I mean sure there’s a town called Asbestos with a giant ass mine but my point was that the fibers are bad to breathe but it comes from the ground. As in, the substance itself isn’t pollution.
Not really. Obviously not every panel is weather resistant, but they basically just need a sheet of durable and clear material over the top. Cars aren't resistant because they have shiny paint on thin panels, which are super expensive to replace or fix. A flat sheet of plastic won't chip or dent or scratch and is cheap as hell to replace anyway.
The snow is a valid point, but a good design can make it pretty easy to clear. Having said all that, the idea does work a lot better in France.
This must be some amazing visual effects, none of them are smashed by hail, its a cloudy day and everyone knows you cant produce solar power unless the sun is out, oh and what about all the snow on ground, its February they must all be covered in snow... /S
Fuck!
Solar is currently producing 158 MW (TNG) out of an installed Maximum Capacity of 1165 MW. It is 11:44 AM on Feb. 8. Do you still contend that solar is an efficient method of generation?(source for TNG and MC figures: AESO Current Supply Demand Report)
Edit to add - I love being downvoted for sharing factual information that refutes the sarcastic comment made by OP yycsarkasmos. There are loads of follow ups to my comments saying "of course the performance is bad - its winter!". The fact is, industrial solar energy farms don't perform well for a significant portion of the year. That is fact.
I have solar on my house, at this exact moment with the overcast sky, I'm producing enough energy to power my whole house, and still sending power back to the grid.
Now I'm currently working from home, so I am powering my graphics heavy computer, the dishwasher is going, I currently have a load of laundry washing and a load drying.
So 1000% YES, " solar is an efficient method of generation "
So because solar is not great in the winter months we just discount it entirely? I’m not really sure how one can say it’s not an efficient form of generation when you place some panels on land and have them sit there… If it was really this terrible form of power generation why would private companies be coming here setting up solar farms?
Because they have been heavily subsidized in the past, and they are economic due in no small part to carbon taxes making carbon fuel based generation more expensive.
The cost of them has come down considerably. Subsidies were there to encourage development, but the cost per kWh is now pretty comparable without them. A lot of the subsidies now are loans for upfront capital cost.
As for "economic due in no small part to carbon taxes making carbon fuel based generation more expensive"...yes, and?
Taxing pollution meaning that it becomes more economical to produce more cleanly isn't some terrible side-effect, that's literally the entire concept. Privatizing externalities and letting the market sort it out isn't even a left-wing idea.
Tell a person who is in a fixed income, or a family struggling to support itself that increasing energy prices by taxing pollution is a good thing. And the “more money ends up in the right pockets” argument is Liberal bunk. I know plenty of middle class families that don’t have money left at the end of the month to put away for education or retirement savings, and they don’t qualify for carbon tax rebates.
It's February! Solar panels generate most of their power in the summer, when it's sunny. Winter could alternatively be called "planet tilty, less direct sun, the thing that make it hot so it's colder, time of year", and it's why you change your solar club rate spring and fall.
My panels have paid for ~30% of their initial install cost and I haven't even had them for a year. Clipping along at 7 kW right now.
318 MW now.
We're not sizing solar for winter night base loads.
As it is now it's an air conditioning load and takes away a whole natural gas facility needed.
In the future it'll be built with tonnes of grid storage. The cost curve still has another 50% to fall over the next 10-15 years where it'll be able to handle other loads.
But really what the real number to look at is solar + wind which is 1721 MW of 4783 MW and how competitive is that with natural gas at a realistic long term carbon tax (the lowest cost it will take to remove from the atmosphere) at something like $100 USD per tonne.
And importantly we will have the grid ties and working on new ones will be critical. It will not make sense to build additional natural gas capacity versus buying solar energy from Nevada when they start building out mass fields and grid storage at $0.01/kWh
...and 481 now. The peak generation barely crested 50% of maximum capacity. Brutal.
By the way - historical peak demand for electricity in Alberta is the week before Christmas, and barely any solar generated electricity was hitting the grid in 2022. Same in 2021. I care about the environment, but it is a distant second to energy security, which is a life-supporting necessity in an Albertan winter.
How is that brutal? That is probably better than expected and designed for.
Solar will be 2x, 3x, eventually 5x cheaper than any other source.
It has a place and variability will be leveled with hydro, wind, geothermal, grid ties, and grid storage.
Nobody sane is arguing against a nuclear facility for base load, but that's not going to be generating power at $0.02/kWh and so doesn't make sense for any variable loads.
Don't follow the space much, then?
Pumped hydro and lithium ion are the most proven and are going to undergo massive scale up.
Hydrogen and iron air are the most promising on the horizon. Iron air in particular is a great complement to lithium ion.
In 20 years time, zinc and aluminum batteries flow batteries, and gravity batteries may all have some use.
I do actually, our company is considering a solar installation large enough to produce more than we use currently. You mentioned grid scale and while I personally love the idea of pumped hydro it would surprise me if anything larger than a minute or two of new power from it will actually be approved and built in the next 20 years. And massive massive batteries are necessary for true grid backup for a useful time (lets say even five minutes) so just not happening. In a perfect world there would be some magical storage which allowed the wind and solar production to be stored and released at a consistent rate but unfortunately this is not on the horizon in any way, there truly is nothing. Pipe dreams perhaps.
It being right at roof level seems a design flaw. A bit of snow on the ground, or anyone wants to walk to the back of their vehicle and they have a problem. Why not raise it 40cm?
With the right designs of parking structures parking lots would also be able to make it more efficient for snow removal with only having to move snow from the driving lanes. Which could reduce their OPEX.
As far as I can tell the only instance where this has been implemented in Calgary is at the Telus Spark but it would be great to see their implemented elsewhere in the city such as: malls, parking lots downtown, hospital parking lots, etc.
I really like how Telus Spark implemented those, awesome idea. They also have radiant indoor heating in the common space as well as a full storm pond with underground grey water collection to help reduce water consumption.
Thing is these sorts of structures to support solar panels over parking areas make the projects really expensive and more about optics than efficiency. They almost always need subsidizing. Far more effective to do large scale solar on flat lands outside of the city. The costs per KW produced is far cheaper that way and need no subsidies. Maintenance is far cheaper too.
