Solar vs nuclear: Giving solar a = chance

Home =
About
- Who=20 are we?
- Our = Contributors=20
- Past = Contributors=20
- Guest = Writers=20
Contact=20
RSS
Archives=20
Subscribe =

Categorised | Features, Lead=20 Story

Solar vs nuclear: Giving solar a chance

By=20 Deborah Loh | 07 July 2010 |=20 Read=20 [9] Comments | 3D"Print Print This Post

(Solar panel by Ayla87; nuclear smoke by = caterox /=20 sxc.hu)

WHEN the government announced plans for a 1,000MW nuclear plant, solar power is often dismissed as too = costly to=20 implement on a large scale. However, developments in the photovoltaic (PV)=20 industry suggest that with planning, it=E2=80=99s not necessarily = prohibitive.

For certain, solar power alone cannot displace fossil fuels as an = energy=20 source. But it is possible for a mix of solar and other renewable energy = sources=20 like biomass, biogas and hydropower to replace fossil fuels, says Ahmad = Hadri=20 Haris. He is the national project leader of the Malaysia Building Integrated Photovoltaic project, = and a=20 renewable energy technical adviser to the Malaysian government.

The question for Malaysia is whether it can increase its use of PV = and other=20 renewable energy sources before turning to contentious energy sources = like nuclear. Can funds and PV technology be made = available for=20 Malaysia to explore and harness solar power? If yes, does the government = have=20 the political will to give solar a chance?

Solar potential

Shamsudin

According to Malaysian=20 Photovoltaic Industry Association president Shamsudin Khalid, the = cost of PV cells has dropped 40% in the last 10 years. = Indeed, the PV=20 industry is growing, and Malaysia is currently the world=E2=80=99s = fourth largest PV=20 modules producer. Shamsudin says Malaysia exported 784MW or RM1 billion = worth of=20 PV modules in 2009.

Despite such advancements, there isn=E2=80=99t much of a domestic PV = market.=20 Currently, only 1MW of electricity is solar-derived, mainly by = participants of=20 the Suria 1000=20 pilot programme. It=E2=80=99s a mere fraction of the total 1% or 30MW of = electricity=20 currently generated from renewable energy sources. This is far short of the = 9th Malaysia Plan=E2=80=99s target for renewable = energy sources to=20 contribute 350MW to total energy supply by 2010. Under the = 10^th=20 Malaysia Plan (10MP) from 2011 to 2015, the government wants 5.5% of = total=20 electricity to come from renewable energy sources.

But what is the government doing to ensure these targets are met?

In 2009, the Malaysian Photovoltaic Industry Association submitted to = the Energy, Green = Technology and=20 Water Ministry a five-year plan to increase PV contribution to = national=20 energy at 2,600MW per annum. This well exceeds the unmet 2010 target for = renewable energy sources to contribute 350MW to total energy supply.

The plan involves installing PV panels on the rooftops of homes, and=20 commercial, industrial and even government buildings. Electricity = generated by=20 the PV cells would immediately be fed to the national grid. At the same = time,=20 electricity is drawn from the grid for consumption. Through the Feed-in Tariff (FiT) mechanism, home or building = owners can=20 sell their green electricity to the grid at a higher price than the = electricity=20 they buy, as incentive for using the technology.

=E2=80=9CIt=E2=80=99s passive income for home and building owners. In = countries where FiT is=20 implemented at a preferential rate for green energy producers, the cost = of PV=20 installation is recoverable in 10 years,=E2=80=9D Shamsudin tells = The Nut Graph=20 in an interview in Shah Alam.

PV cells have a warranty of up to 25 years, he adds.

There is potential to generate more electricity using rooftop-mounted = PV=20 panels as there are about five million houses nationwide, according to=20 Shamsudin. This doesn=E2=80=99t include commercial and industrial roof = space.

