Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

[billvon]

either night or day charging is going to add 10kWh per car, per day, to the existing demand.

Correct. And if you assume level 1 charging at night (which is what utilities want now) that means you could add 11 million EV's to California's grid while doing absolutely nothing - because the peak load (46GW) occurs during the day when it's hot, and the minimum load (30GW) occurs at night. The system is designed to carry that 46GW maximum load already. There are 14.5 million registered vehicles in CA. That means that, without adding any infrastructure at all (other than outlets) we could replace 75% of the cars in California with EV's.

That's not a great goal, of course - because to get there you'd have to run peaker plants all the time. A better goal is to add solar to EV chargers so that daytime charging becomes more practical, so we eventually rely on solar for most of our charging, and just use the excess power from the base load generators at night.

even if only 50% of cars are EVs that would be a massive new demand on the supply system.

See above. No new demand, just a leveling of existing demand.

So any employer with 100+ car drivers, will need their own small solar farm. Not easy in most urban industrial areas.

If they have a roof, they can add a small solar farm. We use just our roof for that 417 KW system, which would support all our existing chargers - and could in fact support ~200 EV's.

and no mention of who pays !

Same people who are paying now - for the fastest buildout of solar the world has ever seen. Again, we don't need to do anything new, just continue what we are doing now.

more batteries ??

Definitely. But this time the battery is in your car.

So you made my point. You said 30 charge stations like it is a lot. But not for 10k people.

?? Right. That's because not a lot of people have EV's yet. Eventually you're going to need something like 1K level 2 chargers (if you get to 50% penetration) or 5K level 1 outlets. But it makes no sense to do that until people buy the cars. In the interim, all you have to make sure is that there are slightly more outlets than there are cars that need charging.

Again, what we do here is instructive. All the EV slots are always full, because charging here is free. And yet we still have far more EV's than we have slots, because most people charge at home or on the road. Which means you don't need 1K slots if you have 1K EV's.

That is no oportunity for ev transportation disruption at all if you want to charge them from solar only during the day.

Well:

1) You're not really "disrupting transportation" with EV's. They work like regular cars, look like regular cars, use the same roads etc. You might disrupt some big oil companies, but from a transportation perspective not a lot changes. (As it would with, say, lots of light rail or flying cars or something.)

2) This change will happen gradually, and companies will decide what avenue is best. Some will choose solar. Some will choose to just buy power, and have someone else install the solar (like the utility.) Some will choose other methods of generation, like natural gas/biogas combined generation and air conditioning.

 

[Hillhater]

either night or day charging is going to add 10kWh per car, per day, to the existing demand.

Correct. And if you assume level 1 charging at night (which is what utilities want now) that means you could add 11 million EV's to California's grid while doing absolutely nothing - because the peak load (46GW) occurs during the day when it's hot, and the minimum load (30GW) occurs at night. The system is designed to carry that 46GW maximum load already. There are 14.5 million registered vehicles in CA. That means that, without adding any infrastructure at all (other than outlets) we could replace 75% of the cars in California with EV's.
That's not a great goal, of course - because to get there you'd have to run peaker plants all the time.

well not quite, .. because that 46GW iis more than the capacity of the gas plants.(43GW).. Infact to supply that demand at night you would need all the gas, nuclear, and hydro etc available in CA, and most likely still import from other states.
CA imports 30% of its annual electricity , even before we plug in any more EVs !
.and that off peak 30GW is only a minimum for a few hours between midnite and 5 am, so you couldnt just charge for 10 hrs without blowing out that peak figure more.

... A better goal is to add solar to EV chargers so that daytime charging becomes more practical, so we eventually rely on solar for most of our charging, and just use the excess power from the base load generators at night....

sure, but you still have to install those new charging panels

even if only 50% of cars are EVs that would be a massive new demand on the supply system.

...See above. No new demand, just a leveling of existing demand....

see above ..for demand , read X GWh..which were not needed previously..and remember CA is currently a net importer of power.

So any employer with 100+ car drivers, will need their own small solar farm. Not easy in most urban industrial areas.

...If they have a roof, they can add a small solar farm. We use just our roof for that 417 KW system, which would support all our existing chargers - and could in fact support ~200 EV's.

again , that fine but i assume you already use that 417kW for some other purpose ??..more panels needed ?
And what if everyone doesnt have enough roof space ?
What do you do the days the sun doesnt shine ?......better keep that grid and interstate connection working.

and no mention of who pays !

