Solar panel prices have halved since 2007, say analysts, at about $1.8 per watt at the end of 2010". maybe these can be worked in. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/14/us-energy-solar-idUSTRE71D4WJ20110214 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.36.2.209 (talk) 13:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Stirling Parabolic Dishes

it should be mentioned that this is one of the newer designs to enter "widespread" use (eg use in large array power plants). there are at least 3 large multi megawatt scale plants operating on this design principle slated for construction in the southwestern US.68.6.76.31 (talk) 00:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Which? Tessera's two big projects have been canceled. (Tessera / Stirling Sell Their Other Major Dish Project to a PV Developer).

—WWoods (talk) 02:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Mistake about James Clerk Maxwell

The article says that James Clerk Maxwell recognised the importance of the photoelectric effect, even though it was discovered after his death.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.42.14 (talk) 11:49, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

yeah.Mannix Chan (talk) 06:18, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Land economic argument

A 1000 Megawatt CSP facility requires 6000 acres of land while a similar coal-fired plant requires less than 640 acres of land.

The figure of 640 acres is purely building area. It does not take into account the area of land needed to mine the coal. 58.170.178.199 (talk) 06:21, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

More economic arguments

All systems have a life-cycle cost. Research (concept), design and development, production, sustaining (maintenance) and finally disposal or end-of-life. Each phase isn't free. This has to be part of the article, or else it's just selling "free energy" without the fine print. --74.107.74.39 (talk) 00:40, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Red Links

Would someone please remove/fix the three red links in the Concentrating Solar Power section?JoshE3 (talk) 16:32, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request

The Glennon article, cited in footnotes 72 and 77, has moved to a new, static weblocation. The URL must change to http://ajelp.com/documents/GlennonFinal.pdf.

Done thanks. Woody (talk) 18:22, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Table of solar thermal power stations only shows 1/3rd of the operational solar power stations

Needs to be updated with List of solar thermal power stations —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corb555 (talk • contribs) 00:31, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Why do developers limit their solar power plant capacity?

Even though the higher the installed capacity, the less cost per megawatt, some developers limit their plant capacities to odd values. I am talking about grid-connected feed-in solar photovoltaic power plants.

Other than:

• Limited land area
• Stepped-fixed-costs (legal fee, etc) (ie. First 10MW: $123, above 10MW: $345, etc)

I don't see any other reason to drop down the plant capacity.

Assuming the 10MW stepped-costs are in place, and the land area is more-than-enough for a 10MW plant, are there any other reasons why one would limit their plant capacity to something lower than 10MW? Assuming the power purchaser has no limits in capacity. Does it have anything to do with the project financing? If so, what exactly? Rehman 09:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Project size is selected for the maximum return on investment - the cost per kw doesn't decline forever with increasing size; the interfaces to the transmission grid come in fairly discrete chunks of standard preferred transformer ratings. There's probably also system interconnection issues - the utility may not want a larger plant connected if it causes stability or dispatch problems. --Wtshymanski (talk) 23:30, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Mmm, not quite. Like I said, "assuming the power purchaser has no limits in capacity", and assuming there are no "stepped-fixed-costs" (legal, transformers, etc), are there any other reasons why one would limit the overall plant capacity? Rehman 02:29, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh. I thought you were asking a reality-based question. Well, then the ultimate size restriction on a solar power plant's capacity is approximately 368 trillion terawatts, assuming 100% efficient solar cells, solar constant of 1300 watts per square metre at Earth's orbital radius, and free materials and labor. If you want to get more than that, you'll have to include other stars. Caution, the environmental impact statement may take centuries to complete. --Wtshymanski (talk) 02:45, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I'm serious ;) The Buruthakanda Solar Park in Sri Lanka is said to be the first commercial-scale solar plant in the country. And from what I see, their "legal limit" is 10MW, before the legal fee skyrocket. And they do have nearly unlimited land area, and have sufficient grid capacity. So I'm just curious, what other factor would lead them to limit their total capacity to less than 2MW? Or simply said, why did that plant, in their conditions, not go for 10MW, when that seems to be the best capacity for them? Rehman 04:14, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps the Japanese and Korean governments weren't willing to finance a bigger project? --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I think this is not good place to discuss, as this discussion is not realted to the improving the article. Anyway it is related to the project financing, as most of big projects (maybe all) are based on financial incentives and laws regulating them mostly include some size limits. --Jklamo (talk) 15:38, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

This question was lingering in my head since I created the "Buruthakanda Solar Park" article. I've ended up on this article talkpage by searching from "Solar power station" for this answer. So in a way, I am helping improve this article (by pointing out that these facts -- limitations in photovoltaic plant capacities -- are missing). Nevertheless, thank you both for participating. :) Regards. Rehman 18:55, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Cost has been decreasing due to the learning curve

I have just reverted the edit in which SCStrikwerda (talk · contribs) removed this text saying, "The reference provided (report on the decrease of PV cost) did not connect to or back-up the statement." I looked at the cited source and found, "A new study on the installed costs of solar photovoltaic (PV) power systems in the U.S. shows that the average cost of these systems declined significantly from 1998 to 2007". It went on to explain, "the overall decline in the installed cost of solar PV systems is mostly the result of decreases in nonmodule costs, such as the cost of labor, marketing, overhead, inverters, and the balance of systems. “This suggests that state and local PV deployment programs — which likely have a greater impact on nonmodule costs than on module prices — have been at least somewhat successful in spurring cost reductions,” states the report". So, various deployment programs have caused cost reductions, by reducing non-module costs such as labor and overheads, to reduce average installed costs significantly. Where is the problem? Is it the link between overheads and labor costs and the 'learning curve'? --Nigelj (talk) 17:25, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

WSJ resource 1.Oct.2011

Drilling for Crude Goes Solar in October 1st, 2011 WSJ; excerpt ...

