![]() |
#61 | |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#62 | |
eBook Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383099
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
Quote:
![]() As I've just explained on another thread, you cannot use wind and solar power for your "base load" power generation requirements, which is what coal stations are used for today. Nuclear really is the only viable alternative for that. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Advert | |
|
![]() |
#63 |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
|
I'm not sure I agree with that assessment... which thread did you discuss this in?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#64 |
eBook Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383099
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#65 | |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
Advert | |
|
![]() |
#66 |
eBook Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383099
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
Feel free to comment here, Steve; it's perfectly on-topic.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#67 |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
|
My only comment about not being able to use renewable source as "base loads" is that adding storage to the renewable source makes it accessible when the sun isn't shining, or the wind isn't blowing. And combining methods (solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, and power storage) means that when any one is not available, the others are.
Also: If every home could produce some of its own power, using renewable sources, and store some of that power for use later, the country's power needs would not be so critical, and we might not need nuclear plants (or more of any other plants, for that matter) to provide a base load. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#68 |
curmudgeon
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1,487
Karma: 5748190
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Redwood City, CA USA
Device: Kobo Aura HD, (ex)nook, (ex)PRS-700, (ex)PRS-500
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#69 | |
Sir Penguin of Edinburgh
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 12,375
Karma: 23555235
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: DC Metro area
Device: Shake a stick plus 1
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#70 | |
eBook Enthusiast
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383099
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
Quote:
![]() You're right, though; you cannot use wind and solar power for base load power generation (although you can use geothermal power in some part of the world - eg Iceland generates most of its power that way). Nuclear stations really are the only "green" alternative to coal. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#71 | |
curmudgeon
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1,487
Karma: 5748190
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Redwood City, CA USA
Device: Kobo Aura HD, (ex)nook, (ex)PRS-700, (ex)PRS-500
|
Quote:
Wind and solar power aren't a good match for base load power generation on their own, because they do not provide constant power 24/7. With the addition of some form of energy storage they could, in theory, be used for base load power generation. In practice, adding the energy storage component (usually) increases costs so much that it makes wind and solar prohibitively expensive for base load usage. Nuclear stations really are the only "green" alternative to coal. All statements made considering current and near-future technologies. ...or something like that. Right? Or have I misunderstood again? I'll add, from my own understanding, that current energy storage techniques decrease energy efficiency as well as adding financial cost. This, too, makes wind and solar less attractive for base load generation. Not fun to realize that you're losing 50% or more of the generated power to the storage setup! Xenophon |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#72 |
curmudgeon
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1,487
Karma: 5748190
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Redwood City, CA USA
Device: Kobo Aura HD, (ex)nook, (ex)PRS-700, (ex)PRS-500
|
One thing rooftop solar is really good for -- at least in the US South West -- is peaking power production in urban areas. The days when all those air conditioners kick in on max are exactly the days (and times!) when the rooftop solar is producing peak generation. An excellent match! Now we need to get the costs down to the point where folks who are not early adopters can afford to join the party.
Xenophon |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#73 | |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 19,832
Karma: 11844413
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tampa, FL USA
Device: Kindle Touch
|
Quote:
BOb |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#74 |
Illiterate
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 10,279
Karma: 37848716
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Sandwich Isles
Device: Samsung Galaxy S10+, Microsoft Surface Pro
|
There are many areas on the Big Island of Hawaii that are not served by the HELCO "grid". Homes in these areas are said to be "off the grid". There are two ways to be off the grid, the poor person's way of candles, kerosene lanterns and Honda generators; and the rich person's way of solar voltaic, solar hot water, back yard windmills and storage batteries.
The last time I checked (about twenty years ago) it cost around $30,000 to be off the grid the rich way. That amounts to a twenty five year pay back in a tropical, A/C not required climate. As technology advances and prices decline (or the cost of electricity goes up), if that price could be brought to a five or ten year payoff, HELCO might have a little more difficulty selling power. Being off the grid becomes less viable as climate becomes more extreme, but being partly off the grid, and relying on the grid instead of batteries for peak surges and nighttime loads still makes economical sense. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#75 |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 8,478
Karma: 5171130
Join Date: Jan 2006
Device: none
|
The U.S. is obviously capable of providing a LOT more power from renewable sources than it does presently, between its open lands, offshore territories, and more than a few rooftops. Storage certainly needs to be worked out for almost all of those (though tidal is essentially constant, and could be a "base load" without storage), and it's an area where research has been lax for a very long time.
But even if storage adds financial cost, it could still be cheaper than coal or oil-based power, given that those technologies are already heavily subsidized, and most significantly, their costs to the environment are presently "hidden"... remove their subsidies, and make those plants pay for their environmental cleanup, and we'd be looking at a much more even playing field. Waste products from coal and oil plants do so much environmental damage that, although it may be harder to quantify than a bird carcass at the base of a windmill (and it isn't always harder to quantify that damage... ask someone in West Virginia), it may be easily as significant... I could easily believe it to be more. When we take into account the total cost of oil- and coal-based power, we will see that the costs to go renewable aren't as high as we think... in some cases, would be significantly lower than staying the course. Although traditional windmills are certainly a threat to birds, the problem has recently been reported to be exaggerated (not completely wrong, just exaggerated). A few new windmill configurations being experimented with, however, are designed to minimize the hazard to birds... the "standard" field-based windmill design may turn out to be very different than the "big propeller" we are all used to. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Aliens have deactivated British and US nuclear missiles, say US military pilots | TGS | Lounge | 14 | 09-29-2010 02:43 PM |
why no built in lights? | tapar | Which one should I buy? | 11 | 06-28-2010 03:07 AM |
mŏd'ə-rā'tər (n.): A substance placed in a nuclear reactor to slow neutrons down | vivaldirules | Lounge | 26 | 07-07-2009 03:13 PM |
Save $1558.00 on Nuclear Energy for the Kindle, Now only $6232.00 | Madam Broshkina | Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links) | 31 | 11-11-2008 11:25 AM |
New 'Nuclear Battery' Runs 10 Years, 10 Times More Powerful | Bob Russell | Lounge | 8 | 05-16-2005 03:22 PM |