10 Big Problems With Wind And Solar Energy

GAIL TVERBERG, OUR FINITE WORLD 

 

 JAN. 22, 2014, 1:35 PM

mpeacey via www.flickr.com creative commons

Intermittent renewables–wind and solar photovoltaic panels–have been hailed as an answer to all our energy problems. Certainly, politicians need something to provide hope, especially in countries that are obviously losing their supply of oil, such as the United Kingdom. Unfortunately, the more I look into the situation, the less intermittent renewables have to offer.

1. It is doubtful that intermittent renewables actually reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

It is devilishly difficult to figure out whether or not any particular energy source has a favorable impact on carbon dioxide emissions. The obvious first way of looking at emissions is to look at the fuel burned on a day-to-day basis. Intermittent renewables don’t seem to burn fossil fuel on day-to-day basis, while those using fossil fuels do, so wind and solar PV seem to be the winners.

The catch is that there are many direct and indirect ways that fossil fuels come into play in making the devices that create the renewable energy and in their operation on the grid. The researcher must choose “boundaries” for any analysis. In a sense, we need our whole fossil fuel powered system of schools, roads, airports, hospitals, and electricity transmission lines to make any of type of energy product work, whether oil, natural gas, wind, or solar electric–but it is difficult to make boundaries wide enough to cover everything.

The exercise becomes one of trying to guess how much carbon emissions are saved by looking at tops of icebergs, given that the whole rest of the system is needed to support the new additions. The thing that makes the problem more difficult is the fact that intermittent renewables have more energy-related costs that are not easy to measure than fossil fuel powered energy does. For example, there may be land rental costs, salaries of consultants, and (higher) financing costs because of the front-ended nature of the investment. There are also costs for mitigating intermittency and extra long-distance grid connections.

Many intermittent renewables costs seem to be left out of CO2 analyses under the theory that, say, land rental doesn’t really use energy. But the payment for land rental means that the owner can now go and buy more “stuff,” so it acts to raise fossil fuel energy consumption.

Read more: http://ourfiniteworld.com/2014/01/21/ten-reasons-intermittent-renewables-wind-and-solar-pv-are-a-problem/#ixzz2rc5U8oUZ

Solar PV: The true value of distributed energy

By Lena Hansen & Virginia Lacy on 23 July 2013

Earlier this month, the decision of APS – Arizona’s largest electric utility – to propose two major changes to its net metering program, one which would do away with the program entirely, has become the latest lightning rod fueling the growing tension between utilities and solar PV. In California, there is significant debate about whether to raise net metering caps. In Texas, CPS Energy – the largest municipally owned utility in the country – has proposed a net metering alternative that some fear will substantially reduce the value of solar.RMI Outlet

What is driving these conflicts? One major factor is that distributed energy resources, including distributed solar photovoltaics (DPV), have different physical, operational, and economic characteristics than conventional power plants. Such differences create potentially significant misalignments when they are added into a system designed for decades around the characteristics of conventional power plants.

Lack of understanding a barrier

At the root of all this is the lack of a clear understanding of the actual costs of integrating DPV onto the grid, and likewise, of the actual values that solar can provide to the grid. Without that foundation of understanding, it’s impossible to fairly evaluate policies such as net metering or its alternatives, and debates become based on opinion rather than fact.

An early step in creating that solid foundation is gleaning collective insight from the plethora of individual studies that have sought to identify and quantify the values DPV provides and, to a lesser extent, the costs it imposes on the system. Over the past several months, a team from the Electricity Innovation Lab (eLab) has done just that – reviewing more than 15 studies and synthesizing the results and implications in a new report, A Review of Solar PV Benefit & Cost Studies, released today. Here’s what we found:

1. No study comprehensively evaluated the benefits and costs of DPV, although many acknowledge additional sources of benefit or cost and many agree on the broad categories of benefit and cost. There is broad recognition that some benefits and costs may be difficult or impossible to quantify, and some accrue to different stakeholders.

Utility Solar Is Dead; Long Live Distributed Generation

The shift from the centralized utility model is forcing utilities—for the first time in their existence—to figure out how to compete.

