Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Renewable Energy  (Read 819730 times)

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2952
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 648
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3150 on: September 17, 2018, 09:22:17 PM »
Sadly, you are right. There is not golden solution yet.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3151 on: September 17, 2018, 09:37:03 PM »
There is literally no chance of these things happening. Why don't we just pay for carbon sequestration, and charge for carbon emissions?!? It's really not that complicated.
I never heard of a well working carbon sequestration project. There isn't even a topic about it in this forum. Carbon capture is not so easy, but to store it somehow for a long time without using too much energy - EROEI or energy return on energy investment is also important...

Carbon negative farming is real and with a fair price it would be highly profitable.
big time oops

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3152 on: September 17, 2018, 09:40:02 PM »
We need not know how to do it. We just need to understand markets and understand that if the price is right, the market will take care of it. Nobody came up with a master plan to get the atmospheric CO2 above 400 ppm. There were simply substances that were useful to burn and no price on the pollution. The market took care of the rest. Same thing can happen but in reverse.
big time oops

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2952
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 648
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3153 on: September 17, 2018, 10:00:34 PM »
We can certainly agree that a carbon tax is needed. However it is implemented it must be implemented now and globally.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8065
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2796
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3154 on: September 17, 2018, 10:16:50 PM »
Please give me an example of that radical thinking that will save us.

Every single human being must distinguish their wants from their needs and then collectively act
"From everyone according to their ability, to everyone according to their needs".

Sound familiar, anyone?
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3155 on: September 17, 2018, 10:18:15 PM »
We can certainly agree that a carbon tax is needed. However it is implemented it must be implemented now and globally.

Globally? Like how? I think that the only real option is for countries to do it independently and then put steep tariffs on countries who don't have a sufficient carbon tax.

Also, payment for sequestration is at least as important, otherwise we will continue to go in the wrong direction, even if less quickly.
big time oops

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1699
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 357
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3156 on: September 17, 2018, 10:34:35 PM »
GSY,  "Carbon negative farming is real and with a fair price it would be highly profitable."
 Yes you can use compost to sink some carbon but that compost comes with it's own carbon costs of transport and whatever fertilizer, water, and fossil fuels were used to produce it. Compost also requires animal manures to achieve a proper carbon nitrogen mix to promote the proper balance of
 bacteria that  do the work.
  A return to best practices that incorporated composts and manures of pre 1850 farming practices would over a very long period rebuild degraded soils but I have serious doubts that we would ever achieve soil carbon levels that pre-dated current industrial agriculture.
  The vegans would have us give up farm animals , beasts of burden and all the parts of agriculture that formerly yielded healthy soils.  So unless someone can show me some serious documentation of carbon farming sinking billions of tons of carbon I have reservations about carbon farming as a solution for current human densities. Someone please show me a self sustaining farm run without animals or manure that produces food, income and healthy soils.
  A crash is coming and some farmers will get through the bottleneck. Hopefully those farmers will be happy with their station in life. The city lights won't burn so brightly or draw the farmers off the land when the fossil fuels are finally spent.
 

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2952
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 648
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3157 on: September 17, 2018, 11:52:39 PM »
Quote
I think that the only real option is for countries to do it independently and then put steep tariffs on countries who don't have a sufficient carbon tax.

That is the way that seems most correct.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3370
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 607
  • Likes Given: 275
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3158 on: September 17, 2018, 11:55:14 PM »
I cannot touch Bruce's experience or knowledge, but a friend is composting wood chips (from utility company's clearing of trees growing in right-of-way) and microbrewery yeasty hops waste (internet search example).  He turns it with a (gas using) tractor, but his solar panels produce more electricity then his house uses (over the course of a year). Okay, some vegans won't drink beer...

Some neighbors use worms to compost household waste, but I don't know how applicable it is for 'industrial' scale, but a curious person may start here (internet search example).
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3159 on: September 18, 2018, 12:27:29 AM »
Quote
I think that the only real option is for countries to do it independently and then put steep tariffs on countries who don't have a sufficient carbon tax.

That is the way that seems most correct.

