16 ms·

Sorry but it is very misleading to say that fossil fuels sources are a bigger cause of blackouts than renewables. Without dispatchable generation, like nat gas

Sorry but it is very misleading to say that fossil fuels sources are a bigger cause of blackouts than renewables. Without dispatchable generation, like nat gas plants but also hydroelectric, the grid would black out every single night. Yes dispatchable generation may fail to materialize at times, but renewables “fail” to provide consistent power every single day, when the sun stops shining at night or wind stops blowing. Future battery deployments may be able to smooth these out over long enough timescales, but we are nowhere near that point right now.

coder543 4y ago
>> Grids have also repeatedly been shown to handle more renewables than every previous prediction would make, and we haven't hit the limit. > Yes dispatchable generation may fail to materialize at times, but renewables “fail” to provide consistent power every single day, when the sun stops shining at night or wind stops blowing. As I said. You're just repeating the old arguments. People thought that small percentages of renewables would destabilize the grid, then that didn't happen, so then they said a slightly larger percentages would do it, and it didn't. This tired theme has been repeated ad nauseam for the last decade or two. I agree that you need some amount of Base Load, but renewables haven't been the problem yet, and energy storage is the solution, long term, along with Demand Response. Small amounts of grid energy storage have been shown[0] to have disproportionately high effects on improving grid stability. We might need less than you predict. As it is, since we are still successfully adding more and more renewables to the grid, and renewables aren't being the source of blackouts, SMRs have to compete with renewables on cost, and they simply don't. SMRs also don't compete with Combined Cycle plants in terms of cost either, so which one are utilities going to choose? Peak demand for the grid is in the late afternoon / early evening, so the amount of battery storage needed to "shift" solar production by a few hours is not as much as you would think. Wind power produces more power at night than during the day, and it produces more in winter than summer, which is quite convenient given how solar produces more in the summer and during the day.[1] They make quite a complementary pair of power sources. There are seasonal concerns, which is where some combined cycle plants come into play, even if they don't operate for most of the year, but that's also not SMRs. Combined Cycle is way cheaper than these nuclear SMRs. If you over-build on wind and solar, you can go a long way even in times of year with "less" wind and less sunshine, and with the low cost of wind and solar... lots of people are looking to overbuild as a partial solution that doesn't require batteries. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornsdale_Power_Reserve#Benefits_for_the_consumers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornsdale_Power_Reserve#Benefi... [1]: https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1368867 https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1368867
- evancox100 4y ago
  Every fact you are saying may be true, but “fossil fuels are a bigger cause of blackouts than renewables” doesn’t follow from the facts your gave, you’re just assuming it is true. That is the last thing I will say on this.
  - coder543 4y ago
    > you’re just assuming it is true I'm not assuming it. I'm referring to the very real, major blackouts that have occurred in the US over the past couple of years. These events have plenty of reliable sources that tell exactly what happened. In the Texas blackouts, the problems were coal and gas plants going offline due to the cold that they weren't winterized against. It had nothing to do with Wind or Solar failing unexpectedly, despite the governor's claims early in the blackouts. In the recent rolling blackouts in the Southeast, TVA and Duke Energy reported that the cause was their coal and gas plants freezing up. Nothing to do with renewables again. I cannot recall any major blackouts caused by the fossil fuel plants operating normally while renewables failed to produce on schedule. I would love to see some examples, if they exist. The Cleantechnica article that I linked to earlier (which you surely didn't read) also provided quotes on this exact topic, and that analysis agrees with my own, FWIW. I could dig into the specifics of these events and provide more sources, but you don't seem likely to care.
    - jcampbell1 4y ago
      I agree with most of what you say, but renewables can’t be counted on, so they can never be blamed. This is tautologically true and yet a meaningless point. If a hospital loses power to lifesaving equipment, 100% of the time it is due to a failure of backup generators.
      - coder543 4y ago
        > I agree with most of what you say, but renewables can’t be counted on, so they can never be blamed. Renewables are fairly predictable, so they can be counted on. The production is variable, but not unreliable or unpredictable. It's an important distinction, and it gives more time for the grid to coordinate with Demand Response (or peaker plants) to match load and production. Obviously the weather models involved are still improving, but for solar especially, it's easy to predict when the sun will go down. Cloud coverage and wind forecasting are active areas of development to make things easier and more predictable for everyone.
criley2 4y ago
95% of stored energy in the US is hydro-electric pump storage. People really have no understanding of how the grid works. We don't just run gas plants all night.
- LarryMullins 4y ago
  Gas plants aren't "stored energy", you're comparing apples to oranges. 95% of stored energy amounts to little more than bupkis, the US grid doesn't run off stored energy at night.
  - barney54 4y ago
    Natural gas in pipelines is stored energy. A pile of coal at a coal plant is stored energy. Nuclear fuel roads are stored energy.
    - LarryMullins 4y ago
      These are not stored energy in the "stored energy" sense, you can't feed solar power into a gas plant and get it back out at night. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_storage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_storage
      - pfdietz 4y ago
        "Stockpiled" would be a better term.