HARESH PATEL: JUNE 17, 2013

For years we’ve likened the energy sector to the computing world, holding up Moore’s law as a guiding example proving that renewables will achieve grid parity.

Today, as panel costs have dropped 90 percent and adoption is at an all-time high, the analogy between the two seems even more fitting. Just like the massive mainframe disruption spawned by personal computing, distributed generation has already begun to challenge the centralized solar model favored by utilities, with no end in sight.

At an industry level, the evidence of a new distributed era is all around us. Fuel cells like Bloom Energy’s are enabling the C&I transformation to self-made energy. Combined natural gas power plants are on the rise, and microgrids are popping up in states across the nation.

The change may feel sudden, but for most of us, it’s been a long time coming. 2009 marked the beginning of utility-scale’s heyday. Investors interested in deploying capital looked at smaller 1-megawatt to 3-megawatt projects and realized that utility-scale solar had the same diligence cost. Investors promptly abandoned the C&I segment in favor of big projects. Though a good decision at the time, the situation has changed. The number of utility projects have dwindled and the shift from the centralized utility model has taken root and is forcing utilities -- for the first time in their existence -- to figure out how to compete.

There’s no doubt now that utilities will ultimately have to change their business models. In a recent discussion with a well-known utility, top executives admitted that not only had solar utility segment plateaued, but that “utility is dead.” It sounded dramatic, but the sentiment has been the topic of discussion for the last twelve months, both in the media and in more hushed tones in closed meetings. So, how will utilities adapt?

Straight from the sun: The renewables revolution has landed

By Mike Robbins on 19 July 2013

The southern tip of Manhattan narrows to a point at its southern end and juts out into the broad expanse of New York Harbour. The Marina is on the lower West Side, far enough down for the famous landmark of Ellis Island to be clearly visible. Just beyond is the Statue of Liberty; it was a mid-June Monday and the statue was bathed in the bluish haze of a warm humid late afternoon at the end of spring. A few lazy sailboats drifted in front of it. Further away, the high, bright-orange superstructure of a Staten Island ferry passed in front of the Verrazano Narrows bridge, itself a tiny latticework on the horizon, spanning the channel between Staten Island and Brooklyn, and guarding New York’s gateway to the sea.  Closer to the shore, the Circle Line sightseeing boat passed by, as did the odd ferry across the Hudson, carrying commuters home to the New Jersey shore a mile or so away across the river.Just after the latest round of climate change talks (in Bonn this time) had sort-of stalled, I took a walk to New York’s North Cove Marina.

The Planet Solar in New York’s North Cove Marina (pic: M. Robbins)

The Marina itself is tucked into the steel-and-glass canyons of modern Manhattan; over it looms the new Freedom Tower that has sprung from the ruins of September 11 2001. That afternoon the MSTûranor Planet Solar had backed into her berth in the Marina after a long trip across the Atlantic to Florida and thence up the coast. The nameTûranor is taken from J.R.R. Tolkien; it is Elvish for Power of the Sun. They are not joking. Planet Solar is powered by an enormous solar array of about 5,600 square feet (519 sq m). Walking into the marina from the south, the 89-ton boat was instantly recognisable; she is actually a catamaran, with a totally flat superstructure bar a small blister for the bridge – the rest of her topside is solar cells.

The brainchild of Swiss eco-entrepeneur Raphael Domjan, in 2010-2012 she became the first solar boat to circumnavigate the globe. On this occasion, she had not come so far – across the Atlantic from La Ciotat on France’s Mediterranean coast. The trip had been accomplished solely on solar power; although she carries a back-up engine to recharge the batteries, she hadn’t needed it.

Planet Solar had not come to New York just to prove a point. On board was a team from the University of Geneva, led by Martin Beniston, Professor of Climate Change at the University and also director of its newly-established Institute of Environmental Sciences. On the night the Planet Solar arrived in Manhattan, the Swiss Consulate arranged a cheerful informal reception on board, and I found Professor Beniston unwinding with some excellent Swiss wines and cheeses.

