Clean energy future might be closer than we previously thought - GoHaynesvilleShale.com2024-03-29T15:55:10Zhttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/forum/topics/clean-energy-future-might-be-closer-than-we-previously-thought?id=2117179%3ATopic%3A3818526&feed=yes&xn_auth=nohttps://mediabiasfactcheck.co…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-04-30:2117179:Comment:38240432019-04-30T23:56:18.778ZSkip Peel - Mineral Consultanthttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/ilandman
<p><a href="https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-thinker/" target="_blank">https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-thinker/</a></p>
<p>Enough said.</p>
<p><a href="https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-thinker/" target="_blank">https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-thinker/</a></p>
<p>Enough said.</p> World's Largest Battery Propo…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-04-30:2117179:Comment:38239412019-04-30T23:52:59.454ZJames L. Williamshttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/JamesLWilliams
<p>World's Largest Battery Proposed:</p>
<p></p>
<p>Florida Power and Light is proposing to build the world's largest battery to smooth output from solar farms. The 900 megawatt-hour capacity battery is expected to cost $400 million. That is $444/kWh. Here is an article discussing the proposal:</p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/04/battery_foolishness_in_florida.html">https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/04/battery_foolishness_in_florida.html</a></p>
<p>World's Largest Battery Proposed:</p>
<p></p>
<p>Florida Power and Light is proposing to build the world's largest battery to smooth output from solar farms. The 900 megawatt-hour capacity battery is expected to cost $400 million. That is $444/kWh. Here is an article discussing the proposal:</p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/04/battery_foolishness_in_florida.html">https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/04/battery_foolishness_in_florida.html</a></p> How wind and solar became Ame…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-04-22:2117179:Comment:38213232019-04-22T12:39:35.744ZSkip Peel - Mineral Consultanthttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/ilandman
<p><strong>How wind and solar became America's cheapest energy source</strong></p>
<p>By Irina Ivanova April 22, 2019 / 5:00 AM / MoneyWatch cbsnews.com</p>
<ul>
<li>The price of renewable energy has been dropping exponentially over the past decade—and shows no sign of reversing.</li>
<li>In most of the U.S., it's now become cheaper to build a new solar or wind farm than to keep an existing coal plant running.</li>
<li>Part of the reason is better technology—solar panels and wind turbines have…</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>How wind and solar became America's cheapest energy source</strong></p>
<p>By Irina Ivanova April 22, 2019 / 5:00 AM / MoneyWatch cbsnews.com</p>
<ul>
<li>The price of renewable energy has been dropping exponentially over the past decade—and shows no sign of reversing.</li>
<li>In most of the U.S., it's now become cheaper to build a new solar or wind farm than to keep an existing coal plant running.</li>
<li>Part of the reason is better technology—solar panels and wind turbines have gotten more effective at generating power </li>
<li>Economies of scale help, too: "When renewables get cheaper, we buy more, and then they get even cheaper and we buy even more," one expert said.</li>
</ul>
<p>In late 2009, as America was clawing its way from the worst recession in 80 years, fiscally pressured local and state governments were doing everything they could to slash costs. That included cutting back on clean-energy initiatives. Here's how the New York Times described the case of Durango, Colorado, a town of 18,000 in the southwest part of the state:</p>
<p><em>But for many other groups, even green-minded ones, the higher price of clean electricity has caused soul-searching and hesitation. Early this year, the city government of Durango, Colo., stopped buying renewable power from its utility, saving $45,000 a year. The clean electricity had cost 40 percent extra.</em></p>
<p>Ten years later, nearly one-third of Colorado's electricity comes from renewable sources, the state's biggest utility is moving to entirely carbon-free energy, and its voters have elected a governor who promised to set the most aggressive clean-energy standard in the nation. </p>
<p>That story is mirrored in dozens of other states, where consumers have demanded cheap power and corporations have moved into clean-energy projects in droves. Behind this shift is not just increasing environmental awareness, but simple economics. The price of renewables has been dropping exponentially—and shows no sign of reversing.</p>
<h3><strong>Rapid price drops</strong></h3>
<p>In most of the U.S. today, it's cheaper to build a new solar or wind farm than to simply keep an existing coal plant running. Most of those cost decreases have happened just in the last 10 years, to the surprise of some energy analysts.</p>
<p>Part of this is technological improvement—solar panels and wind turbines have gotten steadily more effective at generating power. But most of it is economies of scale, said Rushad Nanavatty, principal at the Business Renewables Center at the Rocky Mountain Institute, a sustainability think tank.</p>
<p>"When renewables get cheaper, we buy more, and then they get even cheaper and we buy even more," Nanavatty said. "When you're talking about wind and solar, the cost declines are driven mainly by manufacturing volumes and the cost declines that come with it."</p>