..Same people who are paying now - for the fastest buildout of solar the world has ever seen. Again, we don't need to do anything new, just continue what we are doing now.....

??who is that then ? your employer, or A. N. Other ?

 

[billvon]

well not quite, .. because that 46GW iis more than the capacity of the gas plants.(43GW)..

Right. It is the maximum capacity of the grid without any upgrades. In other words, it is what it could handle today WITHOUT smarter grids, more transmission lines, more solar generation etc.

CA imports 30% of its annual electricity , even before we plug in any more EVs !

That's right. And if things go well, it will import (and export) even more. A better grid means a sunny day in Nevada or Arizona powers LA when it's cloudy in LA - and vice versa.

.and that off peak 30GW is only a minimum for a few hours between midnite and 5 am, so you couldnt just charge for 10 hrs without blowing out that peak figure more.

Also right. Most people don't need that much energy; not everyone drives exactly 25 miles a day (we sure don't.) And of course 75% of Californians don't drive EV's.

sure, but you still have to install those new charging panels

Agreed. Fortunately they are cheap.

again , that fine but i assume you already use that 417kW for some other purpose ??..more panels needed ?

Yes! Like I said, fortunately, they are cheap. As you mention, the expensive part of solar is batteries. And by using the batteries already present in those EVs you avoid needing a lot of stationary storage.

And what if everyone doesnt have enough roof space ?

Then they buy power from the grid - just like they do now.

What do you do the days the sun doesnt shine ?......better keep that grid and interstate connection working.

And (eventually) improve it so you can use that Las Vegas sunshine. But you don't need to do that for a long time; it will take a long time to approach even 50% ownership of EVs and PHEVs, much less the 75% that will start to overstress the existing grid.

??who is that then ? your employer, or A. N. Other ?

The employer who wants to pay less for power. The homeowner who wants to pay less for power. The EV driver who is happy to pay $4 for enough electric energy for 100 miles of range, instead of $8 for the same range with gasoline.

 

[liveforphysics]

If all humans shared a blood bank, which included trees and birds etc all contained in a huge impractical tangle of closed loop medical transfusion hoses, what amount of added well-proven carginogen and mutagen dosing would you wish to explain to those already with mass cancer and mass genetic defects how the financials or land /roofs acerage dedicated to it is an economic impact.

In compassion for life, immediately make solar panels with energy from panels, and eliminate copper to be all aluminum (or approach 1atom thick copper if absolutely needed for an interface potential). Immediately dedicate all resources spent towards destructive efforts on this and energy storage as a priority as seriously as you would take eliminating a known poison source being added to a mutually shared global bloodbank..

 

[Hillhater]

well not quite, .. because that 46GW iis more than the capacity of the gas plants.(43GW)..

.

......]Right. It is the maximum capacity of the grid without any upgrades. In other words, it is what it could handle today WITHOUT smarter grids, more transmission lines, more solar generation etc.......

No bill, you miss the point, CA desnt have enough " base load" capacity to supply 46 GW during night time hours.

CA imports 30% of its annual electricity , even before we plug in any more EVs !

.

...That's right. And if things go well, it will import (and export) even more. A better grid means a sunny day in Nevada or Arizona powers LA when it's cloudy in LA - and vice versa....

Again you are avoiding the issue...
CA..is a NET importer of power. It cannot generate enough electricity to satisfy current demand.
Of course they could simply rely on other states for increased supply, but that is not sustainable.
And..the peak demand is 6pm - 10pm, so solar is not the answer....without a lot more storage.

.and that "off peak" 30GW is only a minimum for a few hours between midnite and 5 am, so you couldnt just charge for 10 hrs without blowing out that peak figure more.

.....Also right. Most people don't need that much energy; not everyone drives exactly 25 miles a day (we sure don't.) And of course 75% of Californians don't drive EV's.

.... They were the numbers you chose...but. ok move the goalposts to suit yourself !

