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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

PamW

(1,825 posts)
5. 100% WRONG as ALWAYS
Sat Jul 27, 2013, 03:05 PM
Jul 2013

Above, kristopher state:
In sum these changes mean a computerized "smart grid" that can watch power flow down to the single kilowatt level

As per always, kristopher is just "blowing smoke", in his statement above. First, kristopher identifies the need to watch power flow "down to the single kilowatt level", in essence hypothesizing an potential error of a single kilowatt.

BZZZZT!! WRONG!! ERROR!!! ERROR!!!

If the error in your measurement is 1 kilowatt, then that means the system would allow a mismatch of generation to load and loss of a killowatt. In a single second, that would mean the system would either create or destroy 1000 Joules of energy - depending on whether generation lagged or exceeded demand/loss.

Do you honestly "think" that Mother Nature will let you get away with either creating or destroying 1000 Joules?

The Law of Conservation of Energy does NOT allow a mismatch as large as 1000 Joules.

There are two failings that non-dispatchable renewables have relative to their dispatchable counterparts. One failing is the inability to sense load. Dispatchable generators like coal, gas, hydro, and nuclear; have generators that are "synched" to the power line, and hence can "sense" the load via Lenz's Law. ( Go look up Lenz's Law in any physics textbook ). If you want to pick up a bucket of rocks, you don't need an "app" on your iPhone that tells you how much the rocks weigh, and hence how much force you need to supply. You can "feel" the weight of the rocks when you pick them up; and provide the necessary level of force.

Non-dispatchable renewables like solar and wind do NOT have generators that are "syched" to the power line, and hence can't "feel" the load via Lenz's Law. That is not a fatal flaw; that issue can be addressed. That is what a "smart grid" is all about. The "smart grid" receives the electric energy demand from each of the loads on the grid and sums up those loads/demands to report to the generators on the grid. The "smart grid" is analogous to the iPhone app that tells you how much the rocks weigh above.

The other, more serious, failing of non-dispatchable renewables is the lack of a "throttle". If your "smart grid" or whatever reports the load that a given generator has to supply; how does one adjust the energy produced to match the demand.

Again, dispatchable generators have a feedback system that senses the load / demand via Lenz's Law; the added demand results in a great "back-torque" in the generator, and the plant has a feedback system to provide more power to the generator to compensate. The feedback system opens the throttle valve on the turbines, and in case of coal or gas, also regulates the fuel flow valve; and in the case of a reactor, inherent temperature feedbacks, principally the moderator/coolant temperature feedback adjusts reactor power.

Non-dispatchable renewables like wind and solar do NOT have throttles; which is why they are "non-dispatchable" by definition. How does one demand more energy from Mother Nature than what she is offering at the time?

When the renewables "engineers" accomplish their deluded attempt to make demands on Mother Nature; let me know.

PamW

Beneby makes an excellent point about 'discreet' customers cprise Jul 2013 #1
I assume he meant "discrete". BlueStreak Jul 2013 #15
jpak doesn't understand the issue PamW Jul 2013 #2
jpak understands the issue well kristopher Jul 2013 #4
Litany of scientific ERRORS by kristopher PamW Jul 2013 #9
Wow. caraher Jul 2013 #33
Yes, isn't it though? kristopher Jul 2013 #42
Well said. wercal Jul 2013 #26
WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! jpak Jul 2013 #43
Right, variable renewables are not a significant technical hurdle kristopher Jul 2013 #3
100% WRONG as ALWAYS PamW Jul 2013 #5
More ravings? kristopher Jul 2013 #6
BALONEY!!! 100% WRONG AGAIN!! PamW Jul 2013 #10
You spend 8 paragraphs BSing then 3 paragraphs admitting I'm right kristopher Jul 2013 #11
More BALONEY!!! PamW Jul 2013 #12
Only you talk of an all wind/all solar/or all solar wind grid. kristopher Jul 2013 #13
100% WRONG as ALWAYS PamW Jul 2013 #14
Wow, you really got me. kristopher Jul 2013 #18
OH BROTHER!!! - now LAME excuses... PamW Jul 2013 #20
Greg/Pam - Apparently you can't read kristopher Jul 2013 #21
I can READ!! PamW Jul 2013 #23
An litany of evolving mistakes, misunderstandings ... kristopher Jul 2013 #24
Again, .... oldhippie Jul 2013 #25
Sp Greg/Pam had to call in the peanut gallery again, huh? kristopher Jul 2013 #31
Why are you arguing about a theoretical problem that could only possibly occur BlueStreak Jul 2013 #16
Because he's dedicated himself to harassing me. kristopher Jul 2013 #19
This stuff is about politics, not about technology or science BlueStreak Jul 2013 #22
"no compelling reason ever to build (or extend) any nuclear or coal plant -- ever" kristopher Jul 2013 #44
It really is remarkable, yet completely missed (or ignored) by so many BlueStreak Jul 2013 #46
You mention V2G wercal Jul 2013 #28
It is an economic benefit to the EV owner kristopher Jul 2013 #30
I don't like the numbers wercal Jul 2013 #32
No, not time of day pricing kristopher Jul 2013 #34
You need more data and less wishful thinking wercal Jul 2013 #35
I'll take the first one FBaggins Jul 2013 #36
Well that's an entirely different concept that has been brought up here before wercal Jul 2013 #38
Uh-oh, kris is not going to like ..... oldhippie Jul 2013 #37
Ready for blast-off wercal Jul 2013 #39
You say "V2G is really a turn off for me" kristopher Jul 2013 #40
I'm going to borrow a phrase from my prior post: wercal Jul 2013 #45
That will make manufacturer warranties very "interesting" BlueStreak Jul 2013 #47
Interesting question kristopher Jul 2013 #48
The whole V2G thing makes absolutely no sense to me BlueStreak Jul 2013 #49
What do you think they use the batteries for? kristopher Jul 2013 #50
You really have to start backing up what you say wercal Jul 2013 #51
Right, the numbers are vast BlueStreak Jul 2013 #55
I believe elevating water is being used in Portugal right now wercal Jul 2013 #62
Hydrogen efficiency BlueStreak Jul 2013 #63
I believe the efficiency is currently 40%... wercal Jul 2013 #64
The economics of storage systems get better as we shift to intermittent sources BlueStreak Jul 2013 #65
They aren't going to pay me enough for that to make any sense BlueStreak Jul 2013 #53
Ah, I see you are actually a twin kristopher Jul 2013 #54
What?? BlueStreak Jul 2013 #56
Bluestreak and I most certainly are not the same wercal Jul 2013 #57
Be careful who you counsel ..... oldhippie Jul 2013 #58
Well I've tried to be polite... wercal Jul 2013 #59
Yes you have oldhippie Jul 2013 #60
Ah...I see wercal Jul 2013 #61
We have a winner wercal Jul 2013 #52
the issue is price quadrature Jul 2013 #7
That's true. It has been modeled in detail. kristopher Jul 2013 #8
And you don't have to stop at 100% BlueStreak Jul 2013 #17
In fact you can't FBaggins Jul 2013 #27
That 300% is a nonsense number, for a case that will never exist in the real world BlueStreak Jul 2013 #29
I agree wholeheartedly with all but the last sentence of your post kristopher Jul 2013 #41
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Intermittency Of Renewabl...»Reply #5