Although Swiss, Professor Beniston was born in the UK and did his first degree at the University of East Anglia, where I did my own PhD  on climate change. The project, he explained, was to carry out research in the Gulf Stream into the mechanics of CO2 fluxes between the ocean and the atmosphere, and especially into the role of phytoplankton. “Because it’s a pollution-free boat, it will be ideal for the collection and analysis of samples,” he told me. “They won’t be contaminated.”

Later I climbed up to the bridge to greet the captain of the Planet Solar,  Gérard d’Aboville.  The vessel had had a hard time docking that afternoon in the confined space of the marina, and he could have been in a foul mood, but he wasn’t, or if he was, he hid it well. But then, not much bothers a man who has rowed singlehandedly across both the Atlantic and the Pacific, sat in the European Parliament and done much else besides. (He also once competed in the Paris-Dakar with his four brothers, each one riding a Kawasaki 250; so maybe the whole family is slightly mad.) Then I stood with my companion in the hatch and admired the solar array, which glowed carmine and orange as the sun sank slowly towards the New Jersey shore, lighting the pink and grey clouds and setting the Hudson on fire.

The future of solar – centralised or local generation?

By Giles Parkinson on 22 July 2013

The 392MW Ivanpah solar tower power station is the biggest concentrated solar thermal project in the world. It is also the most visually arresting. It features three huge towers, each 150m tall, surrounded by huge fields of mirrors that will focus the sun’s energy on a receiver located at the top of the tower. Water is boiled to create steam that then drives the turbines.After driving several hours along Interstate 15 through the desolate and ancient land formations of the Mojave Desert, and after rising over a large summit, you are suddenly presented with a glimpse of what many say is the future of electricity generation.

It’s solar generation at a massive scale, made more impressive by its surroundings. Even though it spreads over so many hectares, its size pales against the grandeur of the stunning Mojave landscape.

Ivanpah is not the only solar power station of large-scale being built in this art of the world. To the north, across the state border in Nevada, a 110MW solar tower with storage facility is being built by SolarReserve.

To the west, in the heart of California’s “high desert”, First Solar is nearing completion of a 250MW AVSR solar PV project near Lancaster, while down the road SunPower has begun construction of a 579MW solar PV plant of their own.

A little further north, the tables are turned as SunPower puts the finishing touches to its 250MW CVSR project, while First Solar is about to trump it with the 550MW Topaz solar PV project, which is half way through construction.

But even as these massive projects are nearing completion, the question is being asked: Does the future of solar really lie in more of these large scale projects? Even the owners of these huge projects are not so sure.

NRG, the largest owner of generation assets in the US, and part owner of the Ivanpah project, says it is uncertain about the future of such large scale projects, because they are hugely capital-intensive.

King Island achieves 100% renewables – wind, solar, storage

By Giles Parkinson on 22 July 2013

The King Island project combines some 2.45MW of wind and a lot less solar power, with storage devices and an automated control system. The $46 million project has been funded by the federal Government and has been described as a potential insight into how Australia’s main grids can wean themselves off fossil fuels.Hydro Tasmania is hailing a major breakthrough with its King Island Renewable Energy Integration Project , saying it has achieved extended periods of 100 per cent renewable energy for the island’s grid – the first time that a grid of this scale has been serviced by wind, solar and storage devices.

Project leader Simon Gamble says the major achievement so far has been the ability to switch off all fossil fuels completely for extended periods while variable renewable sources such as wind and solar  are used. This is the first time this has been achieved for a load of this size (some renewable grids such as Pacific island of  Tokelau’s are just 100kW is size), and the first time with predominantly wind power.

“This has removed a key barrier,” Gamble told RenewEconomy. Such systems had usually succeeded in turning down the amount of fossil fuel power needed, but not switching them off altogether. The full range of storage and control management systems have yet to be deployed.