[/quote]

 

[sendler2112]

I wish I could repost some of the content from Hagen's University course. He has some valuable information starting to come out on his site
.
http://www.themonkeytrap.us/
.
but a concise reference will be easy to access once he finalizes his books. The challenge we face as a society is that we are driven by evolutionary psychology from what has worked in the past 200,000 years to conquer our environment and multiply. Our genetic psycholgy developed to solve problems in small tribes. Important decision making becomes more and more muddled by polarized groups as the size of the group increases to the size of a nation or a world and society tends to become a super-organism who's subconscious genetic agenda is to grow to fill every available space. Like a yeast colony in a bottle of wine. And we know how that always turns out. Individuals can make sense of this but nations full of polarized groups make it harder to balance tough decisions with a system view where "fixing" one problem brings an unintended consequence in another area. For example Austalia's impending economic challenges as a result of it trying to reduce CO2. Which is mainly a problem in a system which breeds massive inequity of wealth and is dependent on eternal growth. The US at the federal level this time around has voted to preserve economy and inequity over ecology.

 

[billvon]

No bill, you miss the point, CA desnt have enough " base load" capacity to supply 46 GW during night time hours.

I didn't claim it did. I said it had the TOTAL CAPACITY to support that. How do I know? Because it does; the system can in fact support 46GW of load.

CA..is a NET importer of power. It cannot generate enough electricity to satisfy current demand.

It also exports power when it generates too much. Most states do this.

Of course they could simply rely on other states for increased supply, but that is not sustainable.

Why not? If Nevada wants to become a solar generation/storage state, more power (literally) to them.

And..the peak demand is 6pm - 10pm, so solar is not the answer....without a lot more storage.

Yep. And part of that storage is going to come in the form of EV's.

You can list reasons this won't work all you like. People will simply continue to do it, as they have been for the last five years.

 

[Hillhater]

Bill... Please read more carefully and understand the meaning and implications of words like "NET" .and "NIGHT".
For CA to 46 GW at night, it has to import more interstate power (thermally generated ?), which means more CO2 produced somewhere ?
Shure CA exports some , but it imports much more than it exports ... 30% of all consumption infact !
That will only be possible until other states shut down their Nuclear and Coal generation and start to realise their own CO2 limitations.

 

[sendler2112]

.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/8402
.
The above graphic shows a three-tiered time history of our planet, starting with the top black line being geologic time. The tiny black sliver on the far right, is enlarged in the second line, and the sliver on its far right is again enlarged on the bottom line, where the last 12,000 years are shown. We, both our environment, and ourselves, are products of this evolutionary history. Our true wealth originates from energy, natural resources and ecosystem services, developed over geologic time. Our true behavioral drivers are a product of our brains being sculpted and honed by 'what worked' in all 3 eras of this graph (but mostly the top 2). The dark line on the bottom is human population, but just as well could be economic output or biomass/fossil fuel use, as they have been highly correlated over this period. The circle "A" indicates the part of the timeline where our economic theory of borrowing and investing into continous explosive growth was formed.
.
.

.
.

 

[billvon]

Bill... Please read more carefully and understand the meaning and implications of words like "NET" .and "NIGHT".
For CA to 46 GW at night, it has to import more interstate power (thermally generated ?), which means more CO2 produced somewhere ?

??? Right. But I think it's you who are not reading.

As I have said several times - RIGHT NOW, with the grid we have (i.e. no more solar/renewables/storage etc added) we could support 75% of Californians driving EV's. That's RIGHT NOW. (Remember that phrase; we will come back to it.)

In the future, as solar continues to grow, that energy mix will include more and more solar. And as that solar percentage grows, more people will be charging during the day - because power will be cheaper during the day due to the solar (non-baseline) contribution.

Notice that that's different than what is happening RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW only 2.7% of the cars in California that are EV or PHEV. That won't become 75% (or even 50%) within a year or two - it will take decades. At which point a much larger mix of California's energy will be solar/renewables.

So RIGHT NOW the grid could support all those EV's. RIGHT NOW it doesn't have to.
IN THE FUTURE the grid will still be able to support all those EV's. IN THE FUTURE more of the generation will be renewable.

Let me know if you get it yet, or if I need to simplify further.

 

[Hillhater]

When you say "right now WE can support..." You must be refering to the USA/ West coast generally,......
...because RIGHT NOW, California cannot support itself with electricity generation, it imports 30% of all electricity used.
And that is NET ! After all import - export exchanges.

 

[sendler2112]

Smart control of EV charge rates such as what Tesla can do remotely to it's cars (if they are plugged in at the correct time)(and if there are enough plugs at other places than just at home) could level the troughs and or take more advantage of a big solar peak.
.
.

.
.

