4 ms·
> the renewables actually generated more power than originally forecasted. They were forecasted to produce 6% and actually made 8%, vs 41% from the prior week.
by jcampbell1 4y ago
> the renewables actually generated more power than originally forecasted.
They were forecasted to produce 6% and actually made 8%, vs 41% from the prior week. You can’t blame renewables in this case, but you aren’t presenting facts in an unbiased way.
- coder543 4y agoMy primary point is that renewables are working the way that they say they will work. Certain people refuse to admit that fossil fuel plants struggle in adverse conditions, but then rant about renewables being somehow unreliable. Renewable integration into the grid is heavily dependent on forecasting. You may think it is biased, but I see that statistic as things going better than forecasted. With proper forecasting, you can overbuild and make up for lower production. With proper forecasting, you can employ demand response. When the fossil fuel plants turn off completely and unexpectedly, there’s nothing you can do, because no one planned for that. The grid was relying on the power plants, and they weren’t there. If the grid had planned for the unreliability of those plants, the grid might’ve had more renewables to make up for it, who knows. People building renewables plan for the variability. As I’ve mentioned, energy storage is essential for the long term.
- robertlagrant 4y ago> there’s nothing you can do, because no one planned for that You're comparing a future of renewables to a present of non-renewables. You could also add in additional generation to cover the gap you mentioned in the future as well.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]