Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

General Discussion about electric vehicles.
billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2928
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Nov 25 2019 11:45am

Punx0r wrote:
Nov 25 2019 11:11am
Sounds balanced.... :roll:
It's from a site named "notrickszone" which is an English-language version of a German website from an organization called EIKE. From Wikipedia: (translated)
===
The European Institute for Climate & Energy ( EIKE ) is a registered association that rejects the scientific consensus that global warming is man-made. The association sees its task in "representing climate and energy violations ideology-free, organizing congresses and disseminating publications on climate research". Contrary to his name, EIKE is not a scientific institute. . . .

EIKE is joined by lobbying groups for the denial of man-made global warming in the US, including through the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow. EIKE pretends to be scientific, deliberately disseminates misinformation and tries to influence parties. The persons responsible are not, and were not, active in climate research. The association publishes no publications in scientific journals.
===
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10307
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Nov 25 2019 5:12pm

Wrong again bill !
Either you dont bother reading, or you selectively ignor sections in posts.
The article came from the German financial weekly “Focus” as i linked.
Obviously it has been picked up on numerous other RE specialist news sites, but its not “from a site named notrickzone”. !
Either way , do you dispute the factual content ?....
...or are you just trolling with irrelevant distractions again ?
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
Dauntless   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 7853
Joined: May 29 2010 1:49am
Location: Coordinates: 33°52′48″N 117°55′43″W

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Dauntless » Nov 27 2019 9:20pm

Hillhater wrote:
Nov 25 2019 5:12pm
. ...or are you just trolling with irrelevant distractions again ?
You STILL don't understand Bill enough to realize even he doesn't know?

RELEVANT info here I'd like to distract you with:

The ExxonMobil website has much to say about partnering with Clariant to develop biofuels, but it also has things like this:

https://energyfactor.exxonmobil.com/new ... n-horizon/

All about biofuels is hype and how exciting it will be. This is what's paying for it all. What really changes it around?

And yeah, it would be nice if the thinkers were allowed to respond in.peace.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC!
- Arthur C. Clarke

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1297
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Nov 27 2019 9:46pm

"The Permian Basin – spanning west Texas and southeast New Mexico – has become the most prolific oil field in the world. That remarkable growth in the Permian and elsewhere has made the U.S. the world’s top oil and natural gas producer, a far-fetched idea just 20 years ago."
.
They state a total recoverable barrels equivalent of 10 billion. The world is blowing through 100 million barrels...A DAY!!! The total in the Permian would supply the world for 100 days.
.
Scale
.
The US is using 7 billion per year. 1.4 years worth in that deposit. And they are fracking it at a loss at $55/ barrel.
.
Any country that has it's own oil, and can still print money to buy other peoples oil at $55, would be wiser to just leave it in the ground for now. Money in the bank for when things really get tight eventually and nationalistic walls go up everywhere.

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2928
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Nov 27 2019 10:04pm

sendler2112 wrote:
Nov 27 2019 9:46pm
Any country that has it's own oil, and can still print money to buy other peoples oil at $55, would be wiser to just leave it in the ground for now. Money in the bank for when things really get tight eventually and nationalistic walls go up everywhere.
I've been making that argument for years. ANWR? Keep that oil in the ground until we really need it i.e. there's a war and we need the oil to win it or the rest of the world is out. Drilling as much as we can, as fast as we can is shortsighted from several perspectives.
--bill von

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1297
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Nov 27 2019 10:42pm

Drain America first again.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10307
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Dec 01 2019 8:55pm

More.. “ Trouble ‘t’ mill”......this time solar in W Australia’s grid.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-01/ ... d/11731452
The rise of solar power is jeopardising the WA energy grid, and it’s a lesson for all of Australia
Daniel Mercer, ABC News

It is a cautionary tale for the rest of the country of how the delicate balancing act that is power grid management can be severely destabilised by what experts refer to as a “dumb solar” approach. “We talk about ‘smart’ this and ‘smart’ that these days,” said energy expert Adam McHugh, an honorary research associate at Perth’s Murdoch University.

“Well, solar at the moment is ‘dumb’ in Western Australia. We need to make it smart.”

Adam McHugh’s an “Energy Expert” at a uni, so his solution involves more centralized control and more dumb money. Apparently, we need to control people’s solar panels, and install “smart” batteries. Jo thinks we don’t need smart batteries, we need smart politicians, and smart academics. We need a smart grid — one that isn’t trying to control the weather, just to keep the lights on......
What ever dumb or smart solution they decide to try to solve the problem with, one thing is certain..
.. the price of electricity to the consumer will increase !
The one “smart” solution that would solve the problem at minimal cost would be to prevent R T Solar from feeding back to the grid !
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
jonescg   1.21 GW

1.21 GW
Posts: 3655
Joined: Aug 07 2009 9:22pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by jonescg » Dec 01 2019 9:31pm

But as the article suggests, they've been aware of it for some time and have a plan to address it. I've been involved with a few of these DER meetings and Western Power are on the ball. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a policy by mid next year requiring all new solar installs to include a battery with demand response capability. Likewise vehicle to grid will get a look-in too. As for EVs in general, they simply need to encourage workplace charging so that we can soak up all that excess solar by day, meaning no need to ramp up the generators of an evening.

