4 ms·

solar and wind can be free, if the sun does not shine and wind is not blowing 100% of the time...

by flavius29663 4y ago

ncmncm 4y ago
This trivial observation, always trotted out, is always meant just to distract. Trolling, really.
- flavius29663 4y ago
  It's not trolling, look at what Germany and California are struggling with... Also Texas, another state where they pushed green energy (wind) and slowed the investment in fossil fuels. We all want cleaner energy, but we must acknowledge that it is not easy.
  - bryanlarsen 4y ago
    On the contrary, California is struggling with with electricity generation during times of high A/C loads due to a heat wave. Those times correspond with high solar power generation, without solar they'd be doing a lot worse. On the contrary, Germany has met their goal of 80% full natgas storage several weeks early despite the French nuclear reactors being offline due to higher than expected renewable energy supplies.
    - flavius29663 4y ago
      You're saying that Germany and California are not struggling with the electric grid...now I believe you're trolling They invested a lot in solar power, which is expensive, so they couldn't afford to invest enough in transmission and backup generators, and now they have expensive electricity and unreliable grids. Ignoring current year, I think Germany is second in the world in regards to expensive electricity (after Denmark) and California is one of the most expensive states in the US.
      - ncmncm 4y ago
        They invested a lot in solar power because it is cheap. It is the cheapest method of generating power every fielded. They got far more power by investing in solar than they would have spending anywhere else. Of course they have not finished building out, which takes time. And, Germany counted on access to NG as backup while they build out. The war interfered. Had they invested any other way they would be even worse off.
        flavius29663 4y ago
        > invested a lot in solar power because it is cheap This is an outright lie, let me dig in a bit. They're cheap only if you look at watts generated, if you ignore extra grid costs and backup supply. For 1 MW of solar, you need 1 MW of backup. If you use solar for most of the day and use the backup just for 20% of the total electricity required, then the backup plant will look like it's very expensive to build and operate, while the solar seems cheap. But solar cannot operate without backup. What needs to happen is that you have to transfer some of the money generated by the solar plant to the backup plant. How you do that will make it look like solar is either very cheap, or expensive - and this is all political and a PR move. In the end, consumer will pay for both anyway, which is why Germany and California have such high electricity bills. A real life equivalent example would be to say that your truck can downhill with 100 MPG and very cheap to run, and this is absolutely true...if you ignore that the truck must also climb the hill. > Had they invested any other way they would be even worse off Germany is lucky that EU just implemented the unified energy market, otherwise they would have been absolutely obliterated this past winter + wartime.
  - thomaslord 4y ago
    Can you provide any sources on Texas having grid issues because of renewables? The biggest publicized issue I'm familiar with was caused by inadequate maintenance of fossil-fuel-based generation facilities - during that period of time renewables produced the expected amount of energy for the weather conditions. Of course that expected amount wasn't their peak output, but that's something you plan for if you're competently managing your grid.
    - flavius29663 4y ago
      When you invest a lot in renewables and neglect investment in other plants, then I find it fair to blame some of it on the investment in renewables. It's like buying a BMW and then not having enough money for groceries...it's not just the groceries being too expensive, the nice shiny car might have something to do with it.

solar and wind can be free, if the sun does not shine and wind is not blowing 100% of the time...

ncmncm 4y ago

This trivial observation, always trotted out, is always meant just to distract. Trolling, really.

flavius29663 4y ago
It's not trolling, look at what Germany and California are struggling with... Also Texas, another state where they pushed green energy (wind) and slowed the investment in fossil fuels. We all want cleaner energy, but we must acknowledge that it is not easy.
- bryanlarsen 4y ago
  On the contrary, California is struggling with with electricity generation during times of high A/C loads due to a heat wave. Those times correspond with high solar power generation, without solar they'd be doing a lot worse. On the contrary, Germany has met their goal of 80% full natgas storage several weeks early despite the French nuclear reactors being offline due to higher than expected renewable energy supplies.
  - flavius29663 4y ago
    You're saying that Germany and California are not struggling with the electric grid...now I believe you're trolling They invested a lot in solar power, which is expensive, so they couldn't afford to invest enough in transmission and backup generators, and now they have expensive electricity and unreliable grids. Ignoring current year, I think Germany is second in the world in regards to expensive electricity (after Denmark) and California is one of the most expensive states in the US.
    - ncmncm 4y ago
      They invested a lot in solar power because it is cheap. It is the cheapest method of generating power every fielded. They got far more power by investing in solar than they would have spending anywhere else. Of course they have not finished building out, which takes time. And, Germany counted on access to NG as backup while they build out. The war interfered. Had they invested any other way they would be even worse off.
      - flavius29663 4y ago
        > invested a lot in solar power because it is cheap This is an outright lie, let me dig in a bit. They're cheap only if you look at watts generated, if you ignore extra grid costs and backup supply. For 1 MW of solar, you need 1 MW of backup. If you use solar for most of the day and use the backup just for 20% of the total electricity required, then the backup plant will look like it's very expensive to build and operate, while the solar seems cheap. But solar cannot operate without backup. What needs to happen is that you have to transfer some of the money generated by the solar plant to the backup plant. How you do that will make it look like solar is either very cheap, or expensive - and this is all political and a PR move. In the end, consumer will pay for both anyway, which is why Germany and California have such high electricity bills. A real life equivalent example would be to say that your truck can downhill with 100 MPG and very cheap to run, and this is absolutely true...if you ignore that the truck must also climb the hill. > Had they invested any other way they would be even worse off Germany is lucky that EU just implemented the unified energy market, otherwise they would have been absolutely obliterated this past winter + wartime.
- thomaslord 4y ago
  Can you provide any sources on Texas having grid issues because of renewables? The biggest publicized issue I'm familiar with was caused by inadequate maintenance of fossil-fuel-based generation facilities - during that period of time renewables produced the expected amount of energy for the weather conditions. Of course that expected amount wasn't their peak output, but that's something you plan for if you're competently managing your grid.
  - flavius29663 4y ago
    When you invest a lot in renewables and neglect investment in other plants, then I find it fair to blame some of it on the investment in renewables. It's like buying a BMW and then not having enough money for groceries...it's not just the groceries being too expensive, the nice shiny car might have something to do with it.