Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

General Discussion about electric vehicles.
Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5267
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Aug 21 2019 4:31pm

True story: a company fitted VFDs to the air circulation blowers on a gas-fired industrial oven to reduce electricity consumption, save money and also, maybe, save the polar bears. The contractor failed to set the overload properly and one blower tripped out. Someone else had failed to maintain the safety cutout so the oven didn't shut off and a hot spot formed. Yet another person had failed to keep the oven clean and a large buildup of flammable paint residue caught fire. What resulted was equipment damage, lost production, a flurry of finger-pointing and threats of legal action that came to nothing. I learnt a valuable lesson though: VFDS DON'T WORK AND REDUCING ENERGY CONSUMPTION IS DANGEROUS!!!

Ianhill   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1699
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Ianhill » Aug 21 2019 11:26pm

Punx0r wrote:
Aug 21 2019 4:31pm
True story: a company fitted VFDs to the air circulation blowers on a gas-fired industrial oven to reduce electricity consumption, save money and also, maybe, save the polar bears. The contractor failed to set the overload properly and one blower tripped out. Someone else had failed to maintain the safety cutout so the oven didn't shut off and a hot spot formed. Yet another person had failed to keep the oven clean and a large buildup of flammable paint residue caught fire. What resulted was equipment damage, lost production, a flurry of finger-pointing and threats of legal action that came to nothing. I learnt a valuable lesson though: VFDS DON'T WORK AND REDUCING ENERGY CONSUMPTION IS DANGEROUS!!!
In the event of an electrical failure please insure the item is clean.

Maybe my ocd does have it's merits, I draw the line at aligning screw heads though that one pisses me off, torque the screw till tight not straight.

User avatar
TheBeastie   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1860
Joined: Jul 28 2012 12:31am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by TheBeastie » Aug 23 2019 3:04am

New article here on Bill Gates TerraPower technology, this stuff is a while off but it really seems like Bill's dream of fully automated nuclear near-zero waste power-stations that run for decades buried underground that are cheaper than even coal generation is his goal.

Inside the lab where Bill Gates’ TerraPower is inventing the future of nuclear energy
https://www.geekwire.com/2019/inside-te ... clear-lab/
One of those technologies is known as TWR, which stands for traveling wave reactors. Rather than relying exclusively on enriched uranium, traveling wave reactors are designed to make use of depleted uranium – the waste that’s left over at enrichment plants – as its reload fuel. After starting with enriched uranium, the reactors can continue to run on depleted uranium for decades. It does this by converting the depleted uranium and then using it in one swing through the reactor.

There is also a YouTube video in the article above that I have embedded here for your super convenience.
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

User avatar
Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2470
Joined: Feb 09 2007 3:02am
Location: Marlboro

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh » Aug 23 2019 10:45am

https://www.opg.com/media_release/nanti ... emolished/
AUGUST 22, 2019
Nanticoke – Today, Ontario Power Generation (OPG) safely demolished the powerhouse of the former Nanticoke Generating Station (GS), which was at one time the largest coal-fired plant in the world. The site on the north shore of Lake Erie has been transformed into OPG’s first-ever solar facility.
https://www.cp24.com/news/must-watch-na ... -1.4560454
https://www.insauga.com/the-4-sisters-a ... demolition
https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/16/business ... index.html
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.

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1253
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Aug 23 2019 11:07am

"The Lakeview Generating Station supplied power to the province of Ontario from 1962 to 2005. It generated more than 215 billion kWh of electricity in its 43 years of operation."
.
Keep in mind that they have demolished 4.000 MW of generating capacity. And in it's place now stands 44MW name plate capacity of solar. Which will actually have a capacity factor of 15% in it's snowy location. So will only average 6.6MW. 0.17% of it's former output. With many days near zero in the winter.
.
This is where we are headed. Things will be much smaller and simpler once again in the future. Simplify now and beat the rush.
.
"The Nanticoke Generating Station is a 44 MW solar power station which started operation in April 2019.[2] Previously from 1972 to 2013, it was the largest coal-fired power plant in North America. At full capacity, it could provide 3,964 MW of power into the southern Ontario power grid from its base in Nanticoke, Ontario, Canada,"
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanticoke ... ng_Station
.

