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

PamW

(1,825 posts)
17. Conservation of Energy
Tue Oct 22, 2013, 11:06 AM
Oct 2013

caraher,

Notice that everything you quote above is talking about how to meet the 20% that the NAS says we can do!

Evidently you didn't read the whole report if you missed the parts where they told you that 20% was the limit.

The main problem is the Law of Conservation of Energy. The generators on the grid have to match the demand instant by instant; not averaged over a day or a few hours; but by the instant.

Suppose the renewable generators are putting out 1 Gw(e) = 1,000,000,000 watts. However, suppose the demand goes up by just 1 watt; so the demand is 1,000,000,001 watts. Suppose the renewables are "maxed out" - they are generating all the energy that they are receiving from Mother Nature. It's just that the demand exceeds that by 1 watt.

Therefore, in a single second, the renewable generators will have put 1,000,000,000 Joules of energy into the grid. However, the load will have received 1,000,000,001 Joules of energy from the grid. In other words, the load will have received 1 Joule more than the renewable generators provided.

Where did that extra 1 Joule of energy come from? The generators didn't create it. The grid can't create it.

It's a violation of the Law of Conservation of Energy - it is creating energy out of nothing.

Mother Nature won't allow that; and before she lets that happen; she will COLLAPSE the grid because it's about to violate Conservation of Energy.

This is what the "greenies" don't tell you; their system can't respond to demand like the dispatchable power sources of coal, gas, hydro and nuclear can. The renewables need the dispatchable power sources of coal, gas, hydro, and nuclear to do the load following that renewables are INCAPABLE of doing. In order for the system to be stable; the dispatchable load followers have to out number the non-dispatchable renewables by about 4:1; hence 80% dispatchable generators, and 20% non-dispatchable renewables.

It's all there in the report. Evidently, you didn't understand it when you read it. That's why having a degree in the sciences is necessary.

See also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispatchable_generation

The NAS report doesn't present the 12-20% as a limit; besides nuclear power exceeds the 20% now; and in the recent past nuclear exceeded 25%.

The good thing about science is that it is true, whether or not you believe in it.
--Neil deGrasse Tyson

PamW

Recommendations

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

Wonderful. Cleita Oct 2013 #1
Some governments see things in perspective.. PamW Oct 2013 #2
Find another way to boil water. wundermaus Oct 2013 #3
I'll let a scientist tell you what the problem is... PamW Oct 2013 #4
And I'll Let Max Planck rebut: Demeter Oct 2013 #5
You mean we have to let a generation of environmentalists die out? PamW Oct 2013 #6
NO, I mean we have to let a generation of nuclear sell-outs die off Demeter Oct 2013 #7
Sweetheart deal on price controls FogerRox Oct 2013 #8
£92.50 is the level they've set muriel_volestrangler Oct 2013 #11
The prediction for gas when the plant comes online is £74 FBaggins Oct 2013 #18
That's a sweetheart deal? FBaggins Oct 2013 #19
It's a lot less than offshore wind is getting Yo_Mama Oct 2013 #22
Then the analogy doesn't hold.... PamW Oct 2013 #9
No scientist would pervert a study like you have here. kristopher Oct 2013 #10
WRONG! PamW Oct 2013 #12
The credentials required are English language comprehension caraher Oct 2013 #14
WRONG too!! PamW Oct 2013 #15
Specifically which laws of physics are being violated? caraher Oct 2013 #16
Conservation of Energy PamW Oct 2013 #17
20% is at most a rough limit with no grid upgrades and no storage caraher Oct 2013 #20
That's not "at most"... it's exactly what they're saying. FBaggins Oct 2013 #21
Try to find the 1992 National Academy Energy Study PamW Oct 2013 #24
Well said & well sourced. FogerRox Oct 2013 #26
Well said K. FogerRox Oct 2013 #27
So many assumptions... I am sad for you. wundermaus Oct 2013 #23
So is the Hindenberg PamW Oct 2013 #25
Look, the only way we can sustain modern industrial society without fossil fuels is nuclear power. hunter Oct 2013 #13
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Britain to build Europe's...»Reply #17