I suppose I have to keep saying this. When you're thinking about the supply of wind and solar, it's all about the bottom line. On a windless night, it's zero.
Right now in Britain at 10.30pm wind and solar are 14% of the supply.
In Sydney at 8 am, 26%.
In Texas at 7am it was 25%.
Is the attempt to transition to wind and solar the worst public policy blunder ever? Trillions spent to get more expensive and less reliable power with massive environmental damage.
I didn’t see nuclear power mentioned. Natural gas is currently cheaper in the United States. It should be regarded as a bridge to fission and then fusion power
I agree, but that is not currently the focus of the governments of the RGGI states.
New York and New Jersey are currently thinking about GW nuclear. New York is also "betting on" the future availability of Dispatchable Emission-Free Resources (DEFRs), probably SMRs.
The future of nuclear in the US is very dependent on regulatory approval cycles, which are currently being addressed but are not yet resolved.
My caution: Don't begin vast programs with half-vast ideas.
Half-vast appears to be a real problem, and a likely future issue. Like the old ‘oils ain’t oils’ advertisement, the same can be said of nuclear energy generators. Too many half-arse loudmouths in the political/bureaucratic and pro-nuclear lobbies seem to be shouting about what’s fashionable (aka SMR’s).
Real nuclear experts, especially people such as Canada’s Dr Charles Rhodes, will give a very informed and clear-eyed view of the questions that must be addressed before any rush to judgement as to what the best options will be for any one location.
Steady as she goes folks: Homework, homework, homework…
When the grid failure comes there should be no bailout. Oh I can hear the screaming and wailing - you can’t let people suffer! Oh yes we can. There’s a cost to behaving childish and voting poorly. That cost punishment just might be suffering cold and heat with no electricity. It’s been long enough and enough information published to understand the green initiative folly. It’s time accountability comes into play!
Cruel, but so true, sadly. We can only hope that it never comes to that scale of disaster and tragedy (only tyrants like Putin, Xi and a few others would be happy).
It would be worth doing a breakdown of exactly it would take in the way of solar generation and storage to get through Fern. Keep in mind that the capacity factor in January in many RGGI states is under 5%, and there were multiple consecutive days of little or no production, preceded by days of low production and followed by the same.
That would require massive amounts of battery storage at a time when very little generation was available to recharge them after the first discharge. At some point, I think we need to do the actual calculations and estimate the real costs of surviving Fern. One of those adverse health effects from cold is freezing to death in the dark, after all.
"Based on the presented analyses, the 100% reliance on solar or wind energy in the Northeast region is not feasible without massive energy storage which is between the 24.1%–28.3% and 17.4%–35.5% of the annual energy consumption for solar and wind respectively. The nationwide connectivity can reduce these storage needs to the national averages (22.4% for solar and 24.9% for wind) or perhaps further if all the power generation moves to the more favorable places; however, even in Texas (one of the most Southern state with the best solar and wind resources), there exists substantial spatial variability in renewable energy resources (Kumler et al., 2019)."
The physics calcs will tell you that grid instability begins to be a risk when asynchronous generation reaches around 24% of total grid capacity. The break-over to grid instability can happen very suddenly (such as when a swarm of solar panels become clouded-over, along with a sudden and unpredictable loss of wind power), especially when synchronous base load generators have already been pushed back or off-line in order to accommodate a rise in asynchronous generation.
I'll be watching for when you put some dollar numbers on this. I suspect there is hardly enough money in the world to go completely on renewables. Then there's the gobbling up of more land, including farm land, timberland, and grassland, more mining, more critical minerals, more killing of birds, battery fire risk, and on and on.
And with the relatively rapid degradation of equipment and batteries, and occasional destruction from hailstorms and tornados, we need to look at replacing the whole shebang every 20 years or so.
Give me a 200 acre footprint and 80 year lifetime of a nuclear plant any day.
The cost of a solar plus battery 500 MW baseload powerplant capable of full capacity operation over a 10 day period of little or no solar, such as winter storm Fern, is mind boggling.
That's what I thought. Even though batteries are "much cheaper" than a few years ago - much of the lower prices may be temporary, because China will eventually work off their surplus production cause by too many incentives encouraging too many producers.
Thank you, Ed, as an ex-Powergen operative (now retired), your summary makes sense. What doesn’t make sense is the abject refusal of the renewables lobby to take this data on board. I doubt that they would even take note if you converted your figures to dollar values.
We can only hope that people like you, Rafe Champion and many others will keep shouting from the rooftops, and that more and more of us will keep listening and learning.
Good on you, and I wasn’t suggesting that you actually do this. But, let’s hope that the effort will yield great outcomes: More People Taking Notice! It’s their money, after all.
I suppose I have to keep saying this. When you're thinking about the supply of wind and solar, it's all about the bottom line. On a windless night, it's zero.
https://rafechampion.substack.com/p/wind-and-solar-aint-capacity
The chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and the weakest link of so-called renewable energy is the windless night.
Look at Texas, January 19 to 26 this year.
https://rafechampion.substack.com/p/wind-and-solar-dream-destroyed-in
Here is a test, MONITOR THE WIND AND SOLAR POWER IN YOUR GRID AT BREAKAST AND DINNERTIME, OR DAWN AND DUSK.
https://rafechampion.substack.com/p/will-windpower-heat-your-breakfast
Right now in Britain at 10.30pm wind and solar are 14% of the supply.
