I tried to send this yesterday but it seems to have failed to go.  Apologies if 
this is a duplicate.
Gene

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Eugene Coyle <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Structure of the energy system: fossil vs renewables
> Date: March 24, 2012 2:22:20 PM PDT
> To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]>
> 
> Hans,
> 
>       The issues you are addressing are much more complicated than the sketch 
> you've made -- not that you don't recognize that.
>         It would be helpful to you, probably, to find and spend some time 
> locally with a person familar with the operation of the Utah P &L system 
> there in Salt Lake City.  I have a friend that spends much of the year in 
> Salt Lake City.  I'll ask her if she would be willing to talk with you.  
> Otherwise a staff member at the utility commission or at the consumer office, 
> located in the same building as the commission, might be willing to spend a 
> few hours with you.
> 
> Here's a quick example of an issue you might discuss.  Perhaps you have 
> overlooked the importance of seasonal differences in stressing diurnal.  The 
> Pacific Northwest has excess hydro capacity in the summer time.  This is base 
> load hydro (also called "run of the river") and in the Northwest the capacity 
> exceeds what the region uses.  It is economical to export that excess rather 
> than simply deactive the turbines and let the water run into the sea.  Much 
> of that excess is exported into California on a Direct Current transmission 
> line built for that purpose.  California returns the power in the winter when 
> the water flows in the Northwest are reduced.
> 
> Utah plays a big part in this swap of seasonal power from the Pacific 
> Northwest into the Los Angeles load center.  Transmission lines from the 
> Northwest run into the Utah Power and Light area and other lines run from 
> there into what is effectively the Los Angeles area.  The hydro power from 
> the Northwest, you might think, flows over those lines to Los Angeles.  But 
> the customers in Utah would object -- saying "we want that cheap hydro for 
> ourselves."  So Utah P &L runs its coal plants, and sells that power to LA at 
> marginal cost plus a mark-up (often priced on "split savings".)  And then 
> Utah P&L says to its local customers "you are getting the hydro we import 
> from the Northwest, and that's cheap, and what we are sending to Los Angeles 
> is the more expensive power from our coal plants.  And, Utah P &L would add, 
> "by running the coal plants even though our own load can't utilize them when 
> we are importing the cheap hydro, we are spreading the fixed costs over all 
> those kilowatt hours that LA is buying, so that lowers your rates as well."
> 
> Utah Power & Light used to have a vice president named Dean Bryner.  He was a 
> trained nuclear power plant guy who successfully kept UP&L out of the nuclear 
> biz.  And because UP&L was taking a cut of the money from the Northwest power 
> going to LA, studies of transmission lines down the west coast to strength 
> the direct swap of power without giving a toll to UP&L were called "the Dean 
> Bryner by-pass."  He's probably not around to chat with, but maybe someone at 
> UP&L would spend some time with you.
> 
> That's a long story to say that things are more complicated than the 
> Wikipedia entry tells about the various types of power plants.
> 
> One thing I would also stress is that Transmission and Generation, while 
> complementary in getting power from a generating station to the load, can and 
> should be thought of as sustitutes for each other (as you do in your post.)  
> But in planning systems they should always be thought of as substitutes, as 
> well as necessary for simply moving power.
> 
> As I said, I'll check with my friend there in Salt Lake City to see if she's 
> in town and has some time to chat with you if you would like to do that.  Her 
> knowledge is pretty deep, and solid.
> 
> Gene
> 
> On Mar 24, 2012, at 11:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
>> 
>> It has often been said that renewable energy needs a
>> different infrastructure than fossil or nuclear energy.
>> Here is an attempt to spell out what this means.
>> 
>> Right now electricity generation can be split into base
>> load, load following, and peak load generators.
>> 
>> Base load is always turned on (except for maintenance) and
>> covers the minimum demand.  It must have high reliability
>> and low marginal cost, ie cheap (dirty) fuel and it must be
>> large scale to get economies of scale, which requires heavy
>> equipment.  This makes it difficult to increase or decrease
>> electricity output on the fly.  But since its capacity
>> factor is high it can have high capital outlays.  It is
>> typically coal and nuclear.
>> 
>> Load following plants can easily be started and regulated to
>> account for the variability of the load.  This requires
>> lighter equipment and since it is not always on, its
>> marginal cost is not so important, it can be simpler
>> equipment using more expensive fuel.  It is typically
>> natural gas.
>> 
>> Peak load power plants cover exceptional needle peaks in
>> demand, but most of the time they are turned off.  They are
>> typically diesel.
