4 ms·

There is a lot of research on exactly the supposedly overlooked problems. This article doesn't even name check the heavily researched solutions to low inertia i

There is a lot of research on exactly the supposedly overlooked problems. This article doesn't even name check the heavily researched solutions to low inertia in power grids. The term "grid forming" (including quotes) has 10.000 hits on google scholar. In summary, this is just another anti renewables "I know better than all the experts" blog post. Edit: If it turns out that we need conventional types of inertia and new technologies do not suffice we can use synchronous condensers. It will increase cost, but so will using nuclear.

pjc50 4y ago
> this is just another anti renewables "I know better than all the experts" blog post https://judithcurry.com/about/ https://judithcurry.com/about/ "Interview with Ron Paul" "Interview with Tucker Carlson (Fox News)" "Interview with John Stossel (Fox News)" Impressive list of disqualifications there.
- boringg 4y ago
  If you had a good idea that you wanted to get traction instead of trying to make money on some opinion you would realize that going through that set of interviewers means you lost your credibility to the majority of people who are critical thinkers. 'Impressive list of disqualifications there.' < couldn't be truer.
  - pjc50 4y ago
    One of the sentences I've read that stuck with me for years is "Good ideas do not need lots of lies told about them in order to gain public acceptance", from https://blog.danieldavies.com/2004_05_23_d-squareddigest_archive.html https://blog.danieldavies.com/2004_05_23_d-squareddigest_arc...
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  https://www.desmog.com/judith-curry/ https://www.desmog.com/judith-curry/ > Judith Curry resigned from her position at Georgia Tech on January 1, 2017, citing the “craziness” of climate science ... > Judith Curry wrote on her blog Climate Etc. that her views on climate change are best summarized by her Congressional Testimony on the President’s Climate Action Plan: [6], [7] > “Recent data and research supports the importance of natural climate variability and calls into question the conclusion that humans are the dominant cause of recent climate change: > – The hiatus in global warming since 1998 – Reduced estimates of the sensitivity of climate to carbon dioxide – Climate models predict much more warming than has been observed in the early 21st century”
bob1029 4y ago
We definitely do need some amount of conventional inertia. I agree that alternative sources are probably ideal. Doesn't really matter what kind of prime mover is involved. Wind/solar augmented with big chunks of iron spinning in sync with the grid would easily mitigate whatever scare language is involved with inertia. Note that this is not about longer term energy storage, so the overall generation mix conversation is still very hot.
makomk 4y ago
This is definitely overstating its case. The problem I've seen isn't so much that there isn't research taking into account problems like this, it's that research which ignores the hard parts of the problem and comes to the conclusion that switching to green energy would be easy if only governments stopped dragging their feet gets picked up by the media and pushed into the public's perception of what science and the experts say is possible, making it seem like the only reason that governments aren't swiching faster is because they're in the pockets of big fossil fuel. In particular, there's been a lot of work done here in the UK on switching these voltage and frequency control services over from fossil fuels to other, renewable sources that's public but not widely known about. Meanwhile, the voting public think that the government has literally done nothing and isn't even trying because all that gets media coverage is overly-optimistic claims based on ignoring the hard parts of the problem and attempts to spin anything they're not doing (like onshore wind and large-scale solar) as the solution and anything they are doing (offshore wind, hydrogen, etc) as stupid.
- Certhas 4y ago
  This is misleading. We could install a lot more renewables and limit their penetration to 80% and avoid the hard problems for quite a while while also reducing CO2 output massively. Ireland has had such penetration Limits for a long time and is gradually relaxing them. The UK is also more difficult, being a smaller grid. Several national grids in the EU are operating at higher levels for significant hours as they "use" the stability of their neighbors. We can gain experience with new tech gradually that way. The reason we're not building more renewables in the EU is _not_ dynamical instability. The reasons are mostly regulatory and political right now. Grid capacity extensions lagging behind due to nimbyism and onshore wind is stimied by strict location rules. Permits often take a long time, etc... Economic incentives are also misaligned due to the lack of nodal pricing. It's wrong to suggest nothing is being done. It's also wrong to suggest that we couldn't do more.
7402 4y ago
> In summary, this is just another anti renewables "I know better than all the experts" blog post. The author of the post is Russell Schussler. I believe this is him, and that he knows what he is talking about: "Russell Schussler works as a Planning Vice President, System at Georgia Electric Membership Corporation" Previous Work Experience: SERC Reliability, Engineering Committee; North American Electric Reliability, Planning Committee. Education: bachelor's degree, Ohio State University, Columbus; master's degree, University of Southern California, Los Angeles. [0] https://www.datanyze.com/people/Russell-Schussler/415612919 https://www.datanyze.com/people/Russell-Schussler/415612919
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  He's a regular guest poster on the blog: He's been consistantly wrong about renewable stuff since 2015 https://judithcurry.com/2015/05/12/true-costs-of-wind-electricity/ https://judithcurry.com/2015/05/12/true-costs-of-wind-electr...

