Renewables Chuck

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Obviously the lesson was in vain, you still responded in the past tense to a question about the future tense.

I will ask in a different way then(again), can you direct me to a jurisdiction with increased renewables whose rates have decreased comensurately due to the cheaper green energy, relative to one who has not made the transition of course, to account for inflation. Since renewables are so much cheaper, it must eventually translate into cheaper rates, approaching free as the capital costs are paid off, there must be many examples where this is happening?

[chuckChuck]

Obviously the lesson was in vain, you still responded in the past tense to a question about the future tense.

I will ask in a different way then(again), can you direct me to a jurisdiction with increased renewables whose rates have decreased comensurately due to the cheaper green energy, relative to one who has not made the transition of course, to account for inflation. Since renewables are so much cheaper, it must eventually translate into cheaper rates, approaching free as the capital costs are paid off, there must be many examples where this is happening?

In Saskatchewan solar PV long term costs are already cheaper than Saskpower's current rates on my farm and in "my jursidiction". So in the future they will be much cheaper! By how much I don't know.

Why don't you do the work to look at grid scale systems and figure it out by talking with Saskpower or Albertas utilities? Or are you too busy?

Here are what the experts are saying will happen in the Future. And it is just a forecast into the (future) not a certainty.

Bloomberg
https://about.bnef.com/new-energy-outlook/

PV, wind and batteries trifecta.
The cost of an average PV plant falls 71% by 2050. Wind energy is getting cheaper too, and we expect it to drop 58% by 2050. PV and wind are already cheaper than building new large-scale coal and gas plants. Batteries are also dropping dramatically in cost. Cheap batteries enable wind and solar to run when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining.

Cheap renewable energy and batteries fundamentally reshape the electricity system. Batteries boom means that half of the world's electricity by 2050 will be generated from wind and solar.

“Wind and solar are set to surge to almost “50 by 50” – 50% of world generation by 2050 – on the back of precipitous reductions in cost, and the advent of cheaper and cheaper batteries that will enable electricity to be stored and discharged to meet shifts in demand and supply. Coal shrinks to just 11% of global electricity generation by 2050.”

[AlbertaFarmer5]

The simple answer as to why I don't do it, is it I can do math, just like I don't need to prove that 2+ 2 doesn't equal 7.

You are the one who made the contradictory assertions, That power rates will continue to rise, well renewables are added making it cheaper(precipitously so as per your cut and paste). My assertion is there will be one or the other, both cannot be true.

Surely there must be an example of what you say being true in the present tense. The World has installed a lot of renewables in recent years, Someone somewhere must be seeing cheaper power rates as a result by now. But you can't seem to find me any examples.
Just like your promises Of revolutionary new battery technology, Or the climate catastrophes you are so desperately wishing for, Always just around the corner.

And just for the record, we both have the same intentions, I want renewables to succeed also, humanities future looks very bleak if finite fossil fuels are the only hope we have. I follow every lead I can find on potential energy storage. But, breakthroughs of the type you promise just hit physical limits, such as the Nernst electrochemistry equation. Speaking of math, do you know how close the latest Tesla batteries are to their theoretical limit for Lithium Ion Batteries is already? We need orders of magnitude improvements, whereas there is only a few crumbs left to improve in the Li Batteries. The previous battery cut and paste you used is 3 years old, how close are they to commercialisation today?

[chuckChuck]

The simple answer as to why I don't do it, is it I can do math, just like I don't need to prove that 2+ 2 doesn't equal 7.

You are the one who made the contradictory assertions, That power rates will continue to rise, well renewables are added making it cheaper(precipitously so as per your cut and paste). My assertion is there will be one or the other, both cannot be true.

Surely there must be an example of what you say being true in the present tense. The World has installed a lot of renewables in recent years, Someone somewhere must be seeing cheaper power rates as a result by now. But you can't seem to find me any examples.
Just like your promises Of revolutionary new battery technology, Or the climate catastrophes you are so desperately wishing for, Always just around the corner.

As I have pointed out previously, generation is only part of the cost of supplying electricity to customers. Solar and wind and other renewables may supply lower cost generation, but may still not offset the cost of maintaining the rest of the grid infrastructure.

