Liberty Posted November 16, 2017 Author Share Posted November 16, 2017 Once more a piece conveniently ignoring storage costs. Cardboard No need to store anything until much further penetration. The grid will easily absorb all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 Not really. If the numbers that you are presenting are so compelling then growth or penetration as you call it should bring it to a meaningful percentage quickly: years not decades. If that is the case, then you cannot simply expect other providers to keep spare capacity idle for night use or when there is no sun. The grid already had its supply, so this is all excess capacity. So either you develop storage or you pay gas-fired producers, hydro, nuclear or others a reasonable rate of return on their capital for providing a buffer. This could mean having to go back to regulated utilities. In any case, there is a cost to add to solar for storage or spare capacity. Cardboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kab60 Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 I'm very Bullish om renewables but of course you're right, Cardboard. There is a cost of intermittent production (just like there with coal) that producers don't pay for today. I expect gas to play a big part in the future as well because production can be ramped quickly and one way to secure supply is to pay for it to stand idle. Another thing is a better grid, making it possible to better match supply and demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharperDingaan Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 You might want to revisit some of your assumptions. Per the mexico article - they have the same problem that a oil/gas producer has. The product is essentially worthless (<2c/Kwh) where it's produced, as everybody has it - and in quantity. 'Storage' for this location is the on-site electric arc furnaces of the 'smelting industries' sucking up lots of surplus green energy - not batteries. To extract value they need to sell the product elsewhere, creating a distribution problem. They have an enormous advantage in that they can distribute EITHER by ship (processed ingots), or by electric grid (assumes its capable). It creates a floor price for the energy, and the more smelters they can attract (additional demand) - the higher that floor price will be. Nice place to be. SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted November 17, 2017 Author Share Posted November 17, 2017 Mexico doesn't even have 1GW of solar power yet afaik (around 180MW last year). Storage isn't an issue at this point, that's what I said. On very sunny days when these solar farms will produce most, A/C use will be at its highest and the grid will easily absorb all that power and some other peaker plants just won't turn on, reducing pollution. Now in many years when solar is 20-30% of the grid, then yes, storage will be an issue. By then storage costs will also have come down a lot (including V2G and demand-response, as EVs come in by millions), and the grids everywhere will be a lot smarter and more interconnected so that if Mexico has a surplus of solar power it might send some up or down to neighboring countries and vice versa, as well as store some in things like grid-scale batteries, pumped hydro, etc. If it all happens overnight it's a problem, but a gradual ramp up, as any infrastructure change is, is fine. Of course it's a challenge, but building out the internet was also a challenge, but it was done because it was worth it. Building some transmission lines to then get almost free and clean power for decades is also worth it. In one specific spot renewables are very variables, but over large areas, and across categories like wind (onshore and offshore) & solar, things are a lot more predictable. It's like how hundreds of stocks might be a lot more volatile individually than an index that smooths things out. That's why more interconnected grids will happen, because while it might be cloudy somewhere, somewhere else it might be very sunny and windy and excess power can be moved across regions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kab60 Posted November 17, 2017 Share Posted November 17, 2017 Agree with above. Wind delivered 41 pct. of total electricity consumed in Denmark last year. Around twice as much as ten years ago. Yet, energy security (as in there's always power) is in the top globally. It works, but obviously it takes a bit of work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 41% of total... Considering that population growth and energy demand is not going up that dramatically what did the country do to keep sufficient intermittent supply which was very likely in place prior. Cardboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Hjorth Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 It's a process that has taken place over many years now. Coal based powerplants has been mothballed. Coal based powerplants has been put on the idle/reserve bench Coal based powerplants has been converted to running on waste or biomass. Ørsted A/S [former DONG Energy A/S] has been the frontrunner in this space nationally, in the last few years with capital provided by Goldman Sachs. I think it was last month, that GS exited finally, after a process that included the IPO of Ørsted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 Germany on the other hand appears desperate for storage: https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/11/17/heres-why-coal-mines-could-be-crucial-cogs-in-the-transition-to-renewables.html So they will need very large pumping systems, turbines with generators, gates/conduits, transformers/power lines, something to prevent this contaminated water with coal to reach their already low source of drinking water and lose minimum 50% of the energy pumping the water up due pump efficiency, pipe friction, then down with turbine