This tweet by Stanford professor Mark Jacobson caught my eye because the first part is obviously nonsense. Solar PV is great, but it will do very little to reduce our *heating* bills. When heating demand is high, solar PV output is low at our high latitudes.
In these complicated times, I think it’s essential that experts are very precise in their communication. The energy transition is complex, and many are confusing the debate already.
But Jacobson denied that (the first part of) his tweet was misleading, using the fact that he just copied the title of an artice as an excuse.
Not a valid excuse in my opinion. Don’t turn nonsensical headlines into a tweet that subsequently looks like a statement from an expert. But I had a look at the article itself too. And it’s not good.
The 2nd paragraph boggles the mind: One of the driving factors behind energy poverty and the rising cost of heating bills across Europe is the European Commission’s regulated energy costs, which were originally implemented after World War II to establish fixed energy prices.
There is no *rising* cost of heating bills across Europe. And the energy costs (author probably means prices) are not determined by the EC. Prices vary by country, and we have competitive energy markets.
Taxes play a big role in our energy bills. Many European countries have decided to tax energy consumption, but their taxes vary widely as well, and are not determined by the European Commission.
The article promoted by prof. Jacobson continues: “the regulations have led to the creation of a European energy monopoly”. Nonsense again; who is supposed to be this monopolist then?
After giving the wrong number for the EU’s 2020 renewables target (it’s 20%, not 15%), the article continues: “In September 2018, the EC eliminated tariffs on imported Chinese-made solar panels – as a result, prices of solar panels are expected to fall as low as 30%”
The author probably means that the prices of solar panels could fall by as much as 30%. If you click the link that’s supposed to give the background, it brings you to an article that doesn’t discuss such a forecast at all.
The impact would be modest; solar panel cost is now only 1/3 (or less) of the cost of a residential solar PV system. But, says the article: it means “households in energy poverty can turn to solar energy as an affordable energy source to heat their homes during winter months.”
Which is the nonsensical statement that Jacobson tweeted. Solar PV panels are great, but they will not play a big role in heating homes here. Even if households have heat pumps, the solar PV output will be low in the months that they need heating.
The article continues by claiming that the success of the new Spanish govt’s scrapping of the tax on residential solar auto-consumption (great decision, btw) has led it to announce 100% renewable energy by 2050.
That’s two errors in one statement.
That’s two errors in one statement.
1. The scrapping of the solar tax was only announced last month, so the subsequent govt announcement wasn’t based on its success.
2. Spain announced to aim for 100% renewable *electricity*, not 100% renewable energy. Quite a difference.
2. Spain announced to aim for 100% renewable *electricity*, not 100% renewable energy. Quite a difference.
And finally, yes, very cheap solar PV could help reduce household electricity bills, and thus alleviate energy poverty. But even that isn't straightforward. Depends on regulation too; e.g. NL has announced end of net metering.
In short: Can energy experts please focus on providing good information, and explaining complicated matters in clear language? And refrain from retweeting nonsensical headlines, with links to artices full of crap.
And here's the perfect illustration of that point, by @BM_Visser:
Professor Jacobson is getting a little aggressive. And constantly changing the subject too. Thanks for the suggestion, but I'll leave the tweets here for now. People can do their own thinking.
Now you can blame “Open Access Government” for publishing all that nonsense, but not for writing it, as @StephenLeahy pointed out. It was originally published by “Informed Infrastructure", as an advertorial for Si, Solar Investment Group: informedinfrastructure.com/43668/the-intr…
Solar Investment Group is a solar project developer and investor. All OpenAccessGovernment apparently did was erase their logo from the top, their boilerplate text from the bottom, and the name of the author (Paul Dubey). Et voilá, there's your source of solar energy information!
Hmm, now prof. Mark Jacobson claims that this graph of the production of @MLiebreich's solar PV system "clearly shows that his PV will reduce his winter *heating* bill".
To stay on the safe side (quick temper!), I'll just say that I'm probably not smart enough to understand why.
To stay on the safe side (quick temper!), I'll just say that I'm probably not smart enough to understand why.
