Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Renewable Energy  (Read 710537 times)

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5134
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 352
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3850 on: August 15, 2019, 10:41:22 PM »
gerontocrat
I think doubling the grid, even if we weren't concerned with CH2, would be a much larger project than building what we have now.  We've plucked all of the low hanging fruit.
There isn't a second Niagara Falls - and if there was we'd have already utilized it.
Same with all of the best wind and solar sites.


On This continent we can do anything - they've been drilling that into our heads since kindergarten. It makes for extreme cognitive dissonance when we're suddenly faced with something that we really can't build or solve.


Most will just keep marching straight ahead - nothing can resist our will!
Some will break ranks and point out the abyss that they're marching into.


The buffalo probably shared similar thoughts as they were driven off the cliffs by the thousands. Driven not by the indians, but driven by the buffalo behind them who thought they were only the followers.


Best
Terry

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4405
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 843
  • Likes Given: 1265
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3851 on: August 16, 2019, 03:48:53 AM »
Honestly I have been reading the last few posts and scratching my head in amazement.
UK power outage blamed on renewables. Why? I see nothing that supports this claim.
Hornsea wind farm cut its grid connection to protect itself. Why? Bad design of the interconnection? I fail to see what its being a wind farm, rather than a nuclear reactor for example, has to do with cutting the grid interconnect during a power demand surge due to the failure of a gas-fired plant.

Power failure blamed on surge in EVS. Why? What surge in EVs? Barely 2.5% of new sales.
The expert is warning of a potential problem by 2040. Is this now? Where are the warning bells exactly?

BTW, is the expert assuming a large growth in EV demand without adding commensurate power generation? 2040 is a long time away.

Nuclear is the solution for 2040. How exactly? The planning and commissioning time of a nuclear plant is extremely long, and fraught with risk of schedule overruns. Hinkley Point C plan was announced in 2008, and was supposed to go online in 2017, but is now expected between 2025 and 2027. So 16 years. Start now, get the power by 2035, with no further surprises. And if EVs surge in the meantime? Blackouts? Why take this risk AND pay 2 or 4 or 10 times the cost per MWh compared to the alternatives?

Why is the solution not added solar and wind, with some gas backup, and battery storage?
Would a grid battery not have solved the frequency issues plaguing the grid? And supplied the missing power and prevented the outage?
I simply fail to see how this outage supports nuclear rather than grid batteries.

Is the choice between "a few gas sipping cars" (37 million in the UK at last count) with E-Buses, or a chimney filled future comparable to Dickens? I fail to see why these are the choices.
Why are E-Buses paired with gas cars? What stops the future from having E-Buses along with "a few electricity-sipping EVs"?
Why the love of gas/diesel? Does the aversion for EVs has to do with dislike of Musk, as can be read between the lines? And if the EVs are all made by VW, and are not robotaxis, will that be okay? Why conflate robotaxis with grid buildout?
Of course E-Buses are better than individual private EVs/shared fleet EVs. But this is orthogonal to all else - grid buildout, nuclear vs. solar, and so on.
If the future holds gas cars, surely a better future holds EV cars with clean power generation, all other things being equal.

And why is it impossible to build out the grid in parallel to the rise in EVs? A solar farm can go online in two years. A grid battery can be installed in 3 months. An offshore wind farm can be planned and built in less than 5 years. A natural gas plant is also cheap and fast to build, cheaper than coal and faster than coal. And can be easily switched off when the wind is blowing and the sun is shining. What is stopping anybody from building enough capacity, on time and at an affordable cost?
In addition, thanks to their large batteries, EVs are a dispatchable load, and with proper control their demand can be shed away when power generation is low.

I fail to understand many things today. Very weird discussion. Maybe my chronic lack of sleep is to blame. Can anyone enlighten me with answers to the above rhetoric?

Human Habitat Index

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 155
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 79
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3852 on: August 16, 2019, 04:13:43 AM »
Turnbull ignored advice that renewable energy not to blame for SA blackouts
 
Coalition statements blaming the blackouts that hit South Australia last year on wind power were made despite official advice that storms were the cause

Freedom-of-information documents reveal a senior bureaucrat at the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet was so concerned about the spreading of misinformation in the immediate aftermath of last September’s SA storm that she emailed officials in the Departments of Environment and Agriculture asking for help.