I'm really uncomfortable with us agreeing on things. It's making me start to question myself.  ;)
big time oops

jacksmith4tx

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 266
    • View Profile
    • Photon mine
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3160 on: September 18, 2018, 02:35:14 AM »
Cross posted from a comment on the The 2018 melting season thread.

SunEarthTools.com
https://www.sunearthtools.com/index.php

Although aimed at solar energy production (and some other environmental issues) I found it useful for a number of other things solar energy related.
Science is a thought process, technology will change reality.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5436
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 667
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3161 on: September 18, 2018, 05:34:02 AM »
Re: compost

blast from the past: 1981

https://electricitybook.com/composting-for-heat/

sidd

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3162 on: September 18, 2018, 07:57:54 AM »
Just trying to make the comments cartoons quotes Sleepy posted above a bit more reader friendly:
snip
No offense here, Lurk. That part was a follow up to Archimid's post #3172, where he was quoting Jason Hickel while giving me the impresson of never reading the full article, so I re-inserted your link in a more reader friendly style without popups and the page layout. Now when you have edited your orignial post #3167 his comments are totally not understandable to anyone who haven't read the entire article. Ok?

Maybe I should have quoted the last two paragraphs from that excellent article you posted as well. So here they come:
Quote
But there’s no escaping the obvious conclusion. Ultimately, bringing our civilization back within planetary boundaries is going to require that we liberate ourselves from our dependence on economic growth—starting with rich nations. This might sound scarier than it really is. Ending growth doesn’t mean shutting down economic activity—it simply means that next year we can’t produce and consume more than we are doing this year. It might also mean shrinking certain sectors that are particularly damaging to our ecology and that are unnecessary for human flourishing, such as advertising, commuting, and single-use products.

But ending growth doesn’t mean that living standards need to take a hit. Our planet provides more than enough for all of us; the problem is that its resources are not equally distributed. We can improve people’s lives right now simply by sharing what we already have more fairly, rather than plundering the Earth for more. Maybe this means better public services. Maybe it means basic income. Maybe it means a shorter working week that allows us to scale down production while still delivering full employment. Policies such as these—and countless others—will be crucial to not only surviving the 21st century but also flourishing in it.

OT and out.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2952
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 648
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3163 on: September 18, 2018, 12:43:07 PM »
I read the article. The author does not fully comprehend the definition of economic growth nor he proposes a realistic way forward. The author is the passenger on the back of the boat of the cartoon you posted.

People that generate solutions independent of government are not on the boat because they are swimming to safety.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8065
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2796
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3164 on: September 18, 2018, 01:23:12 PM »
Please give me an example of that radical thinking that will save us.

Every single human being must distinguish their wants from their needs and then collectively act
"From everyone according to their ability, to everyone according to their needs".

Sound familiar, anyone?

Yes. But what you quoted / said is totally different from what SH said.

So what's your point? -- except to (unconsciously?) completely distort and reframe it out of it's original context what he actually said and was speaking to and for into something he didn't.

Logical fallacies never look good and never help anyone. (well, except for propaganda agents, political spin masters and the .......... )

"Logical fallacies never look good and never help anyone. (well, except for propaganda agents, political spin masters and the .......... ) "

Yes, exactly my point. Any suggestion that there should be a degree of fairness in the way humanity conducts itself on this planet (let alone sustainability) is met with cries of "Socialist, Commie".

We live in a world where political discourse is limited to the maximum characters allowed in a tweet. Shared Humanity in one sentence invokes the prospect of a system of sharing limited resources that would require Governments to enforce it, invokes need vs want, and used the adverb of the word "collective". Shrieks of horror from the Social Darwinists who currently run our world.

The faster renewable energy (and EVs and all the other stuff) is installed the better. If scumbag bloated capitalists have to be cajoled and caressed into coughing up the loot to do it, so be it. Until the revolution comes, they've got the gelt.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3165 on: September 19, 2018, 06:41:44 AM »
I read the article. The author does not fully comprehend the definition of economic growth nor he proposes a realistic way forward. The author is the passenger on the back of the boat of the cartoon you posted.

