Solar cell design with over 50% energy-conversion efficiency

[kristopher]

11. As they build more renewables, then what obsolete generation will be turned off?

Nuclear and coal baseload plants are inflexible. As renewable penetration increases. based on lowest cost bidding the market will employ the no-fuel-cost renewables first and the existing fossil fuel/nuclear plants will have to continue splitting a steadily declining market share.

At what point do the inflexible, money-hogging nuclear plants give way? As it stands, the nuclear credits look to be nearly $8B over the next 12 years (and possibly as much as $12B), while only $2.4B is expected for renewables.

Also, you have included some invalid assumptions in your reasoning.

...replace those 3.5 GWh with non-hydro renewables, you will need to increase them by a factor of 7-8 overnight.

Why would we replace the 3.5GWh with non-hydro renewables; and why would that have to take place "overnight"? Both of those assumptions without merit. I'd suggest we look at how the nuclear plants in California have been phased out for a more realistic look at what type of shutdown path would be expected to emerge. And even that is rapidly becoming out-of-date due to the continued rapid price decline of renewable infrastructure.

Where will we be in our carbon replacement effort in 12 years with (A) all the funding going to support nuclear generation that has to be shut down anyway because of it's poor fit to the modern grid; versus (B) putting those funds into sustained strong commitment to renewables and energy efficiency?

ETA one more thought - which of those two pathways will put more pressure on the fossil plants we want to shut down?
There is a well accepted path for new technology adoption called the S-Curve. It basically breaks down the overall path of adoption and replacement into 5 segments (a few details here https://www.democraticunderground.com/1127109684 ).

We are trying to accelerate change and our planning should recognize that we are embarking on the high rate of adoption segment we see in the S curve.

The adoption curve

When an innovation is introduced into a market, it takes a number of year to ‘diffuse’ and penetrate the market. The adoption typically looks like an S-curve as shown in the following chart. The adoption curve provides a useful way to break down customers in five segment: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, laggards.


Adoption curve

Innovators are the first to adopt new products and services. They are technology freaks par excellence, and like experimenting and playing around to find out what they can do with their new toys. Innovators typically represent a few percent of the target user base.

Early adopters also invest early on in new technologies, not as technologists, but to address their concrete problems.

- They typically represent about 10% of the target population.
- In companies, early adopters are opinion influencers. Often they will not be decision makers themselves, but are key to convince others. Early adopters are usually at the centre of extensive communication networks, for instance internal management circles, industry fora, or are very sociable individuals in their private sphere.
- When a critical mass of early adopters has developed, the process of technology diffusion becomes self-sustaining and like a snow-ball effect, it spills over to the early majority. On the other hand, competing and incompatible standards slow down the rate of adoption and the transition from early adopters to the early majority.

more at: http://www.business-planning-for-managers.com/main-courses/marketing-sales/marketing/the-adoption-curve/