4 ms·
It definitely won't be more resilient, that's silly. In no way will a weather based energy system be more resilient than one based on dispatchable energy source
by evilos 3y ago
It definitely won't be more resilient, that's silly. In no way will a weather based energy system be more resilient than one based on dispatchable energy sources. The best you can hope for is it to be only slightly less reliable. You can never be completely sure you've built enough storage in a certain area since you're relying on historical/statistical phenomenon like weather. And since you'll need a lot more transmission lines to move the energy from your turbines and panels to where people actually live, you're more exposed to failures along those corridors.
- bottlepalm 3y agoLike I said, over a large enough area and with storage, it averages out. The wind will blow, and the shine. More transmission lines allow routing around failure points. Also the 'cloudy day disaster of 2034' sounds a lot better than the 'spent fuel pool disaster of 2034' https://www.science.org/content/article/spent-fuel-fire-us-soil-could-dwarf-impact-fukushima https://www.science.org/content/article/spent-fuel-fire-us-s...
- evilos 3y ago> Like I said, over a large enough area and with storage, it averages out Maybe, it's literally impossible to say. That's terrible design for something as critical as the national grid. People die when the power goes out.
- bottlepalm 3y agoLiterally impossible to look at historical data over an area and calculate the size of system needed for reliable power as well as the amount of storage needed as well? Utilities do that everyday. You should be careful saying something is ‘impossible’, more like you don’t understand.. that’s ok.
- evilos 3y agoPast data does not predict the future, especially since we're expecting changes to the climate remember? Even if you're right "most" of the time, even a tenth of a percent system failure is terrible for something like the grid.
- bottlepalm 3y agoGet a battery for that tenth, or get two. It’s called a safety margin. In engineering it’s not difficult to design for.
- evilos 3y agoI don't think you've grasped the sheer amount of energy storage that is necessary.
- bottlepalm 3y agoCalifornia already has 2% of it's 600 GWh per day consumption covered by batteries soooo around a 1.6 order of magnitude increase to get to 100%. Not that it's even necessary, just an example. Battery production at scale is just beginning right now anyways.