Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Portugal just ran on 100% renewables for six days in a row

canarymedia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 368 posts

Re: Portugal just ran on 100% renewables for six days in a row

#51

Post by robocat »

helloooooooo wrote: post #15
gustavus wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course if they had a nuclear base they wouldn't even need the natural gas plants.

How would they regulate fluctuations in demand? Nuclear can’t do that. You need storage, or a reasonably scalable generation medium. Nuclear as a base load is moot

> Nuclear can’t do that

You are repeating a myth.

Load following is used in France: https://www.oecd-nea.org/nea-news/2011/29-2/nea-news-29-2-lo...

It mostly isn't used in the US due to regulations. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36254716

The reason load following is not generally used is because because the economics of nuclear (large fixed costs) favour base load.

Re: Portugal just ran on 100% renewables for six days in a row

#52

Post by bobthepanda »

kuchenbecker wrote: post #33
simonhorlick wrote: post #26

Note that since about 2021 renewables have overtaken fossil-based sources of energy on price. New installations of utility scale wind and solar PV are now cheaper than their alternatives. Not to mention protection from price fluctuations in the cost of fuels needed to power fossil fuel plants.

The backlog of hooking variable load sources to the US electric grid is very long, often requires retrofitting the grid, and cost is borne by the generator. It's not as simple as having the capacity because power is used the instant it's produced.

IIRC there are actually starting to be wind, solar and pumped hydro sited at former coal mines and plants because they already have transmission capacity. (In the case of pumped hydro, a coal mine can also act as a big hole with an elevation difference to drive a turbine.)

Re: Portugal just ran on 100% renewables for six days in a row

#54

Post by alexnewman »

voisin wrote: post #42
alexnewman wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alas only at 0% interest rates. When you factor in 5% rates they are below again

Source for this? I would think inflation in construction and maintenance costs for traditional generation would still keep it more expensive.

says me. i invest heavily here and do own maths. look to capital vs op costs of renewable

Re: Portugal just ran on 100% renewables for six days in a row

#55

Post by bobthepanda »

robocat wrote: post #51
helloooooooo wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would they regulate fluctuations in demand? Nuclear can’t do that. You need storage, or a reasonably scalable generation medium. Nuclear as a base load is moot

> Nuclear can’t do that You are repeating a myth. Load following is used in France: https://www.oecd-nea.org/nea-news/2011/29-2/nea-news-29-2-lo... It mostly isn't used in the US due to regulations. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36254716 The reason load following is not generally used is because because the economics of nuclear (large fixed costs) favour base load.

It’s mentioned that it runs the equipment harder, and France did have to shut down a large number of plants for maintenance recently: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-11/french-nu...

Re: Portugal just ran on 100% renewables for six days in a row

#56

Post by jacquesm »

tambourine_man wrote: post #22

This is good news people. We’re just not very used to them anymore. Scaling to 365 days and 8 billion people is harder than 10 million and 6 days. But it’s a nice step in the right direction.

A very large percentage of the world is already on 100% renewables, they simply don't have grid power. Their footprint is a fraction of the wealthy remainder.

Re: Portugal just ran on 100% renewables for six days in a row

#58

Post by collegeburner »

voisin wrote: post #42
alexnewman wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alas only at 0% interest rates. When you factor in 5% rates they are below again

Source for this? I would think inflation in construction and maintenance costs for traditional generation would still keep it more expensive.

there might be privileged financing somewhere i'm not aware of but it's a tough space rn. had breakfast with someone who's been in financing and constructing these for a long time and he's still working on it but much tougher.

if you want a public markets proxy, look at invesco's solar etf; down by around half. sedg is down 75%

existing infrastructure is more maintenance than construction

Re: Portugal just ran on 100% renewables for six days in a row

#59

Post by dukeofdoom »

Jedd wrote: post #27
dukeofdoom wrote: post #8

Huge waves in Portugal, when I visited. I'm guessing it's the wind coming off the Atlantic Ocean is strong and steady. And somewhat not common. Where I live, for most of the Winter the sky is overcast with clouds. So that somewhat limits solar panels. But I'm sure California is great place for them.

Any story like this always summons up people eager to cry 'But where I am is an exception'. They rarely say where they actually are. The thing that most countries - a convenient non-geo construct only because most countries have a national grid - who claim to be exceptional have in common, is a firm commitment to the idea that they are exceptional. I am reminded of that onion headline that ends 'says only nation wher…

I don't want to call it delusional, because green technology is feasible in some places. But in a lot of places and applications it's not just that it doesn't work, it's not feasible to ever work. Inflation is bad enough now. To blindly push it like a communist ideology...don't be surprised when the lower classes revolt because they can't heat their homes or afford food, due to cost of energy trickling into the price of everything.

This guy explains it better than I can. https://www.tiktok.com/@freightfamous/video/7294648129654246...

Re: Portugal just ran on 100% renewables for six days in a row

#60

Post by Retric »

alexnewman wrote: post #54
voisin wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source for this? I would think inflation in construction and maintenance costs for traditional generation would still keep it more expensive.

says me. i invest heavily here and do own maths. look to capital vs op costs of renewable

I have, what you may be missing is current interest rates are linked to high inflation rates which drive up the long term costs of fossil fuels. If inflation drops and interest rates drop you can refinance your renewables.

The calculation depends on how good the specific location is for wind/solar but outside of unusually poor areas, like the UK, solar is easily the cheapest option.

Post reply on HN