4 ms·
>temporarily reaches And that's a problem. You don't want "temporarily". If it is temporarily then it is if it doesn't exist at all - there has to be a prepare
by tasubotadas 9y ago
>temporarily reaches
And that's a problem. You don't want "temporarily". If it is temporarily then it is if it doesn't exist at all - there has to be a prepared reserve (read power plants operating) for the cases when renewable doesn't reach 100%.
AFAIK, energy distributors have to have the equal amount of production capacity in regular power plants as there is renewable energy (well, not renewable but wind+solar - the ones that variate the most).
Until battery packs become widely available, I would say that solar+wind is quite a poor choice to reduce CO2 (assuming that it is the reason why we do renewable at all).
- lukeschlather 9y agoIf you read the article, you will see that 55% of the power in question was hydro, so your comment seems a little beside the point, since we are not talking about wind+solar, but wind+solar+hydro. Though obviously it's spring so this isn't a year-round possibility.