Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:From TFA (Score 1) 415

Even if the capacity factor of the wind and solar plants will remain low in the worst case, there absolute capacity will continue to increase as this is cheap energy. This is a logical economic choice by the energy producers. This move alone is enough to lower the capacity factor of the plant that need to buy combustible.

That said, I think that the capacity factor of the wind and solar plants will still increase a bit in the future as there take advantage of wider geographical conditions and take advantage of any kind of energy storage.

Difficult to tell is this will be enough to provides the base load, but it's undeniable that this will make the price of electricity changing very fast compared to today variation. The electricity will be very cheap when wind and solar are producing large amount, sometime even more than what the consumers can take making the price negative if there is no good interconnect to more consumers. On the contrary the price will go more higher than today when the wind and solar plant are producing only a low ratio of the demand because the combustible plants will run with a lower capacity factor.

One way to see the transition is to see it as a multiple steps process. The following schema is very general and not specific to a country (It's somewhat from the German situation, the country that is probably the leader in that transition in Europe):
1) Before nuclear plant, fossil plants take the big part, hydro for most of the rest if geographically possible.
2) Nuclear well in place: some fossils plant go uneconomical, hydro pumping economically possible because nuclear difficult to adjust to the demand.
3) Renewable ramp up: Reduce the fossil plant usage but still needed because of weather change on the renewable. Price start to change quickly. We are actually here now.
4) Energy storage ramp up: because the price change will make is economically possible. More fossil plants go uneconomical.

Nuclear is still an open question as it will also greatly take advantage of an increase of storage energy capacity, even if it's for the exact opposite reason of the renewable energy. I believe that the future of nuclear will have to take in account some difficult society perception regarding risks in exploitation and in long term wast. Probably that some countries will increase it, some will maintain it, some will reduce it, and some will even stop it.

Comment Re:From TFA (Score 1) 415

Clam down, I don't insult you.
From the article:

"For the first time, widespread adoption of renewables is effectively lowering the capacity factor for fossil fuels. That's because once a solar or wind project is built, the marginal cost of the electricity it produces is pretty much zero—free electricity—while coal and gas plants require more fuel for every new watt produced. If you're a power company with a choice, you choose the free stuff every time.
It’s a self-reinforcing cycle. As more renewables are installed, coal and natural gas plants are used less. As coal and gas are used less, the cost of using them to generate electricity goes up. As the cost of coal and gas power rises, more renewables will be installed. "

Comment Re:From TFA (Score 1) 415

I didn't say that, but I agree that I should have used "a difference of 5" instead of 5% to avoid confusion.

As the wind capacity factor increase make the natural gaz capacity factor decrease, then there should cross in the future. Actually the natural gaz is at 62% and wind at 37%, so the cross could be somewhere around 50% capacity factor. It's only a difference of about 13. With a progression of 5 in a single year, this look entirely possible to cross in less than 10 years.

Comment Re:From TFA (Score 1) 415

According to the article:
14H2 32%
15H1 35%
15H2 37%
It's a 5% progression in a single year.
At this rate it will probably need less than 10 years to cross the natural gaz capacity factor decline.

The outcome is clear: the future mainly rely on large number of interconnected wind and solar plants. An other probable consequence is that the price will change more quickly than now, because the production will be less adjustable. This price yo-yo will certainly push big investments to any kind of energy storage.

Comment Re:Issue is more complicated (Score 1) 924

No, I do not insulted him, sorry.

And the question is not about if the bug hang the system or not. The bug hang the system very clearly in a perfectly reproducible way. I will not disclose it here for obvious security reason. Anyway, in that case I was very disappointed by the reaction of the multiple maintainers concerned (the bug is a problem between several layers), while some others developers agree on the bug and even signed-off the proposed patches but can do nothing because there are not maintainers.

Comment Re:Hmmmm (Score 1) 924

Agree about the details, sorry. We disagree on the adjectives to use to talk about the words Linus used in some cases. That also a detail, as Linus himself say that he is unable to act nicely in cases like that. And while I highly respect Linus work, like every human he is not prefect. At least it acknowledge the problem publicly, witch is not an easy step. From that point to the point that this kind of brutal relation should be normal on the LKML is a completely different issue. Sarah was talking about the LKML, not only about Linus.

Comment Re:Issue is more complicated (Score 1) 924

You don't understand that the main problem is that the bug is ignored. Most of the actual maintainers are so busy filtering developers patches that there don't care anymore to user bug reports. Developers don't care either to the actual users as there make features that users don't actually uses.

"One Architecture, One OS" also translates as "One Egg, One Basket".