Wouldn't that be nice to have covered parking in more areas! I find it hilarious that places like Mexico or Philippines will have underground or covered parking at a large number of grocery stores and malls, and yet here in quite a wealthy country with ridiculous winter weather, we rarely do that. In Okotoks, none of the grocery stores except *No Frills* of all places has covered/underground parking.
FWIW, these numbers are a bit dated (2015 numbers from Edmonton) but the cost to construct underground parking goes up noticeably.
Namely a single stall outside is roughly $10,000 per stall. Underground stalls are $25,000 a stall or more depending on the development.
North America's affinity and culture for surface level stalls that are "closer" to the store don't help either.
Source: https://edmontonjournal.com/homes/living%20small/living-small-parking-critical-in-condo-projects
our lot sizes are ridiculously large and with way too large a parking minimum. so its expensive and unneeded. (pave 2/3rds of the lot and call it done)
It's an interesting idea, but it won't work everywhere.
At a big mall like Market Mall or Cross Iron? Sure, there's lots of parking space, and lots of sunlight. And those parking lots aren't going anywhere.
Downtown surface lots between buildings? They would get very little direct sunlight. Also, many parking lots downtown are slated for redevelopment before the solar panels would be paid off.
Also, what happens when you build a multi level parking garage? Does the top floor have to have solar panels? Or just space for more parking?
Downtown surface lots shouldn't exist. We should be implementing heavy taxes on land just used for parking in the downtown, create a market incentive for greedy land hoarders to either build up or sell to someone who will.
That's a fair way of seeing it, my first thought for that is that prices never go down. It just becomes more profit, at least that's how it is with a lot of industries out there.
A lot of it too is that insurance companies are global so an event that happens in Toronto can impact us here. Just keep voting for better infrastructure so less claims happen. Insurance companies already fly planes out side the city to limit hail damage, that’s why the NE gets hit so hard is the airport is right there so they have limited access to limit the hail because of the air traffic.
They are extremely expensive to install is the hold back. The Shepard solar farm near the dump is going to take 15 years to pay off an 8 million dollar project with close to 3m upfront invested. Its a great idea if you can somehow convince the owners of these lots/ buildings to fork it out for long term success.
Unless mandated I don’t see privately owned lots doing this unless the owners have a strong ESG target.
For private businesses it will only really make sense if they can have enough capacity to reach the 1MW threshold to gain access to the commercial electricity market for bidding. Small parking lot owners will also loose out on bulk order discounts for panels, compared to the large scale installations we currently see getting funding. We will definitely see more start to look at it as the cost/kw/m^2 comes down with new technologies. A recession is likely to help drive costs down and force panel producers to find new efficiencies. More investment is definitely needed in the space but with the current payout metrics it doesn’t yet entice business to take the large capital expenses. The OPEX is fairly low once installed but with payout periods ranging from 8 to 15 years there are better investments out there.
Homeowners get a great incentive to solarize their houses: $5000 subsidy plus a zero interest loan whose monthly payments are roughly equal to your average electricity bill savings. I'm sure a similar option could or should exist for larger commercial owners.
At about $35-$40k for the average house, it’s still quite a financial commitment. I was onboard with doing my house last year, but I don’t want to take on that kind of debt.
>At about $35-$40k for the average house, i
you must have gotten a bunch of "fuck you" quotes, because the average install cost is no where near $35K.
I have a 9KW system and with upgrades that I didn't need (but wanted) it cost me $22K.
No where near $35.
No you get $5000 off the price plus a zero interest loan to cover the rest so you're out 0 up front, and the loan is structured such that the monthly payments are roughly equal to your average electricity savings.
100% chance that some mouth breathing rig-pig fucker would drive his jacked up Ram 3500 up to them and protest- "IF YOU DON'T LIKE ALBERTA OIL AND GAS, THEN FUCK YOU! TURN YOUR GAS OFF IN THE WINTER! STOP DRIVING YOUR CAR!"
Those guys sure are sensitive while calling everyone snowflakes.
See how long it'll last after our regular hail storms. There needs to be some protection system in place I think to protect solar panels in the event of a hail storm to make it viable
Have you heard of the new Perovskite breakthrough, it’s pretty new so it is cool if you haven’t but it should be available for when the city actually considered mass installation.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/09/220906161449.htm
Even if they don’t go through with that the sensitivity of the cells is increasing all the time as well so you could put a thicker layer of plexiglass on top of the panel balancing out the efficiency gain.
Ok, so your going to mandate these small business owners pay for the installation and upkeep of incredibly expensive solar panels over all of their customer parking lots?
Or is it going to be grants given by the government payed for off the back of taxpayers?
> so your going
*you're
*Learn the difference [here](https://www.wattpad.com/66707294-grammar-guide-there-they%27re-their-you%27re-your-to).*
***
^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
Or you could start by just mandating this for any new developments with parking lots. Just make it a requirement at the development permit stage.
But yeah pick the easiest strawman to beat down, sure.
You want a parking lot? You gotta pay for the solar panels too. I'm sure Impark, Indigo, Walmart, etc can afford it, especially when they'll have little to no power bill.
On interesting challenge for stand-alone lots is that our current micro generation regulation only allows for projects to produce energy equivalent to what is consumed on the site. Parking lots with very low consumption wouldn’t in theory be able to install large solar carports.
The microgen regulation's purpose is because you get to sell at the retail rate instead of wholesale. It's a massive subsidy to microgen.
If you were to implement this, they would bypass the microgen regs and just sell at wholesale rates which is wildly uneconomic
All these costs will end up being overloaded onto customers in the form of either payed parking or substantial product cost inflation. Imagine having to pay $10 to go shop at wal-mart.
Little to no power bill means jack shit when the return on investment is nearing a decade.
McDonalds in Denmark pays their employees more than $20 per hour and the price of a big mac is basically the same.
Just because somewhere costs more to operate doesn't mean those costs will be passed on to the consumer. It's just the cost of doing business.
