From the NYT: "The problem is not just about power lines. The permitting process and other legal challenges are blocking hundreds of renewable-energy projects, including solar power plants and wind farms, according to the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law."
Fantastic article. Again. Nuclear, Nuclear, Nuclear. The only option ... but the banksters and green-grifters won't make a dime! Keep on fighting and publishing.
Even the most avid nuclear experts do not predict nuclear will ever become remotely competitive with natural gas in cost. The only clean, reliable source of energy currently possible which the experts (NREL) believe has that potential (with more experience) is close loop geothermal.
I disagree. It is entirely possible for nuclear to become cost competitive. Even without newer reactor designs. Get rid of the NRC, and/or make it abandon the ALARA bullshit and replace LNT with something like SNT (Sigmoid No Threshold). South Korea, just a few years ago, was able to build nuclear at about a quarter of the cost in the USA.
"All we need is a supply of impossibilium, and a little unubtanium..."
I'm all for it. I'll believe it when I see it.
Honestly, if our government (and others) hadn't suppressed Thorium research 60+ years ago we might all be using LFTR. But they did, and here we are.
Closed loop geothermal is in any case a better answer provided their learning curve progresses as anticipated. No fuel, so nobody can be blackmailed by the countries with uranium / plutonium / thorium. No radioactive waste. No possibility of leaks / thefts of dangerous materials. No special security concerns. Drilling is only getting cheaper, not more expensive. Similar surface footprint to nuclear.
I agree that closed loop geothermal seems promising, at least in some locations. Don't expect it to be beyond the greens to oppose it. They are opposing wind and solar projects now -- or finding the regulations they pushed are being used against their favored energy sources. I won't be surprised if they start saying that geothermal is "raping Mother Earth", or make up other issues.
If geothermal is getting cheaper and has strong advantages, I'm curious as to why you think that China and India aren't going that direction.
Your answer suggests you do not fully understand the difference between closed loop and traditional geothermal. Closed loop will work anywhere. The vertical component of the wells is only about 4% of the total drilling effort, even if they have to drill down 18km before they do the horizontal (which may more aptly be described as "diagonal") radiator part. Go watch some of the videos at Eavor dotcom (the current leaders in the tech, although there are others rushing to get a piece of this trillion dollar market). Since there is no intermingling of the water outside the holes (i.e. no fracking of the rock into which they pump the water), there is no risk of tremors or ground water contamination.
However, your point is well taken. This approach is a direct threat to the billions (trillions?) of dollars / Euros / etc. of gravy train money for "green initiatives!" never meant to solve anything other than filling political coffers.
Eavor's (and others') approach only became possible about 8-10 years ago. Eavor was founded only 7 years ago. It has taken them this long to explore using these new techniques and technologies to prove they can be applied in this manner (industry is always cautious). They finished their final tests in January, which has resulted in over 3 billion Euros + ~$200 million in committed funding for 24(+? - moving quickly) new plants. The first is under construction in Germany and should complete next July (about a 1-yr build cycle). China and India do not have the lead in petroleum drilling technologies to pursue this yet, but will no doubt seek to buy it.
It could become far cheaper but it would take strong reform (or abolition) of the NRA, and its ALARA nonsense. Until quite recently, South Korea was building nuclear for about a quarter of the cost in the USA.
In the real world, reform or abolition of government agencies is rare but not unknown. The NRA is not going to reform itself. With focused effort, we could get it done. It's more promising now that there is such a push to reduce carbon emissions since nuclear is the obvious choice for that. There is an effort by Build Nuclear Now to prevent a third term on the NRC for John Baran. https://www.buildnuclearnow.org/action
Best of luck to you. If electricity from nuclear can be made as economical as natural gas (no experts in the industry that I've seen have predicted they can), I'll be all for it. But, until that dragon is slain, the only reliable clean candidate out there showing the potential to work anywhere in the world, not require massive quantities of land nor mining, and predicted to become as cheap as natural gas is closed loop geothermal - which will not deliver the first plant (which will NOT be cheaper) until around next July in Germany.