We're lucky over here as we haven't privatised our network like most of the NEM did. It makes implementing new policy much easier.

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2928
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Dec 01 2019 9:56pm

Hillhater wrote:
Dec 01 2019 8:55pm
What ever dumb or smart solution they decide to try to solve the problem with, one thing is certain..
.. the price of electricity to the consumer will increase !
That's a given. It has always increased.
The one “smart” solution that would solve the problem at minimal cost would be to prevent R T Solar from feeding back to the grid !
Then prices would increase faster.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10307
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Dec 01 2019 10:33pm

billvon wrote:
Dec 01 2019 9:56pm
The one “smart” solution that would solve the problem at minimal cost would be to prevent R T Solar from feeding back to the grid !
Then prices would increase faster.
How do you figure that ?
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2928
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Dec 01 2019 10:58pm

Hillhater wrote:
Dec 01 2019 10:33pm
billvon wrote:
Dec 01 2019 9:56pm
The one “smart” solution that would solve the problem at minimal cost would be to prevent R T Solar from feeding back to the grid !
Then prices would increase faster.
How do you figure that ?
Because solar+storage currently represents the cheapest way to get new power.
--bill von

cricketo   1 kW

1 kW
Posts: 470
Joined: Oct 23 2018 10:01pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by cricketo » Dec 01 2019 11:45pm

What do you guys know about compact Sabatier reactors ?

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10307
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Dec 02 2019 1:48am

billvon wrote:
Dec 01 2019 10:58pm
Because solar+storage currently represents the cheapest way to get new power.
RT Solar (+ storage) is universally accepted as the MOST EXPENSIVE source of electricity.
And, EVERY country/state that has tried solar, even on utility scale, has experienced increasing power costs ?
The cheapest source of new power is to increase the ulilisation of existing generator assets , rather than shutting them down when the sun shines.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2508
Joined: Feb 09 2007 3:02am
Location: Marlboro

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh » Dec 02 2019 11:46am

cricketo wrote:
Dec 01 2019 11:45pm
What do you guys know about compact Sabatier reactors ?
made in Thiers from acacia wood with patented edgekeeper technology

Image

wait... there's a 'new' brunswick???
Kick down the barricades Listen what the kids say.
From time to time people change their minds But the Frock is here to stay.
I've seen it all from the bottom to the top Everywhere I go the kids wanna Frock.
Around the world or around the block Everywhere I go the kids wanna Frock.

cricketo   1 kW

1 kW
Posts: 470
Joined: Oct 23 2018 10:01pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by cricketo » Dec 02 2019 1:06pm

Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh wrote:
Dec 02 2019 11:46am
cricketo wrote:
Dec 01 2019 11:45pm
What do you guys know about compact Sabatier reactors ?
made in Thiers from acacia wood with patented edgekeeper technology

Image

wait... there's a 'new' brunswick???
I don't understand how that nuclear stuff relates to my question...

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2928
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Dec 02 2019 10:14pm

Hillhater wrote:
Dec 02 2019 1:48am
RT Solar (+ storage) is universally accepted as the MOST EXPENSIVE source of electricity.
Only by people with a political agenda. In reality:
=============================
Solar plus batteries is now cheaper than fossil power
Robert F. Service

Science 12 Jul 2019:
Vol. 365, Issue 6449, pp. 108

Summary
This month, officials in Los Angeles, California, are expected to approve a deal that would make solar power cheaper than ever while also addressing its chief flaw—its dependence on sunshine. The deal calls for a huge solar farm backed up by one of the world's largest batteries. It would provide 7% of the city's electricity beginning in 2023 at a cost of 1.997 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) for the solar power and 1.3 cents per kWh for the battery. That's cheaper than any power generated with fossil fuel. The deal is being driven by steady price declines in solar power and utility-scale batteries, the latter of which have dropped in cost by 76% since 2012, according to one recent analysis.
=============================
The cheapest source of new power is to increase the ulilisation of existing generator assets , rather than shutting them down when the sun shines.
So burning more natural gas is cheaper than burning less?