>> 
>> More information about this at
>> http://www.grist.org/renewable-energy/2011-05-26-how-to-get-to-a-fully-renewable-power-system
>> and
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_following_power_plant
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Some renewables are base load (hydro and geothermal) or
>> dispatchable (hydro and biofuels), therefore they fit into
>> the above framework.
>> 
>> But the main renewables, wind and solar, are neither base
>> load (because they are intermittent) nor load following
>> (because they are not dispatchable). On the other hand they
>> have practically zero marginal costs and high capital costs.
>> 
>> With increasing penetration of wind and solar energy, a
>> series of things happen:
>> 
>> (1) Since it becomes more difficult to adjust electricity
>> supply to demand, it becomes more important to adjust demand
>> to supply, i.e.  demand side management (DSM).  DSM is
>> already relevant today for peak shaving, will become even
>> more relevant in the future and it will require a smart grid
>> and smart appliances.
>> 
>> (2) base load will become more and more uneconomical because
>> it will happen more and more often that all demand is
>> covered by renewables, which have lower marginal cost than
>> base load.  In the future energy system base load plants
>> are of little use.
>> 
>> (3) Instead of base load or load following, fossil fuels
>> (especially natural gas) will be needed for "residual load"
>> which is highly dispatchable. It is like peak load because
>> it only takes a minute or two to start up or shut down, in
>> order to cover demand when the sun does not shine or the
>> wind does not blow, but it must be more efficient and
>> cleaner and cheaper than diesel because it will be needed
>> much more often.
>> 
>> (4) More and more often,  total renewable electricity
>> generation will exceed total demand.  This electricity will
>> be available for energy storage, so that in the long run the
>> residual load does not come from fossil natural gas but from
>> energy stored during the times of excess renewable supply.
>> Now energy storage can take many forms, some of them
>> unexpected.
>> 
>> (5) Transmission: With the present fossil-fuel-powered
>> system, transmission lines from the large-scale fossil fuel
>> or nuclear power plants to the consumers are needed.  This
>> transmission and distribution network has tree structure:
>> electricity always flows in one direction, from the
>> generator to the consumers.  Some renewables are
>> distributed, they are close to the consumption and need no
>> transmission at all but a more intelligent distribution
>> system; others are large scale (concentrating solar,
>> offshore wind), they need transmission to get to the
>> consumers, but instead of a one-way tree-shaped transmission
>> net, a more interconnected net which at night may bring wind
>> energy from Nebraska and during the day bring solar energy
>> from Arizona.  With better local storage options and higher
>> penetration of renewable energy, these transmission lines
>> may not have to be very long or thick.  It is not clear
>> at this time how everything will play out, this will
>> depend on how technology develops.
>> 
>> (6) Transportation fuels.  So far we only talked about
>> electricity.  Transportation must either be electrified
>> (electric railroads, electric cars) or must use biofuels or
>> hydrogen produced by electrolysis from renewable
>> electricity.
>> 
>> (7) Space heating and air conditioning, water heating,
>> cooking: New buildings will be much more energy efficient,
>> they will not need natural gas for heating and cooking but
>> electricity (ground-sources heatpumps) and water will at
>> least be pre-heated by the sun.
>> 
>> (8) Combined heat and power will become the rule instead of
>> the exception.  Natural gas facilities for residual power
>> will be smaller and cleaner than today's large scale base load
>> generators; therefore they can be located in populated areas
>> and the waste heat from the electricity can be used for area
>> heating, greenhouses, etc.  Initially this will use fossil
>> natural gas, but over time it will switch to biofuels.
>> 
>> (9) How all these things will play out depends on
>> technology: whether and when there will be a breakthrough in
>> battery technology, various storage technologies, fuel
>> cells, also energy saving technologies for end users (LED
>> lights).  For climate reasons it will also be necessary to
>> extract CO2 from the air and sequester it, i.e. CCS may play
>> a role even after all coal-fired power plants have been
>> phased out.
>> 
>> (10) It will also depend on political constellations.  The
>> fossil fuel and nuclear industries are fighting tooth and
>> nail against being superseded by renewables.  They try to
>> maintain the fairy tale that there is not enough renewable
>> energy or that it is too expensive.  Not true.  The
>> construction industry is fighting against stricter home
>> efficiency standards and higher in-home technology which
>> will make pre-fab homes necessary, the auto companies will
>> fight against electric vehicles because electric motors last
>> 20 times longer than internal combustion engines, etc.
>> 
>> (11) There is absolutely no need to use nuclear energy,
>> neither fission nor fusion.  It is too expensive and too
>> dangerous (especially in times of political turmoil).
>> 
>> This is how I see it.  I may have overlooked things.
>> Please comment.
>> 
>> Hans
>> _______________________________________________
>> pen-l mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
> 

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to