The Remarkable Progress of Renewable Energy

[Cheerful Charlie]

US wind energy just hit a major milestone | CNN Politics

The wind energy record came just a week before a critical UN report showed the world needs to switch to solar and wind for electricity to stave off the worst effects of the climate crisis.

edition.cnn.com

...
(CNN)The United States set a major renewable energy milestone last Tuesday: wind power was the second-highest source of electricity for the first time since the Energy Information Administration began gathering the data.
As E&E reporter Ben Storrow noted and the EIA confirmed, wind turbines last Tuesday generated over 2,000 gigawatt-hours of electricity, edging out electricity generated by nuclear and coal (but still trailing behind natural gas).
...

 

[bilby]

In the news commercial wind turbine capacity exceeds that of nuclear power. Natural gas is at the top.

Capacity is meaningless. What matters is actual generation.

You have the capacity to work twenty four hours a day, but you only get paid for the hours you actually work.

Nuclear power plants routinely generate 90+% of capacity.

Wind turbines routinely generate 30% or less.

Those seeking to dupe others about the effectiveness of intermittent renewable power generation always love talking about capacity. But 1GW of wind capacity generates no electricity at all on a calm day. 1GW of nuclear capacity generates 1GW, 300+ days a year, with complete control over which days it will be offline - so you can ensure that only one reactor is down at any particular moment, and that this downtime coincides with low demand (eg spring/autumn, not summer/winter).

Comparing wind or solar capacity against nuclear capacity is like comparing apples to aircraft carriers.

 

[steve_bank]

It was reported that Califonia usng offshore wind farms will be producng about 30% of the needs by wind.

 

[bilby]

It was reported that Califonia usng offshore wind farms will be producng about 30% of the needs by wind.

By whom? Fox News? The Daily Mail? The BBC? Al Jazeera? Bozo the Clown??

And on what evidence?

Your vague memories of things you may have heard somewhere once are not useful contributions to discussions. They aren't data, they aren't evidence, and they apparently aren't even your own opinions.

They are just pointless noise.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

It was reported that Califonia usng offshore wind farms will be producng about 30% of the needs by wind.

By whom? Fox News? The Daily Mail? The BBC? Al Jazeera? Bozo the Clown??

And on what evidence?

Your vague memories of things you may have heard somewhere once are not useful contributions to discussions. They aren't data, they aren't evidence, and they apparently aren't even your own opinions.

They are just pointless noise.

Energy Information Administration
Government agency

eia.gov

You're welcome.

 

[lpetrich]

Wasn't sure where to post this, but here goes: Democrats eye Defense Production Act for clean energy - The Washington Post

Reps. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) and Jason Crow (D-Colo.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) will introduce legislation today to spur domestic production of clean energy technologies through the Defense Production Act, according to details about the legislative push shared exclusively with The Climate 202.

The Energy Security and Independence Act would lay the groundwork for President Biden to invoke the Defense Production Act to shore up domestic supply chains for heat pumps, solar panels, wind turbines and other technologies crucial to the nation's transition to clean energy.

...
The bill comes after Biden last week invoked the law to boost U.S. output of critical minerals used in electric vehicle batteries and reduce dependence on foreign supply chains. Climate advocates have pushed Biden to go a step further and use the Defense Production Act to shore up U.S. manufacturing of heat pumps, while moderate Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) wants Biden to invoke the law to rush completion of a stalled natural gas pipeline.

• Biden to use Defense Production Act for critical-minerals supply - The Washington Post - "The move is intended to boost the U.S. output of materials needed for electric vehicles and other uses, reduce reliance on foreign supply chains"
• Heat pumps can counter Putin and the climate crisis, advocates say - The Washington Post
• Joe Manchin Pushes Defense Production Act for Natural Gas Pipeline - Bloomberg

 

[lpetrich]

Cori Bush's House site, https://bush.house.gov/ seems to be absent, so I had to look in the Internet Archive: Energy Security and Independence Act One-Pager

H.R.7439 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): To promote United States energy security and independence by bolstering renewable energy supply chains in the United States, and for other purposes. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress - no text or summary available

So I have to use that archived one-pager:

House co-sponsors (27): Jason Crow*, Adriano Espaillat, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Andy
Levin, Ayanna Pressley, Bonnie Watson Coleman, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Ilhan Omar, Jamaal
Bowman, Jesús “Chuy” García, Mark Takano, Mondaire Jones, Rashida Tlaib, Raul Grijalva,
Jared Huffman, Ro Khanna, Yvette D. Clarke, Jerrold Nadler, Marie Newman, Nanette Diaz
Barragán, Barbara Lee, Karen Bass, Mikie Sherrill, Sean Casten, Pramila Jayapal, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Steve Cohen

Senate co-sponsors: Cory Booker, Jeff Merkley, Ed Markey, Alex Padilla, Elizabeth Warren,
Chris Murphy

govtrack.us 2020 ideology scores: JC 0.36, AE 0.10, AOC 0.09, AL 0.19, AP 0.05, BWC 0.10, EHN 0.03, IO 0.10, JB -, JCG 0.05, MT 0.14, MJ -, RT 0.08, RG 0.11, JH 0.21, RK 0.14, YC 0.12, JN 0.15, MN -, NDB 0.17, BL 0.00, KB 0.15, MS 0.38, SC 0.26, PJ 0.07, CM 0.30, SC 0.16 --- CB 0.09, JM 0.08, EM 0.10, AP -, EW 0.21, CM 0.24

(0 = lib, 1 = con) -- mostly liberal to moderate by Democratic-Party standards, standards where Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are very conservative at 0.57 and 0.68.

