3 ms·

> it will be replaced with zero carbon generation, including geothermal. No. It will be replaced by gas, because we've pretty much tapped out on sources of geo

> it will be replaced with zero carbon generation, including geothermal. No. It will be replaced by gas, because we've pretty much tapped out on sources of geothermal and hydroelectric power, and wind/solar are intermittent. So the only thing that's left is gas or coal. >which will consist both of "regular" lithium storage, and some newer less tested tech for longer duration storage. No. Lithium for long-term grid scale storage (let's say, on the order of even a day, though in reality we need a few weeks of storage) is never going to work. Outside of pumped storage (for which you need the right geography), there are no other options. You're going to be burning gas or coal if you shut down Nuclear. Germany is finding that out the hard way. >so if it doesn't happen then somebody is violating the law. It was senate bill 1090, passed in 2018: Congress can pass any bill they want, but physics wins every time. >I spend most of my hobby time researching energy, and find that nuclear proponents are often the lowest information contributors on forums, repeating dates talking points, and in the rare cases that they have data, it's far out of date. In all your research around energy, did it ever strike you as odd that no region in the world is powered by renewables (outside of hydro and geothermal)? How about the fact that Germany, at the same time they are touting wind energy, is building multi-billion dollar pipelines to ship Russian gas for decades? Should raise some questions on the viability of solar and wind - no?

epistasis 4y ago
Bald assertions do not refute reality. Here is a year old article on the DC replacement package, and there are lots of CPUC PDFs that are more recent and go into more detail: https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/solar/california-approves-11-5-gw-of-zero-carbon-resources-by-2026-no-natural-gas-required https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/solar/california-approv... > we've pretty much tapped out on sources of geothermal No, the technology is changing and there are far far more sites due to enhanced geothermal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_geothermal_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_geothermal_system > Lithium for long-term grid scale storage (let's say, on the order of even a day, though in reality we need a few weeks of storage) is never going to work. The GW and GWh of deployed lithium ion batteries seems to disagree with your unsourced version of reality... > Congress can pass any bill they want, but physics wins every time. I've found that people that say that "physics" is why we can't deploy renewables never, not even once, can back up their assertion with any physics. It's a dead give away that you haven't even evaluated the problem. > In all your research around energy, did it ever strike you as odd that no region in the world is powered by renewables Before there was a telephone network, did it ever strike anyone that because it didn't exist, it would never be possible? Energy technology is changing at an immense pace, and anybody who says "we can't do it because we haven't done it before" is not really thinking about reality. Germany is always brought up as if it is some sort of energy disaster, and even if it were, it would not disprove the ability of renewables to power a grid. There's all this vague rumors and unsourced assertion about Germany really screening things up, but no technical details, quantitative assertions, or benchmarks that back that up.
- macspoofing 4y ago
  >Here is a year old article on the DC replacement package, and there are lots of CPUC PDFs that are more recent and go into more detail Uh huh ... you say that, but then there is a Stanford/MIT study from 2021 that called the closing of the plant a terrible idea. This utopian replacement of DC with no-gas sources is just that .. utopian. >No, the technology is changing and there are far far more sites due to enhanced geothermal ... EGS is a science project with no clear path to commercial viability. >The GW and GWh of deployed lithium ion batteries seems to disagree with your unsourced version of reality... No! Who is actually using Lithium ion for grid storage? WHO? Lithium Ion is finding a nice little niche in providing very short term storage to even out spikes in electrical transmission. That's great, but not good enough to make wind/solar viable. >Before there was a telephone network, did it ever strike anyone that because it didn't exist, it would never be possible? Uh huh. >Germany is always brought up as if it is some sort of energy disaster, and even if it were, it would not disprove the ability of renewables to power a grid. Germany isn't an energy disaster, but it goes to show you that actions speak louder than words. If Germany was confident that they could replace fossil fuels with Wind/Solar/Battery they wouldn't spend billions to build gas pipelines from an authoritarian nation ... for decades to come. So the question for you is: What do you they know that you don't.

epistasis 4y ago

Bald assertions do not refute reality. Here is a year old article on the DC replacement package, and there are lots of CPUC PDFs that are more recent and go into more detail: https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/solar/california-approves-11-5-gw-of-zero-carbon-resources-by-2026-no-natural-gas-required https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/solar/california-approv... > we've pretty much tapped out on sources of geothermal No, the technology is changing and there are far far more sites due to enhanced geothermal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_geothermal_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_geothermal_system > Lithium for long-term grid scale storage (let's say, on the order of even a day, though in reality we need a few weeks of storage) is never going to work. The GW and GWh of deployed lithium ion batteries seems to disagree with your unsourced version of reality... > Congress can pass any bill they want, but physics wins every time. I've found that people that say that "physics" is why we can't deploy renewables never, not even once, can back up their assertion with any physics. It's a dead give away that you haven't even evaluated the problem. > In all your research around energy, did it ever strike you as odd that no region in the world is powered by renewables Before there was a telephone network, did it ever strike anyone that because it didn't exist, it would never be possible? Energy technology is changing at an immense pace, and anybody who says "we can't do it because we haven't done it before" is not really thinking about reality. Germany is always brought up as if it is some sort of energy disaster, and even if it were, it would not disprove the ability of renewables to power a grid. There's all this vague rumors and unsourced assertion about Germany really screening things up, but no technical details, quantitative assertions, or benchmarks that back that up.

macspoofing 4y ago
>Here is a year old article on the DC replacement package, and there are lots of CPUC PDFs that are more recent and go into more detail Uh huh ... you say that, but then there is a Stanford/MIT study from 2021 that called the closing of the plant a terrible idea. This utopian replacement of DC with no-gas sources is just that .. utopian. >No, the technology is changing and there are far far more sites due to enhanced geothermal ... EGS is a science project with no clear path to commercial viability. >The GW and GWh of deployed lithium ion batteries seems to disagree with your unsourced version of reality... No! Who is actually using Lithium ion for grid storage? WHO? Lithium Ion is finding a nice little niche in providing very short term storage to even out spikes in electrical transmission. That's great, but not good enough to make wind/solar viable. >Before there was a telephone network, did it ever strike anyone that because it didn't exist, it would never be possible? Uh huh. >Germany is always brought up as if it is some sort of energy disaster, and even if it were, it would not disprove the ability of renewables to power a grid. Germany isn't an energy disaster, but it goes to show you that actions speak louder than words. If Germany was confident that they could replace fossil fuels with Wind/Solar/Battery they wouldn't spend billions to build gas pipelines from an authoritarian nation ... for decades to come. So the question for you is: What do you they know that you don't.