COP27 climate summit

[Fah Kiew Tu]

Here in our little town in Alaska where we have a micro grid we switched from fossil fuel power to renewable, the cost was cut in half and the power outages were reduced in duration and number.

A lot of things work on a small scale but not on a larger one.

What is the backing store for your grid when the renewable power is insufficient for demand?

From my POV I think the intermittent renewables are way insufficient unless & until they have a reliable backing store of at least 24 hours on full load. At present this is a fantasy unless you either have hydro power, nuclear or fossil fuel plants.

Happy to be corrected but I'd want to see examples on a realistic (say 1 million population centre) basis. And with a decent mix of residential, light industrial and commercial.

FKT

 

[Bagheera]

Do you understand how "poverty rate" is calculated? Germany's median income is substantially less than that of the US.

Only because the USA allows a few hundred billionaires to completely skewer any form of normality.

 

[Bagheera]

A lot of things work on a small scale but not on a larger one.

What is the backing store for your grid when the renewable power is insufficient for demand?

Insufficiency has not happened since the 14 years it has been online (hydro power). The backup is a bunch of caterpillar diesel engines. The town is about 7500 people in the winter and 11000 in the summer.

Norway and Portugal are great examples of how it works on a larger scale. If it works for countries with 4 million people or 10 million people, I don't see why it wouldn't work on a larger scale. When it comes to renewables you need a nice variety. Storage needs to be sought in heat sinks rather than batteries. Most energy we use is heating homes and buildings.

 

[phill_nz]

A lot of things work on a small scale but not on a larger one.

What is the backing store for your grid when the renewable power is insufficient for demand?

From my POV I think the intermittent renewables are way insufficient unless & until they have a reliable backing store of at least 24 hours on full load. At present this is a fantasy unless you either have hydro power, nuclear or fossil fuel plants.

Happy to be corrected but I'd want to see examples on a realistic (say 1 million population centre) basis. And with a decent mix of residential, light industrial and commercial.

FKT

you have to be more lateral with your thinking
given
renewables are cheaper when they are producing than traditional
we can look at installing things not presently needed
like very large, cheap, long term battery storage .. its not like we have never had to have similar things .. gas storage for coal gas had them all over the place

the exact chemistry of the batteries i would not say was settled yet
but
there are a lot of new ideas that would seem to work and best of all the stream of new ideas seems rapid, strong and voluminous

 

[Fah Kiew Tu]

Insufficiency has not happened since the 14 years it has been online (hydro power). The backup is a bunch of caterpillar diesel engines. The town is about 7500 people in the winter and 11000 in the summer.

Norway and Portugal are great examples of how it works on a larger scale. If it works for countries with 4 million people or 10 million people, I don't see why it wouldn't work on a larger scale. When it comes to renewables you need a nice variety. Storage needs to be sought in heat sinks rather than batteries. Most energy we use is heating homes and buildings.

Ah, hydro power, that make sense. Tasmania basically runs on hydro, has done for many decades. 500,000 people.

But this is so site specific that it isn't a general solution.

Norway is very heavily hydro power IIRC.

A quick check shows Portugal is heavily hydro as well.

Sorry but that's cherry-picking.

I kind of doubt the highlighted phrase too. I think you totally overlook heavy industry & refining. That boat you have is a product of heavy industry. Your new boat is basically frozen electricity.

Yes hydro works for that - in fact aluminium plants used to be deliberately sited near hydro power sources. Once again it isn't a generally applicable answer.

Sorry but I'm still a cynic on this one and until I can actually see functional tech actually installed & working I'm going to stay one. Don't misunderstand, I'd LIKE to see it, I just don't believe it's there yet.

I've been watching this debate for over 30 years so far. The promise is just like fusion - only a few years away. Until we have a good backing store to keep the grid up and delivering sufficient current to keep cities & industry running, we can't get away from fossil fuels UNLESS we go to nukes.

I've lived in 3rd World countries with shitty unreliable power systems and it isn't pretty when the hospital has to switch to their diesel generators due to rolling blackouts, the fuel supply is low and the next tanker is weeks away.

