NEARLY 60% OF THE GENERATION THAT COULD SHUTTER IS DEEMED “UNECONOMIC,” BUT CAPACITY PRICES AND OTHER FACTORS COULD CHANGE, POTENTIALLY EASING THE RISK, THE GRID OPERATOR’S MARKET MONITOR SAID.
Where is the logic to replace continuous uninterruptable electricity generation, with OCCASIONAL electricity generated from breezes and sunshine ?????
The elephant in the room that no policymaker wants to discuss is that:
• Neither wind turbines nor solar panels can replace the supply chain of products from crude oil that are the foundation of our materialistic society demanded by the 8 billion on this planet.
• Occasional electricity generated from wind and solar CANNOT support computers for hospitals, airports, offices, manufacturing, military sites, and telemetry, that all need a continuous uninterruptable supply of electricity.
I agree that for the grand scale, sporadically interrupted power supplies like wind and solar are most unlikely to be appropriate. The best they could do would be to add acres and acres of storage, most likely batteries. On a large scale, that is, I agree. My vision for Seraph Power systems is on a small scale. I am working on the wind turbine now, for which a team of senior engineering students at Purdue are building a test model. I expect their test results will show how to improve the aerodynamics of the system, and give some concrete measure of output power and efficiency. The first model is based on a 55-gallon drum, and the hybrid system will include a battery and fuel-powered backup generator, and I think it will produce over 300W of electrical power, but actual performance of course will depend on specific sizing and configuration. As I say, I’m concentrating on getting the wind turbine completed and ready to manufacture, and even more down to earth, on funding the next stages of development, for which my Indiegogo crowdfunding campaign can use all the support it can get.
David, check my answer to Ronald - I am learning from personal experience, and it is expensive and not scalable. There is a place for wind and solar, and it is not where you have to print money or pay big bucks for the storage. They will not end energy poverty and that is my goal - Thanks again David.
Ronald you are right on as usual!!!!!! I am installing wind and solar on my properties and they in a word - suck and underperform. They do not work as intended or promised. Only as a 3rd layer of back up for those that can afford it is it worth the money like off grid. I have two propane generators for the 4 buildings/cabins and they are the second layer. If the grid down having two redundant systems is critical. It still means power management, but you don't know if you would be able to get propane, and saving some fuel will help. The way I am setting it up is run batteries or storage at night, and charge with solar wind (not always enough) and propane. - Without the expensive storage it is worthless as a system. This set up is not affordable on a large scale with our current regulatory systems in place. One key thing to look at for wind and solar is the third layer of grid protection - and it is not worth it. Modular Nuclear reactors makes better investments for areas where huge grid upgrades are required for "renewable" energy. - They are not renewable!!! Great comment and thanks!!!!
Another example of putting the chart before the horse. So we need natural gas to make up for coal retirements, until wind and solar come online which will need to be backed up by more natural gas because of intermittency. Trying to solve one problem and creating another.
I appreciate your reporting, but caution you to not forget that a lot of ignorant people like me are reading your posts. We (I, anyway) get lost when you use acronyms without defining them at first use in the article. I lost the point of the whole article because I don't know what PJM stands for. I did eventually figure out that you defined RMR. (I could go on and on by recounting how we in nuclear propulsion were not allowed to call the DFT the DFT, even though it is not easily confused with another word and everybody knew exactly what it is and what it does in the steam plant. But in articles that non-propulsion-engineers might read--well, my not defining it makes my point.)
Thank you Richard, it is more better (speaking like my grandson) to have a community help with discussions! As Hillary once said in her book, "It takes a village to raise and idiot." (paraphrase).
Thank you for the feedback and will work to improve - I read so much (4 hours a day and don't sleep much) that I assume a lot! Thanks again for your time!!!!
I sure don't understand. Why are so many power plants deemed "uneconomic"? If demand for electricity is rapidly increasing, and rates are going up, why would a power plant become uneconomic? Why would they want to 'retire' (shut down? Go out of business?) What's this really all about?
Al, they are not "uneconomic" they are being attacked through "Legislation through Regulations" and that drives their cost up so much they become uneconomic due to the EPA, and current administration's horrific energy policies. They are even getting ready to put more regulations on the coal plants and not let us build the nat gas plants like @pablo hill mentioned above - Great points and thank you!
Right on - David, I am finding that the difference between conspiracy theories and reality is only one week. :) It used to be years - I think that is why our podcast has gone through the roof. People are starved for the truth.
Where is the logic to replace continuous uninterruptable electricity generation, with OCCASIONAL electricity generated from breezes and sunshine ?????