Solar panels on the roof of a private = residence in=20 Sungai Buloh, Selangor (Source: mbipv.net.my)

The Malaysia Building Integrated Photovoltaic project, meanwhile, is = in talks=20 with independent power producers about using PV to = complement gas=20 fuel. This combination is already used by US power utilities. = =E2=80=9CIt=E2=80=99s a viable=20 proposition because PV is getting cheaper and is bankable. But only = provided gas=20 subsidies for power generation are gradually removed,=E2=80=9D Ahmad = Hadri says in a=20 phone interview.

Financing

The Malaysian Photovoltaic Industry Association=E2=80=99s five-year = plan to produce=20 2,600MW per year from rooftop PV systems would require an estimated = RM5.6=20 billion on credit through various sources. This would include the FiT = scheme and=20 commercial lending, says Shamsudin. A small 3kW rooftop system would = cost around=20 RM60,000 to buy and install, he says.

=E2=80=9CFrom [the association]=E2=80=99s talks with the banking = industry, there are=20 indications that development and commercial banks are willing to do so, = as it is=20 already practised in other countries,=E2=80=9D notes Shamsudin.

Energy specialist Asfaazam Kasbani says bank lending for home PV = systems is=20 already available for newer housing projects, such as in certain = developments in=20 Putrajaya and Shah Alam. Consumers, however, are still wary of the high = capital=20 cost.

But in principle, FiT contracts are reliable and bankable, says = Asfaazam, who=20 is assistant resident representative of the United Nations Development = Programme=20 Malaysia.

The guaranteed funding is drawn from increased electricity tariffs. = In other=20 words, the higher price at which a power provider were to buy = electricity from=20 green energy producers will be funded through tariff hikes. This makes = FiT,=20 developed about 10 years ago in Germany, the most popular of funding = mechanisms=20 for green energy because it involves consumer and private sector = funding.

Asfaazam. Pic courtesy of Asfaazam = Kasbani.

=E2=80=9CFiT quickens the move towards grid parity, whereby the cost of renewable = energy-generated=20 electricity will be equivalent to or cheaper than fossil fuel,=E2=80=9D = Asfaazam says in=20 a phone interview.

The government plans to introduce FiT in 2011 under the Renewable=20 Energy Bill to be tabled in Parliament by the end of 2010. The = recently=20 unveiled 10MP also includes the =E2=80=9Cintroduction of the FiT of 1% to be incorporated into the electricity = tariffs of=20 consumers to support the development of [renewable energy]=E2=80=9D.

What this means is that a gradual increase in electricity rates = amounting to=20 1% over the next five years will fund renewable energy-related = activities. This=20 includes Tenaga Nasional Bhd=E2=80=99s purchase of green energy from = solar and other=20 sources, Asfaazam explains.

Though consumers may balk at paying more for electricity, Shamsudin = says=20 introducing FiT will be good for the overall economy because of job = creation and=20 export growth.

=E2=80=9CFiT will create a domestic PV market. A local market can = drive expansion of=20 other solar component sectors and markets, like the building of = larger-scale PV=20 power plants that can help Malaysia achieve a higher output of green = energy in a=20 shorter time. We can meet our renewable energy goals faster,=E2=80=9D = Shamsudin=20 says.

Comparing options

The problem with solar, as with other renewable energy sources, is = its low=20 output at high cost compared to fossil fuels. Asfaazam=E2=80=99s = estimate of a=20 ringgit-for-output comparison is roughly RM25,000 worth of PV systems = for every=20 1kW capacity. That=E2=80=99s just about enough to power one = air-conditioner and four=20 lights. Nuclear is the only alternative that can match the output of = fossil fuel=20 or mega hydroelectric projects.

According to Ahmad Hadri, five times the capacity of solar power is = required=20 to generate an equivalent amount of energy from nuclear power. Further, = a=20 nuclear plant when up and running can generate electricity almost = continuously,=20 whereas solar technology is most efficient only during peak daylight = hours.

Neither nuclear nor solar is cheap, but Ahmad Hadri says solar has=20 environmental and financing benefits over nuclear in the long run as the = price=20 of PV gets cheaper over time.

=E2=80=9CIn parts of Europe and the US where PV usage has gone = commercial and where=20 there is no petrol subsidy, the price of PV will be on par with fossil = fuel in=20 the next few years,=E2=80=9D he says.