One reason for posting the links and the cartoon in #3171, was in fact the article that Lurk posted with Jason Hickel.

Because he's one of those 238 fanatics who does not fully comprehend the definition of economic growth nor proposes a realistic way forward who signed the article I posted. Here's the rest of them:

Edit; snipping out that list.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2018, 07:55:13 AM by Sleepy »
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5173
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1413
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3166 on: September 19, 2018, 06:50:52 AM »
J H C.

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3167 on: September 19, 2018, 06:58:27 AM »
No, he's not taking part in todays livestream from that conference.
Session is planned to start at 09:30:
https://www.postgrowth2018.eu/livestream/
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2952
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 648
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3168 on: September 20, 2018, 02:17:25 AM »
I understand their intentions and they are right. I support them 100% in their fight and admire their willingness to exert the change we need. Like they say, if you are not helping, get out of the way. I just got in the way. My apologies.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3169 on: September 20, 2018, 08:11:40 AM »
OT but since I posted it above; anyone followed the livestream yesterday? Was busy yesterday and will be today as well. Will try to watch some of it later but it's well over eight hours.  :P
Petition if someone is interested:
https://you.wemove.eu/campaigns/europe-it-s-time-to-end-the-growth-dependency

There are surely better threads for this but since this is also related and I do think a holistic approach is important while discussing any individual solution, I'll also add the following snippet below, it's from the Swiss ECS yesterday with one of the participants, Anders Wijkman.
The root cause is the way we organized the economy. We don't distinguish between quality and quantity. Everything that is production, is looked upon as good. But of course this is a ridicoulous concept today.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17299
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 792
  • Likes Given: 289
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3170 on: September 23, 2018, 02:55:35 AM »
Solar Energy Largely Unscathed by Hurricane Florence’s Wind and Rain
In North Carolina, the #2 solar state, Florence was the first extreme weather test for much of its renewable energy
Quote
Faced with Hurricane Florence's powerful winds and record rainfall, North Carolina's solar farms held up with only minimal damage while other parts of the electricity system failed, an outcome that solar advocates hope will help to steer the broader energy debate.

North Carolina has more solar power than any state other than California, much of it built in the two years since Hurricane Matthew hit the region. Before last week, the state hadn't seen how its growing solar developments—providing about 4.6 percent of the state's electricity—would fare in the face of a hurricane. ...
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/20092018/hurricane-florence-solar-panel-energy-resilience-extreme-weather-damage-wind-flooding

(Cross-posted from Huricane Season 2018 thread.)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3171 on: September 24, 2018, 08:26:50 PM »
This will happen once GenIV Safe Modular Nukes become the norm (for extremely cheap Hydrogen production) and reality eventually sinks in regarding the upper limits of wind/solar generation and Mass Scale battery cost/capacity limits long term, in both vehicles and Grid stabilization and supply capacity needs. Assuming the world doesn't crash into dysfunction first.

I'm not sure about that.  They may just choose to use the power for the most part.  Although the portable nature of Hydrogen is very useful where fixed infrastructure cannot easily go.

Time will tell but the rate that GenIII reactors are getting there means I probably won't live to see it.

I am, though, extremely interested in NASA Kilopower and the use of Sterling engines...
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5436
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 667
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3172 on: September 29, 2018, 06:05:37 AM »
Birol at IEA has projections of energy use: wind to lead in EU by 2030. He has an interesting diagram of renewable absorption by various countries. Europe is ahead of the pack.

Check it out:

https://www.iea.org/media/presentations/180925_Wind_Europe.pdf

sidd

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2952
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 648
  • Likes Given: 194
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3173 on: September 29, 2018, 02:54:59 PM »
$3 billion Hoover Dam project hopes to bring power plant into 21st century

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hoover-dam-3-billion-plan-power-plant-energy-storage-system/

Quote
The dam was built to tame the Colorado River after devastating floods. Now the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is looking to turn it into a giant energy storage system, similar to the job a battery performs.

