TN

*****5 STAR Article by Irina Slav - "The Ugly Truth About Renewable Power"

Recommended Posts

"The Ugly Truth About Renewable Power" by Irina Slav is a fabulous read!  After having been kept hidden underneath the rug by the political narratives of our times, Irina pulls out the common sense and real world living.

Give the article a "PING!"  Click the link...     https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Renewable-Energy/The-Ugly-Truth-About-Renewable-Power.html

EXCERPT from article

"...The author of this article grew up in the 1980s in Bulgaria—a time when the country's socialist government exported so much electricity for hard currency payments that blackouts were a part of life. It wasn't a particularly convenient life, but millions of people lived that way in both Bulgaria and Romania. It’s worth mentioning, though, that back in the 1980s, people were not constantly online. Our energy consumption has soared since then...."

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

The article cites the falloff in wind power and reliance on uncontracted imports as the culprits in California's blackouts. 

Both have been solved through putting contracts in place and bringing more than 2GWh worth of batteries online with much more coming soon. 2GWh is more than our energy shortage was thus we would not have had a shortage or blackouts had they been online last summer. 

Edited by Jay McKinsey
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wind Power Giant’s Profit Hit by Rocks on the Seabed

By 
 

The company identified a total of 10 projects in the U.K. and Europe that used the same design that may need to be remedied.

Some projects will be easy to fix. The company can just dump more rocks on top of the cables to make them stay in place.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-29/wind-power-giant-s-profit-hit-by-rocks-on-the-seabed

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RichieRich216 said:

And fossil fuel is charging those batteries….

No

image.thumb.png.d2feb7e205a7c4a17aea143a9d637a97.png

image.thumb.png.9b06c3f84c5e5d8ce0ffd0052d037217.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

11 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

No

image.thumb.png.d2feb7e205a7c4a17aea143a9d637a97.png

image.thumb.png.9b06c3f84c5e5d8ce0ffd0052d037217.png

I am certain there are some days where fossil fuel is charging them.

You sure imported a lot on that day, too.

Edited by turbguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Wind Power Giant’s Profit Hit by Rocks on the Seabed

By 
 

The company identified a total of 10 projects in the U.K. and Europe that used the same design that may need to be remedied.

Some projects will be easy to fix. The company can just dump more rocks on top of the cables to make them stay in place.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-29/wind-power-giant-s-profit-hit-by-rocks-on-the-seabed

The company can just dump more rocks on top of the cables to make them stay in place. It’s quite a limited cost to dump more rocks,

Going forward all they have to do is dump more rocks. Easy cheap fix for future development.

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

37 minutes ago, turbguy said:

I am certain there are some days where fossil fuel is charging them.

A couple MW here or there for grid demand smoothing but otherwise what would be the point in doing that? We always have a big chunk of those variable renewables on the grid. 

Feel free to find a day or two when you think that natural gas is the primary source of charging: http://www.caiso.com/TodaysOutlook/Pages/supply.html 

 

Edited by Jay McKinsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

26 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

A couple MW here or there for grid demand smoothing but otherwise there would be no point in doing that. We always have a big chunk of those variable renewables on the grid. 

Feel free to find a day or two when you think that natural gas is the primary source of charging: http://www.caiso.com/TodaysOutlook/Pages/supply.html 

 

Just about any day. 

Several ways of looking at the situation.  Here's one:

  1. If you assume all renewables are assigned to service instantaneous demand...
  2. Then there is no renewable sources available for charging.  It must therefore be other sources assigned to charging.  Those other sources include fossil generation. 

BTW, I do believe batteries have a significant future, and are appropriate as a means of grid support. They have lots of benefits. Great ramp rates are one such benefit.

I also believe that it's gonna cost the consumer.

The consumer must recognize that the added expense is justified by the avoidance of the "externalites" of other generation, as well as the potential cost savings (way) down the road.

For some people stuck in the past, that can be hard to swallow, no?

BTW, why does hydro ramp to near zero at times?  Should that not be used for charging (grid structure allowing) while ramping fossil down further?  Perhaps some water issues raises their ugly heads?

 

Edited by turbguy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

41 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Just about any day. 

Several ways of looking at the situation.  Here's one:

  1. If you assume all renewables are assigned to service instantaneous demand...
  2. Then there is no renewable sources available for charging.  It must therefore be other sources assigned to charging.  Those other sources include fossil generation. 