Whereas for nuclear, commercial lending is unavailable, and continued = high=20 spending is required for maintenance and uranium imports.

Ahmad Hadri (Source: mbipv.net.my)

=E2=80=9CMalaysia=E2=80=99s long-term goal in energy planning should = not just be about energy=20 security but energy independence, where we won=E2=80=99t have to rely on = imported fuel=20 sources,=E2=80=9D notes Ahmad Hadri.

Environmentally, too, nuclear power is not totally carbon-free as = claimed by=20 its proponents, he adds. =E2=80=9CIt is carbon-free during plant = operations, but people=20 forget that emissions are released during the mining and enrichment = process of=20 uranium, and in the process of de-commissioning the waste,=E2=80=9D he = says.

Democratising energy

For Malaysia to maximise its renewable energy potential, electricity = tariffs=20 will have to reflect the true cost of production and supply. Fossil fuel = subsidies will have to be gradually cut. Consumer habits will have to = change by=20 reducing consumption and using energy-efficient appliances.

It sounds like a burden to the public, but Ahmad Hadri says FiT, = while=20 providing consumers passive income, is better in the long run by = distributing=20 the cost of power production, as well as income among the public. = Everyone can=20 generate their own power and contribute to national supply. Whereas = building a=20 single nuclear or fossil fuel power plant would concentrate costs and = spending=20 in the hands of the state and select contractors.

These issues are some of the things the government must address=20 transparently. Already, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has promised a comprehensive study on = the=20 government=E2=80=99s proposed nuclear plant. From what the experts are = saying, that=20 comprehensive study must clearly include giving solar a chance.

"No=20 solution to nuclear waste"=20
= Going=20 nuclear: Convincing the public

The Nut Graph needs your support

=20 =20 =20 =20 =20

Tags: Deborah Loh, Energy Green Technology and Water Ministry, Malaysian Photovoltaic Industry Association, Najib = Razak, Renewable=20 Energy Bill, Shamsudin Khalid, Tenaga=20 Nasional, fossils, nuclear, solar

Also in Today's Headlines:

9 Responses to =E2=80=9CSolar vs nuclear: Giving solar a = chance=E2=80=9D

Sean says:

July=20 7, 2010 at 9:59 am

=E2=80=9C2,600MW per year=E2=80=9D

Units! My eyes=E2=80=A6 is this 2600MW average over a year, or = 2600MWh in one=20 year?

I think the photo of the Selangor roof might be leading people into = a false=20 sense of how much power solar panels produce. My terraced house has a = plan=20 roof area of about 70m^2. According to Wikipedia=E2=80=99s=20 insolation article, I can expect an average power input of about = 240W/m^2.=20 At an efficiency of 10%, my roof would be good for 1.6kW (against a = monthly=20 average demand of about 1kW) if it was in total shade of the solar = array. A pimple-sized installation might look nice, but = it=E2=80=99s not going to=20 make your power problems go away.

I wonder if there=E2=80=99s some kind of house owner/private = partnership=20 arrangement possible under which house owners provide their sunny roof = space=20 in exchange for free (or greatly reduced price) electricity. The = partnership=20 would then build a continuous solar panel shade over the top of the = existing=20 roofs. The roof would be completely in the shade, but the solar = paneling=20 wouldn=E2=80=99t overhang the roof by much, or people would complain = about being=20 unable to dry their clothes!

If you look at a plan view of a housing estate such as the one I live = in, I=20 imagine taking a marker pen and roughly colouring the continuous roof = areas=20 with =E2=80=98solar panel colour=E2=80=99. That would make a housing = development of this size=20 produce about 800kW average, with a max of around 8MW on a clear day, = falling=20 to zero (unless some local storage is built in) at night. Such a = scheme would=20 make much more sense on terraced housing than it would on detached = houses.

