http://bv.com/Projects/sdge-sunrise-powerlink-project

I’m sure the answer will be more transmission in some cases, more storage in others. I suspect transmission will play a large role in moving power into regions which are experiencing multi-day very low wind/solar inputs.

Having good transmission between regions would mean less storage required, not only could supply be shared but also storage could be shared.

And then there’s the issue of what storage will really cost. If we have only the options that we now have, pump-up and flow batteries, transmission would probably play a larger role. If we get a cheap storage technology like liquid metal batteries might provide then the scale swings in the other direction.

With Hawaii they have the ability to put a lot of wind generation on ____ Island (forgot which one) and ship it to other islands. Shipping solar would be unnecessary. I don’t know how well geothermal is distributed between the various islands.

But I still think we have to be wary about intermittency being worse than what we have experienced in the past.

Your point, I think, is that as long as we have 12 hours storage, we can get through the nights using stored sunshine and that may be true most of the time.

My big toe is telling me that we should have some main stream power just in case. This is not going to be an exact science with global warming breathing up our backsides.

I don’t have to look at page 67, I can just look out the window.

We had 5 days in a row with Lake Huron like glass in the second week of August.

And I think we are going to see more of this as the jet streams get more disrupted by global warming. Here’s a couple of links http://www.theguardian.com/news/2013/jul/28/weatherwatch-jet-stream-extreme-climate-change

http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/07/21/3034621/jet-stream-causes-weather-whiplash.html

Nobody really understands this yet but some of our old rules on intermittency may not apply in the future.

Hopefully we are better at this today then we were 5 years ago but maybe not because technology is still evolving.

Now about fossil prices. Remember there is no burden for the damage caused by Hurricane Sandy when the arrows are pointing to Global Warming. Ideally fossil fuels should be phased out on Policy without attempting to price out the damage burden.

And, remember, geothermal is cheaper than nuclear if there’s a need for ‘always on’ generation. Which is debatable.

The price of storage will certainly effect how far we can go with solar and wind. The other issue is intermittency. If the wind stops blowing for say 5 days, then this could be a problem. But it could be that the sun shines best on doldrum days so with good sun and storage, maybe things would work out.

I know that you are not enamoured with nuclear but a single nuclear plant in a state that has little hydro power could make a big difference.

The Hoover Dam could drop below the hydro intakes in the next 10 years. If this happens, nuclear power may look a great deal more attractive for Arizona and Nevada.

I wanted to include this link you gave me on tidal power. http://gcaptain.com/alstoms-megawatt-tidal-turbine/

There is an absolutely phenominal amount of power in our tides and ocean currents. If we could ever figure this out, all states bordering on the oceans and even large rivers might get all their power from water flow.

Wind 50% or more. Again, direct use and the wind blows a lot of hours.

Wind direct and solar direct will probably do about 100% of our EV charging. Parking over wireless outlets is such a simple technology to install and use that it makes sense to use EVs as a major way to match demand to supply.

Hydro will largely be fill-in, cheaper than storage in most cases. Hydro, tidal and geothermal will, I guess, provide about 20%.

(Those are very rough numbers and will, obviously, vary from location to location.)

Nuclear is likely to die away over the next 20 years as we retire old plants and build almost no new ones. And one significant meltdown could cause a rapid abandonment of nuclear. Let Homer pop the top on one of our reactors in a western population center and nuclear is done.

The Ambri giant battery is a new solution that is not yet priced but may eventually be a big factor in decision making. Like you don’t have to construct large expensive transmission lines if you have cheap storage.

I also see your point about large centralized storage but if we can come up with cheap solar panels and in home storage as they have in New Zealand http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/future-grid-networks-focus-on-solar-storage-for-consumers-66152 then decentralized storage may become a factor.

I have a feeling too that wind and solar may end up topping out at say 50% with 50% of the power coming from main stream sources like hydro or nuclear that are always on. The % figures will depend on hydro power availability in each state and the evolution of costs for nuclear, wind, solar, storage and transmission lines.

I think we need solid engineering on the projected costs and long term economic studies using the best projections of interest rates to come up with the best mix of solutions for each state.