This marriage of clean energy technology with one of the dirtiest forms of oil extraction says a lot about the state of the global energy industry.

U.S. solar companies are diversifying their core business of electricity generation to build the economies of scale that they hope will help them compete at a time when the industry is under pressure. The U.S. solar industry, largely financed by government incentives and venture capital, has witnessed a spate of recent high-profile bankruptcies, including Solyndra LLC, Evergreen Solar, and, on Thursday, Stirling Energy Systems Inc.

Chevron and its partner, BrightSource Energy Inc., in late August began making steam from the sunlight that drenches the San Joaquin Valley in what is by far the largest such facility in the world.

Chevron touts the unconventional pairing as a model for oil companies to save money, and solar firms to profit, without the need for government subsidies, while minimizing carbon emissions. ... The Coalinga, California solar project is the largest but not the first to create steam for oil recovery.

In February, GlassPoint Solar said it had begun producing steam, using differently configured technology, for Berry Petroleum Co. in Bakersfield, California.

In August, GlassPoint announced it would build a new, larger project in the Middle East country of Oman's national oil company.

See Solar Thermal Enhanced Oil Recovery. 97.87.29.188 (talk) 20:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Moody Sunburst.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Moody Sunburst.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:44, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

BusinessWeek resource

Solar Innovations and Solar-Powered What? (bikinis, also mentioned in October 17-23 print on page 70) by Joel Stonington and Randall Hackley ... trash bins that track real-time trash levels to help optimize pickups. The new solar movement is also helping to power entrepreneurs and designers who want to create fun little add-ons to things like sunglasses or swim goggles. 97.87.29.188 (talk) 23:35, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Sure, let's fill the encyclopedia with column-filler designed for bored travelers to read while waiting for their flight to be called. We should be able to do better than *this*. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:07, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

potential resource

Patent Watch - Airborne power station by Adam Piore Scientific American January 5, 2012 (1.2012 issue, page 23). 97.87.29.188 (talk) 01:35, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

See Spectrolab and the U.S. Army. 99.181.147.68 (talk) 04:13, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

¢/kWh vs $/watt

Is there a way to explain the difference in the measurement of PV's approach to grid parity? I know the difference between a kilowatt-hour and a watt, but the economics section's switch between ¢/kWh vs $/watt is confusing. $2 per watt seems to be incredibly expensive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.169.143.41 (talk) 15:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Grace Solar Successfully Completed the Solar Photovoltaic Project in Victoria

Grace Solar successfully accomplished the photovoltaic cooperation project in Victoria, Australia. The project which using Grace Solar pole ground mounting system covers an area of 10.8 acres, and installed capacity of 160KW.

This project belongs to an investment company which locates in the rocky area. For the poor construction condition, Grace Solar R&D team repeatedly visited, measured and calculated the construction site. On the base of sunlight source and climate condition in Victoria, Grace Solar pole ground mounting systems was applied for this project, which can optimize the design and ensure the stability and pressure resistance of mounting system.

The Deputy GM of Business Dept.Jkeon says: “whether the generating equipment and its components are easy to repair and replace is the main point the expert group particular concerned to achieve a durable period of 15-25 years.” The customized aluminum PV mounting solution provided by Grace Solar is easy to maintain and replace, what’s more, it can improve the generated power of the PV system and reduce power loss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Echoliang2012 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Table on economics and other information

User:Johnfos deleted a section which I restored last month, saying it was discussed on the Talk page. I don't find any such discussion, and anyway maybe the outcome wasn't the best. He says "Material is obsolete, is too detailed for an overview such as this, unbalances the article because it does not cover CSP, and duplicates material already found in PV sub-articles". But I think it is useful information, and once in a while I come back here looking for it. If some of it is obsolete, it should be edited, not deleted. I don't know where in the sub-articles it is. Especially this part:

The table below illustrates the calculated total cost in US cents per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated by a photovoltaic system as function of the investment cost and the efficiency, assuming some accounting parameters such as cost of capital and depreciation period. The row headings on the left show the total cost, per peak kilowatt (kWp), of a photovoltaic installation. The column headings across the top refer to the annual energy output in kilowatt-hours expected from each installed peak kilowatt. This varies by geographic region because the average insolation depends on the average cloudiness and the thickness of atmosphere traversed by the sunlight. It also depends on the path of the sun relative to the panel and the horizon.

Panels can be mounted at an angle based on latitude, or solar tracking can be utilized to access even more perpendicular sunlight, thereby raising the total energy output. The calculated values in the table reflect the total cost in cents per kilowatt-hour produced. They assume a 10% total capital cost (for instance 4% interest rate, 1% operating and maintenance cost, and depreciation of the capital outlay over 20 years).

