Renewable Energies - Page 3

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: Renewable Energies
On Sunday, November 18, 2018 at 3:05:38 PM UTC-6, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
ote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
  wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
il.com  wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
ous upswing, the cost to the end user is below the market rate for other en
ergy types, what is wrong with trying to switch over?  Maybe there are gove
rnment subsidies helping with the price structures, but as renewables ramp  
up the prices will continue to drop.  It shouldn't be a problem to phase ou
t the subsidies as this happens.  Why would anyone be opposed to this?  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
 energy market to be useful.  Certainly they can supplement and replace a s
ignificant portion of energy sources in the US and many other places.  Inte
restingly enough one of the areas where wind energy is on a major upswing i
s in Texas, home of the Permian basin and much of the US refining industry.
  Funny how things work out.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
bsidised.

Ok, so don't, great!  


Quoted text here. Click to load it
renewables has been decreasing.  That is the point.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
 point before we all pass away.  Carbon generation will only be used when r
equired because of the high costs, both directly economic and environmental
ly.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
r higher cost also means they use more materials in construction & more lab
our, which could be doing something else useful.

So everything about renewables are bad and everything about burning carbon  
fuels is good?  Seems like a large percentage of the world disagrees with y
ou.  You can keep doing things the way you have been.  No one is going to s
top you.  But you don't get to apply your ideas to the rest of us.  The wor
ld will move forward without you.  

Renewable energy is useful... more than useful really, essential.  But if y
ou are in denial about that there is nothing more to say.  


Quoted text here. Click to load it
out and they will remain cheaper then carbon based energies.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
't yet for one simple reason. Every megawatt of intermittent generation req
uires 1 megawatt of reliable generation to back it up. Thus using intermitt
ents adds cost. That is the point.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
ble energy is largely variable, it is not so bizarrely variable that it wou
ld all go out at once.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
so far. Generation often falls so low that it's as near zero as makes no di
fference.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Actually, I didn't realize renewables are are almost 20% of the generation  
in the US!  So at what times does that become zero?  


Quoted text here. Click to load it
some months every 18 months or so.  Does that make nuclear nonviable?  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
. When intermittents routinely drop to zero (solar) or 4% (wind), the exist
ence of extra capacity would need to be at an untenable level to work.

More capacity... making nukes even more expensive.  Nuclear is about done f
or.  The plants cost so much to build they can't produce economic electrici
ty.  I haven't dug into the details but in South Carolina it seems there is
 a big controversy over who is going to pay for the failed construction pro
ject of new nuclear capacity.  Seems it became too expensive to even finish
 after spending some boatload of money.  Bottom line it will be the rate pa
yers.  


Quoted text here. Click to load it
 running it isn't polluting.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
onger rely on lots of coal.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
based power, gas and petroleum.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Zero pollution from carbon???  You aren't making any sense.  Carbon is the  
problem renewables are solving.  


Quoted text here. Click to load it
e investment (unlike renewables for the most part) it is the fuel costs.  L
ess fuel used, much lower cost.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
g that is pointless.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
t the reasonable views of the future that will make this possible.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
 that the future will bring intermittents more into play, as I've already s
aid here. But that does not mean they are in any position to replace conven
tional generation, nor are they currently competitive.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
term.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

You mean the fossil fuel subsidies, $4.6 billion per year?  Forbes says abo
ut the DOE's program to promote clean energy,  

The program got a black eye in the wake of the bankruptcy of California-bas
ed solar manufacturer Solyndra in 2011. Oddly enough, the loan program was  
actually established by federal legislation passed in 2005 that was critica
l for catalyzing the shale gas boom in recent years.

Where would we be without federal subsidies?  


Quoted text here. Click to load it
planned on 3,500 acres here.  I would never have expected this to be built  
on the east coast with the not so great record of sunshine.  But someone cl
early things it will be profitable even with the uncertainty of subsidies g
oing forward.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
nce.

You mean the fossil fuel subsidies?  


Quoted text here. Click to load it
rter electronics better able to handle the issues of unreliable supply. But
 you still can't use unreliable sources for most tasks without causing a wh
olly unreasonable level of problems.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
l the wind blows again before we can cook. Sorry kids, we can't bring you t
hat educational content because generation is down to 4% again - but we can
 run a 3w lightbulb, by which you can almost see the blackboard.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
hat do you think will be the unavoidable outcome if not that. You don't see
m to have any grasp of what it means in real terms.  

