Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

[Hillhater]

Then they really ought to build the NSW SA interconnector so the state which needs it (NSW) can take it from the state that has too much (SA).

Odd. ??....What make you think NSW “needs” power from SA ?..
.. currently NSW has surplus capacity (Gas) and actually prefer to use cheap power from QLD coal plants.
All the interconnector will do is provide another “Battery like” buffer for SA’s intermittent RE, allowing them to “dump” surplus wind and Solar ( usually mid day when everone also has a surplus !) , and opening another supply for SA to support their demand when the Wind /Solar is not generating.
The $billion cost of the Interconnector to the Transmission operators is another hidden cost just to make SA’s RE fleet a little more economical.

 

[ZeroEm]

Transmission Lines are costly and don't need to be above ground. underground needs to be well documented and they don't do that.
Need some magic.

 

[Hillhater]

IF ONLY ...?
“Clean” hydrogen for just 10C /kg !!!
Sounds too good to be true ..so it probably is !
Most likely it will cost much more than they estimate, and/or there will be some issues or side effects that make it impractical on a large scale..
Of course , there will still be all the known issues of H2 storage, transport, and efficient end user devices.
And of course it is not a “Renewable” source.....just another way of exploiting part of the Fossil Fuel resource.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/company-harvest-green-hydrogen-underground-oil-fires

...... on the frozen plains of Saskatchewan in Canada, workers began to inject steam and air into the Superb field, a layer of sand 700 meters down that holds 200 million barrels of thick, viscous oil. Their goal was not to pump out the oil, but to set it on fire—spurring underground chemical reactions that churn out hydrogen gas, along with carbon dioxide (CO2). Eventually the company conducting the $3 million field test plans to plug its wells with membranes that would allow only the clean-burning hydrogen to reach the surface. The CO2, and all of its power to warm the climate, would remain sequestered deep in the earth.

 

[jonescg]

Odd. ??....What make you think NSW “needs” power from SA ?..
.. currently NSW has surplus capacity (Gas) and actually prefer to use cheap power from QLD coal plants.

NSW is a net importer of electricity. It's bringing power across a border 80% of the time. Might as well bring in some of that curtailed power from SA.

 

[Hillhater]

NSW is a net importer of electricity. It's bringing power across a border 80% of the time. Might as well bring in some of that curtailed power from SA.

BECAUSE...rather than run expensive NSW Gas plants, it is cheaper to use coal generated power from Qld ..(and sometimes Vic)..which allows Qld coal plants to run at higher utilisation (= lower cost)
Do you not see that the SA/NSW interconnector is only a benefit to SA. It is just another unnecessary piece of infrastructure that was never contemplated until SA went “Gung Ho” on RE without realising the full consequences and additional costs....
...such as , Gas Back up plants, BIG batteries, Synchronisers, Interconnector capacity, etc.
The cost of this interstate connector will be factored into EVERY POWER BILL in the Eastern grid, such that it forces up the retail cost to every consumer.....just so SA can crow on about how Green they are !

 

[JackFlorey]

The cost of this interstate connector will be factored into EVERY POWER BILL in the Eastern grid, such that it forces up the retail cost to every consumer.....just so SA can crow on about how Green they are !

And so that the next time there's a cat 5 typhoon that hits Australia the damage is only $100 million instead of $300 million. A net savings.

 

[Hillhater]

Jack, Exactly how will this interstate connector reduce the damage bill from a storm ?

 

[JackFlorey]

Jack, Exactly how will this interstate connector reduce the damage bill from a storm ?

Less CO2. Less warming. Reduced storm intensities. Reduced damage. (If you believe in science that is.)

 

[Hillhater]

But you said “next time there is a cat 5 typhoon hits”... it will reduce the damage.
Cat 5 is Cat 5, so no reduced intensity
Dreaming about potential CO2 reductions (?? How ?) and any possible consequences that you think may follow that ,.. is not a cost reduction from an actual Cat 5 storm when it happens.

 

[Balmorhea]

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2020/10/05/nuclear-not-an-effective-low-carbon-option/

A study led by the University of Sussex (UoS), in the U.K., has found renewables up to seven times more effective at reducing carbon emissions than nuclear power. The paper concluded nuclear could no longer be considered an effective low carbon energy technology, and suggests that countries aiming to rapidly and cost-effectively reduce their energy emissions should prioritize renewables.

 

[JackFlorey]

Cat 5 is Cat 5, so no reduced intensity

Are you really that ignorant? Cat 5 is not Cat 5. Allen was much worse than Edith, even though both were cat 5. Cat 5 describes a MINIMUM wind speed. And yes, reducing wind speeds in a Cat 5 from 185 to 160mph will absolutely reduce the damage.