Table showing average cost in cents/kWh over 20 years for solar power panels

	Insolation
Cost	2400 kWh/kWp•y	2200 kWh/kWp•y	2000 kWh/kWp•y	1800 kWh/kWp•y	1600 kWh/kWp•y	1400 kWh/kWp•y	1200 kWh/kWp•y	1000 kWh/kWp•y	800 kWh/kWp•y
200 $/kWp	0.8	0.9	1.0	1.1	1.3	1.4	1.7	2.0	2.5
600 $/kWp	2.5	2.7	3.0	3.3	3.8	4.3	5.0	6.0	7.5
1000 $/kWp	4.2	4.5	5.0	5.6	6.3	7.1	8.3	10.0	12.5
1400 $/kWp	5.8	6.4	7.0	7.8	8.8	10.0	11.7	14.0	17.5
1800 $/kWp	7.5	8.2	9.0	10.0	11.3	12.9	15.0	18.0	22.5
2200 $/kWp	9.2	10.0	11.0	12.2	13.8	15.7	18.3	22.0	27.5
2600 $/kWp	10.8	11.8	13.0	14.4	16.3	18.6	21.7	26.0	32.5
3000 $/kWp	12.5	13.6	15.0	16.7	18.8	21.4	25.0	30.0	37.5
3400 $/kWp	14.2	15.5	17.0	18.9	21.3	24.3	28.3	34.0	42.5
3800 $/kWp	15.8	17.3	19.0	21.1	23.8	27.1	31.7	38.0	47.5
4200 $/kWp	17.5	19.1	21.0	23.3	26.3	30.0	35.0	42.0	52.5
4600 $/kWp	19.2	20.9	23.0	25.6	28.8	32.9	38.3	46.0	57.5
5000 $/kWp	20.8	22.7	25.0	27.8	31.3	35.7	41.7	50.0	62.5

Eric Kvaalen (talk) 12:32, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 2 February 2013

solar contractors{{https://www.solarearthchoice.com/}} Aeroxima (talk) 01:02, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Done - New link inserted (they changed their url format) - Happysailor ^(Talk) 02:49, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 18 February 2013

Please add Perovo Solar Plant in the table. It is located in Ukraine, article about it here It was completed in 2011, has 100 MW power and should take 4-th place in the table. Here are the prooflinks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perovo_Solar_Park http://www.activsolar.com/products/pv-project-development/perovo-en http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-29/europe-s-biggest-solar-park-completed-with-russian-bank-debt-1-.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_photovoltaic_power_stations Avaness (talk) 20:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Done Vacation9 13:02, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Archive

For older archives see Talk:Solar energy.

I tried, but failed, to figure out how to move this as a message into the archive header box, but it should go up there somehow. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:05, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done. I guessed at what you wanted. 75.208.113.183 (talk) 12:18, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

CSP storage

The primary advantage of CSP storage is efficiency, much higher efficiency than any other form of grid storage. Pumped hydro is about 78%, batteries might be 90%, but CSP is 99% efficient, and actually only loses about 1%/day, so is even greater than 99% efficient. Whether storage or transmission is practical is more a matter of cost. Apteva (talk) 06:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Caption for the insolation diagram under "applications"

I'm a bit of a newbie so please forgive if I violate some convention. I'm troubled by the figures in the caption to the insolation diagram in the applications section. The ratio between the instantaneous power and the power per day work out to 24 Clearly this does not respect the day/night cycle. Also I vaguely remember the average insolation figure at the Earth's surface as about a kilowatt per square meter, while the caption calls it out as 150 to 300. This could be including a 15% to 30% factor for the efficiency of the PV cells, but I think it would be more honest to explicitly disclose the basis of this computation. Thank you ke3he@me.com 173.66.6.197 (talk) 02:24, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I clarified what the 18 TW was, but 1000 W/m2 is at noon on a sunny day, and on average most people get between 0.15 to 0.30 noon on a sunny day's worth over the year. Another way of expressing insolation is sun hours/day. 0.15x24 = 3.6 sun hours per day, and 0.3x24 = 7.2 sun hours/day, which is fairly generous even for the middle of Australia. Germany ranges from about 3 sun hours/day to 3.5 sun hours/day, so the range could be moved down slightly, maybe to 120 to 280, but plus or minus 30 we are already there. The efficiency of the cells is not included in the figure. Apteva (talk) 07:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Addition of information on "Solar Steam Augmentation"

Steam augmentation in coal/gas based power plants using solar field is catching global attention. Studies by NREL on Solar-Augment Potential of the US Fossil-Fired Power Plants and other similar reports are available to testify the information.

May I suggest to add this section and relevant information to this page. This will enrich the content of the same. If we have a consensus, I can add the information as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monster eagle (talk • contribs) 17:03, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I know them as hybrid or integrated solar power plants: Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center, Archimede solar power plant, Hassi R'Mel integrated solar combined cycle power station, Ain Beni Mathar Integrated Thermo Solar Combined Cycle Power Plant, Yazd integrated solar combined cycle power station, are some examples. But with the first two, there is a naming problem and some reporters report them as standalone solar plants. --Robertiki (talk) 03:39, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Distributed control systems

I just reverted the following,

"Distributed Control Systems such as Simatic PCS 7 now show great potential in the industrialised world where sufficient investment will support long term investment in renewable technologies and will release the full potential in a short period of time."

because it struck me as glorifying, investment-seeking WP:SPAM. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:33, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Moved from article

I've removed this recently added paragraph from the article:

However, a study for the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory reviewed a number of published comparisons of the cost of electricity from different sources, including nuclear, projected for 2015 through 2030, and concluded: “Solar thermal and PV are the most expensive power generation technologies.”

This content is too old (2010, things are moving very fast with PV), it is US centric (whereas this WP article has a global focus), and it is not very authoritative (just a report, which received "minimal editorial review at NREL"). We need to do better than this.

