9 ms·

So where do you get power during the 50% of the time when there is no wind? What is the other generating infrastructure that needs to be built out for 100% cove

So where do you get power during the 50% of the time when there is no wind? What is the other generating infrastructure that needs to be built out for 100% coverage? * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor#Capacity_factors_by_energy_source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor#Capacity_facto... I have no major problem with more renewables per se, but unless you're in the Orkneys or a dessert/Mediterranean climate, it appears to me that there are always times when they're not available and so you have build out something as a back-up. As someone who lives in Ontario, Canada, we have nuclear plants providing >10,0000 MW continuously (click "Supply"): * https://www.ieso.ca/power-data https://www.ieso.ca/power-data Hydro and gas area scaled up as needed (especially over the last few days with >30C weather), and wind is very "random". (We have only a token amount of solar.)

shafyy 5y ago
The obvious answer is to store the surplus energy in batteries and use it later. And yes, it won't be long until we have enough batteries at low enough cost to make this feasible.
- hutzlibu 5y ago
  You might want to add, that for stationary batteries, where size does not matter so much, you do not need fancy lithium, cobalt or nickel. Plain iron, natrium and copper is enough to build as much storage as you want and can.
- Thaxll 5y ago
  "it won't be long until we have enough batteries at low enough cost to make this feasible" Right now it's not possible, and there is no solution in sight. Edit: Why I'm being downvoted, we can't store energy at scale for now, end of the story.
  - eldaisfish 5y ago
    you are being downvoted - as am i - for raising valid questions about the blind belief that renewable energy is the sole, viable replacement for our current generation mix. Goes to show that many here do not fully understand the challenges of running an electric grid and also that far too many have bought into the propaganda of wind, solar and battery storage being the sole path forward.
  - onethought 5y ago
    We can. Pumped hydro, thermal storage, or gravity storage are all large scale options. Where is the end of story?
    - bluGill 5y ago
      > Pumped hydro, <snip> large scale options Not large enough. There isn't enough space on earth for all the lakes needed to make pumped hydro work. Sure where there is unused potential we should use it, but there isn't a whole lot of places left where we can do it - even before we get into how hydro tends to destroy ecosystems.
- N1H1L 5y ago
  Batteries are already there. We can get them at $100/kWh now. Also generally these wind turbines cost a million US$ per MW, so this turbine is around US$16 million. A day of storage at 50% capacity factor for this would then cost US$ 19 million.
  - eldaisfish 5y ago
    >We can get them at $100/kWh now. The problem with battery energy storage is not cost but scale. There isn't a battery in the world that can power a gigawatt scale electric grid for more than a few minutes. The original point is a good one - no renewable generation technology is a replacement for coal/gas/nuclear simply due to the unpredictable and variable nature of renewable generation. Edit - it is very telling that information and views that go against the grain of "renewable energy is the sole future" are instantly downvoted. Shame on you.
    - NineStarPoint 5y ago
      I suspect you’re being downvoted because it isn’t a very well formulated negative. The problem is indeed scale, but there not being a battery setup in the world that could singlehandedly fix the issue isn’t the problem. You can have a lot of smaller battery setups if the batteries are cost efficient enough and you have a suitably flexible grid. The actual issues are the cost efficiency of batteries, the amount of batteries that can be produced in total, and the flexibility of the power grid. Flexibility of the power grid is a known solvable problem, although how much it will cost to improve our infrastructure there is an important question. The point you were responding to was presumably arguing that $100kw/h batteries exist, and that that’s cost efficient enough. The questions are A) Is it true batteries at that cost exist, B) Is that actually cost efficient enough, and C) Can we produce enough of them to deal with the scale of batteries needed. Your post didn’t really argue against any of those points, just stated vacuously that current setups aren’t sufficient. Obviously current setups aren’t sufficient, the question is if we are approaching the cost point where they could be.
      - N1H1L 5y ago
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
cesarb 5y ago
> So where do you get power during the 50% of the time when there is no wind? A 50% capacity factor does not mean there's no wind 50% of the time. It only means that, averaged over a whole year, the power produced is 50% of the maximum the generator is rated to produce. This includes periods of time when there's wind, but wind that's not strong enough to reach the maximum output of the generator. And the wind not being strong enough to reach the maximum output of the generator is probably the most common situation, since it makes sense to design the generator to reach its maximum output at the strongest normal wind on the region; when the wind is stronger than that maximum, the generator has to shut down (feather the blades and brake the rotor), otherwise it will get damaged.
- eldaisfish 5y ago
  Your reply does not address the question of where power comes from when the wind isn't blowing.
  - tonyedgecombe 5y ago
    From places where it is blowing?
    - HPsquared 5y ago
      High pressure weather systems (low wind speed) can cover a large area. I suppose on those days there is probably more sunlight though.
    - liketochill 5y ago
      They don’t have the data posted yet but there was an event in Alberta recently where there was no wind and this caused the price to be very high. So you either don’t use your AC on a hot still day or you get a giant bill. Looking through may 2021 I see instances in which actual wind power delivered is zero. https://www.aeso.ca/grid/forecasting/wind-and-solar-power-forecasting/ https://www.aeso.ca/grid/forecasting/wind-and-solar-power-fo...
  - biehl 5y ago
heurisko 5y ago
Extending grid interconnections is helping mitigate this issue. It may not be windy in some places, but chances are it will be windy in others. Fossil fuel backups such as gas are not a bad interim solution, considering gas is less polluting than coal. There are some problems with economics, as backup solutions cost money even when they are not being used.
- liketochill 5y ago
  Building transmission lines is a technical solution but not an economic or socially viable one. The amount of permitting required only makes it worthwhile if it is unlocking a great resource. It is not viable to build transmission lines that usually operate with no load just in case it is windy at location A one day but not at B. Extreme prices in Alberta were recently caused by a lack of wind across the province. Turns out sometimes it isn’t windy anywhere! Similar can happen for sun. A big storm can move in and it is dark and cloudy and you get 10% of nameplate for 5 days. I think ammonia production by solar power near deserts is going to be the missing link that provides the flexibility we need to keep the grid reliable on a cloudy windless day.
  - heurisko 5y ago
    Not only is it viable, but it's already happening. On a domestic level, countries like Germany have legislation that targets accelerating internal grid connections. https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netzausbaubeschleunigungsgesetz_%C3%9Cbertragungsnetz https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netzausbaubeschleunigungsges... On a supranational level in Europe, the EU has targets to increase grid interconnections between countries. https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/infrastructure/electricity-interconnection-targets_en https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/infrastructure/electricit... On an intergovernmental level, outside of the EU the UK is building an underwater cable to Denmark, to share hydro and wind energy. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/13/work-begins-in-lincolnshire-on-worlds-longest-subsea-power-cable-viking-link https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/13/work-beg...
    - liketochill 5y ago

