Some truth to people who think we can be 100% renewable

[ncbill]

People always say that but I don’t really understand the logic. It appears Scotland makes most of its energy from wind power, I haven’t heard any scientific barriers for us doing that in the US. (Just emotional ones: example complaint about windmills visible from golf courses).

10% of their wind generation come from offshore installations. Most of our highly populated states are on the coast. Probably more expensive than onshore but seems fairly developed technology.

So it isn’t that we can’t do it, it is that we don’t?

Wind makes the most sense center of the US from Texas up to Canada.

But then you've got to get it to the coasts...more transmissions lines, etc.

Solar installs can be located closer to the end user.

 

[mh]

People always say that but I don’t really understand the logic. It appears Scotland makes most of its energy from wind power, I haven’t heard any scientific barriers for us doing that in the US. (Just emotional ones: example complaint about windmills visible from golf courses).

10% of their wind generation come from offshore installations. Most of our highly populated states are on the coast. Probably more expensive than onshore but seems fairly developed technology.

So it isn’t that we can’t do it, it is that we don’t?

I didn’t want to nit pick if we can get to 100% because someone’s always got some whine about how it’s impossible but We should certainly should be able to get a whole lot closer to that number.

 

[Bigdawg]

I didn’t want to nit pick if we can get to 100% because someone’s always got some whine about how it’s impossible but We should certainly should be able to get a whole lot closer to that number.

OK, let's all give up all of our cars. 100%. Tomorrow. Oh wait, someone is whineing.

I will transition to renewables as the technology evolves and in relation to cost. I also take into consideration other factors like environmental, initial investment, upkeep, etc...

Most discussion I've read regarding renewables don't sufficiently answer my questions such as battery disposal, battery storage, peak generation, etc...

I was following a fleet vehicle today-a Fischer Autoparts delivery vehicle. I was asking myself "Why isn't that vehicle electric?" The range of many EV's is around 250 miles per charge. These fleet vehicles delivery to all the local shops. Ezzy peazzy! Oh well. We'll get there some day.

 

[aja8888]

I didn’t want to nit pick if we can get to 100% because someone’s always got some whine about how it’s impossible but We should certainly should be able to get a whole lot closer to that number.

Yes, the U.S. certainly can "do better" with wind and solar installations, but our power industry is private (it's not a "We" thing) and has to survive on a daily basis with what they have for equipment. Granted, companies can allot capital monies to install wind and solar installations, but that takes time and money and generally, shareholder approval.

Our Gov is broke and in debt and run by a bunch of power hungry (you fill it in), and alternative energy is a buzzword to them. They can't "step up"and build and operate power sources.

 

[Rustic23]

Scotland has about 5.5 million people. That ranks between South Carolina and Minnesota. Can you imagine how many windmills it would take to provide the power to 330 million people! Just because one country can do something, or any given state, does not mean all can.

 

[Texas Proud]

I didn’t want to nit pick if we can get to 100% because someone’s always got some whine about how it’s impossible but We should certainly should be able to get a whole lot closer to that number.

The reason that some say it is a pipe dream is when you read the problems that countries are having at a low 30%...


https://www.forbes.com/sites/michae...ly-mckinsey-warns-in-new-report/#b9f6ef58e482




I wish I could find it but so far cannot... an article had a graph of the 'installed' renewable of wind and solar and the 'actual' amount of electricity that was being produced... there was a big gap (like 50% loss) between the two...



From the article:

But McKinsey issues its strongest warning when it comes to Germany's increasingly insecure energy supply due to its heavy reliance on intermittent solar and wind. For three days in June 2019, the electricity grid came close to black-outs.
"Only short-term imports from neighboring countries were able to stabilize the grid," the consultancy notes.



​

So, if the claim of 100% is to be accepted then there can be NO importation of electricity that is not from a renewable source... if not you are just moving the dirty production of electricity somewhere else...

 

[Texas Proud]

Then you have headlines like this...


Renewables cover about 100% of German power use for first time ever








But reading further it is just a short term ability to meet their demand... it does not take into account when there is no wind or sun... so people think that they are getting there but in reality they are not...


