3 ms·

Well, hydro is still a big source of energy... A diversified renewable energy mix, including offshore wind is much less intermittent than what u imagine Massiv

Well, hydro is still a big source of energy... A diversified renewable energy mix, including offshore wind is much less intermittent than what u imagine Massive investment in both energy efficiency and demand-response would reduce the need of electricity (even with electric car), and would make the energy consumption more controlable... And mechanical, thermal and electricity storage could be the final peace allowing a mostly renewable grid... Nuclear could definitely help, but not required

koheripbal 7y ago
Hydro is not possible in most locations. Diversification is important, but each region must have its own 99.95% reliable power sources. The national grid cannot provide power beyond a few hundred miles without major losses in power. If you look at Quebec, as an example, they lose between 20-40% of their power in transmission because the hydro dams are so much further north than the population centers.
- kragen 7y ago
  "Cannot" and "does not" are not the same thing; existing 735kV lines in Québec have losses in the 5%–8% range, and new HVDC designs can lower the losses even further. HVDC transmission is potentially economical even at transoceanic distances — thousands of "miles", if you insist on using poorly defined units from the Roman Empire. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydro-Qu%C3%A9bec's_electricity_transmission_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydro-Qu%C3%A9bec's_electricit...
belorn 7y ago
https://www.electricitymap.org https://www.electricitymap.org shows a rather simple pattern. When the wind is clam in EU it goes brown in most countries right now. I take a walk outside and even if south of Sweden is only a single data point, I can often make a pretty good prediction about the color of the map. More dynamic energy grid and storage could change that, as could investment in nuclear. In the mean time the investment money are currently going into the combination of gas plants and wind farms. Its a local maximum where investment into wind pays off as it is cheaper than fossil fuels when the winds blows, and investment into natural gas pays when the wind is still because then its a sellers market.

koheripbal 7y ago

Hydro is not possible in most locations. Diversification is important, but each region must have its own 99.95% reliable power sources. The national grid cannot provide power beyond a few hundred miles without major losses in power. If you look at Quebec, as an example, they lose between 20-40% of their power in transmission because the hydro dams are so much further north than the population centers.

kragen 7y ago
"Cannot" and "does not" are not the same thing; existing 735kV lines in Québec have losses in the 5%–8% range, and new HVDC designs can lower the losses even further. HVDC transmission is potentially economical even at transoceanic distances — thousands of "miles", if you insist on using poorly defined units from the Roman Empire. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydro-Qu%C3%A9bec's_electricity_transmission_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydro-Qu%C3%A9bec's_electricit...

belorn 7y ago

https://www.electricitymap.org https://www.electricitymap.org shows a rather simple pattern. When the wind is clam in EU it goes brown in most countries right now. I take a walk outside and even if south of Sweden is only a single data point, I can often make a pretty good prediction about the color of the map. More dynamic energy grid and storage could change that, as could investment in nuclear. In the mean time the investment money are currently going into the combination of gas plants and wind farms. Its a local maximum where investment into wind pays off as it is cheaper than fossil fuels when the winds blows, and investment into natural gas pays when the wind is still because then its a sellers market.