Are current renewable energy strategies worth it?

[macdoc]

Well current renewable strategies are certainly making some progress...

This is good...

Renewables Projected To Add Triple The Capacity Of New Fossil Fuel Plants By 2030
BY JOE ROMM ON JULY 1, 2014 AT 3:53 PM

CREDIT: AP/MATT YOUNG
The “world is already adding more renewable-energy capacity each year than fossil fuel capacity,” Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) explained earlier this year. And BNEF’s just-released 2030 Market Outlook projects that disparity will skyrocket, concluding that “renewable energy may reap as much as two-thirds of the $7.7 trillion in investment forecast for building new power plants by 2030 as declining costs make it more competitive with fossil fuels.”
That means some $5 trillion in renewable investment over the next decade and a half. Of the 5 terawatts (5000 gigawatts) of generating capacity that will be added worldwide over the next 15 years, over 3 TW (3000 GW) are projected by BNEF to come from renewables. The capacity of plants powered by fossil fuels — coal, gas and oil — will account for under 1100 gigawatts.

Here is a chart from Bloomberg New Energy Finance founder (and former CEO) Michael Liebreich:

continues

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/07/01/3449868/renewables-soar/

But I wonder how that compares to projected demand for electrical power...

 

[Aepervius]

I still fail to see how they will replace the base power with renewable without huge reservoir or battery to store it when it comes aplenty and give it back when it isn't, or even long period without good wind and sun. A problem by the way that even Germany (the poster boy for renewable - at an enormous cost) struggle with.

 

[DC]

I still fail to see how they will replace the base power with renewable without huge reservoir or battery to store it when it comes aplenty and give it back when it isn't, or even long period without good wind and sun. A problem by the way that even Germany (the poster boy for renewable - at an enormous cost) struggle with.

no Problem, Elon Musk builds a battery factory

But you are correct, it is the big Problem we have with wind and solar. many People seem to Forget that.
I would suggest Nuclear could solve that Problem until we get that stupid ITER running

 

[aleCcowaN]

But I wonder how that compares to projected demand for electrical power...

According to EIA, the totally electricity installed capacity by 2011 was 5331 GW -I found that figure a bit high and I think it includes private generators, hydro pumped storage and plant that are closed-.

Using your own figure and EIA's yearly statistics, we can speak of 5950 GW by 2014. A simple trapezial integration of it gives additional 930 GW from fossil fuels and additional 3330 GW from renewables, what makes a grand total of 10210 GW by 2030, a 72% increase which means a 3.4% yearly increase. As capacity and real production are different matters, and renewables are still more inefficient, that may represent some 2.8 to 3.2% yearly increase, which is not bad and sounds very reasonable as it would be expected from a global economy rising some 4.5% year in a context with major developing countries like China, India or Indonesia having practically surpassed the phase where huge increments in powers are needed to sustain economical development -only a fifth of mankind inhabits nowadays countries in need of a huge expansion of their electricity sectors to sustain human development-.

 

[aleCcowaN]

I still fail to see how they will replace the base power with renewable without huge reservoir or battery to store it when it comes aplenty and give it back when it isn't, or even long period without good wind and sun. A problem by the way that even Germany (the poster boy for renewable - at an enormous cost) struggle with.

Well, many systems rely on water or oil keeping thermal energy to use during the following two days -pretty much like nuclear power plants do-, or store hydrogen for later use. A lot of ingenious systems have been described in this thread in a madcap review of what's up next in technology.

What I can tell you is that Germany is not a good example to judge these systems. As I said about the UK, Germany is densely populated and poorly endowed by nature in renewables -average about wind, poor in the others-. I'm sure a world with 80% of its energy coming from nuclear and renewables and 20% still coming from fossil fuels, perfectly can accept a Germany with 50 or 60% of its energy coming from fossil fuels.

Top quality German technology, effort and money become partly a waste the moment it is put into producing cleaner German energy. The same moved abroad would cancel German emissions from the big count in a couple of decades.

 

[Trakar]

I still fail to see how they will replace the base power with renewable without huge reservoir or battery to store it when it comes aplenty and give it back when it isn't, or even long period without good wind and sun. A problem by the way that even Germany (the poster boy for renewable - at an enormous cost) struggle with.

I'm not sure why you see storage as a problem but diversification of renewable feeds is the primary means of minimizing or eliminating storage systems.

