11–20 of 66 posts
That's because there's not much load in that area. America's best wind power belt is north from the Texas panhandle up to Canada.[1] But there are no big cities in that region. The US thus needs more long DC power lines. The technology is already in use in China. The Zhundong-Sichuan power line goes 2600km. It's a DC line at 1.1 megavolts carrying 10 gigawatts. That technology could easily carry power from the wind b…
For fun, let's think for a second how much solar panels does it take to power planet Earth. After rough calculation it's about 496805 km2, which is approximately an area of Spain. This calculation is based on consumption predicion of 198 PWh per year in 2030, and average solar energy of 1000W/m2 with 20% efficiency and 70% sunny days a year. Of course, this is an ideal "world is at peace and there is always somewhere sun shinning" model and it uses today's best available technologies. Storage and transmission system errection would pose a cooperation challenge on a global scale. Just morning food for thought...
[1] http://www.tsp-data-portal.org/Breakdown-of-Electricity-Gene...
Yet they account for a modest percentage of the total production. This is where PowerPack and other grid storage technologies would need to come in - to counter the variability of renewable production. Pumped hydro would be cost effective per MWh stored, but there's limited chance for building that.
There are other mechanisms that can also help ameliorate the challenges of intermittent ("non-dispatchable") power generation: - Long-range (generally, DC) power transmission lines. China is investing heavily here. - Similarly, inter-grid connections. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tres_Amigas_SuperStation - Superconductors! - Diversified renewables. Solar works on the stifling windless summer days; wind works on…
- invest in storage technology
Can we imagine, if we can store all electricity and reuse at night, it will reduce a lot of cost ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Variable pricing can likely do a great deal to match supply with demand without needing grid storage. Many uses of power are flexible, like charging electric cars, running the electric water heater/freezer/refrigerator, etc.
The variability needs to be very high to be an effective incentive for small power uses. If price of electricity goes from 10c/kWh to $1/kWh, it won't stop you using 1kW kettle for 5min if you want tea. And if push the price high enough to be effective, it starts hurting essential electricity users. Demand adjustment is more effective for industrial users who have beancounters. Probably better to target excessive cap…
Industrial users can be persuaded to vary their usage though.
A 'smart home' could also be programmed to handle variable electricity usage - e.g. load up a washing machine ready to go and let it start running when electricity is cheapest, or electric storage heaters.
Neither of these things require any technological leaps whereas efficient, cost effective grid-level energy storage does.
'“Ten years ago we thought hitting even a 25 percent wind-penetration level would be extremely challenging, and any more than that would pose serious threats to reliability,” Bruce Row, Southwest Power Pool’s vice president of operations, said in the statement. “Now we have the ability to reliably manage greater than 50 percent. It’s not even our ceiling.”'
It amazes me how humans constantly have sheer lack of will power to solve some global issues. For example, according to this pie [1], electric car is still a car indirectly running on fossil fuels. For fun, let's think for a second how much solar panels does it take to power planet Earth. After rough calculation it's about 496805 km2, which is approximately an area of Spain. This calculation is based on consumption p…
I do remember reading articles 10 years ago and thinking that we would probably not get anywhere near where we're at today. Frankly, I'm more impressed with the technical progress than with the political bureaucracies which prioritize their own bureaucratic inertia above actually solving the problems we have.
It amazes me how humans constantly have sheer lack of will power to solve some global issues. For example, according to this pie [1], electric car is still a car indirectly running on fossil fuels. For fun, let's think for a second how much solar panels does it take to power planet Earth. After rough calculation it's about 496805 km2, which is approximately an area of Spain. This calculation is based on consumption p…
I personally think the answer is to expand nuclear power. Current and next generation plants are way safer than the designs used for Cherynobl, Three Miles or Fukushima .
You need ~400M-500M tons of steel to make 2-3 Terawatt Hours of Electricity
Disclaimer: My family owns a steel plant, so I'm bias in that I think the carbon emissions required to produce steel wind turbines don't make sense/don't match the intention of building wind turbines.
I quit thinking about this energy source after re-opening my chemistry book. You need ~400M-500M tons of steel to make 2-3 Terawatt Hours of Electricity Disclaimer: My family owns a steel plant, so I'm bias in that I think the carbon emissions required to produce steel wind turbines don't make sense/don't match the intention of building wind turbines.
The turbines tend to have composite blades and steel towers. Actual studies put the amount of energy returned by wind turbines at ~18 times the energy invested: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/1863
And if not wind turbines, then what is your preferred low-carbon energy source?