efficiency, etc. Right now I am thinking that geothermal overall would be simpler and more efficient. Even my solar/hydrogen photosynthesis is simpler and as efficient if not better. Sounds like a case of a government/country that went nuts after supply from wind and other renewables without a plan or what I am warning about. Cardboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kab60 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 There is definately some truth to that. You have had subsidy systems that were too generous and didn't get developers to compete, and you haven't designed the right market to handle the large increases in renewables. But my point is that it's doable. One way is to pay gas plants to stay idle and let them earn a lot of money when demand is there. Even if one doesn't subscribe to global warming being man made you can get rid of air pollution (think some 25.000 are said to be killed by pollution from Coal in Europe?) and be more independent from oil and gas regimes be it Russia or Saudi Arabia (less of a problem in the US since you guys won the shale lottery). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted November 19, 2017 Author Share Posted November 19, 2017 Finally re-stumbled on the chart I was referring to somewhere else in this thread: https://steinbuch.wordpress.com/2017/06/12/photovoltaic-growth-reality-versus-projections-of-the-international-energy-agency/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted November 19, 2017 Share Posted November 19, 2017 Nice talking with you Kab60. I appreciate you discussing the issues seriously with rationality. Cardboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted November 28, 2017 Author Share Posted November 28, 2017 https://www.nature.com/articles/nenergy2017125 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Hjorth Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 For our fellow board members, kab60 is referring to Vestas Wind System A/S [VWS.CPH] here. It tanked about 25 percent in two days last week. That actually created what I would call a minor shockwave in the Danish stock market. "Devastating" provision in tax bill could hobble solar, wind tax credits. All over the place this morning here in Denmark. I'm happy I did not grab for some VWS shares. I expect it to be really hurt when the Danish market opens in a few minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-04/america-crowns-a-new-pollution-king Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted December 5, 2017 Author Share Posted December 5, 2017 Li-ion packs down 24% from 2016: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-05/latest-bull-case-for-electric-cars-the-cheapest-batteries-ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Interesting discussion. It strikes me that while the current system is symbiotic (in the sense someone used earlier, i.e. lots of different technologies and subsidies have come together to support one source of energy) with fossil fuels, it's easy to imagine one that is symbiotic with solar and wind. If automated vehicles allows fleet cars to be used 40-50% of the time then electric vehicles become the fleet vehicle of choice due to lower operating costs and the ability to spread higher capital costs over more miles. And if EVs are the vehicle of choice, then we have a lot of batteries driving around, which can constantly compute whether giving a ride or plugging in to charge/discharge is the best use of time. That is, in effect, free storage from the point of view of the LCOE of solar and wind. In other words we seem to have several technologies - automated driving, EVs, fleet apps, and solar/wind - that are potentially far more powerful together than any of them is alone, and which have the ability to help each other get adopted faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted December 6, 2017 Author Share Posted December 6, 2017 Interesting discussion. It strikes me that while the current system is symbiotic (in the sense someone used earlier, i.e. lots of different technologies and subsidies have come together to support one source of energy) with fossil fuels, it's easy to imagine one that is symbiotic with solar and wind. If automated vehicles allows fleet cars to be used 40-50% of the time then electric vehicles become the fleet vehicle of choice due to lower operating costs and the ability to spread higher capital costs over more miles. And if EVs are the vehicle of choice, then we have a lot of batteries driving around, which can constantly compute whether giving a ride or plugging in to charge/discharge is the best use of time. That is, in effect, free storage from the point of view of the LCOE of solar and wind. In other words we seem to have several technologies - automated driving, EVs, fleet apps, and solar/wind - that are potentially far more powerful together than any of them is alone, and which have the ability to help each other get adopted faster. Yeah, Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) tech will be interesting to watch over time. You can combine with variable pricing mechanisms to, for example, tell your car to charge more when rates are lower. This helps flatten the demand curve and reduce the need for peakers, as well as help absorb extra renewable energy when it's available. The reverse of this is also true: When rates spike up, you can have your car delay a charge, or not charge fully (based on some pre-defined rules, like "make sure to be charged by the morning on weekdays" or things like that) to help reduce load when supply's tightest (ie. you might plug in right after work, but the car might wait until after the evening demand peak is over to start charging once it's over a minimum charge in case you need to go out again, etc). Then the next step is to have the EV owners get paid by grid operators to use part of their batteries. So you might say "the grid can