When time permits, I plan to substitute updated information from the 2013 refereed journal article: "Re-considering the economics of photovoltaic power", M Bazilian, I Onyeji, M Liebreich, I MacGill, J Chase, J Shah, D Gielen, ... Renewable Energy 53, 329-338. -- Johnfos (talk) 09:21, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Jonfos - You should not delete a WP:RS on your (so far) unsupported assertion that it has become outdated in the past 3 ½ years. On the contrary, it is good Wikipedia protocol that properly cited material should remain until it is updated with better sources. This is a technical study done for and published by a well known research institution (and NREL is hardly biased against solar) which carefully cites its sources. I put it in to balance the extensive unsourced assertions by Professor Quiggen published in a non-technical web magazine. The article by Quiggen can hardly be described as a “study” (although the Wiki article mischaracterizes it as such). Unlike the NREL source, there is no way of verifying the assertions in the cited magazine article by Quiggen. I have to wonder why you quickly deleted the quote from the NREL source, while not bothering the preceding paragraphs based on an entirely inferior source. Can you have any rational objection to also deleting the Quiggen article? Regards. Plazak (talk) 12:03, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I came back to this page to add Globalize and Update tags to the top of the article in the light of my previous comment. A lot has happened in the last 3 years with renewables, often in developing countries; things are moving faster than anyone imagined. Please do not take my comments personally, I didn't even mention your name. And I did not delete the content, I brought it to Talk for discussion as my edit summary said. But if you are offended, I apologise. In terms of the energy economics expert, Prof John Quiggin, I would suggest visiting User talk:John Quiggin and asking him to join the discussion here. Johnfos (talk) 09:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

I have been through the 2013 "Re-considering the economics of photovoltaic power", review article and distilled the following info:

Solar photovoltaics power generation has long been seen as a clean energy technology which draws upon the planet’s most plentiful and widely distributed renewable energy source – the sun. The technology is “inherently elegant” in that the direct conversion of sunlight to electricity occurs without any moving parts or environmental emissions during operation. It is well proven, as photovoltaic systems have now been used for fifty years in specialised applications, and grid-connected systems have been in use for over twenty years.

There have been recent major changes in the underlying costs, industry structure and market prices of solar photovoltaics technology, but gaining a coherent picture of the shifts occurring across the industry value chain globally is a challenge. This is due to: “the rapidity of cost and price changes, the complexity of the PV supply chain, which involves a large number of manufacturing processes, the balance of system (BOS) and installation costs associated with complete PV systems, the choice of different distribution channels, and differences between regional markets within which PV is being deployed”. Further complexities result from the many different policy support initiatives that have been put in place to facilitate photovoltaics commercialisation in various countries.

The PV industry has seen dramatic drops in module prices since 2008. In late 2011, factory-gate prices for crystalline-silicon photovoltaic modules dropped below the $1.00/W mark. The $1.00/W installed cost, is often regarded in the PV industry as marking the achievement of grid parity for PV. These reductions have taken many stakeholders, including industry analysts, by surprise, and perceptions of current solar power economics often lags behind reality. Some stakeholders still have the perspective that solar PV remains too costly on an unsubsidized basis to compete with conventional generation options. Yet technological advancements, manufacturing process improvements, and industry re-structuring, mean that further price reductions are likely in coming years.

Now it is a case of sensibly integrating this content into this article and the photovoltaics article too... Johnfos (talk) 13:14, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

References

Need for updated information

"General Electric's Chief Engineer predicted grid parity without subsidies in sunny parts of the United States by around 2015. Other companies predict an earlier date:[83] the cost of solar power will be below grid parity for more than half of residential customers and 10% of commercial customers in the OECD, as long as grid electricity prices do not decrease through 2010.[79]"

In a field which is fast moving predictions made 5 years in advance 4 years ago should be updated as to whether they are on track.

The implementation of solar power through Feed In Tariffs has caused a majority of UK installations to face south causing a significant peak of available power between 11am and 2pm or so rather than better distributed throughout the day, and therefore less useful in reducing need for conventional power stations. The network not having been intended to be used with distributed generation can have problems on account of high voltages experienced when the sun is shining.

These issues arguably should be addressed in the context of Wikipedia's lead as the source of authoritative information. Dollist (talk) 19:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

kWh

Comment is invited at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Proposal on the question of whether kWh (with no space and no dot) is an acceptable unit symbol for use in articles, as opposed to restricting the choices to kW·h or kW h (i.e. with either a space or a dot). EEng (talk) 22:47, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

SolaRoad, world's first PV bike path

Calling PV enthusiasts and interested eds, please expand SolaRoad! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Solar power. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100813163816/http://www.solardev.com:80/SEIA-lightworld.php to http://www.solardev.com/SEIA-lightworld.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080908113041/http://www.photon-consulting.com/en/true_cost_2007/summary.htm to http://www.photon-consulting.com/en/true_cost_2007/summary.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121021172839/http://www.dsireusa.org/solar/solarpolicyguide/?id=17 to http://www.dsireusa.org/solar/solarpolicyguide/?id=17

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:31, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 April 2016

At the end of the forecasts paragraph, add In 2015, analysts predicted that one million homes in the US will have solar power by the end of 2016. Wild Irish Rose 2 (talk) 21:56, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:07, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 18 July 2016

In headlines of the article, insert this.

For total power emitted by the Sun, see Solar luminosity.

