Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought • Hacker News Board

Re: Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought

#21

Post by crdoconnor » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 8:01 AM UTC

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #15

crdoconnor wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until the nuclear energy liability cap gets pushed into at LEAST the hundreds of billions range rather than the paltry $375 million per plant it is now, I'm not gonna believe all of the claims that it's completely safe either. If the risk of disaster/need for cleanup truly is infinitesimal as the industry and its cheerleaders keep saying, why is the taxpayer still shouldering basically all of the insurance costs?

I think it's because insurance models stop working once the probability of an accident gets extremely small and the possible damages of any accident get extremely large. An insurance claim of hundereds of billions would wipe out any and all insurance companies instantly. Insurance companies have to make statistics based rational decisions, but society as a whole is always forced to make decisions that cannot be stati…

This is the reason there has to be a cap for nuclear power to exist, but not the reason the cap has to be so small. $375 mil is nothing in the context of cleanup costs.

On the whole I would find the advocates of nuclear energy safety a lot more convincing if they put their entire fortunes on the line. I would like to see guaranteed financial ruin for any of the executives involved in a potential Fukushima and shareholders totally wiped out.

That still wouldn't put much of a dent in cleanup costs, but it would prevent moral hazard somewhat.

This subsidy also never shows up on any models comparing solar, coal and nuclear. Similarly neither does global warming induced environmental catastrophe.

BECAUSE you simply can't put a $ price on the likelihood of these events occurring or their cost they (the OP modelers) just ignore the tail risk.

Anybody who remembers the events of the financial crisis should find that pattern disturbingly familiar.

But, doing so is useful if you're shilling for natural gas/nuclear energy - just as assuming away financial tail risk was useful for executives at AIG.

Re: Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought

#22

Post by Klapaucius » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 8:10 AM UTC

The issue of intermittency is in my opinion vastly undercommunicated in public debate about renewable energy, at least in Europe. A diagram like this [1] can be used to illustrate the issue. Although this diagram is from a hypothetical UK modeling exercise for 2020, the broader point it makes is valid. On the diagram we see how daily electricity demand follow a predictable daily curve, and the different sources of electricity that are used to meet that demand. We see that electricity from nuclear and coal provide the most stable component, whereas power from wind (green) varies hugely in time. Gas power, which can be turned on and off quickly, is used to fill the gaps in demand. At times, there is almost enough wind that no generation from fossil fuels is necessary, but at other times most of the electricity has to come from burning gas (I've seen similar scenario graphs where wind occasionally fills more than 100% of the demand, but still gas power will be needed for a large component of the energy mix when integrating over time).

The point is that without some incredible advance in energy storage capability on a scale that is not on the radar today, we are stuck with an energy system where a significant component needs to be non-solar and non-wind. From a climate perspective, the best options would then be nuclear electricity or electricity from fossil fuel plans equipped with CCS technology (which is now belatedly emerging).

(Disclaimer: I work with CCS-related technology development).

[1] http://www.timera-energy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Hour...

(link to page from which picture is taken: http://www.timera-energy.com/uk-power/getting-to-grips-with-...

Re: Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought

#23

Post by Guthur » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 8:23 AM UTC

crdoconnor wrote: post #10

tomjen3 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One a really stormy day I want to be able to hide under my electric blanket, with a cup of tea, in front of the tv/computer. That requires electricity, but those solar panels aren't going to be very effective when it is overcast and rainy. Why not just go for getting a thorium reactor to work and then use them instead?

Solar panels still generate power when it is overcast. Not as much as on sunny days, obviously, but a lot more than most people give them credit for. On stormy days, also, wind generators will be generating a lot more power than usual. They are more than likely capable of heating your blanket. Although less efficient, power on days when intermittency is high can also be transferred from pumped water storage and from…

Depends on how stormy, Many wind turbines have a max wind speed rating, above which they will be shutdown in some way.

Re: Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought

#24

Post by crdoconnor » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 8:40 AM UTC

Guthur wrote: post #23

crdoconnor wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solar panels still generate power when it is overcast. Not as much as on sunny days, obviously, but a lot more than most people give them credit for. On stormy days, also, wind generators will be generating a lot more power than usual. They are more than likely capable of heating your blanket. Although less efficient, power on days when intermittency is high can also be transferred from pumped water storage and from…

Depends on how stormy, Many wind turbines have a max wind speed rating, above which they will be shutdown in some way.