"In fact it's one of the simplest technologies: pump water up hill when there's too much energy and let it run down hill when there's not enough energy," said David Wright, general manager of the Department of Water and Power. They have already implemented the plan that works on a much smaller scale in Castaic, California.

"This isn't something we're looking at lightly. This is something that has been thought about and now it's, let's look at the engineering, let's look at the feasibility," Wright said.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 905
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3174 on: September 29, 2018, 06:34:57 PM »
$3 billion Hoover Dam project hopes to bring power plant into 21st century

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hoover-dam-3-billion-plan-power-plant-energy-storage-system/

Quote
The dam was built to tame the Colorado River after devastating floods. Now the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is looking to turn it into a giant energy storage system, similar to the job a battery performs.

"In fact it's one of the simplest technologies: pump water up hill when there's too much energy and let it run down hill when there's not enough energy," said David Wright, general manager of the Department of Water and Power. They have already implemented the plan that works on a much smaller scale in Castaic, California.

"This isn't something we're looking at lightly. This is something that has been thought about and now it's, let's look at the engineering, let's look at the feasibility," Wright said.
Let's look at the evaporation at desert temperatures and humidity!


Expending energy to pump water up a hill, then watching lake levels drop, not because you're generating electricity but because the hot dry air soaks up water like an atmospheric sponge isn't a responsible use of energy.
 
Hoover Dam no longer produces base power. It's been run only as a peak power generator for some years.


Looking forward I'd expect the region to become hotter, drier, and even less suitable for this type of project.
I kept a boat on Lake Mead for years. The dock where she berthed is ~10 miles from the nearest puddle now.


Hoover Dam was a tremendous site for hydro-electric power generation, but drought, silt, and a ridiculous evaporation rate have brought that to an end. A few decades as a peak power provider and it's all over.
Terry

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17299
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 792
  • Likes Given: 289
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3175 on: September 30, 2018, 09:08:13 PM »
Cleveland, Ohio, wants to get to 100 percent clean power by 2050 — an ambitious goal for the industrial city where Standard Oil was incorporated in 1870. Atlanta wants to meet its target even sooner, by 2035:

Atlanta Charts a Path to 100 Percent Renewable Electricity
Quote
The plan says its goals could indeed be achieved [by 2025], but largely through purchasing renewable energy credits outside of the Georgia Power service area. Instead, it suggested taking longer and doing the harder and more locally beneficial work of improving energy efficiency in Atlanta and growing renewable electricity generation closer to home. ...
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/25062018/atlanta-city-council-renewable-energy-100-percent-clean-power-climate-change
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3176 on: September 30, 2018, 09:54:31 PM »
Hoover Dam was a tremendous site for hydro-electric power generation, but drought, silt, and a ridiculous evaporation rate have brought that to an end. A few decades as a peak power provider and it's all over.
Terry

Mead and Powell are effectively one giant reservoir which Hoover dam relies on. Recently Powell has been drained to keep Mead high enough to prevent mandatory water restrictions. (Tomorrow (Oct 1) is the day that determines if restrictions are put into place.) If you take both lakes together, the water in at its lowest since they were originally filled. As the level at Mead drops, so does the amount of electricity capable of being generated. Originally the damn could not generate any power if the water level was below 1050, but a redesign improved that number to around 950.

http://powell.uslakes.info/Level/

http://mead.uslakes.info/Level/
big time oops

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3177 on: September 30, 2018, 10:02:26 PM »
Atlanta wants to meet its target even sooner, by 2035:

Atlanta Charts a Path to 100 Percent Renewable Electricity

Atlanta is the least well set up city to go green. The sprawl is ridiculous. And the plan basically is a joke: Buy some wind farms and large scale solar in other places for electrical needs totally unrelated to Atlanta, and retrofit buildings to make them for insulated and add some rooftop solar. Below is the actual plan. (warning: you will get dumber if you read it)

http://www.100atl.com/   (click, VIEW A DRAFT)
big time oops

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 905
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3178 on: October 01, 2018, 12:19:23 AM »
GSY
Surely you aren't implying that the good politicians of Atlanta (and Cleveland) would make promises that they have no intention of following through on?
Where would we be if we couldn't count on our elected leaders to act ethically and honestly?
Terry