FKT

 

[Fah Kiew Tu]

you have to be more lateral with your thinking
given
renewables are cheaper when they are producing than traditional
we can look at installing things not presently needed
like very large, cheap, long term battery storage .. its not like we have never had to have similar things .. gas storage for coal gas had them all over the place

the exact chemistry of the batteries i would not say was settled yet
but
there are a lot of new ideas that would seem to work and best of all the stream of new ideas seems rapid, strong and voluminous

Renewables are cheaper because they don't have to give a guarantee of reliable supply, at least they don't here in Australia. They can bid to supply power in short time blocks and not bid when the wind/sun isn't blowing, leaving the other times for expensive systems with better uptime to take the load.

Now if one were to change the bidding arrangements to say 3 hour blocks or 6 hour blocks, the renewable guys would have to provide their own backing stores at their expense and I expect that'd change their cost structure substantially.

I actually don't give a flying fuck what tech is used, what I care about is reliability & continuity of supply. Find new & better batteries, great, do it.

FKT

 

[3to1]

the human race has gotten, and is, spoiled.
there's this concept, it's called doing more with less, because anything else isn't ecologically sustainable with a human population of eight billion.
think of it as 'one hand for yourself, and one hand for the ship' (the same way all other species do it and achieve true sustainability).

'sacrifice'? guess so (and that ain't proportional to 'quality of life' scenarios). it's on us to walk this shit back because disaster looms.

 

[Gissie]

I find it interesting how often Norway is held up as a shinning beacon of renewable energy. Yet no mention of how they are pumping gas and oil out of the ground and selling it off to the rest of the world without any problem.

 

[Fah Kiew Tu]

the human race has gotten, and is, spoiled.
there's this concept, it's called doing more with less, because anything else isn't ecologically sustainable with a human population of eight billion.
think of it as 'one hand for yourself, and one hand for the ship' (the same way all other species do it and achieve true sustainability).

'sacrifice'? guess so (and that ain't proportional to 'quality of life' scenarios). it's on us to walk this shit back because disaster looms.

You can give up 21C First World medical and dental care any time you choose to do so. I'm not going to.

It takes a high tech civilisation to make those things and have the surplus available to provide the care. Well, it does here in Australia, you guys already have managed the unique combination of highest cost medical with 3rd World results.

FKT

 

[00seven]

the human race has gotten, and is, spoiled.
there's this concept, it's called doing more with less, because anything else isn't ecologically sustainable with a human population of eight billion.
think of it as 'one hand for yourself, and one hand for the ship' (the same way all other species do it and achieve true sustainability).

'sacrifice'? guess so (and that ain't proportional to 'quality of life' scenarios). it's on us to walk this shit back because disaster looms.

Are you the guy that's going to explain to the hut dweller that he can't have power & water because of the mess you've made? While you've got yours?

Fkn hypocrite. You're not giving up anything.

 

[Goodvibes]

Says the guy who has given up on everything, that beer gut is so gross.

 

[BeSafe]

Renewables are cheaper because they don't have to give a guarantee of reliable supply, at least they don't here in Australia. They can bid to supply power in short time blocks and not bid when the wind/sun isn't blowing, leaving the other times for expensive systems with better uptime to take the load.

Now if one were to change the bidding arrangements to say 3 hour blocks or 6 hour blocks, the renewable guys would have to provide their own backing stores at their expense and I expect that'd change their cost structure substantially.

I actually don't give a flying fuck what tech is used, what I care about is reliability & continuity of supply. Find new & better batteries, great, do it.

FKT

Australia is one of the few countries where a mostly renewable grid might work - it's got enough open land to accommodate the additional space requirements for renewables and the demands are more centralized and modest. That guarantee in availability was what I have periodically referenced as "dispatchable power" here in the US when I tried to explain how the power market actually works.

You're right about hydro - about 90% of the world's 'easily available' hydro generation has already been developed. It was one of the first high ERORI systems deployed globally. The next step, unfortunately, is situtions like 3-Gorges where there's going to be significant environmental impact as you create massive new lakes. Norway has started looking at the possibility of damming up fjords to become a massive hydro storage location for northern Europe.

Easy solutions have been exploited. What's left is more expensive to develop. The massive boost of easily obtainable energy was what drove development from the 1850s to the 1950s. Everthing since then has been largely squeezing out efficiencies - not really developing new. We grabbed all the easy stuff and all the adjacent easy stuff... now it gets harder.

Rosie does a good job.

