Quote:
Originally Posted by roflwaffle
A kWh is a kWh, and it's cost is it's cost. Even if we have to build ten times what peak demand is in nameplate (wind) capacity in order to to keep up with supply, since we're talking about the overall lifecycle cost of energy, then we'll still pay roughly the same.
|
It is unfortunate; I thought I was engaging in a debate with people who were fairly well versed in this technology. You clearly do not understand what the power capacity factor or duty cycle is. If a wind turbine has a generous PCF of 40% that means it either generates 40% of peak 100% of the time or 100% peak for 40% of the time, because wind is intermittent it really isn’t either but a summation of values in between. Another simple concept is cost, if I have to keep a natural gas plant as backup reserve for wind it has a cost. Even if I never turn it on, it still has employees waiting to turn it on, people doing maintenance, the capital cost is sunk as well, backup capacity always has a cost. Now if you have 10X overcapacity in wind as you suggest, when wind is giving you 100% of rated capacity all you can do is turn the machines off. Since there is zero fuel cost you have saved nothing, you are still stuck with maintenance costs and winds huge capital investment which is every bit as much as nuclears. When wind is 10% of your grid, you never turn it off, you turn your fueled generation off, when the bulk of your grid is fuelless your cost per kWh rises a lot faster when you turn the supply off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roflwaffle
If we have a HVDC transmission network, weather won't be much of a concern,
|
How So?
Quote:
Originally Posted by roflwaffle
That said, we could bury lines
|
Is that really being done for long high capacity lines anywhere? Why is that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by roflwaffle
You really think someone of middle eastern descent is going to be able to slip through with a bunch of migrant workers?
|
Get real, north America is already full of Arabs, remember all of those Arabs wanting to take pilot training years ago, getting into the country is the easiest part, they come in legally.
If you don’t think there are consequences to cutting the power off clearly you have not been in a situation where you have been without it for an extended period of time. Do a search on the “Quebec Ice storm”, this **** happens. When you put 100 million peoples power supply dependent on a few cross country lines then you definitely have a target and real consequences when it fails.
While I am not a meteorologist (by the way are you?) I do understand math and when I see a PCF of 20% or 30% or 40% I know that that is not a reliable supply.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roflwaffle
What, the NREL isn't credible? Neither are Florida power, the DOE, and the NEI?
|
It’s like you clearly ignored everything I said in post 78.
Also if you got links then provide them, I'm not doing your research for you.
I apologise if my tone has worsened. I expect people to return the courtesy and to carefully read my posts and if not taking the posts at their word then opening up the links provided. I don’t feel this is happening.