AlanG <a...@magicsound.us> wrote:
> With an on-line time of 10 hours per day, that's 39% of nameplate rating. > Averaged over 24 hours, it's 16%. That is interesting. Thanks for the info. This site says that overall efficiency for residential installations varies from 13% to 18%, which is in line with your experience: http://sroeco.com/solar/most-efficient-solar-panels The EIA calls this the "capacity factor," by the way. The Renewable Energy World article says that most installations are non-residential and utility: Residential 792 MW Non-Residential 1,112 MW Utility 2,846 MW Total 4,751 MW I do not know what "non-residential" means. "Utility" means the power companies. Anyway, my guess is that Utility installations have higher overall efficiency than Residential because they are placed in optimum locations, and in some cases they have tracking systems or concentration. So I am guessing that overall efficiency for all 4,751 MW is at least 20%, and maybe a little better. I cannot find an on-line source for this. Anyway, if it is 20% this is equivalent to 950 GW, which is about as much as an average U.S. nuke plant actual. Even nukes do not run at 100% of nameplate capacity. In other words, last year PV added about as much actual capacity as one nuclear plant. At this rate, in 100 years, we will have roughly as much PV as we now have nukes, which is to say ~20% of total generating capacity. Putting it that way makes the 4,751 MW seem less impressive. PV still barely resisters in electric power generation in the U.S. The EIA says that in 2012 it was 0.12% of all electricity (a 1% share of 12% of total generation): http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/article/renewable_electricity.cfm It says wind was 3.36% in 2012 (a 28% share of 12%). - Jed
