We Must Switch to Renewable, Clean Power

Los Angeles Times ^ | 08-23-2003 | Bernadette Del Chiaro and V. John White

[boris]

The East Coast blackout last week offers California a valuable lesson in how to improve our own electric system, beginning with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.

As the analysis of this latest blackout unfolds, California should be weary of false solutions put forward by the utility industry.

The solution to our energy problems, East Coast, West Coast and between, is greater energy efficiency and conservation, more renewable energy and a shift to clean, localized power generation.

[boris]

ditor
Los Angeles Times

Sir:

Almost as reprehensible as those who ghoulishly use murders as 'ammunition' against the Second Amendment are those who misuse events like the Northeast blackout to advance a Luddite and socialist political agenda.

Bernadette Del Chiaro and V. John White are among the latter.

They advise us to use wind, photovoltaic, 'biogas' and geothermal sources. The common denominator among these technologies is their high cost and scarcity. The high cost is due to their being dilute. Economically-feasible sources of energy are intense.

The late Dr. Petr Beckmann once remarked that the only reason Robert Redford favored solar power is because only those as rich as Robert Redford could afford it.

Elementary calculations easily show, for example, that supplying California with electricity will require over 150 square miles of solar cells at a cost between $30 billion and $300 billion.

The Luddite vision of "appropriate energy" is suitable for a new feudalism--with the rulers in their solar powered castles and the rest of us serfs in mud huts. They hate the common man's access to energy and long to reserve it for a leftist elite. This is why Professor Beckmann entitled his newsletter "Access to Energy."

Centralized power stations bring economies of scale which simply cannot be realized by a "distributed" network. They can employ topping and bottoming cycles, intercooling and many stages of turbines. This cannot be accomplished locally and still remain cheap and small.

The solution to the nation's energy problems lies in nuclear energy, along with the emerging technology of methane hydrates (clathrates), coal, and non-conventional sources of oil (such as Canada, which has more reserves of oil than the entire Middle East).

The path that Del Chiaro and White want us to follow leads to poverty, drudgery, and ultimately socialism.

--Boris

[boris]

Oh by the way:

Bernadette Del Chiaro
Environment California Research and Policy Center
bernadette@environmentcalifornia.org

V. John White
Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies
info@ceert.org

[dr_who_2]

Quite right. We should only use the electrical grid when the sun is shining and when there's a steady wind. Brilliant.

[spectre]

Fifty new nuclear plants would give this nation clean, safe, efficient, and cheap power for the next 100 years..

Am I holding my breath?

No.

Common sense appears to be out of fashion.

[Sacajaweau]

We had one area here, serviced by a coal fed plant, which did not lose power. It is called the Russell Station and is located on Lake Ontario, just west of the Genesee River so let's think twice about the Nuke plants which not only change the temperature of the water, present a danger for 10 miles around. The stats on the Nuke Plant problems get swept under the rug. It's like the "allowable" turds in tuna. The north has the wind option available and the west has solar panels available. Let's get it together and come up with a REAL solution to breaking the MONOPOLY of the utility companies. They are raping us!!

[cake_crumb]

What we need to do is ignore all the Kyoto rhetoric, ignore those who still think Big Energy rather then Grey Davis was the cause of the California energy crisis, ignore the environazis who's lawsuits have gotten us all into this mess and try new innovations to proven technology in order to sove the energy problem for the next century.

That'll give us time to try perpetual motion experiments and see how those work without shortchanging our energy needs and having a mass die off here like they did in France.

[50sDad]

The north has the wind option available...>/i>

Except, of course, if that wind farm is within the sight of the Kennedy Compound...then it's got to go. As long as the "little people" are the only ones inconvenienced, then it's a great ided, right, Ted?

[donmeaker]

Modeling the distribution and production nets with differential equations leads to a prediction of lots of spikes and consequent outages. Bus tie contactors act as switches to damp out the spikes. The model doesnt care anything to do with how the power is generated. The problem is in the distribution network. When the distribution network went down, production was at 60 percent of capacity.

The amazing thing is that we went 38 years since the last major outage. I fail to see how a power system with generation based on a 9 of 24 hour sun exposure and an inconstant wind can improve things.

Rather, what is needed is additional local generators, which though less efficient (though diesel is pretty darn good!) can act despite the distribution grid in bad times, but act with the grid in good times. That would let the operators open bus tie contactors earlier, with outages even more limited.

As for Biogas, it is called methane. It has 425 btu per cubic foot compared to 650 btu per cubic foot for propane. again, I fail to see how that affects the model, except in reduced efficienty and reduced capacity if existing storage facilities store gas at 2/3rds the energy density.

[aruanan]

The solution to our energy problems, East Coast, West Coast and between, is greater energy efficiency and conservation, more renewable energy and a shift to clean, localized power generation.

