"Clean Coal" Claims that Solar can't handle Baseload power demands!

[Christ]

This is an article from Michael Bloch's "Green Living Tips" E-letter, Issue 38.

An excerpt which hits home the most of all the paragraphs in the short article:

Originally Posted by Baseload Power Bull

The era of cheap energy is over and it's best we all get used to it. Energy efficiency is the low hanging fruit of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and baseload power needs - it's not going to hurt us to not having our houses lit up like Xmas trees. Increased electricity costs might finally see us realizing that.

The quote is also the article link. Enjoy!

[roflwaffle]

Meh, there's plenty of wind to take over baseload from coal, and it's cheaper now IIRC.

[ai_vin]

In my book any group that dares to call itself "clean coal" loses all credibility.

[Daox]

I believe wind is now cheaper than nuclear, but coal is still the cheaper.

[Doofus McFancypants]

With respect to Clean Coal. anything that burns can be cleaned up with treatment - the question becomes does the cost of the fuel + the cost of the cleanup result in a higher cost then alternatives?

A coal plant runs all the time. The wind blows somewhere all the time as well. the question, at least in my mind, is not the method of generation ( i am one of the "All the above" sources people *) I think the REAL bang for the buck is in the distribution.

If we can cut the distribution losses by 1/3 - there is a HUGE ammount of power we get for FREE**. Of course to actively make this link of change, as a country we need a clear Energy Policy and direction of where we are going.

Now the argument AGAINST clean coal, at least to me, seems to be "You can't make it clean". With $$ anything can happen... But if someone wanted to make the same claim on a different technology - could one also not say Diesel cars? "No way - you can't make them Clean!"

Clean up what we can - expand into other areas - think outside the box for the next breakthrough. bring them ALL on

Steve

* this even includes getting the chubby little kids on treadmills connected to generators so they can watch SpongeBob and work off some weight
**once the cost of the new infrastructure is covered

[ai_vin]

Originally Posted by Daox

I believe wind is now cheaper than nuclear, but coal is still the cheaper.

I'm one of those people who believes there's a high price attached to going cheap. More often than not when you save a few pennies by going for the cheapest option there's a cost that's hidden that you're still paying; like buy something from WalMart and pay for it with jobs lost to China.

[aerohead]

Anyone who derives their living from coal would quite naturally be threatened by the spector of "no-coal."
Politicians from coal-producing states would have a "political" responsibility to defend their constituency back home,and perhaps to the coal-technology corporations which supply equipment and infrastructure,and their lobbyists whom frequent city,county,state,and federal government arenas.
Casting doubt about the ability of a competitors technology to deliver a good or service is historically one of the tools from the game book,to impede,if not stop change.
If you've listened to the actual dialogue from coal-based energy providers,and given the context of population growth,anticipated demand,ability to provide service 24-7-365,there is a logic to their comments given the context with which they are made.
When I look around my own neighborhood I see little "visionary" behavior.
With respect to solar stand-alone applications,my next door neighbors whom have never been " on the grid" and pride themselves in that fact,have had an extension cord running between our two homes for 2-weeks now,sucking grid electricity into their Trojan batteries to keep them from sulphating until the Sun comes out,and stays out for awhile.
I believe it would take little short of a world war to shift attitudes and behavior in the U.S..
R. Buckminster Fuller advocated a trans-global solar-powered energy grid, reasoning that the sun never sets on Earth.Some countries "daytime" power could benefit another's "nightime" demand.
The potential for another country to disrupt one's power,may be a sticking point in overcoming the fear of reliance.
It's a big challenge.

[jamesqf]

The claim is perfectly correct. Neither solar nor wind can handle baseload power - just ask anyone who's ever looked into building an off-the-grid house. You either have to add storage (or use existing storage such as hydro), or have standby generation.

As for the idea that the sun's always shining somewhere, look into things like transmission line losses, or the cost of building an under-ocean transmission line across the Atlantic.

[dcb]

Nah, we just need to pave over NV with solar cells, then we are set.

[ai_vin]

[QUOTE=jamesqf;135888]The claim is perfectly correct. Neither solar nor wind can handle baseload power - just ask anyone who's ever looked into building an off-the-grid house. You either have to add storage (or use existing storage such as hydro), or have standby generation.[QUOTE]

True, neither solar nor wind can handle baseload power if all you're doing is using solar OR wind. But if you use a combination of different renewables together their shortcomings are balanced out. This idea has actually been tried out, in Germany.
Peak Energy: The Combined Power Plant And Biogas In Germany
By linking 36 wind, solar, biomass and hydropower installations spread throughout Germany they were able to match supply to demand minute to minute. In fact they didn't even strictly need the hydropower installations; those were only used to buffer the excess solar and wind because they didn't want to waste it.

Baseload is a myth. Myth of Baseload Power

When it comes to wind you don't need a global grid to get reliable power. Basically the wind IS always blowing - somewhere within a hundred miles of you so if you link wind farms with just your national/continental grid you've got baseload power. http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/winds/aj07_jamc.pdf

Also there are other ways to increase the capacity factor of wind "Capacity Factor is the percentage of energy actually captured relative to what would be captured if the wind turbines were operating at full capacity all the time.

By far the biggest reason for not operating at capacity is that insufficient winds exist at the given site to generate at rated capacity. This is true at any altitude, but the percentage of the time is much less at high altitude." If you can put your windmills up in the air at about 10km they will be generating power 80-90% of the time. Sky WindPower Corporation
Even putting them up just 1000ft will boost your capacity factor to 50%. Magenn Power Inc.

Inbetween you could have kite power. KiteGen » Kite Generator