Could the world be 100% Solar? (refrigerator, energy, compare, economy)

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

How do you hit your target of peak demand in the winter long after the sun has gone down?

Look, let's start with Where We Really Are, Right Here, Right Now -- In (nearly) 2015.

Is that a Good Place to start?

Can we agree that we can already hit that Peak 100%, Right Here, Right Now with NO / 0% Solar and NO / 0% Storage? That is true, is it not? So we can agree that in the Right Here, Right Now, there is Absolutely No Need and No Purpose for Storage?

Really need to look at the Long Term trends, as well. Overall Demand is downward --

Look at the real Numbers

United States - Electricity - consumption - Historical Data Graphs per Year

and then for some laughs look at the industry "Projections."

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Pub

They just cannot comprehend, that Endless Growth, Growth, Growth . . . . may have Ended.

Big Generation Industry is peeing in its pants over this.

Electric Cars are probably the only thing that can save the industry.

Point of that -- Power Generation is ALREADY vastly surplus. For Winter Peaks, Summer Peaks, Twin Peaks, whatever. Already Surplus. Nothing to "Store" For.

------------------------------

But back on topic . . .

All I am suggesting is that somewhere between Most and All New Electricity Generation be Solar, (and Wind, and Solar PV, and . . . other methods that will and can be working . . . say . . . 7 Generations from now).

While ALL the Existing Plants still Exist.

All the Existing Plants are not just "Going Away," anytime soon.

What we have started doing with the Legacy Coal Plants in Texas -- they used to be down (staggered) about a month in the Spring and Fall (low power use time). Now it has stretched to at least two to three months off line. Some as long as 6 months off line. Just sort of Mothballed / In-Storage. (btw, maybe THAT is the Storage you have been looking for. )

Meanwhile, even with a growing population -- folks keep using less power overall and less at night.

Texans Use Less Power than Expected, Baffling State Regulators | StateImpact Texas

And if Solar Thermal Air Conditioning ever comes into play here -- there is no bottom to the generation market.

So Maybe . . . . 40 to 50 years of build out from now -- as even the now newest of the Legacy Carbon Plants become scrap -- there may become some need for storage. How about I grant you that?

But that is NOT where the trends are heading. Geezzz, with enough new Net Zero and Energy Efficient Buildings, over night power demand could head towards near nothing. A girl can dream, huh?

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by Philip T

Can we agree that we can already hit that Peak 100%,

I'm talking about peak daily usage, peak in the winter is late afternoon and early evening when there is no sun. I don't know about where you live but it's dark at 5 where I live. Therefore you would need generation to meet that peak demand without storage which means two systems both of which are very expensive when you really only need one.

As far annual demand recent decreases have everything to do with a downturn in the economy. I don;t know if you understand that second graph you linked too but that is not projections for total demand. It's projections for increased demand, there is always going to be an increased demand for electric over the long haul.

[Dakster]

I lowered my demand by replacing all of my lightbulbs with CFLs or LEDS. No more Halogen or incandescents. And my AC went from SEER 10 to at least SEER 13. I also replaced all my windows with insulated impact windows. This is my Florida house. It had nothing to do with the down turn in the economy - I can tell you I am really glad I did this, since my bill used to hit $800 in the summer and now with higher rates I am only in the $500 range. I doubt I will make the money I spent doing those things back - but they had to be done anyways. Bulbs burn out and A/Cs quit working. The old windows were damaged in the hurricanes of 2005...

What has started to cause an increase in my power consumption is our electric car. And I want another one. Besides the fact that they are cheaper to operate, I like "refueling" them at home. No need to hit the gas station. And in my new home, the gas station is further away and it is a whole lot colder. So plugging in, in the heated garage sounds like something I want to do.

And IF IF IF we went to 100% solar, which I don't think we should. Storage of power could be an issue. BTW - good sun around here is potentially from around 10am to 3pm. But in reality maybe 2 hours a day would you get direct sunlight in the winter. Now the summer is a whole 'nother ballgame.

[GregW]

FWIW - there are only a few Pumped Storage sites "approved". This is because we effectively stopped building the constant output conventional nuclear fission plants that required gigawatts- hours of energy storage to level the load. There are many more potential sites that have not been "approved" but have been located. All that is really required is a water supply, generally a medium to large river, and a 500 to 1,000 foot elevation change. The electrical and mechanical technology already exists.

The primary problem with pumped storage, nuclear power, coal fired plants and most other sources of energy and electric power is the magic combination of the ignorant and frightened (all nuclear plants are BOMBS - NOT) with the selfish NIMBYS that are more concerned with themselves as well as the fish fanatics than what the society really needs.

I figure ignorance can be cured with facts but fear and foolishness should be ignored. I have little tolerance for fools of any kind. IMHO we should just ignore these people and get on with building an infinite power supply for our nation as well as the rest of the world.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by GregW

The primary problem with pumped storage....

.....is the huge hit on efficiency. You need additional capacity just to pump water and there other energy losses through evaporation and regenergation.

[DCforever]

Originally Posted by GregW

FWIW - there are only a few Pumped Storage sites "approved". This is because we effectively stopped building the constant output conventional nuclear fission plants that required gigawatts- hours of energy storage to level the load. There are many more potential sites that have not been "approved" but have been located. All that is really required is a water supply, generally a medium to large river, and a 500 to 1,000 foot elevation change. The electrical and mechanical technology already exists.

