• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The Remarkable Progress of Renewable Energy

Texas does not have to save all it's electricity overnight in batteries. Wind again is going to play a major role.
On some nights, wind will be able to supply close to 100% of Texas' electricity.

On other nights, wind will be able to supply no more than 10% of of Texas' electricity.

Where are you going to get the other 90%?

Your choices are either:
  1. Thousands of batteries.
  2. Gas generators.


Over the next 25 years all of this is going to be worked out.

In 25 years you will still be saying "eventually".
 
Texas does not have to save all it's electricity overnight in batteries. Wind again is going to play a major role. Already people are installing solar panels and Elon Musk's Power Wall batteries for night time. Over the next 25 years all of this is going to be worked out. Bilby can sneer and rant all he wants. But eventually Texas will get there, renewables will provide the largest part of Texas electrical needs. Batteries will be developed that will play their part in all of this. Nuclear is not going to pop up soon and save everybody. Texas at least is solar and wind rich. So that is where Texas is going.
Your beliefs are noted, and dismissed as the wild and unsupported speculation that they are.

Feel free to let me know when events have proven me wrong. You will be able to gloat just like all those people whose faith in the second coming of Jesus will similarly be vindicated.

Personally I doubt that either faith is ever going to be justified, despite both being very popular.
 
Your beliefs are noted, and dismissed as the wild and unsupported speculation that they are.
Stop your gaslighting already!
cranky.gif


hehe.gif
 
From Zielony Atom:

No to nuclear power plants = yes to Russian invasion of Ukraine

Unfortunately, we were right, although we expected Putin to wait until Nord Stream 2 was up and running and the last nuclear plants in Germany were shut down. Apparently Putin has concluded that Germany is already dependent enough on Russia, so he can do anything right now.

What do anti-nuclear movements have to do with the war in Ukraine?

Anti-nuclearists who use renewables to fight nuclear power tell people that closed nuclear power plants will be replaced by renewables. This is not true. Nuclear power plants can operate non-stop at full capacity, no matter if the sun is shining and the wind is blowing. They cannot be replaced by windmills. What actually replaces nuclear power plants is gas, because gas is needed to compensate for sudden power fluctuations due to the instability of wind and sunshine.

The problem is that the largest supplier of gas to Europe, and Germany in particular, is Russia. If Russia turned off the gas tap, then Germany would have a very serious problem. Windmills and photovoltaics do not ensure energy security.

This is why Germany opposes Russia's exclusion from the SWIFT system. They would have no way to pay for the gas, and then Putin would cut off the gas supply. As Germany frantically searches for a way to take the leash off its neck, meanwhile Putin is bombing Ukraine with impunity.

Anti-nuclear organizations are Russia's Trojan horse, which by scaring people with yellow barrels with the ☢️ sign have led to the sabotage of the nuclear industry in their own countries and to gas addiction. Dear anti-nuclear people, Putin is proud of you. You have done a great job!

The same applies to Poland - if the anti-nuclear movements block the construction of nuclear power plants in Poland, then we will have to replace our aging coal-fired power plants with gas-fired ones. This is a road to nowhere.

The citizens of Germany should take to the streets and demand that plans to shut down the last 3 reactors in that country be abandoned. Also they should judge all those who have lied to the public for years, scaring the public with waste, mutants and radioactive clouds.

How do nuclear power plants give independence?

The EPR reactor, which is the world's largest reactor in terms of power (1,650 MW), can operate continuously at full capacity using only 32 tons of fuel per year. Not 32 thousand tons, not 32 million tons, just 32 tons and that's all. Such a small amount of fuel makes it no problem to make a fuel supply for several years. The amount of high-level waste is also 32 tons.

If the source of supply is cut off, the power plant can continue to operate, and in the meantime you can safely look for another supplier.

Fuel for nuclear power plants is purchased from various suppliers. Ukraine, after the invasion of Crimea, switched from Russian TVEL to American Westinghouse.

Yes to nuclear = yes to energy independence

#news #education #Russia #Ukraine #war #energy
 
Texas does not have to save all it's electricity overnight in batteries. Wind again is going to play a major role.
On some nights, wind will be able to supply close to 100% of Texas' electricity.