I wish all states had sites like the Texas ERCOT site which graphs our daily Texas Wind Production !! The only reliable thing about Texas Wind is it lulls dramatically365 days a year
Texan here. Previously The lack of oversight for big wind and solar was appalling, basically none. Some new legislation is coming but we need the kind of local control Ohio enacted. I don’t trust Austin.
Capitalism is simply the description of an economic system in which people are all equally free to make their own economic decisions. Crime is either the result of a government failing to do their job; encouraging malfeasance (crony capitalism, or Crapitalism), or a direct result of government COMMITTING the economic crimes (Socialism, etc.).
Last year Vineyard Wind, a 160-turbine offshore wind farm under construction near Nantucket, came under fire for threatening the critically-endangered North Atlantic Right Whale. When the Bureau of Offshore Management (BOEM) seemed oblivious to the threat, Sean Hayes, Chief of NOAA's Protected Species Branch, sent a letter to the Bureau urging caution:
"[North Atlantic] Right whales are one of the most endangered marine mammals with fewer than 350 animals remaining in the population...the development of offshore wind poses risks to these species at varying stages including increased noise, vessel traffic, habitat modifications, changes in fishing effort and related increased entanglement risk, and oceanographic changes that may disrupt the abundance of typical right whale food," adding "These impacts should be thoroughly analyzed in any EIS or other environmental reviews associated with offshore wind development."
As it turned out, Hayes's letter arrived too late: Vineyard Wind's Final Environmental Assessment (FEA) had already been completed and the project approved.
But in another one performed only three months later, BOEM virtually ignored Hayes's advice. For Morrow Bay Wind Area in California, located in the migration routes of three whales: Humpback, California Gray, and Blue, BOEM's assessment only considered entanglement among the many concerns on Hayes's list.
If Humpback whales start washing up onto beaches in California, will BOEM and California realize their mistake and begin decommissioning Morro Bay? Of course not. Gov. Newsom will continue his headlong rush to install renewables, if for no other reason than to help secure the shutdown of Diablo Canyon [nuclear] Power Plant. Sure, the power from Diablo Canyon isn't "renewable," but neither are dead whales.
I’m a retired engineer who worked for the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). Around 2005 a study was done by TVA that the high maintenance cost of the few wind turbines TVA had at the time was so high (big turbines with a lot of moving parts that break), it concluded that they would never break even and be self supporting due to intermittent operation and low power density. Had reliability improved over the years, or are all wind turbines still losing money???
Western governments of all stripes implement carbon taxes and all sorts of regulations agains oil and gas development. Despite that investment continues
At the same time they remove regulation and pour subsidies at renewables, and even with that they have trouble forcing investment.
Great news. At least rural America has some gumption and is standing up to these greedy opportunists. Unfortunately for us, the renewables proselytizers are starting to crawl all over South Africa. Now that our inept government have overseen the demolition of our coal power utilities and we have imminent grid collapse, it has become a wet dream for all the Greenies. People desperate for power are snapping up solar anything (those who can afford it), and the rest of the suffering masses will be only too grateful to take whatever is rammed down their throats by the crony opportunists nuzzling up to the Prez (who loves hobnobbing with the WEF crowd). This includes Ramaphosa's own brother-in-law, Patrice Motsepe, who has preferential stakes in renewables and is poised to add to his already obscene riches. Corruption, through and through.
Great article but it doesn’t even mention the environmental impact to birds that are killed by the windmills. A huge number of birds, including hummingbirds, migrate across the Gulf of Mexico each fall leaving Texas to go to Mexico. Texas has lots of coastal windmill farms and is planning to build more. The windmills seem to be even worse for the environment than the offshore oil wells.