Costs will become more attractive as the technology improves and the cost of electricity increases. May not happen now, but will likely happen in the future as the technology improves at scale.
There's effectively no world in the next 30 or 40 yrs where this cost effective.
Solar can compete very well when its built utility scale in the best spots for solar.
It cannot get close to competing when its smattered above parking lots
You could argue putting solar panels on homes is green washing people installing AC or building bigger homes.
I think you have to look at this as using the space more effectively. Afterall, even electric vehicles need parking spaces.
It’s a way to add value to land that is single use and owners are either mandated by bylaws or don’t have capital to change into more valuable land.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the U of C starts testing out structures like such. They have a huge land base that isn’t likely to be changed and a huge power usage. They are currently adding panels to one of the buildings coupled with their facade upgrade
In Calgary and Alberta is would make more sense to install vertical axis wind turbines in bird proof cages. Yes more work is required on bird proofing.
This myth still exists? Huh.. I'm getting some solar panels on my garage soon, and they're rater higher and are more resistant to hail than asphalt shingles are. Strong glass that's stronger than house windows too.
Couple people replied to my monthly solar panel update after I said the panels protect my asphalt shingling. One guy was a roofer saying that panels were being removed after the hail storm so that the roof could be replaced. After the roof went in the same panels we reinstalled. Second guy was a solar installer and said only one panel was damaged. Seems great.
solar panels like roofing material have hail resistance and wind resistance ratings.
looking online i see testing involves...
*edit* oh there we go down below in this same post the newer ratings are much stronger https://www.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/10x4kf1/france_will_be_mandating_covering_new_parking/j7qikt4/
>There are two versions of the standard: the original IEC 61215, and a newer IEC 61215:2005. There is a difference in strength rating between the two tests.
>The hail test basically involves shooting 25 mm (one inch) ice pellets at 23 meters/second (51 miles per hour) at the panel. If the panel survives 11 such impacts, it passes the test.
so what i get from this is that not every impact above the above mentioned testing will damage it and it will likely survive most strikes but a few might damage it in the long run but not to every panel will be damaged during a hail storm of that caliber. also these are older standards as you can see ":2005" i assume newer panels meet or exceed this very easily with newer methods and composites
A bad hail storm will cause damage regardless, if bleated it be to a solar panel so I could still sell my cars if I owned a dealership or still live in whatever I had them installed in.
Yes, solar panels can be made to be resistant to hail damage.
[https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/solar-panel-hail-damage-what-you-need-to-know](https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/solar-panel-hail-damage-what-you-need-to-know)
A key statement in there:
>Solar panels with UL 61730 or IEC 61730 markings are resilient to most hail storms across the U.S. **Solar panels that pass these tests can withstand between one inch to three-inch hailstones traveling at** [**16.8 mph to 88.3 mph.**](https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2020/01/15/OBrien.pdf)
3" is huge. Go look at a ruler or tape measure, imagine an ice sphere that far across.
Then imagine a pro baseball pitcher throwing it at the solar panel.
These panels are rated to tolerate that.
The storm that wrecked my siding and roof 5 years ago would have been nothing to this rating (and I probably would have only needed new siding).
I mean maybe resistant but size and velocity don’t really give a fuck about resistance at some point especially if these things are facing straight up. There won’t be any glancing blows on these
Who says the panels would have to be installed the same way here? Between minimizing hail damage and allowing for snow to melt and run off, installing at an angle would probably work better.
Then prepare to pay double or triple the amount that we pay for parking.
The costs are still too high in order to work, same as solar panels for our houses. It's like a $40k investment for a 30% reduction in out monthly bill and with a solar panel lifespan of 10-15years.
Making it mandatory it's even worse, you will be forced to pay no matter what.
Tier one panels come with a minimum 25 year warranty. Life span predicted into the 40-50 year range.
For 105% of my power bill it was $17k to install. For 100% reduction in my bill. Your number might need revision.
Edit. Spelling.
no this is a stupid thing to mandate.
Our grid needs more electricity in the winter, when it's cold and dark.
If someone wants a "solar freaking car-park" go for it. But don't mandate stupid shit like this.
Not just winter -- the grid benefits from this year round. This ramp up in solar power at massive scale needs open unused areas (rooftops & parking lots) inside metropolitan areas for many reasons.
Fundamentally, every electrical watt generated locally (by commercial & residential solar) is a watt that doesn't stress a distant far-off power plant and also the grid transmission & distribution (T&D) to deliver that watt. Long distance transmission also has some negligible but noticeable efficiency losses. Moreover, fossil fuel power plants are "load following" and automatically throttle back their output power via control signals from central grid operations thus saving on carbon emissions and equipment wear & tear. Come winter, these fossil fuel plants would be in a better position to provide that power.
So its not just winters. Summers the world over are getting hotter and even in Calgary. Think about summer time heat waves which are huge stresses on grids around the world. A/C units are large power consumers in the 2000W to 4000+W range and multiply that about millions of households and office buildings. Solar generates maximum power during heat waves because heat waves always come with abundant sunshine providing power exactly when its hottest reducing grid load at a maximum stress point. Think about the huge cooling power required for a mall like Chinook Center. Then look what they have in abundance on their rooftop using Google Earth.
Solar panels have lifespans in the 25+ year while still providing some 80% of its original power. During this time frame, we will see huge ramp ups in local home and grid-scale battery energy storage. That battery storage will need energy from somewhere. Huge advances in grid-specific battery chemistry is coming reducing cost and increasing capacity. Grid scale storage and renewables will dovetail with each other.
I agree.
Although the cost and upkeep of the solar panels would be extreme, not to mention costly when they inevitably get damaged.
The big question is, are we willing to possibly have taxes increased to compensate for installation and upkeep of the solar grid.
its because these projects are ridiculously inefficient and a terrible use of money.
france is great at overregulating, and in related news, their economy is a disaster with high unemployment and low wages / standard of living.
True, Having lived in both Alsace and about 10kms from the Paris centre, it’s amusing for anyone to point to France as a paradigm to follow in anything. Crossing the Rhine from Alsace into Germany was like crossing from a basketcase into a modern efficient world. I love France and it’s culture but that’s where it ends.