On other nights, wind will be able to supply no more than 10% of of Texas' electricity.

Where are you going to get the other 90%?

Your choices are either:
  1. Thousands of batteries.
  2. Gas generators.


Over the next 25 years all of this is going to be worked out.

In 25 years you will still be saying "eventually".

Texas gets up to 25% of it's electrical needs from wind at peak. Can you find any data as to when Texas has seen wind energy drop to only 10%? Texas gets lots of wind energy and as far as I can tell, this dire situation has never befell poor little Texas. Got any hard data to back up that idea? Wind can be seasonal, it drops from peak in summer, but still we get at worst 20% at worst from wind power.

poweringtexas.com


...
Summer 2018 Showed That Texas’ Diverse Energy Portfolio Can Withstand Extreme Demands
• Leading up to the summer some cautioned the grid could not support the state’s electricity needs.
High temperatures and the closure of three coal-fired power plants contributed to this concern.
• As predicted, power use broke multiple records in July, but ERCOT did not have to call for conservation; the lights stayed on.
• Bill Magness CEO of ERCOT: “There were also a lot of days when the wind production was high
when we needed it. So the various types of generation came through.”
...

And no, wind turbines do not cause cancer as the Very Stable Genius loudly proclaimed.
 
Texas gets up to 25% of it's electrical needs from wind at peak. Can you find any data as to when Texas has seen wind energy drop to only 10%? Texas gets lots of wind energy and as far as I can tell, this dire situation has never befell poor little Texas. Got any hard data to back up that idea? Wind can be seasonal, it drops from peak in summer, but still we get at worst 20% at worst from wind power.


Screenshot_2022-02-27_21-33-01.png

1645960175586.png

It looks like the problem might be worse than I anticipated.

It would take thousands of batteries to replace those surges in gas generation.

Wind doesn't just vary on a seasonal basis, it disappears for hours, sometimes days at a time.
 
Texas gets up to 25% of it's electrical needs from wind at peak. Can you find any data as to when Texas has seen wind energy drop to only 10%? Texas gets lots of wind energy and as far as I can tell, this dire situation has never befell poor little Texas. Got any hard data to back up that idea? Wind can be seasonal, it drops from peak in summer, but still we get at worst 20% at worst from wind power.


View attachment 37443

View attachment 37444

It looks like the problem might be worse than I anticipated.

It would take thousands of batteries to replace those surges in gas generation.

Wind doesn't just vary on a seasonal basis, it disappears for hours, sometimes days at a time.
On the positive side, fossil fuel generation (mainly gas) gets throttled down every time wind generation picks up.
 
Texas gets up to 25% of it's electrical needs from wind at peak. Can you find any data as to when Texas has seen wind energy drop to only 10%? Texas gets lots of wind energy and as far as I can tell, this dire situation has never befell poor little Texas. Got any hard data to back up that idea? Wind can be seasonal, it drops from peak in summer, but still we get at worst 20% at worst from wind power.


View attachment 37443

View attachment 37444

It looks like the problem might be worse than I anticipated.

It would take thousands of batteries to replace those surges in gas generation.

Wind doesn't just vary on a seasonal basis, it disappears for hours, sometimes days at a time.
On the positive side, fossil fuel generation (mainly gas) gets throttled down every time wind generation picks up.
So once you work out what power source will fill in the energy gaps when you remove gas generation your problems are solved.
 
Texas gets up to 25% of it's electrical needs from wind at peak. Can you find any data as to when Texas has seen wind energy drop to only 10%? Texas gets lots of wind energy and as far as I can tell, this dire situation has never befell poor little Texas. Got any hard data to back up that idea? Wind can be seasonal, it drops from peak in summer, but still we get at worst 20% at worst from wind power.


View attachment 37443

View attachment 37444

It looks like the problem might be worse than I anticipated.

It would take thousands of batteries to replace those surges in gas generation.

