Nuclear energy is more expensive than renewables, CSIRO report finds

What is the reserve capacity of your current grid?

 

This is just one aspect of the problem of demanding one solution. NOBODY is proposing one solution for electric energy

A combination of having some independence provided by solar as well as being connected to the grid has advantages over grid-only or solar-only. The time period you can live with no grid can be increased by a home battery.

Remember Texas? You can't fully rely on the grid without accepting the risks the grid poses.

 

Assuming you have a grid that can handle the demand; trusting wind, solar and batteries is shaky based on the scale of potential demand.

and yet you're arguing Texas on a wider scale.

 

But you should be able to fully rely on your grid. That's what you're paying for.

 

Our US legacy manufacturers say things like "we need better battery technology to make a good EV" and "we have a plan to beat Tesla in 5 years, but it doesn't include producing a quality EV today", "demand is low today" (meaning they're getting beaten in the marketplace), etc.

These are suicide packs. Even Tesla is advancing as fast as they can to keep ahead of China.

And, there is reasonable evidence that others of the 90 EV manufacturers in China will reduce Tesla's market share.

Even today, entries from Volvo, MG, Opel, and others who SOUND western are made in China through joint ownership agreements, etc.

 

No, I'm arguing Iowa on a wider scale.

And, it appears you are worried about factors that are not show to be problematic in Iowa.

Texas screwed up and then blamed it on wind! Also, they screwed up by thinking they can cut themselves off the two major grids that cover the rest of the USA, making it hard to sell electricity to needy Texas customers.

 

At present the battery banks do not last very long

At present. But this can be supplemented with green hydrogen or green ammonia or iron or vanadium batteries or…….

https://royalsociety.org/topics-pol...fuel – ammonia can,fuel oil in marine engines.

 

Sure, but it's all speculation so far; at least at the scale required to back up a realistic size grid. The costs and availability of raw materials are still humongous road blocks.

 

And yet South Australia did it. Admittedly they also have natural gas generators feeding into the system still but these only kick in when the wind power drops and given WHERE SA is that is not often

 

Remember that my argument is that Iowa is a successful state with nearing 2/3 renewable energy, including more than 50% and growing being wind energy.

For THAT, Iowa had the supplies they need.

 

I think we want over that. I seem to remember you weren't correct.

 

Exactly! Australia is making sound choices that are successful.

So, is our state of Iowa, even though it is certainly not in a warm climate during much of the year.

The arguments put forward by BigOil are seriously weak, purposefully ignoring what even WE are accomplishing in some places.

 

Nope! Hornsdale has been going for YEARS and making nice profit. Australia is mining Vanadium and we will be selling batteries shortly and old Twiggy Forrest is about to corner a lucrative market

https://www.afr.com/companies/minin...lion-in-green-energy-projects-20231114-p5ejrm

 

Feel free to make your case.

 

The link seems to indicate this is just starting.

 

US legacy manufacturers also have the luxury of waiting until June when Loper obliterates EPA's ability to make ICE illegal.

Then it really won't matter what the third world decides to do.

 

Current EV sales are not affected by that law or other laws that are not in effect. Laws have to be in effect first.

Trying to protect legacy auto from Chinese auto manufacturing by trying to refuse them entry is just sad.

And, China is arguably ahead of the rest of the world in EV automotive design and manufacturing, including Tesla.

Tesla still has winning sales, but EVs from China are showing serious advancement.

 

Backed by a cool billion

This is just one initiative others are out there. Change is coming

 

Wrong again. It isn't about any "law" going into effect.

It's about EPA losing its ability to regulate CO2.

Look it up. Even here if you need to. I've explained it several times.

 

This is what happens when intermittent wind and solar don't have fossil fuel or nuclear back-up.
How did Alberta wind up facing blackouts in the extreme cold?
Eric Worrall


“… at this time of year, we don’t have any solar power … Over the last couple of days, the wind has dropped off dramatically. …”

 

I would hope that you would pay a bit more attention to the math associated with your argument. Specifically the units of the figures associated with your claims. I have shown that Iowa has not moved 2/3 of their energy to "renewable" sources. Despite the dispute of their own data presented as being 53% of electrical production, the big discrepancy is the difference between electrical energy use and total energy use.

I did not do that. Again, please pay attention to the units. I compared electrical energy usage with total energy usage. It is clear that the total amount of energy used in Iowa is exponentially greater than the fraction of electrical energy that is produced through wind generation. Now I will grant you that some of that total energy is used producing the remaining 47% of electrical supply, but that still again does not account for the majority of the energy used in Iowa. The vast majority of energy is used in industrial and transportation use.

I really have to emphasize the scale of the energy you're talking about right now. This oil consumption vastly exceeds the energy capacity of the current electrical supply in Iowa. You're asking to float a battleship in a swimming pool.

Choose, or be forced to choose? Because if it's a choice why aren't they making that choice?

Please pay attention to the math. It's exactly the same scale. The fraction of electrical energy produced by wind in proportion to the energy produced by hydrocarbons is nearly exactly the same scale. This is my point. You would need a 10^3 increase in the scale of the electrical grid to match the scale of the energy burned by transportation and industry.

This has nothing to do with how you feel. It has to do with the data that's making you feel things. When you focus on residential energy use you are focusing on such a tiny fraction of energy use that economization of this energy has very little impact on fossil fuel consumption.

 

Again you are blaming a lack of foresight to ensure adequate infrastructure on green energy

 

The problem is green energy is not capable of doing it all by itself as the greenies tend to imply. You still need to maintain full fossil fuel baseload so if anything, power gets more expensive with the addition of green energy. Quite the paradox for green fanboys and girls.

Apparently Alberta bought the hype and retired fossil fuel baseload. Sucks to be them.

 

We have Iowa weather, not Alberta weather. And, I've NEVER suggested a single source energy strategy.

What I HAVE suggested is that Iowa demonstrates being 2/3 renewable energy - over 50% wind and growing in that direction.

They do have fossil fuel backup. You haven't seen me suggesting that's unfortunate - even though their fossil fuel backup is COAL!!

Their energy policy is something that significant areas of the USA can move toward, especially in that wind (and solar) can deliver less costly energy.


You haven't suggested that Iowa has made a mistake.

 

Mate! The current grid has no reserve capacity! If there was a Carrington event tomorrow you could be out of power for months!

https://theconversation.com/a-large...et-an-electrical-engineer-explains-how-177982