The primary problem with pumped storage, nuclear power, coal fired plants and most other sources of energy and electric power is the magic combination of the ignorant and frightened (all nuclear plants are BOMBS - NOT) with the selfish NIMBYS that are more concerned with themselves as well as the fish fanatics than what the society really needs.

I figure ignorance can be cured with facts but fear and foolishness should be ignored. I have little tolerance for fools of any kind. IMHO we should just ignore these people and get on with building an infinite power supply for our nation as well as the rest of the world.

Claiming pumped storage suffers from anti-nuke phobia is a really silly assertion. We have about 24 pumped storage station in this country and several times that number of nuclear stations. The reality is that appropriate sites are very few and the good ones have been taken.

[Year2525]

As more and more people install rooftop solar and taking the 100% solar idea as stated, won't grid connection fees have to continually increase as more and homes go solar? Isn't there a point where you never recover the investment because you're locked into a grid connect payment that never goes away?

[Cyberguy1950]

Originally Posted by Year2525

As more and more people install rooftop solar and taking the 100% solar idea as stated, won't grid connection fees have to continually increase as more and homes go solar? Isn't there a point where you never recover the investment because you're locked into a grid connect payment that never goes away?

Yes but it's green that counts!

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

I'm talking about peak daily usage, peak in the winter is late afternoon and early evening when there is no sun. I don't know about where you live but it's dark at 5 where I live.

Therefore you would need generation to meet that peak demand . . . .

whoa. wait. Hold on a second . . . . "that peak demand" is already being met . . . but real question.

IS THAT When Your Local Peak Demand Really Is?

For much of the US, real Peak Demand is during Daytime, and in the Summer.

And since the Price of Power varies through-out the day . . . . (daytime being the Premium Price, and Nighttime being the Surplus Garbage Price) . . . that is why Coal and Nukes (who make the worthless Night Time Power) are being burnt economically.

If the surplus just came down a ways (quite a ways) maybe the Night Time Nukes and Coal could at least break even . . . but we are DECADES away from needing (or even wanting) ANY Storage.

The Storage that does exist actually works the opposite of what your are supposing. Elevated Water storage for example -- Uses cheap overnight Nuke and Coal power to pump up OVERNIGHT, and then reverses and Generates onto the Grid . . . . during the day.

Do you follow that what you are suggesting is totally backwards of how the real world (due to Human Behavior and real Demand) works?

without storage which means two systems both of which are very expensive when you really only need one.

The Night Time Coal and Nukes, along with the Quick Spin-up Natural Gas Turbines and Hydro -- ALREADY All Exist. All of them. Sunk Cost. Already on the Ground, Tied In, Operating.

No need to build more, so no new or extra cost there -- At All.

We agree on that, right? Only Cost is an O&M Budget. (Operations and Maintenance). Which are already covered in the product price. (except for Surplus Overnight, which a complete loss).

Maybe think of this like any Technology Transfer?

The day folks got their first car . . . maybe some 100 to 80 years ago, now . . . they were not obligated to go shoot their horse.

However, as the cars became more reliable, faster, cleaner (yeah, cleaner -- unreal, huh? Horse Poop was a horrid problem), folks did not get a new horse when the old horse died. So if folks get Solar, there is no need blow up all the Existing Coal, Nuke and Gas plants, that afternoon is there? Overtime, they will just die-off.

Same with Sails on Ships. As Ships transitioned from Wind to Steam, many carried both Sails and Boilers.

About like Telephones for the US, now. Used to be Everyone had a Land Line. And now Cell has expanded, expanded, expanded, along with Voice over Internet. No one dumped their Land Line the next day, but just no longer used them over time, to the point that now many folks no longer have a traditional "Land Line."

Was discussing this concept on another thread with Mack. Typical Technology Transfers seem to take around 40 years. I suspect that is because the die-off and replacement of the People and Mindsets -- as much as the Technology.

As far annual demand recent decreases have everything to do with a downturn in the economy. I don;t know if you understand that second graph you linked too but that is not projections for total demand. It's projections for increased demand, there is always going to be an increased demand for electric over the long haul.

Yes, I am VERY clear on the Industry (EIA) "Projections." Especially for Electricity.

A major chunk of my own livelihood lives and dies on them. So I watch them fairly closely.

They have running wrong for the last 10 Years. Which is why I am Mocking them. They have tried shifting the averaging windows, tried shifting the time bases, on and on. Folks that really watch it at this point kind of snicker.

It is about like Soviet Five Year Plans. We just smile and wave and say, "Yes, Comrade."

Really I just do the Madagascar Penguin routine -- "Smile and Wave, Boys -- Smile and Wave."

Did you notice on that Projection it NEVER shows where things have went Below Zero? When things clearly have and do go Below Zero? It took a fair amount of Numerical Manipulation (is that a kind enough term?) to not show that.

That is because the Corporate Board and CEOs heads would explode if they learn the nonsense they were fed on the MBA path (growth, growth, growth) were not true.

The industry has been sort of conditioned and populated by folks sort of just believe that they have to Chant "growth, growth, growth, growth" solely for the sake of "growth."

You know who does Growth for the Sake of Growth? Only things I have found are:

1. Cancer and
2. Morbid Obesity.

Neither seem like wise models to follow.

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

.....is the huge hit on efficiency. You need additional capacity just to pump water and there other energy losses through evaporation and regenergation.

Elevated Storage is probably the most efficient large scale storage, to date.

Typical Numbers are around 80% or better of Energy Input in turns into Energy Output for the full cycle.

It is just a transfer in Time. Cheap and Surplus Overnight Power is used to Pump during the night and then becomes useful during the Daytime Demand.