I realise there=E2=80=99s an obvious =E2=80=9CNIMBY=E2=80=9D = objection to a big solar scheme such=20 as this one, but it would supply electricity while being much less of = an=20 eyesore than a traditional power station. I can see there=E2=80=99s a = problem with=20 housing =E2=80=9Ccharacter=E2=80=9D, but I haven=E2=80=99t yet = detected character in housing=20 developments of the kind I live in =E2=80=93 do they have one? On a = positive note,=20 rather than just complaining about what politicians and their cronies = give you=20 for power generation, housing areas could actually do = something to=20 take back ownership of the decision. They could be =E2=80=9CNot On My = Account Thank=20 You=E2=80=9D =E2=80=93 NOMATY.

Thanks for posting the link to the Feed-In Tariff article at the = Star. The=20 caption under the picture of the Taiwan solar power plant had me = rolling on=20 the floor laughing like a demented owl.

Reply
- Ahmad Shadzli = Abdul=20 Wahab says:
  
  July=20 9, 2010 at 11:00 am
  
  I would like to clarify some confusions regarding Megawatts and=20 Megawatthours in relation to solar panel systems and also to touch a = bit on=20 government current plan to promote the use of environmentally = friendly=20 renewable energy.
  
  When talking about solar energy, we normally refer to solar water = heating=20 systems, that most house owners are familiar with, which converts = the=20 thermal components of solar radiation to heat up water in our home. = The=20 other aspect of solar energy is the electromagnetic component of = solar=20 radiation that we receive daily (such that of ultra-violet and infra = red=20 that we are all familiar with and those in between known as visible = region),=20 most of which is converted to electrical energy via the use of solar = cells=20 or what we normally called solar modules. This conversion process is = often=20 referred as PV, an acronym for Photovoltaic, P for photo and V for=20 voltaic.
  
  Thus, when we say solar PV system can generate 2,600 MW of power = per=20 annum, it does not mean that the solar PV system will generate = continuously=20 2,600 MW all day long, all year round, as one would expect from = normal=20 conventional power plants (coal, gas, nuclear). It only means and = refers to=20 Total Installed Capacity, is DC power and is sometimes suffixed as = Peak.=20 Rightfully its should be stated as 2,600 MWp DC (Megawatt Peak = DC).
  
  Because of its fluctuating output, due to daily variation in = solar=20 radiation throughout the day, cloudiness of sky, ambient = temperature,=20 conversion efficiency from DC power to grid-compatibility AC supply, = it is=20 best to describe the capability of solar PV system in terms of = energy it=20 produces, and that is what we pay for to TNB. (MWhr is an acronym = for=20 Megawatt-hours referring to units of energy. 1 Megawatt-hour is = equivalent=20 to 1,000 Kilowatt-hours or 1,000 units of electricity, energy units = that are=20 currently used by TNB to charge us all). Only then can we truly = compare it=20 with conventional power system. So for a 2,600 MWp DC solar PV power = plant,=20 the annual energy production is estimated to be about 2,600 = Megawatthours a=20 year i.e 2,600 MWHr or 2.6 Gigawatthours.
  
  Imagine. If we have a million homes each equipped with 2.6 KWp = solar PV=20 system, we could install a combined capacity of 2,600 MWp DC power. = During=20 and around noon time, TNB and IPP could actually switch off some of = their=20 expensive gas fired powered plants used to meet the day=E2=80=99s = high maximum=20 demand and save the country billions of ringgit in terms of gas = subsidy that=20 the government provides to these monopolistic electricity providers. =
  
  The saving in gas subsidies, instead could be channeled to = finance=20 individual house owners to buy and install small roof top PV = systems. For a=20 1.0 KWp capacity, that requires 10 sq m of roof area, the initial = investment=20 cost is around RM16,000 to RM18,000 to install individually = depending on the=20 type of roof.
  
  In order to make the PV system more affordable and pay for itself = in a=20 reasonable period of time, as has been adopted in increasing number = of=20 countries in Europe, many states in USA, Japan, China, Korea, = Australia and=20 even Thailand, the government is to table a ground-breaking new law = known as=20 RE Law ( Renewable Energy law), in the parliament this coming = October 2010,=20 as announced recently by the Minister of Energy. Under the proposed = RE Law,=20 the electricity tariff that would be paid to electricity produced = from RE,=20 solar PV systems included, that would enable PV system to recoup its = high=20 investment cost within perhaps 10 to 12 years. The consequence of = this RE=20 Law will be far reaching as it will bring about mass utilization of = green=20 sources of energy throughout the country that will make Malaysia a = more=20 environmentally-friendly country to live in.
  
