Many WUWT might think that renewable energy just can’t cut it, and when it comes to certain demand situations that may be a very valid issue. However, there has been quite a surge in installed renewables for daytime generation in California over the last 6 years, and the numbers from CAISO do tell a story that is surprisingly positive. Engineer and attorney Roger Sowell explains more about this month in this guest post. -Anthony
Guest essay by Roger E. Sowell, Esq.
http://sowellslawblog.blogspot.com/
From CAISO, record-setting renewable production
A lot of good is being done by renewable energy power plants in California, especially with the Aliso Canyon gas storage facility at very limited capacity due to an earlier leak. Renewable power plants are preventing the grid from experiencing blackouts.
The graphic above, from California Independent System Operator, CAISO, shows renewable power production for what appears to be the record-setting date thus far, June 14, 2016. Total renewable energy was 211,546 MWh. Yesterday, June 22 was not far behind with 208,949 MWh.
Today, June 23’s results are shown below, not quite a record but still a bit more than 200,000 MWh from renewables. see link to CAISO archives on renewable output.
Renewables on June 14 provided an average of 33 percent of the 24-hour total system demand. On an hourly basis, renewables provided 46 percent of the load at 3 p.m. that day. The load on the grid peaked at approximately 39,500 MW just before 6 p.m. Solar production peaked at approximately 7,400 MW.
These results are higher than the peak production in 2015, which was 189,000 MWh in a 24 hour period. As could be expected, peak production occurs when solar power is at or near the Summer Solstice, June 20th typically, but also when wind production is greatest. Wind production was at a maximum thus far at 92,000 to 93,000 MWh in the first half of 2016. On June 14th wind provided 92,250 MWh. Typically in California, wind production peaks in June or July then decreases for the remaining months (source, EIA).
Renewables for June 23, 2016
showing Solar PV exceeds 7,000 MW
and total Renewables exceeds 200,000 MWh
The renewable energy produced saves the state from burning natural gas in the gas-fired power plants, which is a very good thing as this summer’s loads must be met without the full production of stored gas from Aliso Canyon. How much gas is not burned is somewhat difficult to estimate because one must know which gas-fired power plants are not being run and their respective heat rates. Also, as some gas-fired plants are no doubt operated at a slightly reduced rate, one must know the heat rate for each power plant at the reduced output. Reduced output from selected plants is advisable to allow rapid power increase to compensate for variations in the renewable production due to clouds, and changes in wind speed.
However, an estimate of the natural gas not burned can be made by taking the total renewable output from wind and solar, 167,950 MWh on June 14 (per the table at the top of the article), and using an average of 45 percent thermal efficiency for the power plants not being run. On that basis, approximately 1.3 billion cubic feet of natural gas was not burned on that day. Per California Energy Commission documents, that is nearly the same gas withdrawal rate at Aliso Canyon when it is at full operation (1.9 billion cubic feet maximum withdrawal). See Table 1 in “Aliso Canyon Action Plan to Preserve Gas and Electric Reliability for the Los Angeles Basin,” see link
The state’s ability to produce renewable power has changed dramatically since the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) was taken off-line suddenly in 2012 as shown in the graph below:
As shown in the figure and California Energy Commission’s page (see link), solar PV capacity grew from 214 MW at the end of 2011 to 5,498 MW at the end of 2015. More capacity has been added so that, as above, solar PV now can produce approximately 7,000 MW. Solar thermal recently has exceeded 700 MW peak.
It is especially ironic that renewables, once derided as destabilizing a grid, are now riding to the rescue and helping to prevent blackouts on the California electric grid during summer heat waves. One can only imagine the rolling blackouts and uproar with Aliso Canyon gas storage effectively out of commission, SONGS nuclear generating shut down, and if no renewable power plants had been installed over the past 5 years.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“That is the “lot of good” I refer to,…”
It is nice that Roger is finally acknowledging all the good we do in the nuclear and coal industries. Natural gas too.
Considering the amount of time I have spent on shift and working weekends, I am personally gratified. It is a little irritating that Roger has worked to make the grid less stable and then thinks wind and solar is the answer.
The other problem with Roger Sowell is that he accepts CARB, the California Coastal Commission, etc, rather than recognizing most of California’s problems are due to these state agencies. Sometimes one must cut the damn Gordian Knot, and recognize the system is broken.
Roger Sowell June 27, 2016 at 6:30 pm
Anthony is my friend, and he’s aware that I’m not always user-friendly. If he feels insulted I’m sure he will have no problem telling me so, and if that is the case I’m more than happy to apologize.
However, I’m also sure he has not appointed you as his spokesdude. Sorry, but in such matters I only deal with principals, not self-appointed spokespersons.
The grid works, not because of renewables, but despite them. Your “lot of good” posits a false dichotomy—either renewable energy or no energy, “turning off the renewables” in your words. But that’s not the choice.
The relevant comparison is, how much better off would we be if instead of spending billions on wildly expensive renewables, we had spent the same amount on construction of a mix of hydro, fossil, gas, and nuclear power plants?
The obvious answer is that if we had done that, we would have had a more diverse, resilient, and stable grid; it would have cost less; and most importantly, the poor ratepayers like myself and the single mom with three kids wouldn’t be getting screwed by wildly inflated electricity costs.