“The initial event was the loss of four major transmission lines, caused by high wind conditions.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/feb/13/turnbull-ignored-advice-that-renewable-energy-not-to-blame-for-sa-blackouts

There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. That principle is contempt prior to investigation. - Herbert Spencer

KiwiGriff

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3853 on: August 16, 2019, 04:31:39 AM »
Can not help you.
All I get  is.
"You are ignoring this user. "
 :)
I do agree with your build solar, wind and storage and develop a smart grid capable demand load shedding during peaks such as curtailing electric car charging as a solution.
The Au experiment with home solar connected  to battery's as a virtual power plant is also a solution.
https://virtualpowerplant.sa.gov.au/virtual-power-plant
They are trialing a virtual power plant  here as well.
Kiwi virtual power plant planned via home solar and battery systems
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12169649
Also interesting  is vehicle-to-grid
Quote
The  vehicle-to-grid(V2G) concept aims to optimise the way we transport, use and produce electricity by turning electric cars into ‘virtual power plants’. Under this relatively new concept, electric cars would store and dispatch electrical energy stored in networked vehicle batteries which together act as one collective battery fleet for ‘peak shaving’ (sending power back to the grid when demand is high) and ‘valley filling’ (charging at night when demand is low) [13].

V2G would allow consumers to charge electric vehicles and monitor their energy costs, using mobile devices. This information helps utilities to better manage grid loads during peak times. Pilot projects include applications for smartphones and a black box with cellular data modem collecting information on the car’s state of charge, the vehicle location and the type of power source it is connected to [15]. Collected data is sent to the cloud where computers calculate, depending on the grid load, the optimal time to recharge [3].
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/vehicle-to-grid

BenB

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3854 on: August 16, 2019, 10:46:46 AM »
Oren, I would be as baffled as you, except I know that some people aren't really looking at what happened, and trying to understand it, or for that matter at the actual figures for electricity demand from EVs. They have an angle, and they see this as a good excuse to push it. In addition to your valid points, I will add two things:

  • Wind generation was high at the time of blackout, and demand was low. There was a huge amount of slack in the system, but for whatever reason it wasn't possible to deploy it quickly enough. Possibly National Grid had cut corners on frequency response and spinning reserve to save money, possibly some freak event occurred.
  • Frequency was restored within about 15 minutes, and it took less than a couple of hours for the DNOs to restore all demand. The high level of disruption was mainly due to the impact on the railways. This kind of short interruption to the electricity supply to some customers happens all over the world from time to time, both in places with no renewables and in places with high levels of renewable penetration.

interstitial

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 159
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 56
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3855 on: August 16, 2019, 12:30:46 PM »
Terry that did not make sense. In the US transportation uses about the same amount of energy as electric generation. Due to the inefficiencies of the combustion engine electric would only need about a 20-30% increase of electrical supply. If all that new demand was filled with natural gas that would still lead to a massive reduction in CO2 emissions. A new co-generation natural gas plant is over 70% efficient. Even if all vehicles sold from this day forward were electric it is still going to take over 20 years to replace all those vehicles. The average age of autos in the US is 15 years. You have yet to come up with any reason not to get an EV.


Frankly I think you just like to argue about stuff.[size=78%] [/size]

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5134
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 352
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3856 on: August 16, 2019, 12:34:31 PM »
I've a medical appointment today & I'll try to give my responses when I've been cured - or at least when I return from my tribulations. :P


I'll leave you with the thought that my questioning of the rapid growth of EVs is what lead me to my distaste for Tesla then for Musk. It's not my hatred of Musk that lead me to question EVs, but my questioning of EVs that lead indirectly to questions about Musk's motivations.


Terry

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5134
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 352
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3857 on: August 16, 2019, 12:37:08 PM »
Terry that did not make sense. In the US transportation uses about the same amount of energy as electric generation. Due to the inefficiencies of the combustion engine electric would only need about a 20-30% increase of electrical supply. If all that new demand was filled with natural gas that would still lead to a massive reduction in CO2 emissions. A new co-generation natural gas plant is over 70% efficient. Even if all vehicles sold from this day forward were electric it is still going to take over 20 years to replace all those vehicles. The average age of autos in the US is 15 years. You have yet to come up with any reason not to get an EV.


Frankly I think you just like to argue about stuff.
Moi?
Terry

BenB

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3858 on: August 16, 2019, 01:23:51 PM »
Terry, I quite agree it's reasonable to ask questions about Musk's motivations, but EVs had absolutely zero to do with the recent blackout in the UK. That was related to two generators, one gas-fired and one wind-powered, being disconnected from the grid in quick succession, and the back-up systems not managing to respond quickly enough to restore frequency, resulting in "load shedding" - i.e. disconnecting a relatively limited number of customers. But demand was relatively low at the time, and wind generation (even after Hornsea disconnected) was relatively high for the time of the year. So it was some kind of technical failure in the systems of the National Grid and/or Distribution Network Operators (DNOs), the nature of which will no doubt become clearer in due course. But it wasn't due to EVs, and it wasn't because the people who run the grid in the UK believe that wind power has a load factor of 90%.