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3179 on: October 01, 2018, 04:11:09 AM »
Oh of course not Terry. I take great care to never offend anyone ;)

One more thing about Hoover dam. The water stored up-river is at an all time low, but it is going to get quite a bit worse. For starters, Lake Mead is going to be 3 feet too high tomorrow to force water restrictions. Worst of all though, the last 90 days have seen really poor rainfall in the upper co river's watershed. I've attached an image from NOAA (it's only a week old) and I have outlined the area at issue. Lake Powell is going to go very low, so outflows will be limited, and thus water restrictions are very likely to be triggered Oct 1, 2019.
big time oops

miel282002

  • New ice
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3180 on: October 05, 2018, 07:09:10 PM »
The Spanish government repeals the 'sun tax' and recognizes the right to self-consumption without tolls.
http://www.elmundo.es/economia/macroeconomia/2018/10/05/5bb752d846163f601a8b45b3.html


NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3181 on: October 06, 2018, 01:18:10 PM »
On top of everything GSY has said, what do you do with the water during heavy stormy conditions, when the river is in spate and wind turbines are going flat out, but nobody needs that much power?

These are all great ideas, but there is a scale here.  If you want to store even one day of power for the USA, you're going to have to dam every river in the country and flood hundreds of millions of square miles into lakes.

It's not feasible. There will be some places where it can be done and locally it will make sense.  But as a total solution?  Not a chance.

More chance to put 2Mw/h of battery storage in every home in the country and use smart technology to do G2H and H2G depending on the renewable need at the time.  Of course you would have to renew that storage every couple of decades but, still, it is more feasible than trying to do pumped hydro.

For instance there are approximately 26m residential homes in the UK.  If we were to put 2Mw/h capacity in each home that is 52 Tw/h of capacity.  Or put another way, 1/28th of the total power generated in the UK in a year.

Great we say, let's go for it, no way we'd ever run out of capacity or power or need to burn any carbon ever again, we could charge our EV's wherever and whenever we wanted (assume commercial buildings have to do the same on the same scale) and electricity will be cheap as chips.

Erm, just one little problem.  at $100 per kw/h that's 10 quadrillion and 400 trillion dollars to deploy.  Even at $1 per Kw/h that it $100Trillion

Now let's do that figure for the US.....

Just to inject a little reality into the scale of things...

Nuclear decommissioning looking so expensive now??
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1309
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 237
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3182 on: October 06, 2018, 06:50:24 PM »
Solar Power Europe - 2018-2022 Global Market Outlook

Most realistic (medium) scenario is for 3.5% growth in installations in 2018, constrained by cuts in the level of Chinese solar subsidies.

Medium scenario assumes global demand to increase only 5% in 2019, then
- 17% to 125.2 GW in 2020,
- 12% to 140.4 GW in 2021
- 12% to 157.8 GW in 2022"

This would represent a very major deceleration from the previous growth rates of 30% per year.

Resulting in 1TW of cumulative global installed capacity at the end of 2022, approximately a doubling from 2017. That would put the solar share of global electricity at about 5%. Given the forecast growth in global electricity production of about 2% per year, this would be more than offset by growth (i.e. not reduce the level of fossil fuel usage, even when taking into account incremental additions of global wind energy).

The High scenario would have 232.6GW incremental installs in 2022, but this would be dependent on the "most promising emerging markets" being "able to change energy market design to the needs of flexible renewables, and electrification of transport and heat sector speeds up". Also, the 2018 forecast for the high scenario is already seen as being far too optimistic.

http://www.solarpowereurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Global-Market-Outlook-2018-2022.pdf

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 905
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3183 on: October 06, 2018, 07:35:01 PM »
Russia begins exporting solar panels to Europe.

https://www.rt.com/business/440499-russia-solar-panels-europe/

The Russkies are also building 6 Nuclear plants in India.

https://www.rt.com/business/440406-russia-india-npp-putin-energy/

Russian energy is ramping up everywhere, and some of it's carbon free!
Terry

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3184 on: October 06, 2018, 07:50:16 PM »
Yep but, unlike China, the EU does not levy 50% tariffs on Russian solar products...

