Comments by Willem Post Subscribe

On Can Solar Energy Keep the Lights On in the UK?

Robert,

You hit all the nails on the head. Without low-cost storage, say less than 2 c/kWh, solar and wind variable, intermittent energy are dead in the water. Even the Teutonics will realize it, after they have bled themselves enough.

A recent study, sponserd by the DOE, determined charging batteries with solar energy or wind energy (charging loss) during the day and discharging the energy as-needed by demand (discharching loss + DC to AC conversion loss) at night, would cost 23 c/kWh, in addition to the cost of producting the solar or wind energy, say about 10-20c/kWh, unsubsidized, plus utility mark-up of about 6 c/kWh, to yield a user price of about 40-50 c/kWh.

At those prices, Japan, the US, Europe, etc., will not need much energy, because China, India, Brazil, will do nearly all the manufacturing. There is a silver lining some where, but I have not found it yet.

On New DOE Secretary Moniz Stresses Energy Efficiency to Start

Christina,  

FUTURE ENERGY AND RESOURCE CONSUMPTION AND POPULATION   

In 1800, the World Gross Product, WGP, was $175.24 billion; population 1.0 billion. 

In 2012, the WGP was $71,830 billion, 407 times greater; population 7.0 billion.

WGP/capita in 2012 = 407/7 = 58 times greater than in 1800 

In 1800, world per capita energy consumption was 20 GJ. In 2010, 80 GJ

With 4 times the energy use per capita, 58 times the WGP/capita is achieved, i.e., energy/capita is used about 14.5 times* more effectively than in 1800.

WGP multiplier from 1800 to 2010 = 4 x 7 x 14.5 = 406; an indication of environmental impact. 

* steam engines were 3% efficient, modern CCGTs are 60% efficient; Dutch wind mills were 2-4% efficient, modern wind turbines are at about half of the theoretical maximum of Betz's Law of 59%; wood/peat OPEN fireplaces of 1800 had negative efficiency. Lay people usually do not get that point, as they know little about the efficiency of engineered systems. 

http://ourfiniteworld.com/2012/03/12/world-energy-consumption-since-1820-in-charts/

Because of the present effective use of energy, much more goods and services can be produced for consumption and more damage is done to the environment that debilitates the fauna and flora.

It is a fantasy to think RE build-outs by mostly developed nations will reverse this situation, because underdeveloped nations continue to increase their use of fossil fuels, i.e., GW is a given for as long as fossil fuels are available.

World Carrying Capacity: Dr. Paul Ehrlich, a biologist, states the world's sustainable carrying capacity (providing healthy food, clean water, adequate shelter, absorbing pollution, etc.) is AT THE VERY MOST 1.5 billion people;  I use 1.0 billion, the population of 1800, in my articles.

Before WW I, most families had 4-8 children, now 1-3. It takes 2.1 children to MAINTAIN population growth at zero. Some European nations and Japan already have less than zero population growth. GRADUALLY reducing that number to less than 1.5, will GRADUALLY reduce the world population to 1.0 billion.

The 1.0 billion people would need to be on a strict energy/resources diet and on a strict travel diet to minimize their impacts on the environment and its remaining, debilitated fauna and flora. 

Because of the spreading of modernity and its toxic substances, the capacity to support fauna and flora (other than Homo Sapiens with his healthcare support systems) has become minimal in heavily-populated, industrialized regions, such as the Ruhr area, since about 1850. Currently, that capacity is minimal almost everywhere i.e., the impact of Homo Sapiens, “Wise Man”, has greatly diminished the fauna and flora and their habitats almost everywhere.

Example: At the outlets of the Hudson and Mississippi Rivers are dead zones the size of New Jersey; eco-systems collapsed due to toxic silt, pesticides, and fertilizer runoffs. There are semi-dead zones everywhere, such as off the New England Coast, where fish populations have partially collapsed due to overfishing and habitat deterioration. Fish hatcheries and fish farms are required.

Example: Pollution in the environment (air, soil, water) has entered the food chain of the fauna and flora causing and/or increasing the prevalence of a multitude of genetic-damage-related diseases, such as a multitude of various cancers, i.e.,bladder cancer in 4-yr olds; increased autism and attention deficit disorders in children; fish eggs not hatching in the Mexican Gulf; acid-rain-damaged trees dying at an early age, etc. 