It will do:

• Invest $100 billion in reinvigorating the domestic clean energy industrial base using the Defense Product Act
• Create a Domestic Renewable Energy Industrial Base Task Force to coordinate an all-of-government approach that engages environmental justice communities, manufacturers, scientists, engineers, planners, and labor unions to plan and implement a transition to 100 percent renewable energy
• Provide $10 billion in loans and grants to bolster the domestic renewable energy system component manufacturing supply chain with strong corporate governance standards and benefits for taxpayers
• Provide $30 billion to weatherize and insulate 6.4 million homes over the next 10 years to save working families nearly $2 billion each year on their utility bills
• Invest $10 billion to procure and install millions of heat pumps, significantly reducing consumption of imported fossil fuels
• Create good, union jobs by requiring high-road labor standards for all funded projects
• Fulfill EJ40 commitments by investing at least 40 percent of funds in environmental justice communities

"U.S. manufacturing capacity is limited and declining—the ESIA would turn that around."

 

[steve_bank]

That would be a stretch, analogous to Obama Care being justified by calling medical insurance interstate commerce

IMO getting rid of nuclear is not a good idea.

How many nuclear power plants can power California?





IMO not a good idea to get rid of nuclear.
Diablo Canyon is the state's only operating nuclear power plant; three others are in various stages of being decommissioned.Oct 2, 2021

https://www.calwea.org/fast-fact

Wind energy projects totaling at least 5,787 megawatts (MW) of capacity are operating in California today,1 providing enough electricity to power about 2.3 million California households.2

In 2020, California wind projects generated 13,703 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity – 7.2% of all power generated within California.3 In 2020, out-of-state wind projects generated 16,635 GWh of electricity for California, representing 20% of total power imports.3 Combined, wind projects supplied 11% of California’s total system power,3 more than enough to power all homes in Sacramento, San Francisco, and Los Angeles Counties combined.2

Wind energy accounted for 27% of California’s renewable energy production for the RPS as of 2019.4 (See figure below.)

Ca wind energy has been steadily increasing

Wind power in California - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Nissan, NASA aim to ditch rare, pricey metals in solid-state batteries

Partnership to use computational materials science to speed development.

arstechnica.com

Nissan, NASA aim to ditch rare, pricey metals in solid-state batteries​

....
Nissan is partnering with NASA on a computational approach to developing all-solid-state batteries that don’t rely on rare or expensive metals, the AP has reported.
...
The company hopes that its in-house solid-state batteries will debut in passenger vehicles by 2028.

Nissan announces halfhearted EV strategy after fumbling its lead
To get there, the company said it’s opening a pilot solid-state battery plant in 2024. The small-scale factory will be a key step in rolling out solid-state technology; many of the concepts that underpin the batteries have been demonstrated in laboratories time and again, but making the leap to manufacturing often reveals unexpected problems that can take years to solve.
Building a pilot plant shows that Nissan is confident enough in its current solid-state battery tech that it believes it’s worth investing money to work out any manufacturing kinks.
....

Finally! Non-flammible, cheap, and fast charging.

 

[bigfield]

Finally! Non-flammible, cheap, and fast charging.

Considering that Nissan hasn't yet figured out how to manufacture these batteries, I think the celebrations are premature.

However, if any one of these these manufacturers delivers on their promise of a cheap, no-lithium battery, it could be a huge step toward scalable storage for renewables.

Hell, even if it isn't suitable for grid-scale storage, it gets us all a lot closer to reducing our dependence on oil simply by replacing combustion engines in vehicles.

 

[bilby]

Finally! Non-flammible, cheap, and fast charging.

Considering that Nissan hasn't yet figured out how to manufacture these batteries, I think the celebrations are premature.

However, if any one of these these manufacturers delivers on their promise of a cheap, no-lithium battery, it could be a huge step toward scalable storage for renewables.

Hell, even if it isn't suitable for grid-scale storage, it gets us all a lot closer to reducing our dependence on oil simply by replacing combustion engines in vehicles.

I don't think many people truly grasp the scale that 'grid scale storage' implies.

Hydroelectric dams are not currently anywhere close to sufficient in numbers to meet the requirements of a fully intermittent renewables grid, and they are by far our most efficient storage option, and already consist of VAST volumes of material - fortunately, that material is mostly water, which is abundantly available and requires little or no effort to accumulate or purify for the purpose.