<p>Since the first large-scale wind project in the U.S. took root in California in 1981, wind turbines have gotten taller and wider. Taller turbines are more effective because they can access the steady wind that blows at higher altitudes, while larger rotors mean turbines can create more energy. A mid-sized turbine today creates as much energy as 15 of the earliest model.</p>
<p>Larger turbines also mean lower installation and construction costs. "Instead of deploying 10 turbines and moving your crane from site to site to build 10 foundations, you only have to build one foundation, and you are able to access more wind," said John Hensley, vice president of research and analytics for the American Wind Energy Association, or AWEA. Modern turbines also make it easy to identify problems and breakages, so repairs take less time and often don't require shutting down the machine.</p>
<h3><strong>Corporations bought in</strong></h3>
<p>Utilities—the large entities that historically buy power and sell it to homes and businesses—are no longer the only buyers for electricity. Increasingly, big business is buying power directly. </p>
<p>What started as a marketing exercise to win over the "green" consumer has become more and more of an economic proposition, as corporations from AT&T to Anheuser-Busch InBev sign deals to purchase large amounts of clean power.</p>
<p>"In many cases, the motivation is to do the right thing, but what makes these deals viable is that it makes economic sense," said RMI's Nanavatty.</p>
<p>Last year, a record 37 corporations signed contracts for wind power, with nearly half of them being first-time buyers, according to AWEA. Contracts like these kick off the process of building new wind resources, which will be coming online in future years. The pipeline of projects seems long. The group noted that among the "Renewable Energy 100" — a group of companies that pledged to move to 100 percent clean energy—just 25 percent of the total corporate demand has been met to date.</p>
<h3><strong>The power of groups</strong></h3>
<p>It's not just big business. Medium-sized business, increasingly, is getting in on the renewables game.</p>
<p>A handful of companies and nonprofits last month launched the Renewable Energy Buyers Alliance, a <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/03/28/707007584/companies-organize-to-make-it-easier-to-buy-renewable-energy">project</a> to make it easier to buy clean power projects. The group's aim is to grow corporate renewable energy deals threefold in the next six years.</p>
<p>That matters because, as clean energy finds more and more buyers, these customers will need help navigating the byzantine world of electrical systems and electric purchases, where the barriers to entry can be high.</p>
<p>"When you look at the market for deals, typically only a very large, sophisticated buyer with a large energy team was in a position to transact," Nanavatty said. "Now you see a situation where a group of buyers, each one of which might have a relatively small load, can come together and go to market with a much larger volume that would be attractive to developers, and make a deal that much more viable."</p> European solar comes of PPAge…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-04-21:2117179:Comment:38211562019-04-21T15:50:32.396ZSkip Peel - Mineral Consultanthttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/ilandman
<p><strong>European solar comes of PPAge</strong></p>
<p>April 20, 2019 <span> <a href="https://www.pv-magazine.com/author/lwgpaulzubrinich/">pv magazine</a> (excerpt, link to full article at the bottom)</span></p>
<p><span>L</span>ast month, a single contract signed into existence 708 MW of photovoltaic arrays to be built across the Iberian Peninsula. The mammoth deal between offtaker Audax Renovables and developer WElink will roll out as much solar capacity as was installed in Spain and…</p>
<p><strong>European solar comes of PPAge</strong></p>
<p>April 20, 2019 <span> <a href="https://www.pv-magazine.com/author/lwgpaulzubrinich/">pv magazine</a> (excerpt, link to full article at the bottom)</span></p>
<p><span>L</span>ast month, a single contract signed into existence 708 MW of photovoltaic arrays to be built across the Iberian Peninsula. The mammoth deal between offtaker Audax Renovables and developer WElink will roll out as much solar capacity as was installed in Spain and Portugal from 2013 to 2017 combined.</p>
<p>It is no isolated event. Artur Lenkowski, Senior Associate at IHS Markit, says that solar PPA activity in Europe grew from 360 MW in 2017 to more than 2.4 GW in 2018. These projects bring together a colorful range of investors and operate across diverse jurisdictions, but one point many have in common is that they are being built without government subsidies.</p>
<p>“We are competing head-on with market rates,” says Peter Alex, head of investor relations at Energiekontor, which has just signed a 15 year PPA with electricity supplier EnBW for an 85 MW solar farm near Rostock, Germany. “The project came as a big surprise to the market and politicians, but we can already sell solar electricity in Germany that is competitive with fossil fuels and nuclear.”</p>
<p>“We see a lot of projects across Europe, especially in the south,” says Anne Joeken, head of communications at Statkraft, a leading supplier of renewable energy in Europe. Her employer notably closed a 175 MW PPA in early 2018 to buy electricity from the Don Rodrigo solar power plant near Seville in Spain. “There are various sources for funding new PV capacity with PPAs becoming a more relevant one as grid parity evolves,” she says.</p>
