Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

Martyn1981

gefnew wrote: »

Hi all

Some news about wind turbines. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43576226

Regards
gefnew

Cheers. The rate of growth in off-shore WT's has been staggering, this site shows how much off-shore wind we'd have to deploy to meet all energy demand (not just leccy) in 2030. Interestingly the article uses 5MW WT's as a basis, whilst we are already deploying 8MW and 9.5MW and 12MW arriving shortly.

This is quite important as the site suggests an efficiency, or capacity factor of 40%, but the UK fleet has shown a cf of 44% over the last 12 months, a figure that has been steadily rising as newer, larger WT's are installed that can reach into stronger and more constant wind streams. All great news.

Total Surface Area Required to Fuel the World

silverwhistle

I know I can ignore anybody who goes on repeatedly about mullahs and dictators and uses clumsy sarcasm about a serious point.

Perhaps fracking has brought down world oil prices, but fracking wells have a relatively short life. Not like wind turbines or even the PV panels on my roof which will see me out. You seem remarkably obtuse if you haven't seen all the figures regarding lowering costs in the RE industry, and to take an example closer to home, how they are outperforming nuclear on the guaranteed prices front.

Martyn1981

Record-breaking Portugal generates more clean energy than it can use

Portugal produced more clean power than it could use last month, according to official data released yesterday by REN, the country's transmission system operator.

In March renewable energy accounted for 103.6 per cent of the country's electricity consumption, the highest level in 40 years. In total Portugal produced 4,812GWh of renewable electricity, and used 4,647GWh of power, over the course of the month.

Although there were some short periods when thermal power plants were needed to meet demand, renewables met at least 86 per cent of demand throughout the month and at times covered 143 per cent of the country's electricity demand.

Meanwhile, over the course of the month Portugal enjoyed two separate 70-hour periods when it relied solely on renewables for electricity.

GreatApe

silverwhistle wrote: »

Perhaps fracking has brought down world oil prices, but fracking wells have a relatively short life.

That is one of the big mistakes that has been going on for a decade. What you think is a negative is actually a really big positive. If a well has say 1 million barrels of recoverable deposits what is better for you to recover it over a near constant period of 20 years or to recover half of it in the first then half of what remains in the second year then half of what remains in the third year etc

The idea that shale deposits are depleted quickly is completely looking at it the wrong way.
Shale deposits are recovered quickly. Both statements say the same thing but make you think of it in completely different ways

Shale deposits are recovered quickly that is what you want you want to recover 90% of your deposits in the first two to three years not to recover 90% in twenty or thirty years.

Not like wind turbines or even the PV panels on my roof which will see me out. You seem remarkably obtuse if you haven't seen all the figures regarding lowering costs in the RE industry, and to take an example closer to home, how they are outperforming nuclear on the guaranteed prices front.

It is fake and false to believe that renewables are winning on price look at anywhere where subsidy is removed and deployment crashes. That does not mean we should not do renewables. As I keep saying large offshore wind with high CF is probably a wise investment for the UK we can go 80% offshore wind it will cost us more than importing gas but hey we can afford it partly thanks to higher shale production lowering gas/oil prices so keeping more money in the west.

Offshore wind money spent in the UK/EU is better than cheaper money send to the mullahs and dictators.

Martyn1981

French Utility Company EDF Plans Energy Storage Push

French utility company EDF has a goal of 100% carbon-free power by 2050. Energy storage will be a big part of achieving that goal. The company already has 5 gigawatts of installed grid-scale storage, but plans to increase that to 15 gigawatts by 2035. Adding the extra 10 gigawatts of storage called for by its new Energy Storage Plan will cost about $10 billion.

The plan is designed to allow EDF to keep pace with competitors such as Enel, E.ON, and Total. Of those 10 gigawatts, 6 will be industrial-scale projects that include pumped hydro storage and batteries. 4 gigawatts will consist of individual batteries for retail customers, companies, and municipalities, according to a report by Reuters.

Martyn1981

Nothing new here, the IEA is being criticised for its appalling RE projections which have always been massively wrong, typically assuming flat growth of wind and solar going forwards.

IEA accused of undermining global shift from fossil fuels

What's funny is to compare the far more accurate projections from BNEF, or better still those from Shell who project a far faster transition to Renewables and EV's.

Shell envisions central role for solar in new report


Here's a fun old article looking at the IEA projections:

IEA Gets Hilariously Slammed For Obsessively Inaccurate Renewable Energy Forecasts

Martyn1981

Timely article about San Diego, though I suspect they mean leccy not energy.

Getting San Diego Ready For 100% Renewable Energy — Episode 52 Of Local Energy Rules Podcast

When San Diego first began discussing community choice as a route to 100% renewable energy, the utility (San Diego Gas & Electric) was adamant that it was technically impossible. “You have to have natural gas. Point of fact. And they’re the experts,” said Nicole of the utility’s point of view.

But when it became clear that the city wasn’t dissuaded, the utility changed its message. It has now released a concept paper about how it could offer the city and its customers 100% renewable energy by 2035.

SDG&E is the first utility to use shareholder dollars to spend unlimited amounts of money to oppose community choice. “Pretty much embroiled in the same fight that Marin was in with PG&E.”

Martyn1981

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Interesting article, brief but simple looking at the different levels of generation needed, the amount of demand this could meet, and the impact if 12hrs of storage is included too..

Study: wind and solar can power most of the United States

Silly thought, but I remembered (as regards this article) that I've also read articles in the past about Australia needing 12hrs of storage for a wind and PV 100% scenario, and for the UK 'Energy Matters' (not a fan of RE) has proposed 7hrs of storage (500GWh in a 70GW average future (high electrification of transport and space heating)).

The US article suggests a 33% spill /150% annual generation, based on wind and PV simply being so cheap to generate v's FF's or nuclear. [Note, undercutting FF's even before adding on externalities such as pollution and CO2 emissions.]

But I assume the 150% figure would be trimmed down with a broader mix of RE including hydro, bio-energy and CSP (southern states).

12hrs of storage for any nation is a lot of storage, but it's a manageable cost, whereas critics of RE often quote 21 days (504hrs) of storage being needed, which seems to fly in the face of all the studies/analysis.

BTW if the UK needs 500GWh, then that might be available 'free' as a side effect of V2G, since if car ownership doesn't go down (I think it will, but we will see) then 30m EV's is equal to about 1,500GWh of total storage, perhaps providing 500GWh of 'spare' storage at any given time?

So are the problems big, yes. Are the problems too difficult, apparently not.

Martyn1981

A good example of how upside down things are now in the US - some states are now suing the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) to get them to take action against the pollution from the FF industries, because the head of the EPA (appointed by Trump) is a long term anti-regulation guy, who has spent years attacking and suing the EPA to prevent environmental measures.

The problem is, doing the job properly, and cleanly (less dirty), makes the FF industries less profitable/viable.

14 US States Sue EPA Over Methane Emission Standards Delays

Martyn1981

Steady progress towards co-locating RE generation and storage.

National Grid co-located storage guidance welcomed

Guidance issued by the transmission system operator (TSO) National Grid on how to co-locate energy storage with generation facilities has been welcomed by an analyst at the Renewable Energy Association.

National Grid published a short document near the end of last month on existing processes and arrangements for generation – both renewable and non-renewable – to co-locate with energy storage onsite.

It follows from July’s ‘Smart Systems and Flexibility’ plan, published by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) and regulator Ofgem, which found that one of the barriers to the creation of this more decentralised and flexible system was “perceived and actual barriers to storage being able to easily co-locate with generation assets”.