GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

19 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Simon Hackett’s 73-hectare working sheep farm, The Vale, has now achieved energy independence through the deployment of 100 kilowatt-peak solar array and energy storage system consisting of 28 Redflow 10 kWh ZBM2  zinc-bromine flow batteries. https://www.pv-magazine-australia.com/2021/04/21/tasmanian-sheep-farm-installs-flow-battery-based-microgrid-system/

Note the solar panels not interfering with the livestock.

.

“The battery array makes extensive use of the Redflow Standby Power System (SPS) mode, allowing batteries to be fully charged during good solar weather days, and to then be ‘hibernated’ with zero self-discharge. During extended overcast periods, the SPS batteries are automatically activated to support site loads instead of using the grid. This unique strength of Redflow’s ZBM2 batteries allows the site to maximise both energy storage quantity and also energy storage efficiency.”

I'm sure this is going to blow eco's mind but these batteries don't even use lithium and they are built to pretty much weigh as much as they can.

Jay, I think that your battery ads are better at home in your own thread, which I see you have already started. They don't fit here.

Simply recycling some company promotional blurbs does not contribute anything here.

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Nice try at changing the topic. You said several posts back that "Grids will certainly transition into palladium to reduce weight," and that is what has been refuted. I accept your concession.

This link which I gave you shows how the ramp-up of road transportation favors Internal Combustion Engines, that is central to our topic, unlike your recycled company ads.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/The-Great-Car-Comeback-Brightens-Oil-Demand-Outlook.html

Electrified Vehicles need to reduce weight going forward, that is where palladium is central.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

1 minute ago, Ecocharger said:

The link I gave you shows how the ramp-up of road transportation favors ICE, that is central to our topic, unlike you recycled company ads.

Sorry, but the subject was grid batteries, not EV's. ICE are not central to the topic of grid batteries at all.  You are really making yourself look like a fool.

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

4 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Sorry, but the subject was grid batteries, not EV's. ICE are not central to the topic of grid batteries at all.  You are really making yourself look like a fool.

Sorry, but the subject is the Green New Deal=Blizzard of Lies.

That is what I demonstrated to you above.

That salesman's hat you wear does not help your cause.

I can recommend a better model.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

7 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Sorry, but the subject is the Green New Deal=Blizzard of Lies.

That is what I demonstrated to you above.

That salesman's hat you wear does not help your cause.

You know you won the argument when the other guy stoops to personal insults and asks you to leave.

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

You know you won the argument when the other guy stoops to personal insults and asks you to leave.

Which one of us was stooping to insults, Jay?  You have me puzzled there. (You said to me above, "you are making yourself look like a fool"? Not nice, Jay)

I made a generous offer to assist with hattery advice. 

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

Interesting conclusions on todays run-up in oil prices, that the ironically named "green transition" may not be easy to promote.

"The rebound in oil demand that banks and analysts expect appears to be proof that the transition to all-electric transport might be more challenging than some hope."

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/Oil-Prices-Rally-Towards-70-As-Demand-Outlook-Improves.html

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

On 4/25/2021 at 5:52 PM, Jay McKinsey said:

Do you have any evidence for that claim? 

I only find evidence of positive benefits from multiple research projects. Such as:

This paper investigates the net impacts of sizable wind farms on local crop yields and agricultural activities at the farm level by using a new IV approach. I find that soybean and corn yields increase by roughly 1.3 and 2.4 percent, respectively, given an additional 50 MW of wind capacity installed in the same county. The induced microclimate changes are likely main contributors to these increases, as my results also show that the development of wind energy has significant impacts on local meteorological variables but does not measurably change farm operations. Moreover, I also find that farms can obtain most benefits gained from the higher crop yields as returns to labor and management. The aggregate benefits from this unanticipated positive externality of wind energy on agricultural production are fairly large in Illinois

https://ace.illinois.edu/sites/ace.illinois.edu/files/JMP_V6_upload_V2_0.pdf

Start with this one, just a beginning, there are more.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/M-Karwowska/publication/273967727_Effect_of_Noise_Generated_by_the_Wind_Turbine_on_the_Quality_of_Goose_Muscles_and_Abdominal_Fat/links/55f26b1b08ae0af8ee1f8bfb/Effect-of-Noise-Generated-by-the-Wind-Turbine-on-the-Quality-of-Goose-Muscles-and-Abdominal-Fat.pdf

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

On 4/27/2021 at 2:34 AM, Jay McKinsey said:

https://youtu.be/AjUmULa0R-8

Jay, thanks for your kind acknowledgment above for the links I gave you to scientific research showing that global warming/cooling is caused by solar variables and is not related to CO2 in the atmosphere. That was a profound comment you gave us.

