Solar, Wind Renewable Energy

[ERD50]

To me the cost of storage needs to be compared to the cost of production... IOW, why spend billions of dollars on a means for storage might be able to make a few plants that can produce the same amount for less... now, that is if the cost of production is cheaper than storage... ...

It depends on the goal. If the goal is to not use fossil fuel, then it isn't just a cost comparison to other generation. It comes down to "can we afford to go non-fossil?".

....

Most other forms of battery are around $0.30 and above it seems. Which surprised me that it was that low. Two more halvings in cost are needed, that'll be a while longer.

Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source

But that would be cost of storage, right? You need to add the cost of production to charge those batteries.

So a couple halvings would get us to an added ~ $.08/kWh, which is significant, but not the end of the world. I don't know if/when two more halvings is feasable.

-ERD50

 

[travelover]

Nope, private jets make sense to the rich, so does million dollar motor homes... but they offer a level of luxury that the person is buying... if they can get that level of luxury cheaper I would bet they would....



An $8K fuel cell does not make sense for say 99% of applications... it cannot run the fridge or freezer, it cannot run and AC.. it has limited applications... now, if you are on some kind of medical device that needs electricity then it might make sense, but I would first use batteries for that and if it were me I would invest that $8K on a whole house generator that run on NG so I do not have to fill it up....


And why would I run the generator in the bedroom? I can run it outside as it is quiet... and it will run the fridge or a small AC....

OK, this is really not worth discussing.

 

[Chuckanut]

I am all for harnessing the solar wind for energy.

 

[ncbill]

But as I pointed out earlier, 70% round-trip storage efficiency means you need to put $1.43 worth of energy into the system to get $1.00 worth out of the system. So you've had a significant increase to the price of that power, even before you add the cost of amortizing the storage system itself, plus any operating costs. Operating costs are probably low, I imaging the capital cost/loans are the primary factor by far, but those are not cheap, or the San Mateo system would have gone in, but it got cancelled...
-ERD50

Are we still talking about pumped storage?

Cost is what matters, not efficiency.

Doesn't matter if it takes 3 kWh to store 1 kWh.

As long as that 1 kWh is worth more when sold during the day than the 3 kWh cost the previous night.

 

[NW-Bound]

I am all for harnessing the solar wind for energy.

I am too.

The problem people keep forgetting is where to store the energy for use when the sun does not shine (happens every night), and when the wind does not blow. It irks me when I ran across Web sites that show how we can get enough solar energy from just a small portion of the open land, so it's a no-brainer.

Getting it is the easy part, dummy. What to do when you ain't have it is the very hard part. The sun sets every evening. And it gets cloudy at times. And it does not shine in the winter.

 

[ERD50]

Are we still talking about pumped storage?

Cost is what matters, not efficiency.

Doesn't matter if it takes 3 kWh to store 1 kWh.

As long as that 1 kWh is worth more when sold during the day than the 3 kWh cost the previous night.

But efficiency is part of cost.

So you are using overnight wind as an example - fine, let's go with that. Ignoring storage for a moment, it costs $X to install Y.YY MW capacity of wind. Operators won't want to install too far past the point where they get excess at night, as they have no market for excess (w/o storage).

So now let's say pumped storage is available. But they need to increase their installed capacity by a factor of 1.43 to get 1.00 unit of power to sell. So that makes the enterprise more expensive for them, and that gets passed to the consumer (or rejected by the consumer).

I think you are looking at it as if the excess is already there, and being totally wasted. In that case I'd agree, but we aren't there.

Doesn't matter if it takes 3 kWh to store 1 kWh.

As long as that 1 kWh is worth more when sold during the day than the 3 kWh cost the previous night

OK, if we are just talking about cost shifting from low demand to peak demand. But efficiency is still a part of it. The 1.43 factor has to be overcome, in addition to the fixed capital cost of the pumped storage. If the factor was better, say 1.2x they would have more power to sell. They'd make more money, or be able to provide it to the consumer for less. You can't say efficiency doesn't matter - it drives cost.

-ERD50

 

[NW-Bound]

Just now realize something else.

We have been talking just about electricity generation and storage. And it is clear that the problem of storing RE has not been solved for the large scale to displace fossil fuel.

But, but, but everybody throughout the western world still burns some form of fossil fuel for heating in the winter. Germany is the world's largest importer of natural gas, which comes from Russia, Norway, and the Netherlands.

If we are still struggling to get RE for electricity, when will we be able to handle the heating requirement in the winter? I surely hope our grandchildren will have this all figured out when fossil fuel runs out. Or maybe we won't, and mankind reverts to living in caves.

Oh, never mind. We will not be able to run AC in the summer and the furnace in the winter, but somehow will get enough rocket fuel to move everybody to Mars. Problem solved.