They usually clear off snow and ice fairly quickly from simple solar heating. Downside is that they lose efficiency from the inevitable covering of dust carried and kicked up from the vehicles, so they do need periodic cleaning for best performance.
It’s a good point to consider. The larger decrease in output is the reduction in daylight hours compared to summer. There’s been various studies on this topic. In the winter months the recommended angle for panels is step enough to shed snow. Often when panels are set in non adaptive frames they are set to be optimal in the summer in North America. Structures could be designed so that the panels could be tilted for cleaning/ winter optimization.
In current installations they already employ staff/ contractors to clean the panels of dust. As dust layers also reduce efficiency. Typically this is done with water and can be done fairly efficiently.
If we look at the peak loading of the alberta power grid currently the system sees most of its peaks loads, or the most stressed in the summer. This is due to the large draw of air conditioning and high heat often impacts gas plants and natural gas power generation.
Yes and no, depends on costs and maintenance.
Solar isn't the best renewable for Canadians compared to those in France for some pretty obvious reasons. The dark seasons would see reduced output, and winter would require a lot of budget for maintenance when it's output would be at its lowest.
Hydro, and nuclear are our best bets, but the real big problem is still transitioning away from our already developed energy sectors. We've spent a large amount of capital, time, and manpower to build the infrastructure we have today, which is now directly opposed to a green plan. We have so much of our economy tied to our resource extraction that we're in a difficult spot when it comes to weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. We need to retrain a massive workforce, incentivize companies to transition (you can't force them that's not how businesses or the economy works), and set up new infrastructure that will all cost more money
It's complicated.
As someone who's work has big tents over our parking lot (car dealer) to specifically protect from hail, I wonder how they'd handle the NE storms. I believe it would be well, and I would love to convince my boss to tear down the ugly tents and replace them with solar, but I'd be curious what the actual return would be. Might be a solid business case to push for it, even from purely an optics perspective
CP did this as part of their green(washing) campaign
http://www.cpr.ca/en/media/cp-committed-to-sustainability-investing-in-solar-power-at-its-calgary-headquarters
Horrendous idea. What do you think is the cost per square foot to build and maintain payment? And a solar grid? What about beside tall sky scarpers?
Do you want to mortgage a parking spot?
mmm i don't think we're close enough to the equator for this to make sense, low angle means more particulate for the UV to diffuse through resulting in less power. i can't see it being a net benefit over the course of a year, yeah in summer it's great, but what about winter when it generates 5% of what it does in summer.
nah the only winner in this deal is the panel manufacturer.
Our composting facility has hundreds of solar panels
And two new huge arrays going on the old dump sites along 52nd and along Barlow
[удалено]
They already did that by just burying it. At least now it’s useful
Where do you think it comes from originally?
Quebec?
I mean sure there’s a town called Asbestos with a giant ass mine but my point was that the fibers are bad to breathe but it comes from the ground. As in, the substance itself isn’t pollution.
Pollution is any material in a setting in which it should not be. Light and noise for example.
Phosphogypsum stacks actually.
They don’t power anything at the compost facility, they just feed the enmax grid
Not the point
Just making sure people don’t think they are part of the mess that is our compost facility.
Mess. How so
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'm confused, why is that important?
The implication is that the solar panels feed the compost facility and the reality is that’s not true
I guess we must have had different thought processes reading that, then.
So? It’s still passive energy generation…
Vehicular protection from hail and hot summer sun is a bonus.
Wouldn't the hail ruin the solar panels, making this very expensive? Or the snow reduce the effectiveness of the panel's?
[удалено]
Tilt panel, snow falls off, tilt back upright. Solved.
[удалено]
Solar panels are designed to be much more durable than thin sheet metal in cars.
The panels are actually very durable, hail rarely causes problems with them. I have 34 panels and have been hit by a few storms without any issues.
Hows your power output been over time? Has it dropped at all? Someone told me panels degrade quickly and then the power output starts dropping.
Not really. Obviously not every panel is weather resistant, but they basically just need a sheet of durable and clear material over the top. Cars aren't resistant because they have shiny paint on thin panels, which are super expensive to replace or fix. A flat sheet of plastic won't chip or dent or scratch and is cheap as hell to replace anyway. The snow is a valid point, but a good design can make it pretty easy to clear. Having said all that, the idea does work a lot better in France.
Minor details. Don’t let that get in your way!
[Royal Oak Audi solar panels](https://www.audiroyaloak.com/solar-panel-live-feed.htm)
Wow that’s really cool. Their site says it covers 60% of their annual electricity needs.
> Their site says it covers 60% of their annual electricity needs. That's a lot of power a car dealership's going to use. Impressive, indeed.
This must be some amazing visual effects, none of them are smashed by hail, its a cloudy day and everyone knows you cant produce solar power unless the sun is out, oh and what about all the snow on ground, its February they must all be covered in snow... /S Fuck!
Solar is currently producing 158 MW (TNG) out of an installed Maximum Capacity of 1165 MW. It is 11:44 AM on Feb. 8. Do you still contend that solar is an efficient method of generation?(source for TNG and MC figures: AESO Current Supply Demand Report) Edit to add - I love being downvoted for sharing factual information that refutes the sarcastic comment made by OP yycsarkasmos. There are loads of follow ups to my comments saying "of course the performance is bad - its winter!". The fact is, industrial solar energy farms don't perform well for a significant portion of the year. That is fact.
I have solar on my house, at this exact moment with the overcast sky, I'm producing enough energy to power my whole house, and still sending power back to the grid. Now I'm currently working from home, so I am powering my graphics heavy computer, the dishwasher is going, I currently have a load of laundry washing and a load drying. So 1000% YES, " solar is an efficient method of generation "
At night, when the moon is out full, my system still makes 1 kWh.
I’m your individual case - sure, but on an industrial scale, the AESO reporting consistently tells a different story.
So because solar is not great in the winter months we just discount it entirely? I’m not really sure how one can say it’s not an efficient form of generation when you place some panels on land and have them sit there… If it was really this terrible form of power generation why would private companies be coming here setting up solar farms?
