If/when electrics take over

[DGXR]

Originally Posted by PimTac
This new idea of the time of use has crept into our local HOV Pay lanes. The tolls go up during the peak hours and also if traffic is bad. I definitely see this happening with electricity demand. This is where a small fuel cell for a residence could make some sense. Make your own electricity.

Already is happening: SMUD Time-of-Day Pricing

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
Originally Posted by PimTac
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
I am not sure why someone would choose to charge their EV when the cost is highest.




Maybe they have no choice? Not everyone works 9-5.

When demand kicks in on overnight charging and subsequent electricity usage, prices will go up. That's a given.

Timer... Charge off-peak.


Off peak is going to be 11AM to 4PM in the next few years....

All these people who don't understand the grid who think that theyare going to be charging cheap while they sleep are sorely mistaken.

 

[4WD]

Sure enough, it either flips unattended … or level loads with GTG if any real planning takes place …
Big concrete/steel domes can help …

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
In the US the term NetZero in the context of building science means that the structure essentially produces as much electricity as it consumes.


I fully understand that...it's the same as countries claiming net green energy exports, but being 100% reliant on their neighbours for half the time...your house isn't going to be charging your car...and you'll be using someone elses generator to charge your car...MORE EXPENSIVELY at night...which is what I've been saying.


Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
In any case utilities are learning to manage the duck curve by upgrading their equipment, exploring utility scale storage, and converting existing capacity into fast responding NatGas peaker-plants.


Yes, I was in a meeting with one of the managers of teh Australian Energy Market the other day...they used to have to look forward to the weatehr to prdict demand, and now they have to look at it to predict supply as well...and those peakers are increasingly running in diesel, at 30 something percent efficiency...great outcome.

re utility scale storage...you are drinking the unicorn milk.

The biggest battery, the one installed in South Australia, by Tesla can store 3-5 minutes of the state's daily energy usage...they stopped using it for capacity, and are now sniping the frequency control market with it...ehich will likely shorten it's life to less than 10 years.

It "loses" 20% of the energy that goes into it (100MWh in, 80MWh out), and even if it's filled with "free" renewables, it needs 30c/KWh wholesale prices to cover it's capital cost.

A Tesla Power wall filled with free electricity from my roof similarly costs about 30c/KWh.

The idea of "utility" scale batteries storing sufficient energy to carry Ca through the night is laughable.

To replace 1,000MW of thermal, you need 4,000MW of solar cells...plus storage, which then means that you need 5,000MW of solar cells.

That's precisely why the time of use tarrifs are going to reverse....and absolute oversupply during the day, and negative prices (South Australia is already there, with -$1,000/MWh quite often offered during the day), and high prices at night...South Australia has the highest energy prices in Australia.

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
In the US at least the power companies actually prefer renewable such as Solar/Wind because it'll cost them less $$ to upgrade equipment to manage these additional sources of power rather than having to build out more generation capacity.


The ones who get in first, to install capacity get the wins...they get to pump energy into the grid, the grid that's already held up by thousands of tonnes of spinning equipment providing frequency control and inertia.

It's cheap...but only for the first few...than, as I say, you have to install 4-5 times the capacity (nameplate rating) and somewhere to store it...than it's REALLY expensive...more expensive than building a thermal.

Australia went that way, until frequency control became a basket case

Now, if you want to put in a wind or solar farm, you have to install frequency control (either run at 80% capacity and bump up to 100% for frequency events, or put in batteries), and install synchronous condensers (power factor correction and inertia).

Unicorn milk purveyors purposely refuse to acknowledge the elephants in the room, and that future green is incredibly expensive.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by Shannow
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
Originally Posted by PimTac
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
I am not sure why someone would choose to charge their EV when the cost is highest.




Maybe they have no choice? Not everyone works 9-5.

When demand kicks in on overnight charging and subsequent electricity usage, prices will go up. That's a given.

Timer... Charge off-peak.


Off peak is going to be 11AM to 4PM in the next few years....

All these people who don't understand the grid who think that theyare going to be charging cheap while they sleep are sorely mistaken.