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2977
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 307
  • Likes Given: 166
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3859 on: August 16, 2019, 04:05:50 PM »
Quote
The average age of autos in the US is 15 years. You have yet to come up with any reason not to get an EV.
I wondered so did an internet search and found (links follow quotes):
Quote
The average age of light vehicles in the U.S. increased nearly two full years between 2007-17, increasing to 12.1 years. And, the dramatic change in the average age of vehicles has serious implications for U.S. aftermarket product volume over the next five years or so, Lang feels.
[April 2018]
and
Quote
This time series represents the projected average age of vehicles in the United States from 2017 through 2019. By 2019, the average age of vehicles is expected to be around 11.8 years old. Approximately 15 percent of vehicles in 2019 are expected to be 12 years or older.
[forecast from 2016]
and
Quote
The average age of light vehicles in operation (VIO) in the U.S. has risen again this year to 11.8 years, according to new research from business information provider IHS Markit (NASDAQ: INFO).
[June 2019]
So different sources give different ages, but "15" seems on the high side.  (Would that it was 15 years or more!  It is good news that average car age is increasing.)
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1116
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3860 on: August 16, 2019, 07:20:25 PM »
Most US consumers are maxed out, having utilized lower interest rates and extended loan terms (e.g. 6 year car loans) and keep their cars longer to maintain their lifestyles. They don't have the ability to finance any new car, let alone an EV. A little increase in the US unemployment numbers will scare a lot of people into keeping that old beater for longer. A recession will also dump oil prices to help them keep driving that ICE.

rboyd

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1116
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 39
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3861 on: August 16, 2019, 08:25:43 PM »
There's a Global Gust in the Offshore Wind Energy Market

Nice headline and details of more efficient offshore turbines, but the industry forecast embedded in the article is not very pleasant (also placed well below the happy headline). Net new wind installations worldwide:

2020 6.9GW
2022 10.4GW
2024 10.8GW
2026 16.2GW
2028 20.8GW
2030 21.3GW

A tripling in 10 years may look good, but it is from a very small base and will hardly make a dent in the growth in global electricity usage. We need multiples of this rate of growth.

https://www.enr.com/articles/47244-theres-a-global-gust-in-the-offshore-wind-energy-market

blumenkraft

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 974
  • Fans of Hans Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 456
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3862 on: August 16, 2019, 08:34:58 PM »
Terry, I quite agree it's reasonable to ask questions about Musk's motivations

Why, Ben?

I mean, there are thousands and thousands of CEOs out there who never get their motivations questioned, right? Why is it reasonable with him?
Refugees welcome

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3863 on: August 16, 2019, 08:57:42 PM »
There are very few CEOs whose name was associated with the company so tightly. Like Jobs in Apple. Or Gates in microsoft.. they all have been idolized by some and vilified by others and always questioned... their egocentrism and "I am smarter than you" personalities have led to that... Musk is Tesla as much as Jobs was Apple... both a little bit of assholes. 

blumenkraft

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 974
  • Fans of Hans Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 456
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3864 on: August 16, 2019, 09:38:41 PM »
Agreed! I get that dynamic, DrT.

But i'm also seeing the double standard inherently with the premise. And it is by no means 'reasonable' in my opinion. Whether a company will succeed is dependent on important things like the product, or the financing, etc. The character of the CEO isn't really weighty in this regard.
Refugees welcome

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3865 on: August 16, 2019, 09:40:06 PM »
But they appear everywhere... interviews,  tweets, statements, etc etc...

blumenkraft

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 974
  • Fans of Hans Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 456
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3866 on: August 16, 2019, 10:10:58 PM »
Well, other CEOs do these things too, the only difference, less attention.
Refugees welcome

KiwiGriff

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3867 on: August 16, 2019, 10:43:30 PM »
Musk is a disruptor.
Many industry's are being shaken to the core by his company's.
He is driven and focused.
That makes him an arsehole to those he pushes past on his mission.
The fossil fuel industry and legacy auto manufactures  are being made obsolete by his actions.
When it comes to renewable energy he has probably made a bigger impact than any man alive
You don't have to like him to acknowledge his successes.  I follow Tesla because I am a gear head I follow green energy because I am concerned about humanity's future
I follow musk because he is making changes to the very  foundation of both these industry's.
Do I like or worship him ....nope ! I like  the impacts he is having on our world.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 11:25:57 PM by KiwiGriff »

blumenkraft

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 974
  • Fans of Hans Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 456
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3868 on: August 16, 2019, 10:53:26 PM »
+1


Refugees welcome

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5134
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 352
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3869 on: August 16, 2019, 10:54:53 PM »
oren
I'm addressing this to you as you were the first to respond, asked the most pertinent questions, and frankly because I was a little taken aback that you weren't in agreement with the broad jist of my post.
I'll not be quoting your questions, but I'll be answering as best I can in the order you presented them. The others I believe will find answers to their questions/comments covered here. (or evaded?)