use 10% of my battery capacity when rates are higher than X" and now you can draw on millions of batteries to help find extra supply when you need it most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petec Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 Interesting discussion. It strikes me that while the current system is symbiotic (in the sense someone used earlier, i.e. lots of different technologies and subsidies have come together to support one source of energy) with fossil fuels, it's easy to imagine one that is symbiotic with solar and wind. If automated vehicles allows fleet cars to be used 40-50% of the time then electric vehicles become the fleet vehicle of choice due to lower operating costs and the ability to spread higher capital costs over more miles. And if EVs are the vehicle of choice, then we have a lot of batteries driving around, which can constantly compute whether giving a ride or plugging in to charge/discharge is the best use of time. That is, in effect, free storage from the point of view of the LCOE of solar and wind. In other words we seem to have several technologies - automated driving, EVs, fleet apps, and solar/wind - that are potentially far more powerful together than any of them is alone, and which have the ability to help each other get adopted faster. Yeah, Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) tech will be interesting to watch over time. You can combine with variable pricing mechanisms to, for example, tell your car to charge more when rates are lower. This helps flatten the demand curve and reduce the need for peakers, as well as help absorb extra renewable energy when it's available. The reverse of this is also true: When rates spike up, you can have your car delay a charge, or not charge fully (based on some pre-defined rules, like "make sure to be charged by the morning on weekdays" or things like that) to help reduce load when supply's tightest (ie. you might plug in right after work, but the car might wait until after the evening demand peak is over to start charging once it's over a minimum charge in case you need to go out again, etc). Then the next step is to have the EV owners get paid by grid operators to use part of their batteries. So you might say "the grid can use 10% of my battery capacity when rates are higher than X" and now you can draw on millions of batteries to help find extra supply when you need it most. Quite - and as we add tech to the grid we can have more flexible or minute-by-minute pricing, so that (for example) I can load my washing machine in the morning and it will turn on when it secures a cheap price for the next 90 minutes. Lots of investment before we get there though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted December 7, 2017 Author Share Posted December 7, 2017 Quite - and as we add tech to the grid we can have more flexible or minute-by-minute pricing, so that (for example) I can load my washing machine in the morning and it will turn on when it secures a cheap price for the next 90 minutes. Lots of investment before we get there though. Yeah. Once the grid starts to get smarter, there's all kinds of interesting things you can do. For example, demand response mechanism could pay large industrial customers money to, say, increase or reduce the temperature in large refrigerated warehouses to help smooth out the curve (f.ex. If you need your food to be kept frozen, when there's a lot of cheap power you can go lower and drop the temps in your warehouse to -10, and then during the next peak cycle you can let the warehouse progressively warm up back to, say, -2. The food stays frozen, it's not affected, but the warehouse acts as a kind of battery, soaking extra power off peak and "releasing it" (ie negawatts) during peak time -- conceptually the same thing can be done with hot water heaters and all kinds of other things, as long as you remain withins safe parameters. If you have enough of them, changing things by a couple degrees won't be noticed by users but can make a huge difference in power requirements). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rohitc99 Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/07/ge-announces-12000-job-cuts-at-ge-power.html General Electric announced on Thursday it was axing 12,000 jobs at its global power business as the struggling industrial conglomerate responds to dwindling demand for fossil fuel power plants. and GE rival Siemens is cutting about 6,900 jobs, or close to 2 percent of its global workforce, mainly at its power and gas division, which has been hit by the rapid growth of renewables. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted December 14, 2017 Author Share Posted December 14, 2017 https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Batteries-could-replace-three-California-power-12428238.php https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/battery-storage-is-threatening-natural-gas-peaker-plants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted December 20, 2017 Author Share Posted December 20, 2017 https://electrek.co/2017/12/20/usa-cheapest-solar-austin-texas-2-5¢-kwh/ Austin Energy is once again leading the USA with the lowest price per kWh from solar power. Intersect Power and Austin Energy announced a 150MW ac solar power purchase agreement that seems to range between 2.35-2.725¢/kWh, and could be as low as 2.1¢/kWh. When this project comes online in 2020, Austin Energy will be getting 51% of its electricity from renewable electricity sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted January 2, 2018 Author Share Posted January 2, 2018 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-01/coal-power-s-pace-slows-in-india-as-glut-leaves-plants-unused "India added six times as much solar as coal in 2017. It's the least amount of coal added in more than a decade" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now