pjc50 4y ago

> this is just another anti renewables "I know better than all the experts" blog post https://judithcurry.com/about/ https://judithcurry.com/about/ "Interview with Ron Paul" "Interview with Tucker Carlson (Fox News)" "Interview with John Stossel (Fox News)" Impressive list of disqualifications there.

boringg 4y ago
If you had a good idea that you wanted to get traction instead of trying to make money on some opinion you would realize that going through that set of interviewers means you lost your credibility to the majority of people who are critical thinkers. 'Impressive list of disqualifications there.' < couldn't be truer.
- pjc50 4y ago
  One of the sentences I've read that stuck with me for years is "Good ideas do not need lots of lies told about them in order to gain public acceptance", from https://blog.danieldavies.com/2004_05_23_d-squareddigest_archive.html https://blog.danieldavies.com/2004_05_23_d-squareddigest_arc...
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
https://www.desmog.com/judith-curry/ https://www.desmog.com/judith-curry/ > Judith Curry resigned from her position at Georgia Tech on January 1, 2017, citing the “craziness” of climate science ... > Judith Curry wrote on her blog Climate Etc. that her views on climate change are best summarized by her Congressional Testimony on the President’s Climate Action Plan: [6], [7] > “Recent data and research supports the importance of natural climate variability and calls into question the conclusion that humans are the dominant cause of recent climate change: > – The hiatus in global warming since 1998 – Reduced estimates of the sensitivity of climate to carbon dioxide – Climate models predict much more warming than has been observed in the early 21st century”

bob1029 4y ago

We definitely do need some amount of conventional inertia. I agree that alternative sources are probably ideal. Doesn't really matter what kind of prime mover is involved. Wind/solar augmented with big chunks of iron spinning in sync with the grid would easily mitigate whatever scare language is involved with inertia. Note that this is not about longer term energy storage, so the overall generation mix conversation is still very hot.

makomk 4y ago

This is definitely overstating its case. The problem I've seen isn't so much that there isn't research taking into account problems like this, it's that research which ignores the hard parts of the problem and comes to the conclusion that switching to green energy would be easy if only governments stopped dragging their feet gets picked up by the media and pushed into the public's perception of what science and the experts say is possible, making it seem like the only reason that governments aren't swiching faster is because they're in the pockets of big fossil fuel. In particular, there's been a lot of work done here in the UK on switching these voltage and frequency control services over from fossil fuels to other, renewable sources that's public but not widely known about. Meanwhile, the voting public think that the government has literally done nothing and isn't even trying because all that gets media coverage is overly-optimistic claims based on ignoring the hard parts of the problem and attempts to spin anything they're not doing (like onshore wind and large-scale solar) as the solution and anything they are doing (offshore wind, hydrogen, etc) as stupid.

Certhas 4y ago
This is misleading. We could install a lot more renewables and limit their penetration to 80% and avoid the hard problems for quite a while while also reducing CO2 output massively. Ireland has had such penetration Limits for a long time and is gradually relaxing them. The UK is also more difficult, being a smaller grid. Several national grids in the EU are operating at higher levels for significant hours as they "use" the stability of their neighbors. We can gain experience with new tech gradually that way. The reason we're not building more renewables in the EU is _not_ dynamical instability. The reasons are mostly regulatory and political right now. Grid capacity extensions lagging behind due to nimbyism and onshore wind is stimied by strict location rules. Permits often take a long time, etc... Economic incentives are also misaligned due to the lack of nodal pricing. It's wrong to suggest nothing is being done. It's also wrong to suggest that we couldn't do more.

7402 4y ago

> In summary, this is just another anti renewables "I know better than all the experts" blog post. The author of the post is Russell Schussler. I believe this is him, and that he knows what he is talking about: "Russell Schussler works as a Planning Vice President, System at Georgia Electric Membership Corporation" Previous Work Experience: SERC Reliability, Engineering Committee; North American Electric Reliability, Planning Committee. Education: bachelor's degree, Ohio State University, Columbus; master's degree, University of Southern California, Los Angeles. [0] https://www.datanyze.com/people/Russell-Schussler/415612919 https://www.datanyze.com/people/Russell-Schussler/415612919

ZeroGravitas 4y ago
He's a regular guest poster on the blog: He's been consistantly wrong about renewable stuff since 2015 https://judithcurry.com/2015/05/12/true-costs-of-wind-electricity/ https://judithcurry.com/2015/05/12/true-costs-of-wind-electr...