165.132.24.162 (talk) 09:17, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Done MediaKill13 (talk) 12:14, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 external links on Solar power. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721150750/http://www.ese.iitb.ac.in/activities/solarpower/ausra.pdf to http://www.ese.iitb.ac.in/activities/solarpower/ausra.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080910052052/http://www.solarpaces.org/Library/docs/CSP_Brochure_2001.pdf to http://www.solarpaces.org/Library/docs/CSP_Brochure_2001.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ren21.net/Portals/0/documents/Resources/GSR/2014/GSR2014_full%20report_low%20res.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130226222413/http://www.epia.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Competing_Full_Report.pdf to http://www.epia.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Competing_Full_Report.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110811064518/http://ajelp.com/documents/GlennonFinal.pdf to http://ajelp.com/documents/GlennonFinal.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy14osti/62558.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.db.com/cr/en/docs/solar_report_full_length.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/TechnologyRoadmapSolarPhotovoltaicEnergy_2014edition.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608081013/http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=9013609&contentId=7005395 to http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=9013609&contentId=7005395
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029191313/http://www.bp.com/popupimage.do?img_path=liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/reports_and_publications/frontiers/STAGING/local_assets/images/fr19solar_parity570x417.jpg%20&alt_tag=Graphic%20about%20grid%20parity,%20when%20the%20cost%20of%20solar%20energy%20equals%20that%20of%20grid%20electricity to http://www.bp.com/popupimage.do?img_path=liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/reports_and_publications/frontiers/STAGING/local_assets/images/fr19solar_parity570x417.jpg%20&alt_tag=Graphic%20about%20grid%20parity,%20when%20the%20cost%20of%20solar%20energy%20equals%20that%20of%20grid%20electricity
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120725015516/http://www.austinenergy.com:80/Energy%20Efficiency/Programs/Rebates/solar%20rebates/index.htm to http://www.austinenergy.com/Energy%20Efficiency/Programs/Rebates/Solar%20Rebates/index.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130706133417/http://www.cnbc.com/id/32551044/site/14081545 to http://www.cnbc.com/id/32551044/site/14081545
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.oja-services.nl/iea-pvps/isr/22.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722030340/http://iga.igg.cnr.it/documenti/IGA/Fridleifsson_et_al_IPCC_Geothermal_paper_2008.pdf to http://iga.igg.cnr.it/documenti/IGA/Fridleifsson_et_al_IPCC_Geothermal_paper_2008.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/downloads-englisch/pdf-files-englisch/photovoltaics-report-slides.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.postfreemarket.net/pdf/japan1.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150302015428/http://www.solarserver.com:80/solar-magazine/solar-news/current/2015/kw03/vikram-solar-commissions-indias-first-floating-pv-plant.html to http://www.solarserver.com/solar-magazine/solar-news/current/2015/kw03/vikram-solar-commissions-indias-first-floating-pv-plant.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080621052054/http://www.electricitystorage.org/tech/technologies_technologies_pumpedhydro.htm to http://www.electricitystorage.org/tech/technologies_technologies_pumpedhydro.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:41, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Citation Needed Mark

Hello, I am new to editing Wikipedia and trying to get some experience doing edits so I can add technical information and data for certain subjects that I will be writing technical articles for such as chemical identification and storage, the various containers for large-scale storage of industry-used chemicals, among others.

I do not have authority yet to edit this document, (although it is my goal to get to that point), but I have the source and information for the missing citation in this article and I wanted to contribute to fixing it.

The source is a book: Crises of the 21st Century: Start Drilling-the Year 2020 Is Coming Fast Author: John Durbin Husher Publisher: iUniverse Date: 2009

Thank you, A. S. Eccles (talk) 16:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi A. S. Eccles, welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for providing this source, do you know what page or pages are relevant here? Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 21:15, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. No, I am new to Wikipedia and am not sure what you mean by "what page or pages are relevant here?" A. S. Eccles (talk) 23:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I mean what page of the book is relevant. e.g. the citation is from p. 239. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 09:51, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Okay, sorry for the misunderstanding on my part. The applicable page number is pg. 217. Thanks A. S. Eccles (talk) 16:05, 17 January 2017 (UTC) Thanks, and this is for the citation needed marker in the "Feed-in tariffs (FIT)" section right? Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 16:13, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it is specifically for that sentence with the [citation needed] mark ending in "return on investment is better". The section with "Feed-in tariffs" technically needs a different citation all to its own as that information comes from another source. The source for the "Feed-in tariffs" section is also a book:

Title: Alternative Energy Technologies: Opportunities and Markets

Author: Robert N. Castellano

Publisher: Archives contemporaines

Date: 2012

Relevant Page: 23

A. S. Eccles (talk) 17:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2017

100000 watts can power a house for a whole day Elliot Krantz (talk) 19:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

What house? Not done, please provide a WP:reliable source and more detail. Vsmith (talk) 20:25, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

A heads up, Elliot Krantz has yet to produce one serious edit. Dougmcdonell (talk) 00:49, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 October 2017

Joeyenriquez (talk) 06:40, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. SparklingPessimist ^{Scream at me!} 07:20, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2017

CHANGE

Photovoltaics were initially solely used as a source of electricity for small and medium-sized applications, from the calculator powered by a single solar cell to remote homes powered by an off-grid rooftop PV system.

TO

Photovoltaics were initially solely used as a source of electricity for small and medium-sized applications, from the calculator powered by a single solar cell to remote homes powered by an off-grid rooftop PV system. This highlights an advantage of solar over other renewable energy sources, such as wind, water or geothermal power, partially offsetting its generally higher cost: namely that light can be readily, reliably and relatively inobtrusively captured close to the point of power consumption when there is sufficient surface area, avoiding moving parts and the additional costs of a power distribution network, particularly when paired with rechargable batteries.

Not done for now: Please provide a source for this. ToThAc (talk) 16:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2017

Good Afternoon,

I am looking to make a small contribution to this page after doing research. I would like to add a small portion to the Concentrated Solar Power, and Solar Renewable Energy Tax Credits (SRECs) sections. I have listed and cited my addition below.

