Quote:
Originally Posted by David
In Texas, wind power peaks at night. And the wind power swing from night to day is huge.
Of course solar peaks during the day which is when it's needed most so win-win. Texas is no where near where it could be for solar so the next few years will see a lot of solar growth here.
The one thing wind and solar need is something to handle the swings due to weather. What better way than to plug in millions of mobile batteries around the grid.
|
But and it is a big but, conventional fossil fueled plants on a total life cycle cost are way cheaper and more reliable. As you attempt to rely more on "green" sources, every analysis I saw was killed by the need for huge amounts of land (when compared to conventional plants) and there is a significant increase in the need for more transmission and distribution (more wide spread sites). Green power generation is the glamor part of the systems, but transmission and distribution is the nuts and bolts. That is why they call them backbone.
I am not saying that the future may address these things, but not in 2 to 12 years. I have heard stories like this all my life. Yes there have been improvements, but not like these guys are predicting. Caution is the better part of valor.
I remember when the rage was reverse running turbines in water distribution systems. The capital cost for those applications never penciled out during the analysis and the pilot projects showed the analysis was over stated. The French pushed these and I am not sure if they are widely used to this day, but it sure did not deliver as predicted.