Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Adding variable renewable power to the grid does not inherently change how this process of balancing electricity supply and demand works. Studies have shown that the grid can accommodate large penetrations of variable renewable power without sacrificing reliability, and without the need for "backup" generation.
There is baseload power like coal, nuclear, natural gas, and even hydro in most instances. Then there are supplementary power sources like wind, solar, manure digesters, etc...
Baseload power is reliable, dependable, and sustainable. You can plan for outages, peek periods and have baseload power meet the demands. With baseload power you can be confident that on Super Bowl Sunday you will be able to produce the power needs to meet demand. You cannot do that with wind and solar.
So the article you cited is blowing a lot of smoke up your ass. If the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing, "the process of balancing electricity supply and demand" does not work if you are relying on wind and solar to meet your needs.
Yes, but Trump likens wind power as something akin to a hampster wheel.
He is mocking the people who are misleading the public into believing that the USA can rely solely on wind and solar to meet the nation's energy demands.
Wind power and solar power create energy and store energy. The idea is the stored energy part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanst530
Ever heard of batteries?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanst530
Currently the system is designed to provide supplementary power to the grid during high demand. As storage technology improves, we may be able to take more conventional power generation off line. It's not going to be an overnight replacement of all conventional plants.
If they had a cost-effective way to store alternative-energy, we would have stopped using fossil fuels already. Our battery technology is terrible. If you tried to create massive battery banks from current Lithium-Ion technology to store gigawatts of power, electricity prices would at least triple.
Not only are those batteries expensive, but they have a limited number of charge cycles. And typically only last 5-10 years, as well as being incredibly dangerous on such a large-scale(huge fire hazard).
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmagoo
Here in Pa. the coal industry has given us 3,000 miles of dead streams. I`ll take the wind any day but it`s heartening to see a conservative care about wildlife.
If you switch to wind it means higher electricity prices. How much should electricity cost? And how would high energy prices affect the competitiveness of American business?
I'm personally an advocate for living like the Amish. But I know you guys ain't giving all this up.
If they had a cost-effective way to store alternative-energy, we would have stopped using fossil fuels already. Our battery technology is terrible. If you tried to create massive battery banks from current Lithium-Ion technology to store gigawatts of power, electricity prices would at least triple.
Battery tech certainly needs to improve -- I agree with you there -- but the reality is that it will not improve without consistent funding for research and development, and that is going to require some government involvement. Private investment as a primary source of funding just isn't reliable as most investors want fast results with large payoffs. Investors are also notorious for pulling out whenever setbacks occur... and setbacks WILL occur with this sort of stuff. That's just how it is... battery tech is generally a high risk area of investment as the vast majority of prototypes never see the light of day.
Tesla is selling their current lithium packs because they need some way of funding their R&D. Not ideal, but what are they supposed to do? They're the ones taking the biggest risks developing battery technology right now.
Then there are supplementary power sources like wind, solar, manure digesters, etc...
At this very moment as I type this in California:
21,070 MW Current demand
9,571 MW Solar serving load
1,956 MW Wind serving load
64% of load met with wind and solar. That's not "supplemental" power. Right now fossil fuel is supplementing the renewables and it's working great.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
Baseload power is reliable, dependable, and sustainable. You can plan for outages, peek periods and have baseload power meet the demands.
Fossil fuel baseload never has mechanical breakdowns? Of course they do.
Despite the high usage of solar and wind we rarely ever have power outages, and when we do, it's because a storm knocked a tree into an overhead line.
Solar and wind are reliable, dependable, and sustainable. Granted it makes the job of managing the mix of generation a lot more difficult, but it can be done. California proves it every day.
There is baseload power like coal, nuclear, natural gas, and even hydro in most instances. Then there are supplementary power sources like wind, solar, manure digesters, etc...
Baseload power is reliable, dependable, and sustainable. You can plan for outages, peek periods and have baseload power meet the demands. With baseload power you can be confident that on Super Bowl Sunday you will be able to produce the power needs to meet demand. You cannot do that with wind and solar.
So the article you cited is blowing a lot of smoke up your ass. If the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing, "the process of balancing electricity supply and demand" does not work if you are relying on wind and solar to meet your needs.
Aren't we saying the same thing? One cannot rely totally on wind and solar?
9,571 MW Solar serving load
1,956 MW Wind serving load
64% of load met with wind and solar. That's not "supplemental" power. Right now fossil fuel is supplementing the renewables and it's working great.
Fossil fuel baseload never has mechanical breakdowns? Of course they do.
Despite the high usage of solar and wind we rarely ever have power outages, and when we do, it's because a storm knocked a tree into an overhead line.
Solar and wind are reliable, dependable, and sustainable. Granted it makes the job of managing the mix of generation a lot more difficult, but it can be done. California proves it every day.
ohh ohh trying to educate the base
best trump quote today"I know a lot about wind"-----so true cause it can describe him---wind___ ]
If you started to read it that might double its readership.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Aren't we saying the same thing? One cannot rely totally on wind and solar?
