Net Zero - A Solar Dilemma

 

Net Zero - A Solar Dilemma 

Being unfamiliar with this term I wanted to know what it meant. I was told that it was coined by those who were in a hurry to save the planet with someone else’s money. Upon further probing I discovered that it aims at achieving some kind of a balance between CO2 emission & absorption. CO2 being bad for the environment we must urgently deal with coal fired power plants, the champion emitter which deserves to be shut down quickly and promptly replaced by RE (renewable energy) like solar, wind, hydrogen, nuclear etc. 

In India solar is a hot favourite. Government has ambitious investment plans to build huge solar power plants across the country. I therefore decided to beef up my somewhat sketchy knowledge by viewing material on social media. What I understood was that China dominates the world's solar market with 70% share in technology, panels, modules, cells, minerals mining & refining and electronic controllers. Therefore the world, including India, is spending billions of dollars to save the planet by buying Chinese solar systems, either directly or via conduit of third countries. 

Developed countries are shutting down coal and nuclear power plants to save the world, inadvertently enriching China buying copious quantities of their solars, EVs and batteries. Of course, at a convenient date China can & shall weaponise all these to dominate everyone thus obviating any need for saving the planet.

From user reports in social media, net-metering schemes of discoms for rooftop (residential) mini plants seem to be the darlings of both the consumers and discoms (power distribution companies or EBs) alike. But will this remain so when rooftop generation, which is currently small, becomes significant overtime? Will Discoms, already under extreme financial stress, be able to sustain loss of revenue to rooftop operators & will the power grid remain stable when the highly variable rooftop component becomes difficult to control? Only time will tell.

Typically, a thermal power plant generates or is capable of generating energy proportional to its name plate rating or thereabouts. But not so for solar. Between the nameplate power rating of a large solar generating plant and its actual power generation there is a wide gap. This is because radiation from the sun varies throughout the day and is zero at night. For example, as per annual report, Kayamkulam floating solar plant of NTPC in Kerala has a nameplate rating of 92 MW but generated 217 MKWh of energy in 2023-24, about 27% of what a thermal power plant of equivalent rating would have delivered. The capital cost of this solar plant was 465 crores. A thermal plant of equivalent rating would cost 92X8.34(normative value per MW) = 767 crores. Therefore solar costs 60% of equivalent thermal plant but delivers only 27% energy. Since solar produces variable energy through the day and also from one season to another, its output has to be balanced by coal or gas plants for grid stability. This Is kind of subsidy to solar in addition to other subsidies granted by various governments. Subsidies are burdens to be carried by electricity consumers.

Solar and wind are more expensive compared to other sources of energy. But can’t become viable unless a technological breakthrough in economical grid scale storage is achieved. And this is yet to happen, meanwhile huge and mindless investment in grid scale solar farms is happening with taxpayer’s money. The buck will stop at the consumer's end in the form of ever rising energy bills.

This is being realized with much pain by consumers in Germany, UK, USA and other developed countries who were gung-ho about RE and had been on a wild roller coaster ride started by the green mafia. Now the chickens have come home to roost.

As for solar being environment friendly, this is at best only partially true or at worst blatantly untrue, considering pollution caused by mining for raw materials, refining, processing, transporting etc. And there being no solution for disposal of defective and end of life millions/billions of panels and associated toxic gears that are not biodegradable. Like EV batteries, an immeasurable quantity of panels, wind turbines, magnets, electric circuits will be dumped all over the world contaminating soil, ground water and air. The third world population with very poor law enforcement will suffer the most.

The votaries of ‘net zero’ (no to fossil fuels) movement come in three categories. The first one, though well intentioned, are naive believers who tend to believe in anything and everything. In the second category are those who are driven by prospects of financial gains by riding the bandwagon. In the third are those who consider it fashionable to be the saviors of the planet although they themselves ride big SUVs, use multiple air conditioners and zip around the world in jets attending COP, G20, G7, UNGA, DAVOS, BRICS & useless events of myriad UN bodies. In fact, they need to go nowhere in the age of Zoom & Google Meet . They can save the planet without burning jet fuel.

By the way I am not anti solar, on the contrary am a strong admirer of inventors of photovoltaic phenomena and developers of practical solar technologies. Having visited Chinese plants several times and seen their outstanding achievements, I am in awe of China’s technological thrust, spirit of enterprise and manufacturing prowess. I hope that our leaders make proper use of this technology. Until grid scale storage becomes a reality, solar should be left to private initiative for domestic, industrial and commercial applications without subsidies.

There are links to three videos that provide useful insight to this subject.

Vijay Mujumdar 

23.01.2025

https://youtu.be/Kjl_HjEL3Sc?si=1eqy190uz2pNDBVB

https://youtu.be/bs0ZHj76Arc?si=qUt3iLPk5BHMOZju

https://youtu.b

e/gPO3mRmSzH0?si=l5D3Zk3WquGtcKzq