Here is an excellent article showing that reliance on renewable electricity is bound to lead to shutdowns and failures. Enjoy the read.

https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Renewable-Energy/The-Ugly-Truth-About-Renewable-Power.html

 

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Sorry, but the subject was grid batteries, not EV's. ICE are not central to the topic of grid batteries at all.  You are really making yourself look like a fool.

Jay, you should read this brilliant analysis from Forbes, still think that I look like a fool?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2021/04/20/why-renewables-cause-blackouts-and-increase-vulnerability-to-extreme-weather/?sh=7f0d46764e75

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

17 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Jay, you should read this brilliant analysis from Forbes, still think that I look like a fool?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2021/04/20/why-renewables-cause-blackouts-and-increase-vulnerability-to-extreme-weather/?sh=7f0d46764e75

Yes.

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

29 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Yes.

Not nice, Jay, not nice. I guess insults are okay with you?

Your brilliant response indicates that you have no objection to this article?

We should discuss this article in detail.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

Just now, Ecocharger said:

Not nice, Jay, not nice. I guess insults are okay with you?

I was just offering an objective assessment of your behavior. 

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

7 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Not nice, Jay, not nice. I guess insults are okay with you?

Your brilliant response indicates that you have no objection to this article?

We should discuss this article in detail.

No, I succinctly answered your question.

What part of that article do you think is important?

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

3 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I was just offering an objective assessment of your behavior. 

 

First you object to insults, then you say that insults are okay?  You need to make up your mind, Jay.

I guess insults are okay if you are making them about others, but not okay if others are making them to you? Is that how it works?

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

Just now, Jay McKinsey said:

No, I succinctly answered your question.

What part of that article do you think is important?

You tell me.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

7 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

You tell me.

None of it is important. 

It was a 1 in 30 year heat event. The blackouts affected a small percentage of the state population for a very short time period and caused almost no damage, no one here even remembers it:

http://www.caiso.com/Documents/Final-Root-Cause-Analysis-Mid-August-2020-Extreme-Heat-Wave.pdf

If the heat event were to occur this year instead of last there would be no blackouts because over 2GWh of pre planned battery capacity is being added to the grid by August.  Most of it is already online. (many more GWh will continue coming online in the coming years)

There were a number of other foul ups as well, though not nearly as bad as the Texas screw ups, some examples:

"The duration of rotating outages experienced by PG&E customers on both days significantly exceeds the load shed duration called by the CAISO. Because PG&E received less than 10 minutes’ warning to begin shedding load, it implemented its operating instructions protocol (covered in NERC standard COM-002-4) rather than its rotating outage protocol, for which more than 10 minutes’ advance warning is required. PG&E’s operating instructions protocol required the implementation of manual switching using field personnel, resulting in longer-duration outages because of the need for manual restoration.

At 6:13 p.m.  on the 15th a generator unexpectedly ramped down generation from about 394 MW to about 146 MW, resulting in a loss of about 248 MW.35 This was not an outage, but a ramp down from the CAISO dispatch, which the CAISO now understands to be due to an erroneous dispatch from the scheduling coordinator to the plant."

A number of other issues also came into play such as not being able to import because of shortages across the West, decrease in wind power, 475MW natural gas plant went off line, etc but if we had our batteries online then this would never have been an issue.

Summation of the story is that we are in the middle of a mass transition and we had a minor shortcoming exposed to a rare event occurring just before we fixed the mismatch in the grid. 

 

 

Edited April 30, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

43 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

First you object to insults, then you say that insults are okay?  You need to make up your mind, Jay.

No, I was being polite, changing the topic because your position had been refuted and refusing to acknowledge it is worse than what I said.