What dopes. Using less of something doesn't cause there to be more of it. Besides, as energy efficiency has increased, electrical usage has increased far more. As far as "renewable" energy goes, all available hydroelectric capacity is tapped, geothermal is too scarce to make a difference, solar and wind look attractive only to the extent that the government spends money to subsidize it. The one non-renewable (aside from breeder reactors) energy source with about the best track record in terms of cleanliness and safety is just going to waste if nothing is done to make use of its energy. To let that just decay away out there in the environment without taking advantage of it is an even bigger waste than burning up petroleum and coal (which releases tons of uranium and thorium into the environment per year per 1000 megawatt plant, not to mention a lot of other deadly poisons with no half life at all). Without too much trouble, as far as electrical generation goes, the U.S. could be completely independent if the courts hadn't allowed people with no standing to bring lawsuits halting construction of nuclear power plants.

Just thought I'd vent and add to your already excellent letter to the editor. Petr Beckman bump!

[cake_crumb]

"As for Biogas, it is called methane."

Let's not forget that the same people calling for us to only use power when the wind is blowing and the sun is shining also wish to tax and therebye regulate the SOURCE of renewable methane. Livestock.

Someone from New Zealand said that their wonderful leader taxes livestock in jus this way, in order to lessen (because farmers can't afford to keep as much livestock) their flatulent contribution to global warming. Al Gore wanted to do the same thing, though HIS rant about controlling livestock emissions was edited by the media to the more palatable "cow burps".

I'd like to know how hte author reconciles such blatant contradictions in the policies they force us to make?

Your more logical and methodical breakdown proves this article is not about science, but politics as usual.

[aruanan]

so let's think twice about the Nuke plants which not only change the temperature of the water, present a danger for 10 miles around. The stats on the Nuke Plant problems get swept under the rug. It's like the "allowable" turds in tuna.

Not true. Nuclear electrical generation is far cleaner and safer than coal. As far as changing the temperature of the water--ha ha ha ha ha ha! Yeah, and it allows all sorts of fish to prosper in many areas and at times of the year that they couldn't before. This is a benefit, not a drawback of nuclear power. Nearly all of the radiation "leaks" in the U.S. have been of minute quantities having the radioactivity level found in salad oil.

[Sacajaweau]

The "elite" town of our area said they didn't want to see windmills and apparently prefer to gaze at metal "robots" carrying power lines all over the place.

Of course, they're the same idiots that said they didn't want to see a water tank....Solution...We painted the tanks blue to match the sky. Guess they wanted the water bad enough.

[Dr Warmoose]

Fifty new nuclear plants would give this nation clean, safe, efficient, and cheap power for the next 100 years..

Actually the service life of a nuclear power plant is way below 100 years.

[TRY ONE]

"Quite right. We should only use the electrical grid when the sun is shining and when there's a steady wind. Brilliant."

Solar & Wind are alright but Nuks do it all night!

[hadaclueonce]

The problem with wind generation is that the best locations are not close to major transmission paths. Hince they build the wind farms and get paid not to run all the units(within ERCOT). Being paid not to generate plus the Tax credits, is a sweethart deal.
EVERY TIME you get politics involved, some gravey sucking pig is in it for them selves.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

We Must Switch to Renewable, Clean Power

So let's start building those nuclear plants!

[Gritty]

Looking for cheap, plentiful energy?

Anything into Oil (Change trash & sewage to oil for $15@barrel)

[Dr Warmoose]

so let's think twice about the Nuke plants which not only change the temperature of the water, present a danger for 10 miles around.

Actually higher temperatures are beneficial. I can site real life examples. I would like to hear of how a nuclear power plant presents a danger for 10 miles around, when it poses even far less of a danger to those working inside a nuclear power plant than to those who live in an energy efficient home in Colorado.

The stats on the Nuke Plant problems get swept under the rug. It's like the "allowable" turds in tuna.

What kind of verifiable facts are you referring to? Like the inherent cost efficiencies, the zero deaths related to nuclear power generation, the zero levels of greenhouse gases, the perfect functioning of containment buildings ala Three Mile island. What kind of "stats" are you referring to? The ones that are verifiable clearly demonstrate that anything other then nuclear is costly, wastefull and more dangerous.

How many birds have died from the Eagle Cuisinarts? How about the racket made from these things, and the fact that large scale windmills are the most expensive form of energy production?

The number two cause of deaths (following motor-vehicle collisions) is "falls". If you have been out to a solar farm you will discover that there are plenty of motor mounted solar panels and plenty of elevated mirrors that need to kept free of dirt, dust and grime. The usual way of dealing with this problem is to climb up there and polish the mirrors. So now we have a whole new sector of people who are needlessly exposed to the increased risk of death by falling off these mirrors. I don't think that it is even necessary to bring up the silliness of solar panel energy that is only on-line and marginally usefull for a quarter of the day.

[Redcloak]

All together now...

No  Build more nukes!
No  Build more nukes!
No  Build more nukes!
No  Build more nukes!
No  Build more nukes!
No  Build more nukes!

[dr_who_2]

I rember that NASA under the Carter administration was responsible for this big, experimental, and non-functional windmill that was somewhere in the blue ridge mountains. Of course it
was typical of liberals like Carter to tip at windmills, but
that's beside the point. If certain parts of the country have
no shortage of wind or certain lucky individuals would like
to live off the grid ( without any penalties, assuming there
are any for some reason ), great.