Reposted from the MANHATTAN CONTRARIAN
As a state or a country, if you want to have any status in the ranks of the climate virtuous, the key metric is your commitment to get most or all of your energy from “renewables” (mainly wind and solar) by the earliest possible date. Everybody is doing it, and you are nobody if you don’t get in on the bidding. Just a couple of weeks ago (July 14), according to Reuters, the European Commission entered a bid of 40% of final energy consumption from “renewables” by 2030. Back here in the US, the most recent bid from the Biden administration (from April 28) is a goal of 80% of electricity by 2030, which is ambitious on its own, although electricity is a minority of final energy consumption. Congress has yet to consider the Biden administration bid.
Within both the EU and the US, there are national and state champions that are far out-virtuing everybody else. In the EU, it’s Germany. Germany adopted its “Energiewende” way back in 2010 to transition its energy sector to wind and solar. Since then Germany has repeatedly ramped up its renewable energy targets. Most recently, in December 2020, Germany adopted by statute a binding goal of 65% of electricity from renewables by 2030. Here in the US, our champion is California. In California the governing law is the famous SB 100, enacted in 2018, which sets mandatory targets for the electricity sector of 60% from “renewables” by 2030 and 100% by 2045.
As readers here know, the Manhattan Contrarian from time to time has expressed a high degree of skepticism as to whether these mandatory targets are achievable in the real world. Indeed, I have often noted that at somewhere around 40 – 50% of electricity from “renewables,” it becomes impossible as a practical matter to increase the share of electricity from renewables just by adding more renewable capacity. As far as I am aware, no large jurisdiction to date has gotten its percentage of electricity generation from “renewables” up above 50% for any extended period of time. (If a reader can point me to an example, I will be very interested.)
But maybe I’m just a crank. Surely these geniuses in Germany and California must know what they are doing. So let’s check in on the latest news.
Germany
The website No Tricks Zone has a report on July 27 covering electricity output in Germany for the first half of 2021. The No Tricks Zone post is based on data compiled at a German website called Die kalte Sonne.
And the answer is that in the first half of 2020 Germany achieved the level of 50% of its electricity from “renewables.” But in 2021 that level fell back to 43%:
“The share of renewable energies in gross electric power consumption in the first half of 2021 fell from 50% to 43% compared to a year earlier,” Die kalte Sonne reports.
What happened? The wind just didn’t blow as much:
“The production of onshore and offshore wind energy decreased by 20%.” . . . The reason for the steep drop, according to the findings, was due to unfavorable weather conditions. “This year, especially in the first quarter, the wind was particularly still. . . .”
So did solar energy then pick up the slack? Unfortunately, no:
“[T]he sun output was low. . . . Solar energy output . . . rose a modest 2%.”
So how did Germany make up the difference? The answer will not surprise you:
“Coal energy saw a renaissance. Brown coal [lignite] power plants produced 45.8 terawatt-hours of the net power – that is the power mix that comes out of the outlet. That’s a strong increase of 37.6% compared to 2020, when only 33.6 terawatt-hours were produced. The net production by black coal power plants also increased, by 38.9% to 20.4 terawatt-hours after 14.4 terawatt-hours in 2020.”
Basically, Germany has hit the limit of what can be achieved by adding capacity of wind and solar power sources. To get to the higher levels of “renewable” market share that they have committed to, they will need to add large and rapidly-increasing amounts of grid-scale storage. So far, they have barely begun that process.
California
Perhaps you remember the excited headline from the LA Times from April 29: “California just hit 95% renewable energy.” April 29 was just the very day after President Biden had announced his goal of 80% of US electricity from “renewables” by 2030. Now California was already showing the world that they were way ahead and basically all the way to home plate:
Something remarkable happened over the weekend: California hit nearly 95% renewable energy. I’ll say it again: 95% renewables. For all the time we spend talking about how to reach 100% clean power, it sometimes seems like a faraway proposition, whether the timeframe is California’s 2045 target or President Biden’s more aggressive 2035 goal. But on Saturday just before 2:30 p.m., one of the world’s largest economies came within a stone’s throw of getting there.
(Emphasis in the original.). But maybe we shouldn’t get too excited just yet. First, although the author (Sammy Roth) says this was “95% renewable energy,” it turns out as you read further that he is only talking about electricity, which is only about 30% of energy consumption. And for how long did the renewables provide the 95% of electricity consumption?
