Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

General Discussion about electric vehicles.

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby craneplaneguy » Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:20 am

I've heated with waste lumber scrap for decades, which would usually go to the landfill. A home made wood boiler (which burns without any visible smoke, the second I've built) in the shop with underground insulated lines to the house, and radiant floor heat, makes it possible. I literally trip over my fuel supply every day while setting trusses on new construction, while the young carpenters on the job site nowadays don't bother, probably because they live in rental housing, having spent all their money (and then some) on new AWD quad cab pick up trucks! I have not paid a heating bill for......40+ years now, and we're talking Idaho mountain winters, so looking back that savings probably paid for all my beer since then. My neighbors (distant, thank God) all have 1000 gallon propane tanks, some 2 or 3, to heat their overly large homes, sited without any thought of winter solar gain, or summer heat gain. Their year round energy bill, with no end in sight, has to be more then even my beer bill, by many times, what a waste.
craneplaneguy
10 kW
10 kW
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:15 am
Location: S.E. Idaho USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby sendler2112 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 12:16 pm

liveforphysics wrote:All the human activity that isn't sustainable has a single fate, to conclude.
As far the footprint being bigger than ones home, you're of course right and diet is a bigger factor than transportation. I will continue to enjoy a mostly local and always vegan diet, and using EVs for my transportation, and buying used when possible (I fly in airplanes that burn fuel still for now.)
The best we can do is to set the example with our own life choices.

Infrastructure and manufacturing is the biggest consumer of energy and is the one aspect that is always forgotten about in these discussions where it is easier for everyone to just look at their own electric, gas, and grocery bill.
.
Very important things that we now take for granted will conclude.
.
My hope is that we will put aside our divided support for one technology over another to make wise and pragmatic decisions going forward to soften HOW our current way of life is concluded. We need to utilize all forms of electrical production that are available to us to even begin to get off of fossil fuels without a sudden crash of world economic systems. Storage for solar and wind alone are not dense enough, soon enough.
sendler2112
1 kW
1 kW
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:14 am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby liveforphysics » Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:43 pm

wineboyrider wrote:
Hillhater wrote:
wineboyrider wrote:And then there is Biomass! Burning for the future! http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2010/06/biomass-generates-32-of-all-energy-in-sweden.html

Many countries already have some Biomass fueled generation, but if you work out the scale of growth needed to produce even a small proportion of the demand you will see its not practical for large scale use.
115TWh is equivalent to a small 13KVA generator plant.
And it has its environmental issues as well as technical limitations.

All true Hillhater, but you still have to use the wood for something? I heat my house with old grapevine wood and oak pallets.



My wife and I just put on warm clothes if it's cold, and have never heated the house.
Each carcinogen vapor exposure includes a dice roll for cancer.

Each mutagen vapor exposure includes a dice roll for reproductive genetic defects in your children.

Each engine start sprays them into a shared atmosphere which includes beings not offered an opportunity to consent accepting these cancer experiences and defective genetics life experiences.

Every post is a free gift to the collective of minds composing the living bleeding edge of LEV development on our spaceship.
User avatar
liveforphysics
100 GW
100 GW
 
Posts: 14268
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:48 am
Location: Santa Cruz, CA, USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby skeetab5780 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:50 pm

liveforphysics wrote:My wife and I just put on warm clothes if it's cold, and have never heated the house.


I'd never get laid again if I tried this
User avatar
skeetab5780
1 MW
1 MW
 
Posts: 1713
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:58 pm
Location: MA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby liveforphysics » Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:17 pm

skeetab5780 wrote:
liveforphysics wrote:My wife and I just put on warm clothes if it's cold, and have never heated the house.


I'd never get laid again if I tried this


Just got laid. 8)
Each carcinogen vapor exposure includes a dice roll for cancer.

Each mutagen vapor exposure includes a dice roll for reproductive genetic defects in your children.