Well they have to get them from somewhere, the German products are way to expensive for pervasive deployment.

I'll go and have a look at the cost of cells for building my own panels in a few months.  Bound to be some B grade cells kicking around with 95% capacity for a decent knock down in price.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

wehappyfew

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3185 on: October 07, 2018, 02:28:41 AM »
...
For instance there are approximately 26m residential homes in the UK.  If we were to put 2Mw/h capacity in each home that is 52 Tw/h of capacity.

...

Erm, just one little problem.  at $100 per kw/h that's 10 quadrillion and 400 trillion dollars to deploy.  Even at $1 per Kw/h that it $100Trillion

Now let's do that figure for the US.....

Just to inject a little reality into the scale of things...

Nuclear decommissioning looking so expensive now??

NeilT,

I have great respect for your contributions here and in other threads to inject some real calculations to help us grasp the scale of efforts required to wean our civilization from fossil fuels (or die trying, as we seem to be aiming for).

I hope to be able to return the favor and point out that your math seems to be off here.

52 trillion watt hours, 52 TWh, at $100/kWh (or $0.10/Wh) = $5.2 trillion, not $10.4 quadrillion.

Somehow, you are off by a factor of 2,000.  Not sure how, exactly, but British vs American usage of trillions may be part of it.

Another way to look at it - if every household had a car with a 100 kWh battery pack, plugged into the grid with Jim Hunt's bi-directional charging equipment, that would be a similar scale of investment in storage capacity. We already replace the auto fleet every decade or two, so we should expect BEV to start taking up some of the storage duties at no additional cost as they replace FF ICEs.

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3186 on: October 07, 2018, 10:41:45 PM »
You're right.  I probably missed a division somewhere.

So, to be able to absorb 1/28th of the UK annual power generation, would cost $5.2 trillion at $100 per kw/h.  The reason I put this extreme scenario in is that we are talking about solutions to be able to back up and hold renewable energy for an entire country so that we never have to dump any.

But let me adjust those figures a touch.

If we assume we don't want to use more than 50% of the installed capacity (if we can avoid it), let us look at the scenario where we need to support the grid for 5 days due to virtually 0 wind and very cloudy weather which brings solar down significantly.

1/73rd of the year is 5 days and 1/73rd of the UK 336 TWH annual power generation is roughly 4.6TWH.  If we only want to use 50% then we need around 9.2TWH of reserve capacity.  This gives a margin and maximises battery usage.  So, only 350kw/h of battery capacity required now, not my 2mw/h

So, after deploying solar and offshore wind at the nameplate power cost, per kw/h, equivalent to Nuclear, we only need to deploy a further $910 billion in battery power to ensure we can survive a 5 day renewable drought.  Or we could just use 151 million 50% depleted 120kw/h Tesla car batteries.

Much nicer numbers but still totally outside of any form of reality for moving the grid totally to renewable.

Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5173
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1413
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3187 on: October 07, 2018, 11:26:31 PM »
Quote
Much nicer numbers but still totally outside of any form of reality for moving the grid totally to renewable.
Add that there is some pumped-up hydro storage, some plain hydro that can produce during the "drought", and even some nuclear; that even during a 5-day "drought" there is some non-zero production of wind, especially offshore but also onshore; that each household may have on average some 100 kWh in an EV/EVs anyway; that sizing for a relatively rare scenario does not require the 50% discharge limit; and the solution becomes much more manageable.
Keep backup natgas plants as an "emergency generator", and you remove a lot of the extremely rare cases, at a cost of relatively little actual CO2 emission.

wehappyfew

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3188 on: October 08, 2018, 02:02:13 AM »
The goal should be reversing the increase in the CO2 level, turning it into a decrease.

Will eliminating 50% of fossil fuels be enough to halt the increase? (since natural sinks currently absorb half of emissions)... I'm not sure, I think it won't quite be enough, as the natural sinks will slow down once emissions do.