 

[liveforphysics]

"THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION

The abolishment of pain in surgery is a chimera. It is absurd to go on seeking it... Knife and pain are two words in surgery that must forever be associated in the consciousness of the patient.
- Dr. Alfred Velpeau (1839), French surgeon
Men might as well project a voyage to the Moon as attempt to employ steam navigation against the stormy North Atlantic Ocean.
- Dr. Dionysus Lardner (1793-1859), Professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy at University College, London.
There is a young madman proposing to light the streets of London—with what do you suppose—with smoke!
- Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832) [On a proposal to light cities with gaslight.]
The Kölonische Zeitung [Köln, Germany, 28 March 1819] listed six grave reasons against street lighting, including these:
Theological: It is an intervention in God's order, which makes nights dark...
Medical: It will be easier for people to be in the streets at night, afflicting them with colds...
Philosophical-moral: Morality deteriorates through street lighting. Artificial lighting drives out fear of the dark, which keeps the weak from sinning...
[W]hen the Paris Exhibition closes electric light will close with it and no more be heard of.
- Erasmus Wilson (1878) Professor at Oxford University
They will never try to steal the phonograph because it has no `commercial value.'
- Thomas Edison (1847-1931). (He later revised that opinion.)
This `telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a practical form of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.
- Western Union internal memo, 1878
What use could this company make of an electrical toy?
- Western Union president William Orton, responding to an offer from Alexander Graham Bell to sell his telephone company to Western Union for $100,000.
Well informed people know it is impossible to transmit the voice over wires and that were it possible to do so, the thing would be of no practical value.
- Editorial in the Boston Post (1865)
Radio has no future.
- Lord Kelvin (1824-1907), British mathematician and physicist, ca. 1897.
While theoretically and technically television may be feasible, commercially and financially I consider it an impossibility, a development of which we need waste little time dreaming.
- Lee DeForest, 1926 (American radio pioneer and inventor of the vacuum tube.)
[Television] won't be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night.
- Darryl F. Zanuck, head of 20th Century-Fox, 1946.
RAILROADS

What can be more palpably absurd than the prospect held out of locomotives traveling twice as fast as stagecoaches?
- The Quarterly Review, England (March 1825)
...transport by railroad car would result in the emasculation of our troops and would deprive them of the option of the great marches which have played such an important role in the triumph of our armies.
- Dominique Francois Arago (1786-1853)
In Bavaria the Royal College of Doctors, having been consulted, declared that railroads, if they were constructed, would cause the greatest deterioration in the health of the public, because such rapid movement would cause brain trouble among travelers, and vertigo among those who looked at moving trains. For this last reason it was recommended that all tracks be enclosed by high board fences raised above the height of the cars and engines.
Rail travel at high speed is not possible because passengers, unable to breathe, would die of asphyxia.
- Dr. Dionysus Lardner (1793-1859), Professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy at University College, London.
AUTOMOBILES

The horse is here to stay, but the automobile is only a novelty—a fad.
- Advice from a president of the Michigan Savings Bank to Henry Ford's lawyer Horace Rackham. Rackham ignored the advice and invested $5000 in Ford stock, selling it later for $12.5 million.
That the automobile has practically reached the limit of its development is suggested by the fact that during the past year no improvements of a radical nature have been introduced.
- Scientific American, Jan. 2, 1909.
Automobiles will start to decline almost as soon as the last shot is fired in World War II. The name of Igor Sikorsky will be as well known as Henry Ford's, for his helicopter will all but replace the horseless carriage as the new means of popular transportation. Instead of a car in every garage, there will be a helicopter.... These 'copters' will be so safe and will cost so little to produce that small models will be made for teenage youngsters. These tiny 'copters, when school lets out, will fill the sky as the bicycles of our youth filled the prewar roads.
- Harry Bruno, aviation publicist, 1943.
NUCLEAR POWER

There is no likelihood man can ever tap the power of the atom. The glib supposition of utilizing atomic energy when our coal has run out is a completely unscientific Utopian dream, a childish bug-a-boo. Nature has introduced a few fool-proof devices into the great majority of elements that constitute the bulk of the world, and they have no energy to give up in the process of disintegration.
- Robert A. Millikan (1863-1953) [1928 speech to the Chemists' Club (New York)]
...any one who expects a source of power from the transformation of these atoms is talking moonshine...
- Ernest Rutherford (1871-1937) [1933]
There is not the slightest indication that [nuclear energy] will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.
- Albert Einstein, 1932.
That is the biggest fool thing we have ever done. The bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert in explosives.
- Admiral William Leahy. [Advice to President Truman, when asked his opinion of the atomic bomb project.]
There is little doubt that the most significant event affecting energy is the advent of nuclear power...a few decades hence, energy may be free—just like the unmetered air....
- John von Neumann, scientist and member of the Atomic Energy Commission, 1955.
IT'LL NEVER FLY