[turbguy + 1,543]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Yes.

Actually, that opinion piece ain't bad. 

It's unfortunate it does not seem to recognize demand management can be a critical piece of the puzzle. And cheap to bring to fruition.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

5 hours ago, turbguy said:

Actually, that opinion piece ain't bad. 

It's unfortunate it does not seem to recognize demand management can be a critical piece of the puzzle. And cheap to bring to fruition.

It is very dishonest article. It not only ignores demand management which we have been working on implementing, cheap to do but it takes a lot of rejigging of the market which we are in the middle of, takes time to implement.

They make a point of the Escondido battery as one the biggest batteries and utterly fail to mention that within months from then it would be a midget. By August of this year we will have more GWh online than our shortage last August.

The demand surges that last for the better part of the day are in the summer and are half covered directly by solar and the balance is 4 hours.  Long term storage is the next part of the system to build, today's batteries are for daily shifting. Many different technologies are being developed to handle long term storage.

Germany frequently boasts about its use of renewables, especially wind power. Yet in Germany, when wind is 15 percent of electricity, its value drops 20 percent. And when wind is 30 percent, its value drops 40 percent. 

Yes, that is the main market problem that batteries solve. They allow renewables to transfer their low value peak production to high value at peak demand.

And yet, while California is hot, weather conditions are well within the normal range for the state’s summer weather.

This is a lie. August was hottest month on record in California. https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/august-was-hottest-month-on-record-in-california/

 

Edited April 30, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

The Ugly Truth About Renewable Power

https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Renewable-Energy/The-Ugly-Truth-About-Renewable-Power.html

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

10 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

No, I was being polite, changing the topic because your position had been refuted and refusing to acknowledge it is worse than what I said.

No, Jay, your own positions were refuted time and again...you just float along making no responses, pretending nothing has happened.

You made zero response to the major issues surrounding climate change, just ignored them.  I cited your own alma mater in a central study, and your response was , "Okay, what else have you got?"  That is not a refutation.

I tried to improve your online demeanor, get you a better hat, but no luck.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

9 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

It is very dishonest article. It not only ignores demand management which we have been working on implementing, cheap to do but it takes a lot of rejigging of the market which we are in the middle of, takes time to implement.

They make a point of the Escondido battery as one the biggest batteries and utterly fail to mention that within months from then it would be a midget. By August of this year we will have more GWh online than our shortage last August.

The demand surges that last for the better part of the day are in the summer and are half covered directly by solar and the balance is 4 hours.  Long term storage is the next part of the system to build, today's batteries are for daily shifting. Many different technologies are being developed to handle long term storage.

Germany frequently boasts about its use of renewables, especially wind power. Yet in Germany, when wind is 15 percent of electricity, its value drops 20 percent. And when wind is 30 percent, its value drops 40 percent. 

Yes, that is the main market problem that batteries solve. They allow renewables to transfer their low value peak production to high value at peak demand.

And yet, while California is hot, weather conditions are well within the normal range for the state’s summer weather.

This is a lie. August was hottest month on record in California. https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/august-was-hottest-month-on-record-in-california/

 

Jay, here is the reality from the article above.

"This is what the California Public Utilities Commission and the state's grid operator, CAISO, said in a joint letter to Governor Newsom following the blackouts:

"On August 15, the CAISO experienced similar [to August 14] supply conditions, as well as significant swings in wind resource output when evening demand was increasing. Wind resources first quickly increased output during the 4:00 pm hour (approximately 1,000 MW), then decreased rapidly the next hour. These factors, combined with another unexpected loss of generating resources, led to a sudden need to shed load to maintain system reliability."

Further in the letter, CPUC and CAISO also had this to say:

"Another factor that appears to have contributed to resource shortages is California's heavy reliance on import resources to meet increasing energy needs in the late afternoon and evening hours during summer. Some of these import resources bid into the CAISO energy markets but are not secured by long-term contracts. This poses a risk if import resources become unavailable when there are West-wide shortages due to an extreme heat event, such as the one we are currently experiencing.""

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger

[turbguy + 1,543]

10 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

It is very dishonest article. It not only ignores demand management which we have been working on implementing, cheap to do but it takes a lot of rejigging of the market which we are in the middle of, takes time to implement.

