People who think solar and wind power can perform like the traditional power generation stations are idiots. Besides, windmills and solar panels are a waste of real estate as well as an eyesore. Many scenic areas have bee destroyed by windmills.
Why is it these projects remind me of a villain’s grand plan for a “power plant” in Batman Returns (1992)?
Jerry told Gavin that his electric train has to run at night.
And you have to dispose of the L-ion batteries after you use them. That will be a major problem, and add to the cost.
Imagine the battery fire!!
Add me to your list of “puzzled” observers of California’s Moss Landing Power Plant(s): 6-7 plants are apparently continuing, but 4-5 are being mothballed according to a 2017 article. Then that article continues as if California faced a “continuing electric power overload (too much electricity available for the demand!) and NOT a deficiet of power. 2017 economic drivel from Obama’s recession-long drawdown of the national and California economies? No feedback yet (in 2017 remember!) of Newsome’s inept green policies that ruined PG&E’s power line maintenance and clearing budgets between 2016 and 2019’s fires?
Regardless, PG&E was required/resolved in 2017 to keep paying 1,000,000.00 per year in worthless emmission’s fees to Monterey government to keep the 4-5 smokestack (and natural-draft smokestacks are rare for a gas-powered plant!) “active”. Further, there are very, very few natural gas-powered straight-through boiler-and-steam power plants in ANY state!
The much greater efficiency of a heat recovery steam generator using the exhaust heat from a gas turbine plant (63-66% efficient) compared to the 41-43% efficiency of a gas-burning straight-through steam plant means they never were effective once NG gas turbine HRSG technology took off in the early 2000’s.
Something is going on here that is not being made public - from both PG&E and Monterey governments and California Air Resources Board.
A hybrid between a super-cap and a lithium battery, without the downside of either. Interesting, if not a fantasy:
https://newatlas.com/energy/toomen-powercapacitors-kurt-energy-high-density-supercapacitors/
Think of our energy supply needs like a cake. All solar and wind power can ever hope to be is the frosting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium_redox_battery
Snip....
“The main advantages of the vanadium redox battery are that it can offer almost unlimited energy capacity simply by using larger electrolyte storage tanks; it can be left completely discharged for long periods with no ill effects; if the electrolytes are accidentally mixed, the battery suffers no permanent damage; a single state of charge between the two electrolytes avoids the capacity degradation due to a single cell in non-flow batteries; the electrolyte is aqueous and inherently safe and non-flammable;[10] and the generation 3 formulation using a mixed acid solution developed by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory operates over a wider temperature range[11] allowing for passive cooling.[12] VRFBs can be used at depth of discharge (DOD) around 90% and more, i.e. deeper DODs than solid-state batteries (e.g. lithium-based and sodium-based batteries, which are usually specified with DOD=80%). In addition, VRFBs exhibit very long cycle lives: most producers specify cycle durability in excess of 15,000-20,000 charge/discharge cycles. These values are far beyond the cycle lives of solid-state batteries, which is usually in the order of 4,000-5,000 charge/discharge cycles. Consequently, the levelized cost of energy (LCOE, i.e. the system cost divided by the usable energy, the cycle life, and round-trip efficiency) of present VRFB systems is typically in the order of a few tens of $ cents or € cents, namely much lower than the LCOEs of equivalent solid-state batteries and close to the targets of $0.05 and €0.05, stated by the US Department of Energy and the European Commission Strategic Energy Technology (SET) Plan, respectively.[13]
The main disadvantages with vanadium redox technology are a relatively poor energy-to-volume ratio in comparison with standard storage batteries, and the relatively poor round trip efficiency. Furthermore, the aqueous electrolyte makes the battery heavy and therefore only useful for stationary applications. Another disadvantage is the relatively high toxicity of oxides of vanadium (see vanadium § Safety). “
More at link.
Snip
“VRB Energy, a maker of flow batteries headquartered in Canada and owned by a metal resources and mining company, said the first phase of a 40MWh flow battery project in China has now been commissioned.
VRB Energy (VRB), 82% owned by High Power Exploration, a base metals-focused exploration company led by noted mining financier Robert Friedland, provided Energy-Storage.news with a progress update from Hubei Province at the end of last week.
The company said that it has now successfully commissioned a 3MW / 12MWh vanadium redox flow battery energy storage project which represents Phase 1 of the Hubei Zaoyang Utility-scale Solar and Storage Integration Demonstration Project, set to be 10MW / 40MWh when completed. It represents the latest step since the previous update on the project, when the first 250kW / 1MWh “