I'm hesitant to answer for NeilT, but as I understood his post he blames the blackout(s) on a number of factors, one of such is the additional stress that EVs place on an already stressed network.
The UK had been stressed when coal was the primary source of energy, and as coal plants were shuddered they were replaced by lower capacity renewables. In addition to this additional loads that weren't planned for years ago (primarily EVs) have been adding to the problem.


I'll defer to NeilT and your own insites WRT the specifics of UKs power generation other than to mention that like many locales the UK is adding load faster than they are adding generation.
In re to nuclear solutions I'm again unaware of the specifics of the situation in the UK. NeilT seems to believe that it's the only way to get ahead of the UK's rising demand, while my understanding is that North America has lost the ability to bring Nuclear projects in on time, or within budget.


I don't think there is much difference between your own and my take on Nuclear in the near future. I'll leave it to NeilT to explain why he believes Nuclear power to be a timely, viable solution


I'm inclined to agree with your assessment of wind, solar, gas and batteries. My problem is in seeing instances where these solutions are doing much more than treading water WRT the additional demands that EV and other loads are adding to the grid.
The longer anyone burns coal the sooner the worst effects of Climate Change will be felt. We're in a hole re. clean electrical generation and distribution. As long as this perception holds there will be political pressure to extend the life of thermal coal plants.


If I'm misrepresenting NeilT's position I apologize and wan't to assure both sides that any misrepresentation was the result of my misinterpreting what I'd read, not a nefarious scheme to misrepresent his position.


E-Buses were paired with small numbers of gas/diesel sipping private cars as this scenario envisions a drastic cutback in the ownership of private vehicles. I didn't wish to muddy the waters by tossing all options into one large pot, but to separate various futures I was envisioning. Both futures have quite obviously been exaggerated for emphasis.


My feeling about Musk began when we investigated the electricity needed to power an all EV home (some years ago?) on this forum, and research I'd earlier on the same subject. I didn't go after EV's because I didn't like Musk, rather I went after Musk because I didn't like the numbers I was getting from EV saturation scenarios.
If all of the EVs are made by VW, Chevrolet or Toyota the results would be the same  - unless there is some battery/engine combination that increases miles/kWh by a huge degree - a breakthrough that I see as unlikely to occur in a relevant time period.


The problem as I see it with your "all other things being equal" is that privately owned EV's alter the playing field. With an EV in every garage we need to produce ~twice the electricity we generate today. I'm not sure that a rapid roll out of this much clean electricity is reasonable in the UK, the US, China or any number of venues. A problem that halting, limiting, or at least discouraging EV usage might diminish.
The problem of EV's is specifically their "big battery". Can I recommend some of Sig's recent posts where she points out that a long range Tesla actually requires more than two 310 mile charges to nociate the 454 mile trip between Las Vegas and Los Angeles because of elevation changes. While regenerative braking was supposed to negate these hills, apparently in real life this just ain't so, and it points out a huge discrepancy between Tesla's advertised mileage. And the mileage that people are getting in real life.
I'm not singling Tesla out for this >1/3  underestimation of the miles/kWh that a full BEV model will deliver even when the route is limited to the shallow grades allowed on the Interstate Highway system. The pressure to outperform the competition and the obfuscation involved in "by the minute" electrical purchasing as well as advertizing that emphasizes the Wattage entering the battery as opposed to the Wattage leaving your household wiring all serve to add to the problem I'm addressing.


When gerontocrat and I were working on this problem in the past we accepted the advertised mileage of EVs in our calculations. I wouldn't be so naive knowing what I now know.