Each engine start sprays them into a shared atmosphere which includes beings not offered an opportunity to consent accepting these cancer experiences and defective genetics life experiences.

Every post is a free gift to the collective of minds composing the living bleeding edge of LEV development on our spaceship.
User avatar
liveforphysics
100 GW
100 GW
 
Posts: 14268
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:48 am
Location: Santa Cruz, CA, USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby Hillhater » Tue Sep 12, 2017 5:06 pm

skeetab5780 wrote:
liveforphysics wrote:My wife and I just put on warm clothes if it's cold, and have never heated the house.


I'd never get laid again if I tried this


...Try using wet suits !! ...and a little coconut oil. 8)
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca
Hillhater
100 GW
100 GW
 
Posts: 8102
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby amberwolf » Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:12 am

Scrap wood that's too small to be used for anything else makes for good dog chews. When they're done with it it makes for good fertilizer, whether it passes thru them or not. ;)

Before it gets small enough for them to use, there's always one project or another that can use it as wood to build something, or shim something, etc. Fences to build or repair, etc.

If it can't be used for something, can't be chewed on, it can be ground up into shreds to be fertilizer and fill for plants, like to grow new trees.

No need to burn it.
User avatar
amberwolf
100 GW
100 GW
 
Posts: 23314
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 6:43 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA, Earth, Sol, Local Bubble, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby wineboyrider » Thu Sep 14, 2017 8:30 am

amberwolf wrote:Scrap wood that's too small to be used for anything else makes for good dog chews. When they're done with it it makes for good fertilizer, whether it passes thru them or not. ;)

Before it gets small enough for them to use, there's always one project or another that can use it as wood to build something, or shim something, etc. Fences to build or repair, etc.

If it can't be used for something, can't be chewed on, it can be ground up into shreds to be fertilizer and fill for plants, like to grow new trees.

No need to burn it.

I compost the ashes.
ES IS SAVED! THANK YOU JUSTIN.
User avatar
wineboyrider
100 MW
100 MW
 
Posts: 2857
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 9:08 am
Location: Tularosa, New Mexico

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby sendler2112 » Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:08 am

Wood pellet heat from dead fall and urban trimming/ storm damage is a perfectly acceptable use of an otherwise carbon neutral waste.
sendler2112
1 kW
1 kW
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:14 am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby billvon » Fri Sep 15, 2017 4:24 pm

Hillhater wrote: Some large industrial users in Au ...(Steel producers, large paper process mills, ). ..have announced plans to install their own power generation capacity due to the increasing move to renewable grid sources and consequent insecurity of base load. Those will undoubtedly be Thermal generation, gas, waste fueled, etc

Actually a great many will be ESS (energy storage systems.) This will come from a combination of user installs and utility installs. So far there is 6GW worth of large (commercial/grid scale) storage systems in the US, expanding to over 20GW by 2022. Energy storage systems allow companies to still get cheap power from the grid while guaranteeing reliable power.
--bill von
billvon
1 kW
1 kW
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby Hillhater » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:34 pm

billvon wrote:
Hillhater wrote: Some large industrial users in Au ...(Steel producers, large paper process mills, ). ..have announced plans to install their own power generation capacity due to the increasing move to renewable grid sources and consequent insecurity of base load. Those will undoubtedly be Thermal generation, gas, waste fueled, etc

Actually a great many will be ESS (energy storage systems.) This will come from a combination of user installs and utility installs. So far there is 6GW worth of large (commercial/grid scale) storage systems in the US, expanding to over 20GW by 2022. Energy storage systems allow companies to still get cheap power from the grid while guaranteeing reliable power.

What are they using for storage ?
The Paper mill (Visy) has said it will be installing waste burning generators on several large sites (they have a lot of waste product !)
And the steel mill suggested theirs would be a CHP gas plant as they already have a large gas supply facility.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca
Hillhater
100 GW
100 GW
 
Posts: 8102
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby sendler2112 » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:39 pm

billvon wrote: So far there is 6GW worth of large (commercial/grid scale) storage systems in the US, expanding to over 20GW by 2022. Energy storage systems allow companies to still get cheap power from the grid while guaranteeing reliable power.

