| General > General Technical Chat |
| This doesn't make sense - NYT article about a solar installation in the US |
| << < (6/12) > >> |
| NiHaoMike:
--- Quote from: rstofer on October 30, 2021, 09:55:37 pm ---Running on generators is contradictory to the goal of reduced emissions. That would be the absolute worst way to provide power. --- End quote --- It would happen rarely so not much in the grand scheme. Also, it means that the first ones to get dropped for demand reduction should the grid get crippled would be the ones prepared to deal with it. Additionally, there could be different amounts of reward given and/or different priorities depending on the kind of generator, more for generators that run from renewables such as biodiesel or wind/solar. There could also be a separate incentive program for CHP generators in cold areas, to export to the grid when demand is high and get paid for that, with the excess heat stored as hot water for later use. --- Quote ---Work from home is pretty popular and I'll bet houses are more efficient than office buildings because the workers pay their own utility bills. A laptop doesn't require all the features of the modern office building. I think I would work from the patio for about half the year. Poke at a spreadsheet while watching the dogs run and play. Pretty easy life! --- End quote --- Likely to be true in areas where HVAC is rarely used, otherwise it would use far less energy to heat/cool an office building instead of many houses, even under the assumption that not all houses would be unoccupied during the day. Where there would be a huge energy savings would be the reduction in driving. |
| Someone:
--- Quote from: rstofer on October 30, 2021, 09:48:03 pm --- --- Quote from: Someone on October 30, 2021, 02:48:38 am ---For all the talk of moving to electric transport there hasn't been any planning on how the grid will support that and where the generation will come from. Technically possible, yes, but the free market won't deliver it as the current market they play in is largely for show/theatrical (monopoly distributors, cartel generators). --- End quote --- None of the electric public utility systems in the US are 'free market'. They are all controlled by Public Utility Commissions. The PUCs tell the utility what to do, when to do it and how much extra they can charge for the results. --- End quote --- Which is what I said, they arent actually market driven. --- Quote from: rstofer on October 30, 2021, 09:48:03 pm ---Most people work during on-peak hours, that's why the demand is called 'on-peak'; buildings are up and running. Charging at home, after work, will be during a period of reduced demand. But, not to worry, if things get out of hand, the utilities will move to Time Of Day billing. They already have tariffs (regulations) in place and the rates are available as an option (at least here in Northern California with PG&E). They will just convert everybody. For the most part, the revenue meters have already been converted to Smart Meters which are read over the power line so getting instantaneous or interval demand is trivial. You may note that there hasn't been a meter reader (person) in the neighborhood for a decade or more. --- End quote --- Current time of use tariffs are barely connected to the live cost of energy, at most I've seen a 2 season split. So the tariffs are a heavily averaged guess of the average cost, still noting to incentivise people to use less power when supply (or delivery) is constrained. Only moving people to the average time of day when its typically less constrained. The peak demands (as cause outages/curtailments) are currently derived from mass use of electric HVAC, a big part of average energy use: http://www.withouthotair.com/c18/page_103.shtml Time of use is not solving that and won't squeeze the future EV demand into the excess generation available. --- Quote from: rstofer on October 30, 2021, 09:48:03 pm ---EVs already have a programmable start time (or end time) as part of the firmware. That's cool! Tell the car you want it fully charged by the time you finish your cup of coffee in the morning (end time) and it will start the charging as required. It remains for the car owner to have a large enough charger to get it done. --- End quote --- That may help with the delivery (network) constraints, but doesn't explain where the new generation capacity will magically come from. Cars are quicker to build and deploy than power plants, plans/policy is in place to require electric transport, but there is no matching policy or plan to increase generation. --- Quote from: rstofer on October 30, 2021, 09:48:03 pm ---Gasoline here is $5/gallon and if a car gets 20 MPG, that's about $0.25/mile. If we take 3.7 miles per kWh and $0.25/kWh this works out to $0.07/mile. --- End quote --- US is on the low end of electricity pricing relative to petrol when compared worldwide: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/problems-if-we-all-had-tesla-cars/msg705793/#msg705793 And you take the classic EV-nut approach of your choice car designed for energy efficiency shall be compared to gas guzzling bricks, instead of other vehicles designed for energy efficiency (50-60MPG). So keep convincing yourself, but its just the same old reality distortion. You're in a pricing structure (low road tax, flat(tened) electricity) that encourages you to use those supplies (roads and electricity) for your advantage and pushing the costs equally onto everyone else (in the state/country). Its the opposite of a market, and with insufficient personal disincentives the system lacks negative feedback and is almost certain to fail (traffic jams, blackouts). |
| Someone:
--- Quote from: NiHaoMike on October 30, 2021, 10:54:01 pm ---There could also be a separate incentive program for CHP generators in cold areas, to export to the grid when demand is high and get paid for that, with the excess heat stored as hot water for later use. --- End quote --- This is one possibility that could make a big dent in generation and network inadequacies as (above) the worst peak demands on the electricity grid are almost entirely from space heating/cooling. There are groups looking at larger commercial and community/district sized CHP/trigeneration too. |
| NiHaoMike:
--- Quote from: Someone on October 30, 2021, 11:08:56 pm ---The peak demands (as cause outages/curtailments) are currently derived from mass use of electric HVAC, a big part of average energy use: --- End quote --- That can be economically solved by adding thermal storage (particularly for air conditioning which can be stored as ice), but there needs to be incentives to build it. |
| james_s:
--- Quote from: NiHaoMike on October 30, 2021, 10:54:01 pm ---Likely to be true in areas where HVAC is rarely used, otherwise it would use far less energy to heat/cool an office building instead of many houses, even under the assumption that not all houses would be unoccupied during the day. Where there would be a huge energy savings would be the reduction in driving. --- End quote --- Probably a lot less difference than you might expect. Besides, even if everyone is in the office building they can't all just stop heating and cooling their houses. A large number of people have pets and they are generally comfortable under the same sort of conditions that humans are comfortable, you shouldn't let your house get scorching hot or freezing cold if your dog or cat is home. Then there is the fact that if you set back the HVAC deeply you have to play catch up and run it longer to get the temperature comfortable when you get home. Deep setbacks only really make sense if you are away for multiple days. Regarding storing air conditioning as ice, calculate how much ice you need to store say 6 hours of 36,000 BTU/hr, so over 200k BTUs of cooling for a modest house in a moderate climate. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |