Portugal just ran on 100% renewables for six days in a row • Hacker News Board

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

#251

Post by Already__Taken » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:44 AM UTC

causi wrote: post #203

antsou wrote: post #195

It really doesn't tell what really happened: -This was only due to hydro production... -The amount of rain that fell was consistent along those days, which is definitely not usual. -The energy produced was mainly exported to Spain, but at ZERO or even NEGATIVE euros. Does this help? Doesn't seem to me! And besides having to pay full price to the renewables producers (while exporting the same energy at ZERO), which am…

In addition, the title "Portugal just ran on 100% renewables" is inherently misleading because it implies the whole country operated free of fossil fuels and should really be "Portugal's electrical grid just ran on 100% renewables". Often less than half of a country's energy usage passes through the grid, with more than half of it being fuel in vehicles, fossil fuel heating, etc.

That's a real leap to think anyone given that title would assume for six days all vehicles in the country were swapped to electric. Specific to the absurd, implied context isn't misleading.

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

#252

Post by natmaka » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:45 AM UTC

realusername wrote: post #159

hef19898 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love that, you know? You have some good news regarding electricity and renewables, and instead of being happy, people start to look for problems. But let's role with it for second. Renewables are, unfortunately, not at a point yet where they can cover 100% of demand. We cannot change the current mix neither. So, what would be your proposed way forward to "solve" climate change? I am really curious, because most of…

I'm the kind of "I'll believe it when I see it" type of person. The transition is clearly not going well and they even wanted to build more gas pipes, the russian war lessons have not been learned. Renewables in the EU overpromissed and underdelivered for a long time.

Share of nuclear and renewables:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/nuclear-renewables-electr...

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

#253

Post by hef19898 » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:46 AM UTC

adev_ wrote: post #243

natmaka wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nuclear AND Renewable energy It cannot be done because it financially condemns new nuclear plants. "The rates at which conventional power plants are utilized will continue to decrease as competitive pressure from near-zero marginal cost solar photovoltaic and onshore wind power, and battery energy storage continue to grow exponentially worldwide." Eye-opening video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udJJ7n_Ryjg

It is does not. LCOE is a metric from the Lazard institute has been debunked many time alreayd because it does not take into consideration the cost of the capacity guarantee of the grid. If you had that, Nuclear become competitive. If you had that and tax properly coal and Gas plant proportionally to the emission they really do. Nuclear become even incredibly cheap, specially if we consider its hydrogen co-generation…

Well, institute or not, European elextricity markets, which include grid operators and plant operators, agreed on awarding contracts based on generation cost alone (mostly fuel and certificates, I'd have to sig up the details but am literally to lazy to do for a discussion that seems to happen 50% in the land of make believe).

Nuclear is, by any metric you want, on the actual happening markets too expensivebto build new capacity. No amount of "if-only-and-then-if"s changes that.

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

#254

Post by hef19898 » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:49 AM UTC

realusername wrote: post #241

hef19898 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Timeline, again... The additional gas pipes, used for heating and industrial use primarily and not electricity (no idea why people fail to understand the difference) have been built before (!) the war in Ukraine. And never been used. To the point Germany increased coal consumption. So, when those pipelines, Nordstream 2 I assume you mean, was built, there was no war in Ukriane or elsewhere involving Russia, and hence…

People don't make the difference because it's exactly the same thing. Neighbouring France has 40% electric heating whereas it's something like 5% in Germany. > assume you mean, was built, there was no war in Ukriane or elsewhere involving Russia, and hence no lessons to be drwan from it! And what about the talks with Azerbaijan and the increase imports from Algeria then? (both great countries aligned with the EU I'm…

Yes, because any transition takes time. And since people still want heating during said transition we still need gas. And since gas is the cleanest fossil fuel we have, yes, let's built pipelines. Which can be reporposed for green hydrogen in a potential future.

Unless of course, you want to go pre-industrial that is.

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

#255

Post by kuchenbecker » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:50 AM UTC

syllablehq wrote: post #93

bobthepanda wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

There's lots of exciting progress happening with underground mechanical storage like this. It's so interesting that the U.S. DOE has been studying underground pumped hydro since at least the 1980.( https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/6517343 ) Today: - Hydrostor just signed a near $1 Billion contract to build their first underground facility in California using advanced compressed air with water to help efficiency. Se…

My comment is less about storage and more about the physics of the Grid (not an expert though so fact check me) It's largely one giant multitenant pool of both capacity and consumption with Voltage being the indicator.

Variable load sources often change transmission requirements on existing lines because there can be power draw increase between A and B where previous there was less generation at A.