furcifer   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 602
Joined: Dec 21 2018 12:36pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by furcifer » Aug 23 2019 11:43am

sendler2112 wrote:
Aug 23 2019 11:07am
"The Lakeview Generating Station supplied power to the province of Ontario from 1962 to 2005. It generated more than 215 billion kWh of electricity in its 43 years of operation."
.
Keep in mind that they have demolished 4.000 MW of generating capacity. And in it's place now stands 44MW name plate capacity of solar. Which will actually have a capacity factor of 15% in it's snowy location. So will only average 6.6MW. 0.17% of it's former output. With many days near zero in the winter.
.
This is where we are headed. Things will be much smaller and simpler once again in the future. Simplify now and beat the rush.
.
"The Nanticoke Generating Station is a 44 MW solar power station which started operation in April 2019.[2] Previously from 1972 to 2013, it was the largest coal-fired power plant in North America. At full capacity, it could provide 3,964 MW of power into the southern Ontario power grid from its base in Nanticoke, Ontario, Canada,"
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanticoke ... ng_Station
.
Most of the power engineers in my program went to Nanticoke. I actually applied for a job there and was offered one but didn't accept it because they wouldn't give us steam time to move up a class. I'm glad I didn't. I ended up on the receiving end, processing the tar from Nanticoke into naphthalene, light and heavy oil, pitch, creosote etc. The whole industry is filthy and I'm glad to see it go. Those solar panels are hiding a multitude of sins.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10161
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Aug 23 2019 9:53pm

TheBeastie wrote:
Aug 23 2019 3:04am
New article here on Bill Gates TerraPower technology, this stuff is a while off but it really seems like Bill's dream of fully automated nuclear near-zero waste power-stations that run for decades buried underground that are cheaper than even coal generation is his goal.
I dont know how far off Bill s technology is, But the Chinese are commissioning 2 Thorium salt reactors/ power generation stations in the Gobi desert as we speak, and as with all things Chinese,...they have roll out plans for many more !
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-econ ... r-flagship
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2854
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Aug 23 2019 10:05pm

TheBeastie wrote:
Aug 23 2019 3:04am
New article here on Bill Gates TerraPower technology, this stuff is a while off but it really seems like Bill's dream of fully automated nuclear near-zero waste power-stations that run for decades buried underground that are cheaper than even coal generation is his goal.
Great. I fully support that goal. In the meantime, I also support your right to pay 50-100% more for nuclear power. I will stick to my solar.
--bill von

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1253
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Aug 24 2019 12:53pm

billvon wrote:
Aug 23 2019 10:05pm

Great. I fully support that goal. In the meantime, I also support your right to pay 50-100% more for nuclear power. I will stick to my solar.
What is it worth to have electricity in the Winter?

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2854
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Aug 24 2019 10:19pm

sendler2112 wrote:
Aug 24 2019 12:53pm
What is it worth to have electricity in the Winter?
It is worth quite a lot. If you want nuclear power for that, I am all for it. I am also all for the people who want it paying more for it.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10161
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Aug 24 2019 11:28pm

billvon wrote:
Aug 24 2019 10:19pm
sendler2112 wrote:
Aug 24 2019 12:53pm
What is it worth to have electricity in the Winter?
It is worth quite a lot. If you want nuclear power for that, I am all for it. I am also all for the people who want it paying more for it.
So,.. that would be Gas, or coal, then ?.......as there is nothing else that can support a significant level of demand .
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
TheBeastie   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1860
Joined: Jul 28 2012 12:31am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by TheBeastie » Aug 25 2019 2:21am

sendler2112 wrote:
Aug 23 2019 11:07am
"The Lakeview Generating Station supplied power to the province of Ontario from 1962 to 2005. It generated more than 215 billion kWh of electricity in its 43 years of operation."
.
Keep in mind that they have demolished 4.000 MW of generating capacity. And in it's place now stands 44MW name plate capacity of solar. Which will actually have a capacity factor of 15% in it's snowy location. So will only average 6.6MW. 0.17% of it's former output. With many days near zero in the winter.
.
This is where we are headed. Things will be much smaller and simpler once again in the future. Simplify now and beat the rush.
.
"The Nanticoke Generating Station is a 44 MW solar power station which started operation in April 2019.[2] Previously from 1972 to 2013, it was the largest coal-fired power plant in North America. At full capacity, it could provide 3,964 MW of power into the southern Ontario power grid from its base in Nanticoke, Ontario, Canada,"
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanticoke ... ng_Station
.
Thanks for the link, yes this is quite a good example of "fossil fuel footprint/energy" vs "RE's Solar-Wind footprint/Energy" since they are building the solar panels right over the old coal-power station land.
Quote from the Wikipedia link "Nameplate capacity 3964 MW (8 units) 1880 MW (4 units)"

