quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
No blackouts or brownouts. What the guy is talking about is they need to better manage their power distribution automatically so they don't have to have people doing it.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
No blackouts or brownouts. What the guy is talking about is they need to better manage their power distribution automatically so they don't have to have people doing it.

But, as their reliance on renewables has increased, the need to have people manage the distribution has increased. That was the point. They have also had to rely and call upon "winter reserve plants" to keep the grid stable.

Reliance on renewables is making the grid less stable because they aren't always able to output at a constant level.

While I am not surprised that Germany's power grid is having issues dealing with the fluctuating nature of renewable energy, I don't think for a moment that they'll eventually have enough generation (more locations) to easily supply their grid during those lows, and will have tons of excess if they are operating near peak.

IMO, this isn't anything more than "growing pains" for the German utility generators and regulators. Hopefully, the US can call upon the issues the Germans are having and prevent us from having to go through them while we increase our use of renewable energy generation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
No blackouts or brownouts. What the guy is talking about is they need to better manage their power distribution automatically so they don't have to have people doing it.

But, as their reliance on renewables has increased, the need to have people manage the distribution has increased. That was the point. They have also had to rely and call upon "winter reserve plants" to keep the grid stable.
Reliance on renewables is making the grid less stable because they aren't always able to output at a constant level.
While I am not surprised that Germany's power grid is having issues dealing with the fluctuating nature of renewable energy, I don't think for a moment that they'll eventually have enough generation (more locations) to easily supply their grid during those lows, and will have tons of excess if they are operating near peak.
IMO, this isn't anything more than "growing pains" for the German utility generators and regulators. Hopefully, the US can call upon the issues the Germans are having and prevent us from having to go through them while we increase our use of renewable energy generation.

This is part of the main argument about renewables - they aren't stable and thus form peaks and troughs in the supply.
Not only that, the initial outlay to kick-start any renewable project is mega-expensive.
That burden has to be paid for by the people in rising energy costs that won't bring much real cost benefit until maybe decades later and many may not live to see those benefits.
In my time in the US, brown-outs were quite common and even our friends over there still complain about them.
I think the US needs to stabilise and maintain the power supply they already have before they even think about using renewables.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
When I was a kid, we had only a few brown-outs during the peak A/C times. I can't tell you the last time I experienced one that wasn't caused by some storm/accident taking out a transformer, though. But, I'm also in NW Ohio, so we don't experience the conditions that other states experience regarding ridiculous weather (our is more ridiculous due to day-to-day variety; ie. today, it's supposed to be 93 (it's 94 right now), tomorrow 93... yesterday's high was 81 and friday's high is 64). You experience of brownouts may have had more to do with where you were than any systemic issue with the grid. I would very much love to see the US start to move towards renewables (by way of customer, rather than government edict) and phasing out more expensive models. But, the grid has to have enough reliable minimum generation to maintain stability before taking other things off-line. A coal of LNG plant doesn't have to run at 100%, so those can be stepped down as renewable energy generation is stepped up. That would be the lesson I hope we follow.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
No blackouts or brownouts. What the guy is talking about is they need to better manage their power distribution automatically so they don't have to have people doing it.

But, as their reliance on renewables has increased, the need to have people manage the distribution has increased. That was the point. They have also had to rely and call upon "winter reserve plants" to keep the grid stable.

Reliance on renewables is making the grid less stable because they aren't always able to output at a constant level.

While I am not surprised that Germany's power grid is having issues dealing with the fluctuating nature of renewable energy, I don't think for a moment that they'll eventually have enough generation (more locations) to easily supply their grid during those lows, and will have tons of excess if they are operating near peak.

IMO, this isn't anything more than "growing pains" for the German utility generators and regulators. Hopefully, the US can call upon the issues the Germans are having and prevent us from having to go through them while we increase our use of renewable energy generation.

This is part of the main argument about renewables - they aren't stable and thus form peaks and troughs in the supply.
Not only that, the initial outlay to kick-start any renewable project is mega-expensive.
That burden has to be paid for by the people in rising energy costs that won't bring much real cost benefit until maybe decades later and many may not live to see those benefits.

In my time in the US, brown-outs were quite common and even our friends over there still complain about them.
I think the US needs to stabilise and maintain the power supply they already have before they even think about using renewables.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
When I was a kid, we had only a few brown-outs during the peak A/C times. I can't tell you the last time I experienced one that wasn't caused by some storm/accident taking out a transformer, though. But, I'm also in NW Ohio, so we don't experience the conditions that other states experience regarding ridiculous weather (our is more ridiculous due to day-to-day variety; ie. today, it's supposed to be 93 (it's 94 right now), tomorrow 93... yesterday's high was 81 and friday's high is 64). You experience of brownouts may have had more to do with where you were than any systemic issue with the grid. I would very much love to see the US start to move towards renewables (by way of customer, rather than government edict) and phasing out more expensive models. But, the grid has to have enough reliable minimum generation to maintain stability before taking other things off-line. A coal of LNG plant doesn't have to run at 100%, so those can be stepped down as renewable energy generation is stepped up. That would be the lesson I hope we follow.

I spent about 3 months in NC (Raliegh) and the rest of my time in 2 parts of FL (Jax & Tampa).
In all 3 areas we experienced fairly regular brown-outs even when there weren't any real weather issues.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


This is part of the main argument about renewables - they aren't stable and thus form peaks and troughs in the supply.

quote:


Not only that, the initial outlay to kick-start any renewable project is mega-expensive.

quote:


That burden has to be paid for by the people in rising energy costs

quote:


that won't bring much real cost benefit until maybe decades later and many may not live to see those benefits.

quote:

I would very much love to see the US start to move towards renewables (by way of customer, rather than government edict) and phasing out more expensive models.