shafyy 5y ago

The obvious answer is to store the surplus energy in batteries and use it later. And yes, it won't be long until we have enough batteries at low enough cost to make this feasible.

hutzlibu 5y ago
You might want to add, that for stationary batteries, where size does not matter so much, you do not need fancy lithium, cobalt or nickel. Plain iron, natrium and copper is enough to build as much storage as you want and can.
Thaxll 5y ago
"it won't be long until we have enough batteries at low enough cost to make this feasible" Right now it's not possible, and there is no solution in sight. Edit: Why I'm being downvoted, we can't store energy at scale for now, end of the story.
- eldaisfish 5y ago
  you are being downvoted - as am i - for raising valid questions about the blind belief that renewable energy is the sole, viable replacement for our current generation mix. Goes to show that many here do not fully understand the challenges of running an electric grid and also that far too many have bought into the propaganda of wind, solar and battery storage being the sole path forward.
- onethought 5y ago
  We can. Pumped hydro, thermal storage, or gravity storage are all large scale options. Where is the end of story?
  - bluGill 5y ago
    > Pumped hydro, <snip> large scale options Not large enough. There isn't enough space on earth for all the lakes needed to make pumped hydro work. Sure where there is unused potential we should use it, but there isn't a whole lot of places left where we can do it - even before we get into how hydro tends to destroy ecosystems.
N1H1L 5y ago
Batteries are already there. We can get them at $100/kWh now. Also generally these wind turbines cost a million US$ per MW, so this turbine is around US$16 million. A day of storage at 50% capacity factor for this would then cost US$ 19 million.
- eldaisfish 5y ago
  >We can get them at $100/kWh now. The problem with battery energy storage is not cost but scale. There isn't a battery in the world that can power a gigawatt scale electric grid for more than a few minutes. The original point is a good one - no renewable generation technology is a replacement for coal/gas/nuclear simply due to the unpredictable and variable nature of renewable generation. Edit - it is very telling that information and views that go against the grain of "renewable energy is the sole future" are instantly downvoted. Shame on you.
  - NineStarPoint 5y ago
    I suspect you’re being downvoted because it isn’t a very well formulated negative. The problem is indeed scale, but there not being a battery setup in the world that could singlehandedly fix the issue isn’t the problem. You can have a lot of smaller battery setups if the batteries are cost efficient enough and you have a suitably flexible grid. The actual issues are the cost efficiency of batteries, the amount of batteries that can be produced in total, and the flexibility of the power grid. Flexibility of the power grid is a known solvable problem, although how much it will cost to improve our infrastructure there is an important question. The point you were responding to was presumably arguing that $100kw/h batteries exist, and that that’s cost efficient enough. The questions are A) Is it true batteries at that cost exist, B) Is that actually cost efficient enough, and C) Can we produce enough of them to deal with the scale of batteries needed. Your post didn’t really argue against any of those points, just stated vacuously that current setups aren’t sufficient. Obviously current setups aren’t sufficient, the question is if we are approaching the cost point where they could be.
    - N1H1L 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

