6 ms·

The issue is that we now have real experience of deploying this stuff at scale and integrating intermittent sources into grids. Many countries in Europe have 3

by derriz 5y ago

The issue is that we now have real experience of deploying this stuff at scale and integrating intermittent sources into grids. Many countries in Europe have 30% or more of their electricity supplied by intermittent but it turns out that the integration problem isn't as difficult as envisaged. The consensus amongst engineers is that up to about 70% is manageable without any big tech breakthroughs. Network reliability has actually increased in many European countries despite the increasing reliance on intermittent sources. The current approach certainly depends on having back-up deployable generation capacity (natural gas) but that was always required for demand following even with thermal sources so most grids already have the infrastructure to incorporate more intermittent generation.

cbmuser 5y ago
Germany has a large share (50%) of renewables and their specific CO2 emissions per kWh are up to ten times higher as compared to France with 70% nuclear. Volatile renewables don’t effectively help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-emissions-by-sector?tab=table&country=~OWID_WRL https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-emissions-by-sector?t...
- derriz 5y ago
  "Volatile" renewables absolutely do help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As the renewables share of generation has been increasing, the CO2 intensity of electricity generation in Germany has dropped from 542gCO2/kWh in 2000 to 296gCO2/kWh in 2020[1]. Btw, your link brings me to a table on agricultural CO2 emissions? [1] https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/development-of-co2-emission-intensity-of-electricity-generation-in-selected-countries-2000-2020 https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/development-o...
DennisP 5y ago
Fossil backup isn't tenable past 2050 at the latest.
- derriz 5y ago
  Agreed. But assuming no technology advances in this area for 30 years time seems implausible. What has happened with price/efficiency of solar, wind and grid-scale batteries in the last 10 years provides a lesson. None of these were practical even 10 years ago and now they represent 90% of newly installed capacity globally (2020). And this is happening all-over whether with or without government support. For example, new-build, grid-scale battery storage is now cheaper on an LCOE basis than new build open-cycle ("peaker") natural gas plants. This has only happened recently - about a year ago. I was completely skeptical that this could happen a few years ago. I urge any/all hackernews readers to read more about _recent_ developments in de-carbonizing energy. It's fascinating and it has become clear to me that we're living through one of the great technology revolutions of human history. It genuinely is a Kodak/smartphone type moment with even bigger implications for human wellbeing. It's amazing that by being cheap enough, all the disadvantages of a new technology become less relevant. A bit like how the PC displaced "real computers" (i.e. mainframes) even though at the time they were little more than microcontrollers integrated with a terminal.
kergonath 5y ago
> Many countries in Europe have 30% or more of their electricity supplied by intermittent but it turns out that the integration problem isn't as difficult as envisaged. True. It’s very easy when you can tap your neighbour’s power plants when you need. The problem is a bit different when all the neighbours have the same problems at the same time.
- derriz 5y ago
  Of course interconnection is a big help, but transmission isn't "free" or unlimited, the flows between individual European countries is typically a small fraction (less than 10%) of the national consumption and generation. And there are cases like Ireland which has its own grid - with very limited external interconnection - and yet achieved 42% renewable share last year. Techniques/engineering/theory for integrating intermittent sources has advanced considerably in the last ten years.
  - kergonath 5y ago
    > Of course interconnection is a big help, but transmission isn't "free" or unlimited, the flows between individual European countries is typically a small fraction (less than 10%) of the national consumption and generation. It’s more than a little help. Just imagine how a blackout involving 10% of the population or Germany would look like, never mind the EU. > And there are cases like Ireland which has its own grid - with very limited external interconnection - and yet achieved 42% renewable share last year. You cannot really compare Ireland with many of the other EU countries, either in term of population or industry, though. > Techniques/engineering/theory for integrating intermittent sources has advanced considerably in the last ten years. They have. And it is a good thing, because it really should not be a competition between nuclear and renewables. They still have several issues, which are very difficult to solve without either a massive reduction in consumption, or a massive increase in price. I really struggle to understand how almost all mainstream “green” parties see fossil fuels as a lesser menace than nuclear. The truth is, if you read their manifesto, that they don’t care about particle pollution beyond “cars are bad” (which is true, but insufficient) or climate change. It is not a competition, it is a struggle to get rid of fossil fuels, which are an existential threat to our societies. We can sort that out and talk about fusion once we’ve done it. In the meantime, getting rid of fossil fuels is a massive undertaking, and we would be stupid not to use every card in our hand.

