Wind and solar power are disrupting electricity...
- Thread starter wemay
- Start date
- Status
Yes, they are disruptive.
Putting in energy (when it's available) at negative market prices makes traditional power less viable, which is the "disruptive" label. Disrupts business as usual, which drives traditional players out of the market.
Then it gets expensive fast.
Putting in energy (when it's available) at negative market prices makes traditional power less viable, which is the "disruptive" label. Disrupts business as usual, which drives traditional players out of the market.
Then it gets expensive fast.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Can be hard on property value ? with little control of where they are put - that matters. I have a friend (not in my state) who spent a fortune rebuilding and old farm spread - plan was to live there a few years upgrading and then flip for nice profit ...
Dozens of turbines now surround him, guess what - folks looking for a quiet country place would never call back.
So while they have a great purpose and "feel good" from the window of your Lexus ... not so nice when right on top of you ...
Another friend wound up with a gas well -rig was done in 3 weeks - he made a bunch of money - built a new home etc. Bad news for the operator was they thought the well was better - but went into decline in the first few years and is now gone and land put back in shape at operating company expense.
My buddy hopes the wind turbines wear out fast too - nah, all the oil companies make special products for them ...
Hopefully the Giga Factory shows us a better way to do it on a mass scale.
Oh, talked to BIL yesterday - they lost some large and very expensive titanium parts yesterday when power blacked out during heat treat ...
Dozens of turbines now surround him, guess what - folks looking for a quiet country place would never call back.
So while they have a great purpose and "feel good" from the window of your Lexus ... not so nice when right on top of you ...
Another friend wound up with a gas well -rig was done in 3 weeks - he made a bunch of money - built a new home etc. Bad news for the operator was they thought the well was better - but went into decline in the first few years and is now gone and land put back in shape at operating company expense.
My buddy hopes the wind turbines wear out fast too - nah, all the oil companies make special products for them ...
Hopefully the Giga Factory shows us a better way to do it on a mass scale.
Oh, talked to BIL yesterday - they lost some large and very expensive titanium parts yesterday when power blacked out during heat treat ...
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
I predict this thread will get locked just like the last one you posted about renewable energy.
Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't realize it was locked and wouldn't have posted this one if i thought it would become a cantankerous political subject, not my intent.
I predict this thread will get locked just like the last one you posted about renewable energy.
Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't realize it was locked and wouldn't have posted this one if i thought it would become a cantankerous political subject, not my intent.
Originally Posted By: 4WD
Oh, talked to BIL yesterday - they lost some large and very expensive titanium parts yesterday when power blacked out during heat treat ...
The wind stops blowing.
German industry was complaining of the same issue with German politicians pushing of solar. So since Germany shuts down its nukes and green solar and wind is not reliable, now is building coal generators.
Oh, talked to BIL yesterday - they lost some large and very expensive titanium parts yesterday when power blacked out during heat treat ...
The wind stops blowing.
German industry was complaining of the same issue with German politicians pushing of solar. So since Germany shuts down its nukes and green solar and wind is not reliable, now is building coal generators.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Yes, they are disruptive.
Putting in energy (when it's available) at negative market prices makes traditional power less viable, which is the "disruptive" label. Disrupts business as usual, which drives traditional players out of the market.
Then it gets expensive fast.
That last sentence is worrying.
Yes, they are disruptive.
Putting in energy (when it's available) at negative market prices makes traditional power less viable, which is the "disruptive" label. Disrupts business as usual, which drives traditional players out of the market.
Then it gets expensive fast.
That last sentence is worrying.
Originally Posted By: wemay
That last sentence is worrying.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4141423/Levelised_Cost_of_Energy_Stora
Offered storage solutions aren't price competetive.
And the big problem is that a 1,000MW thermal can produce an average of 900MW 24/7....1,000MW solar/wind does around 250MW average 24/7, so you need 3-4 times the nameplate capacity, plus storage.
It means that (for solar), should enough be installed to actually supply the market 24/7 with storage, it will be free at midday, the whole concept of off peak will be eliminated. and be VERY expensive at night when the batteries are being used...otherwise the battery operator needs a couple hundred $ per MWh to cover the lifetime costs of ruining his battery every morning and evening peak.
That last sentence is worrying.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4141423/Levelised_Cost_of_Energy_Stora
Offered storage solutions aren't price competetive.
And the big problem is that a 1,000MW thermal can produce an average of 900MW 24/7....1,000MW solar/wind does around 250MW average 24/7, so you need 3-4 times the nameplate capacity, plus storage.
It means that (for solar), should enough be installed to actually supply the market 24/7 with storage, it will be free at midday, the whole concept of off peak will be eliminated. and be VERY expensive at night when the batteries are being used...otherwise the battery operator needs a couple hundred $ per MWh to cover the lifetime costs of ruining his battery every morning and evening peak.
The key word is "subsidy".
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: wemay
That last sentence is worrying.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4141423/Levelised_Cost_of_Energy_Stora
Offered storage solutions aren't price competetive.
And the big problem is that a 1,000MW thermal can produce an average of 900MW 24/7....1,000MW solar/wind does around 250MW average 24/7, so you need 3-4 times the nameplate capacity, plus storage.
It means that (for solar), should enough be installed to actually supply the market 24/7 with storage, it will be free at midday, the whole concept of off peak will be eliminated. and be VERY expensive at night when the batteries are being used...otherwise the battery operator needs a couple hundred $ per MWh to cover the lifetime costs of ruining his battery every morning and evening peak.
That last paragraph sounds about right. The Tesla home storage product is presently about $7000, and has an expected lifespan of 5000 cycles before it degrades to 80% efficiency, which is considered end of life.