Sorry I missed your prior request, Roger, I’m glad to comply. My proposal to bring down electricity costs not just in California would be:
1. End all subsidy for renewables, both grid-scale and roof-top.
2. End all “renewable mandates”, including the verdammt ethanol mandates.
3. Stop the persecution of coal (very minor contributor in CA but big elsewhere).
4. Build hydro wherever it makes sense.
5. Build new-generation nuclear where it makes sense.
6. Build geothermal where it makes sense.
7. Build conventional everywhere else, except …
8. Build renewable wherever it is actually economically advantageous on a levelized basis including all incidental costs (e.g. transmission lines, spinning backup costs, etc.).
There’s more, but those would solve the problem.
All the best,
w.
FYI all. check the CAISO for 6/27. http://content.caiso.com/green/renewrpt/DailyRenewablesWatch.pdf
On one of the hotest days in CA this year, wind and solar produced 12.5% of the kWhrs. so much for ‘Jerry’s 50%’
Bill writes, “O&M is costing much more than anticipated.”
Not by people in the power industry. It is self proclaimed experts like Roger who claim that wind and solar are free.
I helped put together a business plan for an anaerobic digestor power plant. During the presentation the several board members questioned the capital costs and O&M costs. My answer was that higher initial costs reduced O&M costs based on their landfill gas power plant.
The project did not move forward because a federal or state subsidy was needed. This organization has one small hydro, one small solar PV, and one biogas project; that is all that is need to be ‘green’.
Galvanized writes, “Oh come on! Are you telling me it is not metered?”
Yes, that is often the case and you have to wonder why?
My 7 kw RV generator has a kwh meter that is used for scheduling maintenance. I also picked up power meter from ebay to use with a smaller 800 w generator.
Last week we were camping at a location that did not have electricity. I noticed that the camp host had solar panels. I was going to ask him how well they worked. I went for a morning hike and noticed two Honda generators running. Never mind about the solar panels.
Residential PV and emergency generators are a scam for rich suckers. If you can measure performance, then detecting the scam would be too easy.
When measured, PV performance never meets expectation. No utility is bragging about the performance of 5 year old utility scale solar and reporting to ratepayers O&M costs.
Even Google stopped reporting on their web site. Hey stupid computer geeks, don’t put solar panels on your roof someplace that is famous for the fog rolling in.
Beta Blocker writes, “I’d personally have no qualms about joining the mad stampede to cover every open piece of ground in the state with a windmill or a solar panel.”
I certainly agree. In fact I applied for a position in the PNW with GE wind so I would not have to move back east. GE nuclear called me to come back to NC. I started in new reactors and finished in new reactors.
However, California is meeting its goals by putting a lot of wind farms in the PNW. If you drive from eastern Washington/Oregon you will never notice the ‘dirty’ coal fired power plant but thousands of wind turbines are hard to miss.
Retired Kit P, I see those windmills every time I drive to Portland. And also when I go to my favorite fishing hole along the Tucannon River.
They are destroying the rural character of the Columbia River gorge and are appearing in ever-greater numbers in central Washington State, destroying the rural character of the eastern slopes of the Washington Cascades.
But I don’t see any windmills around Puget Sound where most of the voters who made the decision to spread windmills all over central and eastern Washington’s rural landscape live.
There is a good reason you do not see wind farms around Puget Sound. The sailing sucks. It is a beautiful place to motor.
We sail at Wallula Gap. There are wind farms on both sides of the Columbia there.
These wind farms and others in Washington State were not built based on a mandate of state voters or other subsidies. They were built because of the high price of natural gas. Subsequently, the power was sold to California to meet their mandate. Fun with smoke and mirrors.
Not to be outdone, Washington State did pass a mandate taking credit for the already built projects.
“Kit, I was referring to fusion, not fission.”
Yes, John know the difference. Both fusion and fission make niffy bombs.
Fusion does not work for making power. Only scam artists ‘propose’ it. I do not know what Lockheed’s is but it is a scam. Watch your wallet.
Kit, I have much enjoyed your descriptions of working in fission plants…good additions to the discussion. But, to say fusion doesn’t work for power I think is wrong. It doesn’t work quite yet. But LLNL and the Europeans are spending tens of billions on Tokamak designs that are getting closer to self-sustaining reactions. A solution using those designs may still be 50 years from commercial reality, as it has always been, but they’ll get there. Meanwhile, Lockheed and other private concerns are making perhaps better progress using somewhat different technology, and I don’t mean cold fusion. It appears to me that Lockheed indeed could be in the 10 year time frame they talk about.
For me, the breakthrough to small, distributable fusion plants like Lockheed envisions is the next great thing in science and engineering. And for the world’s economy. Hey, I’m a petroleum guy, but I know oil and gas will be truly scarce in 100 years, and should be saved for transportation fuels and even better for plastics. So it is time for fusion to enter the scene, and ramp up to widespread use by the time other options are in decline.
For those with an interest in the bird and bat deaths at the solar power plant at Ivanpah, California, the following document was released 30 June, 2016. Title is “ISEGS Avian and Bat Monitoring Plan 2014-2015.” ISEGS is Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System. The time frame is 12 months from 21 October 2014 – 20 October 2015.
The approved Plan allows a systematic and detailed count of approximately 30 percent of the facility, then total fatalities plus injuries are estimated using an approved computer model.
http://docketpublic.energy.ca.gov/PublicDocuments/07-AFC-05C/TN212042_20160630T145041_ISEGS_Avian_and_Bat_Monitoring_Plan_20142015.pdf
(note, file is 230 pages, 6.8 MB size)