Adverse lifestyles (breathing polluted air; drinking “processed” water; “doing” drugs; drinking alcohol; smoking tobacco; consuming low-nutrition foods, i.e., junk food) increase mutation and exacerbate the effects of pollution. 

"Is it safe to eat the fish?". "Is it safe to drink the water?". Feel-good advertising makes us drink and eat what the industrial, low/no-nutrition food and drink sectors provide.

If it were not for modern medicine (which is getting increasingly expensive/unaffordable; currently about 18% of US GDP, or about $2.7 trillion/yr, or about 3.5 times the defense budget!), the human race would be in the same predicament as the remaining fauna and flora. 

The resources of modern medicine will likely not be sufficient to stem the coming worldwide tide of cancerous and degenerative diseases, requiring procedures, such as breast, ovary, prostate removals and knee, hip, organ replacements, etc.

In 1800, there were about one billion people. In Europe, there was overpopulation and a lack of resources at THAT time. The reason so many millions (of the then small population) emigrated. Wood had almost run out and coal was not yet mined in sufficient quantities to replace it, oil had not yet been discovered and the technology to use it did not exist.

Renewable Energy Build-Outs The Solution?: Doing RE build-outs are exactly the opposite of what Ehrlich advocates, because they are, lifestyle-wise, BAU. 

Doing heavily-subsidized RE build-outs that are resource-intensive, expensive, polluting, environment-damaging, quality of life-damaging, etc., without first doing significantly increased energy efficiency* (which reduces the use of resources) and population reduction (which reduces the use of resources) is extremely irrational. There are no funds to do RE and EE at the same time. 

*The resource and energy savings due to EE should only be used to do additional EE, not for buying other goods and services; a necessary lifestyle change.

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/107316/global-warming-coal-combustion-and-sea-level-rise

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/151031/global-warming-targets-and-capital-costs-germany-s-energiewende

Excerpt of this article.

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/83704/reduce-co2-and-slow-global-warming

On Energy Finance: German Solar Four Times Higher Than Finnish Nuclear Energy

Alex.

The German PV solar capacity factor for fixed-axis systems is about 0.095, dismal, out of a theoretical 0.115, because all solar panels are not facing true-solar-south, not clean, not without shade, not new, not correctly-angled. Do your calculations reflect it?

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/46142/impact-pv-solar-feed-tariffs-germany 

On Energy Finance: German Solar Four Times Higher Than Finnish Nuclear Energy

Howard,

Fukushima has its back-up diesel-generators and auxiliary transformers on the sea side, instead of inland on a built-up surface, out of seach of any tsunamis.

After I saw the aerial photographs, I could not believe the layout; bad without tsumanis, far beyond rational with tsunamis.

To-day's cars are so much better than 50's cars. To-day's nuclear plants would be so much better than 50s-60s nuclear plants.

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/191326/deaths-nuclear-energy-compared-other-causes

On Wind Energy Growing Faster than Coal in China: False Math

In 2012, China had 15 nuclear power units with a total electric capacity of 11 GW and total output of 54.8 billion kWh, accounting for 1.9% country's total electricity output. There are plans to increase nuclear power capacity and nuclear power percentage, bringing the total electricity output to 86 GW and 4% respectively by 2020. Plans are to increase this to 200 GWe by 2030, and 400 GWe by 2050.

On Wind Energy Growing Faster than Coal in China: False Math

Robert,

Below are the China wind turbine CFs:

2009, 0.153; 2010, 0.152; 2011, 0.161; 2012, 0.166

The claims made by RE folks are far over the top, beyond rational, yet, people slurp it up as if it is mannah from heaven. 

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/169521/wind-turbine-energy-capacity-less-estimated

On New Energy Secretary: Tackle Climate Change with Efficiency and Renewable Energy

IK,

Below is a summary of primary energy - losses = delivered to the user

Energy extracted, 12380 Btu

Extraction, processing, transportation, 8.36%, 1035 upstream loss

To plant, 11345, 7563 rejected heat loss 

Production, 1/3 of input, 3782

Self-use, 5%, 189 self use loss

To grid, 3593

Grid loss, 5%, 180 T&D loss 

From meter, kWh, 3413 Btu

All losses, 8967

Extracted/meter ratio, 3.63

On New Energy Secretary: Tackle Climate Change with Efficiency and Renewable Energy

IK,

One needs to look at primary energy, from mine to exhaust, to determine what is more efficient.

