The Remarkable Progress of Renewable Energy

[Tigers!]

At peak, Texas now can get up to 25% of electric needs from wind and solar. And more solar and wind projects are under way. Last year in the U.S. 500,000 homes had solar systems installed. There is that also.

Great whilst the sun shines. You will always get 0% of electricity from solar at night. Guaranteed.

 

[No Robots]

Transcontinental and global power grids--European Commission

 

[skepticalbip]

"Best in area with no grid"? Last year in Texas solar accouned for 4% of renewable energy. This year 7%. We have some major solar projects being built in West Texas and New Mexico to supply more solar power and more grid projects to acces the energy created. Big solar is here. And big solar is now a player in California and elsewhere.

Never let those who say it can't be done stop those who are doing it.

Who said it can't be done? Throw enough money at almost anything and it can be done and politicians are throwing a hell of a lot of money at solar and wind power. The question is what is the best, most reliable way. On a private sailboat or in a cabin in the wilderness solar cells plus batteries works fine as long as there isn't a long stretch of heavy overcast skies. But if someone on a sailboat was willing to throw enough money to use nuclear power then nuclear would work for them, it works for the navy.

Solar cells alone can't solve our energy demands unless you only want to use light bulbs or anything electronic during the day on sunny days.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

At peak, Texas now can get up to 25% of electric needs from wind and solar. And more solar and wind projects are under way. Last year in the U.S. 500,000 homes had solar systems installed. There is that also.

Great whilst the sun shines. You will always get 0% of electricity from solar at night. Guaranteed.

Summertime in Texas is hot during the day. Solar works best during the day. To keep air conditioners working. It is better than rolling brown outs. Over time, as solar grows and energy storage gets going it will become less of a problem. And we have the solution of large commercial buildings. Using cheap off peak energy to chill water for AC when appropriate.

That we do not have a perfect solution today is no excuse to stop and givi g up, is it? Think long term and keep building.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

"Best in area with no grid"? Last year in Texas solar accouned for 4% of renewable energy. This year 7%. We have some major solar projects being built in West Texas and New Mexico to supply more solar power and more grid projects to acces the energy created. Big solar is here. And big solar is now a player in California and elsewhere.

Never let those who say it can't be done stop those who are doing it.

Who are not even reaching 10% of ‘doing it’.

The only state or national scale grids to achieve Carbon Dioxide emissions routinely below 100gCO₂eq/kWh are those that are close to 100% Hydro, nuclear, or a combination of those two.

Propaganda is cheap. Bragging about things you hope to achieve is easy. But actually keeping the lights on for a month, much less a year, with 100gCO₂eq/kWh or less, is something no large area or large population has ever done with more than 20% wind + solar, or indeed with less than 80% nuclear + hydro.

And that’s not for want of money, effort or time; Just ask the Germans.

Bragging? Just stating the facts. Texas has the sunlight and wind and is rapidly developing these opportunities. It works and it makes profits for those companies who are doing it. This isn't going to stop because the Bilbys of the world don't like it.

Meanwhile the problem of energy storage is now being intensely worked on. Check back with Texas in 25 years.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

So many strawmen, so little time. Renewables are killing off coal in Texas, and will phase out oil over time. It will not phase out gas any time soon. But long term we cannot go on the way we are. We all know that.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

...

Maybe no one here is championing mini-nuclear plants, but TerraPower, a company jointly created by Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are. They have already started building a pilot plant in Wyoming. They recieved $80 million from the government. Their plant will also feature a large molten salt energy storage unit also. Meanwhile in UK, Rolls Royce is planning their small reactor design projects. And there are others. Here in Texas, no nuclear plants are planned. Lots of solar and wind and grid expansion projects are going forward. That is where the money is here.

Meanwhile, natiowide, nuclear waste is accumulating at nuclear sites with no plans in sight to deal with that little problem of permanent disposal of that waste. The Yucca Flats fiasco demonstrates the inability and unwillingness politically to deal competently with the long term nuclear waste problam in the U.S..

I think that a really big problem with envisioning energy production is that it is driven by fads, propaganda, and politicians, not by engineers with an understanding of energy. Solar panels are great but only in areas with plenty sun and then best for isolated areas with no grid like a lone cabin, on a small island, or on a sailboat. Wind power is great for areas where there is lots of reliable wind.

