Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
6. So you believe in "The Baseload Myth"?
Mon Apr 9, 2012, 09:17 PM
Apr 2012
1. variable renewable sources of electricity (windpower and photovoltaics) can provide little or no reliable electricity because they are not “baseload”—able to run all the time;
2. those renewable sources require such enormous amounts of land, hundreds of times more than nuclear power does, that they’re environmentally unacceptable;
3. all options, including nuclear power, are needed to combat climate change; and
4. nuclear power’s economics matter little because governments must use it anyway to protect the climate.


These myths (or falsehoods if you prefer) are promoted by the entrenched energy interests that wish to preserve the present system built around centralized thermal generation.

The grist article lays out for you the basic idea of how two different systems work; centralized thermal and distributed renewables. The article is based on a HUGE body of work around the world that shows without any doubt that your belief in how the energy system operates is not an accurate representation of reality. You are taking some characteristics from individual generators and improperly using that individual generation profile as a model on which to form your beliefs about how the system works.

That leads to false conclusions. These false conclusions are promoted by the interests that control today's energy systems and resources.

Once you explore and incorporate all of the technologies available (not just wind and solar) and look at how they actually work together, you'll find that large scale storage needs are actually only in the range of about 4-5% of total grid capacity. As an example of what you aren't considering, it turns out that a great deal of end use power is well suited to performing the 'load-shifting' role that you see for storage. For example, home heating systems and electric drive transportation are both set to be significant enablers of an all renewable grid. And the thing is, we already buy these systems so the "storage" value is stacked on top of the normal value we assign these products.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

obsolete technology. end our obsession with war and go alternative energy big time nt msongs Apr 2012 #1
As usual, public opinion lags the science longship Apr 2012 #2
Why do you think we need nuclear power... kristopher Apr 2012 #3
Several reasons longship Apr 2012 #4
So you believe in "The Baseload Myth"? kristopher Apr 2012 #6
Okay! How do you store energy? longship Apr 2012 #9
You say "this is basic science"? kristopher Apr 2012 #10
Jesus Christ! You still don't understand real time demand! longship Apr 2012 #13
I understand real time demand extremely well. kristopher Apr 2012 #15
You don't understand the main issue here longship Apr 2012 #18
I told you the answer - it is the same answer we use now, a grid. kristopher Apr 2012 #20
Where is the fucking storage in this fucking grid? longship Apr 2012 #21
I asked where you are getting your information kristopher Apr 2012 #22
Okay, let's assume that longship Apr 2012 #25
You clearly do not "hate nuclear power" kristopher Apr 2012 #26
What forms of renewable energy do you have at your house? XemaSab Apr 2012 #33
I agree that we will need nuclear power johnd83 Apr 2012 #5
Agreed. Nuke power tech is antiquated. longship Apr 2012 #7
They have been researched. kristopher Apr 2012 #8
Agreed in practice, but not in principle longship Apr 2012 #11
Thorium has a host of its own problems kristopher Apr 2012 #12
That is precisely why we need To fund research longship Apr 2012 #16
Solar and wind do not have to do it alone kristopher Apr 2012 #19
Propaganda? longship Apr 2012 #23
You aren't quoting science, you are quoting propaganda. kristopher Apr 2012 #24
You obviously do not want to have a meaningful discussion longship Apr 2012 #27
You aren't engaging in a discussion. kristopher Apr 2012 #28
These are my view of the facts. Tell me where I am mistaken. longship Apr 2012 #29
I've already answered that... kristopher Apr 2012 #30
Blah, blah, blah, blah longship Apr 2012 #31
The current grid operates almost entirely on stored energy... kristopher Apr 2012 #32
The fucking grid does not store power longship Apr 2012 #34
And yet you DO RECOMMEND AND ENDORSE NUCLEAR kristopher Apr 2012 #35
That's enough longship Apr 2012 #36
That's a lot easier than actually addressing the information... kristopher Apr 2012 #37
Voyager is not really a good example johnd83 Apr 2012 #14
the real problem is the enormous cost... of nuclear energy kristopher Apr 2012 #17
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»The 30-year itch America’...»Reply #6