Primary energy, gas, well to user 

Primary energy, electric grid, mine/well to user.

After electricity enters the house, efficiency of electric heating is about 99%. 

On Bill McKibben Mistaken on German Solar Energy

Mike,

The time to make amends was in 1800, when the world population was about 1 billion and each person used 4 times less energy.

Based on world gross products of 1800 and 2012, we have learned to use energy about 14.5 times more efficiently, i.e., produce more goods and services with the same quantity of energy.

A measure of current ANNUAL environmental damage relative to 1800 = 4, energy ratio x 7 population ratio x 14.5 efficiency ratio = 406

RE build-outs are completely irrelevant in this context, without:

- first doing massive energy efficiency AND use the savings of EE to do more EE, not to buy more goods and services.

- first reducing the world population to a level the world can acually sustain without infringing on the habitas of other fauna and flora.

This will require a new ethics.

On Bill McKibben Mistaken on German Solar Energy

Robert,

McKibben was trained as a journalist at Harvard. He is smart, knows how to speak, etc. Unfortunately, his knowledge about energy generating systems, grids and their performance is minimal, as it is for the vast majority of such commentators.

Solar and wind energy can only be supplementary to the energy of traditional systems. Solar and wind facilities cannot be in spinning mode, cannot be called on to provide energy when needed. With weather forecasting, there is some predictability of wind energy generation, which helps the grid operator with the scheduling of balancing units, usually OCGTs and CCGTs, for the next day.

Germany's Solar Energy: About 22,000 MW of Germany’s 32,800 MW of PV solar systems (end 2012) are in South Germany. On a sunny summer day, from an output of about 0 MW at 6 AM, the PV solar output increases to about 16,000 MW at noon, and back down to about 0 MW at 6 PM. As this would create major disturbances on the grid and, as PV solar panels cannot be turned off, Germany has to export part of the PV solar energy from about 10 AM to about 2 PM.

Germany has been exporting the excess PV solar energy to France and the Czech Republic at very low prices, after subsidizing it at 30 - 60 eurocent/kWh; France and Czech Republic net energy exports to Germany were 10.3 TWh and 4.8 TWh, respectively, during Jan-Oct 2012. 

France has a significant hydro capacity for balancing part of the excess PV solar energy, but the Czech Republic does not want it, as it upsets the grid and has threatened to build a big switch. Any excess energy not wanted gets grounded!!!

http://www.thegwpf.org/poland-czech-republic-ban-germanys-green-energy/

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/89476/wind-energy-co2-emissions-are-overstated

http://theenergycollective.com/barrybrook/206306/can-household-solar-photovoltaics-provide-primary-source-low-emission-power

On RGGI Still Falls Short of Real Carbon Pricing

Sieren,

Thank you for your well-done RGGI overvue of future generation and carbon pricing.

As you know the carbon pricing system has collapsed in Europe. Brussels setting lower caps to drive up carbon prices was voted down, i.e., not politically feasible.

In fact, almost the entire RE movement in Europe is at a standstill, except maybe in Germany.

Lower cost efforts, such as increased energy efficiency, time of day rate schedules, and lifestyle changes, should be implemented, as they REDUCE people's energy bills and REDUCE the (Owning+O&M) cost of the NE energy system.

Burdening near-zero-growth economies in the Northeast would also not be politically feasible.

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/46652/reducing-energy-use-houses

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/71771/energy-efficiency-first-renewables-later 

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/83704/reduce-co2-and-slow-global-warming

On Breakthrough Renewable Energy Forecasting Coming to Grid by 2015

Silvio,

Who will pay for the ongoing (Owning + O&M) costs of these systems which benefit solar and wind system owners?

Newly-developed systems are available from GE, Siemens, Vestas, that perform two functions: vary the pitch of the blades, based on wind velocity, as measured at the nacelle, to more-efficiently obtain energy from the wind, and, using partially-charged batteries that absorb and supply energy, to reduce voltages variations. The resulting processed outputs are collected from each IWT and fed, via a substation, into the grid. The likely net effect, claimed by Vendors, is an increased CF and less disturbance of the grid.