Great reporting Robert! But one very obvious inconsistency in many of these locales and you give extensive coverage to coastal MA and NJ...these are the VERY SAME states whose voters continue to elect as their Congressmen and Senators people whom I can only characterize as “cargo-cult” lunatics that vote these reprehensible subsidies at the federal level. That’s democracy at work isn’t it? Let us see how the wokesters in Edgartown and Siasconset enjoy “getting it good and hard”.
As wind and solar perform so poorly in those areas....
.... they will take land via Eminent Domain from middle America, the land of The Deplorables, to keep their pristine forested lands, suburbs and cities.
It is a very good, article, yes, but the problem isn't "small town America." The problem lies in the current administration's infatuation with renewables. In the proposed EPA reg that will shut down fossil fuels, "wind" is mentioned over 40 times, with similar shout-outs for solar (I didn't count those).
The way the fed operates sometimes, they can impose the supremacy clause on us and force us to take wind and solar in the interest of "our future well-being." The politics of intimidation has grown stronger over the years, and local voices, however loud, are too frequently lost to the media. Has anyone ever heard of Mr. Bryce's renewable rejection database from the newspapers or televised media? The only place nationally I've seen a mention on the periphery is the Wall Street Journal.
Renewables as a concept aren't a "problem." However, the current leaders (wind, solar) are like VHS and Beta - lots of hype about which will "win," when both are doomed because they are immature, inferior, over-priced products that nobody wants or can use reliably. Nuclear checks most of the boxes except price, and not one of the most avid nuclear experts predicts it can ever get down to less than twice the cost of natural gas (and that has never been demonstrated, just theorized).
The only player on the board which shows the POTENTIAL (see NREL) to check all the boxes including competitive costs is closed loop geothermal - and that will take several more years of experience to realize. However, there is a lot to like about it, including the fact that it can provide both electricity and heating for homes and businesses, takes up very little land, is quiet and emission-less, can be built anywhere and sized for small communities, etc.
Geothermal is very promising, provided they can overcome the geologic barriers. My problems with renewables are their diffuse density, and the massive amounts of materials and lands needed to replace the higher density fossil and nuclear fuels.
I too doubt if nuclear can ever compete, cost-wise, with gas. But its facilities are far more long-lived and reliable. I am an unabashed proponent of nuclear, and believe that in terms of all different criteria (materials, land, co2 emissions, price, etc.) it will be the best choice. We made a HUGE mistake in 1979 in not encouraging nuclear, and frustrating its development with a lot of political shenanigans.
Closed-loop geothermal is new (only became possible in the past decade), and not like traditional geothermal such as in Iceland and New Zealand. The current leader is Eavor (dotcom), with over 3 billion Euros in funding committed for over 2 dozen plants. Lots of links and articled available from their site. The tech is oil drilling tech, so not really patent-able. Several other competitors already; could be hundreds or thousands in a decade or so. Once drilled, there is no reason a field would not operate for 50 years or more. With their ability to "cross drill" and merge with holes from different directions, even a seismic shear ought to be repairable relatively easily.
Even the most optimistic experts do not expect nuclear to drop lower than about double the cost for combined cycle natural gas base load energy. I agree we missed an incredible opportunity when we "discouraged" (frankly, banned) research into thorium and LFTR, but that ship has sailed.
One point that gets little exposure is that wind/solar is completely incompatible with our rather brilliant/resilient Grid Architecture that has grown over the past hundred years.
That architecture is based on power generator sources being located directly into and near-surrounding our larger population centers (90% of US population in cities 200,000 plus people).
It is at this localized level that we get our redundancies in generation sources and transmission/distribution pathways to our homes, almost operating as independent islands. And as the population/industry grows in that area, it is easy to organically grow the power capacity, as power plants are added with minimal new transmission line to hop on to that localized network. (one mile usually included in the Levelized Cost (LCOE) for a new power plant).
Yes, there is a network of transmission lines that tie these islands together, but the power that can be carried is a small fraction of what the individual city demand is. That transmission line between larger islands usually services rural/small town communities.
