|
A lot of the solar manufacturers are essentially becoming utilities via PPAs...
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 06:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:43 |
|
|
DNK posted:Investing in solar is kinda weird, anyways. The profit / revenue opportunity offered by solar is to the bottom line of utility companies, not top-line sales growth of panel manufacturers. The problem with this is that it depends on the net metering regulations of a jurisdiction. An element of solar that everyone seems to forget is that the the majority of solar production within an interconnect is not actually assumed as available capacity. Solar acts as a highly variable peak shaving source and the associated utilities still need to provide baseline production to back it up if it fails. This means that the utility needs to run their coal boilers like they usually would, but not sell the kWh if the connected solar is producing. That obviously reduces their margins as they are running their factories but not selling any goods. Cheap natural gas helps with this a little bit, as those plants are easy to start up, but only so much. Likewise, distributed solar generation causes havoc with transmission. Power flows used to go top down in predicable ways. If you add distributed solar generation to the grid, you have power flowing every which way in a random pattern dependent on weather conditions. This is extremely hard to manage and requires significant and expensive investment into existing transmission schemes to implement. Finally, retail solar inverters generally don't provide kVAR to the grid. This means that every sub-unity load connected to the grid needs to be partially served from the utility's generators. Since individual meters measure real power and not apparent power, all those additional amps and their losses are provided for free from the utility while distributed solar sucks dry the billable kW. Utilities only like solar when they are the ones producing it on a large, concentrated scale. Unfortunately, this is becoming less and less common due to utility deregulation and laws mandating net metering of small solar installations. In these cases, the utilities get stuck holding the investment costs of making sure the entire grid doesn't collapse while smaller producers reap the billable kWh that used to pay for such improvements.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
The bizarro mental gymnastics of how solar is bad for utilities and consumers just never loving parses in my brain. Utter horseshit. Just because the utilities still operate like it's the 1910s and hide behind "peak demand is too hard waaaah" doesn't mean they should continue to do so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
greasyhands posted:A lot of the solar manufacturers are essentially becoming utilities via PPAs... Hoping my 8point3 shoots to the moon!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:The problem with this is that it depends on the net metering regulations of a jurisdiction. An element of solar that everyone seems to forget is that the the majority of solar production within an interconnect is not actually assumed as available capacity. Solar acts as a highly variable peak shaving source and the associated utilities still need to provide baseline production to back it up if it fails. This means that the utility needs to run their coal boilers like they usually would, but not sell the kWh if the connected solar is producing. That obviously reduces their margins as they are running their factories but not selling any goods. Cheap natural gas helps with this a little bit, as those plants are easy to start up, but only so much. Likewise, distributed solar generation causes havoc with transmission. Power flows used to go top down in predicable ways. If you add distributed solar generation to the grid, you have power flowing every which way in a random pattern dependent on weather conditions. This is extremely hard to manage and requires significant and expensive investment into existing transmission schemes to implement. Finally, retail solar inverters generally don't provide kVAR to the grid. This means that every sub-unity load connected to the grid needs to be partially served from the utility's generators. Since individual meters measure real power and not apparent power, all those additional amps and their losses are provided for free from the utility while distributed solar sucks dry the billable kW. This will be changing when the next version of the interconnect requirements come out and mandate modern inverters. IEEE looked at the newer tech and found that distributed solar with smarter inverters would actually be a huge help for grid power factor correction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:The bizarro mental gymnastics of how solar is bad for utilities and consumers just never loving parses in my brain. Utter horseshit. Just because the utilities still operate like it's the 1910s and hide behind "peak demand is too hard waaaah" doesn't mean they should continue to do so. It is absolutely an entrenched interest protecting their business model and I have no idea why people buy into it. It's like because it's all kind of sciencey sounding, people who are usually more skeptical just go 'oh yeah grid distribution blah blah blah'. It's loving electricity, not rocket science and yes our grid needs changed regardless of wind/solar's place
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:This will be changing when the next version of the interconnect requirements come out and mandate modern inverters. IEEE looked at the newer tech and found that distributed solar with smarter inverters would actually be a huge help for grid power factor correction. quote:The bizarro mental gymnastics of how solar is bad for utilities and consumers just never loving parses in my brain. Utter horseshit. Just because the utilities still operate like it's the 1910s and hide behind "peak demand is too hard waaaah" doesn't mean they should continue to do so. quote:It is absolutely an entrenched interest protecting their business model and I have no idea why people buy into it. It's like because it's all kind of sciencey sounding, people who are usually more skeptical just go 'oh yeah grid distribution blah blah blah'. It's loving electricity, not rocket science and yes our grid needs changed regardless of wind/solar's place Greasyhands recently quoted an article boasting how solar prices have dropped. Is that per solar panel? Installed kW? It almost assuredly doesn't include the billions that utility companies are going to have to invest to facilitate customers not buying electricity from them. Do you see now why they are so resistive into implementing such things?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 01:49
