It's more a matter of costs and efficiency. We don't have inexpensive and efficient means of storing energy, that doesn't mean that we don't nor does it mean we won't have such means in the future.
Ultimately, we could store the energy by converting CO2 and H2O into hydrocarbons much as nature does. Sandia Labs CR-5 does that by using a solar furnace to heat counter rotating discs of cobalt oxide to 2,400 Celsius where it gives off it's oxygen atoms, then as it rotates out of the heat, it cools enough to grab an oxygen atom out of CO2 or H2O, leaving us with CO and H2 which is syngas that forms linear hydrocarbons in the Fischer Tropsch process.
But you are right that the time isn't quite right for solar and wind to be the majority of our power generation. We should focus on something like Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactors, they can't melt down, they can't explode, they can't leak, they shutdown safely without power, they stay safely shutdown without power, they consume existing nuclear wastes and what wastes they do produce only needs to be stored for 350 years rather than the current 30,000 years. They are also load following which means power production changes according to the draw.
This renewable energy thing is tricky.
While Norway may claim a high figure for the amount of electricity generated from renewable sources it still uses 45% from fossil fuels. Why? Because it exports most of its production. So, all its neighbours claim high renewable use too. Accountants call that double accounting.
Norway has more land than the UK, about 8% of the population and many more mountains. This makes hydro power a good bet for them. It would not work in the UK, though. Similarly for Iceland: they live on a volcano so have access to lots of geothermal energy. Again, it would not work in the UK. Other well-placed countries include: Austria, Lesotho, Albania, Paraguay, Bhutan and Mozambique.
Alph says that oil supplied only a small amount of electricity in the past. If the UK is anything to go by it still does now. The third link shows current usage by fuel type for the UK. Bear in mind that the figures are skewed. We have to use wind if it is available. This is like saying that you have to buy something fromWalMart if they have it in stock. If they don't have one only then can you go to another shop. Imagine what that would do for WalMart's profits. The other shops would still be obliged to keep everything in stock just in case WalMart runs out.
This means that the other suppliers could easily replace the wind power you see in the graphs and, in fact, they will be asked to do just that if the wind drops.
The article seems to be about recovering better when the system crashes rather than fixing any problems. So I am not sure how useful it really would be. The author seems to have something to sell.
The main problem with wind and solar is that you can't rely on it. Wind, in partticular, can come and go in an instant. The grid switches itself off if it sees instability. So expect blackouts as wind power increases. Germany's wind figures look good because they don't use all of it. They ship it to a neighbour with mountains who can store it. They then buy it back at a higher price. Again, there is a risk of double accounting and, as usual, the poor consumer pays the increased fees for no real gain. It is the people trading the power that are making the money. The final link is about the stability of the German grid.
We still need storage to make things like wind and solar viable. A few hundred tons of lead acid accumulators is not a solution. It may be OK for home use but would it scale for a hospital or factory? It may well not. Neither is something that does not work now but might work one day. We are rolling out wind turbines now. We need a solution now. Without one we are just wasting more energy deploying a deficient solution for political reasons. The current turbines will be being scrapped before they can be used sensibly.
Hey Kano, actually the technology exists now to store that power, but there are only 2 places it is being tested today, the Northwest Sahara Desert, still under construction, and Tonopah, Nevada in the U.S. The Tonopah facility is more leading edge, it is not solar electric (photovoltiac), but rather solar thermal. Photovoltiacs, in addition to having the sudden on/off problem with a cloud going by, have no storage. As you said, we can connect 50 tons of lead acid to it, but it won't solve our problem today.
The way the new farm works is it melts salt into molten liquid, around 600 degrees, and circulates it through a large insulated tank, the size of a small building. Then water to salt heat exchangers make steam. There at two advantages over direct water boiling: First, if you have the system up and running at "a full head of steam," and a sudden grid failure disconnects half of the farms load, it can be instantly throttled back by a computer that controls the heat exchanger water inlet, like taking your foot off the gas peddle of the car if it slips into nuetral. None of the steam will be wasted. In direct water boiling, the only way to keep the turbine from overspeeding is to vent off all the steam we worked so hard to save up all day. Second, because the tank is so large and so hot, it can continue to generate power when clouds drift overhead, or at night, up to 10 hours in the case of the Tonopah facility. We can keep accurate track of how much "battery" power remains simply by monitoring the saline temparature in the tank.
