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

In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

e360.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 809 posts

Re: In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

#541

Post by pfdietz »

zdragnar wrote: post #520
jacquesm wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anywhere you use resistive heating you're better off with a heatpump which is far more efficient than that.

Unless you live somewhere that (air, e.g. in an EV) heat pumps can't function at high efficiency. Tonight and tomorrow night will be -20F/-28C. Always good to have a backup plan, no matter what your primary heat source is.

Almost no one lives in a location where heat pumps are never (or even usually) inappropriate. Yes, it might get to -20 F, but how often does that happen over a winter, never mind over a year?

Re: In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

#542

Post by pfdietz »

adrianN wrote: post #298
eigenspace wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be rather misleading to to talk about renewable energy generation versus total energy usage. Most uses of fossil fuels are very inefficient. For instance, when you step on the accelerator in your car, only around 30% of the energy in the fuel you use actually is being used to propel you forward. The majority of the energy is wasted as heat. In a power plant that's more like 70% being captured and going towards…

Most power plants are less than 50% efficient.

A gas-fired CC plant built today will have a LHV efficiency > 60%.

Re: In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

#543

Post by pfdietz »

IshKebab wrote: post #396
pranavj wrote: post #113

The most underreported part of this story is the battery piece at the end. Batteries are beginning to displace natural gas in evening peak hours - that's the exact window where solar critics have long argued renewables fall short. If this trend accelerates (and battery prices are dropping faster than most models predicted), the "intermittency problem" starts looking more like a solvable engineering challenge than a f…

The problem with solar isn't the night. Getting enough batteries to cover that is totally doable. The issue is the winter. And not even because of fewer daylight hours - on sunny winter days there is usually still a good amount of solar. The problem is its often very cloudy in the winter. In the UK in winter we regularly have periods of 5 cloudy days in a row where solar output is virtually zero. I don't know what th…

This just shows batteries shouldn't be the only storage technology, at least at high latitude. There needs to be a complementary long term storage technology with low capacity capex, even if its round trip efficiency is bad. Examples: green hydrogen, ultra low capex thermal storage.

To see the effect of including such, go to https://model.energy

Using a long term storage technology (in addition to wind/solar/batteries) can cut the cost in half at high latitudes.

Re: In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

#544

Post by pfdietz »

MakersF wrote: post #472
IshKebab wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with solar isn't the night. Getting enough batteries to cover that is totally doable. The issue is the winter. And not even because of fewer daylight hours - on sunny winter days there is usually still a good amount of solar. The problem is its often very cloudy in the winter. In the UK in winter we regularly have periods of 5 cloudy days in a row where solar output is virtually zero. I don't know what th…

It's unfair you're being down voted, you're right. I used to think that we could get by with just solar wind and batteries, but then after collaborating with people on an ideal energy mix the numbers were obvious: there is a (small) fraction that cannot be covered. Not with storage (the discharge cycles are so few that the cost is prohibitive. How can a battery pay for itself with 10-20 discharges a year? And this ap…

> Likely there will need to be some baseload nuclear

Baseload nuclear is entirely feckless as a backup for a renewable grid. You either go with a long term storage technology (and then don't need nuclear), or you go to an entirely nuclear grid. Wind/solar and nuclear don't mix well.

Re: In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

#545

Post by pfdietz »

kilroy123 wrote: post #474
IshKebab wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with solar isn't the night. Getting enough batteries to cover that is totally doable. The issue is the winter. And not even because of fewer daylight hours - on sunny winter days there is usually still a good amount of solar. The problem is its often very cloudy in the winter. In the UK in winter we regularly have periods of 5 cloudy days in a row where solar output is virtually zero. I don't know what th…

Just over build the solar. Build out solar so demand in winter is met. Use the excess power in summer for some kind of industrial use.

This can lead to a solution, but at high latitude it becomes infeasibly expensive. Insolation varies too much from summer to winter. Low round trip efficiency long term storage becomes much cheaper than doing (just) this.