BTW, I do believe batteries have a significant future, and are appropriate as a means of grid support. They have lots of benefits. Great ramp rates are one such benefit.

I also believe that it's gonna cost the consumer.

The consumer must recognize that the added expense is justified by the avoidance of the "externalites" of other generation, as well as the potential cost savings (way) down the road.

For some people stuck in the past, that can be hard to swallow, no?

But you can likewise assume that renewables are assigned to charge the batteries and the batteries are assigned to service instantaneous demand. I think that is closer to how it would actually work as servicing instantaneous demand is the thing batteries excel at the most.

I think you will be surprised how soon those cost savings start showing up.

Definite yes as to those stuck in the past.

 

Edited by Jay McKinsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

31 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

But you can likewise assume that renewables are assigned to charge the batteries and the batteries are assigned to service instantaneous demand. I think that is closer to how it actually works as servicing instantaneous demand is the thing batteries excel at the most.

I think you will be surprised how soon those cost savings start showing up.

Definite yes as to those stuck in the past.

 

That's another valid way of looking at it, but in the current big picture, they are more or less operated as a "trim" to the grid.

BTW, I actually expect that California should just install some large pumped-storage (you have some small amounts now).  Particularity if you can source water from an existing dammed reservoir, pump THAT uphill to a new reservoir above the source, then discharge below the dam (flow conditions permitting).  That way, you get back MORE than you put in.   Or just install typical two-level pumped storage.  MUCH longer operating time, great spinning inertia, governed frequency and VAR control (and more jobs than batteries, if that's important).  Gonna need some transmission lines.

California filled the Hetch Hetchy valley.  They used to be able to do anything.  I think you have a large one out in the deserts undergoing approval??

Edited by turbguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

7 hours ago, turbguy said:

That's another valid way of looking at it, but in the current big picture, they are more or less operated as a "trim" to the grid.

BTW, I actually expect that California should just install some large pumped-storage (you have some small amounts now).  Particularity if you can source water from an existing dammed reservoir, pump THAT uphill to a new reservoir above the source, then discharge below the dam (flow conditions permitting).  That way, you get back MORE than you put in.   Or just install typical two-level pumped storage.  MUCH longer operating time, great spinning inertia, governed frequency and VAR control (and more jobs than batteries, if that's important).  Gonna need some transmission lines.

California filled the Hetch Hetchy valley.  They used to be able to do anything.  I think you have a large one out in the deserts undergoing approval??

I'm not sure filling Hetch Hetchy is anything to be too proud of.  We might build one more PH in San Diego which is 500MW/4000MWh (smaller than the biggest battery being built in Moss Landing), mostly for the jobs as you suggested, but I doubt there will be anymore. The big one out in the desert appears to have been dropped.

San Diego made a report on the economics of the project hoping to get funding https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2019/05/14/pumped-hydro-with-better-financing-can-compete-with-batteries/

 I know you see batteries as having a significant future but I don't think you quite appreciate just how fast this is happening. In December 2017 the impossibly huge 100MWh Hornsdale battery came online. Three years later in December 2020 the first phase of Moss Landing came online at 1200MWh, 12x in 3 years! By August '21 Moss Landing will almost double at 2330 MWh. And that is just the batteries at Moss Landing.

 

 

 

Edited by Jay McKinsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The electricity utility industry employs a simple strategy for maintaining reliability: always have more supply available than may be required. Yet it can be difficult to forecast future electricity demand, and building new generating capacity can take years. The industry regularly monitors the supply situation using a measure called reserve margin. Regional estimates of reserve margins are compared to pre-determined target levels to assess supply adequacy.

 

You can see Texas runs a tighter cushion in spite of over 20% use of renewables. Seems to me joining together the Southwest power pool, ERCOT and the Western Electricity Coordinating Council joins wind producers together with solar producers in a much larger grid will give you the resilience from weather events.E110DD12-21F5-410E-9A75-BBC9D5AEC46A.jpeg.0973699c128a5511be36a8b4e16fbd41.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

7 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I'm not sure filling Hetch Hetchy is anything to be too proud of.  We might build one more PH in San Diego which is 500MW/4000MWh (smaller than the biggest battery being built in Moss Landing), mostly for the jobs as you suggested, but I doubt there will be anymore. The big one out in the desert appears to have been dropped.