Do we need to eliminate 100% of FF emissions in order to see a decline in atmospheric CO2? No... Some amount of reduction between 50 and 100% should do it.

If we can still afford a bit of FF emissions for the darkest cloudiest winter days with little wind, then very little battery backup is required.

There's no need to wring our hands over the last few percent of FF emissions, especially since won't get there for many years. Technology will advance in the meantime, so let's allow the next generation of renewable energy engineers to figure that out.

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2678
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 149
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3189 on: October 08, 2018, 03:08:34 AM »

Will eliminating 50% of fossil fuels be enough to halt the increase? (since natural sinks currently absorb half of emissions)... I'm not sure, I think it won't quite be enough,...

Sorry to disappoint, but ...

It is much closer to cut our emissions by 50% and natural sinks will reduce to absorbing just half of that. But cut our emissions by 80% and that will give us quite a bit more time.

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3190 on: October 08, 2018, 03:44:43 AM »
Quote
Much nicer numbers but still totally outside of any form of reality for moving the grid totally to renewable.
Add that there is some pumped-up hydro storage, some plain hydro that can produce during the "drought", and even some nuclear; that even during a 5-day "drought" there is some non-zero production of wind, especially offshore but also onshore; that each household may have on average some 100 kWh in an EV/EVs anyway; that sizing for a relatively rare scenario does not require the 50% discharge limit; and the solution becomes much more manageable.
Keep backup natgas plants as an "emergency generator", and you remove a lot of the extremely rare cases, at a cost of relatively little actual CO2 emission.

All true except for one small thing.  On the cycling of Li batteries, the very best scenario is to use between 65% and 75%.  In other words 10% of the power.  Try and use 80% of the power and you'll be replacing them every decade and a half.

What I'm trying to do with these numbers is inject a portion of reality into the discussion.  We're not going totally renewable until we have storage which can handle the oversupply on a daily basis for up to half the year.  With current technology that's a bust.

So we need to focus on Zero Carbon, not specifically on renewables.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3191 on: October 08, 2018, 03:49:11 AM »
Sorry to disappoint, but ...

It is much closer to cut our emissions by 50% and natural sinks will reduce to absorbing just half of that. But cut our emissions by 80% and that will give us quite a bit more time.

Too true, the sinks already absorb 50% of what we produce.  Reduction to 50% does nothing to reduce, it only maintains the status quo.  If we only reach status quo in 2040, at the current rate of growth, we'll bet at around 450ppm, 100ppm over the supposedly "sustainable" increase of 350ppm.

We don't have the luxury of burning carbon fuels for power because we wanted to be purists about renewables.  Well I probably do, but my Grandchildren don't.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3370
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 607
  • Likes Given: 275
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3192 on: October 08, 2018, 04:13:59 AM »
When we arrive at functional zero FF use for electricity generation (in places not wholly dependent on hydro), on a daily basis there will be times (days) that produce and times (nights) that don't - batteries are one excellent tool for handling this gap. Other gaps (grey days during a drought with little wind) may last longer.  I wonder if storage would be a problem if we 'banked energy' in the form of H2 gas.  Are there better ways to use 'waste' electricity that are more efficient and safer to store, but can readily be put into service ('turned back into electricity') when needed?  Somewhere I recently read a tiny bit about some 'exotic' thermal batteries that might have a role. 
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17299
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 792
  • Likes Given: 289
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3193 on: October 08, 2018, 01:57:11 PM »
...
All true except for one small thing.  On the cycling of Li batteries, the very best scenario is to use between 65% and 75%.  In other words 10% of the power.  Try and use 80% of the power and you'll be replacing them every decade and a half.
...

We are certainly not at the stage where “babying” batteries is a top consideration.  Of course we’ll use 80% of the charge — and when needed, even more.  In 15 years, battery tech will look much different than today: much cheaper, better performance.  Replacement/repurposing will be a viable option.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5173
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1413
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3194 on: October 08, 2018, 03:21:09 PM »
Also don't forget the full depth of these batteries will only be used on rare occasions, once or twice a year during the worst wind+solar "droughts". So they could last a long time.

