U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-18-2018, 07:00 AM
 
36,965 posts, read 37,839,848 times
Reputation: 14760

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
Of course you have to deal with reality. What happens now is you maintain the existing fossil capability. But it is of course less and less cost effective as you lower its utilization with cheaper solar or wind. So over time you bring in gas and gas plants to replace fossil capacity as it ages out.

Regardless of whether it's coal, nuclear or gas fire you still need to build that capacity and they all become less cost effective.



Quote:
But the replacement assets become low capital cost gas and perhaps long haul power lines.

It's lower capital cost, they are more efficient and more effective for use where the power demand on them is fluctuating daily because of solar/wind. However the price of gas on average has been roughly 75 to 100 percent higher over the last decade spiking in 2014 at 300% more.





Quote:
And it is possible we may eventually see workable battery storage. Particularly possilbe if the cost of solar gets cheap enough.

In an interesting twist on this battery storage can be utilized for fossil fuels to eliminate the cost of capital in power plants, they effectively all become base load plants with the battery taking on the role of intermediary and peaking plants. This favors coal plants because of the lower cost of the fuel, it would favor them even further if the same tech could be developed for coal that is being used for gas that makes them more efficient.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-18-2018, 12:53 PM
 
2,271 posts, read 963,619 times
Reputation: 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
And how do you propose supplying power to the Northeast when we have an event like we did this last winter when you had coal, nuclear and gas plants running at capacity nearly constantly for more than a week. Your capacity and storage requirements go through the roof and at the ned of the day you are throwing the dice that capacity and storage is enough.



They don't even have the gas infrastructure to accommodate this. Back in 2014 they were bordering on disaster because there is only so much supply of gas in the pipes. Because of a combination of closure of coal plants and increased demand across the board for domestic, industry and power plants they pushed the supply to it's limits. They have addressed this short term by making the power plants dual fuel, they have onsite storage of oil which they were using this past winter.
Never could figure out why their is limited natural gas lines up north. Everybody still using oil to heat the houses, when natural gas line would been beneficial.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2018, 03:46 PM
 
10,273 posts, read 3,522,390 times
Reputation: 4557
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Regardless of whether it's coal, nuclear or gas fire you still need to build that capacity and they all become less cost effective.
You end up pretty much with gas. And you may well end up favoring the cheaper peaking plants. And again some high voltage trans continental plants may be effective.




Quote:
It's lower capital cost, they are more efficient and more effective for use where the power demand on them is fluctuating daily because of solar/wind. However the price of gas on average has been roughly 75 to 100 percent higher over the last decade spiking in 2014 at 300% more.
Your numbers do not compute. the cost of gas has been around $5.00 per 1000 cf since a higher peak in 2008 There was a minor peak in the winter of 2014 but that is it.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n3045us3m.htm




Quote:
In an interesting twist on this battery storage can be utilized for fossil fuels to eliminate the cost of capital in power plants, they effectively all become base load plants with the battery taking on the role of intermediary and peaking plants. This favors coal plants because of the lower cost of the fuel, it would favor them even further if the same tech could be developed for coal that is being used for gas that makes them more efficient.
Still better to build more solar as the fully loaded cost of solar appears to be below the variable cost of fossil. That means it will always be cheaper to add solar rather than running a fossil plant. So the only real use for fossil is to fill in the gaps in the ability of solar to perform.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2018, 05:53 PM
 
36,965 posts, read 37,839,848 times
Reputation: 14760
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
Never could figure out why their is limited natural gas lines up north. Everybody still using oil to heat the houses, when natural gas line would been beneficial.

They were adequate before but that is no longer the case. The increased demand justifies more supply but you don't simply snap your fingers and build a gas line especially with all the legal hurdles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2018, 05:59 PM
 
36,965 posts, read 37,839,848 times
Reputation: 14760
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
Your numbers do not compute. the cost of gas has been around $5.00 per 1000 cf since a higher peak in 2008 There was a minor peak in the winter of 2014 but that is it.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n3045us3m.htm


My mistake, incomplete sentence. To clarify that should of read "....the price of gas per BTU on average has been roughly 75 to 100 percent higher than coal"

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2018, 11:48 AM
 
2,271 posts, read 963,619 times
Reputation: 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
They were adequate before but that is no longer the case. The increased demand justifies more supply but you don't simply snap your fingers and build a gas line especially with all the legal hurdles.

So when the north build houses they didnt think of having natural gas lines to be installed and just kept relying on oil to burn, or electric heaters. Thought they was innovators of forward thinking..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2018, 02:40 PM
 
36,965 posts, read 37,839,848 times
Reputation: 14760
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
So when the north build houses they didnt think of having natural gas lines to be installed and just kept relying on oil to burn, or electric heaters. Thought they was innovators of forward thinking..

The house I grew up in had gas lines we found in the wall during a renovation that were for lighting, the house was built right before electric became common. It was also built in a densely populated area and that is what it comes down to today. There is small towns here in Northeastern PA surrounded by gas wells and major supply pipes and they do not have gas. Even in a small town that has 500 households it's not cost effective for them to build the infrastructure to supply customers in that town let alone ones that are not near major supply pipes or individual homes that dot the landscape. Even if you are on a street in a densely populated area where a gas line was never ran you are probably going to be out of luck unless you can get many of the neighbors onboard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2018, 05:27 PM
 
2,271 posts, read 963,619 times
Reputation: 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
The house I grew up in had gas lines we found in the wall during a renovation that were for lighting, the house was built right before electric became common. It was also built in a densely populated area and that is what it comes down to today. There is small towns here in Northeastern PA surrounded by gas wells and major supply pipes and they do not have gas. Even in a small town that has 500 households it's not cost effective for them to build the infrastructure to supply customers in that town let alone ones that are not near major supply pipes or individual homes that dot the landscape. Even if you are on a street in a densely populated area where a gas line was never ran you are probably going to be out of luck unless you can get many of the neighbors onboard.

Guess we got spoiled with it down in teh south.. Its always been natural gas or propane. We moved away from burning oil down here..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2018, 06:24 PM
 
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
1,534 posts, read 578,914 times
Reputation: 2963
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
You cannot lower the capital investment in the traditional plants because when the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing those conventional plants are required to meet demand. I'm not so sure why this is so difficult to understand. .

Speed reading thru this thread to catch up.-- I think other readers don't understand that the conventional power plants need to provide the back-up for the unreliable, intermittently working solar & wind plants and the conventional plants have to be kept running, but not producing energy, even when the alternative power plants are indeed functioning.



Cf- how bad is the economics of shelling out big bucks for a family car and paying for fuel because it had to be kept idling at all times in your driveway but used only when it's raining out and you couldn't get around on your bicycle?


Re: hoping for a better battery-- the Babylonians seem to have had the first Leyden jar 4000 yrs ago. We're still stuck on that same paradigm and not much closer to the dream. Don't hold your breath waiting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2018, 06:32 PM
 
2,271 posts, read 963,619 times
Reputation: 2005
Well consider the Capital investment already paid for itself over and over by now, since we havent built any new power plants in a long time. Not every line in grid has been or needs to be replaced, so how can you keep counting it as investment when its already bought and paid for and funded least double to replace it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top