San Diego made a report on the economics of the project hoping to get funding https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2019/05/14/pumped-hydro-with-better-financing-can-compete-with-batteries/

 I know you see batteries as having a significant future but I don't think you quite appreciate just how fast this is happening. In December 2017 the impossibly huge 100MWh Hornsdale battery came online. Three years later in December 2020 the first phase of Moss Landing came online at 1200MWh, 12x in 3 years! By August '21 Moss Landing will almost double at 2330 MWh. And that is just the batteries at Moss Landing.

 

 

 

Isn't 4000 MWh "bigger" storage than 2330 MWh storage? 

Pumped storage has a LOT of advantages, with "relatively minimal" environmental impact. 

One issue is they must be on NEW sites, while batteries can be located on brownfields, where transmission capability might be nearby. 

Edited by turbguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, turbguy said:

Isn't 4000 MWh "bigger" storage than 2330 MWh storage? 

Pumped storage has a LOT of advantages, with "relatively minimal" environmental impact. 

One issue is they must be on NEW sites, while batteries can be located on brownfields, where transmission capability might be nearby. 

I agree with pumped hydro.

Who knows, this might be the golden age for pumped hydro because the intermittency of renewables (on multiple different time scales) is enough to make storage solutions of any type economically more viable than they have been in the past. And well, pumped hydro takes advantage of more "free" stuff (what we have plenty of), for example, gravity, the hydrological cycle.

On the other hand, some of the historical bottlenecks, that is, permitting, land acquisition, environmental reviews, still might apply. I think it'll be interesting to see smaller scale pumped hydro projects be economically viable that could be used in more places with either natural or artificial topology, especially switching between generation (the battery)/pumping (recharging) quickly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

8 hours ago, turbguy said:

Isn't 4000 MWh "bigger" storage than 2330 MWh storage? 

Pumped storage has a LOT of advantages, with "relatively minimal" environmental impact. 

One issue is they must be on NEW sites, while batteries can be located on brownfields, where transmission capability might be nearby. 

The biggest battery at Moss Landing will be 1500MW/6000MWh when it is completed in a few years.. Whereas pumped hydro can't be brought online until completed, batteries are modular and can be revenue generating long before completion.

Another huge advantage of batteries is that they can be quickly built at pre existing substations. Moss Landing is a very large natural gas plant that has been retired. The battery is being built in the former turbine building and using the plants' pre existing transmission. No environmental issues at all, no new power lines, just reusing power industry infrastructure is a big plus for batteries. The plan is to convert many of the natural gas plants to big batteries.

 

Edited by Jay McKinsey
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Speaking of ULGY...uhh  ohh its beginning to get "UGLIER"..

 

Warren Buffett faces impatient investors as Berkshire Hathaway returns decline

Institutional shareholders are pressing for change on climate and governance at the Omaha, Neb., conglomerate

 

Neuberger, a privately held money manager with more than $429 billion in assets, also said it would vote for several shareholder-led proposals related to environmental, social and corporate-governance issues, often abbreviated as ESG.

"One would think that if companies have a responsibility to look out for the environment or deliver good on social issues and governance, that Berkshire might be a leader in these areas," said Michelle Giordano, a Neuberger analyst who follows the company. "But it doesn’t seem like they are."

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/warren-buffett-faces-impatient-investors-as-berkshire-hathaway-returns-decline

 

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Speaking of ULGY...uhh  ohh its beginning to get "UGLIER"..

 

Warren Buffett faces impatient investors as Berkshire Hathaway returns decline

Institutional shareholders are pressing for change on climate and governance at the Omaha, Neb., conglomerate

 

Neuberger, a privately held money manager with more than $429 billion in assets, also said it would vote for several shareholder-led proposals related to environmental, social and corporate-governance issues, often abbreviated as ESG.

"One would think that if companies have a responsibility to look out for the environment or deliver good on social issues and governance, that Berkshire might be a leader in these areas," said Michelle Giordano, a Neuberger analyst who follows the company. "But it doesn’t seem like they are."

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/warren-buffett-faces-impatient-investors-as-berkshire-hathaway-returns-decline

 

He's been investing in old technology fossil fuels and loosing money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2021 at 7:34 AM, Jay McKinsey said:

The article cites the falloff in wind power and reliance on uncontracted imports as the culprits in California's blackouts. 

Both have been solved through putting contracts in place and bringing more than 2GWh worth of batteries online with much more coming soon. 2GWh is more than our energy shortage was thus we would not have had a shortage or blackouts had they been online last summer. 

Jay - I'm so glad to see that your balloon has not landed but, as I've said before, this forum is not the right place for this sort of uncritical repetition of the green line. You may kid your self that these batteries and additional supply contracts would have prevented the problems of last summer, but since then a lot more renewable capacity has been added in both California and the surrounding states (with much smaller grids) which are supposed to supply the shortfall. In any case, it seems that California has adopted a form of capacity market - a major additional expense for the supposedly cheap green power. Where will this expense end? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

He's been investing in old technology fossil fuels and loosing money.

Incidentally, I forgot to ask, how was the winter where you were? I understand it was arctic conditions in much of North America for a time.. and pretty bad in Europe for part of the time. It was a terrible summer in Australia, which didn't stop the Bureau of Meteorology declaring it the "fifth hottest".. anyway, I hope you weren't too cold.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

He's been investing in old technology fossil fuels and loosing money.

Warren Buffett: Solar and Wind Could ‘Erode the Economics of the Incumbent Utility’

In his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders, Buffett outlined the risks posed by distributed generation to traditional power companies. Berkshire Hathaway, a multinational holding company worth nearly $200 billion, owns 10 energy companies, including three large electric utilities serving territories across 11 Midwestern and Western U.S. states.

Berkshire Hathaway Energy has poured $16 billion into renewables in recent years, according to Buffett. The company's electricity portfolio now consists of 7 percent wind and 6 percent solar. The company also plans to increase its investments in large-scale renewable energy projects in support of international climate goals. “We're not done,” wrote Buffett.

https://fuelsave-global.com/warren-buffett-solar-and-wind-could-erode-the-economics-of-the-incumbent-utility/

 

If Clean Energy Is the Future, Why Are Renewable Energy Stocks Selling Off Right Now?

. Oil and gas is now in favor

In 2020, low commodity prices brought oil and gas companies to their knees, forcing them to slash spending, cut dividends, take on tons of debt, record writedowns, and report some of the largest annual losses in history. But now, West Texas Intermediate (WTI) oil prices, the commonly quoted U.S. benchmark, are at their highest point in over a year. Prices averaged less than $40 per barrel in 2020. Today, WTI is over $65 per barrel. Even less well run oil companies can turn a profit at $65 oil. For the ones that have made timely acquisitions and lowered their production costs, $65 oil is like waking up every morning and winning the lottery.

https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/14/if-clean-energy-is-the-future-why-are-renewable-en/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Warren Buffett: Solar and Wind Could ‘Erode the Economics of the Incumbent Utility’

In his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders, Buffett outlined the risks posed by distributed generation to traditional power companies. Berkshire Hathaway, a multinational holding company worth nearly $200 billion, owns 10 energy companies, including three large electric utilities serving territories across 11 Midwestern and Western U.S. states.

Berkshire Hathaway Energy has poured $16 billion into renewables in recent years, according to Buffett. The company's electricity portfolio now consists of 7 percent wind and 6 percent solar. The company also plans to increase its investments in large-scale renewable energy projects in support of international climate goals. “We're not done,” wrote Buffett.

https://fuelsave-global.com/warren-buffett-solar-and-wind-could-erode-the-economics-of-the-incumbent-utility/

 

If Clean Energy Is the Future, Why Are Renewable Energy Stocks Selling Off Right Now?

. Oil and gas is now in favor

In 2020, low commodity prices brought oil and gas companies to their knees, forcing them to slash spending, cut dividends, take on tons of debt, record writedowns, and report some of the largest annual losses in history. But now, West Texas Intermediate (WTI) oil prices, the commonly quoted U.S. benchmark, are at their highest point in over a year. Prices averaged less than $40 per barrel in 2020. Today, WTI is over $65 per barrel. Even less well run oil companies can turn a profit at $65 oil. For the ones that have made timely acquisitions and lowered their production costs, $65 oil is like waking up every morning and winning the lottery.

https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/14/if-clean-energy-is-the-future-why-are-renewable-en/

 

 

Warren Buffett: 'Chevron's not an evil company in the least'

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/warren-buffett-chevrons-not-an-evil-company-in-the-least-193906184.html

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, ceo_energemsier said:

Warren Buffett: 'Chevron's not an evil company in the least'

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/warren-buffett-chevrons-not-an-evil-company-in-the-least-193906184.html

 

 

 

Yes i do understand, if one looks at those links it should be apparent Buffet is moving away from green energy, his personal portfolio is quite deep in old fossil fuels...Actually heavy investments are now going back to fossil fuel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.