Respectfully, Evan

Section: Concentrated Solar Power One technique used by solar power towers is the use of an insulated closed system to produce molten salt. Molten salt contains more energy than that of water vapor and is channeled through the system to generate electricity via steam driven turbines. Molten salt storage units, often referred to as molten-salt batteries, are capable of maintaining energy production for up to 16 hours without additional input. [2]

Section: Solar Renewable Energy Tax Credits (SRECs) The Energy Policy Act of 2005 was signed into law by President George W. Bush. The policy allowed investors of solar technology to deduct up to 30% of the costs involved with installation and materials from their taxable income. One downfall to this plan is the bi-annual renewal of the legislation. An average CSP plant takes approximately 4-6 years to build, but the lack of guaranteed tax reductions over the lifespan of the project deterred investors. [1]

[1] Schmidt, C. (2008). Legislation: Solar Tax Credit Loses Energy. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, 116(9), A380.

[2] Wright, M., & Hearps, P. (2011, August). Australian Sustainable Energy: Zero Carbon Australia Stationary Energy Plan. Melbourne Energy Institute. Retrieved from http://media.bze.org.au/ZCA2020_Stationary_Energy_Report_v1.pdf Epais (talk) 05:29, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Already done Sections on both are already in the article. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:02, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Solar power. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20060903112910/http://www.solar.unlv.edu/projects/eldorado.php to http://www.solar.unlv.edu/projects/eldorado.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714181024/http://eng.cpicorp.com.cn/e_corporateNews/201312/t20131218_227495.htm to http://eng.cpicorp.com.cn/e_corporateNews/201312/t20131218_227495.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608081020/http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9019305&contentId=7035199 to http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9019305&contentId=7035199
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bp.com/popupimage.do?img_path=liveassets%2Fbp_internet%2Fglobalbp%2Fglobalbp_uk_english%2Freports_and_publications%2Ffrontiers%2FSTAGING%2Flocal_assets%2Fimages%2Ffr19solar_parity570x417.jpg%20&alt_tag=Graphic%20about%20grid%20parity%2C%20when%20the%20cost%20of%20solar%20energy%20equals%20that%20of%20grid%20electricity
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090603195611/http://eng.shirasol.co.il/Approved-Feed-in-tariff-in-Israel.htm to http://www.eng.shirasol.co.il/Approved-Feed-in-tariff-in-Israel.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120726034440/http://www.portablesolarpanels-forsale.com/solar-energy-facts/ to http://www.portablesolarpanels-forsale.com/solar-energy-facts

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:27, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Solar power. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150704145824/http://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/pdf/Energy-economics/statistical-review-2015/bp-statistical-review-of-world-energy-2015-electricity-section.pdf to http://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/pdf/Energy-economics/statistical-review-2015/bp-statistical-review-of-world-energy-2015-electricity-section.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120811072202/http://www.energex.com.au/sustainability/sustainability-rewards-programs/what-is-peak-demand to http://www.energex.com.au/sustainability/sustainability-rewards-programs/what-is-peak-demand
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722030340/http://iga.igg.cnr.it/documenti/IGA/Fridleifsson_et_al_IPCC_Geothermal_paper_2008.pdf to http://iga.igg.cnr.it/documenti/IGA/Fridleifsson_et_al_IPCC_Geothermal_paper_2008.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.solarserver.com/solar-magazine/solar-news/current/2015/kw03/vikram-solar-commissions-indias-first-floating-pv-plant.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:32, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

add images

maybe we can add this icon to the page https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_energy_icon.png --Tommaso.sansone91 (talk) 11:34, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Lost citation to Let It Shine (Perlin) in the article

The footnote references to Perlin (starting with citation #6) don't include a full citation. It probably got edited out by accident. The ref appears to be to John Perlin's book, Let It Shine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.255.25.187 (talk) 22:06, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2020

Grid Tied Solar power plant without net metering

A Grid-connected solar power plant can be worked without net-metering . Net-metering is required to counts the amount of power Imported from the grid and from total imported power it will subtract the amount of power exporting to the gird. So it has nothing to do with the performance of the plant. When you connect grid-tied solar power plant without net metering, Your electricity bills will start rising in place of reducing. An ordinary electricity meter only measures the amount of power flow through it, irrespective of either you are importing or exporting the power. So all the surplus power your solar power plant generates will be added to your electricity bill. On the other hand, Net-meter counts the amount of power importing from the grid and from total imported power it will subtract the amount of power exporting to the gird. Payperwatt (talk) 10:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Not going to add advertising masquerading as a ref. creffett (talk) 14:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

References

Remove old maps under the 'Productivity by location' heading (November 2018)

I propose that the maps that are displayed under this heading are removed, as more recent maps already exist under the links article on Solar irradiance, and it seems duplicatory to have them included in this high-level article on solar power. Furthermore, some example solar maps are already included as part of the article higher up. If the maps should remain, then they should at least be updated to match those available under Solar irradiance, as these maps are much more recent (albeit from the same provider of resource data, Solargis). O-Jay (talk) 22:06, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

No lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.36.10.244 (talk) 10:45, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Solar power (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 00:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Solar power/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Summary style

As there are now detailed articles (such as Photovoltaic power station, Lists of solar power stations, Solar power forecasting) I feel this article needs to be edited to be more of a summary. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Specifically it no longer meets good article criteria such as 3. b) "stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)". I hope one of the many people I have notified will respond as it would be a pity to downgrade such an important topic.