"Matching Hourly and Peak Demand by Combining Different Renewable Energy Sources: A case study for California in 2020" - http://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/CombiningRenew/HosteFinalDraft

Many renewable resources are intermittent or variable by nature—producing power inconsistently and somewhat unpredictably—while on the other end of the transmission line, consumers demand power variably but predictably throughout the day. The Independent System Operator (ISO) monitors this demand, turning on or off additional generation when necessary. As such, predictability of energy supply and demand is essential for grid management. For natural gas or hydroelectricity, supplies can be throttled relatively easily. But with a wind farm, power output cannot be ramped up on demand. In some cases, a single wind farm that is providing power steadily may see a drop in or complete loss of wind for a period. For this reason, grid operators generally pay less for energy provided from wind or solar power than from a conventional, predictable resource.

Although wind, solar, tidal, and wave resources will always be intermittent when they are considered in isolation and at one location, several methods exist to reduce intermittency of delivered power. These include combining geographically disperse intermittent resources of the same type, using storage, and combining different renewables with complementary intermittencies (e.g., Kahn, 1979; Archer and Jacobson, 2003, 2007). This paper discusses the last method: integration of several independent resources. In the pages that follow, we demonstrate that the complementary intermittencies of wind and solar power in California, along with the flexibility of hydro, make it possible for a true portfolio of renewables to meet a significant portion of California’s electricity demand. In particular, we estimate mixes of renewable capacities required to supply 80% and 100% of California’s electricity and 2020 and show the feasibility of load-matching over the year with these resources. Additionally, we outline the tradeoffs between different renewable portfolios (i.e., wind-heavy or solar-heavy mixes). We conclude that combining at least four renewables, wind, solar, geothermal, and hydroelectric power in optimal proportions would allow California to meet up to 100% of its future hourly electric power demand assuming an expanded and improved transmission grid.

"Renewable Electricity Futures Study" - http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/re_futures/

Key findings -

• Renewable electricity generation from technologies that are commercially available today, in combination with a more flexible electric system, is more than adequate to supply 80% of total U.S. electricity generation in 2050 while meeting electricity demand on an hourly basis in every region of the country.
• Increased electric system flexibility, needed to enable electricity supply and demand balance with high levels of renewable generation, can come from a portfolio of supply- and demand-side options, including flexible conventional generation, grid storage, new transmission, more responsive loads, and changes in power system operations.
• The abundance and diversity of U.S. renewable energy resources can support multiple combinations of renewable technologies that result in deep reductions in electric sector greenhouse gas emissions and water use.
• The direct incremental cost associated with high renewable generation is comparable to published cost estimates of other clean energy scenarios. Improvement in the cost and performance of renewable technologies is the most impactful lever for reducing this incremental cost.

"A global renewable mix with proven technologies and common materials" - http://www.imedea.uib-csic.es/maste...embre_2011/Articulos/Garcia-Olivares.2011.pdf

 

[macdoc]

Molten salt storage gives push to US solar power
GEOFF HISCOCK THE AUSTRALIAN MARCH 03, 2014 4:17PM

Molten salt thermal energy storage, the technology that extends a solar power station’s daily operating life by up to six hours, is gathering momentum in the United States with the likely completion of a second utility-scale power plant later this year.

The first large-scale plant to use molten salt storage, the $US2 billion Solana 280 MW parabolic trough plant near Gila Bend in Arizona, successfully passed commercial operation tests last October in what the project developer, Abengoa of Spain, called a “major accomplishment” for the concentrating solar power (CSP) industry.

Arizona’s largest utility, Arizona Public Service, will buy all of Solana’s electricity output under a 30-year power purchase agreement with Abengoa.

Solana’s thermal storage system, which stores heat generated during the day in tanks of molten salt and uses this at night to drive steam-powered turbines, can produce energy for six hours at maximum power after the sun goes down.

more
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...843924302?nk=2e1c0b61b398f2057e01b134cfb66184

And that is in commercial use now

 

[jimbob]

no Problem, Elon Musk builds a battery factory

But you are correct, it is the big Problem we have with wind and solar. many People seem to Forget that.
I would suggest Nuclear could solve that Problem until we get that stupid ITER running

I've mentioned it before, but that is being proposed as a way of smoothing the load - when the demand is high, plug in hybrid car owners could opt to discharge (to a certain level) and get paid rather than charge.