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

#256

Post by natmaka » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:51 AM UTC

RandomLensman wrote: post #229

katbyte wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is none except hydro and nuclear for base load. Unless you want to burn gas (co2) or coal (co2 and radioactive emissions that cause more cancers in the us then nuclear has world wide) Renewables outside hydro cannot, and will never, be able to provide a a stable base load for the grid, battery storage isn’t there and has all sorts of issues, pumped storage requires even more rare conditions then hydro, as does…

Fission is too expensive. The good real reasons from a cost perspective for reactors are weapons, medical and industrial applications as well as research. Why would you want to use battery storage instead of pressure or gravity, for example? You can do gravity by moving stuff around underground, not just classical pumped storage. Digging big and deep holes is something people know how to do quite well, same goes for…

A major piece here (electricity storage) is V2G ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-to-grid ).

Reducing emissions related to transportation leads to electrical vehicles, and therefore to a vast amount of batteries, most not used at any given moment and therefore ready to store overproduction or release needed electricity.

Batteries' performance are quickly progressing, and their prices history is clear: https://ourworldindata.org/battery-price-decline

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

#257

Post by adev_ » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:51 AM UTC

kawhah wrote: post #200

katbyte wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is none except hydro and nuclear for base load. Unless you want to burn gas (co2) or coal (co2 and radioactive emissions that cause more cancers in the us then nuclear has world wide) Renewables outside hydro cannot, and will never, be able to provide a a stable base load for the grid, battery storage isn’t there and has all sorts of issues, pumped storage requires even more rare conditions then hydro, as does…

My proposal would be to use combined cycle gas turbines to peak renewables until over-installation and storage make that no longer necessary. Gas is the cleanest fossil fuel. Modern gas turbines are by far the most efficient way of generating electricity from fossil fuels. Replacing fossil fuels burnt in ICEs and for heating with electricity generated using gas will drastically reduce emissions quickly. There is plen…

> Gas is the cleanest fossil fuel. Modern gas turbines are by far the most efficient way of generating electricity from fossil fuels.

The "Cleanest" is around 400g/kwh which is still very far from clean. It is around 20x more emissive that what Nuclear would give you.

But congratulations, you just described what was the German strategy for the previous 20 years. With a lot of pipelines connected directly to Russia (Because Germany does not have Gas) and with a very happy Vladimir.

And then the Ukrain-Russia war came. And the rest is history.

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

#258

Post by natmaka » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:56 AM UTC

hef19898 wrote: post #235

Moldoteck wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so you say that something that is done like shit have shit consequences? Somehow La Hague is doing much better so maybe reprocessing/storage is not that a big problem and humanity should just get their sh* together?

You know what else could be done, if we got our shit together and cooperated? A proper energy transition away from fossil fuels to clean alternatives. One thing so: France, or rather all French goverents, are as pro-nuclear as it gets. And even they only built one reprocessing plant. Should tell you something.

AFAIK there is no recycling (re-enrichment) in France since 2013 (costs, technical problems...). Source: https://www.rtl.fr/actu/debats-societe/nucleaire-que-devienn... It may restart in 2029.

Some is done in Russia, of all 'partners'...

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

#259

Post by labster » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:56 AM UTC

mplewis wrote: post #198

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is none except hydro and nuclear for base load. I'm not the person you're replying to, and I mostly agree with your points, but I think its necessary to point out that nuclear and hydro have long lead times to build the infrastructure. And we basically don't have enough time left to build it. I don't have good answers. Solar + interconnectors, maybe? So that areas in daylight can power areas that aren't? But…

The second best time to build nuclear is today.

The third best time to build nuclear is in about 20 years, when we develop fusion.

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

#260

Post by adev_ » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:57 AM UTC

hef19898 wrote: post #253

adev_ wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is does not. LCOE is a metric from the Lazard institute has been debunked many time alreayd because it does not take into consideration the cost of the capacity guarantee of the grid. If you had that, Nuclear become competitive. If you had that and tax properly coal and Gas plant proportionally to the emission they really do. Nuclear become even incredibly cheap, specially if we consider its hydrogen co-generation…

Well, institute or not, European elextricity markets, which include grid operators and plant operators, agreed on awarding contracts based on generation cost alone (mostly fuel and certificates, I'd have to sig up the details but am literally to lazy to do for a discussion that seems to happen 50% in the land of make believe). Nuclear is, by any metric you want, on the actual happening markets too expensivebto build…

> Well, institute or not, European elextricity markets, which include grid operators and plant operators, agreed on awarding contracts based on generation cost alone (mostly fuel and certificates, I'd have to sig up the details but am literally to lazy to do for a discussion that seems to happen 50% in the land of make believe).

It is not true anymore [1]

[1]: https://www.euractiv.com/section/electricity/news/deal-on-eu...