cesarb 5y ago

> So where do you get power during the 50% of the time when there is no wind? A 50% capacity factor does not mean there's no wind 50% of the time. It only means that, averaged over a whole year, the power produced is 50% of the maximum the generator is rated to produce. This includes periods of time when there's wind, but wind that's not strong enough to reach the maximum output of the generator. And the wind not being strong enough to reach the maximum output of the generator is probably the most common situation, since it makes sense to design the generator to reach its maximum output at the strongest normal wind on the region; when the wind is stronger than that maximum, the generator has to shut down (feather the blades and brake the rotor), otherwise it will get damaged.

eldaisfish 5y ago
Your reply does not address the question of where power comes from when the wind isn't blowing.
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  From places where it is blowing?
  - HPsquared 5y ago
    High pressure weather systems (low wind speed) can cover a large area. I suppose on those days there is probably more sunlight though.
  - liketochill 5y ago
    They don’t have the data posted yet but there was an event in Alberta recently where there was no wind and this caused the price to be very high. So you either don’t use your AC on a hot still day or you get a giant bill. Looking through may 2021 I see instances in which actual wind power delivered is zero. https://www.aeso.ca/grid/forecasting/wind-and-solar-power-forecasting/ https://www.aeso.ca/grid/forecasting/wind-and-solar-power-fo...
- biehl 5y ago

heurisko 5y ago

Extending grid interconnections is helping mitigate this issue. It may not be windy in some places, but chances are it will be windy in others. Fossil fuel backups such as gas are not a bad interim solution, considering gas is less polluting than coal. There are some problems with economics, as backup solutions cost money even when they are not being used.

liketochill 5y ago
Building transmission lines is a technical solution but not an economic or socially viable one. The amount of permitting required only makes it worthwhile if it is unlocking a great resource. It is not viable to build transmission lines that usually operate with no load just in case it is windy at location A one day but not at B. Extreme prices in Alberta were recently caused by a lack of wind across the province. Turns out sometimes it isn’t windy anywhere! Similar can happen for sun. A big storm can move in and it is dark and cloudy and you get 10% of nameplate for 5 days. I think ammonia production by solar power near deserts is going to be the missing link that provides the flexibility we need to keep the grid reliable on a cloudy windless day.
- heurisko 5y ago
  Not only is it viable, but it's already happening. On a domestic level, countries like Germany have legislation that targets accelerating internal grid connections. https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netzausbaubeschleunigungsgesetz_%C3%9Cbertragungsnetz https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netzausbaubeschleunigungsges... On a supranational level in Europe, the EU has targets to increase grid interconnections between countries. https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/infrastructure/electricity-interconnection-targets_en https://ec.europa.eu/energy/topics/infrastructure/electricit... On an intergovernmental level, outside of the EU the UK is building an underwater cable to Denmark, to share hydro and wind energy. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/13/work-begins-in-lincolnshire-on-worlds-longest-subsea-power-cable-viking-link https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/13/work-beg...
  - liketochill 5y ago