“Achieving 100 per cent renewable energy penetration in large off-grid systems has remained elusive until now, and is very difficult to achieve given the need to maintain reliability and security of power supply under highly variable wind and solar conditions,” he said in an earlier statement>

The overall project aims to cut the use of diesel consumption on King Island by more than 65 per cent over a one year period, but it will allow diesel generators to be switched off when not required. So far it has achieved zero diesel operation for periods of up to 1.5 hours overnight when customer demand is lowest, and in daylight hours under high wind conditions.

Last year, Gamble told RenewEconomy that the project would provide an insight into how the Australian grid might look in a few decades – a combination of renewables backed up by dispatchable power and with storage solutions. “The NEM (National Electricity Market) is a much larger system, but it will have similar technical issues,” Gamble said then. “If we are integrating more wind, and solar, we need to learn how to do it.”

The project is using Hydro Tasmania’s own advanced automated control systems and dynamic resistor technology, coupled with a standard flywheel uninterruptible power supply system, commonly used in hospitals and telephone exchanges. Later this year, customer load control will be introduced, as well as a 3MW battery array from Ecoult, which is developing an enhanced lead battery known as the “UltraBattery” 

A Plan to Power 100 Percent of the Planet with Renewables

Wind, water and solar technologies can provide 100 percent of the world's energy, eliminating all fossil fuels. Here's how

By Mark Z. Jacobson and Mark A. Delucchi

Urban Visions: The Future of CitiesWhat will population centers look like in 20 years' time? Innovations in transportation, energy production and technology will have to keep pace with a host of challenges  »June 15, 2010

Image: John Lee Aurora Photos

In Brief

• Supplies of wind and solar energy on accessible land dwarf the energy consumed by people around the globe.
• The authors’ plan calls for 3.8 million large wind turbines, 90,000 solar plants, and numerous geothermal, tidal and rooftop photovoltaic installations worldwide.
• The cost of generating and transmitting power would be less than the projected cost per kilowatt-hour for fossil-fuel and nuclear power.
• Shortages of a few specialty materials, along with lack of political will, loom as the greatest obstacles.

More In This Article

• Infographic

  Powering a Green Planet: Sustainable Energy, Made Interactive

• PDF

  Download the Full Paper from paper by Jacobson and Delucchi

In December leaders from around the world will meet in Copenhagen to try to agree on cutting back greenhouse gas emissions for decades to come. The most effective step to implement that goal would be a massive shift away from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy sources. If leaders can have confidence that such a transformation is possible, they might commit to an historic agreement. We think they can.Julian W. - Gwangju 2 months ago

It's great to finally hear in a North American accent someone saying what the late great Hermann Scheer was saying all his good short life: the solar and other renewable energy revolution is entirely possible in an extremely short time - as in a couple of years, and using EXISTING technology - and all it takes is political will.

Given the ignorance of the average English-only speaking, media illiterate western consumer/ voter, it's obviously taking a little longer outside Europe. It'll happen.

A year ago former vice president Al Gore threw down a gauntlet: to repower America with 100 percent carbon-free electricity within 10 years. As the two of us started to evaluate the feasibility of such a change, we took on an even larger challenge: to determine how 100 percent of the world’s energy, for all purposes, could be supplied by wind, water and solar resources, by as early as 2030. Our plan is presented here.

Scientists have been building to this moment for at least a decade, analyzing various pieces of the challenge. Most recently, a 2009 Stanford University study ranked energy systems according to their impacts on global warming, pollution, water supply, land use, wildlife and other concerns. The very best options were wind, solar, geothermal, tidal and hydroelectric power—all of which are driven by wind, water or sunlight (referred to as WWS). Nuclear power, coal with carbon capture, and ethanol were all poorer options, as were oil and natural gas. The study also found that battery-electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles recharged by WWS options would largely eliminate pollution from the transportation sector.

Solar could replace nuclear power in Japan

Solar power is not usually considered a viable source of base-load electricity, but according to a study published inEnvironmental Research Letters (ERL), Japan could use solar power for base load because of the country's large-scale pumped hydroelectric storage systems.

Researchers from the University of Texas in the US have calculated that if solar panels were installed on available roof space in the greater Tokyo area, the region could generate up to 26.5% of the electricity it received from nuclear power before the Fukushima disaster.