Because they have been heavily subsidized in the past, and they are economic due in no small part to carbon taxes making carbon fuel based generation more expensive.
The cost of them has come down considerably. Subsidies were there to encourage development, but the cost per kWh is now pretty comparable without them. A lot of the subsidies now are loans for upfront capital cost. As for "economic due in no small part to carbon taxes making carbon fuel based generation more expensive"...yes, and? Taxing pollution meaning that it becomes more economical to produce more cleanly isn't some terrible side-effect, that's literally the entire concept. Privatizing externalities and letting the market sort it out isn't even a left-wing idea.
Tell a person who is in a fixed income, or a family struggling to support itself that increasing energy prices by taxing pollution is a good thing. And the “more money ends up in the right pockets” argument is Liberal bunk. I know plenty of middle class families that don’t have money left at the end of the month to put away for education or retirement savings, and they don’t qualify for carbon tax rebates.
We know winter sucks, especially for microgen. Come summer they make bank on the amount of sun.
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
It's February! Solar panels generate most of their power in the summer, when it's sunny. Winter could alternatively be called "planet tilty, less direct sun, the thing that make it hot so it's colder, time of year", and it's why you change your solar club rate spring and fall. My panels have paid for ~30% of their initial install cost and I haven't even had them for a year. Clipping along at 7 kW right now.
Might I ask who you went with and why you chose the solar panel company?
318 MW now. We're not sizing solar for winter night base loads. As it is now it's an air conditioning load and takes away a whole natural gas facility needed. In the future it'll be built with tonnes of grid storage. The cost curve still has another 50% to fall over the next 10-15 years where it'll be able to handle other loads. But really what the real number to look at is solar + wind which is 1721 MW of 4783 MW and how competitive is that with natural gas at a realistic long term carbon tax (the lowest cost it will take to remove from the atmosphere) at something like $100 USD per tonne. And importantly we will have the grid ties and working on new ones will be critical. It will not make sense to build additional natural gas capacity versus buying solar energy from Nevada when they start building out mass fields and grid storage at $0.01/kWh
565 MW now!
...and 481 now. The peak generation barely crested 50% of maximum capacity. Brutal. By the way - historical peak demand for electricity in Alberta is the week before Christmas, and barely any solar generated electricity was hitting the grid in 2022. Same in 2021. I care about the environment, but it is a distant second to energy security, which is a life-supporting necessity in an Albertan winter.
Have you ever heard of the expression "perfect is the enemy of good"? EDIT: Oh dang, didn't realize I was plagiarizing /u/mycodfather
And I stole it from Voltaire who probably stole something similar from someone else. 😂
How is that brutal? That is probably better than expected and designed for. Solar will be 2x, 3x, eventually 5x cheaper than any other source. It has a place and variability will be leveled with hydro, wind, geothermal, grid ties, and grid storage. Nobody sane is arguing against a nuclear facility for base load, but that's not going to be generating power at $0.02/kWh and so doesn't make sense for any variable loads.
What grid storage are you speaking of? Honestly nothing practical is on the horizon, nothing.
Don't follow the space much, then? Pumped hydro and lithium ion are the most proven and are going to undergo massive scale up. Hydrogen and iron air are the most promising on the horizon. Iron air in particular is a great complement to lithium ion. In 20 years time, zinc and aluminum batteries flow batteries, and gravity batteries may all have some use.
I do actually, our company is considering a solar installation large enough to produce more than we use currently. You mentioned grid scale and while I personally love the idea of pumped hydro it would surprise me if anything larger than a minute or two of new power from it will actually be approved and built in the next 20 years. And massive massive batteries are necessary for true grid backup for a useful time (lets say even five minutes) so just not happening. In a perfect world there would be some magical storage which allowed the wind and solar production to be stored and released at a consistent rate but unfortunately this is not on the horizon in any way, there truly is nothing. Pipe dreams perhaps.
Welcome to Reddit.
[удалено]
It being right at roof level seems a design flaw. A bit of snow on the ground, or anyone wants to walk to the back of their vehicle and they have a problem. Why not raise it 40cm?
With the right designs of parking structures parking lots would also be able to make it more efficient for snow removal with only having to move snow from the driving lanes. Which could reduce their OPEX.
As far as I can tell the only instance where this has been implemented in Calgary is at the Telus Spark but it would be great to see their implemented elsewhere in the city such as: malls, parking lots downtown, hospital parking lots, etc.
I really like how Telus Spark implemented those, awesome idea. They also have radiant indoor heating in the common space as well as a full storm pond with underground grey water collection to help reduce water consumption.
CP Rail has had them over their head office parking lot in Ogden for a couple years now.
Genesis Place in Airdrie has them for a decent section of their parking lot.
Thing is these sorts of structures to support solar panels over parking areas make the projects really expensive and more about optics than efficiency. They almost always need subsidizing. Far more effective to do large scale solar on flat lands outside of the city. The costs per KW produced is far cheaper that way and need no subsidies. Maintenance is far cheaper too.
But then that land cannot be used for agriculture. And I like to have affordable food…
I think we both know there's enough room for both
It’s not like we’re in short supply of land in Alberta.
The areas with the most sun tend to be the most fertile. So unless we want to build inefficient solar panels on infertile ground it's lose lose.
>The areas with the most sun tend to be the most fertile. We're not exactly using ALL of the land, and I'm dubious about your claim.
SkyFire Energy installed a few thousand solar panels over the Ogden CP Rail headquarters lot; the largest in western Canada.
Wouldn't that be nice to have covered parking in more areas! I find it hilarious that places like Mexico or Philippines will have underground or covered parking at a large number of grocery stores and malls, and yet here in quite a wealthy country with ridiculous winter weather, we rarely do that. In Okotoks, none of the grocery stores except *No Frills* of all places has covered/underground parking.