It would fill the world with innumerable immoralities and give such occasion for intrigues as people can not meet with. You would have a couple of lovers make a midnight assignation upon the top of the monument and see the cupola of St. Paul's covered with both sexes like the outside of a pigeon house. Nothing would be more frequent than to see a beau flying in at a garret window or a gallant giving chase to his mistress like a hawk after a lark.
- Joseph Addison. [Concerns about where manned flight might lead (1713)]
Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible.
- Lord Kelvin (1824-1907), ca. 1895, British mathematician and physicist
...no possible combination of known substances, known forms of machinery, and known forms of force, can be united in a practical machine by which man shall fly long distances through the air...
- Simon Newcomb (1835-1909), astronomer, head of the U. S. Naval Observatory.
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years. Two years later we ourselves made flights. This demonstration of my impotence as a prophet gave me such a shock that ever since I have distrusted myself and avoided all predictions.
- Wilbur Wright (1867-1912) [In a speech to the Aero Club of France (Nov 5, 1908)]
Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value.
- Marshal Ferdinand Foch, French military strategist, 1911. He was later a World War I commander.
ROCKETRY AND SPACE FLIGHT

There has been a great deal said about a 3000 miles high angle rocket. In my opinion such a thing is impossible for many years. The people who have been writing these things that annoy me have been talking about a 3000 mile high-angle rocket shot from one continent to another, carrying an atomic bomb and so directed as to be a precise weapon which would land exactly on a certain target, such as a city.
I say, technically, I don't think anyone in the world knows how to do such a thing, and I feel confident that it will not be done for a very long period of time to come... I think we can leave that out of our thinking. I wish the American public would leave that out of their thinking.

- Vanevar Bush, director of our Office of Scientific Research and Development during World War II.
This foolish idea of shooting at the moon is an example of the absurd length to which vicious specialization will carry scientists working in thought-tight compartments. Let us critically examine the proposal. For a projectile entirely to escape the gravitation of earth, it needs a velocity of 7 miles a second. The thermal energy of a gramme at this speed is 15,180 calories... The energy of our most violent explosive--nitroglycerine--is less than 1,500 calories per gramme. Consequently, even had the explosive nothing to carry, it has only one-tenth of the energy necessary to escape the earth... Hence the proposition appears to be basically impossible.
- W. A. Bickerton, Professor of Physics and Chemistry at Canterbury College (Christchurch, New Zealand), 1926.
There is not in sight any source of energy that would be a fair start toward that which would be necessary to get us beyond the gravitative control of the earth.
- Forest Ray Moulton (1872-1952), astronomer, 1935.
To place a man in a multi-stage rocket and project him into the controlling gravitational field of the moon where the passengers can make scientific observations, perhaps land alive, and then return to earth--all that constitutes a wild dream worthy of Jules Verne. I am bold enough to say that such a man-made voyage will never occur regardless of all future advances.
- Lee deForest (1873-1961) (American radio pioneer and inventor of the vacuum tube.) Feb 25, 1957.
Space travel is utter bilge.
- Dr. Richard van der Reit Wooley, Astronomer Royal, space advisor to the British government, 1956. (Sputnik orbited the earth the following year.)
COMPUTERS

Computers in the future may...perhaps only weigh 1.5 tons.
- Popular Mechanics, 1949.
There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home.
- Kenneth Olsen, president and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977.
WHY BOTHER?

If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done.
- Peter Ustinov
It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow.
- Robert Goddard (1882-1945)"




Today are living in the exponential age, where advancement in computer modeling improves materials tech which improves computer tech, battery tech, solar tech and is ramping to an era of atom-perfect manufacturing. We will not only see batteries (and capacitors) crush the energy density of fuels you burn once, we will also see an awakening of perspective in recognition of being some fleeting organics on the surface of a spaceship all sharing a life support system with thickness to scale thinner than a soap bubble film.

We will learn to treat our single shared atmosphere with the same care we treat our own bodies supply of blood, or die by the billions in suffering masses vs today dying by the millions from 100% avoidable self poisoning.

The the generation which today is young, all those advocating reasons how/why burning anything intentionally in this life single shared support system will be rightly seen as barbarians of magnitude making all previous human atrocities combined seem compassionate.