"That's a sizable fraction of the base load that used to be generated by nuclear power," said lead author Brady Stoll. "The reason this is possible is because Japan is in the unique position of already possessing the largest capacity of pumped hydroelectric storage in the world."

Stoll and her colleagues estimated the suitable rooftop area in the greater Tokyo region to be around 300 km². Such an array would have an installed capacity of 43.1 GWp. The researchers used this information, together with the reported availability of pumped hydroelectric storage for the region – 7.28 GW – and daily average surface solar irradiances from a 34 year database, to determine the level of base-load power that could be provided by the distributed photovoltaic system, as well as the overall amount of energy that could be expected per year.

The combined system was found capable of providing 4.8 GWe for 91% of the time. The team also estimated that a photovoltaic array of 1700 km², coupled to 18.1 GW of storage capacity would be sufficient to replace the 2010 nuclear capacity of the Tokyo Electric Power Company.

Coming soon: 100% renewable power

By Chris Nelder | December 12, 2012

One day in the not-too-distant future — probably sooner than many expect — some parts of the world will have power grids that are completely powered by renewables. Eventually, the entire world could be powered by renewables.

These are not green pie-in-the-sky fantasies, but the conclusions of recent research.

There is no doubt that renewable resources are positively vast. Solar alone could power the world: The solar energy that falls on the Earth every minute is more than the amount of fossil fuel the world uses every year. Wind alone could provide about 15 times the world’s energy demand. The recoverable geothermal heat under the U.S. is about 140,000 times its annual energy consumption. Wave power alone could supply twice as much electricity as the world consumes.

Capturing that energy, and being able to use it to power everything, is the hard part.

Probably the most ambitious attempt to quantify that challenge to date has been done by Mark Jacobson and Mark Delucchi of Stanford University, who have published a series of papers over the past several years outlining how it could be done. In 2010, they published two papers (Part Iand Part II) estimating how the world’s energy demand for all purposes — including electric power, transportation, heating and cooling — could be met with renewables by 2030, and replace the existing energy generation mix by 2050:

• 3,800,000 5-MW wind turbines
• 49,000 300-MW concentrated solar plants
• 40,000 300-MW solar PV power plants
• 1.7 billion 3-kW rooftop PV systems
• 5,350 100-MW geothermal power plants
• 270 new 1300-MW hydroelectric power plants
• 720,000 0.75-MW wave devices
• 490,000 1-MW tidal turbines
• Storage in grid-connected electric and hybrid-electric vehicles
• Increased grid transmission capability

(A quick word on units: A kilowatt, or kW, is 1000 watts. A megawatt, or MW, is 1000 kW. A gigawatt, or GW, is 1000 MW.)

India’s thorium-based nuclear dream inches closer – New Scientist

INDIA NUCLEAR NEWS (FROM INTERNET)

SINCE India began its nuclear programme in the 1950s, it has aimed to tap the ample thorium reserves that lie within its borders. Construction is finally set to begin on a reactor that will produce electricity from India’s most convenient fuel for the first time. But with a checkered past on the subject, the country’s promises of a new dawn for nuclear rest on shaky ground.

Last week, the Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL) put out statements to the Indian press touting the safety of its new Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR), which could break ground near one of the country’s conventional reactors next year. Once operational, they claim it will fulfil the vision of India’s 60-year-old blueprint for thorium-based nuclear energy production, generating 300 megawatts of power from thorium more safely than nuclear energy has ever done. NPCIL’s technical director, Shiv Abhilash Bhardwaj, told the press that such reactors will be so safe they can be built right inside major cities like Mumbai.

The rhetoric is familiar: for decades, thorium has been repeatedly held up as a cheap, clean way forward for nuclear power. Compared with the uranium-based fuel cycles, thorium produces far smaller amounts of radioactive waste elements – including plutonium, which remains dangerous for tens of thousands of years.