  Shadzli A Wahab
  Secretary
  Malaysian Photovoltaic Industry=20 Association (MPIA)
  
  Reply
Hwa = Shi-Hsia says:

July=20 7, 2010 at 11:15 am

Let=E2=80=99s be honest =E2=80=93 for an existing homeowners to buy = a big solar panel +=20 battery system is not =E2=80=9Cworth it=E2=80=9D even if the FiT = system was already up and=20 running. It will take a pretty long time to pay for itself. However, I = think=20 developers should be given incentives to include them in houses under=20 planning/construction so that the cost of the system would be included = in the=20 cost of the house, so new buyers can get it at less than what it would = cost to=20 buy it individually, and it will be less psychologically painful to = the buyer.=20 I know a guy in the US who has a solar panel and he said it=E2=80=99s = pretty cool to=20 see the reading on his electric meter go backwards on sunny days.

Let=E2=80=99s not forget that there are many Malaysians who also = don=E2=80=99t have=20 electricity in the kampung areas=E2=80=A6for the rural poor there = should be subsidies=20 or community-based solutions like a big bank of panels + batteries = shared by=20 one small kampung.

Reply
Radix = says:

July=20 7, 2010 at 1:05 pm

The primary reason fossil fuels and nuclear energy appear cheap = relative to=20 renewables like solar is that the long term cost of environmental = degradation=20 has not been adequately factored in. Here is where the government = needs to=20 ensure a pricing mechanism that captures the full impact of all = economic=20 activities. This can be done via something like the carbon tax regimes = being=20 proposed in some countries=E2=80=A6 =E2=80=9Cdirty=E2=80=9D energy = should pay taxes for its cost to=20 the environment & health of population.

The issues is not just about removing subsidies, but also imposing = taxes=20 where market prices are giving polluters a free-ride (with the tab = picked up=20 by general population or future generations).

Reply
Lainie=20 says:

July=20 7, 2010 at 5:19 pm

Wondering if Malaysia could implement something like = Australia=E2=80=99s=20 government, where homeowners are given tax incentives to build solar = panels=20 within a certain timeframe?

Reply
Sean says:

July=20 7, 2010 at 7:27 pm

=E2=80=9C784MW or RM1 billion worth=E2=80=9D

That price you=E2=80=99ve quoted is less than RM1.30 per Watt. I = paid USD5 per Watt=20 (plus shipping from Shanghai) for my small panels, and I thought I was = doing=20 well to get close to a figure on which people usually base their = calculations.=20 Can you check your figures / currency? A 70m^2 roof at 1kW/M^2 = nominal, 10%=20 efficiency would support 7kW of solar panels. That=E2=80=99s normally = priced (for the=20 sake of argument) at something like USD5/W, so = =E2=80=98normally=E2=80=99 a bit over 110,000=20 Ringgit. That=E2=80=99s the installation that would generate about = 1,200kWh per month,=20 about RM360 per month. That=E2=80=99s 25 years just to break even. At = the price you=E2=80=99ve=20 quoted, the roof would cost just over RM9,000, covering its own cost = in a=20 little over two years, paying back more than ten times its cost over = 25 years.=20 That=E2=80=99s an entirely different proposition.

Reply
neptunian = says:

July=20 8, 2010 at 12:42 pm

The solar power industry =E2=80=93 PV-installation industry always = looks and sounds=20 like a scam. They are their own worst enemies. Even the MBIPV website = does not=20 give a potential user the information required to make an informed=20 decision.

1. Cost =E2=80=93 about RM20,000 per Kw. What does this mean? Is it = 1Kw constant=20 throughout the day available or average when the sun shines? Is it = 24Kw in a=20 day average, therefore the panels actually generate about 70+ Kw in an = 8-hour=20 sunny period?