Utility-scale operations appear to have similar costs to homeowner-purchased solutions. So a field of batteries might not be any cheaper. And instead of being mounted in basements or other places out of the elements, they're getting subjected to the full force of nature. Not ideal for batteries.
Here's the article I cribbed from: https://cleantechnica.com/2015/05/09/tes...-energy-imergy/
Originally Posted By: wemay
That last sentence is worrying.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4141423/Levelised_Cost_of_Energy_Stora
Offered storage solutions aren't price competetive.
And the big problem is that a 1,000MW thermal can produce an average of 900MW 24/7....1,000MW solar/wind does around 250MW average 24/7, so you need 3-4 times the nameplate capacity, plus storage.
It means that (for solar), should enough be installed to actually supply the market 24/7 with storage, it will be free at midday, the whole concept of off peak will be eliminated. and be VERY expensive at night when the batteries are being used...otherwise the battery operator needs a couple hundred $ per MWh to cover the lifetime costs of ruining his battery every morning and evening peak.
That last paragraph sounds about right. The Tesla home storage product is presently about $7000, and has an expected lifespan of 5000 cycles before it degrades to 80% efficiency, which is considered end of life.
Utility-scale operations appear to have similar costs to homeowner-purchased solutions. So a field of batteries might not be any cheaper. And instead of being mounted in basements or other places out of the elements, they're getting subjected to the full force of nature. Not ideal for batteries.
Here's the article I cribbed from: https://cleantechnica.com/2015/05/09/tes...-energy-imergy/
The ultimate power source is nuclear fusion. We need to get there. It will take billions in physics research that is being done.
Until then we will have a mix. Hopefully coal is not part of the mix.
For storage what about water? Candlewood Lake in CT is owned by the CL&P power company. Its designed to use off peak power to pump water up and then use it as hydro power when extra electricity is needed. I just do not know how much its really used.
Until then we will have a mix. Hopefully coal is not part of the mix.
For storage what about water? Candlewood Lake in CT is owned by the CL&P power company. Its designed to use off peak power to pump water up and then use it as hydro power when extra electricity is needed. I just do not know how much its really used.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: wemay
That last sentence is worrying.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4141423/Levelised_Cost_of_Energy_Stora
Offered storage solutions aren't price competetive.
And the big problem is that a 1,000MW thermal can produce an average of 900MW 24/7....1,000MW solar/wind does around 250MW average 24/7, so you need 3-4 times the nameplate capacity, plus storage.
It means that (for solar), should enough be installed to actually supply the market 24/7 with storage, it will be free at midday, the whole concept of off peak will be eliminated. and be VERY expensive at night when the batteries are being used...otherwise the battery operator needs a couple hundred $ per MWh to cover the lifetime costs of ruining his battery every morning and evening peak.
And an example of what that looks like: Based on the present efficiency/density of solar panels currently on the market, China would need to install enough solar panels to cover Germany 3x to match what they currently generate via coal. On top of that, they would need matching storage.
Originally Posted By: wemay
That last sentence is worrying.
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4141423/Levelised_Cost_of_Energy_Stora
Offered storage solutions aren't price competetive.
And the big problem is that a 1,000MW thermal can produce an average of 900MW 24/7....1,000MW solar/wind does around 250MW average 24/7, so you need 3-4 times the nameplate capacity, plus storage.
It means that (for solar), should enough be installed to actually supply the market 24/7 with storage, it will be free at midday, the whole concept of off peak will be eliminated. and be VERY expensive at night when the batteries are being used...otherwise the battery operator needs a couple hundred $ per MWh to cover the lifetime costs of ruining his battery every morning and evening peak.
And an example of what that looks like: Based on the present efficiency/density of solar panels currently on the market, China would need to install enough solar panels to cover Germany 3x to match what they currently generate via coal. On top of that, they would need matching storage.
Solar is still a niche product, with marginal generating capacity. Plus, and NEVER mentioned by proponents, it's an environmental nightmare to manufacture. There is simply no way a modern solar panel can repay the short term, high emission (1~2 years) greenhouse gas cost of manufacture with improved (long term, low recovery) generating efficiency over it's lifetime, and that's not even considering what amounts to an enviromnental interest penalty ... the impact of a 2017 greenhouse gas emission is greater than 1/25th times that amount for 25 years. So the payback, beside being inadequate, is returned with depreciated credits.
Wind is infinitely more viable, as is geothermal and tide generation. Solar is like the CFL bulb ... a stopgap measure that ultimately harms more than it helps.
And I live in the part of North America with more solar hours than anywhere else in Canada and more than 90% of the US, so we'd be using it here if it actually worked.
We use wind, and geothermal for alternative energy and carbon capture with natural gas for conventional green generation here (the CO2 is the vehicle used to extract the Natural Gas onsite at the generation plant. In essence CO2 from generation replaces the Natural Gas extracted to power the generators).
Wind is infinitely more viable, as is geothermal and tide generation. Solar is like the CFL bulb ... a stopgap measure that ultimately harms more than it helps.
And I live in the part of North America with more solar hours than anywhere else in Canada and more than 90% of the US, so we'd be using it here if it actually worked.
We use wind, and geothermal for alternative energy and carbon capture with natural gas for conventional green generation here (the CO2 is the vehicle used to extract the Natural Gas onsite at the generation plant. In essence CO2 from generation replaces the Natural Gas extracted to power the generators).
All good points on the hidden costs of green energy schemes. Anyone that has driven the I-10 thru palm springs between California and Arizona has seen literally many hundreds of windmills of many sizes and configurations. What struck me was how many of them were not turning while others were spinning quickly. So my assumption is that they are either way over capacity or many are broken down with the blades feathered back. Both of which scream inefficiency as a solution. Not even speaking to all the horrible bird impacts happening.
Last edited:
- Status