TRANSMISSION PROJECTS: AT A GLANCE — TRANSMISSION SUPPORTING THE INTEGRATION OF RENEWABLE RESOURCES

These projects support the integration of renewable resource generation. Renewable energy technologies include: wind power, solar power, hydroelectricity, geothermal, biomass and biofuels. Highlighted projects that facilitate the integration of renewable resources reflect the addition or upgrade of 13,300 miles of transmission with an accompanying investment cost of approximately $38.7 billion of the total $51.1 billion in this report (nominal $).
•
500 kV Upgrade Project Badger Coulee
•
Big Stone South to Ellendale
•
CapX2020 Transmission
Plan
•
Cardinal Bluffs
•
Cimarron – Mathewson
Double Circuit 345 kV Line
•
Devers – Colorado River and Devers – Valley No. 2 Transmission Project
•
Eldorado – Ivanpah Transmission Project
•
Elk city – Gracemont 345 kV Line
•
ETT CREZ
•
G905 Generator Interconnection
•
Grand Rivers Projects
•
Great Northern Transmission Line
•
Greater Fresno Area Upgrade Project
•
Hitchland – Woodward 345 kV Transmission Line
•
Hitchland – Woodward District EHV Double Circuit 345 kV Line
•
Kansas V-Plan
•
KETA Project
•
Mathewson – Tatonga 2nd Circuit 345 kV Line
•
Michigan Thumb Loop Transmission Project
•
MidAmerican Energy Expansion Projects
•
Midwest Portfolio Phase 1-7
•
Multi-Value Projects 3 & 4
•
Northeast Energy Link
•
Northern Pass Transmission Project
•
Oncor CREZ Development
•
One Nevada 500 kV Transmission Intertie
•
Palo Verde Hub – North Gila 500 kV Project
•
Palo Verde Substation – Delaney Substation – Sun Valley Substation – Morgan Substation – Pinnacle Peak Substation 500 kV Projects
•
Path 42
•
Pawnee – Daniels Park 345 kV Transmission Line
•
Pawnee – Smoky Hill 345 kV Transmission Project
•
Pioneer Transmission, LLC
•
Prairie Wind Transmission, LLC
•
RITELine
•
San Joaquin Cross Valley Loop
•
Sibley – Nebraska City 345 kV Transmission Line
•
South of Devers
•
South of Kramer
•
Straits Flow Control
•
Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project
•
Tehachapi Wind Energy Storage Project
•
Tuco – Woodward District 345 kV Transmission Line
•
Woodward – Thistle Double Circuit 345 kV Line
•
Woodward – Tuco 345 kV Line
•
Woodward District EHV – Tatonga 2nd Circuit 345 kV Line
•
Zephyr Power Transmission Project

http://www.eei.org/issuesandpolicy/transmission/Documents/TransmissionSupportingtheIntegrationofRenewableResources.pdf

These are just the new transmission associated with renewables. There are pages of new transmission projects on their main site….

http://www.eei.org/issuesandpolicy/transmission/Pages/transmissionprojectsat.aspx

A new HVDC line running north from the Texas Panhandle. A new HVDC line carrying Oklahoma wind to Tennessee. A new HVDC line bringing Wyoming wind to the Pacific Coast. One in the upper Midwest. And we’re getting ready to lay one underwater to bring offshore wind to the grid. And there are more.

Certainly efficiency is very important. You’re right there.

Consider what could happen if Ambri’s liquid metal battery works as prototypes are working. That would give utilities extremely cheap storage. Wind is now cheap (6c/kWh without subsidies in the US) and solar will almost certainly get as cheap as wind.

Worst case utilities might sell a mix of wind, solar and other renewables at only slightly more than what we now pay for a mix of coal, NG, nuclear and renewables. But because we are being successful with our efficiency measures the impact on the economy and budgets would be unnoticeable.

Most of us would continue to get our electricity from a utility company. Some of us would produce electricity with solar panels on our roofs and act as suppliers for the grid, most wouldn’t.
—

Even if the Ambri battery doesn’t materialize storage is likely to be cheaper at the utility level than at the end-user level. Individuals are not going to build pump-up hydro (currently our cheapest way to store electricity) nor build CAES into large subterranean caverns. Even using chemical batteries, utilities are going to be able to purchase at much better prices than will individuals due to their volume of purchase.
—

Utilities will take a financial hit due to having to write off stranded resources (coal and gas plants). In the case of publicly owned utilities these costs will be passed on to customers or paid by taxpayers (so that the costs are less visible). Privately owned companies will attempt to get the costs passed on and will be successful in places with corrupt local governments. But these financial adjustments will be a temporary transitional problem.