2. How big an area for installation is needed to produce the above? = Please=20 clear up the above first.

3. Most homes are terrace homes measuring 22 x 40 (built up roof = area) with=20 no garden space to speak of. How much is useable for PV installation? =

4. Why can=E2=80=99t PV promoters come up with a typical terrace = house cost=20 together with expectations, etc, so that a potential user can just go = through=20 and not get surprises?

I am so tired.

Reply
- Sean = says:
  
  July=20 8, 2010 at 7:42 pm
  
  @neptunian:
  
  I=E2=80=99m not the PV industry, but I=E2=80=99ll have a go at = your questions:
  
  Cost =E2=80=93 about RM20,000 per Kw. What does this = mean?
  PV is=20 usually costed by its nominal output. A panel is usually sold as a = 5W or 8W=20 (I have some for projects) or 120W or 140W. I paid USD5 (RM16) per = Watt for=20 mine, so that would be about RM16,000 per kW just for panels. For a=20 permanent installation, there=E2=80=99s mounting (framework), = cabling, power=20 conversion (DC to AC if you want mains-compatible) etc. RM20,000 = sounds=20 about right.
  
  Is it 1Kw constant throughout the day
  No! The = =E2=80=98nominal output=E2=80=99=20 is what the panel will theoretically produce under =E2=80=98nominal = conditions=E2=80=99.=20 Nominal conditions will be full sun, with the panel directly facing = the sun.=20 Clouds =3D less than 1kW. Panel not directly facing the sun =3D less = than 1kW.=20 Night-time =3D 0kW =3D 0W =3D 0mW =3D nothing at all. The = =E2=80=9CInsolation=E2=80=9D article at=20 Wikipedia that I linked in my first reply has a pretty map showing = you how=20 much power you should expect on average in different places = in the=20 world. Malaysia looks like 240W per square metre. Max power (mid-day = no=20 clouds) per square metre is something like 1kW. If your solar panels = are 10%=20 efficient, they=E2=80=99ll put out something like 100W per square = metre=20 maximum, or 24W (in Malaysia) per square metre on a long = average=20 which includes night-time.
  
  Is it 24Kw in a day
  kW is kiloWatt, an instantaneous = measure of=20 power. It=E2=80=99s like km/j measures the current speed of your = car, kW measures=20 the rate at which energy is transferred. Your electricity bill = should be in=20 kWh which means 1kW average for one hour. You pay for the amount of = energy,=20 not the rate at which it=E2=80=99s transferred. We (in my house) use = about 600kWh=20 per month according to our TNB bill, or about 20kWh per day = =E2=80=93 I suspect=20 we=E2=80=99re high users because we have a home office. To take your = 8-hour sunny=20 period as an example, the 20kWh per day could be (ideally) met by = solar=20 panels generating 2.5kW for 8 hours.
  
  How big=E2=80=A6?
  Taking your 8 hour, 2.5kW example, = and asserting that=20 the hypothetical solar panels will generate at their nominal output = for 8=20 hours: 2.5kW of full equatorial sunlight falls on 2.5m^2 of ground. = If your=20 solar panels are 10% efficient (10% of sunlight converted to = electricity),=20 you=E2=80=99ll need 10x that area, so 25m^2. If you don=E2=80=99t = get 8 hours of nominal=20 full sun, or your solar panel area doesn=E2=80=99t exactly face the = sun, you=E2=80=99ll need=20 a larger area.
  
  How much roof is usable
  Solar panels should produce = some=20 electricity from being pointed at a bright sky =E2=80=93 = it=E2=80=99ll vary from panel to=20 panel. The problem with mounting on roof pitches is that at some = times of=20 day the pitches are in shadow, and even when the sun rises above the = pitch=E2=80=99s=20 horizon, there=E2=80=99ll be some low angles for which the panel = won=E2=80=99t produce=20 usable amounts of electricity. It gets worse if you live on the side = of a=20 hill or there are tall buildings or trees nearby which cast a shadow = over=20 your house. You save money on framework and mounting by putting = solar panels=20 directly on a roof pitch, but lose energy. I would suspect that in = Malaysia=20 =E2=80=93 given its proximity to the equator =E2=80=93 a horizontal = mount would be best for=20 fixed panels. We really need lots of experimental data!
  