Can you show when and where that happened?  


Quoted text here. Click to load it
for the grid using the energy source that is in excess at that time.  No ca
rbon emitted.  If the sun doesn't shine for a few days many autos can charg
e at night when the wind tends to blow or just forego charging until they a
re actually low for example.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
y isn't practical. It's like suggesting we can run a modern internet just o
n unused phone line capacity. It was done once, but to go back to that now  
would mean the loss of nearly all the business value, education value and f
wiw entertainment value of the internet. Nobody would entertain such a prop
osal seriously. Except you.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
d commuted 100 miles round trip and only had to fill his tank every other d
ay at most.  Most people run their cars better part of a week before they n
eed to fill up... well unless they only have 11 gal tanks like my friend's  
econobox.  Electric cars are the same way,
Quoted text here. Click to load it
nge because battery capacity is expensive, and recharging is a very slow bu
siness - if in your world the energy is available at all.

They don't have "much shorter range".  My truck goes 400 miles on a fill an
d my Tesla nearly 300.  I don't care if the charging takes 40 or 50 minutes
 on a trip - because I got out of a car after 4 hours and I need to take a  
leak and eat a bite.  

Talking about convenience... when I'm at home, I charge at home.  I don't n
eed to take the car somewhere to put gas in it.  I don't need to bother wit
h a messy, smelly fuel leaking from the nozzle when I replace it in the pum
p and I never get gas on my hands.  

But then I do feel guilty when I stop to scrape bugs off my windshield at a
 gas station.  I took a bathroom break at a gas station and bought a cup of
 coffee.  The guy said he would fill me right up if I pulled up to the pump
s... making a joke.  I guess he knew what a Tesla is.  


Quoted text here. Click to load it
t charging if supply is short.  Those who need charging will get it.  Unles
s we are in a nuclear winter renewables don't go away 100%.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

You must not either because you are doing a lousy job of explaining it.  

  Rick C.  

  Tesla referral code -++-+ https://ts.la/richard11209

Re: Renewable Energies
On 18/11/2018 10:52 am, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The stated costs for renewables tend to be misleading.

For example if someone constructs a wind farm, and then cost per  
kilowatt-hour generated is approximately the cost of the wind farm,  
divided by the number of kilowatt-hours generated over the life of the  
farm, plus operating and maintenance costs. This is the cost that will  
be quoted for the wind farm.

But that is not the cost of supplying a kilowatt-hour to an end user  
(even ignoring distribution costs), because the wind farm may not be  
generating when the end user wants to consume.

The cost to the end user has to include the cost of other generation  
when the wind isn't blowing. This makes the cost to the end user  
significantly higher.

Sylvia.


Re: Renewable Energies
On Saturday, November 17, 2018 at 9:41:05 PM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
 the cost to the end user is below the market rate for other energy types,  
what is wrong with trying to switch over?  Maybe there are government subsi
dies helping with the price structures, but as renewables ramp up the price
s will continue to drop.  It shouldn't be a problem to phase out the subsid
ies as this happens.  Why would anyone be opposed to this?
Quoted text here. Click to load it
et to be useful.  Certainly they can supplement and replace a significant p
ortion of energy sources in the US and many other places.  Interestingly en
ough one of the areas where wind energy is on a major upswing is in Texas,  
home of the Permian basin and much of the US refining industry.  Funny how  
things work out.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Do you calculate the cost of nuclear the same way?  Nuclear is a constant s
ource with little ability to adjust to demand.  So do you factor in the pea
king generators to adjust the supply to the load?  

  Rick C.  

  Tesla referral code --- https://ts.la/richard11209

Re: Renewable Energies
On 18/11/2018 4:50 pm, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

No, why would I? It's nothing like the same thing.

Sylvia.

Re: Renewable Energies
On Sunday, November 18, 2018 at 2:52:11 AM UTC-6, Sylvia Else wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
g, the cost to the end user is below the market rate for other energy types
, what is wrong with trying to switch over?  Maybe there are government sub
sidies helping with the price structures, but as renewables ramp up the pri
ces will continue to drop.  It shouldn't be a problem to phase out the subs
idies as this happens.  Why would anyone be opposed to this?
Quoted text here. Click to load it
rket to be useful.  Certainly they can supplement and replace a significant
 portion of energy sources in the US and many other places.  Interestingly  
enough one of the areas where wind energy is on a major upswing is in Texas
, home of the Permian basin and much of the US refining industry.  Funny ho
w things work out.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
nt source with little ability to adjust to demand.  So do you factor in the
 peaking generators to adjust the supply to the load?
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Of course it is.  Nuclear can't be used for 100% of electrical generation.  
 So we need alternate energy sources and Nuclear can only fill its niche.  
  