I am not knocking that they are above 30%... that is great... but a very far cry from 100% which is what this thread is about...





https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/renewables-cover-about-100-german-power-use-first-time-ever

 

[Alan]

It’s not just Scotland but the whole of the UK that benefits from wind power. This last weekend was another case where our power company alerted us to overnight negative power prices so for a couple of nights we charged our solar batteries, ran our washing machine and dishwasher and used a space heater set to run for a couple of hours, and got paid for doing so, plus cut down on the gas needed early morning to heat the house.

In December the UK set a record for wind generation.

https://www.nationalgrid.com/uk-wind-power-record-broken-blustery-weekend

Record-breaking wind power generation
This past weekend’s gales, thanks to Storm Atiyah, meant that the nation’s wind farms were kept busy, with a consistently high level of power produced. In fact, 5pm on Sunday 8 December set a new record for the amount of electricity generated by wind turbines in Great Britain – 16,162 MW, equivalent to around 44% of power needs. National Grid Electricity System Operator’s (ESO) control room says this was more than double the proportion produced by nuclear power (20.5%) and gas (12.8%) for example.
What is negative pricing?
This impressive performance also resulted in a surplus of wind energy, which led to what’s called negative pricing. This occurs when energy suppliers have excess energy and customers on certain tariffs can get paid to use electricity.
High levels of wind generation are something we will see more of as we move towards our 2025 ambition.

 

[Koolau]

It’s not just Scotland but the whole of the UK that benefits from wind power. This last weekend was another case where our power company alerted us to overnight negative power prices so for a couple of nights we charged our solar batteries, ran our washing machine and dishwasher and used a space heater set to run for a couple of hours, and got paid for doing so, plus cut down on the gas needed early morning to heat the house.

In December the UK set a record for wind generation.

https://www.nationalgrid.com/uk-wind-power-record-broken-blustery-weekend

I suppose this is a classic glass half full or half empty scenario. Nice to get negative pricing, but that means the energy can not be stored for when the wind doesn't blow (and more gas or whatever is needed.) What then? Does the price go up? If not who "eats" the extra cost? The gummint?

I see this as one more symptom of the inability to easily integrate renewables and traditional (primarily fossil fuel) production of energy. It seems to me that our ability to produce renewable energy is outstripping our ability to integrate it in an efficient manner. Locally, HECO limits neighborhoods to a certain amount of solar which can be integrated into the grid. I think it maxes out at about 10%. I'm sure much of our local solar is wasted (as in, we still have the HECO boilers running even when the sun shines.) If we have to use our "peaking" generators due to sudden cloud cover, the cost per KWH goes way up.

I don't think there are easy answers to any of this. It doesn't mean I'm not for getting to significant renewable energy levels. I only suggest we not kid ourselves that it will be easy or cheap. It may be worth it, but we will all eventually pay more for "free" energy than we pay now. Of course, YMMV as in this case.

 

[NW-Bound]

^^^ Yes.

As I keep reiterating, it is quite easy to generate lots of power from wind turbine and PV solar panels. More than you can use at times.

The problem is what to do when the wind does not blow, and the sun does not shine.

Again, we need cheap, cheap, and long-lasting batteries. Lots and lots of them.

Or we can stop driving, and take public transportation. Stop air travel too. And live in tiny houses.

 

[Alan]

I suppose this is a classic glass half full or half empty scenario. Nice to get negative pricing, but that means the energy can not be stored for when the wind doesn't blow (and more gas or whatever is needed.) What then? Does the price go up? If not who "eats" the extra cost? The gummint?

I see this as one more symptom of the inability to easily integrate renewables and traditional (primarily fossil fuel) production of energy. It seems to me that our ability to produce renewable energy is outstripping our ability to integrate it in an efficient manner. Locally, HECO limits neighborhoods to a certain amount of solar which can be integrated into the grid. I think it maxes out at about 10%. I'm sure much of our local solar is wasted (as in, we still have the HECO boilers running even when the sun shines.) If we have to use our "peaking" generators due to sudden cloud cover, the cost per KWH goes way up.

I don't think there are easy answers to any of this. It doesn't mean I'm not for getting to significant renewable energy levels. I only suggest we not kid ourselves that it will be easy or cheap. It may be worth it, but we will all eventually pay more for "free" energy than we pay now. Of course, YMMV as in this case.

First of all the "gummint" has nothing to do with it, it is all private companies with no subsidies, so the profits they make for the vast majority of the year on wind makes up for the short periods of over supply when they lose a bit.

