Solar Power In California

[bilby]

When you have a surplus to sell (of any product), that's a success.

A minor nit, but surpluses such as the one discussed here are created by spending capital. Capital that could be spent on other things. To the extent more capital is spent to achieve the same end, society is worse off.

And, they don't have "so much power it is going to waste". The grid is being balanced instantaneously. The negative price is a product of the regulatory overlay.

A major nit - my entire point is that they don't have 'a surplus to sell' if they have to pay someone to take it. Selling is what happens when someone pays you for your product. When you pay someone else to take it, it's not a product anymore; it's waste - or to use a suitable synonym, garbage.

Perhaps if you were to read more than just the first line of the third paragraph my post, you would grasp that I am explicitly declaring that they are NOT A SUCCESS in any way. As is made completely clear by the very next sentence. That paragraph in full:

When you have a surplus to sell (of any product), that's a success. When you have to get rid of something and you are prepared to pay someone to take it off your hands, that's pure waste.

 

[dismal]

A minor nit, but surpluses such as the one discussed here are created by spending capital. Capital that could be spent on other things. To the extent more capital is spent to achieve the same end, society is worse off.

And, they don't have "so much power it is going to waste". The grid is being balanced instantaneously. The negative price is a product of the regulatory overlay.

A major nit - my entire point is that they don't have 'a surplus to sell' if they have to pay someone to take it. Selling is what happens when someone pays you for your product. When you pay someone else to take it, it's not a product anymore; it's waste - or to use a suitable synonym, garbage.

Perhaps if you were to read more than just the first line of my post?

Oh, thanks for the helpful information.

Unfortunately, you don't really understand what's going on. The wholesale market is just one of the places people are paid. Elsewhere, they are being paid a positive amount greater than the negative amount, or they wouldn't be nominating to sell at a negative price.

 

[bilby]

A major nit - my entire point is that they don't have 'a surplus to sell' if they have to pay someone to take it. Selling is what happens when someone pays you for your product. When you pay someone else to take it, it's not a product anymore; it's waste - or to use a suitable synonym, garbage.

Perhaps if you were to read more than just the first line of my post?

Oh, thanks for the helpful information.

Unfortunately, you don't really understand what's going on. The wholesale market is just one of the places people are paid. Elsewhere, they are being paid a positive amount greater than the negative amount, or they wouldn't be nominating to sell at a negative price.

They are not selling anything.

They are buying something.

As you can tell by the direction in which the money is flowing.

What they are buying is grid stability services.

Please read my post again, and try to understand what I am saying (and that it might not include everything you think I ought to say, but that that's not actually a problem with my post - only with your expectations).

 

[dismal]

Oh, thanks for the helpful information.

Unfortunately, you don't really understand what's going on. The wholesale market is just one of the places people are paid. Elsewhere, they are being paid a positive amount greater than the negative amount, or they wouldn't be nominating to sell at a negative price.

They are not selling anything.

They are buying something.

As you can tell by the direction in which the money is flowing.

What they are buying is grid stability services.

Please read my post again, and try to understand what I am saying (and that it might not include everything you think I ought to say, but that that's not actually a problem with my post - only with your expectations).

You have no clue what you are talking about. And you're being a dick. Not a good combo.

Seriously, go fuck yourself.

 

[bilby]

They are not selling anything.

They are buying something.

As you can tell by the direction in which the money is flowing.

What they are buying is grid stability services.

Please read my post again, and try to understand what I am saying (and that it might not include everything you think I ought to say, but that that's not actually a problem with my post - only with your expectations).

You have no clue what you are talking about. And you're being a dick. Not a good combo.

Seriously, go fuck yourself.

Well, that escalated quickly.

The Internet - where a person who agrees with the main thrust of the post under discussion can disagree about how it should have been worded so violently as to reach 'go fuck yourself' in five posts or fewer.

 

[dismal]

You have no clue what you are talking about. And you're being a dick. Not a good combo.