If this missed anyone's specific objections I'm sorry, but it's what I'm going to throw out there today. If you're not familiar with the previous discussion regarding Average electrical use per family, matched against Average miles driven per family, it might be enlightening. We used American families driving on American roads - and with that caveat the results shouldn't be too different in other 1st world nations.- but for the relatively new data indicating huge problems with the proffered mileage figures when hills are involved. We don't drive on pancake flat highways.
Terry


Appears I'm cross posting with 7 others, so this may need revision at some point - posting it now before an 8th chimes in. :D











etienne

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 745
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3870 on: August 17, 2019, 12:03:44 AM »
We are facing a double chalenge.
On one side, the EV technology block with all its components (loading station, load management, batteries or fuel cells, PV, windpower...) is not mature, but is evolving quite fast. I don't believe we can now have any clear idea of how it will work in 5 to 10 years. One thing is sure, renewables can be produced everywhere and batteries can be loaded according to power availability, so network capacity might not have to increase as much as production capacity. The first chalenge is technological.
The second chalenge is that our energy consumption is just too high, and efficiency gains will not be enough to solve our problems. Fossil fuels made it possible to have a huge amount of kWh per sqr meter, just compare an oil well/coal mine and PV or windpower. This has nothing to do with EV but with energy transition (we could power EV with diesel generators).

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15376
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 403
  • Likes Given: 205
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3871 on: August 17, 2019, 02:32:49 AM »
Quote
... a long range Tesla actually requires more than two 310 mile charges to nociate the 454 mile trip between Las Vegas and Los Angeles ...

Incorrect.  They did not charge to 100%.  The LA-LV-LA tripsters stopped for a partial charge on the way to LV, and two partial charges on the way back to LA.  24, 15, and 31 minutes, respectively.  Remember our discussion about brief charges, and how charging to 100% is generally not the most efficient option?

——
Also...
The UK is using much less coal generation now, due to added renewables and increasing efficiency.  They could use more if they needed it, while more clean energy is added every year. 

There are many steps they could take to adjust how people charge EVs and when, like Time of Use, and special deals for keeping your EV’s battery connected to the grid to provide grid balancing when you aren’t driving it.  The world won’t be 100% electric tomorrow, or next year.  There’s plenty of time to adjust.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4405
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 843
  • Likes Given: 1265
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3872 on: August 17, 2019, 04:17:03 AM »
Thanks for your detailed and fair response Terry.
I recall well the EV exercise and I believe I gave my comments in real time, I thought then and I still do now that it's quite doable to build up the required grid capacity.
Maybe I'll revisit that excercise soon (can you recall the thread and date?). But the big unknown is how fast these (mostly renewable) generation solutions can be deployed, I believe they can come online faster than the expected hordes of EVs who threaten to swamp the grid. Hopefully they can also fully replace coal and baseload natgas at the same time. I am sure it's technically doable if the government(s) would decide strategically to do it.
I prefer E buses and a limited number of EVs over a proliferation of individual EVs for other reasons, but not because it's impossible to supply their electricity.

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4405
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 843
  • Likes Given: 1265
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3873 on: August 17, 2019, 04:20:16 AM »
BTW advertised EPA mileage for EVs is quite accurate on average in real life. WLTP mileage (European standard) is overly optimistic and should not be trusted as is.

interstitial

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 159
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 56
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3874 on: August 17, 2019, 06:35:11 AM »
Terry
The grid doesn't need to double in capacity to charge EVs. You keep repeating that but it isnt true.

interstitial

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 159
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 56
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3875 on: August 17, 2019, 06:51:39 AM »
As far as the 15 years for average vehicle age. I pulled that number from  memory because I got tired of spending a long time researching current data only to have people ignore it. My bad. My post was largely ignored except your response. But this is from 2017 and says 14.2 years.
https://www.ratchetandwrench.com/articles/4502-average-domestic-vehicle-age-reaches-all-time-high
One other wrinkle I just noticed they are referring to domestic nameplates not foreign or all nameplates.


KiwiGriff

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3876 on: August 17, 2019, 07:32:40 AM »
Miles per driver .
Quote
According to United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, Americans now drive an average of 13,476 miles per year. That’s the most in history. Do the math and the average American drives well over 1,000 miles a month.

KWh per mile Tesla3 sr+.
0.25 kWh per mile.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=41416

Miles traveled times kWh consumption. KWh needed per person per year for 100% electric cars.
13,476 * 0.25 = 3,369kwh.

Electricity generation per person.*
11,927 kWh.
https://www.worlddata.info/america/usa/energy-consumption.php

Around 28% more electricity over the next about forty years.

Confounding factors.
* Electricity per person not per driver so real percentage increase needed is less.
Not including freight and public transport.
Drilling and pumping oil, Refining crude to petrol and getting the petrol to your tank takes energy some of which is electricity.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 07:48:08 AM by KiwiGriff »

blumenkraft

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 974
  • Fans of Hans Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 456
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3877 on: August 17, 2019, 08:14:16 AM »
(loading station, load management, batteries, windpower...) is not mature,

Sorry, Etienne, but no!