In Wales, at Dinorwig, there is a Pumped-storage Hydro-Electric System (PHES) that pumps water up to a reservoir for use when needed as a peaking power plant and that storage capacity is 9.1 GWh. They were going to build the 2nd such scheme on Exmoor but with falling prices of battery storage that project was put on hold.

There are also plans to use electricity from wind power to make hydrogen from seawater. U of H in Galveston has developed new catalysts to do this cheaply and is extracting hydrogen from seawater drawn from Galveston Bay. Britain, Germany and China are also putting money into researching this now that offshore wind turbines up to 30 miles offshore are affordable and there is the real prospect of large amounts of cheap wind energy.

200 households near Keele university are currently being fed hydrogen into their natural gas supply and so far they can take up to 20% hydrogen with no modifications to domestic gas boilers or appliances. When cheap hydrogen becomes available this may well become a viable option to be rolled out nationwide provided the issues etc can be overcome.

Just because something is not possible today does not mean it won't be possible tomorrow and it is better, I think, to continue with multiple approaches to big, seemingly impossible problems.

He who dares, [-]winds[/-] wins.

 

[Chuckanut]

It’s not just Scotland but the whole of the UK that benefits from wind power. This last weekend was another case where our power company alerted us to overnight negative power prices so for a couple of nights we charged our solar batteries, ran our washing machine and dishwasher and used a space heater set to run for a couple of hours, and got paid for doing so, plus cut down on the gas needed early morning to heat the house.

In December the UK set a record for wind generation.

https://www.nationalgrid.com/uk-wind-power-record-broken-blustery-weekend

The problem with wind power is that if the wind starts blowing from the opposite direction, the windmill generators run backward and start sucking power out of your house. !!!

I am glad to hear of the UK's success with wind. Each area needs to take advantage of the resources available to it. 20% from nuclear power isn't bad either.

 

[Alan]

The problem with wind power is that if the wind starts blowing from the opposite direction, the windmill generators run backward and start sucking power out of your house. !!!

I am glad to hear of the UK's success with wind. Each area needs to take advantage of the resources available to it. 20% from nuclear power isn't bad either.

We also get paid for the excess electricity we export to the grid and our contract with our energy supplier states that when energy prices go negative we will never be paid less than £0/kWh. I guess there may be times in high summer when solar energy exceeds demand and energy prices go negative during the day while we are exporting, but I doubt it.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysi...-electricity-than-fossil-fuels-for-first-time

In the third quarter of 2019, some 39% of UK electricity generation was from coal, oil and gas, including 38% from gas and less than 1% from coal and oil combined.

Another 40% came from renewables, including 20% from wind, 12% from biomass and 6% from solar. Nuclear contributed most of the remainder, generating 19% of the total.

While it is unlikely that renewables will generate more electricity than fossil fuels during the full year of 2019, it is now a question of when – rather than if – this further milestone will be passed.

 

[NW-Bound]

First of all the "gummint" has nothing to do with it, it is all private companies with no subsidies, so the profits they make for the vast majority of the year on wind makes up for the short periods of over supply when they lose a bit.

In Wales, at Dinorwig, there is a Pumped-storage Hydro-Electric System (PHES) that pumps water up to a reservoir for use when needed as a peaking power plant and that storage capacity is 9.1 GWh. They were going to build the 2nd such scheme on Exmoor but with falling prices of battery storage that project was put on hold.

There are also plans to use electricity from wind power to make hydrogen from seawater. U of H in Galveston has developed new catalysts to do this cheaply and is extracting hydrogen from seawater drawn from Galveston Bay. Britain, Germany and China are also putting money into researching this now that offshore wind turbines up to 30 miles offshore are affordable and there is the real prospect of large amounts of cheap wind energy.

200 households near Keele university are currently being fed hydrogen into their natural gas supply and so far they can take up to 20% hydrogen with no modifications to domestic gas boilers or appliances. When cheap hydrogen becomes available this may well become a viable option to be rolled out nationwide provided the issues etc can be overcome.

Just because something is not possible today does not mean it won't be possible tomorrow and it is better, I think, to continue with multiple approaches to big, seemingly impossible problems.

He who dares, [-]winds[/-] wins.

I like the above story.

It's tough to be 100% RE, and we do not know how to do that now. We can reduce the dependence on fossil fuel as technology progresses, and we learn more about what works and what doesn't.

I am still having fun with my DIY solar system and battery storage. No way I can live on that solely, and that's just for energy for the home. I have money I can spend to enlarge the system (more for fun than for profit), but do not have enough land for a personal mini solar farm.

 

[pj.mask]

Scotland has about 5.5 million people. That ranks between South Carolina and Minnesota. Can you imagine how many windmills it would take to provide the power to 330 million people! Just because one country can do something, or any given state, does not mean all can.

I genuinely don’t understand the logic here because this argument comes up a number of times.

What exactly is the limitation between a small country and a large country? Is it because you need to do the same thing just more of it and that is somehow prohibiting?

If you are talking about train tracks that have to be built to span miles of nothingness, I see a valid point. But here we are talking about connecting things to an already established grid. You don’t have to start from scratch. And if we can’t build a wind farm 10 miles offshore and connect it to the grid, how did we build the grid in the first place?

 

[JoeWras]

I genuinely don’t understand the logic here because this argument comes up a number of times.

What exactly is the limitation between a small country and a large country? Is it because you need to do the same thing just more of it and that is somehow prohibiting?

If you are talking about train tracks that have to be built to span miles of nothingness, I see a valid point. But here we are talking about connecting things to an already established grid. You don’t have to start from scratch. And if we can’t build a wind farm 10 miles offshore and connect it to the grid, how did we build the grid in the first place?

I can kind of see Rustic's point, sort of.

It is about diversity of resources. The same argument happens with social issues being handled in small, culturally mono-lithic countries, and trying to apply that solution to large countries with diverse culture and economies.

I see a bit of this problem here on the east coast in the great regrowing temperate forests. It isn't was easy to do wind power in these forests, and this particular climate.

So, the problem becomes greater when you have to share that resource across vast differences. The grid and power lines are not free, nor are they loss-less. Sharing power from Texas' windmills to Georgia's mountain areas is not efficient. So, yeah, you can hook up to the grid, but to go truly 100% renewable? Difficult due to the vast distances between the best wind sites.

And then there is the idea of power generation over the ocean. You are going to get push back on the east coast over aesthetic and other issues. Actually, this already happened up in the cape area in Massachusetts. Whether that is right or wrong is a different discussion. The reality is that off-shore generation generates more controversy than in the unpopulated windy plains as it is right now. Maybe that will change. But, right now the best options for wind in many states is off-shore, and that is not popular.

 

[Alan]

Scotland has about 5.5 million people. That ranks between South Carolina and Minnesota. Can you imagine how many windmills it would take to provide the power to 330 million people! Just because one country can do something, or any given state, does not mean all can.

I genuinely don’t understand the logic here because this argument comes up a number of times.

What exactly is the limitation between a small country and a large country? Is it because you need to do the same thing just more of it and that is somehow prohibiting?

If you are talking about train tracks that have to be built to span miles of nothingness, I see a valid point. But here we are talking about connecting things to an already established grid. You don’t have to start from scratch. And if we can’t build a wind farm 10 miles offshore and connect it to the grid, how did we build the grid in the first place?

Scotland's excess wind generated electricity is exported to England and Wales over the national Grid. ScottishPower Renewables, which is part of the Spanish company Iberdrola, runs the Whitelee wind farm which is the largest onshore wind farm in the UK.

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

Positioned 300 metres (985 feet) above sea level and 15 kilometres (9.3 mi) outside Glasgow, Scotland’s largest city, the wind farm has over half a million people living within a 30 km radius. This makes Whitelee one of the first large-scale wind farms to be developed close to a centre of population.

 

[Texas Proud]

This is not the article that I read, but similar...


https://www.desmoinesregister.com/s...urbine-blades-head-iowa-landfills/3942480002/




Seems that the blades used are NOT easily recycled!! Say WHAT? We are expecting this to be green and they cannot make it where at the end of life you cannot recycle? Say it ain't so....

 

[Alan]

Where there is a problem there is often a solution. I think the disposal or recycling of turbine blades will be easier to solve than the waste from nuclear plants and coal fired plants.

https://resource-recycling.com/plastics/2019/03/27/company-expands-wind-turbine-recycling-operation/

Generally, fiberglass blades are made of a glass fiber-thermoset composite, he said. They can also contain a core of PS foam, polyurethane foam or balsa wood to reduce weight and alter stiffness. Unlike thermoplastics, thermosets are permanently cured and can’t simply be remelted and molded. As a result, chemical or thermal treatments are used to “cook off” the resin and recover the glass fiber, Englund said. But doing so destroys what was designed to be a strong material.