 

[JackFlorey]

A study led by the University of Sussex (UoS), in the U.K., has found renewables up to seven times more effective at reducing carbon emissions than nuclear power.

Agreed. Nuclear for base load power only; renewables for daily peaks, natural gas peakers for unusually high peaks.

 

[Hillhater]

Cat 5 is Cat 5, so no reduced intensity

Are you really that ignorant? Cat 5 is not Cat 5. Allen was much worse than Edith, even though both were cat 5. Cat 5 describes a MINIMUM wind speed. And yes, reducing wind speeds in a Cat 5 from 185 to 160mph will absolutely reduce the damage.

Ignorant of many things for sure, ..but wise enough to know that if a Cat 5 is forming, you cannot predict what its wind speed may be from the atmospheric CO2 levels
..you are wriggling Jack, just admit you know Jack 5h1t about Australia’s grid issues. !

 

[Hillhater]

.. Nuclear for base load power only; renewables for daily peaks, natural gas peakers for unusually high peaks.

Now all you need to do is define “Base Load”...
... and how you deal with daily peaks when the weather is not co operating for renewables ?
..OR,.. you could just learn from current experience’s in Ca , Germany, S Australia etc ..

 

[Balmorhea]

A study led by the University of Sussex (UoS), in the U.K., has found renewables up to seven times more effective at reducing carbon emissions than nuclear power.

Agreed. Nuclear for base load power only; renewables for daily peaks, natural gas peakers for unusually high peaks.

What the study found was that countries that use renewables but not nuclear to try to reduce CO2 emissions, do it that much better than countries that use both.

It makes sense to me, since nuclear power is one of the most industrially intensive things you can possibly do, and the folks who promote and implement it are exactly the ones who fail to consider the big picture, externalities, the good of the whole, future consequences, etc.

 

[Hillhater]

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2020/10/05/nuclear-not-an-effective-low-carbon-option/

A study led by the University of Sussex (UoS), in the U.K., has found renewables up to seven times more effective at reducing carbon emissions than nuclear power. The paper concluded nuclear could no longer be considered an effective low carbon energy technology, and suggests that countries aiming to rapidly and cost-effectively reduce their energy emissions should prioritize renewables.

From the same paper..

“The evidence clearly points to nuclear being the least effective of the two broad carbon emissions abatement strategies and, coupled with its tendency not to co-exist well with its renewable alternative, this raises serious doubts about the wisdom of prioritizing investment in nuclear over renewable energy,” said Benjamin K Sovacool, professor of energy policy at UoS. “Countries planning large scale investments in new nuclear power are risking suppression of greater climate benefits from alternative renewable energy investments.”

..which makes me wonder if they actually looked at real data, such as comparing France’s emissions from a Nuclear based grid ,..to those from Germany with a predominantly RE based grid ?

 

[JackFlorey]

Now all you need to do is define “Base Load”...

No problem.

https://lmgtfy.app/?q=base+load+power+plant

 

[Hillhater]

So, which one of those multiple different definitions do you prefer to use Jack ?
...but this is what i think of when someone mentions “base load”..
The 45 tons of steel and 1000 tons of concrete that go into EACH of the 800 or so bases of wind turbines needed for 1 GW average output !!

 

[Balmorhea]

Do you mean the recyclable steel and reusable concrete that isn’t radioactive or toxic when they’re done with it? In a foundation that can have another wind turbine fastened to it when the first one wears out? Is that what you’re talking about?

 

[Hillhater]

Do you mean the recyclable steel and reusable concrete that isn’t radioactive or toxic when they’re done with it? In a foundation that can have another wind turbine fastened to it when the first one wears out? Is that what you’re talking about?

No,.. i am talking about all the steel and concrete that is left burried in the ground after the turbines have reached the end of their useful life and the bases are not suitable for the newer , larger , turbines that no one would risk on an old base of unknown security. !!
“Recycled” in the same way they recycle the composite turbine wind sails.....

 

[Dauntless]

Once again, so in love with the image, unable to face the reality.

 

[markz]

Not so green anymore.

https://stopthesethings.com/2020/06/15/how-long-do-wind-turbines-last-10-years-or-until-the-subsidies-run-out-whichever-occurs-first/

No,.. i am talking about all the steel and concrete that is left burried in the ground after the turbines have reached the end of their useful life and the bases are not suitable for the newer , larger , turbines that no one would risk on an old base of unknown security. !!
“Recycled” in the same way they recycle the composite turbine wind sails.....