In Sydney at 8 am, 26%.
In Texas at 7am it was 25%.
Is the attempt to transition to wind and solar the worst public policy blunder ever? Trillions spent to get more expensive and less reliable power with massive environmental damage.
For solar, at night, it's always zero.
The transition is not about anything other than control.
What aspect of expensive, short-lived and intermittent is better? Bring on the nukes!
when are we going to commit these idiots to the insane hospital and get them back on medication.
Probably not until pigs can fly. ;-)
I didn’t see nuclear power mentioned. Natural gas is currently cheaper in the United States. It should be regarded as a bridge to fission and then fusion power
I agree, but that is not currently the focus of the governments of the RGGI states.
New York and New Jersey are currently thinking about GW nuclear. New York is also "betting on" the future availability of Dispatchable Emission-Free Resources (DEFRs), probably SMRs.
The future of nuclear in the US is very dependent on regulatory approval cycles, which are currently being addressed but are not yet resolved.
My caution: Don't begin vast programs with half-vast ideas.
Half-vast appears to be a real problem, and a likely future issue. Like the old ‘oils ain’t oils’ advertisement, the same can be said of nuclear energy generators. Too many half-arse loudmouths in the political/bureaucratic and pro-nuclear lobbies seem to be shouting about what’s fashionable (aka SMR’s).
Real nuclear experts, especially people such as Canada’s Dr Charles Rhodes, will give a very informed and clear-eyed view of the questions that must be addressed before any rush to judgement as to what the best options will be for any one location.
Steady as she goes folks: Homework, homework, homework…
When the grid failure comes there should be no bailout. Oh I can hear the screaming and wailing - you can’t let people suffer! Oh yes we can. There’s a cost to behaving childish and voting poorly. That cost punishment just might be suffering cold and heat with no electricity. It’s been long enough and enough information published to understand the green initiative folly. It’s time accountability comes into play!
In summer, people sweat. In winter, people die.
Cruel, but so true, sadly. We can only hope that it never comes to that scale of disaster and tragedy (only tyrants like Putin, Xi and a few others would be happy).
It would be worth doing a breakdown of exactly it would take in the way of solar generation and storage to get through Fern. Keep in mind that the capacity factor in January in many RGGI states is under 5%, and there were multiple consecutive days of little or no production, preceded by days of low production and followed by the same.
That would require massive amounts of battery storage at a time when very little generation was available to recharge them after the first discharge. At some point, I think we need to do the actual calculations and estimate the real costs of surviving Fern. One of those adverse health effects from cold is freezing to death in the dark, after all.
Storage requirement is ~25% of annual generation for a renewable plus storage grid.
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/environmental-science/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1076830/full
"Based on the presented analyses, the 100% reliance on solar or wind energy in the Northeast region is not feasible without massive energy storage which is between the 24.1%–28.3% and 17.4%–35.5% of the annual energy consumption for solar and wind respectively. The nationwide connectivity can reduce these storage needs to the national averages (22.4% for solar and 24.9% for wind) or perhaps further if all the power generation moves to the more favorable places; however, even in Texas (one of the most Southern state with the best solar and wind resources), there exists substantial spatial variability in renewable energy resources (Kumler et al., 2019)."
Storage as far as the eye can see.
The physics calcs will tell you that grid instability begins to be a risk when asynchronous generation reaches around 24% of total grid capacity. The break-over to grid instability can happen very suddenly (such as when a swarm of solar panels become clouded-over, along with a sudden and unpredictable loss of wind power), especially when synchronous base load generators have already been pushed back or off-line in order to accommodate a rise in asynchronous generation.
I'll be watching for when you put some dollar numbers on this. I suspect there is hardly enough money in the world to go completely on renewables. Then there's the gobbling up of more land, including farm land, timberland, and grassland, more mining, more critical minerals, more killing of birds, battery fire risk, and on and on.
And with the relatively rapid degradation of equipment and batteries, and occasional destruction from hailstorms and tornados, we need to look at replacing the whole shebang every 20 years or so.
Give me a 200 acre footprint and 80 year lifetime of a nuclear plant any day.
The cost of a solar plus battery 500 MW baseload powerplant capable of full capacity operation over a 10 day period of little or no solar, such as winter storm Fern, is mind boggling.
That's what I thought. Even though batteries are "much cheaper" than a few years ago - much of the lower prices may be temporary, because China will eventually work off their surplus production cause by too many incentives encouraging too many producers.
Thank you, Ed, as an ex-Powergen operative (now retired), your summary makes sense. What doesn’t make sense is the abject refusal of the renewables lobby to take this data on board. I doubt that they would even take note if you converted your figures to dollar values.
We can only hope that people like you, Rafe Champion and many others will keep shouting from the rooftops, and that more and more of us will keep listening and learning.
Conversion to $ next Monday.
Good on you, and I wasn’t suggesting that you actually do this. But, let’s hope that the effort will yield great outcomes: More People Taking Notice! It’s their money, after all.
It was already written and cued for next Monday.
I should have known.
It would be interesting to know the environmental hazards of coal mining tailings vs the hazards of lithium mining tailings.