Let me see if I understand this????we the people send "our choice" to washington and to the state capital to codify into law "our wishes" and yet this suggests otherwise

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

I would very much love to see the US start to move towards renewables (by way of customer, rather than government edict) and phasing out more expensive models.

Let me see if I understand this????we the people send "our choice" to washington and to the state capital to codify into law "our wishes" and yet this suggests otherwise

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

No blackouts or brownouts. What the guy is talking about is they need to better manage their power distribution automatically so they don't have to have people doing it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


This is part of the main argument about renewables - they aren't stable and thus form peaks and troughs in the supply.

Has no one ever heard of pumping water into a tank,weights on a pully or rail cars loaded with lead and moved to a higher elevation to be used as power by gravity when the prime source of power was not available?

quote:


Not only that, the initial outlay to kick-start any renewable project is mega-expensive.

As opposed to the cost of a similar sized conventional plant???any documenation for that or is that your "unbiased" opinion unsubstantiated by fact?

quote:


That burden has to be paid for by the people in rising energy costs

So far no validation that there will be cost increases based on this.

quote:


that won't bring much real cost benefit until maybe decades later and many may not live to see those benefits.

By this reasoning canned food should not exist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

No blackouts or brownouts. What the guy is talking about is they need to better manage their power distribution automatically so they don't have to have people doing it.

Not in this article. Many documented in other articles.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

Government isn't about codifying the whims of the majority.

It would appear that some prefer the whim of the minority.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Government isn't about codifying the whims of the majority.

It would appear that some prefer the whim of the minority.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


This is part of the main argument about renewables - they aren't stable and thus form peaks and troughs in the supply.

Has no one ever heard of pumping water into a tank,weights on a pully or rail cars loaded with lead and moved to a higher elevation to be used as power by gravity when the prime source of power was not available?

quote:


Not only that, the initial outlay to kick-start any renewable project is mega-expensive.

As opposed to the cost of a similar sized conventional plant???any documenation for that or is that your "unbiased" opinion unsubstantiated by fact?

quote:


That burden has to be paid for by the people in rising energy costs

So far no validation that there will be cost increases based on this.

quote:


that won't bring much real cost benefit until maybe decades later and many may not live to see those benefits.

By this reasoning canned food should not exist.

quote:

Thompson, your comments once again are.. staggering. Technical education really ought to be required.

The above post that I responded to is testimony to that.

quote:

Pumping water uphill has, indeed, been done many, many times. Luddington is one of the better examples of the technology, and has around 1800MW capacity.

Personally, I am greatly fond of this kind of technology - but it has issues.

a). Not every power plant can be situated next to a lake thats uphill, and over a square mile in size.

Does that mean that we should not utilize those that do?

quote:


Lack of water (much of the southwest),

The water is reused not thrown away.

quote:

b). As per the laws of thermodynamics, 1 watt pushed up the lake translates into about .75 watts coming down the lake. This inefficiency makes the electricy more expensive.

Free electricity from solar pushes water uphill to a resevoir during the day and we get 75% of that free energy back at night when the sun does not shine and the water flows out of the resevoir. If I want more electricity for day time I just add more collector capacity. As for cost take a look at just how cheap that shit is. They are building solar farms all around me.

quote:

c). It doesn't work well with solar power. Typically, water is pumped up the hill at night, which is the time of lower demand. Unfortunately, the sun doesn't shine at night.

For the reasons explaned above this statement is just moronic bullshit.

quote:

d). The capital costs are huge;

Gouging out resevoir with a d9 is more expensive than building a power plant

quote:

the siting demands rigorous.

Hmmm let's see would it be more difficult to obtain siting validation for a resevoir or a power plant

quote:

Tanks are worse, having a much higher unit cost.

Higher than the cost of a power plant?

quote:

As for the costs of power plants the costs for coal, hydro, combined cycle were all presented previously. These were costs per kW/hr, provided by the US DoE, as well as the more accurate ones presented by the Aussie govt.
I'm not providing them again.

They were shown to be bullshit the first time so please do not waste our time further with insipid reference to them.

quote:

If you dispute the obvious fact that building and maintaining hydropumping / generation station is expensive - you provide the links.

I have not said it was free to build the infastructure,just as it is not free to build conventional power plants. Which do you feel would be cheaper to build? Maintaining the two the obvious winner is solar since there is no cost for the fuel. I have said that the energy to drive it is free.



< Message edited by thompsonx -- 9/10/2013 5:42:58 PM >

(in reply to Phydeaux)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Actually in the real world there are power plants that exist solely to provide power at peak demand. Those producers do start up and shut down very quickly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peaking_power_plant
The idea, at least in the short term, is to provide the base line power most of the time with renewables and rely on peaker plants during bad weather. It would simply shift those peaker plants from running mostly in summer to mostly running in winter.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

I would very much love to see the US start to move towards renewables (by way of customer, rather than government edict) and phasing out more expensive models.

Let me see if I understand this????we the people send "our choice" to washington and to the state capital to codify into law "our wishes" and yet this suggests otherwise

Government isn't about codifying the whims of the majority.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Government isn't about codifying the whims of the majority.

What then,is the government's job?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)