 

[sendler2112]

The coup in Bolivia last year was centered on a fight for their Lithium by the rich countries.
.
Evo Morales: "Last December, Republican senator Richard Black acknowledged that the coup had been planned in the United States, taking advantage of this opportunity [opened up by the racist right in Bolivia]. I was surprised by what the owner of Tesla [Elon Musk] said on July 24: he confessed to having taken part in the coup.

So, the coup was directed against us and for [control over] our natural resources, for lithium. We had decided to industrialize lithium, and started on our international reserves. [Commercialization] deals had been signed with Europe, with China. As part of the patriotic agenda marking the bicentenary of our independence, we had planned to build forty-one plants, more than fifteen for potassium chloride, lithium carbonate, lithium hydroxide, three for lithium batteries, and other plants for inputs but also for by-products. But I said, the United States does not enter here — and that was our crime"
.
https://jacobinmag.com/2020/10/evo-morales-interview-bolivia-mas-election?utm_source=Jacobin&utm_campaign=b4e2b7370c-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_10_01_07_50_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_be8b1b2846-b4e2b7370c-85429433&mc_cid=b4e2b7370c&mc_eid=20d1c55969

 

[Dauntless]

Evo Morales: "Last December, Republican senator Richard Black acknowledged that the coup had been planned in the United States,

Coup? What are you reading? The Jacobin or something? (Oh, look at that.) Tell me something. You're such a big believer in Russia Today that you'll take the word of one of their regulars who is registered as a foreign agent that there was some sort of 'Coup?' You realize he was derided for saying that? Did you think the rioting after the 2016 election here was a coup attempt? Do you even realize that as a STATE senator he's not with the Federal government, basically NOT the insider you're pretending he was?

You're like this left winger, aren't you? You like Black, do you? You're ready to read about and AGREE WITH Black, aren't you?

In February 2005, Black urged his constituents to picket Stone Bridge High School for putting on a play about a gay football player, claiming that the school was "being used to promote a homosexual lifestyle." He further claimed that attempts to "encourage homosexual activity, to portray it in a cute or favorable light" could lead to children contracting HIV.[27] In 2004, he said with regard to Virginia's sodomy law: "If I'm the last person on the face of this Earth to vote against legalizing sodomy, I'll do it."

In July 2003, Black proposed legislation that would prevent unmarried and gay couples from applying for low-interest home mortgages, saying that the state was "spending $90 million to subsidize sodomy and adultery. I just don't understand why we are taking money away [from worthwhile programs] and supporting a radical homosexual agenda.

In 2018, Black appeared on an Arab TV channel where he claimed that the British intelligence service, MI6, was planning a false flag chemical attack on Syria, which it would then try to blame on the Assad regime

In an interview in December 2013, Black compared same-sex marriage to polygamy and incest, saying that although he opposed polygamy, "at least it functions biologically", adding that it was "just more natural" than homosexuality

Black said, "Putting a statue to [Lincoln] there is sort of like putting the Confederate flag at the Lincoln Memorial."

Oh, but about his employers:

I think that it makes a mockery of free speech in the United States. We go around lecturing the world about how they need to have freedom of the press and freedom of speech and yet here we are cracking down on free speech. ... the objective of doing this to RT news is not to block information from going to Russian citizens, it is to block the truth from reaching the American public in the United States ... I will tell you that I know many, many Americans who have come to rely on RT News as the most valid, truthful broadcast medium in the United States ... we consider CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC - all of them are just a bunch of people screaming back and forth at one another. Most of it is just propaganda. It is, it is extremist opinion, and you listen to RT news and they present very accurate information that is verifiable when you go and you and you actually research it. ... RT news ... has been a source of accurate information about NATO's provocations; their military provocations and their aggressive actions towards Russia in Europe. ... too many Americans have been saying you know what, what we're seeing on RT news seems to be much more factual than what we're seeing on CNN and some of these other broadcast media sources. ... I hope that RT remains a very robust source of news because I rely on it, and I will tell you millions of Americans have come to rely on RT news.

 

[sendler2112]

How about The Guardian?
.
"What has received even less attention is the role of the Organization of American States (OAS) in the destruction of Bolivia’s democracy last November.

As the New York Times reported on 7 June, the organization’s “flawed” analysis immediately following the 20 October election fueled “a chain of events that changed the South American nation’s history”.


The OAS allegations were indeed the main political foundation of the coup, and they continued for months."
.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/18/silence-us-backed-coup-evo-morales-bolivia-american-states