Let's all be thankful you are not in any sort of position where you make economic/business decisions for people!
--bill von

User avatar
TheBeastie   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1903
Joined: Jul 28 2012 12:31am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by TheBeastie » Dec 03 2019 12:25am

Hydrogen from Natural Gas Without CO2 Emissions--Methane is separated into gaseous #hydrogen and solid carbon that is a valuable material for various industry branches
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/hydroge ... emissions/
Ideally, pure carbon can be arranged in its perfect symmetrical structure to form diamonds but this takes a lot of energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond, this new process can take pure carbon atoms from methane/naturalgas (which is 4 hydrogen atoms and 1 carbon atom) and create carbon-based materials as a byproduct.

Carbon which is the 4th most abundant element in the universe if left exposed to air is vulnerable to getting oxygen atoms attached to it and becoming evil co2.
The reason why methane is found everywhere include methane clouds in space is because of the fact hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe and carbon is 4th. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47788451

The upside to splitting methane gas rather than burning it is you don't create all those other evil gases like nitrogen oxide or anything else that likes to bind to oxygen in our air when its burned, as proven via the "dieselgate" scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswage ... ns_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_emissions_scandal.
By volume, dry air contains 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.04% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases.[8] Air also contains a variable amount of water vapor, on average around 1% at sea level
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth

I love the Co2/H2 dice thing in this image.
Image
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A city in France now has a fleet of Hydrogen fuel cell ebikes, not something you see every day...
France: Centre-Val de Loire Region Acquires Pragma Hydrogen Bikes-Acquisition of a fleet of 15 hydrogen fuel cell electric bikes from Pragma Industries
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/france- ... gen-bikes/
https://www.pragma-industries.com/light-mobility/
Image
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guy drives 778 km's on a single tank of hydrogen fuel cell.
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/bertran ... he-future/
Image
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A hydrogen-powered Fuel cell delivery drone managed an epic ocean crossing in 1-hour, 43-minute ocean.
Utilizing its temperature-controlled payload system, the drone was used to transport live bacteria samples from a hospital on the Caribbean island of St. Croix to a testing facility on the neighboring island of St. Thomas. This involved crossing 43 miles (69 km) of open ocean. Upon successfully reaching its destination, the copter reportedly still had almost 30 minutes of flight time left on its fuel cell.

According to Guinn Partners, it can ordinarily take up to a week before patients' biological fluid samples are transported between the two islands by manned aircraft – in the case of illnesses such as Dengue fever, the infection can progress to dangerous levels within that amount of time. Because using a drone is much cheaper and simpler, though, samples could conceivably be sent to St. Croix immediately.

A crew followed the drone below on a boat, but next time they will let the drone run at full speed.
Curious I marked it out on Google Maps, it is indeed 43miles/70km across the ocean.
https://www.google.com/maps/search/Cari ... m2!1e3!4b1
https://goo.gl/maps/K8JM3fQnWJiQvrcAA
https://goo.gl/maps/B5by6M8KKpNZTX748
https://insideunmannedsystems.com/hydro ... an-flight/
https://newatlas.com/drones/fuel-cell-d ... -crossing/
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/doosan- ... -delivery/
This is why I think flying fuel cells should come pretty fast because they can literally replace a lot of expensive manned flight work, that being major news helicopter footage collection/expensive delivery services like medical.
And then ideally it should replace a lot of premium short-range human transport that would normally be done by helicopter, because ideally, the fuel-cell VTOL will be quieter and more environmentally friendly etc.
Image
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyundai plans to invest $52 billion between 2020 and 2025, focused on electric, autonomous and flying fuel-cell cars.
https://twitter.com/ReutersBiz/status/1 ... 26336?s=20
Image
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bosch and Mercedez-Benz/Rolls-Royce start new factories/labs in China/elsewhere for Fuel-Cells.
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/bosch-b ... -in-china/
https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/mercede ... l-systems/
Mercedes-Benz has completed millions of test kilometers around the globe and, with the Mercedes-Benz GLC F-CELL fuel-cell plug-in hybrid (weighted hydrogen consumption: 0.91 kg/100 km, weighted CO2 emissions: 0 g/km, weighted power consumption: 18 kWh/100 km)1, it has recently set a further technological milestone.
Image
Last edited by TheBeastie on Dec 07 2019 1:54am, edited 24 times in total.
Speed Kills Range, 10mph = 46 miles range, 20mph = 20 miles, 30mph = 8 miles rangehttps://goo.gl/1JNL53
Over Charging Kills ur battery bit.ly/1hzWKl4
Consider PAS as your only throttle https://goo.gl/Kg1F8F
Fuel-Cell is the ultimate battery coupled with 4th-gen Nuclear
https://goo.gl/TcKtHs https://goo.gl/ZhFFot https://goo.gl/gfa215
10 Square Miles of solar panels = 0.12GW average power! https://goo.gl/Ub1S39