 

[phill_nz]

t

Australia is one of the few countries where a mostly renewable grid might work - it's got enough open land to accommodate the additional space requirements for renewables and the demands are more centralized and modest.

without going to far into it

thats
wrong and mostly wrong

we have been on 85%+ renewable most of our modern era .. add a full array of wind and solar and we are there .. even with a 100% electric fleet

iceland is closer than us .. i believe they are already at 100% renewable .. they have less year round solar but more geothermal than us .. certainly percentage wise .. maybe the total has changed lately

aus has very little powerful running water ... from the sky's or along the ground ( lots of flat .. not many mountains ) .. although that may be changing in a big way soon so they are stuck with wind and solar .. maybe some really good marine turbines when they can sort out some of the rush tides in the kimberlies and neighboring area
but it will be a long expensive uphill battle that they will probably try to do on a floodplain first

 

[00seven]

Australia is one of the few countries where a mostly renewable grid might work - it's got enough open land to accommodate the additional space requirements for renewables and the demands are more centralized and modest. That guarantee in availability was what I have periodically referenced as "dispatchable power" here in the US when I tried to explain how the power market actually works.

You're right about hydro - about 90% of the world's 'easily available' hydro generation has already been developed. It was one of the first high ERORI systems deployed globally. The next step, unfortunately, is situtions like 3-Gorges where there's going to be significant environmental impact as you create massive new lakes. Norway has started looking at the possibility of damming up fjords to become a massive hydro storage location for northern Europe.

Easy solutions have been exploited. What's left is more expensive to develop. The massive boost of easily obtainable energy was what drove development from the 1850s to the 1950s. Everthing since then has been largely squeezing out efficiencies - not really developing new. We grabbed all the easy stuff and all the adjacent easy stuff... now it gets harder.

Rosie does a good job.

Google Sun Cables.

 

[BeSafe]

Google Sun Cables.

I don't have to google it. I met with their group last year and we talked for the day.

Thanks.

 

[00seven]

I don't have to google it. I met their reps last year and we talked for a day.

Thanks.

Before they went into voluntary administration then?

 

[BeSafe]

Before they went into voluntary administration then?

Yes, last year is before this year ☺️.

 

[Dog 2.0]

You show over and over again that you haven't the faintest clue about what science is and what science does.

Climate is always changing and will always be changing, that is factually correct. The change that we have seen over the last 30-40 years has taken planet earth (without the help of humans) several thousands of years in the fastest warm up period in the last million years. Most warm upo periods take closer to 10.000 years. That difference is due to the fact that we are collectively burning every fucking drop of oil before it will run out. The warming is not the problem, the rate at which is it warming is the problem

The other thing is that scientists seldom make predictions of what is going to happen (less than 1% of studies make predictions) and if they do it is always in the form of a bell-curve. There is a likely outcome and two other extremes that could happen but are very unlikely. Those dumb-ass denier websites/youtube channels/newspapers take a study and completely fuck it over to their liking by only selectively quoting as well as only looking at an extreme if a prediciton is made and present that extreme as what 'science' is saying will happen in x-years. Of course it is fucking wrong, it was an extreme that COULD happen but is very unlikely.

There have been nearly a hundred thousand studies to this subject and 99.994% of the scientists come to the exact same conclusion. But you insinuate that they are all crooks and all dumb and all wrong. Your best explanation: because my favorite politician/priest/comedian/teacher/mentor says so.

The only thing I could advise you is to learn to read and learn to think. Though it sounds like you are a lost cause.

I have seen the observed warming fall entirely outside the range of confidence for for predicted warming based on AGW theory. I have seen prediction after prediction fail. Based on these failures any rational person has to view further predictions with skepticism. The alarmists have failed time after time, continuing to blindly believe them is faith based.

 

[Dog 2.0]

Solar and wind are by far the cheapest sources of energy so those will reduce the energy bills. They also provide more jobs than oil and gas do. If it needs any more explanation than that it is on you.
What is happening in Germany (and most other places in Europe) is political bullshit and it has absolutely nothing to do with what the source of the energy is.

Does that cost analysis include the cost of storage to make them continuous sources? If not, you're comparing apples and oranges.

 

[Dog 2.0]

Here in our little town in Alaska where we have a micro grid we switched from fossil fuel power to renewable, the cost was cut in half and the power outages were reduced in duration and number.

Sounds interesting. Would you please provide more details. What was the former source and what renewables did you switch to.