coder543 4y ago

>> Grids have also repeatedly been shown to handle more renewables than every previous prediction would make, and we haven't hit the limit. > Yes dispatchable generation may fail to materialize at times, but renewables “fail” to provide consistent power every single day, when the sun stops shining at night or wind stops blowing. As I said. You're just repeating the old arguments. People thought that small percentages of renewables would destabilize the grid, then that didn't happen, so then they said a slightly larger percentages would do it, and it didn't. This tired theme has been repeated ad nauseam for the last decade or two. I agree that you need some amount of Base Load, but renewables haven't been the problem yet, and energy storage is the solution, long term, along with Demand Response. Small amounts of grid energy storage have been shown[0] to have disproportionately high effects on improving grid stability. We might need less than you predict. As it is, since we are still successfully adding more and more renewables to the grid, and renewables aren't being the source of blackouts, SMRs have to compete with renewables on cost, and they simply don't. SMRs also don't compete with Combined Cycle plants in terms of cost either, so which one are utilities going to choose? Peak demand for the grid is in the late afternoon / early evening, so the amount of battery storage needed to "shift" solar production by a few hours is not as much as you would think. Wind power produces more power at night than during the day, and it produces more in winter than summer, which is quite convenient given how solar produces more in the summer and during the day.[1] They make quite a complementary pair of power sources. There are seasonal concerns, which is where some combined cycle plants come into play, even if they don't operate for most of the year, but that's also not SMRs. Combined Cycle is way cheaper than these nuclear SMRs. If you over-build on wind and solar, you can go a long way even in times of year with "less" wind and less sunshine, and with the low cost of wind and solar... lots of people are looking to overbuild as a partial solution that doesn't require batteries. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornsdale_Power_Reserve#Benefits_for_the_consumers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornsdale_Power_Reserve#Benefi... [1]: https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1368867 https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1368867

evancox100 4y ago
Every fact you are saying may be true, but “fossil fuels are a bigger cause of blackouts than renewables” doesn’t follow from the facts your gave, you’re just assuming it is true. That is the last thing I will say on this.
- coder543 4y ago
  > you’re just assuming it is true I'm not assuming it. I'm referring to the very real, major blackouts that have occurred in the US over the past couple of years. These events have plenty of reliable sources that tell exactly what happened. In the Texas blackouts, the problems were coal and gas plants going offline due to the cold that they weren't winterized against. It had nothing to do with Wind or Solar failing unexpectedly, despite the governor's claims early in the blackouts. In the recent rolling blackouts in the Southeast, TVA and Duke Energy reported that the cause was their coal and gas plants freezing up. Nothing to do with renewables again. I cannot recall any major blackouts caused by the fossil fuel plants operating normally while renewables failed to produce on schedule. I would love to see some examples, if they exist. The Cleantechnica article that I linked to earlier (which you surely didn't read) also provided quotes on this exact topic, and that analysis agrees with my own, FWIW. I could dig into the specifics of these events and provide more sources, but you don't seem likely to care.
  - jcampbell1 4y ago
    I agree with most of what you say, but renewables can’t be counted on, so they can never be blamed. This is tautologically true and yet a meaningless point. If a hospital loses power to lifesaving equipment, 100% of the time it is due to a failure of backup generators.
    - coder543 4y ago
      > I agree with most of what you say, but renewables can’t be counted on, so they can never be blamed. Renewables are fairly predictable, so they can be counted on. The production is variable, but not unreliable or unpredictable. It's an important distinction, and it gives more time for the grid to coordinate with Demand Response (or peaker plants) to match load and production. Obviously the weather models involved are still improving, but for solar especially, it's easy to predict when the sun will go down. Cloud coverage and wind forecasting are active areas of development to make things easier and more predictable for everyone.

criley2 4y ago

95% of stored energy in the US is hydro-electric pump storage. People really have no understanding of how the grid works. We don't just run gas plants all night.

LarryMullins 4y ago
Gas plants aren't "stored energy", you're comparing apples to oranges. 95% of stored energy amounts to little more than bupkis, the US grid doesn't run off stored energy at night.
- barney54 4y ago
  Natural gas in pipelines is stored energy. A pile of coal at a coal plant is stored energy. Nuclear fuel roads are stored energy.
  - LarryMullins 4y ago
    These are not stored energy in the "stored energy" sense, you can't feed solar power into a gas plant and get it back out at night. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_storage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_storage
    - pfdietz 4y ago
      "Stockpiled" would be a better term.