There are other problems which if not obvious I can detail here if anyone responds - if no response within a week or so it would be a waste of time to detail the other problems as the above is sufficient to show the article needs improvement.

So I think there is a fair amount of work here but hope someone has time. Chidgk1 (talk) 08:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC) Chidgk1 (talk) 08:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I looked at this with an eye on fixing it, but I feel there is too much work. Better to delist it for now. Aircorn (talk) 11:32, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

life-cycle greenhouse emissions section

This section needs some additional information:

"The life-cycle greenhouse-gas emissions of solar power are in the range of 22 to 46 gram (g) per kilowatt-hour (kWh) depending on if solar thermal or solar PV is being analyzed, respectively."

I don't have any details on solar thermal, but the value 46g for solar PV is only a median figure, with (according to IPCC 2014) values going from 18g to 180g. For many European countries, the correct value would be slightly above 100g. So adding a line about the importance of geographical location would be very welcome. It makes a huge environmental difference. Since the article is locked, I have no idea about how to do this. Roshambo32 (talk) 13:42, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

there don't seem to be any restrictions on editing the article now - please go ahead Chidgk1 (talk) 17:18, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

International solar alliance

There is no mention of the international solar alliance. BORAZINE (talk) 11:28, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

there don't seem to be any restrictions on editing the article now - please go ahead Chidgk1 (talk) 17:18, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2021

I suggest to reference this paper which in a study of several hundred global PV farms found a median land use energy efficiency of 5%.\ https://www.pnas.org/content/118/26/e2015025118/tab-article-info

This should go in the section about land use efficiency in the article. 84.141.86.150 (talk) 11:53, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. We don't merely cite a paper because it exists and is related to the topic. If this is pertinent, then you should suggest a precise sentence which should be added, and should ideally quote the relevant part of the source so that the information can be compared. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:14, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Missing language links

I've noticed we are missing some language links in this article. Personally I'm concerned about the link to the Portuguese page: "Energia solar". It seems I'm unable to link it. Could anyone with better credentials take a look? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gianmariot2 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Gianmariot2 https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energia_solar is linked to solar energy which seems correct. As far as I know you cannot link to 2 English articles. You could consider splitting off part of https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energia_solar_fotovoltaica Chidgk1 (talk) 17:04, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Energy payback section

The section was way out of date and I cannot see how it is relevant so I boldly deleted it. Feel free to undo and update and explain why relevant. It was

The energy payback time (EPBT) of a power generating system is the time required to generate as much energy as is consumed during production and lifetime operation of the system. Due to improving production technologies the payback time has been decreasing constantly since the introduction of PV systems in the energy market. In 2000 the energy payback time of PV systems was estimated as 8 to 11 years and in 2006 this was estimated to be 1.5 to 3.5 years for crystalline silicon PV systems and 1–1.5 years for thin film technologies (S. Europe). These figures fell to 0.75–3.5 years in 2013, with an average of about 2 years for crystalline silicon PV and CIS systems.

Another economic measure, closely related to the energy payback time, is the energy returned on energy invested (EROEI) or energy return on investment (EROI), which is the ratio of electricity generated divided by the energy required to build and maintain the equipment. (This is not the same as the economic return on investment (ROI), which varies according to local energy prices, subsidies available and metering techniques.) With expected lifetimes of 30 years, the EROEI of PV systems are in the range of 10 to 30, thus generating enough energy over their lifetimes to reproduce themselves many times (6–31 reproductions) depending on what type of material, balance of system (BOS), and the geographic location of the system.

Chidgk1 (talk) 15:08, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

References

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 14 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dylankapadia98.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Cold War Science

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2022 and 6 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dc211 (article contribs).

Hello Emilyenguyen - I guess you are working together - unless you can generalise it to include other countries perhaps you could consider moving the text you just added about installation problems to Solar power in the United States as it might fit better there. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:09, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Structure of the article

I'd like to bring this article back up to GA, but I've got some trouble getting started. The article covers both CSP and PV. With the current dominance of the latter technology, I wonder how we should weight the two technologies in this article. I was thinking that to limit overlap with photovoltaics, but recognizing that PV is dominant, we should decidate about 2/3 to 3/4 to PV.

I think it would also be good to remove the section on emerging technologies. The section is quite out of date, and recent literature on emerging trends is highly technical, and may fit better into photovoltaics. The development section could mention new technologies in strict summary style. Any objections? Femke (talk) 10:19, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hybrid

Could probably be simplified to most common presumably pv with wind hydro or csp Chidgk1 (talk) 18:56, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Also batteries Chidgk1 (talk) 18:59, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely, most of these are very uncommon. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:21, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

The former text is below - other editors feel free to put back anything you think necessary.Chidgk1 (talk) 18:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

A hybrid system combines (C)PV and CSP with one another or with other forms of generation such as diesel, wind and biogas. The combined generation may enable the system to vary power output with demand, or at least smooth the solar power fluctuation and the consumption of non-renewable fuel. Hybrid systems are most often found on islands.

CPV/CSP system

A novel solar CPV/CSP hybrid system has been proposed, combining concentrator photovoltaics with the non-PV technology of concentrated solar power, or also known as concentrated solar thermal.

Integrated solar combined cycle (ISCC) system

The Hassi R'Mel power station in Algeria is an example of combining CSP with a gas turbine, where a 25-megawatt CSP-parabolic trough array supplements a much larger 130 MW combined cycle gas turbine plant. Another example is the Yazd power station in Iran.

Photovoltaic thermal hybrid solar collector (PVT)

Also known as hybrid PV/T, convert solar radiation into thermal and electrical energy. Such a system combines a solar (PV) module with a solar thermal collector in a complementary way.

