Recommended Posts

Just now, Jay McKinsey said:

Sorry, but grid batteries make money. The California batteries didn't get any subsidies.

So can I, in theory at least. There is some EU directive that mandates all electrical meters being reversible now :) (mine engages an eddy current brake shared with ICE bullet train if I try)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

That is because

a) France allegedly does not need need much new baseload capacity

b) Areva is bankrupt, same as US/Japanese Westinghouse

as a corollary of b) you effectively got to hire Russia's Rosatom if you want a Gen III+ (post-Fukushima safe) reactor on time and on budget. The only remaining real competitors are Chinese and Koreans, but they've got no track record yet.

It looks like a game of chicken. Who gives in first between Deutschland and the Bear. Russia is very good at holding out because their people are tough and used to being poor and cold. The West is getting softer every year. They don't want to work hard and want high pay (I am speaking of many in the young generations). Even many in China want shorter work hours and easier work. Right now they work six days a work 12 hour days, that is my understanding anyway. How about Russia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Starschy said:

The Key issue is real-time. At Noon there is a spike if Wind is down you have to produce Power and that works by Nuclear Power, Water or Coal.

The affluent portion of our population has the desire for "all the energy I want, when I want it".

I grew up with that paradigm.  The population must get smarter about consuming energy.

Real-time balance of supply to demand is important for grid-supplied electric power,

You just might be concentrating on the supply side, and overlooking the demand side.

  • Like 3
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 hours ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

Are you serious?!?

Grid scale battery storage has some issues to overcome, but otherwise works fine (better and faster that just about any other energy storage method).

So, is grid-scale battery storage a serious and demonstrably proven method?

Yes.

You don't believe so?.

Here's CALISO's supply graph from today. 

Remember, battery installations are in their infancy.

There are, of course, other popular bulk energy storage methods.  Pumped storage for one.

Clipboard02.jpg

Edited by turbguy
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ronwagn said:

It looks like a game of chicken. Who gives in first between Deutschland and the Bear. Russia is very good at holding out because their people are tough and used to being poor and cold. The West is getting softer every year. They don't want to work hard and want high pay (I am speaking of many in the young generations). Even many in China want shorter work hours and easier work. Right now they work six days a work 12 hour days, that is my understanding anyway. How about Russia?

However hard-working Russians may be, the current crisis has very little to do with them. Otherwise, see

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/hardest-working-countries ?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

However hard-working Russians may be, the current crisis has very little to do with them. Otherwise, see

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/hardest-working-countries ?

Great reference but too bad it doesn't cover the poorer nations. I guess that is just too hard to quantify and no good statistics kept. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Here is the new deal of the week:

Tesla and Arevon have announced that they came to an agreement for the former to supply a massive 2 GW/6 GWh of Megapack batteries to the latter. https://electrek.co/2021/09/28/tesla-tsla-secures-massive-order-6-gwh-megapack-batteries-arevon/

Wow!

Moss landing should have left a generator or two in place, and converted them to synchronous condensers, though.  Those provide really useful grid support that inverters struggle with.

More and more retiring fossil sites will be replaced with batteries, since a big chunk of the grid infrastructure is already there.

Edited by turbguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Wow!

Moss landing should have left a generator or two in place, and converted them to synchronous condensers, though.  Those provide really useful grid support that inverters struggle with.

More and more retiring fossil sites will be replaced with batteries, since a big chunk of the grid infrastructure is already there.

Moss Landing had at least two if not three natural gas plants. Looking on google earth, one of them is still there. I don't know if it is operational but they may save the turbines from it. What happened is that the main plant had been retired and sold for scrap a year before the whole battery thing suddenly happened. Regardless we have plenty of natural gas plant turbines to use as condensers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

You don't have even the beginning of a clue.

California is on track to have 2.5GW of batteries online by the end of the year. https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/082621-feature-battery-storage-capacity-rapidly-rising-across-california-thermal-remains-strong

Australia is on track to have almost as much and Hornsdale Big Battery has been a huge success.

EIA reports that the US will add 4.3GW (including California) of batteries this year.

planned U.S. utility-scale electricity generating capacity additions

 

And new big batteries get announced almost every day.

 

 

Thanks for a link that proves that consumption of natural gas continues to increase in California along with increasing renewables and that no storage method is cheap enough nor is adopted at a scale that would reverse the increases in gas consumption. Would've been nice if it also talked about the energy prices in the regions batteries are installed being among the highest for the neighborhood or about the special feed-in-tariffs and other regulations which insulate those battery storage and renewable energy projects from market forces, but even as it is it proves my initial point fairly well.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Chuko said:

Thanks for a link that proves that consumption of natural gas continues to increase in California along with increasing renewables and that no storage method is cheap enough nor is adopted at a scale that would reverse the increases in gas consumption. Would've been nice if it also talked about the energy prices in the regions batteries are installed being among the highest for the neighborhood or about the special feed-in-tariffs and other regulations which insulate those battery storage and renewable energy projects from market forces, but even as it is it proves my initial point fairly well.

We just started the battery build out. It is cheap enough, building just takes a little time. We barely had any batteries online a year ago. But enjoy your Pyrrhic victory. There are no special feed in tariffs for the batteries. They buy and sell at market rates. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

We just started the battery build out. It is cheap enough, building just takes a little time. We barely had any batteries online a year ago. But enjoy your Pyrrhic victory. There are no special feed in tariffs for the batteries. They buy and sell at market rates. 

There was no "Pyrrhic victory". The Romans thus smeared

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhus_of_Epirus

for kicking their asses. The guy was universally recognized by contemporaries (including Hannibal) as the greatest military leader since Alexander.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is simple. Germany asked for nordstream 2 not Russia. the reason why is that there are other countries that can send LNG to the EU. one country who was waiting for the nordstream 2 to fail. that country was Turkey. remember Turkstream 1 and 2, why not 3,4, and on? Germany is not Bulgaria. Bulgaria refused the pipeline listening to John McCain and still kicking themselves for that one. they are now begging Russia for a pipeline. who ever has a pipeline makes extra billions in transit fees. money talks and BS walks. Germany is not Bulgaria and is not listening to the US. it saw what happened to Bulgaria besides why should Turkey get all the transit fees anyway? why not us?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, ronwagn said:

It looks like a game of chicken. Who gives in first between Deutschland and the Bear. Russia is very good at holding out because their people are tough and used to being poor and cold. The West is getting softer every year. They don't want to work hard and want high pay (I am speaking of many in the young generations). Even many in China want shorter work hours and easier work. Right now they work six days a work 12 hour days, that is my understanding anyway. How about Russia?

Winter is coming...

FAsvLtmXsAIlapt?format=jpg&name=small

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/1/2021 at 5:32 PM, Starschy said:

The Key issue is real-time. At Noon there is a spike if Wind is down you have to produce Power and that works by Nuclear Power, Water or Coal.

Or natural gas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

Winter is coming...

FAsvLtmXsAIlapt?format=jpg&name=small

We don’t have to work as hard or be as poor because we use machines to be productive. You call it soft, I call it being woke. Gotta use your brains to cut through the bull shyt.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let’s talk US nat gas. during Obama’s term he caved and allowed nat gas to be exported around the world. Before that there was an excess of supply. Now the rednecks will spin Obama as anti FF but he wasn’t. Coal, yes but oil and nat gas had massive expansion. More than any other US president. 
The real question is how will the US economy will do in the short term. Like Australia the US is experiencing high FF prices due to allowed exports. The woke group doesn’t mind the higher prices knowing this is the last heyday for coal and oil. The electric society will be ramping up over the next few years. 
Week after week wells drilled and wells completed goes up. Extra supply will eventually catch up and prices will drop once again. Biden haters won’t point out he is still allowing nat gas flaring just like Obama did. Both parties are comfortable with the labels but other than coal there is little difference. If you want to heat your food and your home at an affordable price your going to need a third party. Ain’t gonna happen with this group of politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s one thing to export nat gas to Mexico or Canada using the reasoning if North America gets stronger each country benefits. That makes sense to some woke. Same with oil, all for one one for all. No race problems within N America I say. Except Germany who have a history of attacking the world multiple times with plans of control. That’s a separate issue. So these exports to the world brings nat gas closer to the global market prices. So Obama’s sins working with Republicans and here comes winter with nat gas going to foreign countries instead of US reserves. Of course it’s the poor which is the 50% of the population that makes less than $30,000 per year that gets hurt. The new plan is to round up the disgruntled poor with cops on horseback with whips? Darn, I thought Trump lost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am happy oil and gas drillers have had a chance to make a few bucks over the last few months. One cause for concern is this pipeline 3 is planned to start Oct 1. More tar sands the US doesn’t need which will end up in foreign lands because the US is basically net oil independent without most of the oil Canada rams down our throat. Enbridge who’s largest shareholder is the Canadian government gets handshake access to our politicians who love to run pipelines through our populations and risk our underground water tables. Then of course that oil is refined so the gulf coast populations can filter that pollution with our lungs. It takes a woke guy like me to connect those dots and mention them from time to time. Like the connection with pollution damaged lungs, COVID and health problems. Nary a voice out there to talk common sense. Face it folks, our country is brainwashed like a China or Russia. Lol  one last thought, FF built the world and has been invaluable. But we’re to big, to much infrastructure and to many people. Growth is idiocy, bigger is not better. We need not give up morals or values problem solving over time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Energy transition appears the main culprit in energy crisis.  I venture that Europe's rush out of fossil fuel will cause a great scramble this winter.  Quite naturally, those who support the move away from fossil fuels will call on governments to support the poorer parts of the population who are subjected to higher heating costs this winter.  This will naturally be financed through debt making these societies even less competitive prospectively.  I think that Europe should embrace Nord Stream 2, utilize it as a transition piece, and allow for their climate goals to transition to non-FF in due time.  Nord Stream 2 should be utilized as a stepping stone as opposed to a hurdle.  If utilized in such a fashion, it will not empower Russia except in the very near-term.  3-5 years from now Europe can walk away from this source strategically.  I hope that this is their plan of action but I am not sure that Germany sees it the same way.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Boat said:

We don’t have to work as hard or be as poor because we use machines to be productive. You call it soft, I call it being woke. Gotta use your brains to cut through the bull shyt.

 

 

Eh? Who is "you" and who is "me" here? Last I checked, we also use machines and aren't woke  where I come from.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Electric energy supplies in Europe were hampered by the fear of what happened at Chernobyl and Fukushima. That caused the direction of energy supply to change direction. Europe in particular killed some nuke plants while attempting to kill coal at the same time. Renewables were expensive and were not as advanced as today’s wind and solar. By choice Europe maybe jumped the gun by 10-15 years making this transition much tougher. From here on out the transion will be cheaper and more efficient. Nat gas including Russian gas will play a big role for at least a decade but after that FF will be taking big hits in market share. Let’s not get to caught up in today’s energy drama as it’s just temporary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

California’s GDP is about 3.6 vrs Russia 1.3 in 2019. That’s the significance on the world stage. Fake news kinda overstates the importance of the Bear trying to play global politics. Fast forward 20 years and imagine the role of FF in a world going electric. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Boat said:

California’s GDP is about 3.6 vrs Russia 1.3 in 2019. That’s the significance on the world stage. Fake news kinda overstates the importance of the Bear trying to play global politics. Fast forward 20 years and imagine the role of FF in a world going electric. 

Nominal USD GDP is a meaningless metric for Russia. Russia also poised to have by far the cheapest electricity cost for the foreseeable future. How much of it can you really handle? It is for sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/2/2021 at 1:04 AM, Andrei Moutchkine said:

Not much danger of that in most of Europe. As a side note, the European future must be Ukraine, which is over 70% carbon free already. (50% nuke, the rest hydro)

Ukraine Carbon free. Do you have a qualified Source? I have a list with above 100 Thermal Units meaning Coal Power Plants.

As example  Burshtyn TES holds 12 Units With 200 MW. Therefore is important to understand, that a simple Powerplant consists of multiple Units.

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.