Seriously, go fuck yourself.

Well, that escalated quickly.

The Internet - where a person who agrees with the main thrust of the post under discussion can disagree about how it should have been worded so violently as to reach 'go fuck yourself' in five posts or fewer.

No, what's great about the internet is that it allows people who have worked professionally in a field to be lectured to about that field -- rudely and incorrectly -- by total asshats.

 

[bilby]

Well, that escalated quickly.

The Internet - where a person who agrees with the main thrust of the post under discussion can disagree about how it should have been worded so violently as to reach 'go fuck yourself' in five posts or fewer.

No, what's great about the internet is that it allows people who have worked professionally in a field to be lectured to about that field -- rudely and incorrectly -- by total asshats.

It's OK; I understand that you too have worked in a related field, so I forgive your rude asshattery.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So solar power between 8 AM and 6 PM provides 9% to 25% of the state's energy, averaging around 10% of total demand. Wind and Bio provide 15%. Hydro provides another 15% of daily demand. So renewable energy stands at 40% in California.

What is the argument here? That this is a bad thing? That because solar only provides power during the day, we should just throw that 10% of total daily demand out the window?

The problem is that wind and solar only run when the weather is right. While they are providing a quarter of the power they contribute 0% towards meeting the peak load. Hence a whole bunch of generators that aren't used all the time but which the electric customers pay for anyway.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The electric utilities across the nation run their own little commodities desk. They buy and sell to each other as needed. The faster you can adjust to your load requirements, the better. Just another reason coal plants suck. Take down a boiler for maintenance and you're looking at 24 hours before it producing electricity.
Why CA is paying AZ to take excess is a bit of a mystery. Must have been no one needed the excess at the time.
"Imports" in Raven's graph I believe refer to just this, electricity bought from another utility.

Right--nobody needed it. The solar plants were producing more than was needed, the utilities were required to accept it anyway and had to do something with it.

- - - Updated - - -

A major nit - my entire point is that they don't have 'a surplus to sell' if they have to pay someone to take it. Selling is what happens when someone pays you for your product. When you pay someone else to take it, it's not a product anymore; it's waste - or to use a suitable synonym, garbage.

Perhaps if you were to read more than just the first line of my post?

Oh, thanks for the helpful information.

Unfortunately, you don't really understand what's going on. The wholesale market is just one of the places people are paid. Elsewhere, they are being paid a positive amount greater than the negative amount, or they wouldn't be nominating to sell at a negative price.

Or the heavy hand of the government is involved.

Thou shalt buy all available solar power. Doesn't matter if they need it or not.

 

[dismal]

No, what's great about the internet is that it allows people who have worked professionally in a field to be lectured to about that field -- rudely and incorrectly -- by total asshats.

It's OK; I understand that you too have worked in a related field, so I forgive your rude asshattery.

It's nice you were able to become so familiar with US wholesale power market regulation. Now we are just left lacking an explanation for why you are so clueless about it.

 

[fast]

This is not a good thing. Certainly not for the environment or for consumers.

Negative wholesale prices force baseload power plants to close; leaving the less efficient, more expensive, rapid response plants to make up the slack when the sun sets, and wholesale prices spike back up.

Intermittently negative prices and large price swings through the day are indicative of a problem, not a victory.

View attachment 10618

Notice the prices of electricity when solar is online. Then notice the peak when the sun begins to set. Also, notice what comprises that peak - imports (unspecified, but assuming these are from neighbouring states like Arizona, mostly gas or coal) and thermal (burning stuff - mostly gas or coal).

If you want to get that fossil fuel use down, you need baseload nuclear power; all solar power achieves is to distort the market in ways that favour gas rather than nuclear for the evening peak in demand.

Looking at the big picture and forsaking the trees for the forest. When the pros and cons are collectively weighed and you arrive at a conclusion of harm, let us not minimize the potential for long term positive impact by positive elements of the collectively weighed.