3 ms·
We save in stability: p.v. and co vary it's output far quicker than classic big power plant, this means that on grid we have more and more frequency stability i
by kkfx 2y ago
We save in stability: p.v. and co vary it's output far quicker than classic big power plant, this means that on grid we have more and more frequency stability issues. To compensate we need a smart grid witch is an IT nightmare and in any case it's not there.
At home, in self consumption, we are in a small smart-grid. So we can do our best to shift loads on p.v. using the grid let's say "for the base load", as a result individually we spend less and have (in case of batteries) backups, at grid scale peak demand is less intense and happen less.
That's the "issue" with p.v.: utilities do not want semi-autonomous homes, they do want to own, leaving others with nothing but subscriptions, paid services, this is incompatible with current state of tech while the current state of tech is perfectly compatible with small scale self-consumption.
Now try to imaging a hypothetical society where people living in reasonably sunny part of earth have p.v. and batteries. On scale it's probably not doable today, but we can definitively start. We still need a grid or some other backup, but we do not need an UPGRADED grid in capacity terms because most of the loads, the biggest one at least, happen locally. Surely without seasonal storage being autonomous it's a myth, but technically we can pass most day-to-day needs in largest slice of the Earth who happen to be the most inhabited as well. This means we can converge to electricity as main energy without consuming much more than today from the grid.