  Why can=E2=80=99t PV promoters come up with a typical terrace = house cost=20
  Maybe there isn=E2=80=99t a typical terraced house? Fancy = roof designs with=20 bay /dormer windows seems to be popular here, but they do nothing to = help=20 someone come up with a typical calculation! Is there a typical = direction for=20 roof pitches to face in Malaysia? There doesn=E2=80=99t seem to be = around here.=20 Steeply pitched roofs facing =E2=80=98the wrong way=E2=80=99 = complicate matters.
  
  I don=E2=80=99t want to wee on anybody=E2=80=99s bonfire, but I = can=E2=80=99t help thinking that=20 a few solar panels plonked on a roof that wasn=E2=80=99t designed = specifically to=20 accommodate them would be more nuisance than benefit for anybody = except=20 consumers of the very lowest amounts of electricity. If you only = visit your=20 house one afternoon every week, a small solar panel installation is = for=20 you.
  
  Perhaps what the Malaysian energy industry needs to do is to come = up with=20 a few designs, in partnership with housing developers, of workable=20 large-scale domestic solar generation. I suggest that those designs = will=20 feature continuous flat, horizontal roofs, possibly reducing the sky = line of=20 housing developments. If you=E2=80=99re a fan of brightly tiled = pitched roofs, you=20 won=E2=80=99t like it! If the roof were to be separately owned and = maintained by a=20 power station operator, then it might actually reduce the price of = the=20 house, as it would only need a rain and burglar-proof roof and not a = sun-proof roof. If the solar roof were slightly raised to permit = maintenance=20 access from below, it would also permit air-flow and potentially = result in=20 cooler houses. I suppose it might even permit a nice shady roof-top = terrace.=20 Rather than use the generated power directly, I=E2=80=99ve a feeling = it might be=20 simpler and more practical for a 3rd party to operate the roof as a = power=20 station and pay a small rent to each of the houses beneath, while = the houses=20 consume electricity as normal from TNB.
  
  I hope that helps. I agree =E2=80=93 there=E2=80=99s not enough = information available. I=20 have a suspicion that in the case of domestic solar, there = aren=E2=80=99t many=20 well-publicised facts because the facts are simply not very = attractive.
  
  Reply
Ng Ai Soo = says:

July=20 9, 2010 at 3:37 am

Solar electricity is too expensive now. The only economic solar = usage is=20 through solar water heating, which is often seen here, and which works = well=20 because it incorporates storage and backup. The heat is collected and = stored=20 in the insulated tank for use as required and, in the event that = storage is=20 insufficient, backup is provided in the form of an electric heating = element=20 working off the mains.

Our cloud cover reduces insolation and makes solar energy variable = so that=20 the electric power cannot be relied on totally without storage and/or = backup.=20 What the solar industry wants is incentives or subsidies. See the = German=20 experience in promoting solar electricity with very good = feed-in-tariffs and=20 installation subsidies backed by high price for consumer electricity. = Going=20 green in this way is an expensive undertaking for everyone!

Until our per capita electricity consumption is equal to the = =E2=80=9Cdeveloped=E2=80=9D=20 countries, we should do what they did to get where they are = now=E2=80=A6 use the=20 cheapest, most economic sources of power. When we are equal, then we = talk=20 about all the other issues. Otherwise, ask them to subsidize = carbon-free=20 sources for us=E2=80=A6 after all this is what they are doing in their = own countries=E2=80=A6=20 do it here as well.

Reply

COMMENT RULES: Please = note=20 ALL comments are moderated, so your comment may take = some time=20 to appear. Stay on topic, no personal attacks, no spam and just be = civil. Full=20 comment policy here= .

Click here to cancel reply.

Recent in Features

Most Comments (Past 3 Months)

Latest Articles

=20

Categorised | Features, Lead=20 Story