Note: It's damn cold on Mars. Mars Rover measured 43F (6C) at noon, and -100F (-73C) at night. Somehow, we will survive the climate there better than we can do on earth. Hah! And grow lots of food too, while wearing spacesuits.

 

[Totoro]

But that would be cost of storage, right? You need to add the cost of production to charge those batteries.

Correct. Production however is already at $0.04 or so for solar and wind, and dropping.

So a couple halvings would get us to an added ~ $.08/kWh, which is significant, but not the end of the world. I don't know if/when two more halvings is feasable.

With $0.08 + $0.04 you end up at $0.12. That's cheaper than gas peaker plants at that stage.

Don't know though if we can straight up add the $0.08, or just need to factor it in only for the dark, windless hours.

Current Li-Ion battery costs have been halving every 5 years since 1991 or so roughly.

 

[Texas Proud]

OK, this is really not worth discussing.

Yea, probably right... but since it never went into production it seems more than just me thought it was a bad idea....

 

[ERD50]

...
With $0.08 + $0.04 you end up at $0.12. That's cheaper than gas peaker plants at that stage.

Don't know though if we can straight up add the $0.08, or just need to factor it in only for the dark, windless hours.

Current Li-Ion battery costs have been halving every 5 years since 1991 or so roughly.

I'm also not sure what to do with that LCOE number for battery storage. It seems reasonable to assume that would only be for MW-hrs delivered. If it is being used to flatten a peak demand, that's probably very predictable - you use them daily at about the same amount (maybe seasonal variations).

But I don't think that number applies if we need a weeks worth of batteries to cover an occasional slump in wind/solar. That's a huge amount of battery that would just be sitting there unused for weeks, months, and yes, maybe even years (I think I've read some gas peakers sit that long - they are there to cover the outlier situations). That would increase the cost tremendously. You could even conceivably have batteries that hit their end-of-life and were never called on (no one wants a black/brown out - you need reserve) - that would be an infinite $/MW-hr, as MW-hr would be zero!

No, I don't think those are good numbers for this situation. I suspect those are for regular use, not sitting idle XX% of the time. That's an easier calculation, and makes sense that is what they would use.

-ERD50

 

[aja8888]

Oh, never mind. We will not be able to run AC in the summer and the furnace in the winter, but somehow will get enough rocket fuel to move everybody to Mars. Problem solved.

Note: It's damn cold on Mars. Mars Rover measured 43F (6C) at noon, and -100F (-73C) at night. Somehow, we will survive the climate there better than we can do on earth. Hah! And grow lots of food too, while wearing spacesuits.

The hard part will be getting all those necessary drill rigs and well equipment to Mars to drill for natural gas so that electricity can be generated to keep the lights on or the furnace lit.

 

[Independent]

Just now realize something else.

We have been talking just about electricity generation and storage. And it is clear that the problem of storing RE has not been solved for the large scale to displace fossil fuel.

But, but, but everybody throughout the western world still burns some form of fossil fuel for heating in the winter. Germany is the world's largest importer of natural gas, which comes from Russia, Norway, and the Netherlands.

If we are still struggling to get RE for electricity, when will we be able to handle the heating requirement in the winter? I surely hope our grandchildren will have this all figured out when fossil fuel runs out. Or maybe we won't, and mankind reverts to living in caves.
.

Yep. I just checked this for our house (northern Iowa). If I'm doing the math right, over the last few years we've averaged:

913 therms of natural gas, equivalent to 91 million BTUs, and
9,057 kwh of electricity, equivalent to 31 million BTUs.

Replacing that natural gas with electricity would mean very big step.

According to this pie chart, https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=10271
we're unusual. It says that, in the average house, about 60% of total BTUs go to space heating and water heating, with about 40% going to all electrical uses (including space cooling).

And, of course, for the heating side, the sun rarely shines in the winter where I live. So our RE source for heating would need to be wind.

 

[NW-Bound]

... if we need a weeks worth of batteries to cover an occasional slump in wind/solar. That's a huge amount of battery that would just be sitting there unused for weeks, months, and yes, maybe even years (I think I've read some gas peakers sit that long - they are there to cover the outlier situations). That would increase the cost tremendously. You could even conceivably have batteries that hit their end-of-life and were never called on (no one wants a black/brown out - you need reserve)...

When people need something bad enough and there's no alternative, they will simply pay and use less, and cut back on something else. Say hello to tiny houses for everybody. McMansions will be a dime a dozen, and left abandoned like the homes in Detroit.

