2 ms·

This directly contradicts the first results I find: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_California#/media/File%3ACalifornia_Electricity_Generation_Sources

This directly contradicts the first results I find: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_California#/media/File%3ACalifornia_Electricity_Generation_Sources_Pie_Chart.svg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_California#/media/... Solar and wind add up to 25.5% of generation, as compared to over 40% natural gas. Add hydro and geothermal and renewables rise to 43%, still far from the 100:70 renewable to gas ratio you claimed. But hydroelectric and geothermal are geographically limited, the plan is still to build more solar and wind, with gas plants for use when demand exceeds the renewables' production.

philipkglass 7y ago
That chart says that natural gas was 43.8% in 2018. It also gives: Solar, 19.0% Hydro, 12.3% Wind, 6.5% Geothermal, 5.7% Wood/biomass, 2.7% Add those renewable sources together and you get 46.2%, more (but only slightly more) than natural gas. It looks like the chart-maker's data source is the Energy Information Administration. The greater dominance of renewables that I found may be because I'm just tracking the CAISO grid. The EIA would have data covering Southern California as well.
selimthegrim 7y ago
As far as MISO (not CAISO) goes, fantasy is a bit much to say, see https://energytransition.umn.edu/modernizing-minnesotas-grid-an-economic-analysis-of-energy-storage-opportunities/ https://energytransition.umn.edu/modernizing-minnesotas-grid...