You can see from this article here the picture of the completed solar farm half covered in snow matches perfectly with the cleared ground from googlemaps satellite view.
http://www.mining.com/former-coal-fired ... -facility/
The land-cleared area matches it in a kind of deformed irregular quadrilateral shape.
https://goo.gl/maps/eTVRFnR9eiWwW2W76
Image

But the amazing thing is a 44MW solar farm in that location will have a similar solar capacity factor as what the UK/Northen Europe has which 10% of its claimed max power on average.
So that's really 4.4MW solar farm on average power output.

So if we take (4.4MW_average_power / 4000) = 0.0011 x 100 = 0.11% of the original plants output.

So this is a great "real-world data" example of what Solar can really do with a roughly same-sized footprint of land, that is Solar can provide 0.1% of the coals power station output on average. Nuclear is even better.
This is what's amazing about "theoretical" performance vs "real-world" performance.

While this data will not come to a surprise to any of us who have been on this thread for a long time now as we have gone over these real-world examples many times, we can do the general math in our heads without even thinking, it's still fun to do and it's a great example as its all in one spot.
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: 10161
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Aug 25 2019 4:15am

Key points from the interim ISO report on the Aug 9 UK grid shut down..
Power Loss
• The lightning strike and rapid frequency fall caused the loss of ~500MW of Distribution connected generation, likely to be solar and some small gas and diesel fired generation, due to the operation of the generation sources own protection systems (Loss of Mains Protectioni)
• Hornsea One offshore wind immediately lost Hornsea modules 2 and 3, totalling 737MW. Module 1 continued to operate smoothly at 50MW throughout the event.
• Little Barford Gas Power Station – near immediate loss of the Steam Turbine unit (244MW) and then, as a result of the loss of the steam unit, loss of the two Gas Turbine units (total station loss of 641MW) over the following 90 seconds.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5267
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Aug 25 2019 6:47am

Keep trying to somehow use this to trash RE. Let's be honest, you have a 50% chance of being "right" about which of the two generators went offline first just by guessing. You don't have a point either way...

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5267
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Aug 25 2019 6:56am

sendler2112 wrote:
Aug 23 2019 11:07am
"The Lakeview Generating Station supplied power to the province of Ontario from 1962 to 2005. It generated more than 215 billion kWh of electricity in its 43 years of operation."
3964 MW * 24 * 365 * 43 * 1000 = 1493 billion kWh

215 / 1493 = 14% "capacity factor"

WORTHLESS! GARBAGE!!! :lol:

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1253
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Aug 25 2019 7:20am

Punx0r wrote:
Aug 25 2019 6:56am
WORTHLESS! GARBAGE!!! :lol:
The coal plant was relegated to dispatchable demand following after the build out of Ontario's nuclear electricity generation which provides 58%. Along with the 23% from big hydro.
.
https://www.ontario.ca/document/2017-lo ... lectricity.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10161
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Aug 25 2019 7:59am

Punx0r wrote:
Aug 25 2019 6:47am
Keep trying to somehow use this to trash RE. Let's be honest, you have a 50% chance of being "right" about which of the two generators went offline first just by guessing. You don't have a point either way...
Solar went off first..
Wind went down “immediately”
Gas (244MW) wend down. “near immediately”
.....Their words , not mine !
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5267
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Aug 25 2019 9:33am

"Solar went off first", he cries, conveniently leaving out the "some small gas and diesel fired generation".

It's always fun to use actual facts... The interim ESO report: https://www.nationalgrideso.com/documen ... 1/download

A little context:

"Around 30% of the generation was from wind, 30% from gas and 20% from Nuclear and 10% from interconnectors."

" In this instance c. 5% of GB’s electricity demand was turned off (c. 1GW) to protect the other 95%. This has not happened in over a decade and is an extremely rare event."