 

[Hillhater]

Smart control of EV charge rates such as what Tesla can do remotely to it's cars (if they are plugged in at the correct time)(and if there are enough plugs at other places than just at home) could level the troughs and or take more advantage of a big solar peak....
.

Sure, its commonly called "Demand Management" ..a term contrived to replace the the phrase " Oh shit, we dont have enough capacity". ! :lol:
No matter how much you shuffle the peaks and troughs, if you dont have enough GWh generation capacity, you have a problem !... And EVs are only going to increase the demand.
Last year , CA was short aprox 90 TWh of capacity....or about 90 Topaz solar plants worth of capacity.
Lucky they have friendly neighbours with power to spare currently.

 

[sendler2112]

And EVs are only going to increase the demand.
.

True. Transitioning all personal cars in California from liquid fuel gasoline to electric is a big increase needed in all aspects of the grid. I didn't try to find diesel since much of it is not road taxed during farm use it is harder to find out about. Even with a 4:1 advantage in efficiency for electric drive this is still somewhere around an additional 126,123 GWh/year to replace the 15.1 Billion gallons of gas sold per day. 75 Solar Star farms. And a 43% increase for the wires to carry in the total grid.
.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/transportation_data/gasoline/
.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html
.
This site states 14.6 Billion gallons
.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/01/business/la-fi-california-gas-20111002
.
This states 16 billion
.
http://www.answers.com/Q/How_many_gallons_of_gas_purchased_in_California_per_day
.
This states 14.6 B gallons
.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-california-burns-more-gasoline-2014dec02-story.html
.
But it does make more sense to put all possible battery production into personal vehicles than to have batteries stationary. Even if it means increasing fossil fuel electrical plants. Cars are using their fuel at 20% and electrical plants can get gas to 55% and coal to 40%.

 

[billvon]

When you say "right now WE can support..." You must be refering to the USA/ West coast generally,.........because RIGHT NOW, California cannot support itself with electricity generation, it imports 30% of all electricity used. And that is NET ! After all import - export exchanges.

That's like saying that you can't support yourself, because you can't grow your own food, design your own cellphone or build your own nuclear power plant. So you have to import those things into your home by paying for them! (o the horror)

In the future, states will become more - not less - interconnected. More/better HVDC transmission lines will allow Los Angeles to run on Phoenix solar power, will allow Pacific Northwest hydro to support Sacramento when it's cloudy and (eventually) allow that Phoenix solar power to light the Midwest after the sun sets on Kansas City.

 

[Hillhater]

Nice coooperative thinking bill, but i suspect most state Govenors will want to be as self sufficient as possible.
You cannot have a majority of states being short on generation capacity, certainly not 30%.
And we all know its not practical or economic to transmit power long distances across the country.
CA should be one of the best resourced states for Wind and Solar generation.

 

[liveforphysics]

Nice coooperative thinking bill, but i suspect most state Govenors will want to be as self sufficient as possible.
You cannot have a majority of states being short on generation capacity, certainly not 30%.
And we all know its not practical or economic to transmit power long distances across the country.
CA should be one of the best resourced states for Wind and Solar generation.

States as a concept is fictional, there is a shared spaceship and the sun remains shining on it.

 

[Punx0r]

This all becomes irrelevant if the legal challenges to CO2 emitters become successful. There is a push to make coal and petroleum companies responsible for the effects of their products, much like eventually happened to big tobacco. If this happens these fuels will become more expensive as the CO2 will have to be captured and processed/stored. The price will have to reflect the externalities and will be completely unsubsidised.

The U.S. withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement has made this more likely, as it was previously ruled that CO2 emissions are controlled by the government and so courts had no jurisdiction.

 

[sendler2112]

States as a concept is fictional, there is a shared spaceship and the sun remains shining on it.

The economists all know that it is a balancing game. To balance a viable world economy based on continuous growth vs a reduction in fossil fuel consumption. The required changes to our economic system are so big, they are unfathomable.
.
Somehow even the concept of separate nations on our shared planet must go away in order to implement a carbon tax right when it comes out of the ground to put a true price on it's head. But the world economy would irrevocably crash and require the repatriation and redistribution of hidden wealth. There must also unfortunately be a new idealogical crusade against any doctrines that do not accept science and that promote positive population growth. Poor families with seven kids are making their own problems and the Scientists are being steadily outnumbered.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.