Molten metal batteries that MIT are working on may be a long way off or available in a few years. Ask the developer. Bloomberg has predictions for renewables and batteries out to 2050. Only time will tell. Cheap storage will be a game changer.

Electricity rates will likely go up whether renewables become a bigger share of the generation or not. Looking at past performance of renewables is not a measure of what it will cost in the future with with lower manufacturing costs and wider adoption.

At the farm and residential level, solar PV net metering in Southern Saskatchewan is already long term, cheaper source of electricity than Saskpower.

Large grid based system cost structures and analysis of renewables and fossil fuel sources of electricity can't be done by farmers. We don't have the information or training to be able to do it. And it is variable across each province or state with different factors.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Believe what you want to believe. Your opinions are irrelevant to me and the utilities who are responsible for making these decisions.

There is no belief required, math and physics will suffice. Math is not an opinion. But an excellent comeback which addressed none of the questions, as usual.

[oneoff]

In whose eyes and by what measure does anyone declare me retired? That is but another slight against those who have done more than you may ever accomplish by hanging and riding on other peoples' backs.


This was probably meant be a personal attack (which by the way seems totally disconnected in all ways from any critique of the current state of solar energy in Sask) .... and those statement are then followed by pure horseshit "environmentalist" logic.


QUOTE
Large grid based system cost structures and analysis of renewables and fossil fuel sources of electricity can't be done by farmers. We don't have the information or training to be able to do it. And it is variable across each province or state with different factors.

UNQUOTE

What would the rest of you say about a proven flare gas cogeneration system (Combined heat and power (CHP) with potential 75 KW generating capacity with probably 90% overall energy conversion efficiency during winter months; and admittedly during the summer and parts of spring and fall the waste heat from the internal combustion engine currently is unused. Nevertheless it would heat 20-25 house with the waste heat and with a little care and cooperation; easily supply 10 or a couple dozen farmsteads basic needs). Its the electric heat and welders, electric stoves and larger aeration motors that this type of system could only work for a half dozen farms when used with some cooperation.

Of course the system hasn't yet been maxed out with the Ford 460 cubic inch "natural gas" powered prime mover and 100 KW manufacturer rating on the generator. But I have no doubt about the casing gas volume still being vented and the governor will open up a trifle more when additional loads might be found to be connected.

Now I claim a reliability of uptime (over the last 3.5 years) of well exceeding the SPC grid system. Like about minutes of "down time " to check fluid levels; and two water pump failures in 4.5 years. During the repair time; the SPC line standby was switched in by the automatic transfer switch. And to be fair; in the first couple of years whilst determining the methanol injection rate to prevent wintertime freezeup of the casing pressure regulator; there were maybe 4 episodes of loss of line pressure to the generator. Again SPC was available to be immediately switched in...and there was no need for loss of electrical supply in the last 3.5 years. It works; and in the words of a Ministry of Economy fellow there have been comments about no other operator making a success of such a wasted resource.

Some would point to interpret this experiment as following a path that only prolongs an oil industry existence that has somehow ruined the planet. Poor myopic bastards.

Someone commented about the recent SPC outage of 3 power stations and the electrical grid as a whole for all of SE Sask and a big chunk of the rest of the province for one to 2 days. That person quipped that the only oil well producing in thousands of square miles was 1-28-XXX-XX-W2.

Not even chucks solar array yet has any history; and certainly his setup will never produce any output during such a major power outage that is capable of helping either himself or other farmers.


Reread what chuck claims: "Large grid based system cost structures and analysis of renewables and fossil fuel sources of electricity can't be done by farmers. We don't have the information or training to be able to do it"

**** me.

Large grid based systems are not based on the output of a 75 KW generator running 24/7/365/year after year. And certainly not on 3kw of solar power producing 50 some per cent of the time (on average) with the timing of any production at basically unknown intervals. Rewrite that to say 15% or 16% average of near their "rated" capacity.

To say "We" don't have information or training" doesn't necessarily pertain to all "retired"farmers or all entrepreneurs; or any person who maybe wisely has determined that red tape and carbon taxes will eat such producers alive at 2% inflationary electrical prices; red tape; upcoming real time centralized control; pricing based on peak periods; electrical quality; code upgrades; regulation and interference; safety requirements that may have no bounds based on practicality; demand charges?? for using the grid system and its necessary upgrades and especially carbon taxes effectively designed to destroy such a project.