When I think of wind, I think of islands. When I think of Islands, I think of PEI in Canada. Wind power capacity in PEI has skyrocketed (~1500% since 2005). It still imports about 60% of its electricity from News Brunswick. Occasionally it is a net exporter, but it usually isn't. The trouble with wind can be too much wind means zero power!

 

[skepticalbip]

...

...

Maybe no one here is championing mini-nuclear plants, but TerraPower, a company jointly created by Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are. They have already started building a pilot plant in Wyoming. They recieved $80 million from the government. Their plant will also feature a large molten salt energy storage unit also. Meanwhile in UK, Rolls Royce is planning their small reactor design projects. And there are others. Here in Texas, no nuclear plants are planned. Lots of solar and wind and grid expansion projects are going forward. That is where the money is here.

Meanwhile, natiowide, nuclear waste is accumulating at nuclear sites with no plans in sight to deal with that little problem of permanent disposal of that waste. The Yucca Flats fiasco demonstrates the inability and unwillingness politically to deal competently with the long term nuclear waste problam in the U.S..

I think that a really big problem with envisioning energy production is that it is driven by fads, propaganda, and politicians, not by engineers with an understanding of energy. Solar panels are great but only in areas with plenty sun and then best for isolated areas with no grid like a lone cabin, on a small island, or on a sailboat. Wind power is great for areas where there is lots of reliable wind.

When I think of wind, I think of islands. When I think of Islands, I think of PEI in Canada. Wind power capacity in PEI has skyrocketed (~1500% since 2005). It still imports about 60% of its electricity from News Brunswick. Occasionally it is a net exporter, but it usually isn't. The trouble with wind can be too much wind means zero power!

Right. Renewables have to solve the problem of reliability. A functional industrial society has to have a power system that insures that the light comes on when the the switch is flicked. Without storage and/or backup, solar can only provide that during sunny days, not so much during storms or at night. Wind can work at night or day but not so much during heavy storms or during a calm.

Interestingly, the Voyager and Pioneer probes have used reliable uninterrupted power for over 45 years now. The problem of providing reliable clean power was solved before the 1970s.

 

[bilby]

At peak, Texas now can get up to 25% of electric needs from wind and solar. And more solar and wind projects are under way. Last year in the U.S. 500,000 homes had solar systems installed. There is that also.

And at trough, they can get “down to” 0%.

And they get no choice whatsoever about when the peaks or troughs will be.

At peak, Ontario gets 100% of electric needs from nuclear and hydro; And at trough, well over 80%.

Installed solar panels generate zero power at night, no matter how many of them there are.

 

[bilby]

That we do not have a perfect solution today is no excuse to stop and givi g up, is it?

But we DO HAVE a perfect solution. You just don’t like it, for no good reasons.

Nuclear power is the safest way of generating electricity yet developed. It’s the most reliable. It’s the lowest in carbon dioxide emissions (onshore wind is the only technology that is comparable on that score). It’s the cheapest low emissions option, when all costs are included (though wind and solar advocates ignore the cost of storage, and fossil fuel advocates ignore the cost of environmental damage, making nuclear look comparatively expensive).

What other attributes would an ideal solution have? What’s wrong with you, that you are rejecting the safe, reliable, environmentally friendly and cheap option we have available today, in favour of a future possibility that we might get a fundamentally less effective solution, to not suck quite as badly as it does now?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Who said anything about 0%? Not anytime soon. The problem with commodities like gas and oil is wild price swings like we had with the disasterous Texas big freeze last year and we are seeing today with oil. Gas killed off expensive coal and renewables are finishing the job. The heat dome Texas is now sufering from has increased electrical prices by great amounts. Gas increases in such cases. Price and demand.

Long term, renewables are going to prove attractive.

 

[bilby]

"Best in area with no grid"? Last year in Texas solar accouned for 4% of renewable energy. This year 7%. We have some major solar projects being built in West Texas and New Mexico to supply more solar power and more grid projects to acces the energy created. Big solar is here. And big solar is now a player in California and elsewhere.