Concentrated photovoltaics and thermal (CPVT)

A concentrated photovoltaic thermal hybrid system is similar to a PVT system. It uses concentrated photovoltaics (CPV) instead of conventional PV technology, and combines it with a solar thermal collector.

PV diesel system

It combines a photovoltaic system with a diesel generator. Combinations with other renewables are possible and include wind turbines.

PV-thermoelectric system

Thermoelectric, or "thermovoltaic" devices convert a temperature difference between dissimilar materials into an electric current. Solar cells use only the high frequency part of the radiation, while the low frequency heat energy is wasted. Several patents about the use of thermoelectric devices in tandem with solar cells have been filed.

The idea is to increase the efficiency of the combined solar/thermoelectric system to convert the solar radiation into useful electricity.

Cheaper than batteries

There is a lot of hydro worldwide, and adding solar panels on or around existing hydro reservoirs is particularly useful, because hydro is usually more flexible than wind and cheaper than batteries, and existing power lines can sometimes be used.

Neither source mentions the word battery. Please be more careful with text-source integrity. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:16, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

OK yes I have to admit I wrote it quickly from my own knowledge and then hastily threw in the cites. Have added battery cite. If you or anyone else finds any other problems with the section please let me know. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:26, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Should any of these articles be merged or excerpted?

I wonder whether any of these articles should be merged or excerpted here or with each other:

Concentrated solar power

Solar energy

Solar thermal energy

Solar thermal collector

Solar thermal enhanced oil recovery

Solar water heating

Solar cell

Theory of solar cells

Solar cell efficiency

Thin-film solar cell

Perovskite solar cell

Organic solar cell

Third-generation photovoltaic cell

Multi-junction solar cell

(there are more articles on types of solar cells - see List of types of solar cells)

Photoelectric effect

Photovoltaic effect

Photovoltaics

Intermediate band photovoltaics

Concentrator photovoltaics

Applications of photovoltaics

List of solar-powered products

Growth of photovoltaics

Financial incentives for photovoltaics

Photovoltaic system

Photovoltaic system performance

Soiling (solar energy)

Photovoltaic power station ("solar farm" redirects here. My attempt to rename this to "Solar power plant" was unsuccessful)

Photovoltaic thermal hybrid solar collector

Thermophotovoltaic

Solar panel

Solar module quality assurance (whereas "solar module" itself redirects to solar panel)

Smart module

AC module

Solar inverter

Solar micro-inverter

Three-phase micro-inverter

Intelligent hybrid inverter

Solar cable

Solar tracker

Grid-connected photovoltaic power system

Utility-scale solar

Rooftop solar power

---

For example maybe:

Solar micro-inverter and Three-phase micro-inverter and Intelligent hybrid inverter merge to Solar inverter

Solar cable merge to Photovoltaic system

Soiling (solar energy) merge to Photovoltaic system performance

Photovoltaic power station merge to Utility-scale solar

Grid-connected photovoltaic power system (which says little about utility scale) merge to Rooftop solar power

Solar module quality assurance and Smart module and AC module merge to solar panel

Applications of photovoltaics merge with List of solar-powered products (not sure how as one is list and other article)

Financial incentives for photovoltaics merge to Growth of photovoltaics

Intermediate band photovoltaics merge to Photovoltaic effect

Chidgk1 (talk) 08:17, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

I would avoid using excerpts, especially for a high visibility article such as Solar power. Also most of the listed articles are way too detailed for this general article. --Ita140188 (talk) 09:57, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

There are too many proposals here. I have some ideas of merges / drastic shortenings to reduce the overlap among the top-level articles. I think excerpt can work for high-visibility articles, but not excerpts of leads (which are unstable/poorly cited, and written in a style unsuitable for the body of articles). Will get back later with two proposals. Femke (talk) 17:40, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Have proposed the 4 part merges at Talk:Solar_inverter#Merger_proposal and Talk:Solar_panel#Merger_proposal Chidgk1 (talk) 17:22, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Done the first one Chidgk1 (talk) 14:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

and the other Chidgk1 (talk) 07:29, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Merged solar cable to photovoltaic system Chidgk1 (talk) 17:27, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Content moved from climate change mitigation - useful?

I am moving this content from climate change mitigation. Is any of this useful for this article or is it all already in there? Also, I am still a bit confused what would go here and what would go to solar energy.

Solar energy

Main article: Solar energy

The 150 MW Andasol solar power station is a commercial parabolic trough solar thermal power plant, located in Spain. The Andasol plant uses tanks of molten salt to store solar energy so that it can continue generating electricity for 7.5 hours after the sun has stopped shining.

• Solar photovoltaics (PV) has become the cheapest way to produce electric energy in many regions of the world, with production costs down to 0.015 US$/KWh in desert regions. The growth of photovoltaics is exponential and has doubled every three years since the 1990s. In the summer, PV power generation follows the daily demand curve.
• A different technology is concentrated solar power (CSP) using mirrors or lenses to concentrate a large area of sunlight onto a receiver. With CSP, the energy can be stored for a few hours, providing supply in the evening. This can outweigh the higher costs compared to PV.
• Solar water heating has doubled between 2010 and 2019. Total installed solar water heating systems provide a capacity of 501 GW_th, with 67% of the global share in China. Photovoltaic thermal hybrid solar collectors combine PV and solar heating.
• Floating solar
• Solar panels over canals
• Agrivoltaics

EMsmile (talk) 22:38, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

References

EMsmile (talk) 22:38, 11 November 2022 (UTC)