Replacing Coal Fired Power Plants With Solar RoofsNSM6020 Current Topics In Earth and

Space Science

Photoelectric Effect

In 1905, Albert Einstein discovered that light could free electrons on the surface of metals and cause them to flow making electricity.

In 1921 he received the Nobel Prize in Physics for the discovery. It was his only Nobel Prize.

Photoelectric Effect

Photoelectric Effect

When the light is on, photons give their energy to loosely held electrons in the metal and they begin to flow thus producing electric current.

http://ed.fnal.gov/projects/photoe_lab/student/background.html

Right Now We Burn Coal To Make

Electricity

A Lot Of Coal

A Lot Of Pollution

A Lot Of Money

Is There An Alternative?

My Hypothesis: If electric utilities provided homes and businesses with photovoltaic roofs then they could increase the profitability of providing peak and intermediate electricity over the cost of building and operating new power plants.

Solar Roofing Shingles

Seamlessly Integrate

Come In Many Styles

On New Construction

Or As A Replacement Roof

Installs The Same As A Conventional Roof

And Saves Money

Hypothesis

Hypothesis: I believe that power companies could actually increase their profitability by diverting new fossil fuel power plant building funds away from new construction and into providing homeowners with photovoltaic roofing shingles.

Analysis

As a baseline comparison, the least expensive overnight cost power plant will be used as the basis for comparison to the possibility of solar roofing on homes within that power plants service area. In this case that would be dual unit advanced pulverized coal without a carbon capture system. For that type of power plant the overnight (construction) costs equal $2,934 per kilowatt production ability. This plant typically has a nominal capacity of 1,300 megawatts. Therefore, the total cost of construction for this plant would be $2934 x 1000 x 1300, which equals $3,814,200,000. (eia.gov report)

Analysis

Fuel costs have risen 76.7% from 2002 to 2012.

Operating costs have risen 67%

Based on EIA data report.

Analysis

According to the Dow Powerhouse Website, a major producer of solar roofing shingles, the cost to do a 3000 square foot roof is approximately $46,460.http://www.dowpowerhouse.com/value/ This equals 15.5 cents per square foot. For that investment a solar roof would generate 12 watts per 15.5 cents. Current technology in solar roof shingles generates 12 watts per square foot of roof. (Sun roof: Solar panel shingles come down in price, gain in popularity. (2013, Apr. 2). Scientific American. Retrieved from: http://www.scientificamerican.com/)

Analysis

The total electrical energy that can be generated from a 3000 square foot roof using current efficiency is 12 watts x 3000 square feet equals 36000 watts or 36 kilowatts per hour. Because weather is unpredictable and accounting for seasonal changes it is necessary to make some estimates on the amount of time the solar roof will be producing electricity. Calculations for the comparison are based on the following criteria:

Analysis

Part 4: Number of sunny days in a year-150 with most being in the Summer.

Number of hours per day the sun is hitting the roof at a usable angle-7 hours.

Number of years the shingle will last-30 years.

In Illinois, reasonable estimates calculate as the following:

36 kW x 150 days per year x 7 hours per day x 30 years equals 1,134,000 kWhrs of electricity generated from one roof over the life of that roof.

Analysis

When the cost of the roof is divided by the amount of electricity generated, $46,460/1,134,000 kWhrs the final cost is equal to $.04 per kWhr.

Coal costs 3.6 cents per kWhr not including the overnight costs.

If the homeowner pays for installation the cost per kWhr comes down more.

Rising Costs From 2002-2012

Operational Costs rose .114 cents/kWhr

Maintenance costs rose .132 cents/kWhr

Fuel cost rose .808 cents/kWhr

Total rise in cost per Kilowatthour to produce electricity in 10 years using fossil fuel equals 1.053 cents.

The most significant portion of the rising cost is FUEL for operating these power plants.

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa_08_04.html

Emissions Decreased

From 2002 to 2012 emissions decreased as following: (In thousand metric tons)

CO2 from 2,423,963 to 2,156,875

SO2 from 10,681 to 3,704

NOx from 5,194 to 2,148

BUT, AT WHAT COST?

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report"

Table 9.4. Average Costs of Existing Flue Gas Desulfurization Units

Pollution scrubber costs rose from $135.41 in 2007 up to $252.48 in 2012 per unit.

Scrubbers do remove pollution from gases but must pollute water to do so.

There are no free rides!!!

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-860, "Annual Electric Generator Report"

Increasing Efficiency

Right now solar cells highest level of efficiency peaks around 25%. That means that only 25% of the sunlight that strikes the surface of the cell is converted into electricity. That may be changing soon. Dr. John Rogers of the University of Illinois-Champaign-Urbana is experimenting with a new configuration of stacking solar cells and using more efficient materials like arsenic, gallium and indium That might be able to double the efficiency of solar cells very soon.http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21596924-way-double-efficiency-solar-cells-about-go-mainstream-stacking)

Conclusion

In conclusion, my hypothesis is correct for the most part. As the cost of fossil fuel, specifically coal, continues to rise and the cost of solar electricity continues to fall due to increasing efficiency and lower production costs, electric companies will become more able to provide their customers with quality service at a lower cost while still being profitable. Combining this methodology with other sources of renewable energy like geothermal, wind, and bio-fuels will only make the bottom line better for everyone involved.

3/7/14