Batteries store energy right? Do they mean 20GWh of storage? That is less than 1 day of output of 1 conventional power plant.[/quote]
sendler2112
1 kW
1 kW
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:14 am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby billvon » Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:28 pm

sendler2112 wrote:Batteries store energy right? Do they mean 20GWh of storage? That is less than 1 day of output of 1 conventional power plant.

No, I mean 20GW of _power_. Energy storage is generally 2 to 4 times the power rating depending on the system.
Last edited by billvon on Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:29 pm, edited 1 time in total. View post history.
--bill von
billvon
1 kW
1 kW
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby Hillhater » Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:25 pm

If batteries are going to store energy for 3-4 times the 20 GW power rating, then that would be 60-80 GWh of battery :shock:
For the 6 GW that is already in use , it means 18-24 GWh of batteries !
......where are these large battery farms ?
..or have you included pumped hydro etc in that storage ?
Last edited by Hillhater on Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:26 pm, edited 1 time in total. View post history.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca
Hillhater
100 GW
100 GW
 
Posts: 8102
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby sendler2112 » Sat Sep 16, 2017 12:29 am

I think we are seeing just a simple mix up of units by the media that doesn't know the difference between a GW and a GWh. No battery is ever rated on it's power. They are always rated on energy capacity and then a discharge rate. Sometimes a burst rate.
sendler2112
1 kW
1 kW
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:14 am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby wineboyrider » Wed Sep 20, 2017 9:04 am

Speaking of burning stuff it looks like Florida has a plan to burn the trash from the hurricane damage?https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-18/trash-from-hurricane-irma-will-add-energy-to-florida-s-power-grid
ES IS SAVED! THANK YOU JUSTIN.
User avatar
wineboyrider
100 MW
100 MW
 
Posts: 2857
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 9:08 am
Location: Tularosa, New Mexico

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby billvon » Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:37 pm

sendler2112 wrote:I think we are seeing just a simple mix up of units by the media that doesn't know the difference between a GW and a GWh. No battery is ever rated on it's power.

ESS (energy storage systems) are rated on both power and storage. Power, because it's important to know how much power they can output to support times of high demand in the grid. Energy, because it's important to know how long they can do that.

For example, BYD makes an energy storage system in stackable shipping containers, so you can buy as many as you need. Here's one they designed for China a while back:

=======
China Southern Grid 3MW/12MWH
The world's first megawatt-level, grid-connected,
Lithium iron-phosphate battery storage station
for commercial use.
=======
--bill von
billvon
1 kW
1 kW
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby Hillhater » Wed Sep 20, 2017 4:45 pm

billvon.....you didnt answer the question as to where this 6, GW of storage actually is ?
billvon wrote:...... So far there is 6GW worth of large (commercial/grid scale) storage systems in the US, expanding to over 20GW by 2022. .....


China Southern's 3.0MW system is a long way short of 6 GW !
Last edited by Hillhater on Wed Sep 20, 2017 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total. View post history.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca
Hillhater
100 GW
100 GW
 
Posts: 8102
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby jonescg » Thu Sep 21, 2017 8:13 pm

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-21/p ... ch/8966530

Australia's energy demands are far lower than that of the USA, so we're in a unique position to implement pumped hydro for storing excess solar and wind energy.
It seems entirely feasible that we could at least shift the nation to 50% renewables with pumped hydro within two decades.
User avatar
jonescg
1 GW
1 GW
 
Posts: 3290
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 9:22 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby Hillhater » Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:03 pm