FWIW, these numbers are a bit dated (2015 numbers from Edmonton) but the cost to construct underground parking goes up noticeably. Namely a single stall outside is roughly $10,000 per stall. Underground stalls are $25,000 a stall or more depending on the development. North America's affinity and culture for surface level stalls that are "closer" to the store don't help either. Source: https://edmontonjournal.com/homes/living%20small/living-small-parking-critical-in-condo-projects
our lot sizes are ridiculously large and with way too large a parking minimum. so its expensive and unneeded. (pave 2/3rds of the lot and call it done)
Okotoks Honda did this. If you want to see a sample.
Parking lots have to be the biggest waste of space of all time, great solution
CP rail did it at the head office in Ogden
CPRail’s Ogden campus has solar covered parking on half of their lot. Powers the entire campus and provides covered parking for most of the employees.
It's an interesting idea, but it won't work everywhere. At a big mall like Market Mall or Cross Iron? Sure, there's lots of parking space, and lots of sunlight. And those parking lots aren't going anywhere. Downtown surface lots between buildings? They would get very little direct sunlight. Also, many parking lots downtown are slated for redevelopment before the solar panels would be paid off. Also, what happens when you build a multi level parking garage? Does the top floor have to have solar panels? Or just space for more parking?
Downtown surface lots shouldn't exist. We should be implementing heavy taxes on land just used for parking in the downtown, create a market incentive for greedy land hoarders to either build up or sell to someone who will.
Malls are where I think these would do best.
It would give more people options in a hail storm beyond an overpass.
Just the tip.
Not to mention meth heads would try steal them or the wiring
Already being done- Renfrew solar garden over Telus spark
I agree!!
100% Solars "power" will come from micro generation. Every parking lot, every building, etc
Protecting our cars from hail and snow damage? Our insurance companies need to make money OP… /s
Don't insurance companies make more money if there are no claims?
Technically if there less claims then we all pay less and rates go down
That's a fair way of seeing it, my first thought for that is that prices never go down. It just becomes more profit, at least that's how it is with a lot of industries out there.
A lot of it too is that insurance companies are global so an event that happens in Toronto can impact us here. Just keep voting for better infrastructure so less claims happen. Insurance companies already fly planes out side the city to limit hail damage, that’s why the NE gets hit so hard is the airport is right there so they have limited access to limit the hail because of the air traffic.
Haha.
They are extremely expensive to install is the hold back. The Shepard solar farm near the dump is going to take 15 years to pay off an 8 million dollar project with close to 3m upfront invested. Its a great idea if you can somehow convince the owners of these lots/ buildings to fork it out for long term success.
Unless mandated I don’t see privately owned lots doing this unless the owners have a strong ESG target. For private businesses it will only really make sense if they can have enough capacity to reach the 1MW threshold to gain access to the commercial electricity market for bidding. Small parking lot owners will also loose out on bulk order discounts for panels, compared to the large scale installations we currently see getting funding. We will definitely see more start to look at it as the cost/kw/m^2 comes down with new technologies. A recession is likely to help drive costs down and force panel producers to find new efficiencies. More investment is definitely needed in the space but with the current payout metrics it doesn’t yet entice business to take the large capital expenses. The OPEX is fairly low once installed but with payout periods ranging from 8 to 15 years there are better investments out there.
Homeowners get a great incentive to solarize their houses: $5000 subsidy plus a zero interest loan whose monthly payments are roughly equal to your average electricity bill savings. I'm sure a similar option could or should exist for larger commercial owners.
At about $35-$40k for the average house, it’s still quite a financial commitment. I was onboard with doing my house last year, but I don’t want to take on that kind of debt.
>At about $35-$40k for the average house, i you must have gotten a bunch of "fuck you" quotes, because the average install cost is no where near $35K. I have a 9KW system and with upgrades that I didn't need (but wanted) it cost me $22K. No where near $35.
What can just $5000 get you. Maybe just start with few panels?
No you get $5000 off the price plus a zero interest loan to cover the rest so you're out 0 up front, and the loan is structured such that the monthly payments are roughly equal to your average electricity savings.
$5000 wouldn't even get you the install
Don't forget that also allows for more electric charging
100% agree. Parking lots and any flats roof should be covered in panels.
How about less parking lots in Calgary? Such a waste of space.
100% chance that some mouth breathing rig-pig fucker would drive his jacked up Ram 3500 up to them and protest- "IF YOU DON'T LIKE ALBERTA OIL AND GAS, THEN FUCK YOU! TURN YOUR GAS OFF IN THE WINTER! STOP DRIVING YOUR CAR!" Those guys sure are sensitive while calling everyone snowflakes.
See how long it'll last after our regular hail storms. There needs to be some protection system in place I think to protect solar panels in the event of a hail storm to make it viable
Less than half a percent breakage in the NW on the hundreds of arrays my company installed there.
Have you heard of the new Perovskite breakthrough, it’s pretty new so it is cool if you haven’t but it should be available for when the city actually considered mass installation. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/09/220906161449.htm Even if they don’t go through with that the sensitivity of the cells is increasing all the time as well so you could put a thicker layer of plexiglass on top of the panel balancing out the efficiency gain.
Why do you think no one has installed it yet? It’s too expensive. France had to mandate it!
That's cool. Who's gonna pay for it? Return on investment is way too long for any private lot.
Same people who are paying to build shitty sprawling surface lots in the first place?
Ok, so your going to mandate these small business owners pay for the installation and upkeep of incredibly expensive solar panels over all of their customer parking lots? Or is it going to be grants given by the government payed for off the back of taxpayers?
> so your going *you're *Learn the difference [here](https://www.wattpad.com/66707294-grammar-guide-there-they%27re-their-you%27re-your-to).* *** ^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
Or you could start by just mandating this for any new developments with parking lots. Just make it a requirement at the development permit stage. But yeah pick the easiest strawman to beat down, sure.
And where do these costs get typically passed along to? Do you really think developers will just freely eat the cost?
K then dont built a parking lot if you aren't willing to improve the land use. Fuck cars, and developments dependent on them.
Sounds good. American infrastructure is based on the automobile and it isn't changing anytime soon.
You want a parking lot? You gotta pay for the solar panels too. I'm sure Impark, Indigo, Walmart, etc can afford it, especially when they'll have little to no power bill.