“We want to keep that inherent strength into the next generation of composites,” said Englund, who works part time for GFS and part time as an associate research professor at the Composite Materials and Engineering Center at Washington State University (WSU) in Pullman, Wash.

GFS uses a mechanical breakdown process to size reduce the blades. Grinding the material is a “very big battle” requiring their expertise, Englund said. Metal bolts and fasteners are removed with magnetic separation equipment. GFS uses gravity separators and air classification separators to sort shredded pieces by size. The particles are usually fibrous, but some have the consistency of powders.

The material is then blended with either virgin or recycled thermoplastics to make a reinforced, filled thermoplastic pellet. The company can adjust the percentage of recycled fiberglass content depending on customers’ preferences. GFS can easily create a 50-50 blend, for example, although GFS expects most customers will want a lower level of fiberglass content, he said.

https://waste-management-world.com/...oject-researches-wind-turbine-blade-recycling

A short time ago, Finland’s very first wind power turbines were dismantled after nearly 30 years in service. Much of the material is easy to recycle – it's mostly steel. But the blades, the largest up to 90 meters long and close to 10 tonnes in weight, are made with thermoset FRPs that have so far been considered unrecyclable.

Together with the 28 Ecobulk partners, the possibilities of re-using and recycling bulky composite products are being explored in the construction, automotive and furniture industries.

Markku Vilkki, CEO of Conenor and demonstration manager for the H2020 project, Ecobulk, wants to demonstrate that it is not only possible, but also profitable.

“This is not just a problem for turbine blades. Composite materials are a fast-growing choice for many applications due to the excellent weight to strength ratios, excellent durability, and highly flexible moulding and manufacturing techniques,” he explained.

“The analysts of Ceresana expect the global market for C-FRP and G-FRP to increase to a volume of over 9.98 million tons by 2024. But they very difficult, and in some cases considered impossible, to recycle,” Vilkki continued.

According to the CEO most end up in landfills – and that’s something that needs to be resolved.

 

[Winemaker]

https://oilprice.com/Alternative-En...-Panels-Harness-The-Energy-Of-Deep-Space.html


This is a interesting link regarding the research into using "anti-solar" panels to be used when the 50% or so time the sun isn't shining or the wind isn't blowing. It has to do with temperature differentials.

 

[JoeWras]

Seems that the blades used are NOT easily recycled!! Say WHAT? We are expecting this to be green and they cannot make it where at the end of life you cannot recycle? Say it ain't so....

The TV show named "Engineering Catastrophes" or in the UK I think "Massive Engineering Mistakes" has dealt with the problem of blade edge erosion. Blade edge erosion is turning out to be a difficult issue, more severe than envisioned.

At least in some of the UK off shore farms, they are first trying to fix the problem with an applied-in-place bandage on the leading edge. Hopefully that will work, instead of just landfilling them. Apparently the off shore farms are more prone to it because they let them spin at higher speeds.

I'm still for wind and solar power. But they are not without problems.

 

[Nemo2]

This is not the article that I read, but similar...


https://www.desmoinesregister.com/s...urbine-blades-head-iowa-landfills/3942480002/




Seems that the blades used are NOT easily recycled!! Say WHAT? We are expecting this to be green and they cannot make it where at the end of life you cannot recycle? Say it ain't so....

Another article alone the same lines:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/feat...be-recycled-so-they-re-piling-up-in-landfills

 

[NW-Bound]

... I think the disposal or recycling of turbine blades will be easier to solve than the waste from nuclear plants and coal fired plants...

https://resource-recycling.com/plastics/2019/03/27/company-expands-wind-turbine-recycling-operation/

https://waste-management-world.com/...oject-researches-wind-turbine-blade-recycling

+1

A lot of stuff that we use cannot be recycled, or bio-degradable. Wind turbine blades are not a major issue.

https://oilprice.com/Alternative-En...-Panels-Harness-The-Energy-Of-Deep-Space.html


This is a interesting link regarding the research into using "anti-solar" panels to be used when the 50% or so time the sun isn't shining or the wind isn't blowing. It has to do with temperature differentials.

I remember reading about this earlier. Sounds interesting, but not efficient. It takes a lot of work and money to get a little bit of power. A battery is cheaper to store the power.