Never let those who say it can't be done stop those who are doing it.

Who are not even reaching 10% of ‘doing it’.

The only state or national scale grids to achieve Carbon Dioxide emissions routinely below 100gCO₂eq/kWh are those that are close to 100% Hydro, nuclear, or a combination of those two.

Propaganda is cheap. Bragging about things you hope to achieve is easy. But actually keeping the lights on for a month, much less a year, with 100gCO₂eq/kWh or less, is something no large area or large population has ever done with more than 20% wind + solar, or indeed with less than 80% nuclear + hydro.

And that’s not for want of money, effort or time; Just ask the Germans.

Bragging? Just stating the facts. Texas has the sunlight and wind and is rapidly developing these opportunities. It works and it makes profits for those companies who are doing it. This isn't going to stop because the Bilbys of the world don't like it.

What you or I like has fuck-all to do with it. My question is ‘why are you trying to get a second rate solution to do things it’s fundamentally incapable of, when we already have a first rate solution that is better in pretty much every regard?’.

Meanwhile the problem of energy storage is now being intensely worked on. Check back with Texas in 25 years.

We don’t have 25 years. And in 25 years, we will have fusion, as well as storage, both being predicted to become available in 25 years time…

 

[bilby]

Who said anything about 0%

Reality said that on a windless night, renewables generate 0% of your energy requirements.

If you don’t like that, take it up with reality.

 

[bilby]

It will not phase out gas any time soon. But long term we cannot go on the way we are. We all know that.

Long term, we cannot keep burning fossil fuels. Gas is a fossil fuel. And Wind + Solar is ALWAYS Wind + Solar + Gas.

I can understand why the frackers and fossil fuel merchants of Texas love wind and solar power; I cannot understand why anyone else, in Texas or anywhere, who gives a shit about climate change, would support their desire to profit from destroying our environment.

You are being used as a patsy in a battle for cash between coal barons and gas barons. Neither give a crap about our environment, but one side has found an expensive propaganda weapon, and a way to get idiots to insist that taxpayers fund it. It’s genius, albeit evil genius.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

In case you have not noticed, here in Texas, there are no plans for more nuclear plants. There are plans for a lot more renewable projects. Being a realist, dreaming nuclear will save us lacks one little element. Actually building more nuclear plants in Texas.

It is not happening. It is not going to happen anytime soon. If somebody started today, it would be 15 years or more befoe any plant came on line. Meanwhile renewable projects are just chugging along.

Meanwhile, nuclear waste is piling up at existing nuclear plants with no solution in sight. Nobody wants the burden of solving this little problem. Uncle Sam doesn't want the nuclear industry to build plants and stick the government with the nuclear waste problem. And the nuclear industry doesn't want to be saddled with that problem as a condition for be allowed to build.

Perhaps you can write President Biden with the grand solution.

 

[skepticalbip]

...

In case you have not noticed, here in Texas, there are no plans for more nuclear plants. There are plans for a lot more renewable projects. Being a realist, dreaming nuclear will save us lacks one little element. Actually building more nuclear plants in Texas.

It is not happening. It is not going to happen anytime soon. If somebody started today, it would be 15 years or more befoe any plant came on line. Meanwhile renewable projects are just chugging along.

Meanwhile, nuclear waste is piling up at existing nuclear plants with no solution in sight. Nobody wants the burden of solving this little problem. Uncle Sam doesn't want the nuclear industry to build plants and stick the government with the nuclear waste problem. And the nuclear industry doesn't want to be saddled with that problem as a condition for be allowed to build.

Perhaps you can write President Biden with the grand solution.

You are confusing political reality for physics reality. Politicians pandering to the gas lobby, solar, and wind lobbies does not mean that solar and wind are not dumb solutions compared to nuclear. Personally, I don't look to politicians for an understanding of physics.

 

[bilby]

In case you have not noticed, here in Texas, there are no plans for more nuclear plants.

Why would I notice, or care much about, Texas? I don’t live in Texas. I don’t live in the same country as Texas. I don’t live in the same hemisphere as Texas. Texas is utterly unimportant to me.

There are plans for a lot more renewable projects. Being a realist, dreaming nuclear will save us lacks one little element. Actually building more nuclear plants in Texas.