by derriz 5y ago

cbmuser 5y ago

Germany has a large share (50%) of renewables and their specific CO2 emissions per kWh are up to ten times higher as compared to France with 70% nuclear. Volatile renewables don’t effectively help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-emissions-by-sector?tab=table&country=~OWID_WRL https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-emissions-by-sector?t...

derriz 5y ago
"Volatile" renewables absolutely do help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As the renewables share of generation has been increasing, the CO2 intensity of electricity generation in Germany has dropped from 542gCO2/kWh in 2000 to 296gCO2/kWh in 2020[1]. Btw, your link brings me to a table on agricultural CO2 emissions? [1] https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/development-of-co2-emission-intensity-of-electricity-generation-in-selected-countries-2000-2020 https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/development-o...

DennisP 5y ago

Fossil backup isn't tenable past 2050 at the latest.

derriz 5y ago
Agreed. But assuming no technology advances in this area for 30 years time seems implausible. What has happened with price/efficiency of solar, wind and grid-scale batteries in the last 10 years provides a lesson. None of these were practical even 10 years ago and now they represent 90% of newly installed capacity globally (2020). And this is happening all-over whether with or without government support. For example, new-build, grid-scale battery storage is now cheaper on an LCOE basis than new build open-cycle ("peaker") natural gas plants. This has only happened recently - about a year ago. I was completely skeptical that this could happen a few years ago. I urge any/all hackernews readers to read more about _recent_ developments in de-carbonizing energy. It's fascinating and it has become clear to me that we're living through one of the great technology revolutions of human history. It genuinely is a Kodak/smartphone type moment with even bigger implications for human wellbeing. It's amazing that by being cheap enough, all the disadvantages of a new technology become less relevant. A bit like how the PC displaced "real computers" (i.e. mainframes) even though at the time they were little more than microcontrollers integrated with a terminal.

kergonath 5y ago

> Many countries in Europe have 30% or more of their electricity supplied by intermittent but it turns out that the integration problem isn't as difficult as envisaged. True. It’s very easy when you can tap your neighbour’s power plants when you need. The problem is a bit different when all the neighbours have the same problems at the same time.

derriz 5y ago
Of course interconnection is a big help, but transmission isn't "free" or unlimited, the flows between individual European countries is typically a small fraction (less than 10%) of the national consumption and generation. And there are cases like Ireland which has its own grid - with very limited external interconnection - and yet achieved 42% renewable share last year. Techniques/engineering/theory for integrating intermittent sources has advanced considerably in the last ten years.
- kergonath 5y ago
  > Of course interconnection is a big help, but transmission isn't "free" or unlimited, the flows between individual European countries is typically a small fraction (less than 10%) of the national consumption and generation. It’s more than a little help. Just imagine how a blackout involving 10% of the population or Germany would look like, never mind the EU. > And there are cases like Ireland which has its own grid - with very limited external interconnection - and yet achieved 42% renewable share last year. You cannot really compare Ireland with many of the other EU countries, either in term of population or industry, though. > Techniques/engineering/theory for integrating intermittent sources has advanced considerably in the last ten years. They have. And it is a good thing, because it really should not be a competition between nuclear and renewables. They still have several issues, which are very difficult to solve without either a massive reduction in consumption, or a massive increase in price. I really struggle to understand how almost all mainstream “green” parties see fossil fuels as a lesser menace than nuclear. The truth is, if you read their manifesto, that they don’t care about particle pollution beyond “cars are bad” (which is true, but insufficient) or climate change. It is not a competition, it is a struggle to get rid of fossil fuels, which are an existential threat to our societies. We can sort that out and talk about fusion once we’ve done it. In the meantime, getting rid of fossil fuels is a massive undertaking, and we would be stupid not to use every card in our hand.