1) All AC power transmission lines have a practical limit of 300 miles, regardless of voltage, (St. Clair Curve)
2) The power-carrying capacity of a transmission line drops with distance such that the capacity at 30 miles total length is 3x as high as out to 300 miles.
3) Power transmission lines are exceeding expensive and intrusive on our landscape. A 300 mile 345kV line will carry 400MW peak loading for a cost of $1.65 BILLION dollars. ($5.5 million/mile).
(a 400 MW new combined cycle gas plant costs about $400 million installed in a major population center. Remotely locate that power plant 300 miles away, cost is FIVE TIMES higher at $2.05 BILLION.)
-------------------------------------------
And therein lies the problem with renewables (wind/solar). THEY ARE ALWAYS LOCATED FAR AWAY FROM MAJOR POPULATION CENTERS (like 200 miles plus, and most often exceeding 300 miles).
WIND/SOLAR RENEWABLES ARE FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH OUR FANTASTIC GRID ARCHITECTURE. And there is NO proposed "NEW" architecture that gives the redundancy, and allows for ANY organic growth as our current architecture.
For the most part, most installations of wind/solar utility scale plants TODAY simply serve the rural/small town communities within 50-100 miles of those plants, as, a deliberate, multi-billion dollar effort to build out multiple power transmission lines is ignored. If you review the transmission line routing, you will see that only a small fraction of needed power from wind/solar makes its way to larger cities.
The power companies/operators may sometime fund those transmission line projects, which result in higher per kWh consumer power bills.....
....but more often than not, state taxpayer bills, or federal funding is used on these major transmission line projects to hide the true cost. And the scapegoat is "Our Aging Infrastructure."
------------------------------------
I estimate we will need 3 million miles of new high voltage power transmission lines if we want to hit net-zero from fossil/nuclear sources (we current have about 250,000 installed miles).
Watch the battles begin for taking land to run these lines. The government will eventually intercede with Eminent Domain claims and just start taking the land from people. Scary.
...which would be absolutely unnecessary if we start focusing on closed loop geothermal instead. No massive use of land; no toxic / scarce / expensive / sourced-from-our-enemies materials; reliable; works about anywhere; provides heating as well as electricity; can be built locally; quiet; unobtrusive; and it's the only form of reliable clean energy the experts (NREL) believe will become cheaper than natural gas with experience.
True, I'm not well schooled on geothermal. Thanks for the pointers.
From the NYT: "The problem is not just about power lines. The permitting process and other legal challenges are blocking hundreds of renewable-energy projects, including solar power plants and wind farms, according to the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law."
*Permission to Build*
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/12/briefing/electrical-grid-america-clean-energy.html
This was interesting as well... "To start with, there is no single U.S. electric grid."
*Why the U.S. Electric Grid Isn't Ready for the Energy Transition*
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/06/12/climate/us-electric-grid-energy-transition.html
@RobertBryce, how about writing an article about closed loop geothermal?
You were the janitor there, we presume.
Fantastic article. Again. Nuclear, Nuclear, Nuclear. The only option ... but the banksters and green-grifters won't make a dime! Keep on fighting and publishing.
Even the most avid nuclear experts do not predict nuclear will ever become remotely competitive with natural gas in cost. The only clean, reliable source of energy currently possible which the experts (NREL) believe has that potential (with more experience) is close loop geothermal.
I disagree. It is entirely possible for nuclear to become cost competitive. Even without newer reactor designs. Get rid of the NRC, and/or make it abandon the ALARA bullshit and replace LNT with something like SNT (Sigmoid No Threshold). South Korea, just a few years ago, was able to build nuclear at about a quarter of the cost in the USA.
https://jackdevanney.substack.com/p/what-is-nuclears-should-cost
<i>"Get rid of the NRC..."</i>
"All we need is a supply of impossibilium, and a little unubtanium..."
