2pm today

[VHDawg53]

Get back with me when when they figure out how to replace the the other 92% of the energy we use with wind farms and solar panels.

Here you go - see the various reports at the link below.

There's been quite a bit of research into this topic. The short answer is that the Southeast is the most difficult region to achieve higher renewable penetration levels due to a general dearth of wind and solar resources compared to other regions, but the US broadly is capable of supporting a substantially higher rate of renewables using existing technology combined with better load / grid management and additional transmission infrastructure.

If our leaps in renewable technology continue at the rate of the past decade, we could vastly outperform even these models.

Renewable Electricity Futures Study

www.nrel.gov

 

[Deadlyputter]

Here you go - see the various reports at the link below.

There's been quite a bit of research into this topic. The short answer is that the Southeast is the most difficult region to achieve higher renewable penetration levels due to a general dearth of wind and solar resources compared to other regions, but the US broadly is capable of supporting a substantially higher rate of renewables using existing technology combined with better load / grid management and additional transmission infrastructure.

If our leaps in renewable technology continue at the rate of the past decade, we could vastly outperform even these models.

Renewable Electricity Futures Study

www.nrel.gov

You should read the supporting articles in what you forward. Here's one.

 

[Dr. Curmudgeon]

Here you go - see the various reports at the link below.

There's been quite a bit of research into this topic. The short answer is that the Southeast is the most difficult region to achieve higher renewable penetration levels due to a general dearth of wind and solar resources compared to other regions, but the US broadly is capable of supporting a substantially higher rate of renewables using existing technology combined with better load / grid management and additional transmission infrastructure.

If our leaps in renewable technology continue at the rate of the past decade, we could vastly outperform even these models.

Renewable Electricity Futures Study

www.nrel.gov

That is sweet...

 

[VHDawg53]

You should read the supporting articles in what you forward. Here's one.

View embedded media

wow I had no idea it cost money

 

[Deadlyputter]

wow I had no idea it cost money

Your costs will double at least. And, as of now its not doable. You've been trying to say the conversion will save us money. Get your story straight. Have a nice day.

 

[VHDawg53]

Your costs will double at least. And, as of now its not doable. You've been trying to say the conversion will save us money. Get your story straight. Have a nice day.

New renewable capacity is cost competitive taking out a few GWs here and there as coal retires.

Getting to 80% renewable penetration is not currently cost competitive as it requires an entire restructuring of our grid

Your new question pertained to the feasibility of replacing all fossil generation capacity, which is possible, but at a higher price. The incremental cost increases as renewable generation increases as a % of total generation given current technology and infrastructure. But we are still pretty low on the penetration curve, so the incremental costs for transmission and other investments aren't as high for the next x% penetration. Hence the attractive costs of adding renewable generation today.

 

[jbpayne32]

Your costs will double at least. And, as of now its not doable. You've been trying to say the conversion will save us money. Get your story straight. Have a nice day.

That’s just completely untrue. The cost of extracting oil does not decrease, but as you can see in the chart below, the cost of solar and battery storage has decreased dramatically and will be cheaper than oil very soon. Energy costs will decrease as a whole as technology continues to innovate and drive renewable costs down.

 

[Deadlyputter]

Now do cost of conversion. Cost of land (wind requires up to 360 times, and solar 75 times the land area of conventional) . New infrastructure and grid requirements. Source for amount of lithium required for batteries, environmental impact of lithium disposal. Cost of backup diesel generators that are used in almost every area trying to live off grid. Again, China knows, that's why they're building lots of coal plants as we speak. I have no doubt we'll find an alternate energy source in the last quarter of the next century, but wind and solar won't be it.

 

[VHDawg53]

Now do cost of conversion. Cost of land (wind requires up to 360 times, and solar 75 times the land area of conventional) . New infrastructure and grid requirements. Source for amount of lithium required for batteries, environmental impact of lithium disposal. Cost of backup diesel generators that are used in almost every area trying to live off grid. Again, China knows, that's why they're building lots of coal plants as we speak. I have no doubt we'll find an alternate energy source in the last quarter of the next century, but wind and solar won't be it.

Most of those costs are included in LCOE

you make it obvious you don’t read the reports

 

[jbpayne32]

Now do cost of conversion. Cost of land (wind requires up to 360 times, and solar 75 times the land area of conventional) . New infrastructure and grid requirements. Source for amount of lithium required for batteries, environmental impact of lithium disposal. Cost of backup diesel generators that are used in almost every area trying to live off grid. Again, China knows, that's why they're building lots of coal plants as we speak. I have no doubt we'll find an alternate energy source in the last quarter of the next century, but wind and solar won't be it.

What part of LCOE do you not understand...

"LCOE captures the cost of building the power plant, as well as the ongoing costs for fuel and operating the power plant itself..."

And that's not why China is building coal plants...it's complicated, but essentially local provinces are building plants despite not needing the capacity. China's coal-powered electricity generation in China has actually flatlined, despite the explosive growth in the number of coal plants.

China Is Still Building an Insane Number of New Coal Plants

While the rest of the world turns away from the fossil fuel, China is investing big in coal-powered electricity.

www.wired.com