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.
That fossil fuel plant was built 50 years ago. They have no need to build another one. A new solar plant is just that, a new solar plant.
And as far as northern climes, that's when wind turbine farms begin to make more sense.
Good lord I'm glad you're not a decision maker in this country for where technology will take us.
Um no. Building two plants when one is doing 75% of the work is not efficient. The 50 year old fossil fuel plant only creates energy when it needs it while the other only produces it at the same time of day. Especially since that 50 year old fossil fuel plant is most likely now a modern gas turbine plant using very cheap natural gas.
Its a good thing you're not a decision maker in this country otherwise we'd mow down all of the forest in New York State and replace them with windmills just to power New York City on windy days only.
You assume that there will be technological progress from here on out? I'll put my money on science and technology -- they will crack the storage problem, it's only a matter of time.
Your point about having to maintain two plants instead of one isn't correct -- because even if you rely on a gas plant for most of your energy you still have to build and maintain a 2nd plant for reliability because the main plant will go down for breakdowns and maintenance. No matter what type of energy a utility uses they are required to have excess capacity in case a plant goes offline.
It doesn't work that way. Your gas turbine plant will have more than one turbine, just as your nuclear plant has more than one reactor. The gas turbine plant is irreplaceable unless you want the government putting you on electricity rations on extended cloudy days. Remember, you want the entire world powering their electric cars when the sun is not shining.
Yes its only a matter of time, but that time is most likely long after you're gone. Its nowhere on the horizon. Nothing can store energy better than a fossil fuel and the earth is a much cheaper storage tank than any battery will ever be.
Some plants actually use excess energy during the day to pump water up a mountain and store it in a lake, just to let the water back down the mountain through a turbine during peak times. How many batteries do you think it will take to replace a lake's worth of energy?
You are neglecting to consider if they will allow the public to even know about this new technology though.
Imagine that someone has perfected anti-gravity or utilizing the earths electromagnetics as a power source, think about how disastrous that would be for the energy industry, suddenly people could power their vehicles with something that cannot be run thru a meter.
Remember that the Invention Secrecy Act was created in 1951 (thats a curious time when it comes to vehicles and engines btw), and that is still in force today. if an engine or power source could not support a large industry behind it, it would likely be suppressed under this act.
I may be wrong on this, but I believe some Freedom of Information releases have listed some of the inventions/ technology this act has been used to suppress over the years, and its about what you would expect with cars and engines...anything thats a bit 'too good' for the end user, driver, and it is suppressed!
Dude you've got to let this conspiracy nonsense go. As if we don't have enough proof that the government can't keep a secret for more than a couple weeks much less 7 decades. The moon landings were real and there is no 100 mpg carburetor held in a secret bunker by the government.
Um no. Building two plants when one is doing 75% of the work is not efficient. The 50 year old fossil fuel plant only creates energy when it needs it while the other only produces it at the same time of day. Especially since that 50 year old fossil fuel plant is most likely now a modern gas turbine plant using very cheap natural gas.
Its a good thing you're not a decision maker in this country otherwise we'd mow down all of the forest in New York State and replace them with windmills just to power New York City on windy days only.
Sigh.
I'm just going to put you on ignore. You never have anything intelligent to add to these discussions, and are generally just flat out wrong.
In other words you don't know how to keep up and hold your own when it's over your head.
If you actually wanted to put me on ignore, you would have just done it already without providing an excuse because it's not myself or anybody else cares.
That fossil fuel plant was built 50 years ago. They have no need to build another one. A new solar plant is just that, a new solar plant.
Yes there is a need to build another one because solar and wind is subject to the whims of mother nature. When you have figured out how to supply the Northeast with electric when it's 0 degrees out, cloudy, no wind, record demands at 8AM and it's going to be like that for the next two weeks come see me. In the meantime we will have to rely on coal, natural gas, nuclear and hydro which can meet that demand.
Yes there is a need to build another one because solar and wind is subject to the whims of mother nature. When you have figured out how to supply the Northeast with electric when it's 0 degrees out, cloudy, no wind, record demands at 8AM and it's going to be like that for the next two weeks come see me. In the meantime we will have to rely on coal, natural gas, nuclear and hydro which can meet that demand.
Yes... which the first plant accomplishes.
I have an astounding newsflash for you... when a new solar farm is built, they don't go building a coal plant along with it. Whatever the existing energy infrastructure was continues on just the same. THAT is what is meeting the energy demands you are talking about.
In other words you don't know how to keep up and hold your own when it's over your head.
If you actually wanted to put me on ignore, you would have just done it already without providing an excuse because it's not myself or anybody else cares.
That is 2012...let us see what has happened since then...
Yes there is a need to build another one because solar and wind is subject to the whims of mother nature. When you have figured out how to supply the Northeast with electric when it's 0 degrees out, cloudy, no wind, record demands at 8AM and it's going to be like that for the next two weeks come see me. In the meantime we will have to rely on coal, natural gas, nuclear and hydro which can meet that demand.
You are of course correct. But you still duplicate all the fossil plants because the loaded cost of the solar plants is less than the variable cost of fossil plants. Easy for coal but now true even for high performance natural gas installation. And the linkage of many areas vast distances apart in the US will make it practical to use Midwest wind to offset eastern fossil.
We will also find the type of plants being built changing. The low cost natural gas peaking plants will become cost effective in the sun belt where long day sunshine is normal. Yes it is fossil - but it is cheap to build rather than the expensive gas plants.
That is 2012...let us see what has happened since then...
The best year for wind power peaked in 2012. What the article goes onto say is that the low hanging fruit of placing wind power near their consumers has been the first to be built out, while the larger transmission lines to run to distant locations adds dramatically to the cost of wind power.
In the end it’s almost never technology that’s the problem, but the market itself.
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.