The Germans are busy building a large facility in the desert of North Africa that will supply power to half of Europe when done. Theres is interesting also in that they are using sea water to boil into steam, which when done in the turbine making electricity, re condenses into fresh water, and the salt is left behind in the exchanger, which is backwashed out each night and sold to salt producers. The by product of this process is fresh water, in the desert, so you have a desalination plant that also runs on solar power as a side effect of making solar electricity. There's is designed to run all night, not just the 10 hours that Tonopah is using now.
There is also the fact that photovoltiac panels are about 10 to 15 % efficient, so we can collect about 12 watts per square foot, but solar thermal in the desert is closer to 70 %. The article I've clipped below from Wiki is a few years old. The plan for the tower and surrounding mirrors worked so well in 2011 that it has been expanded to 3 full plants now, several hundred megawatts, and is running today. I flew over the field earlier this year and got a nice picture of all three towers glistening in the sun, but I can't locate it on my phone at present. Obviously this will not work well in Alaska, or the Artic, but they still have plenty of wind up there. Take care Kano, keep up the good answers too, Rudydoo
PSST! We are not supposed to tell. There is big money in attempting to persuade the commons that these are the answers and there is no flaw. Why do you think Germany had to go back to coal? Answer: Because it is consistent and reliable. The Dumkofts in Deutschland never thought ahead when they outlawed nuclear power. Once they shut down their nuclear power plants by law they then found out that they had made a mistake. Part of that mistake was enacting a law that outlawed nuclear power. They did this on the basis that wind and solar would provide enough constant energy. It didn't take them very long to figure out that at times these two were sufficient but there is a CONSTANT need for power and to this day no one has enough storage capacity to tide everyone over for those periods of low production.
Look at Jas B, another Wikipedia University grad. OMG!
You obviously did not read the full article because no where does it say that wind and solar can only be a small percentage of electricity supply.
What Dr Black is saying is that new computer software will be needed to avoid the problems which can arise from renewable energy and his Institute is in the process of developing them.
In his own words "In order to control these risks, transmission operators need new tools to increase situational awareness and help them to quickly restore the grid to a stable condition when a blackout occurs. Researchers are developing sophisticated new software solutions that are powerful enough to accommodate complex, multi-variable scenarios, including variable renewable energy sources, and adjust in response to rapidly changing grid conditions, even up to the point of collapse. Rather than relying on traditional Newton-Raphson methods to solve limit equations, new software uses deterministic load-flow system solvers able to accurately calculate grid conditions even up to the point of voltage collapse. The software continuously recalculates solution paths in response to changing grid conditions and equipment availability, so operators can make restoration decisions using real-time information. Rather than a static map, the software acts like a GPS, providing dynamic, step-by-step guided solution recommendations that change in response to real-time data on grid conditions.
These newer approaches to monitoring and modeling the grid can give power companies an important new tool in their arsenal for emergency planning and restoration as they adjust to new technologies and energy sources. By giving operators better visibility into grid conditions, power companies can ensure that they are prepared for all of the changes and challenges the future will bring".
As for your suggestion that solar and wind can only supply a small percentage of supply, no one ever suggested they were the total answer, there is also hydro, biomass and geothermal. the fact is that the figures for percentage of electricity from renewable sources is as follows for the following countries; Norway 96%, Austria 69.3%, Brazil 88.8%, Canada 64,2%, Sweden 64%, Switzerland 58%, Spain 42%, Portugal 58% etc. etc. etc. see link for full list.
Not only can renewable energy supply a majority of electricity needs but in many countries it is already or very close to doing so.
The grid is obsolete. Power companies have 30-40 years of work just to keep it from collapsing.
What we can do now does not change what is going to happen. Unfortunately, stupidity is the largest percentage of Deniers strategy for the future.
All electricity is used as it is generated. The real problem with solar and wind is they don't work at night.
Solar is just a novel source of power. We need the 24/7 power ability of nuclear power
This level of understanding requires more education on the subject than most who wish to prognosticate and agitate seem to have.
oil once supplied a small fraction in the past too. at the rate of change renewables will get there.
there is tides geothermal and other sources.
we can also do better. driving a car ar 5% efficiency is stupid
We don't have any means of storing large amounts of electricity
Don't we?
http://www.wholesalesolar.com/battery-ba...