Oh jeez Jonesy :shock:
Really ..? Not much mention of cost in that report ?
Currently, all Snowy (the biggest and best hydro location) generates 6 GW...when there is enough snow run off etc.
The magic Snowy 2.0 is a 2 GW extention . Any other locations are less optimal/ lower output , hence why they suggest you would need many (hundreds at least) of them to function as storage...and you know what they cost to build !
But here is the kicker...you have to generate the power initially, to "charge" (fill, pump, ) the system before you get anything out.
So for every GWh you want out you are goung to have to build 1.5 GWh of solar or wind to make it work. :shock:
That is in addition to the other totally impossible amount of solar/wind needed to keep the country running .
Try a few simple dollar estimates on that lot.... It a joke !
Batteries would be cheaper, but there is not enough battery manufacturing capacity in the world to do it....
.....even just for Australia !
.....and all the time , you have to keep praying you dont have too many cloudy days or fluky winds.
This is a recipe for scaring every sensible manufacturer out of the country.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca
Hillhater
100 GW
100 GW
 
Posts: 8102
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby sendler2112 » Fri Sep 22, 2017 5:53 am

If we really think we can keep all of the plates spinning without nuclear (we definitely cannot) we must use our current fossil fuel wealth to develop every possible location for hydro all over the world with the minimum regard to ecological impacts of inundation.
.
Some intersting cost analysis will come out of the Snowy 2.0 project. They are planning the outcome to allow pumped hydro for an additional 2 GW with storage enough for 1 week which is 330 GWh of storage! Even if the cost is double the projected $2B with the added transmission lines it will be $0.012/ Wh.
.
Of course all of the dams are already there.
.
Do it. Everywhere.
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowy_Mou ... sion_plans
.
http://www.afr.com/news/politics/pms-sn ... 523-gwb2cb
.
http://www.ecogeneration.com.au/why-pum ... -solution/
.
sendler2112
1 kW
1 kW
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:14 am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby speedmd » Fri Sep 22, 2017 7:18 am

when there is enough snow run off


Salt water works! It also could be used near any ocean in salty baron desert areas near dried salty low lands while adding needed humidity to the area. My bet is that batteries will soon be the best option even if not as cost effective for small domestic requirements and personal transport.
Last edited by speedmd on Fri Sep 22, 2017 10:49 am, edited 1 time in total. View post history.
User avatar
speedmd
100 MW
100 MW
 
Posts: 2663
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:16 pm
Location: new england

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby jonescg » Fri Sep 22, 2017 9:50 am

The Three Gorges Dam and power station cost $30 billion and was built in 16 years.

We've spent $50 billion on an abortion of a broadband network in this country and it still doesn't frocking work. I dread to think what we've spent on international conflict and associated folly.

We know we can find the funds to build bulk pumped hydro storage AND fund the new generation to fill it.

And yes I agree nuclear will be a part of the solution for many places, especially in places where they are already set up for it. Who knows? Maybe Australia will put its hand up to test one of these much fabled "Gen 4" reactors which has never been built anywhere else in the world...
User avatar
jonescg
1 GW
1 GW
 
Posts: 3290
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 9:22 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby billvon » Fri Sep 22, 2017 10:19 am

sendler2112 wrote:If we really think we can keep all of the plates spinning without nuclear (we definitely cannot)

There's no question that we can. Enough harvestable solar energy falls on the Earth to supply all our energy needs ten times over, and distribution and storage are problems with well understood solutions. The question is - is that the best way to do it? (Answer - probably not.)
--bill von
billvon
1 kW
1 kW
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Postby sendler2112 » Fri Sep 22, 2017 11:28 am

billvon wrote:storage are problems with well understood solutions. The question is - is that the best way to do it? (Answer - probably not.)

Storage to cover intermittents for the 75 Terra Watt hours of electricity we are currently using every day is completely unfathomable. For even one off day of bad weather. Regardless of how much sunlight falls on the earth. We would have to go to a 6 hour a day sunshine economy.
sendler2112
1 kW
1 kW
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:14 am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

PreviousNext

Return to E-Vehicles General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests