Why the intermittency problem can’t be solved

[rangerrebew]

Why the intermittency problem can’t be solved
Wednesday 15th February 2023 | Andrew Montford, Net Zero Watch
 
I often ask renewables enthusiasts to explain what we are supposed to do when the wind isn’t blowing if we can’t fall back on fossil fuels. The other day, I pressed James Murray, the editor of Business Green magazine, what forms of storage he thought we could use, and this is what he said:

… a portfolio of nuclear, demand response, grid scale batteries, other emerging forms of energy storage technologies, hydrogen, and gas, ultimately in conjunction with CCS.

Clearly, we were talking somewhat at cross purposes; my question was specifically about storage, but even if we broaden the scope to cover the general question of “what do we do when the wind isn’t blowing”, his answer suggests that he hasn’t grasped the fundamental economic problem.

https://www.netzerowatch.com/why-the-intermittency-problem-cant-be-solved/

[roamer_1]

In practice, I think that 'renewables' can only be useful in a distributed model, where each house contributes to the grid as they can, or relies upon solar/wind onsite as they can. And even at that, there will surely be times when the main power in the grid will be plant generated.

Even so, a large percentage of each home's use would be generated onsite, with no transmission losses or costs involved... which is where the gain by renewables can be most optimized... And after that, by the contribution locally and regionally by houses functioning off-grid, where in manufactured energy can be utilized where it is needed elsewhere.

But this comes at a price - Anyone using a solar based off-grid system will tell you, heating elements are beyond the scope of a solar/battery system. A hard, built-in reliance on propane or wood comes with the deal.

The cost of a system capable of sufficient generation and storage through the winter months is approximately double (bordering on triple) that which can handle household needs in summer, when solar is most reliable.

A system capable of handling heat and cooling year around is predictably triple that.

A system that functions well in the summer but requires generator assistance in the winter is around $15-20k - That's a decently robust starter set that many of my friends have implemented.

Double that, maybe triple, for a system to withstand long winter months with little sun.

One that will also cover heat and cooling becomes ridiculously expensive.

But, if one wants to take the win, such systems, widely implemented, could take an enormous weight off of the grid, in a distributed and robust system that could give and take from the grid in a hybrid fashion. It could reduce, but will not eliminate manufactured power.

Such a system would be excellent, leaving each house with a sustained local power source, a limited but useful independence from the grid, a certain ability to function, at least somewhat, in the face of power outage, and a reasonable protection against catastrophic failure because of its distributed nature.

It is also infinitely scalable, and can be introduced reasonably through building codes and refits, across decades.

And that's about the best that can be done right now.

But that is not what they will do - because the thought is toward the castle, and not the bazaar. They are not looking toward a distributed system, because there is no control - In fact, less control, and more independence.

[berdie]

In practice, I think that 'renewables' can only be useful in a distributed model, where each house contributes to the grid as they can, or relies upon solar/wind onsite as they can. And even at that, there will surely be times when the main power in the grid will be plant generated.

Even so, a large percentage of each home's use would be generated onsite, with no transmission losses or costs involved... which is where the gain by renewables can be most optimized... And after that, by the contribution locally and regionally by houses functioning off-grid, where in manufactured energy can be utilized where it is needed elsewhere.

But this comes at a price - Anyone using a solar based off-grid system will tell you, heating elements are beyond the scope of a solar/battery system. A hard, built-in reliance on propane or wood comes with the deal.

The cost of a system capable of sufficient generation and storage through the winter months is approximately double (bordering on triple) that which can handle household needs in summer, when solar is most reliable.

A system capable of handling heat and cooling year around is predictably triple that.

A system that functions well in the summer but requires generator assistance in the winter is around $15-20k - That's a decently robust starter set that many of my friends have implemented.

Double that, maybe triple, for a system to withstand long winter months with little sun.

One that will also cover heat and cooling becomes ridiculously expensive.

But, if one wants to take the win, such systems, widely implemented, could take an enormous weight off of the grid, in a distributed and robust system that could give and take from the grid in a hybrid fashion. It could reduce, but will not eliminate manufactured power.

