How much of the Mix can Renewables be?

[ding]

He is

All over herself. Apu is a Lola.

 

[abu afak]

All over herself. Apu is a Lola.

In reporting the many above posts... (ding's last 3 above, 2 calling me a 'subversive' for asking about renewable 'mix' opinion now gone, but the Biased Mod likes his last No content post/troll/'Lola' ad hom! My point)

'My Main Stalker ding (more than similar also one-liner Todddster who spit at me "Sandy Vaglna") and more active.[/B]​

Here, as usual, he is OFF TOPIC Without content (his last 3). ​

​

He has been Groomed to be a troll/criminal for YEARS BY THE MODERATORS Ineptitude and unwillingness to enforce any trace of civility. ​

He knows from previous posting/trolling it's acceptable, esp at me, a "lib."​

This is 100% on them.​

We need ALL new Mods.​

(and of course Ding got a 'like' from former mod MisterBealle, himself a Troll.[/B]​

​

​

`​

 

[abu afak]

50-80% looks very possible to me. After that, it's very tricky.
We have been adding renewables in Vast majority last 5 years: 2/3 (2016) - 85% (2021).
How much of the mix is possible/can they ultimately be.. how soon.
I posted this pair years ago as part of my series of the most Major issues in the debate.
Two opinions:

1. Is 100% renewable energy realistic? Here’s what we know.

"...Today’s models, at least, appear to agree that “a diversified mix of low-CO2 generation resources” add up to a more cost-effective path to deep decarbonization than 100% renewables. This is particularly true above 60% or 80% decarbonization, when the costs of the renewables-only option rise sharply.​

Again, it’s all about balancing out VRE. The easiest way to do that is with fast, flexible natural gas plants, but you can’t get past around 60% decarbonization with a large fleet of gas plants running. Getting to 80% or beyond means closing or idling lots of those plants. So you need other balancing options."..."​

-
Some say 100% os possible, I don't see it any time soon without new technology.

2. 100% renewable energy - Wikipedia​

"...Two potentially large sources of dispatchable carbon-free power are nuclear and fossil fuels with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS). Suffice it to say, a variety of people oppose one or both of those sources, for a variety of reasons.​

​

So then the question becomes, can we balance out VRE in a deeply decarbonized grid without them? Do our other dispatchable balancing options add up to something sufficient?​

​

That is the core of the dispute over 100% renewable energy: whether it is possible (or advisable) to decarbonize the grid without nuclear and CCS."..."​

elektra
Actualy the above is "what I said."
Wiki was exploring 100%

`

 

[MarathonMike]

Solar and wind are VERY undependable sources of power. They do OK on very small scale applications like houses and farms. They should play a very limited role in any power grid.

 

[abu afak]

Solar and wind are VERY undependable sources of power. They do OK on very small scale applications like houses and farms. They should play a very limited role in any power grid.

From my link above, not your Idiot empty opinion.
Try reading it and MY lesser estimate/

​

""1. Is 100% renewable energy realistic? Here’s what we know.​

​

"...Today’s models, at least, appear to agree that “a diversified mix of low-CO2 generation resources” add up to a more cost-effective path to deep decarbonization than 100% renewables. This is particularly true above 60% or 80% decarbonization, when the costs of the renewables-only option rise sharply.​

Again, it’s all about balancing out VRE. The easiest way to do that is with fast, flexible natural gas plants, but you can’t get past around 60% decarbonization with a large fleet of gas plants running. Getting to 80% or beyond means closing or idling lots of those plants. So you need other balancing options."...""​

-​

Some say 100% is possible, I don't see it any time soon without new technology...."​

​

​

`​

 

[jc456]

From my lonk abov, not your Idiot empty opinion.

​

1. Is 100% renewable energy realistic? Here’s what we know.​

​

"...Today’s models, at least, appear to agree that “a diversified mix of low-CO2 generation resources” add up to a more cost-effective path to deep decarbonization than 100% renewables. This is particularly true above 60% or 80% decarbonization, when the costs of the renewables-only option rise sharply.​

Again, it’s all about balancing out VRE. The easiest way to do that is with fast, flexible natural gas plants, but you can’t get past around 60% decarbonization with a large fleet of gas plants running. Getting to 80% or beyond means closing or idling lots of those plants. So you need other balancing options."..."​

-​

Some say 100% os possible, I don't see it any time soon without new technology....​

​

​

`​

What happens at night with solar?

 

[jc456]

What happens at night with solar?

What’s the output?

 

[MarathonMike]

From my link above, not your Idiot empty opinion.
Try reading it and MY lesser estimate/

​

""1. Is 100% renewable energy realistic? Here’s what we know.​

​

"...Today’s models, at least, appear to agree that “a diversified mix of low-CO2 generation resources” add up to a more cost-effective path to deep decarbonization than 100% renewables. This is particularly true above 60% or 80% decarbonization, when the costs of the renewables-only option rise sharply.​

Again, it’s all about balancing out VRE. The easiest way to do that is with fast, flexible natural gas plants, but you can’t get past around 60% decarbonization with a large fleet of gas plants running. Getting to 80% or beyond means closing or idling lots of those plants. So you need other balancing options."...""​

-​

Some say 100% is possible, I don't see it any time soon without new technology...."​

​

​

`​

My opinion is borne out by reality. What do you do when the Sun doesn't shine for days or weeks at a time? Or when the wind doesn't blow? Or when it blows TOO HARD and the windmills have to shut down? You can be as insulting as you want, YOU ARE WRONG. All of your pie in the sky studies are just that. I'm talking about reality.

 

[MarathonMike]

My opinion is borne out by reality. What do you do when the Sun doesn't shine for days or weeks at a time? Or when the wind doesn't blow? Or when it blows TOO HARD and the windmills have to shut down? You can be as insulting as you want, YOU ARE WRONG. All of your pie in the sky studies are just that. I'm talking about reality.

I confront abu a fake with the cold hard facts and all she has is a "funny" rating. LOL

 

[abu afak]

My opinion is borne out by reality. What do you do when the Sun doesn't shine for days or weeks at a time? Or when the wind doesn't blow? Or when it blows TOO HARD and the windmills have to shut down? You can be as insulting as you want, YOU ARE WRONG. All of your pie in the sky studies are just that. I'm talking about reality.

Switch to Wind, or the biggest $ investment in the last few years, the Ever more efficient/cheaper Battery Backup. Lastly of course, I see NG as the last 1/3 or so. "over 60%" mentioned IN MY OP and several more times.

Of course the best places for Solar are (your area) the Southwest where sunshine is NOT absent for weeks or even days. (similar in Florida etc)
Anything else Turd?
`

`

 

[jc456]

Switch to Wind, or the biggest $ investment in the last few years, the Ever more efficient/cheaper Battery Backup. Lastly of course, I see NG as the last 1/3 or so. "over 60%" mentioned IN MY OP and several more times.

Of course the best places for Solar are (your area) the Southwest where sunshine is NOT absent for weeks or even days. (similar in Florida etc)
Anything else Turd?
`

`

what's the solar output at night? You still haven't addressed that yet. Why didn't you? How reliable is wind as well? What's the up time on the farms?

 

[Samofvt]

Brrr. It is way below normal for temperatures in my area this year.

Were the people who said there would be another ice age within 20 years correct?

Feels like it to me, right now.

But seriously. NO.

And carbon dioxide has so little impact on global climate, it is a joke.​