Re: In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

#546

Post by salynchnew »

bee_rider wrote: post #381
pranavj wrote: post #113

The most underreported part of this story is the battery piece at the end. Batteries are beginning to displace natural gas in evening peak hours - that's the exact window where solar critics have long argued renewables fall short. If this trend accelerates (and battery prices are dropping faster than most models predicted), the "intermittency problem" starts looking more like a solvable engineering challenge than a f…

Intermittence really has always had the flavor of an engineering problem instead of a physics problem (it is about putting the energy when/where humans want it, rather than having enough of it). IMO load shifting seems like a cleverer and more engineer-y solution. Imagine a giant smart system where all of our appliances talk to each-other and can optimize the timings of their workloads. It’s a magnificent society-wid…

It's a great idea, but I feel like that way ends up with the nightmare scenario of each of us managing an AWS-style admin console for washing the dishes, etc.

That way lies madness, although I suppose there might be one or two family members I would want to lock out of the dishwasher.

Re: In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

#547

Post by jopsen »

epolanski wrote: post #409
bee_rider wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intermittence really has always had the flavor of an engineering problem instead of a physics problem (it is about putting the energy when/where humans want it, rather than having enough of it). IMO load shifting seems like a cleverer and more engineer-y solution. Imagine a giant smart system where all of our appliances talk to each-other and can optimize the timings of their workloads. It’s a magnificent society-wid…

I ain't gonna use the dishwasher when the system wants me to, but when I can or want. I pay low energy prices during night than day, that's normal, but I'm still not gonna do laundry at 9 pm, I'd rather pay the 10/20 cents more during the day.

Yeah, but your dishwasher or washing machine isn't the big electricity eater.

Your car is. And honestly, you'd rather charge the car at night so that you don't blow a fuse when you're running the dishwasher, microwave, dryer, oven, induction stove and charging your car :)

I have never blown a fuse being getting an EV, and so far still only once.

But charging at night is preferable for that reason, and I couldn't care so long as it's ready by 7am.

Load shifting EVs is easy, and this moves a lot of load. It was never about moving all load.

Re: In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

#548

Post by pfdietz »

nradov wrote: post #301
philipkglass wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solar hardware is so affordable now that it's booming even in poorer countries. The most remarkable recent example is Pakistan, which has seen explosive growth of rooftop solar power, most of it receiving no government subsidies: Pakistan has imported almost 45 gigawatts worth of solar panels over the last five or six years, which is equal to the total capacity of its electricity grid. Almost 34 gigawatts have come i…

Right, so that implies there's no need for homeowner subsidies in wealthy, developed countries.

What's needed are Pigouvian CO2 taxes, but those aren't politically feasible.

Re: In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

#549

Post by danans »

ericd wrote: post #513
epolanski wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like your feedback, it's condescending and you know nothing about me. 1. In my area 96% of energy is gas-based. I live in Rome, Italy. It's written in my energy bill. I ain't got no solar. Night or day it's mostly a matter of relatively small changes of demand. 2. If you want to do something real for the environment change your diet! I'm sick of this neverending focus on energy when the biggest impact you can…

Pretty sure your diet is a relatively small part of your carbon footprint.

Like everything else, it depends. In the extreme case, if you eat beef every day but use a bicycle for transportation, live in a mild climate with little need for heating and cooling, and rarely fly in an airplane, your diet could be a significant part of your carbon footprint in percentage terms.

Re: In Europe, wind and solar overtake fossil fuels

#550

Post by pfdietz »

thinkcontext wrote: post #456
sp4cec0wb0y wrote: post #136

Imagine the powerhouse America would be (pun intended) if we subsidized nuclear energy to become the defacto producer of nuclear power plants world wide. Sometimes it is easier said than done but this really is as easy as said.

The US gave the nuclear industry a chance for a nuclear renaissance with the subsidies they asked for towards the AP1000. The industry whiffed big time. Looks like nuclear will get another chance with the increased subsidies begun under Biden, the deregulatory approach of Trump and the huge demand spike in electricity. Its an open question on whether they'll be able to deliver.

Judged historically, it will be a massive fiasco.
Post reply on HN