Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Night? (Score 1) 252

by DemoLiter3 (#40876801) Attached to: Tokelau Becomes First Country To Go 100% Solar

What you propose is about 5TWh of total storage. Currently there are 40GWh. Increasing the current capacity 125-fold is just as unrealistic as increasing it 2000-fold, seeing how a company who now tries to push plans for the 13GWh pumped storage Atdorf (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumpspeicherkraftwerk_Atdorf#Pumpspeicherkraftwerk_Atdorf , sorry, no English version) has been struggled for years with their plans, primarily against the opposition of the Green party.

So your plans is to build a ~30-by-30 kilometers sea that is elevated by 100 meters. Do you even realize how giant this thing is? It's the size of Berlin! Do you realize that you also need to multiple it by 2, since you also need a sea at the low level to store the water?

80TWh will never happen, and 5TWh won't happen either, and 1TWh is maybe realistic within 200 years or so. The renewable revolution will not happen, all we're doing now is going back to burning lignite and gas.

Comment: Re:Night? (Score 1) 252

by DemoLiter3 (#40874007) Attached to: Tokelau Becomes First Country To Go 100% Solar

1) This storage capacity was calculated by simulating wind, solar etc. output based on real weather data. It already assumed a realistic mix of renewables including ones with adjustable output such as biogas and a realistic possibilities of export/import.

And about "firing up fossil plants for a few days in a year". Just imagine what would any electricity company do if they had a power plant that they would be able to use only a few days a year? They would immediately close and dismantle it and fire the staff, because the maintenance and standby costs would dwarf any profit from it.

Actually, this effect can already be seen here in Germany. We're far away from 100% renewables, yet in the wake of closure of several NPPs, and the ever increasing demand for backup power because of growing renewable supply, there is a huge debate about building additional coal and gas power plants. One would guess there's a gold rush building these? Nope. The major electricity producers already said that unless they can fire them close to 24/365, there's simply no profit in building them. The government would have to do the despicable and actually start subsidizing coal and gas power plants if they want a stable supply.

2. Solar might have a generation curve that matches the daily consumption. But seasonally, it doesn't match the consumption at all. The season of the peak consumption in Germany is WINTER, because of less natural light and warmth. At the same time, the solar production is very low in winter, it falls way below 5% of what it does in the summer. It's the saisonal fluictuations that need the storage, not daily.

3. This list is obviously bullshit. It lists Germany with THE AVERAGE PRICE of 27 $ct/kWh. it's like 21.5 euroct/kWh. I'd like that price! Where can I get it?

If you look at verivox.de, there's a price calculator at the top. You can enter the postal code (try 10000-13000 for Berlin) and your expected consumption to get the cheapest tariffs. The cheapest one I get is 411 euros for 1700 kWh a year. That's ~30 US-cents/kWh in the current conversion ratio. However it's a prepaid package which everyone would recommend to stay the hell away from. Last year a major "cheap" supplier suddenly went bankrupt and many people lost their prepaid electricity packages. The average prices are much higher, typically around 26-27 euroct/kWh.

About the taxes: the major factor is in the recent price increase in Germany was indeed a tax - a sort of a tax that is levied on the electricity consumers and used to pay the renewable electricity producers.

4. Well, guess what? Germany is a couple of hundreds kilometers long. Yet the wind power manages to fluctuate between near zero and the maximum all the time!

Comment: Re:Night? (Score 1) 252

by DemoLiter3 (#40866337) Attached to: Tokelau Becomes First Country To Go 100% Solar
Oh, and about pumped storage: yes, it's the most cost-efficient storage method, but for the dimensions we are talking about, it requires too much space. For comparison: currently available pumped storage in Germany is 40GWh. In a regenerative 100% scenario, 80TWh would be required, the 2000-fold increase. Currently, there is a plan to build another storage sea with 14GWh, it's been in planning for the last 15 years and is currently confronted with massive lawsuits from the public who want to stop the project at any cost (nobody wants to have a huge concrete sea in their backyard), so it's anything but certain if it ever is going to be built.

Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.

Working...