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3195 on: October 09, 2018, 12:43:17 AM »
In my experience betting your continued power availability on the chance that batteries won't degrade is not that sensible.  Especially at a price that could flood the country with virtually always on Nuclear power.  Current Nuclear reactors have a designed life time of 60 years.  Li Batteries have a fully cycle capacity of a MAX 1,500 full cycles and a min capacity of 500 cycles.

The smaller you make the batteries the more you cycle them.  I keep hearing 100kw/h, which means the batteries will cycle ever more rapidly. Think Leaf over Tesla.

This is no longer conjecture.  We know that the smaller the battery, for the given task, the faster it will start to fail.

Switching to renewables is not something which gets a do over if we get it wrong.  You think the Green manic move to remove Nuclear in the wake of Fukushima was bad.  Consider the move to FF from renewables as the grids start to fail on a predictable basis.

It is not something we can afford to make a mess of.  So lets do it right.  CO2 free power first, renewable power after.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 211
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3196 on: October 09, 2018, 01:50:47 AM »
In my experience betting your continued power availability on the chance that batteries won't degrade is not that sensible.  Especially at a price that could flood the country with virtually always on Nuclear power.  Current Nuclear reactors have a designed life time of 60 years.  Li Batteries have a fully cycle capacity of a MAX 1,500 full cycles and a min capacity of 500 cycles.

The smaller you make the batteries the more you cycle them.  I keep hearing 100kw/h, which means the batteries will cycle ever more rapidly. Think Leaf over Tesla.

This is no longer conjecture.  We know that the smaller the battery, for the given task, the faster it will start to fail.

Switching to renewables is not something which gets a do over if we get it wrong.  You think the Green manic move to remove Nuclear in the wake of Fukushima was bad.  Consider the move to FF from renewables as the grids start to fail on a predictable basis.

It is not something we can afford to make a mess of.  So lets do it right.  CO2 free power first, renewable power after.

Shut in wells , if re opened do not produce at the same rates as before. If we are not careful with energy management we are in for a rude awakening.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 905
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3197 on: October 09, 2018, 02:08:54 AM »
I fear we're going to be rudely awakened whether we're careful or not. :-X


We need the cooperation of the world to fight climate change, and instead seem bent on making enemies.
Terry

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1302
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 94
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3198 on: October 10, 2018, 05:59:49 PM »
I think the evidence points to failure of the natural carbon sinks. Complex ecosystems typically can store the most carbon. As climate changes ecosystems break down and release carbon instead of soaking a little extra up. As the arctic continues its rapid change the weather patterns throughout the world will drastically change and ecosystems will dramatically fail and be replaced by something simpler and less carbon dense.

We need to go significantly carbon negative and resilient, cuz the problem of abnormal atmospheric concentrations of GHGs won't be solved in a single generation, and weather will get worse for decades to come regardless of short term emissions/sequestration.
big time oops

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17299
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 792
  • Likes Given: 289
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3199 on: October 10, 2018, 09:55:50 PM »
Pairing Wind + Solar for Cheaper, 24-Hour Renewable Energy
A unique power project in Ohio will take advantage of solar's midday burst of energy and wind's all-day power to provide more consistent clean energy to the grid.
Quote
Along a country road east of Lima, Ohio, a company is preparing to build one of the world's largest renewable energy projects that pairs wind and solar to create a hybrid power source. It's a rare combination now, but one that's expected to become more common because of its potential to cut costs while providing a more consistent flow of clean energy.

Invenergy is starting with a 175 megawatt wind farm. Within the wind farm, it plans to build a 150 megawatt solar farm. Together, they would produce enough electricity for about 75,000 homes.

The wind and solar energy complement each other. They hit their peaks at different times of day and night, allowing them to provide a steadier output together than if each was alone. And they save money because they can share equipment, power lines and workers. ...
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/04102018/wind-solar-24-hour-renewable-energy-reliability-lower-cost-power-plant
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.