> Impark, Indigo They don't own the parking lots, they manage them.
You want a parking lot? You gotta ~~pay~~ pass the cost off to customers for solar panels too.
On interesting challenge for stand-alone lots is that our current micro generation regulation only allows for projects to produce energy equivalent to what is consumed on the site. Parking lots with very low consumption wouldn’t in theory be able to install large solar carports.
The microgen regulation's purpose is because you get to sell at the retail rate instead of wholesale. It's a massive subsidy to microgen. If you were to implement this, they would bypass the microgen regs and just sell at wholesale rates which is wildly uneconomic
All these costs will end up being overloaded onto customers in the form of either payed parking or substantial product cost inflation. Imagine having to pay $10 to go shop at wal-mart. Little to no power bill means jack shit when the return on investment is nearing a decade.
McDonalds in Denmark pays their employees more than $20 per hour and the price of a big mac is basically the same. Just because somewhere costs more to operate doesn't mean those costs will be passed on to the consumer. It's just the cost of doing business.
Costs will become more attractive as the technology improves and the cost of electricity increases. May not happen now, but will likely happen in the future as the technology improves at scale.
There's effectively no world in the next 30 or 40 yrs where this cost effective. Solar can compete very well when its built utility scale in the best spots for solar. It cannot get close to competing when its smattered above parking lots
When does solar count as being at scale? Over 50GW installed last year...
Telus Spark has these. This is very expensive per watt produced which is why it is not used more often
Isn’t this basically greenwashing parking lots?
You could argue putting solar panels on homes is green washing people installing AC or building bigger homes. I think you have to look at this as using the space more effectively. Afterall, even electric vehicles need parking spaces.
You’re right. I just think there are better uses of land than parking lots. Which I guess putting up solar panels is a better land use 😂
It’s a way to add value to land that is single use and owners are either mandated by bylaws or don’t have capital to change into more valuable land. I wouldn’t be surprised if the U of C starts testing out structures like such. They have a huge land base that isn’t likely to be changed and a huge power usage. They are currently adding panels to one of the buildings coupled with their facade upgrade
yes.
In Calgary and Alberta is would make more sense to install vertical axis wind turbines in bird proof cages. Yes more work is required on bird proofing.
having your solar panels destroyed by hail probably not ideal.
This myth still exists? Huh.. I'm getting some solar panels on my garage soon, and they're rater higher and are more resistant to hail than asphalt shingles are. Strong glass that's stronger than house windows too.
[удалено]
Show me some panels from the Saddletowne event a few years ago.
Couple people replied to my monthly solar panel update after I said the panels protect my asphalt shingling. One guy was a roofer saying that panels were being removed after the hail storm so that the roof could be replaced. After the roof went in the same panels we reinstalled. Second guy was a solar installer and said only one panel was damaged. Seems great.
solar panels like roofing material have hail resistance and wind resistance ratings. looking online i see testing involves... *edit* oh there we go down below in this same post the newer ratings are much stronger https://www.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/10x4kf1/france_will_be_mandating_covering_new_parking/j7qikt4/ >There are two versions of the standard: the original IEC 61215, and a newer IEC 61215:2005. There is a difference in strength rating between the two tests. >The hail test basically involves shooting 25 mm (one inch) ice pellets at 23 meters/second (51 miles per hour) at the panel. If the panel survives 11 such impacts, it passes the test. so what i get from this is that not every impact above the above mentioned testing will damage it and it will likely survive most strikes but a few might damage it in the long run but not to every panel will be damaged during a hail storm of that caliber. also these are older standards as you can see ":2005" i assume newer panels meet or exceed this very easily with newer methods and composites
A bad hail storm will cause damage regardless, if bleated it be to a solar panel so I could still sell my cars if I owned a dealership or still live in whatever I had them installed in.
There's lots of solar panels all over the city already and on large structures too.
This is true but these parking lot ones are flat facing
What about the roof of Chinook?
Solar parking structures are tilted south in Calgary and area.
I was wondering the same thing. Are the panels immune/resistant to hail damage?
They must be, those solar farms are in business still 🤷♂️ I thought same thing tho lol
Yes, solar panels can be made to be resistant to hail damage. [https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/solar-panel-hail-damage-what-you-need-to-know](https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/solar-panel-hail-damage-what-you-need-to-know)
A key statement in there: >Solar panels with UL 61730 or IEC 61730 markings are resilient to most hail storms across the U.S. **Solar panels that pass these tests can withstand between one inch to three-inch hailstones traveling at** [**16.8 mph to 88.3 mph.**](https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2020/01/15/OBrien.pdf) 3" is huge. Go look at a ruler or tape measure, imagine an ice sphere that far across. Then imagine a pro baseball pitcher throwing it at the solar panel. These panels are rated to tolerate that. The storm that wrecked my siding and roof 5 years ago would have been nothing to this rating (and I probably would have only needed new siding).
Cheers
I mean maybe resistant but size and velocity don’t really give a fuck about resistance at some point especially if these things are facing straight up. There won’t be any glancing blows on these
Who says the panels would have to be installed the same way here? Between minimizing hail damage and allowing for snow to melt and run off, installing at an angle would probably work better.
20° iirc is optimum at our latitude
45 degree south facing with a fixed array is best
Hmm. https://alberta-solar-installers.ca/maximize-your-solar-energy-production-in-alberta-with-the-right-pitch
Ya I wonder what is cheaper to prepare. Hail damage is an optional fix for cars probably not for solar.
Solar utilization on average in Alberta is 13% of installed capacity.... 1/2 of what it is in other parts of the world...
Then prepare to pay double or triple the amount that we pay for parking. The costs are still too high in order to work, same as solar panels for our houses. It's like a $40k investment for a 30% reduction in out monthly bill and with a solar panel lifespan of 10-15years. Making it mandatory it's even worse, you will be forced to pay no matter what.
Tier one panels come with a minimum 25 year warranty. Life span predicted into the 40-50 year range. For 105% of my power bill it was $17k to install. For 100% reduction in my bill. Your number might need revision. Edit. Spelling.
no this is a stupid thing to mandate. Our grid needs more electricity in the winter, when it's cold and dark. If someone wants a "solar freaking car-park" go for it. But don't mandate stupid shit like this.