What actually happened, from "Preliminary findings" (emphasis mine):

"Two almost simultaneous unexpected power losses at Hornsea and Little Barford occurred independently of
one another
- but each associated with the lightning strike. As generation would not be expected to trip off or
de-load in response to a lightning strike, this appears to represent an extremely rare and unexpected event."

From timeline of events:
  • 16:52:33.728 Hornsea started deloading Orsted
    16:52:33.835 Hornsea stabilised at 62MW and injecting 21 MVAR [737 MW ofcumulative infeed loss]Orsted
    16:52:34 Little Barford Steam Turbine trips 244MW instantaneously. Source:RWE [981MW of cumulative infeed loss]
Taken at face value, Hornsea appears to have gone offline less than 0.25 seconds (11-12 AC cycles) before Little Barford. However, due to the lesser precision of the Little Barford timings it's not actually possible to tell which went offline first.

Taken any way you like, I'm curious how you will attempt to twist and contrive this as "proof" that RE "doesn't and cannot work"...

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1253
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Aug 25 2019 12:06pm

Here is some complete data from an intentional community owned solar array in Ithaca, NY 14850. This 50 kW array is privately owned and gets the best care and cleaning and shows us the actual opportunities and constraints of solar PV in snowy locations.
.
https://ecovillageithaca.org/live/living-greener/
.
The performance in Canada or Russia and Eastern European regions will be worse.
.
Image
.
Here we see the all time electrical production of the 50kW community owned solar PV system at Ecovillage Ithaca, NY 14850. These panels are privately owned by an intentional co-op and receive the best care and cleaning. Taking the five good years value of 60,000 kWh, shows us that it is normal to expect a capacity factor of 13.7% at best for solar in upstate NY.
.
Image
.
Electric heat and solar pv in Winter do not fit
.
Image
.
Image
.
There are many days near zero output in the Winter and the average for the month is only 5.5% of nameplate capacity.
.
Image
.
15 days out of 18 with literally NO power. Again, there are many days near zero output in the Winter.
.
Image
.
Image
.
Image
.
Image
.
Image
.
The best month ever produced 22.2% of the nameplate capacity.
.

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5267
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Aug 25 2019 12:50pm

Were the panels oriented vertically and kept clean during the snow season?

What about those of us on similar lattitudes that only get a handful of snow days per year?

What about an energy mix that isn't 100% solar?

What about the projects underway to store PV generation for the winter months in thermal mass or chemical fuels?

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10161
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Aug 25 2019 5:29pm

What about some common sense and logical reasoning ?
.. at 13, 15, even 25%, solar is still a totally unrealistic solution for utility power, and all the time remaining intermittent , and unreliable, !
Last edited by Hillhater on Aug 25 2019 7:50pm, edited 1 time in total.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1253
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Aug 25 2019 7:24pm

Punx0r wrote:
Aug 25 2019 12:50pm
What about those of us on similar lattitudes that only get a handful of snow days per year?
Favorable regions where water, food, shelter, and energy remain abundant can expect a billion displaced migrants in the next 50 years. We will also see seasonal migration once again to follow the growing season and avoid being too hot or too cold. National borders will inevitably fall. Or there will be all out world (nuclear?) war. Easy choice.

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2854
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Aug 25 2019 8:23pm

Hillhater wrote:
Aug 25 2019 5:29pm
What about some common sense and logical reasoning ?
.. at 13, 15, even 25%, solar is still a totally unrealistic solution for utility power
Yet you think a 14% capacity factor for Lakeview is totally realistic! LOL!
--bill von

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1253
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Aug 25 2019 8:43pm

billvon wrote:
Aug 25 2019 8:23pm
Yet you think a 14% capacity factor for Lakeview is totally realistic! LOL!
I explained this above. The coal plant was relegated to a low on time after the build out of Ontario's nuclear plants which still supply 58%. And the 23% from big hydro. And, Where did this lifetime production number come from that we are baseng this 14 number from? Is it accurate? Wikipedia states a capacity factor of 68%.

billvon   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2854
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Aug 25 2019 9:12pm

sendler2112 wrote:
Aug 25 2019 8:43pm
I explained this above. The coal plant was relegated to a low on time after the build out of Ontario's nuclear plants which still supply 58%. And the 23% from big hydro.
No argument there. I was just responding to the absurd claim that a generation source with a 13-15-25% capacity factor was "a totally unrealistic solution for utility power."
--bill von

Post Reply