|
|
|
Cheesemaster I'll be looking for more to read on the issue and I'm glad you brought it up because it's an angle I hadn't even considered. Reactive power is a very real imaginary thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:The question is not whether inverters can provide VARs but where specifically the VARs are coming from. Currently VARs supplied through traditional generation scheme can be adjusted to meet demand because generators are fairly limited in number. If you have a 500mW generator in a centralized thermal plant, meeting MVAR demand is easy; you just adjust the field current as required. The same thing goes for a centralized solar plant. Providing reactive power is easy with modern IGBTs. The problem comes is when you have 500MW of production from 100,000 homes with retail solar installations on the roof. How do you tell each inverter how to operate? VARs are supplied to support voltage at a terminal, so you would control inverters exactly like a classic generator or cap bank control is done; by setting a desired voltage. You are also confusing where VARs are supplied to meet load, this is usually done at the feeder and not the generator because synchronous machines aren't very efficient at providing VAR support compared to a cap bank. Distributed inverter VAR control hasn't been implemented yet mostly due to a lack of necessity. It's also easier to plop a cap bank down at the substation and maybe a few poles and just not worry about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 06:01
|
|
|
These are all really easy problems to solve. Xcel is the utility that was really on the cutting edge of this, we should all have computered meters and be able to talk to the grid on our phones by now. Xcel was building all this and giving people apps to talk to the grid before the iPhone, I remember it well. Their initial tests revealed that when people can see their relationship with the grid in real time their energy use plummets drastically, and they became an order of magnitude (or more) likely to install solar/wind/battery setups. I was part of this program and was about to get a smart meter installed for free, but my timing was a bit late. When these initial tests revealed that it would effectively destroy much of Xcel's business they pivoted hard. Suddenly upgrading meters was this unfathomably difficult ordeal that would cost trillions, and a new policy of charging the gently caress out of anyone who looks at a solar panel was implemented. The Xcel tech who came to my house said "well sorry we can't install this here, you don't have a proper ground". When I pointed out the huge copper rod and wire that exceeds any code for grounding and that I personally checked every circuit was wired correctly to he got really nervous and said "sorry Xcel isn't doing these anymore" and just left. When someone starts complaining about the engineering being too difficult or the scale being too huge or the physics being too complicated they are generally full of poo poo. That's never been the reason for anything not getting done. Pryor on Fire fucked around with this message at 15:29 on Feb 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
In and out of FIT in four days. Back to even between this and ATVI 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
DNK posted:FSLR has a technology lead due to their manufacturing process, but it's still looking in the wrong place if you want make money, imo. Agnostically, who does solar benefit? Anyone who wants shitloads of cheap power. Who dat? I don't have anything in any solar at the moment but just to toss a ticker out for consideration wrt that question: TSLA? Assuming Musk can deliver on his promises, the combo of the solar roof + battery/charger + car is pretty killer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:I don't have anything in any solar at the moment but just to toss a ticker out for consideration wrt that question: TSLA? Big assumption.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
Let me tell you, this NVDA rollercoaster is a lot more fun when you don't have a ton of money riding on it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Bitcoin farmers benefit from cheap electricity. And pot farmers. Really everyone benefits from cheaper electricity. Transportation uses .2%.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:These are all really easy problems to solve. Xcel is the utility that was really on the cutting edge of this, we should all have computered meters and be able to talk to the grid on our phones by now. Xcel was building all this and giving people apps to talk to the grid before the iPhone, I remember it well. Their initial tests revealed that when people can see their relationship with the grid in real time their energy use plummets drastically, and they became an order of magnitude (or more) likely to install solar/wind/battery setups. Nobody is saying that implantation of large scale distributed solar can't be done. With enough time and money you can do pretty much anything in this industry. The question is who is going to pay for it; both the capital and operations cost. As I have previously stated, the cost of renewables is much more complex than just "5 cents a kWh", representing the cost of production. The back end investment is significant and must be made by players who have little incentive to do so. My city has full smart meters rolled out. The cost was borne by a rate increase to the consumer and it caused an uproar, especially since the local utility only currently uses it to reduce operational costs for meter readers. How much will rate payers and local public service commissions be willing to shell out for large scale grid improvements. quote:VARs are supplied to support voltage at a terminal, so you would control inverters exactly like a classic generator or cap bank control is done; by setting a desired voltage. You are also confusing where VARs are supplied to meet load, this is usually done at the feeder and not the generator because synchronous machines aren't very efficient at providing VAR support compared to a cap bank. Distributed inverter VAR control hasn't been implemented yet mostly due to a lack of necessity. It's also easier to plop a cap bank down at the substation and maybe a few poles and just not worry about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Let me tell you, this NVDA rollercoaster is a lot more fun when you don't have a ton of money riding on it. Sell to the fun point! Agronox posted:Picked up a bunch of Unilever (UL) at 47.20. Sold this at 47.58. I was completely wrong but still made a (nominal) profit. Guess it's just that kind of market. I was tempted to hold until hearing what's going on with this strategic review they're doing, but after thinking about it further didn't want to become an "accidental investor" on this. Anybody out there doing anything today?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Agronox posted:Anybody out there doing anything today? I'm considering NTDOY but it seems like just another "plastic game controller" type gamble. Pros are that peorders are solid and the device isn't unfavorably reviewed. The marketing is also much better than that for the Wii U.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
I sold AMD at 14.98 this AM 'cuz I ain't gonna look a +6% on the day spike in the mouth. Looking to get back in under that in the next couple days. The review embargo on Ryzen ends on March 2nd so I want to get in again before that, hopefully for a swing trade to catch some new product hype dollars. Last week I got FCX and lost about 3% on that position before I decided to nix it and load up on more AMD. I think FCX is going up in the 6-12 mo. time range (assuming copper/gold doesn't take a massive dump ofc) but that trade was just to see if I could catch a rebound after the dip on the Indonesia news. They still own the mine and it is still very potentially lucrative in terms of amount of copper/gold deposits. They'll work out a mutually beneficial deal I'm sure - I just don't feel like waiting around for that at the moment. I'm also considering NTDOY because I think the product will be stronger than people are giving it credit for but yeah that is kind of just a plastic game controller gamble. Not gonna put a lot of $$$ into that if I end up picking some up. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Feb 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
I intended to hold WDAY for longer, but it's up ~6% in a couple weeks and I'm out. I still like it on a longer term, but I expect I'll be able to get back in lower the next time anything doesn't go perfectly for them.quote:I'm also considering NTDOY because I think the product will be stronger than people are giving it credit for but yeah that is kind of just a plastic game controller gamble. Not gonna put a lot of $$$ into that if I end up picking some up. Super anecdotal "community impressions": the parents-of-9-year-olds-birthday-circuit chatter is not looking favorably on Switch. The Wii U wasn't a huge success yet still managed to burn a lot of brand capital (based on what parents I talk to are saying, I'm not market research or something). They see it as a fiddly mess with 90 kinds of controllers, Amiibos that don't work on the games people expect them to, the single "special" controller built to breed family resentment, and just not enough games for their kids to get full use out of it. All the different configurations of Switch just looks like more of the same. If they released a "normal" console at a competitive price point, I think they could have cleaned up. I think there's pent-up demand for a safe, simple game-box that comes with all the controllers you need, so the kids can play Mario with their sister while Mom sleeps. People are quite happy with the DS (usually the cheap, rugged 2DS, not the flippy gimmicky 3DS) for their kids because it's a very clear commodity; they don't want a new fragile gimmick. Now is the time for another Gamecube, not another Wii. jmzero fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Feb 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
ugh when do I sell VSLR?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
Anyone have any interesting ideas to look at? I have the day off and I would like to avoid politics for a while
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Harry Potter on Ice posted:Anyone have any interesting ideas to look at? I have the day off and I would like to avoid politics for a while Nintendo is probably opening up orders for switch dev kits this week (GDC; they announced for Japan a couple weeks during at a similar event). Not sure if it will move things; press already ran with it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
fougera posted:ugh when do I sell VSLR? About 18 months ago.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
jmzero posted:I intended to hold WDAY for longer, but it's up ~6% in a couple weeks and I'm out. I still like it on a longer term, but I expect I'll be able to get back in lower the next time anything doesn't go perfectly for them. ...annd back in today (it's back down 7% on surprisingly poor earnings). I continue to really like this company and I think it's a good value, but I think there's good odds I'll be in and out of it for a while - market seems to way over-respond to every win and loss.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Harry Potter on Ice posted:Anyone have any interesting ideas to look at? I have the day off and I would like to avoid politics for a while I still like EBIX and I've been beating that drum since about 2013. The thesis is very different today than it was back then, and the upside is nowhere near as high, but it's still undervalued IMO. Popped on another earnings/revenue beat today and made me a lot of money. mbisonyes.gif
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
GameStop (GME) is getting wrecked. Down about 8% at the moment on news that Microsoft will launch its own subscription-based online gaming library.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