Those are all technologies we have well understood for literally a century now. Only PV is relatively new but it's also well understood and efficiency gains are going to happen. Fuel cells are not needed in this picture.

It's not a technological problem, it's a political one. Technologically every country can transform within 10 years. How? You implement a $150 carbon tax and increase it by 15% every year and invest this money into renewables.
Refugees welcome

etienne

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 745
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3878 on: August 17, 2019, 08:59:50 AM »
(loading station, load management, batteries, windpower...) is not mature,

Sorry, Etienne, but no!

Those are all technologies we have well understood for literally a century now. Only PV is relatively new but it's also well understood and efficiency gains are going to happen. Fuel cells are not needed in this picture.

It's not a technological problem, it's a political one. Technologically every country can transform within 10 years. How? You implement a $150 carbon tax and increase it by 15% every year and invest this money into renewables.
Well, at least in Luxembourg, the smart grid is not available now. I can manage my load in my house, but there is no way to manage the load of a 20 kV power line on the consumer side. That really is the missing element to allow a better integration of renewable energy. It doesn't make sense to build an Australian type of grid management battery if this is to store power allowing smooth loading of EV.

There is also a lot of evolution regarding batteries. They are still expensive, we need something like the transistor revolution in the IT industry.

Fuel cells could also be part of the picture because nowadays hydrogen long term storage is easier than electricity storage, ok production is not efficient, but curtailing PV and hydro is also not efficient. The question is if we could have hydrogen production infrastructure on stand by (or anything similar, a technology using CO2 would be better) just like we have now gas peakers on stand by. We have most of the bricks but interconnection of the bricks is not ready and efficiency can be improved.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 09:08:21 AM by etienne »

blumenkraft

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 974
  • Fans of Hans Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 456
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3879 on: August 17, 2019, 09:27:46 AM »
The electrical grid works like that:

You need to maintain 50 Hz. If it's going below that, you add energy and vice versa.

In Europe, you have the power of high numbers behind you. There is a high number of power sources and consumer. It's leveling out and if it's not, power will be bought or sold nationally or even continentally. This principle will not change in the future. It's not rocket science, really.

With more renewables in the grid, you will have a higher management need, that's true. But it's not a new technique. You only do what you did before, just a little more of it.
Refugees welcome

KiwiGriff

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3880 on: August 17, 2019, 09:30:44 AM »
Quote
there is no way to manage the load of a 20 kV power line on the consumer side.
It is not an issue of ability it is one of government and industry inertia.
Demand side control is easy. Old tech as used in NZ for generations.
Quote
Ripple control is the most common form of load control, and is used in many countries around the world, including Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, and South Africa. Ripple control involves superimposing a higher-frequency signal (usually between 100 and 1600 Hz[10]) onto the standard 50–60 Hz of the main power signal. When receiver devices attached to non-essential residential or industrial loads receive this signal, they shut down the load until the signal is disabled or another frequency signal is received.
Now days you could easy do it with a digital signal for even more flexibility.
I worked in a large industry in Auckland NZ where we manually shut down during winter peaks in demand in exchange for a cheaper power rate the rest of the time. Maybe three times a year in winter around 5.00pm to 8.00pm we would shut off the plant. Such measures mean generators don't need to start an expensive inefficient gas peaker. Not really a huge issue in many industry's as long as it is worth the effort.

 It is the will not the ability that holds us back.

BenB

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3881 on: August 17, 2019, 12:55:44 PM »
Terry, UK electricity demand has been falling for a number of years, not rising. Demand from evs is currently tiny and negligible in the grand scheme of things. Demand is low at this time of year and variable renewable generation was high. Hence your assumptions are incorrect in this case.

BenB

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3882 on: August 17, 2019, 12:58:48 PM »
Blumen, personally I think it's reasonable to question anyone's motivations. But I don't think we should clog up this thread with arguments over musk. I'll answer more fully in one of the other threads when I have a chance.

blumenkraft

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 974
  • Fans of Hans Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 456
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3883 on: August 17, 2019, 01:04:02 PM »
Looking forward to it Ben. :)
Refugees welcome

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5134
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 352
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3884 on: August 17, 2019, 05:10:57 PM »
Thanks for your detailed and fair response Terry.
I recall well the EV exercise and I believe I gave my comments in real time, I thought then and I still do now that it's quite doable to build up the required grid capacity.
Maybe I'll revisit that excercise soon (can you recall the thread and date?). But the big unknown is how fast these (mostly renewable) generation solutions can be deployed, I believe they can come online faster than the expected hordes of EVs who threaten to swamp the grid. Hopefully they can also fully replace coal and baseload natgas at the same time. I am sure it's technically doable if the government(s) would decide strategically to do it.
I prefer E buses and a limited number of EVs over a proliferation of individual EVs for other reasons, but not because it's impossible to supply their electricity.
oren
Thanks for the kind remarks.
I do try to give both sides an even playing field. No fun winning if the wind's always at your back.