The factory where I work will sometimes go off grid at times of high demand. It has a rather large uninterupptable power supply (a building about 10m x 20m and 8m high containing a flywheel in a vacuum spun up by the grid and with enough kinetic energy for about half an hour. There are a couple of marine diesels that kick in within 30 seconds as the back up generator). Power cuts are potentially expensive for us.

 

[jimbob]

Another, less obvious benefit of photovoltaic and wind generation

http://www.aweablog.org/wind-energy...water-annually-in-drought-parched-california/

Wind energy saved 2.5 billion gallons of water in California in 2014 by displacing water consumption at the state’s thirsty fossil-fired power plants, playing a valuable role in alleviating the state’s record drought. Wind energy’s annual water savings work out to around 65 gallons per person in the state (200 gallons per household), or the equivalent of 20 billion bottles of water.

Of course that is against about 200 gallons per capita per day (I imagine this includes industrial use) so is fairly small even with PV added but it is an additional benefit .

 

[jimbob]

Bump:

http://www.iea.org/newsroomandevent...ssions-of-carbon-dioxide-stalled-in-2014.html

Global energy-related emissions of carbon dioxide stalled in 2014

Preliminary IEA data point to emissions decoupling from economic growth for the first time in 40 years

13 March 2015

Preliminary data from the International Energy Agency (IEA) indicate that global emissions of carbon dioxide from the energy sector stalled in 2014, marking the first time in 40 years in which there was a halt or reduction in emissions of the greenhouse gas that was not tied to an economic downturn...

 

[Elind]

Yes the eternal question of whether more is less.
I think without addressing lifestyle choices we will not solve the energy problem no matter the technology.

By lifestyle choices, are you referencing contraception?

 

[macdoc]

Yupper - tho if Japan is any indication that may self correct.

Originally Posted by !Kaggen
Yes the eternal question of whether more is less.
I think without addressing lifestyle choices we will not solve the energy problem no matter the technology.

Horsepucky

 

[Elind]

Horsepucky

This is a place for debate, or at least intelligent quips. What category do you think you are in?

 

[macdoc]

He was answered earlier if you care to read the thread. I prefer not to repeat myself.

That's the old right wing mantra for doing nothing - evoking Jimmy Carter putting on sweaters and shivering in the dark.

There are no technological barriers to having a carbon neutral industrial society that provides all the benefits we currently take for granted and then some ( clean air ).

It will take time...some nations are getting there.
Now do you have something relevant.?

I don't see you contributing a thing to this rather extensive thread as yet or are you just a flyby?

 

[jimbob]

He was answered earlier if you care to read the thread. I prefer not to repeat myself.

That's the old right wing mantra for doing nothing - evoking Jimmy Carter putting on sweaters and shivering in the dark.

There are no technological barriers to having a carbon neutral industrial society that provides all the benefits we currently take for granted and then some ( clean air ).
It will take time...some nations are getting there.
Now do you have something relevant.?

I don't see you contributing a thing to this rather extensive thread as yet or are you just a flyby?

like this

Bump:

http://www.iea.org/newsroomandevent...ssions-of-carbon-dioxide-stalled-in-2014.html

Global energy-related emissions of carbon dioxide stalled in 2014

Preliminary IEA data point to emissions decoupling from economic growth for the first time in 40 years

13 March 2015

Preliminary data from the International Energy Agency (IEA) indicate that global emissions of carbon dioxide from the energy sector stalled in 2014, marking the first time in 40 years in which there was a halt or reduction in emissions of the greenhouse gas that was not tied to an economic downturn...

 

[Elind]

He was answered earlier if you care to read the thread. I prefer not to repeat myself.

That's the old right wing mantra for doing nothing - evoking Jimmy Carter putting on sweaters and shivering in the dark.

There are no technological barriers to having a carbon neutral industrial society that provides all the benefits we currently take for granted and then some ( clean air ).

It will take time...some nations are getting there.
Now do you have something relevant.?

I don't see you contributing a thing to this rather extensive thread as yet or are you just a flyby?

You commented on "I think without addressing lifestyle choices we will not solve the energy problem no matter the technology." and your comment was non contributing. This one is better and I don't disagree with you, although there are still lifetsyle issues involved at many levels, from food production to travel and much in between that are affected.