The elephant in the room that no policymaker wants to discuss is that:
• Neither wind turbines nor solar panels can replace the supply chain of products from crude oil that are the foundation of our materialistic society demanded by the 8 billion on this planet.
• Occasional electricity generated from wind and solar CANNOT support computers for hospitals, airports, offices, manufacturing, military sites, and telemetry, that all need a continuous uninterruptable supply of electricity.
I agree that for the grand scale, sporadically interrupted power supplies like wind and solar are most unlikely to be appropriate. The best they could do would be to add acres and acres of storage, most likely batteries. On a large scale, that is, I agree. My vision for Seraph Power systems is on a small scale. I am working on the wind turbine now, for which a team of senior engineering students at Purdue are building a test model. I expect their test results will show how to improve the aerodynamics of the system, and give some concrete measure of output power and efficiency. The first model is based on a 55-gallon drum, and the hybrid system will include a battery and fuel-powered backup generator, and I think it will produce over 300W of electrical power, but actual performance of course will depend on specific sizing and configuration. As I say, I’m concentrating on getting the wind turbine completed and ready to manufacture, and even more down to earth, on funding the next stages of development, for which my Indiegogo crowdfunding campaign can use all the support it can get.
David, check my answer to Ronald - I am learning from personal experience, and it is expensive and not scalable. There is a place for wind and solar, and it is not where you have to print money or pay big bucks for the storage. They will not end energy poverty and that is my goal - Thanks again David.
There is no logic. It's money, politics, green plating = idiocy.
you are right on!!!!!
Ronald you are right on as usual!!!!!! I am installing wind and solar on my properties and they in a word - suck and underperform. They do not work as intended or promised. Only as a 3rd layer of back up for those that can afford it is it worth the money like off grid. I have two propane generators for the 4 buildings/cabins and they are the second layer. If the grid down having two redundant systems is critical. It still means power management, but you don't know if you would be able to get propane, and saving some fuel will help. The way I am setting it up is run batteries or storage at night, and charge with solar wind (not always enough) and propane. - Without the expensive storage it is worthless as a system. This set up is not affordable on a large scale with our current regulatory systems in place. One key thing to look at for wind and solar is the third layer of grid protection - and it is not worth it. Modular Nuclear reactors makes better investments for areas where huge grid upgrades are required for "renewable" energy. - They are not renewable!!! Great comment and thanks!!!!
Another example of putting the chart before the horse. So we need natural gas to make up for coal retirements, until wind and solar come online which will need to be backed up by more natural gas because of intermittency. Trying to solve one problem and creating another.
I appreciate your reporting, but caution you to not forget that a lot of ignorant people like me are reading your posts. We (I, anyway) get lost when you use acronyms without defining them at first use in the article. I lost the point of the whole article because I don't know what PJM stands for. I did eventually figure out that you defined RMR. (I could go on and on by recounting how we in nuclear propulsion were not allowed to call the DFT the DFT, even though it is not easily confused with another word and everybody knew exactly what it is and what it does in the steam plant. But in articles that non-propulsion-engineers might read--well, my not defining it makes my point.)
I agree. The article was almost unintelligible. I couldn't make much sense out of it. See my note.
https://www.pjm.com/
Thanks. I'm less ignorant now.
So RTOs (regional transmission operator)under the balancing authority. https://images.app.goo.gl/TRijjj5KAW3frqXv6
Thank you Richard, it is more better (speaking like my grandson) to have a community help with discussions! As Hillary once said in her book, "It takes a village to raise and idiot." (paraphrase).
Thank you for the feedback and will work to improve - I read so much (4 hours a day and don't sleep much) that I assume a lot! Thanks again for your time!!!!
I sure don't understand. Why are so many power plants deemed "uneconomic"? If demand for electricity is rapidly increasing, and rates are going up, why would a power plant become uneconomic? Why would they want to 'retire' (shut down? Go out of business?) What's this really all about?
Al, they are not "uneconomic" they are being attacked through "Legislation through Regulations" and that drives their cost up so much they become uneconomic due to the EPA, and current administration's horrific energy policies. They are even getting ready to put more regulations on the coal plants and not let us build the nat gas plants like @pablo hill mentioned above - Great points and thank you!
Makes you wonder. It’s the kind of thing that makes conspiracy theories sound more plausible.
Right on - David, I am finding that the difference between conspiracy theories and reality is only one week. :) It used to be years - I think that is why our podcast has gone through the roof. People are starved for the truth.