I've never mastered the "search" feature here and couldn't find those posts without just crawling back through gerontocrat's and my old posts.  :P


I don't remember what data sets we settled on or what the numbers were. What I do remember is that gerontocrat and I started out with very different statistical sets, but when the dust settled both of our calculations showed that if driving patterns stayed as they are/were when the stats were published - and if the full BEV's Mile/kWh advertisements were ~accurate - then full EV usage would require ~ twice the energy that the average family now uses.


Whether the generation of clean energy can replace all of the coal and other thermal generation plants, then double this amount faster than EV's enter the market can't be known at this time. I don't believe it can be done and I'm relatively sure that it won't be done.


When the Keeling curve straightens out and points to the horizon we'll know it's within our grasp. All we'll need to do then is to mothball some of the other polluters and that damn thing will bend back down.


I'm not an optimist & I have been wrong in the past. ???
Terry

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5134
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 352
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3885 on: August 17, 2019, 05:30:17 PM »
Terry
The grid doesn't need to double in capacity to charge EVs. You keep repeating that but it isnt true.
I'm sorry but I don't recall if you were here for the last two brouhahas re. this subject. Rather than rehashing it every 6 months I'd ask you to dig back through old posts until you've stumbled on to one or more of the posts, read what was written at that time, then (after telling the rest of us where and when it was) explain why our work at that time was wrong, or explain why the facts have changed since that time.


Until then I'll be repeating the data we dug up after a squabble that lasted for some time. Saying something "just isn't true" isn't an argument it's an unsupported statement, it's argumentative, and it belongs on WUWT.


Not trying to be snarky, but digging up new arguments every time someone new, or someone who missed the last dustup insists that it's wrong because it just doesn't seem right, just isn't going to happen.


Sorry, now I am getting snarky. I had a bad day at the doctor and I'm not in the best frame of mind. Ignore this, ignore me, ignore the thread, but remember that ignorance doesn't wear well.
Terry

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5134
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 352
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3886 on: August 17, 2019, 05:39:56 PM »
Terry, UK electricity demand has been falling for a number of years, not rising. Demand from evs is currently tiny and negligible in the grand scheme of things. Demand is low at this time of year and variable renewable generation was high. Hence your assumptions are incorrect in this case.


Can you provide some stats. What you say seems to contradict NeilT's post. I don't even keep up with Ontario's usage - which has fallen due to an industrial downturn - but I do know we've been off coal for a while now.
If a nation facing dropping energy demand can't clean up generation and have excess production held in abeyance, what can we expect when there is additional demand on the grid?


Terry

blumenkraft

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 974
  • Fans of Hans Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 456
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3887 on: August 17, 2019, 05:45:26 PM »
Terry, both, energy usage in oil equivalent, and also electrical power usage are going down. The former since the 70s peaking again in 1996, the later only since recently.
Refugees welcome

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3888 on: August 17, 2019, 05:46:50 PM »
Darn you blumen...   >:( ;D. You typed it faster ...

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3889 on: August 17, 2019, 05:48:14 PM »
Not the industrial powerhouse it used to be + energy efficiency + steep increases of energy prices...

blumenkraft

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 974
  • Fans of Hans Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 456
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3890 on: August 17, 2019, 05:50:37 PM »
Darn you blumen...   >:( ;D. You typed it faster ...

Haha! :P  :D
Refugees welcome

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5134
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 352
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3891 on: August 17, 2019, 05:52:18 PM »
But both charts were per capita.
Have more people been moving into the UK than out?
Do immigrants have less money to spend on energy intensive activities?


Terry

blumenkraft

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 974
  • Fans of Hans Club - circa 2018
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 456
  • Likes Given: 635
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3892 on: August 17, 2019, 05:56:23 PM »
In absolute numbers, all energy sources but renewables are down.

What may i google for you next, Terry? :P
Refugees welcome

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3893 on: August 17, 2019, 06:16:53 PM »
The big dip after 2007-2008 was due to the economic downturn.