Or there will be blackouts or brownouts, and people get used to it. Just like they get used to congested traffic in all metropolitan areas around the world. Not having to drive during rush hours, we were caught in terrible traffic on the expressways in Phoenix at the end of our recent RV trek. The bumper-to-bumper traffic at 15 mph was unbearable to me, but looking around me, the daily commuters were stoically suffering it as it was a daily routine to them. We just did not know traffic condition had deteriorated to that level.

Back on electricity, when the lights flicker and go out, the poor people will just grit their teeth and bear it. The rich people will have their Tesla Powerwalls quietly delivering continuous power for their wall-sized TVs and keeping their Keurig machine sputtering.

And they say money does not buy happiness. At least it lets you avoid misery.

 

[NW-Bound]

The hard part will be getting all those necessary drill rigs and well equipment to Mars to drill for natural gas so that electricity can be generated to keep the lights on or the furnace lit.

Do we know if there's fossil fuel on Mars? And before we can burn anything for warmth, we first need to create an atmosphere with oxygen.

 

[TwoByFour]

Solar power is amazingly cheap right now, but there's no way to store it cheaply. I can buy a 300W solar panel for $100. If I have 67 panels, I can produce excess during the daylight hours to use for a 24-hr period. I would need a battery the size of the one in the P100D Tesla. I don't know how much its battery costs, but that's a $135K car.

Cost for battery storage is currently about $70/KWH for traditional lead-acid batteries and about $400/KWH for LiPo (Tesla type) batteries. Reason for price difference has to do with how long the battery lasts and how deeply it can be discharged. LiPo is more cost effective over the long term.

We have a 5KW array of solar panels that produce about 27 KWH of power daily. We use 10-12 KWH per day and sell the excess to the local utility and then buy some of it back at night. The utility is effectively our battery. We are thinking of buying a battery so we can be off the grid (the grid is not real reliable here - storms are always taking down power lines). We would want to store at least one day of energy, so 12 KWH battery. That would cost us around $7-8k by the time it is installed with all the other things that go along with it.

For us, this has been a very good deal. But we live in a sunny place so solar power is a no-brainer.

 

[samclem]

I think the discussion so far makes it pretty clear that mass (i.e. utility-scale) storage of wind and solar energy using "conventional" batteries would be very expensive.

Many teams are working on ways to store this electrical energy chemically (typically as bulk liquids, rather than in small unit "cells" as we find in batteries.) Think of it as a fuel cell run in reverse: the resultant fluids have bonds that can be re-converted into electricity at a later time. Known as "flow batteries", here are some examples. More on the quinone flow battery.

On the face of it, this approach has more conversions (light>electricity>chemical fuel) than using algal photosynthesis to accomplish the same thing (light>chemical fuel), but the practical details are important in determining which can be accomplished most economically.

At any rate, we can use NG and other fossil fuels as an interim step for providing electricty (and heat) during times when wind and sunlight are not available. When fossil fuels become more scarce (driving prices up) or environmental concerns generate demand, these light-to-storable fuels technologies will become economically viable.

 

[dixonge]

Cost for battery storage is currently about $70/KWH for traditional lead-acid batteries and about $400/KWH for LiPo (Tesla type) batteries.

Prices are already well below $400/kwh - during a recent earnings call Musk talked about breaching the $100/kwh line this year (for battery cells) and within a couple of years for the whole pack.


https://cleantechnica.com/2018/06/0...his-year-100-kwh-tesla-battery-packs-in-2020/


A quick Google reveals several other sources tracing that general price path projection. VW signed a contract for 100 Euros/kwh recently. Like solar panels, the prices hit a certain point then accelerate beyond projections.

 

[TwoByFour]

The problem with a pure economical approach to the electrical utility industry is that the costs of certain choices won't be felt for 50 years, at which time they could be significant. Most people/countries recognize this, at least in principle. The interesting thing is that people can reduce their use of fossil fuels without any government intervention, but they don't. Air travel is a terrible generator of CO2, yet air travel is increasing. People still drive cars and in fact prefer big gas guzzling cars. I think we are pretty much screwed as I cannot see the changes taking place on the scale they need to. I feel badly for future generations - they are going to have to deal with the mess that is being created now.

 

[Rianne]

My neighbors had geothermal heating/cooling installed. They tried to explain it to me but I went on youtube to better understand. It keeps their house at a comfortable temperature all year round and we have nasty winters and hot summers. Has anyone else had this installed?

 

[TwoByFour]

Geothermal is just a heat pump, which is a popular way of having both AC and heat in one unit. Only difference is a traditional heat pump uses ambient air as the reservoir, while geothermal uses the ground. A friend has a geothem unit and his is only 5 feet deep but he lives in a mild climate.