As a result there remain no such workable projects tied to the Sask Power grid. And yes the solar projects application is listed next to equally important flare gas electrical generation projects AND NO

Not one dollar of Sask Power electrical user's money was involved in this mentioned working project; and yes this single generation project could on a continuous basis would contribute 25 times as much electricity as chucks mind boggling contribution that is puny in comparison.

Now piss me off a little more chuck and I will tell the world how rich selfish neighbors have helped out ungrates when such aren't too proud to ask for real favors.

[chuckChuck]

Its is a better use of flared gas to use it for heat or electricity production than to dump it into the atmosphere. There is s tremendous untapped resource being wasted. I will give you credit for pulling that off.

I just wonder why the oil industry and the Saskatchewan Government hasn't caught on to doing the same instead of polluting the air with raw gas including H2S and half burned dirty flares.

[chuckChuck]

Saskpower purchases 20 MW of electricity from Alliance Pipelines waste heat generation at Alameda, Kerrobert, Loreburn and Estlin. This is a good example of green energy sources that make use of "waste" energy.

Why continuously attack solar and wind when Saskpower and many others in this province see value in both?

Saskpower is going ahead with significant wind energy capacity and some solar.

Tell us why Saskpower should not proceed with their plans?

[oneoff]

It is not an attack on solar or wind or anything else. Comments are made to give some balance to the honest merits of alternate energy sources.

Small flare gas generation units have no fit in Sask Power's electrical grid in the past 3.5 years (nor apparently before that time. I have never had any illusions about that fact.

That would change in short order if some manufacturer (or much better yet , if Sask Power) were to develop an electrical package themselves or point small power producers to a $10,000 to $20,000 interconnection unit between any synchronous standby generator and the electrical grid. Despite all attempts; all everyone gets is give them $315.00 and follow all the same steps required that look like adding another 300 Mw unit to Boundary Dam power station and refuse to answer how real questions of carbon tax etc will be handled.


Should Sask Power or anyone (except maybe some one like Alliance Pipelines where they did have more than 5 Mw of waste heat being blown into the atmosphere at each compressor station) be surprised at apparent total lack of interest from head office.

Heck you can't get a phone number; certainly can't get a name and won't get any encouragement or information from that Crown utility.
Things like rural electrification happened because of local farmers in the early 1950's. All that is now lost. Congratulations Sask Power.

[chuckChuck]

The solution is not to wait for Saskpower or the oil industry to initiate a program for recovering flared gas for a useful purpose. Governments just need to make it mandatory that gas is used and not considered a waste product. Otherwise leave it in the ground.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

The solution is not to wait for Saskpower or the oil industry to initiate a program for recovering flared gas for a useful purpose. Governments just need to make it mandatory that gas is used and not considered a waste product. Otherwise leave it in the ground.

Flaring gas is certainly one of the biggest crimes of humanity. But for the same governments who make it impossible to build pipelines, to then make it mandatory that the gas must be used would be the ultimate in irony.

[chuckChuck]

Using flared gas near to where it is produced requires less pipelines. A lot of saskatchewan's gas could replace coal.

The BC NDP and Federal Liberals approved a $40 billion LNG facility with a gas pipeline from Dawson Creek to Kitimat.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Using flared gas near to where it is produced requires less pipelines. A lot of saskatchewan's gas could replace coal.

The BC NDP and Federal Liberals approved a $40 billion LNG facility with a gas pipeline from Dawson Creek to Kitimat.

And building power lines has been just about as much of a battle as pipelines. Canada is full of NIMBY's, natives with greedy lawyers, greens with an agenda, and governments who enable all of them.

[jazz]

Only solar that makes sense is a few panels on all the roofs and some windmills down in the SW where there are no people. Anything else will be blocked by nimbys. You wont even be able to build a hydro dam anymore. Nuke plant, forget it. natural gas generation is the only thing that has a chance.

[oneoff]

Using flared gas near to where it is produced requires less pipelines. A lot of saskatchewan's gas could replace coal.

The BC NDP and Federal Liberals approved a $40 billion LNG facility with a gas pipeline from Dawson Creek to Kitimat.