excuse my ignorance with these questions, but this is something I've been wondering every time I see an article like this (specifically the batteries needed for solar).
1) shouldn't we be concentrating our efforts on reducing the requirements from the grid to near zero for new housing builds?
Newer builds will (hopefully) also incorporate the latest in conservation technologies (better performing insulation, etc) resulting in a lower energy requirement regardless of the source. One would also imagine that new home builders implementing solar solutions would see cost benefits from scale.
2) wouldn't the efforts of concentrating on new home builds have a two pronged benefit on everyone else?
Not only would technology advances become available for retrofit projects, but the reduced strain on the grid could potentially reduce the costs grid wide?
3) what would be the benefit of having a centralized solar installation?
Any solution that centers around having a mile square cube (from the linked article) seems a bit silly to me, wouldn't houses having their own battery solution make much more sense? Having individual batteries would allow for a market for these solutions and, one would hope, from the competition within this market, new and better solutions would emerge.
Pretty sure he's not advocating actually making a mile square cube of battery. He's just illustrating the scale of the problem. It's the same amount of battery no matter how you divide it up.
Efficiency is definitely some low-hanging fruit. It only gets us so far, though. Rooftops are probably the most effective place to deploy solar, but housing is only one piece of the puzzle.
1) shouldn't we be concentrating our efforts on reducing the requirements from the grid to near zero for new housing builds?
Newer builds will (hopefully) also incorporate the latest in conservation technologies (better performing insulation, etc) resulting in a lower energy requirement regardless of the source. One would also imagine that new home builders implementing solar solutions would see cost benefits from scale.
2) wouldn't the efforts of concentrating on new home builds have a two pronged benefit on everyone else?
Not only would technology advances become available for retrofit projects, but the reduced strain on the grid could potentially reduce the costs grid wide?
3) what would be the benefit of having a centralized solar installation?
Any solution that centers around having a mile square cube (from the linked article) seems a bit silly to me, wouldn't houses having their own battery solution make much more sense? Having individual batteries would allow for a market for these solutions and, one would hope, from the competition within this market, new and better solutions would emerge.