I'm amazed Gamestop made it past like ~2010 to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:But what would be controlling all those inverters? They can meet their voltage as you indicate but do you really want thousands of these things acting independently and adjusting voltage and power factor fluctuations? I would think you would have stability problems. At least with capacitor banks you have an ability to shunt in and out and/or adjust taps; all controlled and monitored by a central system. My experience with the supply of VARs has generally been on the generator level on campuses; I have only been involved with capacitors on a select few projects. You can easily have inverters on the same line supply VARs with a couple set points and coordinating the voltage bandwidth between devices. This is something already done at transmission level gear when SVCs are used in conjunction with cap banks or multiple cap banks exist at the same substation. Or since these devices are on the feeders it would be easy enough to pick a VAR supply that's always required or based on time of day. Distribution systems already have this with pole mounted cap banks, which generally don't have SCADA control or even monitoring. Heck, even if it was required, there are wide area wireless network devices that can be used to cheaply build out a control network since very little bandwidth would be required. The reason why no one bothers is that a cap bank can supply a VAR with lower losses and is cheaper than electronic controlled devices.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
I'm not coming here to throw stones, but I followed a certain poster who won't stop talking about solar into SUNE last January. In the span of a month I lost 90% on the position. I thought it would recover so I didn't sell until a few days before they announced BK. Had I simply avoided solar, my portfolio would be up 36% in the past year instead of down 2% overall. I made like 6 great picks, a few that were even and that one bad solar play and I'm still not back to where I started. Past performance is not an indicator of future performance, but goddamn if solar is a wonderful technology with horrible stocks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
leper khan posted:Nintendo is probably opening up orders for switch dev kits this week (GDC; they announced for Japan a couple weeks during at a similar event). I've already decided to watch Nintendo from the sidelines, I have no idea how the switch will do. The peripherals are expensive but the battery life seems better than I thought it would be paternity suitor posted:I still like EBIX and I've been beating that drum since about 2013. The thesis is very different today than it was back then, and the upside is nowhere near as high, but it's still undervalued IMO. drat I missed the drum circle, it sure has.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
tesilential posted:I'm not coming here to throw stones, but I followed a certain poster who won't stop talking about solar into SUNE last January. In the span of a month I lost 90% on the position. I thought it would recover so I didn't sell until a few days before they announced BK. Had I simply avoided solar, my portfolio would be up 36% in the past year instead of down 2% overall. I made like 6 great picks, a few that were even and that one bad solar play and I'm still not back to where I started.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
nm
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
tesilential posted:I'm not coming here to throw stones, but I followed a certain poster who won't stop talking about solar into SUNE last January. In the span of a month I lost 90% on the position. Just out of curiosity, who clicked "confirm" on the trade?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Blinky2099 posted:Were your 6 "great picks" great because they won, or great because you actually did a shitload of research and made the best decision with the information you had, and had good reason to believe that you knew more than the rest of the market? Because if 6 of the picks you made happened to turn out well that doesn't make them great picks. Similarly, if you had won on SUNE because you followed a random internet stranger's advice that would still not be a great pick; rather a bad pick that happened to turn out well.  you chose the word "great" to reply to? Whether or not my pick's success was based on "luck" or "skill" has nothing to do with my post. I was simply saying 6 winners don't make up for the 1 loser. Just like in school one low "F" on an exam drags your grade down, even if you get an "A" on every other test.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
tesilential posted:I'm not coming here to throw stones, but I followed a certain poster who won't stop talking about solar into SUNE last January. In the span of a month I lost 90% on the position. I thought it would recover so I didn't sell until a few days before they announced BK. Had I simply avoided solar, my portfolio would be up 36% in the past year instead of down 2% overall. I made like 6 great picks, a few that were even and that one bad solar play and I'm still not back to where I started. Wonderful tech doesn't mean wonderful investment. Look at how many dotcoms went belly-up in 2000.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
tesilential posted:
If you had six stocks making 36% last year on average, and one -90% loser, but invested the same amount in each, you'd still come out way ahead (something like 18% return.) Did you load up the truck on SUNE or something?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
Agronox posted:Just out of curiosity, who clicked "confirm" on the trade? Don't want to empty quote but...
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
tesilential posted:
tesilential posted:I thought it would recover
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:43 |
|
|
monster on a stick posted:If you had six stocks making 36% last year on average, and one -90% loser, but invested the same amount in each, you'd still come out way ahead (something like 18% return.) Did you load up the truck on SUNE or something? He referred to 36% as his would-have-been-total ROR, not his average winner. I.E.: 1.36 = (A)*(B)*(C)*(D)*(E)*(F) He also gave us: 0.98 = (A)*(B)*(C)*(D)*(E)*(F)*0.1
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 21:14
|
|
