4 ms·

You've clearly never done the math. Renewables have a HUGE negative effect on grid stability - it's actually cheaper to pay to NOT have renewable power on the

by dublin 4y ago

You've clearly never done the math. Renewables have a HUGE negative effect on grid stability - it's actually cheaper to pay to NOT have renewable power on the grid once you get to about 30% renewables. (See Dr. Eleanor Denny's groundbreaking study of this, based on real data about a decade ago.) For the foreseeable future, we're going to need fossil-fueled peakers. Nuclear can (and should) pick up more of the base load, but only NG peakers are both clean and instantly dispatchable on utility scales. Batteries on that scale are not possible given known reserves, and even if they were, they'd offer a lifecycle considerably dirtier than a gas-fired peaker plant!

Schroedingersat 4y ago
Batteries have already been produced on the scale required for frequency stability purposes (about 20 minutes for the entire world electricity production), and there are plenty of reserves left even without switching to abundant chemistries (which has always been possible but is happening now because they're actually starting to be needed). These mystical high penetration costs have also never materialised in and of the grids that exceeded 30% VRE even without batteries. Add in just a tiny amount of battery and South Australia's grid is more stable than it was with gas and coal and has smaller price excursions during demand spikes. The exact opposite of the prediction based on real data.
foxyv 4y ago
Often the forseeable future is about 5 years. A study from 10 years ago is outdated. Solar has dropped roughly half it's cost every decade for the past two decades. This means you can have twice as much as you need for the same price. Lithium battery costs are 1/7th the price they were 10 years ago per kwh. Will we still need fossil fuels? Yes, absolutely! But the scale of fossil fuel usage will drop like a rock until it's a quaint product of a bygone age used in arctic regions only. Fossil fuels are already feeling the crunch. Coal is the first victim. Natural gas will go down as well. Mostly because they are too expensive and there are better alternatives. I can see nuclear becoming cheap enough to replace a lot of existing steam generators in colder, darker, regions like northern Europe. But even then, geothermal is starting to sneak back as a viable technology. I really look forward to seeing where this all goes, but it's not looking good for petroleum based fuels.

by dublin 4y ago

Schroedingersat 4y ago

Batteries have already been produced on the scale required for frequency stability purposes (about 20 minutes for the entire world electricity production), and there are plenty of reserves left even without switching to abundant chemistries (which has always been possible but is happening now because they're actually starting to be needed). These mystical high penetration costs have also never materialised in and of the grids that exceeded 30% VRE even without batteries. Add in just a tiny amount of battery and South Australia's grid is more stable than it was with gas and coal and has smaller price excursions during demand spikes. The exact opposite of the prediction based on real data.

foxyv 4y ago

Often the forseeable future is about 5 years. A study from 10 years ago is outdated. Solar has dropped roughly half it's cost every decade for the past two decades. This means you can have twice as much as you need for the same price. Lithium battery costs are 1/7th the price they were 10 years ago per kwh. Will we still need fossil fuels? Yes, absolutely! But the scale of fossil fuel usage will drop like a rock until it's a quaint product of a bygone age used in arctic regions only. Fossil fuels are already feeling the crunch. Coal is the first victim. Natural gas will go down as well. Mostly because they are too expensive and there are better alternatives. I can see nuclear becoming cheap enough to replace a lot of existing steam generators in colder, darker, regions like northern Europe. But even then, geothermal is starting to sneak back as a viable technology. I really look forward to seeing where this all goes, but it's not looking good for petroleum based fuels.