Contrast California with Texas, whose power grid completely collapses with a little glazing of ice. Wonder what’s different about those running these two states?
California runs on 100% renewable energy
- Thread starter Phenomenally Frantastic
- Start date
It may for a brief amount of time. It usually depends on what the load is at that specific time. I’ve seen enough rolling blackouts to know the state of California isn’t completely there with renewables as they couldn’t keep up all the time with a combo of renewables and non-renewables.
It’s not that I don’t want it to work, it’s just not there yet. As far as the battery thing that @Joes Place is referring to, we really aren’t there yet.
You do realize that CA used to have brown-outs during sunny summer months, when everyone's running their AC, right?
Being able to handle that daytime surge with 100% renewables is pretty impressive.
No one is arguing we are there yet.
The point is, we are getting pretty close, and investing in that infrastructure is worthwhile. Because in the long-run, renewables and batteries are much cheaper.
For the present time, I think we will be “there” when the renewable to fossil ratio will be in the 80/20 or 90/10 range. Renewable fuel costs are zero and labor costs are minimal. And every Mw they produce is one less Mw of crap being put into the air.
But we’re operating on a power grid that was designed for something else. If you built a large generation plant you also had to build/purchase the transmission line to get that power to your load. Now the wind farms are sited where the wind is optimal and tied into existing transmission lines. This causes other problems on those lines. I don’t think there will be any quick conversion to total renewables any time soon.
Indeed.
It is why significant investment in grid infrastructure is necessary.
And the cost benefit is that energy will get cheaper over time, not more expensive.
US also needs more nuclear power to bridge the gap, and thorium reactors should be in the next-decade plans. Thorium was dumped as an idea in the 1970s, because it was incapable of producing material for nuclear warheads.
Right wing pundits and politicians bought by oil companies told them to be mad. A hundred years ago if the railroad lobby wanted them to think flying was bad, they’d mock the Wright brothers’ brief first flight.
Indeed. Wind farms kill birds, EVs have batteries that harm the environment, solar farms hurt trees and birds, hydro damages the ecosystem etc...
All of that comes out when there is discussion on forward progress for any of those methods of power generation. It's kind of odd since the people seemingly concerned about the environmental impact don't otherwise seem to care about what is being impacted. They just know that the people who care about renewable energy also care about those other things so in your face libs!.
Do fossil fuel plants require less extensive and less expensive maintenance ?
Huh. Some triggered cons on this thread telling everyone how it is impossible? So shocking.
Sorry to burst your bubble but we are heading to the day when the grid component for cities, states and countries is all renewable energy. This does not mean transportation and manufacturing and construction won’t be using fossil fuels. But yes, we are getting to the point where your house and business will not be using them in the decades to come. And no it won’t be out weighed by maintenance of solar panels or charging a car (lol) Sorry that gives you a sad.
Sorry to burst your bubble but we are heading to the day when the grid component for cities, states and countries is all renewable energy. This does not mean transportation and manufacturing and construction won’t be using fossil fuels. But yes, we are getting to the point where your house and business will not be using them in the decades to come. And no it won’t be out weighed by maintenance of solar panels or charging a car (lol) Sorry that gives you a sad.
Those crazy linemen. The preeminent knowledge-bank for the electrical grid, as well as gittin a good laugh at all of us out here in Califor-ni-a.
Out in west Texas with my boss at one of our solar sites.
I’m dubious about what “pretty close” means but you are probably right and have more experience with renewable energy than I do.
Odd post is odd. The company and Linemen we were doing work for was PacifiCorp. A simple google search will tell you that PacifiCorp does indeed provide power to certain areas in Northern California via coal plants in Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado.
Yeah, it’s crazy that the guys that install and maintain the transmission lines for that company know what those same transmission lines are doing.
I believe that is the goal, isnt it? We have a chance to be a world leader in renewable energy and that would seem like something worth pursuing, right?
It’s 100% necessary. I don’t understand the backlash. I would if California was in some big ass economic crisis from achieving this, but they’re not.
Oh, yeah... California NEVER has brownouts or blackouts.
GTF out of town with this shit.
This is exactly the company where I visited the coal fire plant.
California seems to be making progress towards fixing their problems, Is that not a good thing?
CA now has enough solar installed that brownouts aren't what they were 2 decades ago.
The solar provides the electricity when it is most needed.
What would be crazy is believing that those linemen had any idea what the load flow on that line was at the moment of their little joke. There could be 500 Mw flowing on that line into California, but if the generation in CA matched the load that same 500 Mw would flow out on other tie lines.