I'm all for it. I'll believe it when I see it.
Honestly, if our government (and others) hadn't suppressed Thorium research 60+ years ago we might all be using LFTR. But they did, and here we are.
Closed loop geothermal is in any case a better answer provided their learning curve progresses as anticipated. No fuel, so nobody can be blackmailed by the countries with uranium / plutonium / thorium. No radioactive waste. No possibility of leaks / thefts of dangerous materials. No special security concerns. Drilling is only getting cheaper, not more expensive. Similar surface footprint to nuclear.
I agree that closed loop geothermal seems promising, at least in some locations. Don't expect it to be beyond the greens to oppose it. They are opposing wind and solar projects now -- or finding the regulations they pushed are being used against their favored energy sources. I won't be surprised if they start saying that geothermal is "raping Mother Earth", or make up other issues.
If geothermal is getting cheaper and has strong advantages, I'm curious as to why you think that China and India aren't going that direction.
Your answer suggests you do not fully understand the difference between closed loop and traditional geothermal. Closed loop will work anywhere. The vertical component of the wells is only about 4% of the total drilling effort, even if they have to drill down 18km before they do the horizontal (which may more aptly be described as "diagonal") radiator part. Go watch some of the videos at Eavor dotcom (the current leaders in the tech, although there are others rushing to get a piece of this trillion dollar market). Since there is no intermingling of the water outside the holes (i.e. no fracking of the rock into which they pump the water), there is no risk of tremors or ground water contamination.
However, your point is well taken. This approach is a direct threat to the billions (trillions?) of dollars / Euros / etc. of gravy train money for "green initiatives!" never meant to solve anything other than filling political coffers.
Eavor's (and others') approach only became possible about 8-10 years ago. Eavor was founded only 7 years ago. It has taken them this long to explore using these new techniques and technologies to prove they can be applied in this manner (industry is always cautious). They finished their final tests in January, which has resulted in over 3 billion Euros + ~$200 million in committed funding for 24(+? - moving quickly) new plants. The first is under construction in Germany and should complete next July (about a 1-yr build cycle). China and India do not have the lead in petroleum drilling technologies to pursue this yet, but will no doubt seek to buy it.
It could become far cheaper but it would take strong reform (or abolition) of the NRA, and its ALARA nonsense. Until quite recently, South Korea was building nuclear for about a quarter of the cost in the USA.
However, this is the real world. Do you see the NRA going away, or even meaningfully reforming?
In the real world, reform or abolition of government agencies is rare but not unknown. The NRA is not going to reform itself. With focused effort, we could get it done. It's more promising now that there is such a push to reduce carbon emissions since nuclear is the obvious choice for that. There is an effort by Build Nuclear Now to prevent a third term on the NRC for John Baran. https://www.buildnuclearnow.org/action
Best of luck to you. If electricity from nuclear can be made as economical as natural gas (no experts in the industry that I've seen have predicted they can), I'll be all for it. But, until that dragon is slain, the only reliable clean candidate out there showing the potential to work anywhere in the world, not require massive quantities of land nor mining, and predicted to become as cheap as natural gas is closed loop geothermal - which will not deliver the first plant (which will NOT be cheaper) until around next July in Germany.
The tubes are sealed, Simple Jack. Educate yourself before embarrassing yourself.
You always convince yourself that it's "the other people" who lack a basic understanding. Classic Dunning-Kruger. Bye.
Those are issues with open loop geothermal such as in Iceland.
Try paying attention - this is CLOSED loop geothermal.
You stand as living proof to the old adage that while intelligence has limits, ignorance is not so fettered.