 

[ERD50]

My neighbors had geothermal heating/cooling installed. They tried to explain it to me but I went on youtube to better understand. It keeps their house at a comfortable temperature all year round and we have nasty winters and hot summers. ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv8bTAGr0tU

Be careful not to confuse geothermal as an energy source, and geothermal as an energy conservation technique for HVAC (what your neighbor has).

It can reduce bills for HVAC, but you still have to run the heat pump (reversible air-conditioner) and the pump to circulate fluid through the system. The ~ 55F temperature in the ground isn't enough to heat a house, and not enough to efficiently cool it. You still need to put energy in, just less of it.

In places like Iceland, there are areas where the ground is very hot just below the surface. That can be a source of energy, either very hot steam to run a turbine, or lower levels of heat for buildings.

-ERD50

 

[NW-Bound]

Cost for battery storage is currently about $70/KWH for traditional lead-acid batteries and about $400/KWH for LiPo (Tesla type) batteries. Reason for price difference has to do with how long the battery lasts and how deeply it can be discharged. LiPo is more cost effective over the long term...

I don't know how long it will take for lithium battery price to get to $100/kWh, but used batteries out of wrecked EVs are still bid up by people wanting to build their own Powerwall. The going price is $200-300/kWh (nameplate kWh when new, not actual) for used batteries in working condition, but of unknown remaining capacity. New LiFePO4 batteries still go for $400/kWh and above.

I think the discussion so far makes it pretty clear that mass (i.e. utility-scale) storage of wind and solar energy using "conventional" batteries would be very expensive.

Many teams are working on ways to store this electrical energy chemically (typically as bulk liquids, rather than in small unit "cells" as we find in batteries.) Think of it as a fuel cell run in reverse: the resultant fluids have bonds that can be re-converted into electricity at a later time. Known as "flow batteries", here are some examples. More on the quinone flow battery.

On the face of it, this approach has more conversions (light>electricity>chemical fuel) than using algal photosynthesis to accomplish the same thing (light>chemical fuel), but the practical details are important in determining which can be accomplished most economically.

At any rate, we can use NG and other fossil fuels as an interim step for providing electricty (and heat) during times when wind and sunlight are not available. When fossil fuels become more scarce (driving prices up) or environmental concerns generate demand, these light-to-storable fuels technologies will become economically viable.

Some people may want to spend more money right now, in order to cut fossil fuel usage. Rich people can afford to, but poor people cannot.

 

[NW-Bound]

We have a 5KW array of solar panels that produce about 27 KWH of power daily. We use 10-12 KWH per day and sell the excess to the local utility and then buy some of it back at night. The utility is effectively our battery. We are thinking of buying a battery so we can be off the grid (the grid is not real reliable here - storms are always taking down power lines). We would want to store at least one day of energy, so 12 KWH battery. That would cost us around $7-8k by the time it is installed with all the other things that go along with it...

As mentioned earlier, in the worst day of summer, my home consumes 100kWh in a 24-hr period. Much of that is for AC cooling, because my lowest daily usage is only 24 kWh in cool months.

It sounds pretty bad, but then I realize that people in colder climates burn the same or even higher energy for heating in the winter.

Come to think about this, when energy runs scarce or expensive, it is easier to live in southern latitudes than in the colder climate. The cooling requirement for the summer can be easily met by photovoltaic panels. How does one meet the heating requirement in colder places without fossil fuel to burn?

I can see new homes being built with a large, perhaps 2000-sq.ft., solar array, which serves as a shade canopy for the dwelling underneath. Such a large solar array can easily produce more than 150kWh/day in the summer in the Southwest. The excess electricity production during the day can be used to freeze water into ice, then used for cooling during the night. The heating in the winter is minimal, and is not a problem.

At higher latitudes where the daylight hours are short, and the sky is overcast, what can you do?

 

[NW-Bound]

The problem with a pure economical approach to the electrical utility industry is that the costs of certain choices won't be felt for 50 years, at which time they could be significant. Most people/countries recognize this, at least in principle. The interesting thing is that people can reduce their use of fossil fuels without any government intervention, but they don't. Air travel is a terrible generator of CO2, yet air travel is increasing. People still drive cars and in fact prefer big gas guzzling cars. I think we are pretty much screwed as I cannot see the changes taking place on the scale they need to. I feel badly for future generations - they are going to have to deal with the mess that is being created now.

Even with EVs, people talk about "greenness" and "ludicrous acceleration" at the same time. Hah!

If we really wanted green, we would tax vehicles with excessive horsepowers, whether EV or gas-guzzler, and would not give them tax credits.

It's all bogus.

 

[mpeirce]

Or there will be blackouts or brownouts, and people get used to it.

I expect this is where we are headed.

It's the status quo in many countries. You do get used to it and plan around when their might be electricity on - and water on sometimes too.

Civilization was nice while it lasted.