Such a system would be excellent, leaving each house with a sustained local power source, a limited but useful independence from the grid, a certain ability to function, at least somewhat, in the face of power outage, and a reasonable protection against catastrophic failure because of its distributed nature.

It is also infinitely scalable, and can be introduced reasonably through building codes and refits, across decades.

And that's about the best that can be done right now.

But that is not what they will do - because the thought is toward the castle, and not the bazaar. They are not looking toward a distributed system, because there is no control - In fact, less control, and more independence.

I thought about this for some time today, @roamer_1 .  If I understand what you are saying, their dream of energy independence might work. If every home has their own power supply and only relies on the grid in emergencies.  But I can't imagine the cost. Most homes like mine would require a substantial roof upgrade to install solar panels. Although I have heard a person can sell energy back. What about the people living in urban area apartments?

And as you said, there would have to be back up energy sources. I have propane and wood, but again I must ask...what about the cities?

If this would come to fruition...I think I'll invest in solar panels. I don't see wind being an option.

[Smokin Joe]

Okay, let me put it this way.

Hypothetically speaking, you have suffered a severe injury. Your body will eventually recover, but for now it needs the assistance of medical devices to get over the hump and on the road to recovery.

Would you want your equipment, the gadgets that are keeping you alive long enough for your own body to take over, to be powered by renewables?

[roamer_1]

I thought about this for some time today, @roamer_1 .  If I understand what you are saying, their dream of energy independence might work. If every home has their own power supply and only relies on the grid in emergencies. 

Well no, @berdie , I don't think it will work. I know what off-grid looks like. And there is a reason why anyone that can, anyone that is near to grid power, uses grid power.

I do know many who are off-grid, and many that are hybrid... having grid power, but also having a subsidiary solar/battery bank, because power where they are is unreliable, and can be off for quite a stretch... But most who can get at grid power choose grid power, because it is cheap and reliable.

But I can't imagine the cost. Most homes like mine would require a substantial roof upgrade to install solar panels. Although I have heard a person can sell energy back. What about the people living in urban area apartments?

As I said, a decent starter kit would be in the range of 6-10 panels, and 4-6 batteries, in or around $10-15k... Which makes no sense to folks that are grid-tied already.

But it is starting to make sense in the face of grid failures like all y'all down in Texas went through when that big winter storm took y'all out. Having a couple days wrth of power in batteries, to get through the storm, and having solar to charge those batteries after the storm was gone but the power grid was destroyed for days and weeks... well maybe that's worth looking at.

And you don't need to put it on your roof. In fact most folks up here make a free-standing frame for em, so they can shovel the snow off em easy, which is a thing around  here.

And as you said, there would have to be back up energy sources. I have propane and wood, but again I must ask...what about the cities?

Cities are a different animal. But even the cities are comprised mainly of suburbs full of single family dwellings and condos... All of which have sufficient roof. But as I said, in all cases, I don't think it would be main power, but rather subsidiary power which could take quite a bit of weight off the grid when they're working... full daylight, sunny days...
But would not account for full use, including heat and air... But the supplement could help.

And I am considering it mainly becoming part of new construction, more than retro-fit.
In the grand scheme of a new house build, $15k is peanuts. So in that case, adding rudimentary solar and batteries ain't awful, especially if electric companies must buy your unused power.

If this would come to fruition...I think I'll invest in solar panels. I don't see wind being an option.

You are set up alright. Propane/wood means your major cost, heat and cooking, is outside of electrical power... Although air conditioning probably matters...

But without the air and heat, you could set up to function pretty reasonably - especially down there by you, because you have so very much sun.

Up in here, it is quite a bit like being on the jenny. Most folks off-grid have to go fire up the jenny to use big power items like a microwave, or an air conditioner, if they have them things at all. And they probably have to fire up the jenny to charge the batteries if there ain't no sun for three days or more. And you are a thousand times more conscious of the power that you DO use.

Most folks that have a sandpoint well (110v) or collection pumps for water, get by alright with a propane fridge and stove and wood heat. The solar is enough to keep the lights and TV and internet on, and run a load of clothes through the washer now and then... Except in the winter, when sunlight is a crap-shoot... I don't know any that ain't on the jenny at leas t part of the time in the winter.