BTW, you need to justify your claim of "significantly higher".  Most carbon
 based generation expense is largely the fuel cost.  Less use, less polutio
n, lower cost.  

  Rick C.  

  Tesla referral code ----+ https://ts.la/richard11209

Re: Renewable Energies
On Sunday, 18 November 2018 19:33:33 UTC, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com  wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

It already is in France.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

bzzt

Re: Renewable Energies

m:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
on.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

it is only 75% :P


Re: Renewable Energies
On Sun, 18 Nov 2018 11:33:28 -0800 (PST),
snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Nuclear is good for powering 24/7 industry. Solar is good for the
higher daytime consumption, but other sources are required for the
variable loads.

Neither is 100 % renewable possible unless you build a huge number of
biofueled steam power stations.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: Renewable Energies
On Monday, November 19, 2018 at 12:45:49 AM UTC-6, snipped-for-privacy@downunder.com w
rote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
e:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
wing, the cost to the end user is below the market rate for other energy ty
pes, what is wrong with trying to switch over?  Maybe there are government  
subsidies helping with the price structures, but as renewables ramp up the  
prices will continue to drop.  It shouldn't be a problem to phase out the s
ubsidies as this happens.  Why would anyone be opposed to this?
Quoted text here. Click to load it
 market to be useful.  Certainly they can supplement and replace a signific
ant portion of energy sources in the US and many other places.  Interesting
ly enough one of the areas where wind energy is on a major upswing is in Te
xas, home of the Permian basin and much of the US refining industry.  Funny
 how things work out.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
the
ill
r
e
n
stant source with little ability to adjust to demand.  So do you factor in  
the peaking generators to adjust the supply to the load?
Quoted text here. Click to load it
n.  So we need alternate energy sources and Nuclear can only fill its niche
.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Solar is not actually a good match for day time loads.  They tend to peak i
n the early AM before solar has gotten to it's peak and in the late afterno
on/early evening now after the solar peak.  Combined with the night time in
crease for wind this may work better depending on exactly when the wind pow
er picks up and drops off.  I haven't seen those curves and they are averag
es anyway.  


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Something needs to be worked out for sure.  There are a lot of variables, b
ut even if we don't retire carbon based generation plants, by using them a  
lot less we would be helping things.  

  Rick C.  

  Tesla referral code -+ https://ts.la/richard11209

Re: Renewable Energies
On Sun, 18 Nov 2018 23:34:18 -0800 (PST),
snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

You seem to think that all panels are oriented towards south (in
northern hemisphere), but especially roof mounted panels are also
oriented towards SE and SW, thus better matching the load.


Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: Renewable Energies
On Monday, November 19, 2018 at 1:44:34 AM UTC-6, snipped-for-privacy@downunder.com wr
ote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
m wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
rote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
upswing, the cost to the end user is below the market rate for other energy
 types, what is wrong with trying to switch over?  Maybe there are governme
nt subsidies helping with the price structures, but as renewables ramp up t
he prices will continue to drop.  It shouldn't be a problem to phase out th
e subsidies as this happens.  Why would anyone be opposed to this?
Quoted text here. Click to load it
rgy market to be useful.  Certainly they can supplement and replace a signi
ficant portion of energy sources in the US and many other places.  Interest
ingly enough one of the areas where wind energy is on a major upswing is in
 Texas, home of the Permian basin and much of the US refining industry.  Fu
nny how things work out.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
rm,
of the
t will
user
t be
tion
constant source with little ability to adjust to demand.  So do you factor  
in the peaking generators to adjust the supply to the load?
Quoted text here. Click to load it
tion.  So we need alternate energy sources and Nuclear can only fill its ni
che.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
k in the early AM before solar has gotten to it's peak and in the late afte
rnoon/early evening now after the solar peak.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sure, you can do that, but you get a fraction of the total energy.  Also, i
n the winter the sun is not even up for an hour in the morning peak and the
 entire evening peak (my rates are peak from 6 to 9 AM and 5 to 8 PM).  A b
it hard to get much from a solar panel no matter which way it's pointed if  
the sun is not up.  