Wind doesn't just vary on a seasonal basis, it disappears for hours, sometimes days at a time.
On the positive side, fossil fuel generation (mainly gas) gets throttled down every time wind generation picks up.
So once you work out what power source will fill in the energy gaps when you remove gas generation your problems are solved.
Meanwhile...
 
On the positive side, fossil fuel generation (mainly gas) gets throttled down every time wind generation picks up.

Correct. That's the one thing renewables do actually accomplish--reduce fossil fuel use. The problem is when people think they can replace generating capacity--they can't. And that throws the reported economics out the window.
 
On the positive side, fossil fuel generation (mainly gas) gets throttled down every time wind generation picks up.
Correct. That's the one thing renewables do actually accomplish--reduce fossil fuel use. The problem is when people think they can replace generating capacity--they can't. And that throws the reported economics out the window.
Why not?
 
. . .

In 2021, Texas installed a battery capable of supplying 300MW/1200MWh.

In 2020, The US consumed 3,800TWh (3,800,000,000MWh) of electricity.

That's roughly 10TWh (10,000,000MWh) a day, on average.

Suppose you needed to supply the entire US with electricity from batteries for a single hour. How many of the USA's biggest battery would you need in order to accomplish this?

10,000,000MW / 300MW = 33,334 fully-charged batteries.. . .
Am I correct that you neglected to divide MWh/day by 24 to get MWh/hour (also known as MW!) ?
It's not nit-picking to point out your "scary" numbers have a wrongful 24-times factor.

Anyway, your "Suppose you needed to supply the entire US with electricity from batteries for a single hour" is counterfactual.
In #1204 I mention the HUGE load-leveling capacity of hydroelectricity power (where available), as well as other storage systems and non-intermittent renewables coming on-line.

This technology doesn't scale. "Eventually" it will, but that's not a solution when climate action is already decades overdue.
. . .
In 25 years you will still be saying "eventually".

Am I the only one amused that those deprecating developments in energy storage technology as above are often the VERY same people who respond to shortfalls in phosphate, water, and habitat with

we have always solved such issues with technology
 
. . .

In 2021, Texas installed a battery capable of supplying 300MW/1200MWh.

In 2020, The US consumed 3,800TWh (3,800,000,000MWh) of electricity.

That's roughly 10TWh (10,000,000MWh) a day, on average.

Suppose you needed to supply the entire US with electricity from batteries for a single hour. How many of the USA's biggest battery would you need in order to accomplish this?

10,000,000MW / 300MW = 33,334 fully-charged batteries.. . .
Am I correct that you neglected to divide MWh/day by 24 to get MWh/hour (also known as MW!) ?
It's not nit-picking to point out your "scary" numbers have a wrongful 24-times factor.

Good grief, I'm an idiot.

Thanks for pointing that out, I'm just going to go die of embarrassment somewhere.
 
. . .

In 2021, Texas installed a battery capable of supplying 300MW/1200MWh.

In 2020, The US consumed 3,800TWh (3,800,000,000MWh) of electricity.

That's roughly 10TWh (10,000,000MWh) a day, on average.

Suppose you needed to supply the entire US with electricity from batteries for a single hour. How many of the USA's biggest battery would you need in order to accomplish this?

10,000,000MW / 300MW = 33,334 fully-charged batteries.. . .
Am I correct that you neglected to divide MWh/day by 24 to get MWh/hour (also known as MW!) ?
It's not nit-picking to point out your "scary" numbers have a wrongful 24-times factor.

Good grief, I'm an idiot.

Thanks for pointing that out, I'm just going to go die of embarrassment somewhere.
1388 x 300MW batteries would still make the battery manufacturers drool.
 
On the positive side, fossil fuel generation (mainly gas) gets throttled down every time wind generation picks up.
Correct. That's the one thing renewables do actually accomplish--reduce fossil fuel use. The problem is when people think they can replace generating capacity--they can't. And that throws the reported economics out the window.
Why not?

Because, as Bilby keeps pointing out, electric power is a service, not a commodity. You need to have enough generating capacity even when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing. Unreliable sources of power can only be used to reduce fuel use unless you have loads that can quickly be shed on demand. (Say, a desalination plant that can easily be turned on and off.)
 
Back
Top Bottom