I wish all states had sites like the Texas ERCOT site which graphs our daily Texas Wind Production !! The only reliable thing about Texas Wind is it lulls dramatically365 days a year
We got one of those in Alberta, shows every installation connected to the grid in 30 second up date
http://ets.aeso.ca/ets_web/ip/Market/Reports/CSDReportServlet
Right now shows our wind at 25%
Thanks !! This is today's Texas Wind Production, not want you'd call reliable, HA https://www.ercot.com/content/cdr/html/CURRENT_DAYCOP_HSL.html?utm_campaign=The%20Daily%20Cannon&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=111241744&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8wqwnsqOeEIdUxWKkbEmC7dyeVSuJ4o_OCBZJMeK7sLubO7eBux9yzeyXNDRCFnRS_qmc7hDn5xa3uJH-ZgZ6f1S4k3XkZTFRr3QuvcN12NyKglxY&utm_content=111241744&utm_source=hs_email
Texan here. Previously The lack of oversight for big wind and solar was appalling, basically none. Some new legislation is coming but we need the kind of local control Ohio enacted. I don’t trust Austin.
You are correct never to trust Demunists.
Capitalism is simply the description of an economic system in which people are all equally free to make their own economic decisions. Crime is either the result of a government failing to do their job; encouraging malfeasance (crony capitalism, or Crapitalism), or a direct result of government COMMITTING the economic crimes (Socialism, etc.).
You really are badly mis-educated.
Last year Vineyard Wind, a 160-turbine offshore wind farm under construction near Nantucket, came under fire for threatening the critically-endangered North Atlantic Right Whale. When the Bureau of Offshore Management (BOEM) seemed oblivious to the threat, Sean Hayes, Chief of NOAA's Protected Species Branch, sent a letter to the Bureau urging caution:
"[North Atlantic] Right whales are one of the most endangered marine mammals with fewer than 350 animals remaining in the population...the development of offshore wind poses risks to these species at varying stages including increased noise, vessel traffic, habitat modifications, changes in fishing effort and related increased entanglement risk, and oceanographic changes that may disrupt the abundance of typical right whale food," adding "These impacts should be thoroughly analyzed in any EIS or other environmental reviews associated with offshore wind development."
As it turned out, Hayes's letter arrived too late: Vineyard Wind's Final Environmental Assessment (FEA) had already been completed and the project approved.
But in another one performed only three months later, BOEM virtually ignored Hayes's advice. For Morrow Bay Wind Area in California, located in the migration routes of three whales: Humpback, California Gray, and Blue, BOEM's assessment only considered entanglement among the many concerns on Hayes's list.
If Humpback whales start washing up onto beaches in California, will BOEM and California realize their mistake and begin decommissioning Morro Bay? Of course not. Gov. Newsom will continue his headlong rush to install renewables, if for no other reason than to help secure the shutdown of Diablo Canyon [nuclear] Power Plant. Sure, the power from Diablo Canyon isn't "renewable," but neither are dead whales.
Great piece, Robert and perfect companion to Doomberg's latest.
Robert,
I’m a retired engineer who worked for the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). Around 2005 a study was done by TVA that the high maintenance cost of the few wind turbines TVA had at the time was so high (big turbines with a lot of moving parts that break), it concluded that they would never break even and be self supporting due to intermittent operation and low power density. Had reliability improved over the years, or are all wind turbines still losing money???
They all make money because their purpose and design is to pull in subsidies.
Without that they vanish.
Ok, look, I’ll be nice for one day
Western governments of all stripes implement carbon taxes and all sorts of regulations agains oil and gas development. Despite that investment continues
At the same time they remove regulation and pour subsidies at renewables, and even with that they have trouble forcing investment.
I’ll leave it to you to try and figure that out
Based on subsidies implicit and explicit
Without them investment would be zero.
We know that.
Better than you apparently.
Maybe one day we might even be able to measure.
Before you hyperventilate, take a heart pill and chill out.
There is no chance you can change my mind.
I used to be like you.
