A stable grid needs stable power sources. Which wind and solar are not and never will be.
The principle Germany discovered (and of late has abandoned) is that for every 100 MW your grid gets from “renewable” sources, you need 80 MW from conventional power plants operating in a condition called “spinning reserve” to pick up the slack when “green” falters to preserve the grid’s stability. Which means the “hidden” cost of a green grid is paying for the construction and operation of a conventional, non-green “ghost grid” capable of meeting 80% of your power needs all by its lonesome.
Which means the green grid will never be a stand-alone proposition (if you value a stable grid) and always will be significantly more expensive than a 100% conventional grid, and actually won’t be green at all because it requires the construction and operation of redundant power sources. Which means the dream of a “green grid” is impractical and little but virtue signaling.
Paal Gulli wrote:
“
A stable grid needs stable power sources. Which wind and solar are not and never will be.
The principle Germany discovered (and of late has abandoned) is that for every 100 MW your grid gets from “renewable” sources, you need 80 MW from conventional power plants operating in a condition called “spinning reserve” to pick up the slack when “green” falters to preserve the grid’s stability. Which means the “hidden” cost of a green grid is paying for the construction and operation of a conventional, non-green “ghost grid” capable of meeting 80% of your power needs all by its lonesome.
Which means the green grid will never be a stand-alone proposition (if you value a stable grid) and always will be significantly more expensive than a 100% conventional grid, and actually won’t be green at all because it requires the construction and operation of redundant power sources. Which means the dream of a “green grid” is impractical and little but virtue signaling.
“
Many thanks for the info !!