There is an interesting form of storage called electrically synthesized methane that was included in this recent report: http://arstechnica.com/science... I suspect that the wind resource south of Iceland may end up being used for that.
Actually, there is a pretty classic diagram of a cannon on a mountain firing so that it hits itself from behind. It is used to explain the concept of an orbit. This kind of idea could be running in about a decade with a bit of effort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
You can see where the tradeoff comes. When more aerodynamic mean more weight, fuel economy may not benefit. Carbon fiber can give you the desired shape with less weight. In terms of recycling, it is early days, but is seems to happening already. http://www.siemens.com/innovat... The BMW i3 has more range with less battery than the Leaf so they seem to be getting some advantage there.
On cost, Lovins is way ahead of you. That was the point of the chart I linked for you. All the potential systems have been costed out and the renewable system turns out to be the least expensive.
I think the point is, you can get those shapes with less weight. I think also that the cost comes down with scale, and much of the savings comes from improved performance. http://www.rmi.org/winter_2014...
Carbon fiber rims are common on bicycles and motorcycles now are are getting used on autos more frequently. Carbon fiber roofs seem to be popular in new car models as well. http://www.plasticsnews.com/ar...
The central challenge considered here is do we need a lot of storage for renewable energy and the answer turns out to be no, not much:
"Renewable electricity generation from technologies that are commercially available today, in combination with a more flexible electric system, is more than adequate to supply 80% of total U.S. electricity generation in 2050 while meeting electricity demand on an hourly basis in every region of the country.
Increased electric system flexibility, needed to enable electricity supply and demand balance with high levels of renewable generation, can come from a portfolio of supply- and demand-side options, including flexible conventional generation, grid storage, new transmission, more responsive loads, and changes in power system operations." http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/r...
Clearly, the possibilities considered in your second reference are part of the conclusion that supersedes the claims of your first link regarding storage. Other management strategies can fill in for storage including flexible conventional generation, new transmission, more responsive loads, and changes in power system operations. So, storage is not so crucial as some have claimed. It would be nice, and given trends in transportation, likely cheap and abundant, but it is not crucial.
So, your second link seems largely in agreement with Lovins. A smarter grid accepts more kinds of inputs gracefully. The first link seems superseded by the NREL work and some of the work of Mark Jacobson at Stanford regarding the need for storage.
How about a link on the subject of storage. An acknowledged energy expert and a respected government lab have asserted it isn't required. Address their argument and data. Ad hominem just shows you don't have anything to say on the subject.
The NREL simulation is for 80% renewables in 2050 so the gas plants should still be around in that. http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/r... There was mention of some ice storage for cooling as new storage as well in the video. The main thing was that not a lot of new storage was needed though.
Assuming greater range vehicles or more durable batteries could account for that. I used some A123 systems data for durability from a while back. I think things have improved since then.
He is recognized as an expert by those who would know. He publishes in Annual Reviews, for example. Look you ad hominem has failed. You just make yourself look foolish pursuing this. Try posting a link about storage if you have any constructive ideas. Lovins knows what he is talking about. He in an expert. He could be wrong though. Why not dig into the topic and find out?
Energy Policy, International Journal of vehicle Design, Foreign Affairs, Harvard Business Review, Population and Development Review, Contemporary Economic Policy all look as though they have peer review. Annual Reviews is invited of course. Perhaps your trouble is in reading the link?
Interestingly, the backup is in fact storage. When a natural gas plant backs up a nuclear plant, the natural gas is stored energy. So, if we are doing the same kind of backup for renewables, there is storage. But, there is no new storage and apparently we will be using it less. So, I don't think he has made the mistake you think he has.
Slashdot Mirror
That sound about right. Here is where I did a calculation about seven years ago. http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/20...
There is an interesting form of storage called electrically synthesized methane that was included in this recent report: http://arstechnica.com/science... I suspect that the wind resource south of Iceland may end up being used for that.
Actually, there is a pretty classic diagram of a cannon on a mountain firing so that it hits itself from behind. It is used to explain the concept of an orbit. This kind of idea could be running in about a decade with a bit of effort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
Since it is more efficient than Haber Bosch it is only a matter of time.