They make a point of the Escondido battery as one the biggest batteries and utterly fail to mention that within months from then it would be a midget. By August of this year we will have more GWh online than our shortage last August.

The demand surges that last for the better part of the day are in the summer and are half covered directly by solar and the balance is 4 hours.  Long term storage is the next part of the system to build, today's batteries are for daily shifting. Many different technologies are being developed to handle long term storage.

Germany frequently boasts about its use of renewables, especially wind power. Yet in Germany, when wind is 15 percent of electricity, its value drops 20 percent. And when wind is 30 percent, its value drops 40 percent. 

Yes, that is the main market problem that batteries solve. They allow renewables to transfer their low value peak production to high value at peak demand.

And yet, while California is hot, weather conditions are well within the normal range for the state’s summer weather.

This is a lie. August was hottest month on record in California. https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/august-was-hottest-month-on-record-in-california/

 

While there may be differences of opinion, if California did not have access to fossil generation, the rolling blackouts would have been much worse. 

You cannot have the expected level of system reliability with 100% sourcing from intermittent generation.   The issue boils down to how much percentage of renewable penetration is acceptable for the expected level of reliability.  Even systems with 100% dispatchable sources do not achieve 100% reliability.

California will continue to "run on the edge" of expected reliability with further penetration of renewables during (rare?) intermittent periods where generation isn't there, but demand is.

Can the grid be "hardened" by increasing storage and demand management?   Yes.

Can the consumer be expected to pay for that hardening.  Of course.  Some fraction of that cost will probably be spread around the country via tax incentives or similar political maneuvers.   There can be some justification for that, as reduced fossil emissions benefit a population wider than just California.

Can the consumer be expected to participate in the reliability of the grid, rather than expecting 100% of supply, 100% of the time?  THAT is a good question.  The design of the current grid can only provide effective management via gross (rolling) blackouts circuit-by-circuit via the distribution system.

I look forward to see all new residential/business construction having frequency-sensitive circuit breakers installed to automatically shed local (internal) loads during system stress, with those loads selected at the discretion of the consumer.  I want my well pump able to run 100% of the time.  I don't care if my dishwasher, or clothes drier, or freezer, is interrupted for an hour or two.    

Don't forget, you gotta charge that storage somewhere along the line.  If you can do that with intermittent sources a large (say 90%) of the time, great!  The other 10% comes from where?

 

Edited April 30, 2021 by turbguy

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

While there may be differences of opinion, if California did not have access to fossil generation, the rolling blackouts would have been much worse. 

You cannot have the expected level of system reliability with 100% sourcing from intermittent generation.   The issue boils down to how much percentage of renewable penetration is acceptable for the expected level of reliability.  Even systems with 100% dispatchable sources do not achieve 100% reliability.

California will continue to "run on the edge" of expected reliability with further penetration of renewables during (rare?) intermittent periods where generation isn't there, but demand is.

Can the grid be "hardened" by increasing storage and demand management?   Yes.

Can the consumer be expected to pay for that hardening.  Of course.  Some fraction of that cost will probably be spread around the country via tax incentives or similar political maneuvers.   There can be some justification for that, as reduced fossil emissions benefit a population wider than just California.

Can the consumer be expected to participate in the reliability of the grid, rather than expecting 100% of supply, 100% of the time?  THAT is a good question.  The design of the current grid can only provide effective management via gross (rolling) blackouts circuit-by-circuit via the distribution system.

I look forward to see all new residential/business construction having frequency-sensitive circuit breakers installed to automatically shed local (internal) loads during system stress, with those loads selected at the discretion of the consumer.  I want my well pump able to run 100% of the time.  I don't care if my dishwasher, or clothes drier, or freezer, is interrupted for an hour or two.    

Don't forget, you gotta charge that storage somewhere along the line.  If you can do that with intermittent sources a large (say 90%) of the time, great!  The other 10% comes from where?

 

The issue will be moot if gas-generated electricity is widely accepted as being environmentally friendly, which in reality it is.

That would provide a compatible source of electricity to ride out any temporary overloads.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Ecocharger