 

[sendler2112]

see below

 

[sendler2112]

WTF? I thought this seemed a little low. Now this web site lists the california gas consumption at 15.1 Billion gallons/year. divde by 4 for the EV efficiency advantage = 3.775 Billion. convert to GWh electric = 126,123 GWh/y to replace gasoline. 75 Solar Star farms and an increase in the wires carrying 43% more. I didn't try to find diesel since much of it is not road taxed during farm use it is harder to find out about.
.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/transportation_data/gasoline/
.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html
.
This site states 14.6 Billion gallons
.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/01/business/la-fi-california-gas-20111002
.
This states 16 billion
.
http://www.answers.com/Q/How_many_gallons_of_gas_purchased_in_California_per_day
.
This states 14.6 B gallons
.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-california-burns-more-gasoline-2014dec02-story.html
.
Don't know why eia.gov lists it at 1.46B from refiners. Sorry for the previously erroneous post of 8 solar star farms and 4% of the grid. This was obviously way off.

 

[liveforphysics]

Solar cars are a thing already with today's primate technology. Today they are cramped and trade comforts for low drag and low mass, but still cover big distances in racing while limited to tiny battery rules.

Having or not having a central grid will slowly fade in importance of discussions as solar inevitably approaches normal roof cost, and every homes concrete foundation is a MWh or more of some centuries long lofe geopolymer structural cast in place battery or whatever the future may hold.

We already know today it's possible to have home solar, drive only EVs and be a net grid energy provider. It will never cost more or be worse performance than today's solar panels and energy storage, yet already demonstrated possible to achieve.

A human surviving without burning things is not unimaginable for me, because the alternative of burning things already is too expensive in the only real currencies that matter during our spaceship ride together, like clean air and water.

Whatever aspect of whatever one wishes to label 'economy' or 'costs' should be weighed in priority with holding one's breath.

WTF? I thought this seemed a little low. Now this web site lists the california gas consumption at 15.1 Billion gallons/year. divde by 4 for the EV efficiency advantage = 3.775 Billion. convert to GWh electric = 126,123 GWh/y to replace gasoline. 75 Solar Star farms and an increase in the wires carrying 43% more. I didn't try to find diesel since much of it is not road taxed during farm use it is harder to find out about.
.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/transportation_data/gasoline/
.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/total_system_power.html
.
This site states 14.6 Billion gallons
.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/01/business/la-fi-california-gas-20111002
.
This states 16 billion
.
http://www.answers.com/Q/How_many_gallons_of_gas_purchased_in_California_per_day
.
This states 14.6 B gallons
.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-california-burns-more-gasoline-2014dec02-story.html
.
Don't know why eia.gov lists it at 1.46B from refiners. Sorry for the previously erroneous post of 8 solar star farms and 4% of the grid. This was obviously way off.

 

[billvon]

Nice coooperative thinking bill, but i suspect most state Govenors will want to be as self sufficient as possible.

Why? I think most governors want what is best for their economy. If a state with a lot of nickel can export it for big bucks, and buy their oil from a state that has a lot of cheap oil, everyone wins. If he said "hell no, you can't sell nickel or buy oil! We should be self sufficient" he'd (rightly) get booted out of office.

You cannot have a majority of states being short on generation capacity, certainly not 30%.

Exactly. If you're Nevada or New Mexico you want to export solar. If you are Washington you want to export hydro power. If you are Texas or Iowa you want to export wind power.

And we all know its not practical or economic to transmit power long distances across the country.

Quite wrong. That's like saying "we all know it's not practical or economic to build an ebike with more than a 300 watt motor, or more than 500 watt-hours of storage. It's just a FACT!"

 

[sendler2112]

As I have said several times - RIGHT NOW, with the grid we have (i.e. no more solar/renewables/storage etc added) we could support 75% of Californians driving EV's. That's RIGHT NOW. (Remember that phrase; we will come back to it.)

Replacing gasoline in California requires an additional 126,123 GWh/y electric. Reduce that by 25% to apply to your statement if you like but it is still a big increase beyond even what leveling the night time troughs with thermal generation would cover. If you try to do this with solar PV the cars will have to charge during the solar peak and you will need 75 more Solar Star farms and an increase in the wires to carry 43% more peak electricity since the solar peak nearly coincides with the current big daytime peaks.
.
Not being facetious. Just pragmatic. We need to run numbers so that we can get back to making smart decisions with our head. Not our heart.
.