Are there figures on the actual effects of this? How often it happens/the level by which electricity output is reduced?

Re: Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought

#25

Post by GoodGuy » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 9:09 AM UTC

You can be 100% assured that if anybody wants to talk to you about "the costs of solar power" then it is a rep of the Neandertalers-Industry in full smokescreen operation mode.

These discussions are a great example for how propaganda works.

It does not make sense to calculate the "costs" of freedom, independence and the health of your family.

Also the real costs of unresolved nuclear waste problems, huge wars for securing oil supply and the contamination of our ground water by primitive fracking techniques are... titanic.

We need more young people in the US to take over the general political and economic discussion. Old and greedy neandertalers are destroying the living environment of young people, not ok, must change.

Homo sapiens, sapiens (!), take over please...

Re: Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought

#26

Post by ZeroGravitas » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 9:19 AM UTC

crdoconnor wrote: post #4

When looking at these graphs, it pays to take a peek at who exactly is behind them. Modeling the costs and benefits of different forms of energy (especially environmental costs) is extremely easy to fudge. There are all sorts of assumptions you have to plug in to the model where you could covertly insert a policy bias. If the 'measurer' had an agenda, it wouldn't be hard for them to push the figures one way or anothe…

One of the comments points to this response from the American Wind Energy Association:

http://aweablog.org/blog/post/fact-check-wind-power-is-a-cos...

They suggest his biggest distortions are using a) a historical figure for wind costs averaged over a decade even though it's got much cheaper over that time span and b) counting each year in that decade equally even though the amount of wind energy produced grew rapidly, c) using a figure from a press release for gas capacity rather than actual figures which would be 50% lower.

Re: Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought

#27

Post by dozzie » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 9:20 AM UTC

crdoconnor wrote: post #4

When looking at these graphs, it pays to take a peek at who exactly is behind them. Modeling the costs and benefits of different forms of energy (especially environmental costs) is extremely easy to fudge. There are all sorts of assumptions you have to plug in to the model where you could covertly insert a policy bias. If the 'measurer' had an agenda, it wouldn't be hard for them to push the figures one way or anothe…

> [...] global warming effect of methane leakage [...]

What? So we're sure all of sudden that human activity does actually have any visible impact on global warming? O_o

Re: Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought

#28

Post by dozzie » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 9:24 AM UTC

spingsprong wrote: post #18

ekianjo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Demand for electricity is lower at night Not really much lower as you'd like to portray it. http://www.solstats.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/chart1... Solar only works if you can produce energy and use it locally. As distance increases the energy loss is significant.

Did you look at your own graph?! Demand is reduced almost by half at night.

...so you pretty much have to rely on non-solar energy at 50% rate, at minimum.

Re: Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought

#29

Post by marcus_holmes » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 9:28 AM UTC

crdoconnor wrote: post #12

ekianjo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Demand for electricity is lower at night Not really much lower as you'd like to portray it. http://www.solstats.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/chart1... Solar only works if you can produce energy and use it locally. As distance increases the energy loss is significant.

>Not really much lower as you'd like to portray it. A LOT of the higher usage at night is due to the fact that night-time electricity is cheaper. If you're going to run an aluminum smelting plant, for instance (uses TONS of electricity), it currently makes sense to run it full bore when electricity is cheapest - at night. If daytime electricity were cheaper or even the same price, that graph would certainly look diff…

I read that Germany is importing French nuclear power.

Mind you, both could be perfectly possible in the messed-up EEC energy market.

Re: Wind and solar power are even more expensive than is commonly thought

#30

Post by tomohawk » Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 10:07 AM UTC

I have enough photovoltaic solar on my roof to provide all the electricity I need over the course of a year. I remain grid connected because the power from the roof rarely matches the demand during any given hour. Intermittency is a real issue that any realistic grid will need to take into account. Rather than the political posturing driven approach we seem to have today, what we really need is sober, clear eyed engineering and financing to solve this.

It was heartening to read about the VC funded fusion projects the other day.