4 ms·

The problem with the simplistic comment is we do already have large scale ways to store and move energy, and wind is typically available offshore 24/7, though s

The problem with the simplistic comment is we do already have large scale ways to store and move energy, and wind is typically available offshore 24/7, though some coasts are better served than others. We haven't chosen to build that storage yet. We also have ways to move demand to times of excess. Trying to keep it short and intentionally ignoring new ideas like molten salt and winched weights etc: + A smart grid allows demand and load to be managed, home and industrial storage and devices to be controlled to vary the load. This is a direction Europe is moving in. Your industrial heavy user might willingly sign up to a service that can be cut to stop grid crash in exchange for discount on the vast amount of electric used - this has quietly existed for decades. Getting smarter, homes and other premises can have charging and in building devices controlled to move demand, and in home spare solar battery added to grid storage for the overnight. Again for discounts. There are examples of this working already. + Pumped hydro can add TWh of storage if built at scale. It needs suitable geography, but we don't lack potential sites. Sites that would attract a NIMBY reaction can take the "hollowed out mountain" approach, invisible when finished. Again, plenty of examples exist. Unlike battery will last hundreds of years needing only turbine replacement periodically. The higher build cost can amortise beyond a lifetime. + It is very unlikely the whole of the US will completely lack wind at the same time, especially offshore. It's just about unheard of for tiny UK to be becalmed, though admittedly we're more "blessed" with wind than many regions. Over specify to allow the regions with wind to assist any region currently becalmed. + Last, use neighbours as storage - sell and buy electric from surrounding countries to smooth each other's demand. Once again this is already coming into being across Europe with the super-grid. In short, we have ample ways to store and move electricity, along with managing demand today. It's already being done in many places. We just need the political will do more of it to support a fully renewable grid. FWIW, I also tend to agree 10 of his 11 closing points. I'm not at all convinced by his argument renewables can't scale up to cover all global electric generation.

falcolas 7y ago
So, we don't have it in the US, and don't have plans to have it in anything resembling a helpful timeframe. All we have is a few people installing solar on their roof and patting themselves on their back for saving our future. > A smart grid allows demand and load to be managed Which we don't have on a national (let alone international) scale, and won't have in any reasonable period of time. > Pumped hydro can add TWh of storage if built at scale. It's not, and it's not being built or even planned. > sell and buy electric from surrounding countries We can't. There's not enough transmission capacity, and there's no sign that capacity between countries is being built. We can't even ship power from the east coast to the mid-west interior. > It is very unlikely the whole of the US will completely lack wind at the same time, especially offshore. Which doesn't help the interior of the US - see comment about a complete lack of transmission capacity. We also have effectively-zero offshore wind capacity, and none in the works to be built. It's a dirty secret but the US simply doesn't have the capacity to ship power any major distance. The country is broken into individual sub-groups that are maybe a thousand miles on a side that are physically incapable of linking up due to a lack of infrastructure for lots of power. Theoretical technology won't solve our problems; Pumped Hydro is a great example. It effectively doesn't exist outside of a few demos; per Wikipedia the total installed pumped hydro storage in under 200 GWh. That wouldn't even cover the electricity imported into CA.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  Sure you don't have that now, but if nothing is going to be changed, nothing is going to be fixed. Coal until it runs out then. The sticking point is political, not technical or logistical. If there are ever politicians convinced climate heating, and sustainability is important, it's fixable with no more difficulty than building a highway network. Undoubtedly you'll say citizens won't tolerate the taxes that would be needed -- still a political issue. Those can change. As the International Energy Agency noted today whilst criticising the completely inadequate efforts the globe is making: “We will need to see great political will around the world. This is why I believe that the world needs to build a grand coalition encompassing governments, investors, companies and everyone else who is genuinely committed to tackling climate change.” > That wouldn't even cover the electricity imported into CA In a year. CA doesn't need a year's storage backup capacity, just enough to cover cyclic shortfalls. A few hours to cover winter nights, that's under a day's worth at most.

falcolas 7y ago

So, we don't have it in the US, and don't have plans to have it in anything resembling a helpful timeframe. All we have is a few people installing solar on their roof and patting themselves on their back for saving our future. > A smart grid allows demand and load to be managed Which we don't have on a national (let alone international) scale, and won't have in any reasonable period of time. > Pumped hydro can add TWh of storage if built at scale. It's not, and it's not being built or even planned. > sell and buy electric from surrounding countries We can't. There's not enough transmission capacity, and there's no sign that capacity between countries is being built. We can't even ship power from the east coast to the mid-west interior. > It is very unlikely the whole of the US will completely lack wind at the same time, especially offshore. Which doesn't help the interior of the US - see comment about a complete lack of transmission capacity. We also have effectively-zero offshore wind capacity, and none in the works to be built. It's a dirty secret but the US simply doesn't have the capacity to ship power any major distance. The country is broken into individual sub-groups that are maybe a thousand miles on a side that are physically incapable of linking up due to a lack of infrastructure for lots of power. Theoretical technology won't solve our problems; Pumped Hydro is a great example. It effectively doesn't exist outside of a few demos; per Wikipedia the total installed pumped hydro storage in under 200 GWh. That wouldn't even cover the electricity imported into CA.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Sure you don't have that now, but if nothing is going to be changed, nothing is going to be fixed. Coal until it runs out then. The sticking point is political, not technical or logistical. If there are ever politicians convinced climate heating, and sustainability is important, it's fixable with no more difficulty than building a highway network. Undoubtedly you'll say citizens won't tolerate the taxes that would be needed -- still a political issue. Those can change. As the International Energy Agency noted today whilst criticising the completely inadequate efforts the globe is making: “We will need to see great political will around the world. This is why I believe that the world needs to build a grand coalition encompassing governments, investors, companies and everyone else who is genuinely committed to tackling climate change.” > That wouldn't even cover the electricity imported into CA In a year. CA doesn't need a year's storage backup capacity, just enough to cover cyclic shortfalls. A few hours to cover winter nights, that's under a day's worth at most.