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10307
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Dec 03 2019 1:55am

billvon wrote:
Dec 02 2019 10:14pm
Hillhater wrote:
Dec 02 2019 1:48am
RT Solar (+ storage) is universally accepted as the MOST EXPENSIVE source of electricity.
Only by people with a political agenda. In reality:
=============================
Solar plus batteries is now cheaper than fossil power
Robert F. Service

Science 12 Jul 2019:
Vol. 365, Issue 6449, pp. 108

Summary
This month, officials in Los Angeles, California, are expected to approve a deal that would make solar power cheaper than ever while also addressing its chief flaw—its dependence on sunshine. The deal calls for a huge solar farm backed up by one of the world's largest batteries. It would provide 7% of the city's electricity beginning in 2023 at a cost of 1.997 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) for the solar power and 1.3 cents per kWh for the battery.
So burning more natural gas is cheaper than burning less?
Yes, we had that dance before bill, it just another “Projet proposal” costing.. bearing no relationship to the cost the consumer will pay.
Explain to me why it is that California has more solar than other states, and yet has the highest power cost by some margin ?
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1297
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Dec 03 2019 7:01am

Solar PV has an annual capacity factor of 14% in North East USA. And 5% in January. Less all across Germany and Eastern Europe and Russia.
.
The 50kW solar site at ecovillage Ithaca, NY had 15 out of 18 days near zero in January 2018.
.
.
Image
.
.

cricketo   1 kW

1 kW
Posts: 470
Joined: Oct 23 2018 10:01pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by cricketo » Dec 03 2019 4:48pm

To produce the lithium needed for a 64 kWh battery pack, for example, Fichtner stated that about 3840 liters of water are evaporated according to usual calculation methods. This is roughly comparable to the production of 250 grams of beef, 30 cups of coffee, or half a pair of jeans, according to the researcher.
https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3 ... esearcher/

Ianhill   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1770
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Ianhill » Dec 04 2019 8:19am

cricketo wrote:
Dec 03 2019 4:48pm
To produce the lithium needed for a 64 kWh battery pack, for example, Fichtner stated that about 3840 liters of water are evaporated according to usual calculation methods. This is roughly comparable to the production of 250 grams of beef, 30 cups of coffee, or half a pair of jeans, according to the researcher.
https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3 ... esearcher/
How about the cobalt ? I'm all for clean engineering but when it's apply compared with Apple's but there's figure for an orange used i get pissed show how little they beleive the public understands.

I seen one news story that said an electric car can travel 100 miles for £5 yet a diesel can only do 50 and a petrol even worse when the figures being used are the electrics very possible best and diesels average if they want to be funny audi got an A1 that does 125mpg in the 90's to me it seems there's alot of miss info to support a claim where it's not needed to hit the nail home in the first place

cricketo   1 kW

1 kW
Posts: 470
Joined: Oct 23 2018 10:01pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by cricketo » Dec 04 2019 10:49am

Ianhill wrote:
Dec 04 2019 8:19am
How about the cobalt ?
Cobalt is talked about in the article as well.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10307
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Dec 04 2019 7:07pm

I dont know what Fichtner was angling at with his water volume comparasons, but if he was defending Lithiums use of water, he missed a major home run by not pointing out that lithium is mainly obtained by evaporating naturally occurring BRINE sources, whilst the other products he sites,..Beef, Coffee, Cotton, etc,.. are using FRESH water sources...a much more valuable form of water. !
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1297
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Dec 05 2019 1:35pm

Here is an interesting study on the recent solar plus battery installation on Samoa which attempts a 100% electrical production of 150 kW average with no further diesel generation. It was calculated that it would indeed cover the historical consumption for all but 4 days in a year. The stated Cap cost was stated as $8 million but the author questions this as to whether the cost was actually much higher when including transportation and installation to the remote location and might be more representative of a cost for a continental USA location. This works out to about $55/ Watt using the $8 million number.
.
http://euanmearns.com/solar-power-on-th ... appraisal/
.
.
It will be good to start getting some real world data on longevity of the big batteries in 100% systems.
.
Keep in mind also that this is 100% solar ELECTRICITY at a thrifty 136 kWh/ month/ person average including all infrastructure. Not 100% of their ENERGY, as is so often mistakenly conflated in green news articles. They have no mining/ refining locally so this carbon energy is all offshored and dependent upon carbon fueled transportation as is their fishing fleet. And biomass is still the predominant cooking and heating fuel at 97%.
.
http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/ ... s/4835.pdf
.
.
Image
.
.

User avatar
Dauntless   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 7853
Joined: May 29 2010 1:49am
Location: Coordinates: 33°52′48″N 117°55′43″W

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Dauntless » Dec 07 2019 2:59am

Any sufficiently advanced technology is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC!
- Arthur C. Clarke

Post Reply