 

[macdoc]

you haven't read the thread
you haven't contributed to the thread
I don't need your approval or disapproval.

there are still lifetsyle issues involved at many levels, from food production to travel and much in between that are affected.

this says nothing but a vacuous opinion without support.

now do you have something substantive to contribute??

9 REASONS NOT TO BE DEPRESSED ABOUT THE PLANET

From a sustainable future market perspective, it’s been a very good year.
Wind turbine, solar panels, agriculture, and fossil fuels with swirling currency
December 30, 2014 —

Don’t leave 2014 without realizing there have been notable — often underreported — big capital market breakthroughs on climate change, water protection and other sustainability fronts.
Stock exchanges requiring company disclosure on sustainability risks or bonds backed by electricity payments from solar rooftop panels may not at first glance seem compelling, but these are the mechanisms that move markets and help build a more sustainable future.

Before we head into 2015, it’s worth taking a moment to shine a light on key areas of progress.

1) Electric utility business models are changing before our eyes by eschewing new centralized power plants in favor of energy efficiency and decentralized distributed energy, which are less expensive for consumers and more resilient to extreme weather. Case in point: Consolidated Edison’s ambitious $100–$150 million investment in energy efficiency and distributed energy — rooftop solar, battery technologies and smartphone-assisted energy conservation — to avoid building a new $1.1 billion substation.

2) Energy storage is a critical cog in large-scale deployment of renewable energy. That’s why it’s a big deal that Southern California Edison announced contracts last month for more than 260 megawatts of energy storage, five times more than what the state’s utilities commission required. Among the companies selected: Ice Energy, which installs rooftop devices called Ice Bears that freeze water in 450-gallon pots. The devices run at night when temperatures are lower so making ice is easier; during peak hours, the ice is used for space cooling.

In a stunning recent analysis, Goldman Sachs found nearly $1 trillion of oil projects at risk due to shrinking demand and plummeting oil prices.

more
http://ensia.com/voices/9-reasons-not-to-be-depressed-about-the-planet/

the tech is available - political will in some circles sorely lacking....admirable in others - sweden and portland oregon to name exemplars.

people and companies and some nations are getting on with it....

 

[Elind]

Codswallop

 

[wobs]

Bad news in the UK (& EU):
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ear...-on-insulation-and-solar-panels-EU-rules.html

The EU has told the UK it should set VAT on insulation and renewable technology at the standard rate. It is currently on a lower rate to encourage the take up of carbon saving initiatives.

Hopefully the UK will find a way around this.

 

[macdoc]

As I was saying before the walloped fish floated by stinking up the place...

Another Big Turning Point
It has never made less sense to build fossil fuel power plants.
Tom Randall
October 6, 2015 — 6:00 AM EDT

Wind power is now the cheapest electricity to produce in both Germany and the U.K., even without government subsidies, according to a new analysis by Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF). It's the first time that threshold has been crossed by a G7 economy.1
But that's less interesting than what just happened in the U.S.
To appreciate what's going on there, you need to understand the capacity factor. That's the percentage of a power plant's maximum potential that's actually achieved over time.
Consider a solar project. The sun doesn't shine at night and, even during the day, varies in brightness with the weather and the seasons. So a project that can crank out 100 megawatt hours of electricity during the sunniest part of the day might produce just 20 percent of that when averaged out over a year. That gives it a 20 percent capacity factor.
One of the major strengths of fossil fuel power plants is that they can command very high and predictable capacity factors. The average U.S. natural gas plant, for example, might produce about 70 percent of its potential (falling short of 100 percent because of seasonal demand and maintenance). But that's what's changing, and it's a big deal.
For the first time, widespread adoption of renewables is effectively lowering the capacity factor for fossil fuels. That's because once a solar or wind project is built, the marginal cost of the electricity it produces is pretty much zero—free electricity—while coal and gas plants require more fuel for every new watt produced. If you're a power company with a choice, you choose the free stuff every time.
It’s a self-reinforcing cycle. As more renewables are installed, coal and natural gas plants are used less. As coal and gas are used less, the cost of using them to generate electricity goes up. As the cost of coal and gas power rises, more renewables will be installed.

more


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ind-reach-a-big-renewables-turning-point-bnef