I agree. A lot of things are changing. Most metro areas with severe traffic are encouraging businesses to adopt shift times that spread that traffic out, hence my statement that not everyone works 9-5. I know a few people that start work very early (0400-0500) and get off around noon or so. Four tens or three twelve hour shifts are common.

The obvious factor here that prices will climb higher during the night is that there is no sun to hit the solar panels.

More efficient vehicles are coming but they will not be stylish. The high roof box is the next trend. Very light and very utilitarian and efficient.

 

[dnewton3]

This is yet more of the elaborate conversations that take place around many water coolers, but they often include ignorance of the otherwise obvious facts ...

I have a friend that now has a Volt. Nice car. Works great for him. He has a 20 mile commute, and his employer has a charging station at work. Great. But that same car cannot make the long trips to my house, or make multiple trips a day.

There are two main problems with electric vehicles;
- energy density
- energy replenishment time

Have an electric battery powered lawn mower? That's fine when it take 20 minutes to mow your tiny little lawn. That won't cut it (pun intended) on a multi-acre estate.
Have a battery powered chain saw? Fine for trimming a few limbs but won't do the job when large trees fall after a storm, or when you're trying to clear a lot or stock up wood for winter heating.
Have a battery powered vehicle? Fine for a short commute, but won't carry you long distances, and would take too flippin' long to recharge.

When my friend drives his Volt from Louisville to Indy, he ends up running on gas after about 60 miles. And then when he arrives at my house, he charges up the car for 8 hours. There is NO WAY he can make long trips without engaging the two concepts I stated above; power density and power replenishment duration. He MUST use gas to drive long distances, and he MUST engage in long refuel times if electric is his choice. Those are two concepts that are clearly a benefit of fossil fuels. Gas/diesel has a fantastically dense energy package, and it's 100% replenishment in minutes (fill your tank and you're good for hours of operation).

Then there's the the other two topics also often ignored during these conversations ...
Infrastructure is easily supported for fossil fuels because the systems already exist, but if we tried to move to a majority of electric vehicles and power products we're in trouble, because we are nearly at the brink of collapse at the current electric use rates. Our electric grid would need a GIANT, EXPENSIVE, LONG TIME INVESTMENT overhaul to get there. And we'd still be producing the power from the plentiful sources (NG and Coal).

There are times when electric power makes sense for many applications; there are times it does not.
Electric power will NEVER become the main fuel source during my lifetime because despite the ostrich-approach of some folks, you cannot avoid certain physical realities.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl


Nuclear is ridiculously expensive and S-L-O-W to ramp up/down. In all seriousness w/out govt guarantees reactors would never get built.


Nuclear has high CAPEX costs due to regulation and construction costs. It has low operating costs, with most of them being staffing. Nuclear can operate in a load following manner (see: France), but traditionally operates in baseload because a nuke running wide-open is its most cost-effective mode of operation. The more kWh it can churn out, the cheaper those kWh are, given the rather fixed costs of operation.

But your 2nd remark is on-point: Given the amount of time to recoup CAPEX, and the fact that fuel loading is recouped from ratepayers, a private generator will favour gas because it will cost WAY less to build (thus profit occurs much faster), and its operating costs are covered by ratepayers. If gas prices go up, they charge more. They are not on the hook for fuel costing. If these organizations were penalized for emissions; costs that they were forced to bear and couldn't be passed-on to ratepayers, then you may see behaviours change. As you noted, in most locations where new nukes are currently under construction or coming online, the funding for those projects is state-provided. That's how all 20 of ours in Ontario were built and likely how future ones will be built here.

 

[4WD]

Of course some were built with expansion capabilities … nearby plant has enough cooling water already … and land to do such … miles and miles of line … even have permits in hand … but they are "watching the weather" (so to speak) …

 

[Snagglefoot]

Originally Posted by OVERKILL

That's how all 20 of ours in Ontario were built and likely how future ones will be built here.


Are there any new nuclear plants planned in Canada?

Apparently there are two plants in the USA getting finished ( in Georgia) but that seems to be it.

 

[TiredTrucker]

The powers that be are turning my state (Iowa) into one great big giant wind farm. Building the towers and blades here, setting up the wind mills here.We are swimming in electricity and we are selling a lot of it to other states, especially Illinois.