I think it is so cute when anonymous posters share biographical details....
You can see where the tradeoff comes. When more aerodynamic mean more weight, fuel economy may not benefit. Carbon fiber can give you the desired shape with less weight. In terms of recycling, it is early days, but is seems to happening already. http://www.siemens.com/innovat... The BMW i3 has more range with less battery than the Leaf so they seem to be getting some advantage there.
On cost, Lovins is way ahead of you. That was the point of the chart I linked for you. All the potential systems have been costed out and the renewable system turns out to be the least expensive.
I think the point is, you can get those shapes with less weight. I think also that the cost comes down with scale, and much of the savings comes from improved performance. http://www.rmi.org/winter_2014...
Carbon fiber rims are common on bicycles and motorcycles now are are getting used on autos more frequently. Carbon fiber roofs seem to be popular in new car models as well. http://www.plasticsnews.com/ar...
The central challenge considered here is do we need a lot of storage for renewable energy and the answer turns out to be no, not much:
"Renewable electricity generation from technologies that are commercially available today, in combination with a more flexible electric system, is more than adequate to supply 80% of total U.S. electricity generation in 2050 while meeting electricity demand on an hourly basis in every region of the country.
Increased electric system flexibility, needed to enable electricity supply and demand balance with high levels of renewable generation, can come from a portfolio of supply- and demand-side options, including flexible conventional generation, grid storage, new transmission, more responsive loads, and changes in power system operations." http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/r...
Clearly, the possibilities considered in your second reference are part of the conclusion that supersedes the claims of your first link regarding storage. Other management strategies can fill in for storage including flexible conventional generation, new transmission, more responsive loads, and changes in power system operations. So, storage is not so crucial as some have claimed. It would be nice, and given trends in transportation, likely cheap and abundant, but it is not crucial.
So, your second link seems largely in agreement with Lovins. A smarter grid accepts more kinds of inputs gracefully. The first link seems superseded by the NREL work and some of the work of Mark Jacobson at Stanford regarding the need for storage.
How about a link on the subject of storage. An acknowledged energy expert and a respected government lab have asserted it isn't required. Address their argument and data. Ad hominem just shows you don't have anything to say on the subject.
The NREL simulation is for 80% renewables in 2050 so the gas plants should still be around in that. http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/r... There was mention of some ice storage for cooling as new storage as well in the video. The main thing was that not a lot of new storage was needed though.
Assuming greater range vehicles or more durable batteries could account for that. I used some A123 systems data for durability from a while back. I think things have improved since then.
Now you really look like a fool.
They are all there. He has a lot of publications. Dig in a few pages.
He is recognized as an expert by those who would know. He publishes in Annual Reviews, for example. Look you ad hominem has failed. You just make yourself look foolish pursuing this. Try posting a link about storage if you have any constructive ideas. Lovins knows what he is talking about. He in an expert. He could be wrong though. Why not dig into the topic and find out?
You poor soul. "Banquet Keynote Speaker – Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute"
How stupid. A catapult would be to earth orbit. Get a grip.
Wow, look at the egg on your face...
Look again "Banquet Keynote Speaker – Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute"
He was the Keynote Speaker.
Energy Policy, International Journal of vehicle Design, Foreign Affairs, Harvard Business Review, Population and Development Review, Contemporary Economic Policy all look as though they have peer review. Annual Reviews is invited of course. Perhaps your trouble is in reading the link?
Interestingly, the backup is in fact storage. When a natural gas plant backs up a nuclear plant, the natural gas is stored energy. So, if we are doing the same kind of backup for renewables, there is storage. But, there is no new storage and apparently we will be using it less. So, I don't think he has made the mistake you think he has.
And yet spreading cr*p is all you do here. How about a link or two instead of ad hominem all the the time?
The American Physical Society disagrees. http://www.aps.org/units/fps/m...
The American Physical Society, http://www.aps.org/units/fps/m... Association of Energy Engineers http://www.aeecenter.org/i4a/p... and the Annual Appalachian Energy Summit http://www.news.appstate.edu/2... all seem happy to have Lovins as a Keynote speaker. Guess claims he is not an expert are ignored by these groups.