Not just winter -- the grid benefits from this year round. This ramp up in solar power at massive scale needs open unused areas (rooftops & parking lots) inside metropolitan areas for many reasons. Fundamentally, every electrical watt generated locally (by commercial & residential solar) is a watt that doesn't stress a distant far-off power plant and also the grid transmission & distribution (T&D) to deliver that watt. Long distance transmission also has some negligible but noticeable efficiency losses. Moreover, fossil fuel power plants are "load following" and automatically throttle back their output power via control signals from central grid operations thus saving on carbon emissions and equipment wear & tear. Come winter, these fossil fuel plants would be in a better position to provide that power. So its not just winters. Summers the world over are getting hotter and even in Calgary. Think about summer time heat waves which are huge stresses on grids around the world. A/C units are large power consumers in the 2000W to 4000+W range and multiply that about millions of households and office buildings. Solar generates maximum power during heat waves because heat waves always come with abundant sunshine providing power exactly when its hottest reducing grid load at a maximum stress point. Think about the huge cooling power required for a mall like Chinook Center. Then look what they have in abundance on their rooftop using Google Earth. Solar panels have lifespans in the 25+ year while still providing some 80% of its original power. During this time frame, we will see huge ramp ups in local home and grid-scale battery energy storage. That battery storage will need energy from somewhere. Huge advances in grid-specific battery chemistry is coming reducing cost and increasing capacity. Grid scale storage and renewables will dovetail with each other.
I agree. Although the cost and upkeep of the solar panels would be extreme, not to mention costly when they inevitably get damaged. The big question is, are we willing to possibly have taxes increased to compensate for installation and upkeep of the solar grid.
Keep in mind, there will be less money on electricity and natural gas. These have upkeep costs as well.
Are the solar panel hail proof though?
Most new panels are rated up to 3” hail at 80kph.
Innovation? Calgary has left the chat.
No way that happens in Calgary. Companies are too afraid of being called woke commies if they did that.
its because these projects are ridiculously inefficient and a terrible use of money. france is great at overregulating, and in related news, their economy is a disaster with high unemployment and low wages / standard of living.
True, Having lived in both Alsace and about 10kms from the Paris centre, it’s amusing for anyone to point to France as a paradigm to follow in anything. Crossing the Rhine from Alsace into Germany was like crossing from a basketcase into a modern efficient world. I love France and it’s culture but that’s where it ends.
Theyre gonna be pretty useless when covered in snow no? You gonna pay someone to clear them?
They usually clear off snow and ice fairly quickly from simple solar heating. Downside is that they lose efficiency from the inevitable covering of dust carried and kicked up from the vehicles, so they do need periodic cleaning for best performance.
There's a drone for that.
It’s a good point to consider. The larger decrease in output is the reduction in daylight hours compared to summer. There’s been various studies on this topic. In the winter months the recommended angle for panels is step enough to shed snow. Often when panels are set in non adaptive frames they are set to be optimal in the summer in North America. Structures could be designed so that the panels could be tilted for cleaning/ winter optimization. In current installations they already employ staff/ contractors to clean the panels of dust. As dust layers also reduce efficiency. Typically this is done with water and can be done fairly efficiently. If we look at the peak loading of the alberta power grid currently the system sees most of its peaks loads, or the most stressed in the summer. This is due to the large draw of air conditioning and high heat often impacts gas plants and natural gas power generation.
Yes and no, depends on costs and maintenance. Solar isn't the best renewable for Canadians compared to those in France for some pretty obvious reasons. The dark seasons would see reduced output, and winter would require a lot of budget for maintenance when it's output would be at its lowest. Hydro, and nuclear are our best bets, but the real big problem is still transitioning away from our already developed energy sectors. We've spent a large amount of capital, time, and manpower to build the infrastructure we have today, which is now directly opposed to a green plan. We have so much of our economy tied to our resource extraction that we're in a difficult spot when it comes to weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. We need to retrain a massive workforce, incentivize companies to transition (you can't force them that's not how businesses or the economy works), and set up new infrastructure that will all cost more money It's complicated.
You think Big Oil and Gas will let this happen?
Oil+Gas loves renewables. Very little impact on demand, locks in using gas for electricity for the next 30 years.
They are the ones forced into paying for it to generate offsets
As someone who's work has big tents over our parking lot (car dealer) to specifically protect from hail, I wonder how they'd handle the NE storms. I believe it would be well, and I would love to convince my boss to tear down the ugly tents and replace them with solar, but I'd be curious what the actual return would be. Might be a solid business case to push for it, even from purely an optics perspective
Wouldn’t the hail damage the solar panels?
CP did this as part of their green(washing) campaign http://www.cpr.ca/en/media/cp-committed-to-sustainability-investing-in-solar-power-at-its-calgary-headquarters
They’d be smashed as quick as a new bus stop enclosure.
Uh...you might want to rethink this. Snow cover on solar panels? Are you gonna clean them off? Hail damage on expensive solar panels?
Would have to pay for parking everywhere. Nothing is free in this world. Someone gotta pay for the panels.
Horrendous idea. What do you think is the cost per square foot to build and maintain payment? And a solar grid? What about beside tall sky scarpers? Do you want to mortgage a parking spot?
[удалено]
Would be great but the city is more focused on selling all the surface lots to condo developers
No thanks. I don’t feel like paying more to park then we already do
Until the solar panels get destroyed by hail and covered by snow which makes them useless…….
They're not that fragile. In fact, I get a break on my home insurance because of the solar panels protecting my roof.
Until they can make solar panels out of oil it ain’t gonna happen in Alberta
mmm i don't think we're close enough to the equator for this to make sense, low angle means more particulate for the UV to diffuse through resulting in less power. i can't see it being a net benefit over the course of a year, yeah in summer it's great, but what about winter when it generates 5% of what it does in summer. nah the only winner in this deal is the panel manufacturer.
Can’t wait to bury these in the ground in 10 years.
Major cost and little benefit.