  Rick C.  

  Tesla referral code -+-+- https://ts.la/richard11209

Re: Renewable Energies
On 19/11/18 07:34, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

For the UK you can see the demand curves and generation curves at
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ and the datasets can be
downloaded for your own processing.

When I quickly processed the wind generation stats for one year
I was surprised to find a very simple rule of thumb for the
probability of having wind power. If the peak output is P, then
the probability that there will be xP or more of power is
roughly x (for x in 0..1!).

Hence there will be less than 1% of wind power output on 3.5
days per year. That destroys the greenwash that "if the wind
isn't blowing /here/, it is blowing /there/".

I ought to repeat that with a later dataset, since more wind
capacity has been added.

Re: Renewable Energies
On Mon, 19 Nov 2018 10:48:09 +0000, Tom Gardner

Quoted text here. Click to load it

There are duration curves for the Nordic region at
http://orbit.dtu.dk/files/57657176/Variability_and_smoothing_effect.pdf
page 3. The curves show one year of  8760 hours (365x24).  

The output from a single site drops quite fast, but for each Nordic
country much slower. The curve for the entire Nordic region drops even
slower. The other graph on that page shows the variation relative to
the average output and there is an enlargement of the last 200 hours,
clearly showing the averaging effect. The output of the region drops
radically about 24 hours from the end. Clearly the larger area helps
in reducing the risk of calm in the whole region.
.
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: Renewable Energies
On Sunday, November 18, 2018 at 4:50:23 PM UTC+11, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com  
wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
g, the cost to the end user is below the market rate for other energy types
, what is wrong with trying to switch over?  Maybe there are government sub
sidies helping with the price structures, but as renewables ramp up the pri
ces will continue to drop.  It shouldn't be a problem to phase out the subs
idies as this happens.  Why would anyone be opposed to this?
Quoted text here. Click to load it
rket to be useful.  Certainly they can supplement and replace a significant
 portion of energy sources in the US and many other places.  Interestingly  
enough one of the areas where wind energy is on a major upswing is in Texas
, home of the Permian basin and much of the US refining industry.  Funny ho
w things work out.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
 source with little ability to adjust to demand.  So do you factor in the p
eaking generators to adjust the supply to the load?  

Nuclear reactors have (cadmium?) control rods that can raise or lower the n
eutron flux, and  the rate of fission within the reactor, and this the heat
 output.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_rod

The capital cost of the plant is enormous, so you do want to keep running a
s close to capacity as you can manage, but that's maximising the return on  
your investment. You can turn it down or turn it off.

--  
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Re: Renewable Energies
On 18/11/18 13:14, snipped-for-privacy@ieee.org wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

As with much hot and/or moving machinery, thermally cycling
them isn't cost-free.

Source: my father, a two-phase flow expert who had a sideline
in diagnosing strange reactor behaviour (e.g. at 55% load the
power output starts oscillating), operation at strange angles,
and comparing their behaviour to a bathtub full of water
(before Fukushima).

Re: Renewable Energies
On Sun, 18 Nov 2018 15:44:28 +0000, Tom Gardner

Quoted text here. Click to load it

If control rods affected heat generation quickly, we wouldn't have
China Syndrome.




Quoted text here. Click to load it

--  

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics  


Re: Renewable Energies
On 11/18/2018 10:59 AM, John Larkin wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

They do affect heat generation quickly! You can SCRAM the control rods  
into a modern US reactor in about 1 second and the thermal output will  
drop about 90% just as quickly.

It's the ~10% output that's left over from decay heat that can be a  
problem especially if you say, for some reason have no circulating coolant!

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: Renewable Energies

Quoted text here. Click to load it
.com
:
Quoted text here. Click to load it
ing,
be a
ne
es.
or
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
he  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
ll be
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
 when
Quoted text here. Click to load it
antly
tant
the
the
e heat
ing as
on your

afaiu normal operation is 5% per minute  


Re: Renewable Energies
On Sun, 18 Nov 2018 09:40:22 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen


Quoted text here. Click to load it

I think that's a fast-response reactor. Some are more like 2%.

You can always dump excess steam straight into the condenser, but
ramp-up is slower.


--  

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics  


Re: Renewable Energies
On 11/18/18 10:59 AM, John Larkin wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

You can turn the fission output up and down quickly, just not the  
decaying daughter isotopes.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--  
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.

Site Timeline