Texas isn’t the world. It’s not even a significant fraction of the world.

It is not happening. It is not going to happen anytime soon. If somebody started today, it would be 15 years or more befoe any plant came on line. Meanwhile renewable projects are just chugging along.

Though none will solve the intermittency problem in the next fifteen years.

And the gas companies are loving all that sweet cash.

Meanwhile, nuclear waste is piling up at existing nuclear plants with no solution in sight.

Solution? Solution to what problem?

Nobody wants the burden of solving this little problem.

You haven’t identified a problem.

Uncle Sam doesn't want the nuclear industry to build plants and stick the government with the nuclear waste problem. And the nuclear industry doesn't want to be saddled with that problem as a condition for be allowed to build.

WHAT PROBLEM???

Are people getting hurt, or being placed at risk of injury or death? Is our environment being degraded in some way? Are plants running out of space to store this spent fuel? What, exactly, is this “problem”?

Perhaps you can write President Biden with the grand solution.

Biden is not my President.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Who said anything about 0%

Reality said that on a windless night, renewables generate 0% of your energy requirements.

If you don’t like that, take it up with reality.

Did I not point out one can buy hydrogen plants now to solve that problem? Did i not point out there are many projects being pursued to solve that issue. Did I not point out that the Biden Adminstration started a 10 year plan to cut costs of hydrogenstorage 80%? $100 Million to prime that pump.

Long term, this is an issue that is solvable and will be solved. Stop trolling!

 

[bilby]

Who said anything about 0%

Reality said that on a windless night, renewables generate 0% of your energy requirements.

If you don’t like that, take it up with reality.

Did I not point out one can buy hydrogen plants now to solve that problem?

If you did, you were wrong. You cannot buy such plants. You may be able to buy a very expensive plant that addresses a minuscule fraction of that problem; But that’s not a solution.

Did i not point out there are many projects being pursued to solve that issue.

Did I not point out that plans, ideas, and research don’t store electricity?

Did I not point out that the Biden Adminstration started a 10 year plan to cut costs of hydrogenstorage 80%? $100 Million to prime that pump.

That seems wasteful. Betting $100M on a chance at a partial solution to climate change, when that money could have been invested in the existing nuclear industry that is known to be effective.

But you didn’t need to tell me that politicians are often ignorant and wasteful.

Long term, this is an issue that is solvable and will be solved.

You hope.

Hope doesn’t store electricity.

Stop trolling!

I am arguing in good faith here. Your failure to find any good counterarguments is not an indication that I am trying to annoy you, it is just an indication that you are mistaken in your position.

If that annoys you, it’s a you problem, and one that could be easily solved by simply opening your mind to the possibility that reality might disagree with your beliefs.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

...

In case you have not noticed, here in Texas, there are no plans for more nuclear plants. There are plans for a lot more renewable projects. Being a realist, dreaming nuclear will save us lacks one little element. Actually building more nuclear plants in Texas.

It is not happening. It is not going to happen anytime soon. If somebody started today, it would be 15 years or more befoe any plant came on line. Meanwhile renewable projects are just chugging along.

Meanwhile, nuclear waste is piling up at existing nuclear plants with no solution in sight. Nobody wants the burden of solving this little problem. Uncle Sam doesn't want the nuclear industry to build plants and stick the government with the nuclear waste problem. And the nuclear industry doesn't want to be saddled with that problem as a condition for be allowed to build.

Perhaps you can write President Biden with the grand solution.

You are confusing political reality for physics reality. Politicians pandering to the gas lobby, solar, and wind lobbies does not mean that solar and wind are not dumb solutions compared to nuclear. Personally, I don't look to politicians for an understanding of physics.

The fact here in Texas, California, New Mexico etc is renewables are being implemented on a large scale. Nuclear is not. We take what we get. Nuclear plants are expensive. Typically, constuction runs over budget and behind schedule. And sometimes fails such as the two projects Westinghouse botched. Nuclear is exspnsive to operate.

Everybody as a result is gun shy about starting new reactor projects. Nobody wants to buy a white elephant. Nobody wants the nuclear waste disposal problem.