<p>The news offers timely respite to Europe’s battered solar sector as governments across the region phase out financial incentives for renewable energy. “In the past, there was a lot of solar implementation in Europe, but it was usually supported by subsidies,” says Georg Hoefler, Investment Director in the renewable energy team of Allianz Capital Partners. “The difference now is that offtakers are private and there is no government support.”</p>
<p><a href="https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/04/20/the-weekend-read-european-solar-comes-of-ppage/" target="_blank">https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/04/20/the-weekend-read-european-solar-comes-of-ppage/</a></p> According to the article it w…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-04-20:2117179:Comment:38210342019-04-20T00:08:55.245ZJames L. Williamshttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/JamesLWilliams
<p>According to the article it was based on Texas Grid data from 2017. Given the publication date I would surmise that the analysis, which probably took several months, was done in 2018. </p>
<p>According to the article it was based on Texas Grid data from 2017. Given the publication date I would surmise that the analysis, which probably took several months, was done in 2018. </p> James, I have one observation…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-04-19:2117179:Comment:38208232019-04-19T13:07:56.106ZSkip Peel - Mineral Consultanthttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/ilandman
<p>James, I have one observation for the article by Professor Michaelides. It is not his analysis which I think is likely correct. The problem inherent with trying to model a fast evolving technology is that by the time sufficient data is available, the technology has changed. The professor is using 2017 data. The articles that I post, and my comments based upon them, are current (2019). Part of my interest and a reason for the number of articles on the subject is the stunning strides in…</p>
<p>James, I have one observation for the article by Professor Michaelides. It is not his analysis which I think is likely correct. The problem inherent with trying to model a fast evolving technology is that by the time sufficient data is available, the technology has changed. The professor is using 2017 data. The articles that I post, and my comments based upon them, are current (2019). Part of my interest and a reason for the number of articles on the subject is the stunning strides in improved efficiency of latest solar technology and how much less expensive PV modules have become. The same evolutionary arc is ongoing for batteries. The entities deploying utility scale solar globally are reporting surprising costs per kWh. Along with the willingness of capital markets to invest in those projects, it appears we are fast reaching the point of price equivalence with hydrocarbon generated electricity grids. </p>
<p></p> Thanks for the additional inf…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-04-18:2117179:Comment:38207892019-04-18T19:53:35.832ZSkip Peel - Mineral Consultanthttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/ilandman
<p>Thanks for the additional information, James. I should have been more clear in my question regarding attribution. Maybe I missed somewhere in the article what data Professor Micaelides was using in his analysis. When I have a little more time I will try to look through some of your hyperlinks to see if I can find that. Although the article is March 2019, I was wondering if it was based on 2018 data or earlier.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Thanks for the additional information, James. I should have been more clear in my question regarding attribution. Maybe I missed somewhere in the article what data Professor Micaelides was using in his analysis. When I have a little more time I will try to look through some of your hyperlinks to see if I can find that. Although the article is March 2019, I was wondering if it was based on 2018 data or earlier.</p>
<p></p> As I stated, the primary sour…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-04-18:2117179:Comment:38207842019-04-18T19:44:32.541ZJames L. Williamshttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/JamesLWilliams
<p>As I stated, the primary source that I used was the article “Making Texas Green” by TCU Engineering Professor E. E. Michaelides in the March 2019 issue of the ASME publication <em>Mechanical Engineering, pp.</em> 36-41. This article is the first attempt I have seen to determine how much storage would be required to make viable an electrical grid that uses only solar and wind (with some nuclear in this case) with no fossil fuel backup. Michaelides did a detailed analysis of the Texas grid…</p>
<p>As I stated, the primary source that I used was the article “Making Texas Green” by TCU Engineering Professor E. E. Michaelides in the March 2019 issue of the ASME publication <em>Mechanical Engineering, pp.</em> 36-41. This article is the first attempt I have seen to determine how much storage would be required to make viable an electrical grid that uses only solar and wind (with some nuclear in this case) with no fossil fuel backup. Michaelides did a detailed analysis of the Texas grid electricity consumption throughout the year and generation of electricity with wind and solar throughout the year. There is a lot of seasonal variation in both supply and demand, and these do not perfectly match. The result is that a lot of energy must be stored for long periods, not just storage while the sun is out for use overnight. The amount of storage required was determined to be about 16 times the daily average use in Texas. That seems like a lot, but when seasonal variation is considered, and experience in Germany and England where there have been periods for as much as a week in which wind and solar produced only 1 or 2% of nameplate capacity is considered, it may be reasonable. I let the “Making Texas Green” article speak for itself, I did not attempt to critique it.</p>