 

[ShutdownCorner]

Nuclear is horrible. San anofre plant out here has a real possibility of leaking into the ocean and ruining the entire coastline for Human habitation. For a few years of profit, we have all that waste to watch over for thousands of years. The private companies take the profits and tax payers pay for clean up.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by ShutdownCorner
Nuclear is horrible. San anofre plant out here has a real possibility of leaking into the ocean and ruining the entire coastline for Human habitation. For a few years of profit, we have all that waste to watch over for thousands of years. The private companies take the profits and tax payers pay for clean up.



You have all that waste because you CHOOSE TO...US designed their nuclear power station progamme to provide "waste" to make bombs...it's illegal to reprocess, and thus creates "waste"

Choose a sensible system like Canada which not only reconsumes the waste, it builds fuel, and its great.

 

[ShutdownCorner]

They used depleted uranium on battlefields in Iraq (and kids there have deformities). They do use the waste to an extent.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Kids in Iraq had deformities long before we showed up. It's a little different there as far as lifestyle. Our tanks and A-10's use depleted uranium shells, but I seriously doubt anyone could rationally link that to children's deformities.

Modern nukes are very clean if desired. There's just too much political hoo-ha in the US with the word "nuclear" due to the greenies going crazy. An awful lot of our citizenry is misinformed and/or outright disingenuous about the facts surrounding environmental issues.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by ShutdownCorner
They used depleted uranium on battlefields in Iraq (and kids there have deformities). They do use the waste to an extent.





Don't believe all the fake news you read.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by Snagglefoot
Originally Posted by OVERKILL

That's how all 20 of ours in Ontario were built and likely how future ones will be built here.


Are there any new nuclear plants planned in Canada?

Apparently there are two plants in the USA getting finished ( in Georgia) but that seems to be it.


There are plans for at least two new builds at Point Lepreau in New Brunswick. In Ontario, OPG is [censored]-bent on building Darlington B, though we are not sure what will be built there. The Environmental Assessment is still valid and there are two approved designs that were in competition to be built. They could, right now, build CANDU 6's there, but there is interest in waiting and doing SMR's so......

At the Chalk River testing ground there will be a number of demo units constructed by the various entities participating in the SMR programme. The winning designs from that process will likely be picked up by OPG, Bruce Power and the other utilities that are participating in it.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by ShutdownCorner
Nuclear is horrible. San anofre plant out here has a real possibility of leaking into the ocean and ruining the entire coastline for Human habitation. For a few years of profit, we have all that waste to watch over for thousands of years. The private companies take the profits and tax payers pay for clean up.



Nuclear is an amazing technology and by far the most efficient method for generating electricity.

Now, what do you think is going to leak out of San Anofre? The cooling pond water? Water from one of the cooling loops?

The term "waste" when used in conjunction with fuel that has come out of the reactor is a misnomer. This product is no more waste than unrefined crude. It has massive amounts of power generating potential left in it, which is why France actively reprocesses these used fuel bundles from reactors all over Europe and even Japan. Depleted Uranium can as well be used in the fabrication of fuel bundles.

The US has, intentionally, NOT pursued a reprocessing program. That's a CHOICE. That's not at the feet of the technology, but rather your government. Also, the majority of US nuclear facilities CHOOSE to store all their used fuel, from their entire life of operation, in the onsite cooling ponds, rather than transferring this product into dry cask storage, which is what Canada, and the rest of the world does. Remember, a nuke does not produce a lot of this, which is why they are able to store decades upon decades of it in the cooling bays on-site.

Dry cask storage is incredibly safe and requires no special handling, just periodic inspection. It's also a great intermediate measure until 4th gen reactors that can run on existing waste, without the need for reprocessing, become common.

This is what Dry Cask storage in Canada looks like:

 

[PimTac]

This subject keeps popping up here and usually with the same results.

Another likely scenario is having a get together somewhere and several people will ask to recharge their vehicles. That might be hard with one charge station, that is if one is available.

Nuclear produced energy is one of the most misunderstood topics around.

 

[4WD]

Isn't that what the MBT's are armored with … ?

 

[4WD]

There have been a number of Tesla's burn to the ground … but just on Google I can't find a percentage that burned while charging -vs- in some other mode … Any idea ?