Advanced batteries are a generally good thing; But basic physical chemistry tells us that they will never play a major role at grid scale. There's only so much you can do with the electrons in the 91 stable elements we have to work with.

Batteries to provide grid stability services? Sure.

Batteries to provide grid scale storage? As plausible as mining the Moon for it's cheese.

And batteries - whether made from lead, lithium, or anything else - imply a LOT of mining. They are far from being an environmentally benign solution to the problems caused by the already environmentally harmful mass manufacturing of wind turbines and solar panels.

Energy density is everything, if you want to run an advanced society with minimal environmental impact. That means, as much as possible, abandoning gravity and electromagnetism, in favour of the strong force.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Finally! Non-flammible, cheap, and fast charging.

Considering that Nissan hasn't yet figured out how to manufacture these batteries, I think the celebrations are premature.

However, if any one of these these manufacturers delivers on their promise of a cheap, no-lithium battery, it could be a huge step toward scalable storage for renewables.

Hell, even if it isn't suitable for grid-scale storage, it gets us all a lot closer to reducing our dependence on oil simply by replacing combustion engines in vehicles.

"Building a pilot plant shows that Nissan is confident enough in its current solid-state battery tech that it believes it’s worth investing money to work out any manufacturing kinks."

It is now time to move from the lab to manufacturing. There has been a lot of work on solid state batteries for some years now. Now it is on to phase 2.

From CBS news:
...
The all-solid-state battery will replace the lithium-ion battery now in use for a 2028 product launch and a pilot plant launch in 2024, according to Nissan.

The battery would be stable enough to be used in pacemakers, Nissan said. When finished, it will be about half the size of the current battery and fully charge in 15 minutes instead of a few hours.
...

Nissan, if successful has a future as a battery maker and supplier, not just cars.

 

[ZiprHead]

I posted about solid state battery technology maybe a year and a half ago.

 

[Swammerdami]

Energy density is everything, if you want to run an advanced society with minimal environmental impact. That means, as much as possible, abandoning gravity and electromagnetism, in favour of the strong force.

I like this. "Use the (strong) force, Luke!"

 

[bigfield]

I posted about solid state battery technology maybe a year and a half ago.

There's a few companies working on it, but none have made a solid state battery ready for manufacture.

Neither has Nissan, but they seem to think they will have one in a couple of years, and then ready for mass production four years after that.

Let's hope they figure it out, because without a replacement for Li-ion we probably won't get cheap EV's.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I posted about solid state battery technology maybe a year and a half ago.

Nissan is apparently not the only manufacturer that is moving towards solid state batteries.

From CBS News:
...
Other automakers, including Japanese rival Toyota Motor Corp., as well as Volkswagen of Germany and U.S. automakers Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Co., are working on all-solid-state batteries.
...

I suspect that in ten years, old fashioned lithium batteries will be buggy whip technology.

 

[ZiprHead]

Toyota and VW were mentioned in my post that they were onboard back then, iirc. I thought about investing in the company they are all working with but someone mentioned they have a sketchy past. Now I can't find the post.

 

[Tharmas]

An interesting recent article in The New Yorker (may be behind a paywall) discusses current developments in renewable energy storage. There are some good ideas in the proof-of-concept and prototype stages but the devil will be scaling up. The article concludes that we may always need gas and nuclear back-ups to handle peak or emergency power needs, or even cloudy or wind-less days, but still, renewable storage could become a reality. My question is, how soon?

 

[bilby]

An interesting recent article in The New Yorker (may be behind a paywall) discusses current developments in renewable energy storage. There are some good ideas in the proof-of-concept and prototype stages but the devil will be scaling up. The article concludes that we may always need gas and nuclear back-ups to handle peak or emergency power needs, or even cloudy or wind-less days, but still, renewable storage could become a reality. My question is, how soon?

There's a physical limit to energy density from chemistry, that sets a minimum amount of material required to store a given amount of power.

Even if we could do it, the resource extraction needed to go 100% renewables plus storage would be devastating to the environment.

The only way to get out of this physical constraint is to replace dependence on electromagnetic force with dependence on the Strong force - that is, replacing chemical energy with nuclear energy.

 

[Tharmas]

An interesting recent article in The New Yorker (may be behind a paywall) discusses current developments in renewable energy storage. There are some good ideas in the proof-of-concept and prototype stages but the devil will be scaling up. The article concludes that we may always need gas and nuclear back-ups to handle peak or emergency power needs, or even cloudy or wind-less days, but still, renewable storage could become a reality. My question is, how soon?

There's a physical limit to energy density from chemistry, that sets a minimum amount of material required to store a given amount of power.

Even if we could do it, the resource extraction needed to go 100% renewables plus storage would be devastating to the environment.

The only way to get out of this physical constraint is to replace dependence on electromagnetic force with dependence on the Strong force - that is, replacing chemical energy with nuclear energy.

The article discusses gravity mechanisms and geothermal. I would think the second law of thermodynamics would be more involved, but I'm not chemist/physicist.