<p>All I did was take results presented in the ‘Making Texas Green” article and applied typical installation costs as discussed below.</p>
<p>The Tesla Hornsdale battery capacity is initially 129 MWh and the cost was $90 million, yielding an initial $697/kWh cost. (The battery capacity declines over time.)</p>
<p><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-27/tesla-battery-cost-revealed-two-years-after-blackout/10310680">https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-27/tesla-battery-cost-revealed-two-years-after-blackout/10310680</a></p>
<p>The 2019 Tesla Powerwall has capacity of 13.5 kWh and costs around $10,000 installed for a total cost of about $740/kWh.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/is-the-tesla-powerwall-the-best-solar-battery-available-in-2019">https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/is-the-tesla-powerwall-the-best-solar-battery-available-in-2019</a></p>
<p>The cost of lithium-ion batteries at the time Hornsdale was done was about $240/kWh and is now about $200/kWh and is expected to decline to $62/kWh by 2030. That is speculative, of course. A utility scale battery will require housing, ancillary sensors and controls and a thermal conditioning system. If I assume that the Hornsdale battery cost $240/kWh, then the housing and ancillary equipment cost about $460/kWh. If I assume that battery cost falls to $60/kWh and the housing and ancillary cost (which will have a less steep “learning curve” than the battery) is cut in half, I get a total cost of $300/kWh. (Even if I just use the anticipated future battery cost of $60/kWh then 16,020 GWh of storage would cost a significant $960 billion)</p>
<p>Solar farms cost about $1000/kW to build.</p>
<p><a href="https://news.energysage.com/solar-farms-start-one/">https://news.energysage.com/solar-farms-start-one/</a></p>
<p>Wind farm cost varies from around $1300/kW to $2200/kW:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.windustry.org/how_much_do_wind_turbines_cos">http://www.windustry.org/how_much_do_wind_turbines_cos</a></p>
<p>The need for energy storage to make large scale renewable (wind and solar) electricity generation systems viable causes interest in developing alternative utility level storage systems that are less expensive than lithium-ion batteries. Lockheed Martin is one such company:</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/capabilities/energy/energy-storage.html">https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/capabilities/energy/energy-storage.html</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/mfc/documents/energy/mfc-GridStar-Flow-EnergyStorage-07192018.pdf">https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/mfc/documents/energy/mfc-GridStar-Flow-EnergyStorage-07192018.pdf</a></p>
<p>Note that Lockheed Martin’s flow batteries are intended for short-term and medium-term utility-level storage, not the long-term storage indicated as being required by Michaelides.</p>
<p>I have a Master’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering with over 50-years experience. I worked for over 40 years for Lockheed Martin (retiring at the end of 2003) and worked for a consulting company and a construction company before that. I designed missiles, spacecraft, and rockets and know nothing about Lockheed Martin’s energy storage business except for what is publicly available. </p> Report: Global Energy…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-04-17:2117179:Comment:38201562019-04-17T13:35:41.405ZSkip Peel - Mineral Consultanthttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/ilandman
<table width="100%">
<tbody><tr><td></td>
</tr>
<tr><td></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h1><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Report: Global Energy Storage to Hit 158 Gigawatt-Hours by 2024</span></h1>
<h2><span style="font-size: 12pt;">We project a thirteenfold increase in grid-scale storage over the next six years, led by the United States and China.</span></h2>
<p>“Over the last five years, the world began to experiment with storage; in the next five, storage will become a key grid asset,” says…</p>
<table width="100%">
<tbody><tr><td></td>
</tr>
<tr><td></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h1><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Report: Global Energy Storage to Hit 158 Gigawatt-Hours by 2024</span></h1>
<h2><span style="font-size: 12pt;">We project a thirteenfold increase in grid-scale storage over the next six years, led by the United States and China.</span></h2>
<p>“Over the last five years, the world began to experiment with storage; in the next five, storage will become a key grid asset,” says Ravi Manghani, Wood Mackenzie Power & Renewables director of energy storage. </p>
<p></p>
<p>Wood Mackenzie, 4/19/2019</p>
<p></p> Attribution, please.
tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-04-16:2117179:Comment:38202162019-04-16T21:13:39.080ZSkip Peel - Mineral Consultanthttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/ilandman
<p>Attribution, please.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Attribution, please.</p>
<p></p>