Now I enjoy life
Great news. At least rural America has some gumption and is standing up to these greedy opportunists. Unfortunately for us, the renewables proselytizers are starting to crawl all over South Africa. Now that our inept government have overseen the demolition of our coal power utilities and we have imminent grid collapse, it has become a wet dream for all the Greenies. People desperate for power are snapping up solar anything (those who can afford it), and the rest of the suffering masses will be only too grateful to take whatever is rammed down their throats by the crony opportunists nuzzling up to the Prez (who loves hobnobbing with the WEF crowd). This includes Ramaphosa's own brother-in-law, Patrice Motsepe, who has preferential stakes in renewables and is poised to add to his already obscene riches. Corruption, through and through.
Robert, I want to apply for your job after you retire, but being 79 years old I will have to vicariously admire your work. Steve
Great article but it doesn’t even mention the environmental impact to birds that are killed by the windmills. A huge number of birds, including hummingbirds, migrate across the Gulf of Mexico each fall leaving Texas to go to Mexico. Texas has lots of coastal windmill farms and is planning to build more. The windmills seem to be even worse for the environment than the offshore oil wells.
Great reporting Robert! But one very obvious inconsistency in many of these locales and you give extensive coverage to coastal MA and NJ...these are the VERY SAME states whose voters continue to elect as their Congressmen and Senators people whom I can only characterize as “cargo-cult” lunatics that vote these reprehensible subsidies at the federal level. That’s democracy at work isn’t it? Let us see how the wokesters in Edgartown and Siasconset enjoy “getting it good and hard”.
As wind and solar perform so poorly in those areas....
.... they will take land via Eminent Domain from middle America, the land of The Deplorables, to keep their pristine forested lands, suburbs and cities.
Two democrat Congressmen propose eminent domain rules for new transmission lines required by Renewables
Great stuff Robert! Sending it to others.
It is a very good, article, yes, but the problem isn't "small town America." The problem lies in the current administration's infatuation with renewables. In the proposed EPA reg that will shut down fossil fuels, "wind" is mentioned over 40 times, with similar shout-outs for solar (I didn't count those).
The way the fed operates sometimes, they can impose the supremacy clause on us and force us to take wind and solar in the interest of "our future well-being." The politics of intimidation has grown stronger over the years, and local voices, however loud, are too frequently lost to the media. Has anyone ever heard of Mr. Bryce's renewable rejection database from the newspapers or televised media? The only place nationally I've seen a mention on the periphery is the Wall Street Journal.
Renewables as a concept aren't a "problem." However, the current leaders (wind, solar) are like VHS and Beta - lots of hype about which will "win," when both are doomed because they are immature, inferior, over-priced products that nobody wants or can use reliably. Nuclear checks most of the boxes except price, and not one of the most avid nuclear experts predicts it can ever get down to less than twice the cost of natural gas (and that has never been demonstrated, just theorized).
The only player on the board which shows the POTENTIAL (see NREL) to check all the boxes including competitive costs is closed loop geothermal - and that will take several more years of experience to realize. However, there is a lot to like about it, including the fact that it can provide both electricity and heating for homes and businesses, takes up very little land, is quiet and emission-less, can be built anywhere and sized for small communities, etc.
Geothermal is very promising, provided they can overcome the geologic barriers. My problems with renewables are their diffuse density, and the massive amounts of materials and lands needed to replace the higher density fossil and nuclear fuels.
I too doubt if nuclear can ever compete, cost-wise, with gas. But its facilities are far more long-lived and reliable. I am an unabashed proponent of nuclear, and believe that in terms of all different criteria (materials, land, co2 emissions, price, etc.) it will be the best choice. We made a HUGE mistake in 1979 in not encouraging nuclear, and frustrating its development with a lot of political shenanigans.
Closed-loop geothermal is new (only became possible in the past decade), and not like traditional geothermal such as in Iceland and New Zealand. The current leader is Eavor (dotcom), with over 3 billion Euros in funding committed for over 2 dozen plants. Lots of links and articled available from their site. The tech is oil drilling tech, so not really patent-able. Several other competitors already; could be hundreds or thousands in a decade or so. Once drilled, there is no reason a field would not operate for 50 years or more. With their ability to "cross drill" and merge with holes from different directions, even a seismic shear ought to be repairable relatively easily.
Even the most optimistic experts do not expect nuclear to drop lower than about double the cost for combined cycle natural gas base load energy. I agree we missed an incredible opportunity when we "discouraged" (frankly, banned) research into thorium and LFTR, but that ship has sailed.
Texas had spent $66 Billion on Renewables up to the Freeze, only to see them fail, yet Texas continues funding Renewables !!!
Great article.
One point that gets little exposure is that wind/solar is completely incompatible with our rather brilliant/resilient Grid Architecture that has grown over the past hundred years.
That architecture is based on power generator sources being located directly into and near-surrounding our larger population centers (90% of US population in cities 200,000 plus people).
It is at this localized level that we get our redundancies in generation sources and transmission/distribution pathways to our homes, almost operating as independent islands. And as the population/industry grows in that area, it is easy to organically grow the power capacity, as power plants are added with minimal new transmission line to hop on to that localized network. (one mile usually included in the Levelized Cost (LCOE) for a new power plant).
Yes, there is a network of transmission lines that tie these islands together, but the power that can be carried is a small fraction of what the individual city demand is. That transmission line between larger islands usually services rural/small town communities.
1) All AC power transmission lines have a practical limit of 300 miles, regardless of voltage, (St. Clair Curve)
2) The power-carrying capacity of a transmission line drops with distance such that the capacity at 30 miles total length is 3x as high as out to 300 miles.
3) Power transmission lines are exceeding expensive and intrusive on our landscape. A 300 mile 345kV line will carry 400MW peak loading for a cost of $1.65 BILLION dollars. ($5.5 million/mile).
(a 400 MW new combined cycle gas plant costs about $400 million installed in a major population center. Remotely locate that power plant 300 miles away, cost is FIVE TIMES higher at $2.05 BILLION.)
-------------------------------------------
And therein lies the problem with renewables (wind/solar). THEY ARE ALWAYS LOCATED FAR AWAY FROM MAJOR POPULATION CENTERS (like 200 miles plus, and most often exceeding 300 miles).
WIND/SOLAR RENEWABLES ARE FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH OUR FANTASTIC GRID ARCHITECTURE. And there is NO proposed "NEW" architecture that gives the redundancy, and allows for ANY organic growth as our current architecture.
For the most part, most installations of wind/solar utility scale plants TODAY simply serve the rural/small town communities within 50-100 miles of those plants, as, a deliberate, multi-billion dollar effort to build out multiple power transmission lines is ignored. If you review the transmission line routing, you will see that only a small fraction of needed power from wind/solar makes its way to larger cities.
The power companies/operators may sometime fund those transmission line projects, which result in higher per kWh consumer power bills.....
....but more often than not, state taxpayer bills, or federal funding is used on these major transmission line projects to hide the true cost. And the scapegoat is "Our Aging Infrastructure."
------------------------------------
I estimate we will need 3 million miles of new high voltage power transmission lines if we want to hit net-zero from fossil/nuclear sources (we current have about 250,000 installed miles).
Watch the battles begin for taking land to run these lines. The government will eventually intercede with Eminent Domain claims and just start taking the land from people. Scary.
Great Comments. I mentioned up there ^ that 2 democrat Congressmen want eminent domain to build those new transmission lines, Wind/ Solar require
...which would be absolutely unnecessary if we start focusing on closed loop geothermal instead. No massive use of land; no toxic / scarce / expensive / sourced-from-our-enemies materials; reliable; works about anywhere; provides heating as well as electricity; can be built locally; quiet; unobtrusive; and it's the only form of reliable clean energy the experts (NREL) believe will become cheaper than natural gas with experience.
Yes. We DO have a distributed system. Distributed to the places where we need power.