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4405
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 843
  • Likes Given: 1265
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3894 on: August 17, 2019, 07:00:50 PM »
Terry, thanks again (and I hope you feel better).
I get the feeling that maybe the comparison was only for residential electricity (the average family) but the grid also supplies industrial and commercial users.
I promise to dig this up and revisit the calculation this week.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 11:00:32 PM by oren »

Tom_Mazanec

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1439
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 300
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3895 on: August 17, 2019, 08:05:47 PM »
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-47803-3
Solar energy has the potential to offset a significant fraction of non-renewable electricity demands globally, yet it may occupy extensive areas when deployed at this level. There is growing concern that large renewable energy installations will displace other land uses. Where should future solar power installations be placed to achieve the highest energy production and best use the limited land resource? The premise of this work is that the solar panel efficiency is a function of the location’s microclimate within which it is immersed. Current studies largely ignore many of the environmental factors that influence Photovoltaic (PV) panel function. A model for solar panel efficiency that incorporates the influence of the panel’s microclimate was derived from first principles and validated with field observations. Results confirm that the PV panel efficiency is influenced by the insolation, air temperature, wind speed and relative humidity. The model was applied globally using bias-corrected reanalysis datasets to map solar panel efficiency and the potential for solar power production given local conditions. Solar power production potential was classified based on local land cover classification, with croplands having the greatest median solar potential of approximately 28 W/m2. The potential for dual-use, agrivoltaic systems may alleviate land competition or other spatial constraints for solar power development, creating a significant opportunity for future energy sustainability. Global energy demand would be offset by solar production if even less than 1% of cropland were converted to an agrivoltaic system.

SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

etienne

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 745
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3896 on: August 17, 2019, 09:07:53 PM »

Quote
Ripple control is the most common form of load control, and is used in many countries around the world, including Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, and South Africa. Ripple control involves superimposing a higher-frequency signal (usually between 100 and 1600 Hz[10]) onto the standard 50–60 Hz of the main power signal. When receiver devices attached to non-essential residential or industrial loads receive this signal, they shut down the load until the signal is disabled or another frequency signal is received.
Now days you could easy do it with a digital signal for even more flexibility.
I worked in a large industry in Auckland NZ where we manually shut down during winter peaks in demand in exchange for a cheaper power rate the rest of the time. Maybe three times a year in winter around 5.00pm to 8.00pm we would shut off the plant. Such measures mean generators don't need to start an expensive inefficient gas peaker. Not really a huge issue in many industry's as long as it is worth the effort.

 It is the will not the ability that holds us back.
This is not so easy because we are not talking of a few customers with many kW, but of thousands of cars with different loading speed available, and different levels of urgency for a loaded battery. Furtheore sometimes loading will have to be faster as required because power will be available. I believe that this will be managed by defining different prices and you will define which price you're ready to pay for when you will plug your car to the grid. Maybe you will even be able to define a price where you agree to sale power.

Well, I just wrote some science fiction.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 09:14:13 PM by etienne »

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6294
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1338
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3897 on: August 17, 2019, 09:12:16 PM »
Dragged out my old back of envelope calculation on additional energy required for 100% EVs in the US of A 2017 data.

The big surprise remains that California's consumption per capita is so much lower than the US average. (I am sure I double-checked that). So EVs are being implemented the fastest where additional renewable energy required is the highest. If California can do it, surely so can the other 49 (except Alaska?).

For the US of A it is 25% more total energy demand.
For California +55 %.

To go 100% renewable add dumping coal and gas (and nuclear?). I have got those figures for 2017, they are not small, even though coal and some gas are now gone or going. Indeed, the major task is that still approaching 80% of USA energy comes from fossil fuels, approaching 90% if you add nuclear..
"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)

KiwiGriff

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3898 on: August 17, 2019, 10:13:03 PM »
Some of the energy contained in fossil fuels is wasted when it is converted to usable forms . The mining, refining and transport of fossil fuels account for a significant amount of total energy used.
These factors together mean the amount of energy needed from renewable generation  to replace fossil fuel use is considerably less than  the energy contained in the fossil fuels used at present.

Tom_Mazanec

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1439
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 300
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: Renewable Energy
« Reply #3899 on: August 17, 2019, 11:26:44 PM »
Some of the energy contained in fossil fuels is wasted when it is converted to usable forms . The mining, refining and transport of fossil fuels account for a significant amount of total energy used.
These factors together mean the amount of energy needed from renewable generation  to replace fossil fuel use is considerably less than  the energy contained in the fossil fuels used at present.

Not only that, but as we have picked the low hanging fruit and are reaching higher and higher up the tree, that "significant amount" gets a little more significant each year.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS