Los Angeles to Open Five New Natural Gas Plants to Avoid More Outages.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 8/30/2021 at 10:21 AM, turbguy said:

Electricity sure is addicting, no?

Yes, it is! No problem if we approach it in a realistic way. We have saved lots of electricity with LED lighting, but nobody saw many lower bills. It took very little time for the suppliers to increase their billing. They immediately checked my house and changed my meter twice when I went to all LED. 

Some suggestions: insulation, weather stripping, whole house fans, better air conditioners, natural gas for heating. Smaller houses if larger ones are not needed. 

In California whole house fans work well after sunset, to clear out hot air and bring in the much cooler evening and night air. Air conditoning is usually needed in hot areas but it is expensive.

[Ecocharger + 1,459]

On 8/31/2021 at 2:15 AM, Jay McKinsey said:

I know you don't understand how anything works so a quick science lesson for you: a downed electric line carrying electricity generated by fossil fuels starts fires just the same as if the electricity came from solar. 

Your math is from another time/space, Jay, the issue is that electrical TRANSMISSION in California starts wildfires. Electrical demand needs transmission. How else can the electricity infrastructure in California support the EV ramp-up?

Edited September 2, 2021 by Ecocharger

[turbguy + 1,540]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Your math is from another time/space, Jay, the issue is that electrical TRANSMISSION in California starts wildfires. Electrical demand needs transmission. How else can the electricity infrastructure in California support the EV ramp-up?

Ahh...

Put new transmission underground?

Yeah, it's more expensive. 

So are wildfires...

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

19 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Your math is from another time/space, Jay, the issue is that electrical TRANSMISSION in California starts wildfires. Electrical demand needs transmission. How else can the electricity infrastructure in California support the EV ramp-up?

It is called reality.

All the power line fires have that I know of have been from distribution except one. The one transmission fire was because a hundred year old poorly maintained tower failed. I know this next part will be hard for you to believe but any new transmission lines we build will not be a hundred years old. In fact all of the 10,000 miles of line PG&E are planning on burying are distribution.

However, other than potentially upgrading existing lines, the only new transmission lines we are planning on building are some feeder lines to connect solar and wind farms. Fascinatingly we don't build solar or wind farms in the forest so those feeder lines won't be in the forest either.

Moreover, as has been explained to you many times, EV's primarily charge off peak at night. Currently the grid is drastically under utilized during those hours but that will change as EVs come online. The current grid transmission capacity can easily handle the entire CA fleet being electric and charging at night, not a difficult number to calculate. 

30 million registered cars in CA. Average car drives 35 miles per day. Average EV gets 3.5miles / kWh which equals 10kWh per day to go 35 miles. 10kWh multiplied by 30 million is 30,000 megawatt hours. Highest recorded transmission rate is 50,000MW. 

During off peak night time hours the grid runs on average at 50% utilization. Last night between 3 and 5 am the grid could have handled enough transmission to completely charge all 30 million cars in 2 hours, with over 20,000MW to spare. 

http://www.caiso.com/TodaysOutlook/Pages/index.html

Welcome to real spacetime.

Edited September 3, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[turbguy + 1,540]

42 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

It is called reality.

All the power line fires have that I know of have been from distribution except one. The one transmission fire was because a hundred year old poorly maintained tower failed. I know this next part will be hard for you to believe but any new transmission lines we build will not be a hundred years old. In fact all of the 10,000 miles of line PG&E are planning on burying are distribution.

However, other than potentially upgrading existing lines, the only new transmission lines we are planning on building are some feeder lines to connect solar and wind farms. Fascinatingly we don't build solar or wind farms in the forest so those feeder lines won't be in the forest either.

Moreover, as has been explained to you many times, EV's primarily charge off peak at night. Currently the grid is drastically under utilized during those hours but that will change as EVs come online. The current grid transmission capacity can easily handle the entire CA fleet being electric and charging at night, not a difficult number to calculate. 

15 million registered cars in CA. Average car drives 35 miles per day. Average EV gets 3.5miles / kWh which equals 10kWh per day to go 35 miles. 10kWh multiplied by 15 million is 15,000 megawatt hours. Highest recorded transmission rate is 50,000MW. 

During off peak night time hours the grid runs on average at 50% utilization. Last night between 3 and 4 am the grid could have handled enough transmission to completely charge all 15 million cars in one hour, with over 10,000MW to spare. 

http://www.caiso.com/TodaysOutlook/Pages/index.html

Welcome to real spacetime.

While you make a good case, Jay.

To be more realistic, you probably should add any grid-connected battery charging during the lulls (unless they are included in "demand"), and add in those vehicles driven during lulls as well.

It may make a trivial difference, but might be more tellling.

Also, some transmission will be out-of-service from tme to time as well.  I suspect that info is buried somewhere on CAISO's page...

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

42 minutes ago, turbguy said:

While you make a good case, Jay.

To be more realistic, you probably should add any grid-connected battery charging during the lulls (unless they are included in "demand"), and add in those vehicles driven during lulls as well.

It may make a trivial difference, but might be more tellling.

Also, some transmission will be out-of-service from tme to time as well.  I suspect that info is buried somewhere on CAISO's page...

My point with that exercise was to show just how trivial EV electricity demand is going to be.  Of course charging will be spread out over the whole day with the bulk occurring at night. But if it was spread out evenly over the whole day it would hardly even be noticeable.

Yes the batteries count as demand when charging.

Some transmission may be out of service occasionally but not enough to make a difference to EV charging at a state level. The 50,000MW is the highest load recorded, we seem to get there about once a decade, last reached in 2017. However I don't know what the actual top limit of transmission is. 

 

[nsdp + 449]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

While you make a good case, Jay.

To be more realistic, you probably should add any grid-connected battery charging during the lulls (unless they are included in "demand"), and add in those vehicles driven during lulls as well.

It may make a trivial difference, but might be more tellling.

Also, some transmission will be out-of-service from tme to time as well.  I suspect that info is buried somewhere on CAISO's page...

The biggest plus is they are getting rid of all the 2400/4160 volt distribution. That saving  in line losses will pay most of the cost of the work.  and reduce pollution.

[Ecocharger + 1,459]

7 hours ago, nsdp said:

The biggest plus is they are getting rid of all the 2400/4160 volt distribution. That saving  in line losses will pay most of the cost of the work.  and reduce pollution.

What pollution?  

[Boat + 1,323]

13 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

My point with that exercise was to show just how trivial EV electricity demand is going to be.  Of course charging will be spread out over the whole day with the bulk occurring at night. But if it was spread out evenly over the whole day it would hardly even be noticeable.

Yes the batteries count as demand when charging.

Some transmission may be out of service occasionally but not enough to make a difference to EV charging at a state level. The 50,000MW is the highest load recorded, we seem to get there about once a decade, last reached in 2017. However I don't know what the actual top limit of transmission is. 

 

The question is how long till the cheap battery is built in several mega factories and then deployed. Grid storage is the competitive edge electricity over FF. Will there be a massive rollout soon?

[Boat + 1,323]

It is speculation on my part but is the new battery Tesla announced in trouble? The semi delayed. The Cyber truck delayed. An announcement talking about the move of the cheaper cars moving towards iron based batteries. Has the big 4-5 year tech lead on batteries shrunk? If the 4680 doesn’t deliver the range at a cheap price do Ice cars compete a few extra years?

Can you sell an EV with less than 300 mile range for $30,000 or less. I am skeptical. I believe you need 300 mile range to compete and 400 mile range to kick butt.

Edited September 3, 2021 by Boat

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

14 minutes ago, Boat said:

The question is how long till the cheap battery is built in several mega factories and then deployed. Grid storage is the competitive edge electricity over FF. Will there be a massive rollout soon?

It has begun:

Electric power markets in the United States are undergoing significant structural change that we believe, based on planning data we collect, will result in the installation of the ability of large-scale battery storage to contribute 10,000 megawatts to the grid between 2021 and 2023—10 times the capacity in 2019. https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/electricity/batterystorage/

[nsdp + 449]

10 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

It has begun:

Electric power markets in the United States are undergoing significant structural change that we believe, based on planning data we collect, will result in the installation of the ability of large-scale battery storage to contribute 10,000 megawatts to the grid between 2021 and 2023—10 times the capacity in 2019. https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/electricity/batterystorage/

It becomes a matter of economics.  5-10 gwh is going to be a practical limit for batteries.  Italy has H2 are used with storage that can contain 1.2 TWH (1000 times  a large battery) and there are facilities that chemical plants use that could store 92 TWH. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_hydrogen_storage

"Retail pricing for vehicle refueling in California varies from about $9.99 to $17.50 depending on location and brand. Production cost is about $4 - $5 whether from steam methane reforming or electrolysis according to NREL. However, the cost for electrolysis is dominated by the cost of electricity, while the cost of SMR hydrogen is strongly affected by natural gas prices.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

A good source for form energy info. https://www.energy-storage.news/iron-air-long-duration-battery-startup-form-energy-closes-us240-million-funding-round/

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 9/3/2021 at 1:24 PM, Jay McKinsey said:

It has begun:

Electric power markets in the United States are undergoing significant structural change that we believe, based on planning data we collect, will result in the installation of the ability of large-scale battery storage to contribute 10,000 megawatts to the grid between 2021 and 2023—10 times the capacity in 2019. https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/electricity/batterystorage/

Jay, that would be ten times the present capacity in 15 months. 27 months before the end of 2023. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 9/2/2021 at 9:24 PM, Jay McKinsey said:

It is called reality.

All the power line fires have that I know of have been from distribution except one. The one transmission fire was because a hundred year old poorly maintained tower failed. I know this next part will be hard for you to believe but any new transmission lines we build will not be a hundred years old. In fact all of the 10,000 miles of line PG&E are planning on burying are distribution.

However, other than potentially upgrading existing lines, the only new transmission lines we are planning on building are some feeder lines to connect solar and wind farms. Fascinatingly we don't build solar or wind farms in the forest so those feeder lines won't be in the forest either.

Moreover, as has been explained to you many times, EV's primarily charge off peak at night. Currently the grid is drastically under utilized during those hours but that will change as EVs come online. The current grid transmission capacity can easily handle the entire CA fleet being electric and charging at night, not a difficult number to calculate. 

30 million registered cars in CA. Average car drives 35 miles per day. Average EV gets 3.5miles / kWh which equals 10kWh per day to go 35 miles. 10kWh multiplied by 30 million is 30,000 megawatt hours. Highest recorded transmission rate is 50,000MW. 

During off peak night time hours the grid runs on average at 50% utilization. Last night between 3 and 5 am the grid could have handled enough transmission to completely charge all 30 million cars in 2 hours, with over 20,000MW to spare. 

http://www.caiso.com/TodaysOutlook/Pages/index.html

Welcome to real spacetime.

You would have to mandate that vehicles are only charged during low demand periods or that prices during high demand periods are extremely pricey. California has been trying to get people to dry clothes at night for decades. 

California is the testing state for EV feasability. Politicians will be wary of voter reaction. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

2 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Jay, that would be ten times the present capacity in 15 months. 27 months before the end of 2023. 

So, what is your point?

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

Just now, Jay McKinsey said:

So, what is your point?

 

Not very likely to be accurate IMHO. You should reconsider your projection. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

1 minute ago, ronwagn said:

You would have to mandate that vehicles are only charged during low demand periods or that prices during high demand periods are extremely pricey. California has been trying to get people to dry clothes at night for decades. 

California is the testing state for EV feasability. Politicians will be wary of voter reaction. 

If you live in a house it is very convenient to charge overnight while you are asleep. No mandates required. Time of day pricing is going to be come the norm. Also as I pointed out EV charging is trivial, it is no big deal to spread it out all day long.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

2 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Not very likely to be accurate IMHO. You should reconsider your projection. 

Reconsider *my* projection?? Good grief, that is the EIA projection. If anything it is conservative.

Battery storage. EIA expects the capacity of utility-scale battery storage to more than quadruple; 4.3 GW of battery power capacity additions are slated to come online by the end of 2021.

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

Maybe now, but I hope that hydroelectric capacity returns soon. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 minute ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Reconsider *my* projection?? Good grief, that is the EIA projection. If anything it is conservative.

Battery storage. EIA expects the capacity of utility-scale battery storage to more than quadruple; 4.3 GW of battery power capacity additions are slated to come online by the end of 2021.

 

EIA projections of additions are obviously not meeting the real need in California. Otherwise politicians would allow expanding natural gas plants. 

I have mentioned many times that increases from a small base number are deceptive over a the long run. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

14 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Reconsider *my* projection?? Good grief, that is the EIA projection. If anything it is conservative.

Battery storage. EIA expects the capacity of utility-scale battery storage to more than quadruple; 4.3 GW of battery power capacity additions are slated to come online by the end of 2021.

 

Here is a clear picture of energy use from the EIA. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/  That is what renewables cannot replace. Then there is the rest of the world which wants us to build renewable energy for them while they use coal and other fossil fuels. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

Just now, ronwagn said:

EIA projections of additions are obviously not meeting the real need in California. Otherwise politicians would allow expanding natural gas plants. 

I have mentioned many times that increases from a small base number are deceptive over a the long run. 

Absolute rubbish. Our batteries are kicking ass. It is because of their success that we are cruising right through this summer. All the projected batteries have come online on time and on budget. From last week:

• The California Independent System Operator (CAISO) is seeing signs of storage resources' ability to shift energy between different times of the day, as the state begins to deploy more and more energy storage systems, a representative for the grid operator said at a regulatory meeting on Monday.
• "We're seeing the kind of performance from storage resources that very much matches what we've envisioned the storage fleet doing in the past… inter-temporal movement of energy from low-priced hours of the day to high-priced hours of the day," Gabe Murtaugh, CAISO's storage sector manager, said at a regulatory meeting Monday.
• Last year, CAISO had around 550 MW of storage on its system; today, that number has grown to a little over 1,500 MW, and is expected to top 3,000 MW by the end of the year, Murtaugh said at the California Energy Commission (CEC) workshop.

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/californias-growing-storage-fleet-is-beginning-to-impact-energy-markets-as/605819/

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

4 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Here is a clear picture of energy use from the EIA. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/  That is what renewables cannot replace. Then there is the rest of the world which wants us to build renewable energy for them while they use coal and other fossil fuels. 

More rubbish. Yes renewables can replace all of that. 

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

3 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

More rubbish. Yes renewables can replace all of that. 

 

Maybe in a hundred years. If it is cost effective, I am all for it. Your timeline is far from realistic though.