Over at Bishop Hill, there’s a story about an inquisition into the Spanish solar power industry, which was so heavily subsidized and the price being paid for solar power feed-in so much more than conventional power, that some unscrupulous opportunists decided to run solar power systems at night, with the help of a diesel generator:
After press reports, it was established during inspections that several solar power plants were generating current and feeding it into the net at night. To simulate a larger installation capacity, the operators connected diesel generators.
“This is just the tip of the iceberg,” said one industry expert to the newspaper “El Mundo”, which brought the scandal to light. If solar systems apparently produce current in the dark, will be noticed sooner or later. However, if electricity generators were connected during daytime, the swindle would hardly be noticed.
Now, the results of the inquisition are published, and it’s just what you’d expect:
The chapter analysing the history of the industry in Spain is laugh-a-minute stuff, a tale of incompetent politicians and civil servants bumbling from one disaster to another and fraudulent investors cheating their way to a slice of public funds. We learn how the Spanish government decreed a feed-in-tariff system that guaranteed six times market rates to PV businesses, before a belated realisation that this was going to lead to astonishing surges of investment. They then put in place a series of only partially successful measures in an attempt to stop the expansion, as the whole farrago quickly became unaffordable and ultimately disastrous. We hear about the diesel generators generating “solar power” at night and that at one point the authorities estimated that half of new solar PV connections to the grid were fraudulent.
Bishop Hill has more here, including a comparison of the dismal EROI number.
The preview for the book suggests the authors did a detailed job on the inquisition, which has been out for over a year:
The Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROI or EROEI) is the amount of energy acquired from a particular energy source divided by the energy expended, or invested, in obtaining that energy. EROI is an essential and seemingly simple measure of the usable energy or “energy profit” from the exploitation of an energy source, but it is not so easy to determine all of the energy expenditures that should be included in the calculation. Because EROI values are generally low for renewable energy sources, differences in these estimates can lead to sharply divergent conclusions about the viability of these energy technologies. This book presents the first complete energy analysis of a large-scale, real-world deployment of photovoltaic (PV) collection systems representing 3.5 GW of installed, grid-connected solar plants in Spain. The analysis includes all of the factors that limit and adjust the real electricity output through one full-year cycle, and all of the fossil fuel inputs required to achieve these results. The authors’ comprehensive analysis of energy inputs, which assigns energy cost estimates to all financial expenditures, yields EROI values that are less than half of those claimed by other investigators and by the solar industry. Sensitivity analysis is used to test various assumptions in deriving these EROI estimates. The results imply that the EROI of current, large-scale PV systems may be too low to seamlessly support an energy and economic transition away from fossil fuels. Given the pervasiveness of fossil fuel subsidies in the modern economy, a key conclusion is that all components of the system that brings solar power to the consumer, from manufacturing to product maintenance and life cycle, must be improved in terms of energy efficiency. The materials science of solar conversion efficiency is only one such component.
Sunny Spain represented an ideal case study as the country had the highest penetration of solar PV energy at 2.3 percent of total national demand as well as state-of-the-art expertise in solar power including grid management of intermittent, modern renewable systems. This book, written by a uniquely qualified author team consisting of the chief engineer for several major photovoltaic projects in Spain and the world’s leading expert on the concept and application of EROI, provides a comprehensive understanding of the net energy available to society from energy sources in general and from functioning PV installations under real-world conditions in particular. The authors provide critical insight into the capacity of renewable energy sources to fill the foreseeable gap between world energy demand and depletion rates for fossil fuels.
· Presents the first comprehensive study of the EROI of large-scale solar PV systems in a developed country
· Uses real-world operational data rather than laboratory approximations and extrapolations
· Describes the dependence of one alternative energy source on the goods and services of a fossil-fueled economy
· Has global implications for the potential of renewable energy sources to replace dwindling reserves of fossil fuels
· Written with the first-hand knowledge of the chief, on-site engineer for many solar installations in Spain together with the leader in the development and application of the concept of EROI
And finally, for those that don’t get the joke in the headline, see this.
Gary Pearse,
Producers of water from the Oglala aquifer get depletion allowances too, because some day that water will run out.
So, how does a small manufacturer of windows get an oil depletion allowance?
They don’t. Anymore than an oil company gets an inventory write down on bad inventory, like, for example Microsoft recently did when they wrote off most of the inventory cost of a model of Surface tablets that wasn’t selling. The question is a red herring.
Energy Return on Energy Invested only makes sense as a measure when the energy in and the energy out are roughly the same value.
Money Return on Money Invested is what drives technology, so putting cheap energy in to get valuable energy out is worthwhile even if there is lavish waste of the input energy.
If we could use solar energy to produce gasoline, for example, it makes no difference that 80% or more of the solar energy be wasted.
GlynnMhor:
At August 17, 2014 at 11:31 am you write
Yes! Well said!
The clearest example is a power station. Fuels is used to generate electricity, and most of the energy in the fuel is lost doing this.
Richard
“The search bar at the top of the page” searches only thru the “top post,” not the comments that follow. Those are what I quoted. And I winnowed out the best of them over many years here.
…And finally, for those that don’t get the joke in the headline…
NOBODY doesn’t get the Spanish Inquisition joke!! …
sunshinehours1 says:
August 17, 2014 at 8:55 am
Edward, the IRS says: “Depletion is the using up of natural resources by mining, drilling, quarrying stone, or cutting timber.”
So you may claim it is an “oil depletion” allowance. But it is not just for oil.
So you are a troll.
====================================================================
Sunshine you are being kind in your description of the man.
I am sure any Australian “greenut” government can top any level of fiscal stupidity that Spain can squander.
.BUT all grrenuts can cease to worry , after all every drop of diesel owes its existence to the Sun so it is all “Solar Power” anyway – effing fools!