But the reality is that there’s nothing new about the AHWR, says Craig Smith, a nuclear engineer at the US Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. Smith says Bhardwaj’s claims that the reactor will be safe enough to build in urban areas simply do not stand up. The reactor will convert thorium to uranium-233, which then splits to produce heat and other elements with short half-lives. If an accident were to occur, this dangerous mix of chemicals could be released into the environment.

A Nuclear-Free, Carbon-Free World is Possible!

Nix nuclear. Chuck coal. Rebuff biofuel. All we need is the wind, the water, and the sun

Article Courtesy: IEEE Spectrum

We don’t need nuclear power, coal, or biofuels. We can get 100 percent of our energy from wind, water, and solar (WWS) power. And we can do it today—efficiently, reliably, safely, sustainably, and economically.
We can get to this WWS world by simply building a lot of new systems for the production, transmission, and use of energy. One scenario that Stanford engineering professor Mark Jacobson and I developed, projecting to 2030, includes:

• 3.8 million wind turbines, 5 megawatts each, supplying 50 percent of the projected total global power demand
• 49 000 solar thermal power plants, 300 MW each, supplying 20 percent
• 40 000 solar photovoltaic (PV) power plants supplying 14 percent
• 1.7 billion rooftop PV systems, 3 kilowatts each, supplying 6 percent
• 5350 geothermal power plants, 100 MW each, supplying 4 percent
• 900 hydroelectric power plants, 1300 MW each, of which 70 percent are already in place, supplying 4 percent
• 720 000 ocean-wave devices, 0.75 MW each, supplying 1 percent
• 490 000 tidal turbines, 1 MW each, supplying 1 percent.

We also need to greatly expand the transmission infrastructure in order to create the large supergrids that will span many regions and often several countries and even continents. And we need to expand production of battery-electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, ships that run on hydrogen fuel cell and battery combinations, liquefied hydrogen aircraft, air- and ground-source heat pumps, electric resistance heating, and hydrogen for high-temperature processes.

Why renewable energy and NOT nuclear is the answer for India’s future energy needs

The nuclear lobby in India has been pushing nuclear energy as safe, clean and a solution to the country’s energy requirements. Now, going even a step further, it is undermining the potential India’s renewable energy sources which is alarming and unacceptable.

The news about Dr. Anil Kakodkar (Ex-Chairman, Dept. of Atomic Energy) heading India’s solar missions is disturbing and flies in the face of democracy and fair policy-making. Renewable energy sources are the main competitor to nuclear power. Even today, the total energy produced through renewables is much higher than nuclear, despite the miniscule R&D budget and subsidies that it receives in comparison to nuclear energy. Dr. Kakodkar, in particular, is known for his discouraging views on solar energy.

The recent issue of the Current Science journal has published an article by S P Sukhatme, Ex-Chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, titled Meeting India’s future needs of electricity through renewable energy sources. Without mentioning the author’s nuclear links, the article first charts outs an inflated energy requirement for the country, then underestimates the potentials of renewable energy and concludes with strongly supporting nuclear energy !

Here is a rigorous rejoinder by Shri Shankar Sharma, a leading energy policy analyst, demonstrating how renewable energy sources, in a decentralised energy environment, are best quipped to provide a reliable, safe and more equitable solution to India’s real energy requirements.

Editor, DiaNuke.org 

Future electricity demand and the critical role of renewable energy sources

Shankar Sharma
Power Policy Analyst

shankar.sharma2005@gmail.com

Preface:
Many attempts have been made to project future electricity demand in the country. One such recent effort in the article “Meeting India’s future needs of electricity through renewable energy sources” by Dr. S. P. Sukhatme of Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay is based on many assumptions, which appear to be unrealistic. The weakness with many of such articles is that they tend to base their inferences on just the dry statistics without really appreciating the context/message behind those numbers.

Assumptions/ inferences in this article, which seem to defy sound logic are:

• the assumption that a projected per capita electricity consumption of 2,000 kWH/annum for India is very frugal;
• the assumption that a per capita consumption of 2,000 kWH/annum would be needed to ensure adequate level of Human Development Index (HDI) in the country;
• the inference that the projected total electricity production requirement of 3,400 Billion Units (or TWH) by 2070;