The problem with current “sustainable”energy is that it isn’t sustainable. And come to think of it why is ENRON accounting is criminal but identical government accounting is called a budget?
Now if only one could connect the mains electricity to the solar metre.
Edward Richardson,
Here is the ‘subsidy’ on UK petrol. Petrol is so cheap that the Fuel Price Escalator, which was introduced in 1993 was abandoned after the disruptive fuel tax protests of 2000. UK government revenue in 2009 from fuel tax was £25.894 billion. This is in fact a subsidy.
Can you spot this massive subsidy?
You need to look at oil rich middle eastern nations. There you will find subsidies.
Cirby,
You wrote: “This part is good: ‘Federal regulation costs for renewable energy were negligible.’ Yeah, because they paid for those costs by rolling the expenses into the Department of Energy – and billing it to the fossil fuel industry.”
That Catch 22 accounting method reminds me of the “Hunger in America” statistics. Supposedly 1 in 5 is “hungry in America”. What is the evidence? 1 in 5 uses Food Stamps. What is the solution to hunger in America? More Food Stamps!
Non Nomen says:
August 17, 2014 at 6:17 am
I assume you are referring to the French and not the Vietnamese when you reference “creative fools”.
It is hilarious! But beyond the stick of solar power, it also demonstrates that when government gets involved in the private markets, it is never good. Most of the fault lies with the government in trying to pick winners, and unscrupulous people (do we really need a debate on their existance?) taking advantage of pencil pushers who have no stake in the game.
Well that is no surprise, the Spanish have few excuses. One of the fat ladies (now passed) said in her book, that in the mountains in Spain. It was cheaper to replace a turbine than fix it. Two were placed near each other, one working one still.. No wonder they are in financial troubles.
The late Mark Oliphant (Manhatten project) and also science adviser to the liberal governments.
Suggested that solar thermal could be very valuable to Australia with all our desert regions and we could sell it to overseas. Once they know how to store it of course. Now Richard C did write about solar thermal I have his brief he presented in 2006 on alternative electricity sources. I think Richard you warned there could be dangers attached to solar thermal operations and I can’t remember exactly what this was?
The left is much vexed by the widening gap in wealth, yet continues to promote one policy after another which steals from the poor to give to the rich and build a mythical “greentopia”. Such as:
Cash for clunkers – destroyed a decade or so of cheap transportation for the working poor
High corporate tax rates – which tax the wealthy, middle class and poor at the same rate, drive away jobs needed for upwardly mobility
Crazy Tort Laws – “tax” the poor at HIGHER rates than the wealthy, plus indirectly impact the working class more then the wealthy by driving away industry and economic activity (how does product liability tax the poor at a higher rate? The rich and poor pay the same premium hidden within a product, yet in the case of loss the wealthy are more likely to recover damages and more likely to receive larger awards, thus the wealthy receive far more coverage for the same premium)
Historically thwarted exploitation of plentiful and cheap energy sources – nuclear, gas and oil, coal
And now support absurd subsidies for PVC installations – Transfer wealth from the poor to the wealthiest who can afford to buy PVC installations… often with borrowed money, which also raises the cost of borrowing for the less fortunate and for businesses which might provide jobs…. in wealth-creating industries as opposed to wealth-destroying “green” industries dependent upon subsidies.
When I left UK in 1965, petrol was twice as expensive as in Australia. 5 shilling and sixpence a gallon then, and 2 shillings a gallon in Australia.(Sydney). Now in our regional area of NSW, the cost is about $1.63 a liter. 4 and a half liters to the imperial gallon. Not cheap eh. I don’t know how the Brits can afford to run a Rolls or Bentley or some of these yank tanks.
bushbunny:
In your post at August 17, 2014 at 7:41 pm you write
I think you are probably referring to Section 14.7 (on pages 16 & 17) of this this item.
I am not sure about “dangers” from existing solar technologies but I have provided a link so you can see what I did say.
I hope this helps.
Richard
Thank you Richard I have a copy of the paper somewhere, I sent a copy to Tony Windsor for his perusal as he was on the board of the Climate change commission. I don’t think he read it. Anyway today there is news the two solar farms are quitting because of market uncertainty. Good.
Also it seems if birds fly to close they get burned. My god, bird choppers now bird burners.
Did you intend to call for more of the same that is causing business and jobs to flee the USA? The actual solution is a low, simple tax system that encourages investment. Regulation has the same effect as taxation in that it increases the costs of doing business.
And have you been in a coma for the last 5-1/2 years. We aren’t reducing our tax base, we aren’t reducing tax rates and we are throwing more and more regulations into the mix everyday.
EROEI of 2.45 .
That’s not so bad. It is also on the order of what I expected.
We can maintain a civilisation starting at 3 so we’re nearly at survival levels. (given a sunny climate like Spain’s or California’s).
As some process improvements in the fabrication have happened since the Spanish Solar Bubble, I wouldn’t be surprised if we would already manage a 3 right now.
Edward: “So, how does a small manufacturer of windows get an oil depletion allowance?”
Producers, spotting any window of opportunity in the tax regime, are quick to louver their way through it. In fact many tax breaks are the result of applying louverage skilfully to politicians. The oily industry is the grease that lays the golden handshakes. Losing incumbents, often old cranks in pane, turn to oily industrialists to bail them out of their financial jambs. I can see clearly now the abuse of the tax code will only end when the enablers argon and we insulate society from their influence.
Soda glass is half full or half empty?
Q: What is an E-certified window maker’s favourite song?
A: “Down by the bay, where the watermelons grow, slack to my bones, I dare not glow, ’cause if I do-o, my mother would say, “Did you ever see some glass with a sunburnt sash? Down by the bay…”
Methinks the window industry is equally stained.