Saturday’s 94.5% figure — a record, as confirmed to me by the California Independent System Operator — was fleeting, lasting just four seconds.
So what’s the real picture over the course of multiple months or a year? For that you’ll have to ignore the cheerleading reporters at the MSM, and try to find some aggregate statistics. Here are the figures from the California Energy Commission for the full year 2020. The total contribution to electricity supply from “renewables” is claimed to be 33.09%. Oh, but that includes 2.45% from “biomass,” 4.89% from “geothermal,” and 1.39% from “small hydro.” Take those out and you’re left with a big 24.36% from wind and solar. And since electricity is only about 30% of final energy consumption, that means that wind and solar are only contribution around 8% of total energy consumption in California.
Over at the website of California’s Independent System Operator (“CAISO”) they provide a chart for every day’s electricity production that dramatically illustrates the problem. California’s peak electricity demand is around 40 GW, generally occurring around 6 – 8 PM. The large majority of their “renewable” production is from solar. Their current solar capacity, on a sunny mid-summer day like today, provides around 12 GW from about 9 AM to 5 PM — and nothing the rest of the time, including at the time of peak usage. In the winter, the output is more like 8 GW from 10 AM to 4 PM, and nothing the rest of the time. So far, they have almost nothing in the way of grid scale energy storage. In the evening, they ramp up the natural gas plants, and import power from Arizona and Nevada — mostly natural gas, nuclear, and coal. Close to 30% of California’s electricity comes from imports from neighboring states.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Don’t tell Pierre
German Wind Power Consumption Plummets 20% In First Half 2021… Coal Power Consumption Jumps 38%! (notrickszone.com)
Intermittent/renewable. Hilarious. Let them burn candles from both ends.
EIA data shows that in 2019 California used fossil fuels for about 83% of its total energy needs. The electricity sector accounted about 21.1% of its total energy use with the transportation sector being by far the the largest energy use sector accounting for about 39.3% of the states total energy use.
CEC data shows that In 2019 renewable energy was used to supply about 31.7% of the states electricity use with natural gas supplying about 34.2% and imported electricity accounting for about 28% of the states electricity. Non renewable energy accounted for about 68.3% of the states electricity in 2019.
CEC data shows that In year 2020 California used about 2% less electricity than in 2019 due to the pandemic shutdown with the share of natural gas produced electricity increasing to about 36.7% and the share of electricity imports climbing to about 30%. Renewables share increased to about 32.7%. Large hydro use for electricity in 2020 versus 2019 declined by about 46% due to the on going drought.
The amount of the states total energy use from fossil fuels in 2019 was unchanged from year 2006 when the idiotic Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) was stupidly passed by the legislature and sign by the incompetent “governor climate alarmism”.
In 2019 EIA data shows that despite California’s mandates and subsidies pushing EV’s the states transportation sector utilized electricity for less than 0.1% of its total transportation energy use with of course oil completely dominating this this largest energy use sector.
In 2019 renewables accounted for just 6.7% of California’s total energy use compared to 83% from fossil fuels. Given the period from 2006 to 2019 along with the state’s clueless government renewable use mandates along with many tens of billions of dollars in renewable subsidies this outcome is ludicrous and reveals the colossal exaggeration of the states renewable energy hype.
Over the last 12 months, Tasmania generated 79.5% of its electricity from hydro, 17.8% from wind, 2.1% from solar, and 0.6% from gas. However they do have a big powercord to Victoria, and some weeks imports represent over 20% of supply.
South Australia generated 19% from solar, 43% wind, with the balance gas. They also have a big powercord to Victoria, and peak imports can be over 20% of demand.
Australia 11% solar, 11% wind, 7% hydro, 62% coal, balance gas.
New Zealand reports 80% renewables, mainly hydro and geothermal, only 5% wind, the balance mainly coal and gas.
It should be noted that South Australia is a minor state, and is propped up up by the other much larger states when it is not windy or sunny. Gas was recently providing 91% of the power for a short period- but around 50% of that capacity (most of which is 45 years old or more) has recently been retired or will be shortly. Our renewables work only because of the kindness of our neighbors. Our regulator regularly asks big consumers to cut consumption. The grid does not have the integrity that it did.
Weathertricity
Statements are one thing, actions are another, and I don’t see any evidence any country is serious about CO2.
All politicians do is spout tokenistic platitudes to soothe the eco-Marxists.
Look at the UK, puts Attenborough in charge of the transition to electric cars.
He isn’t even a scientist, or any sort, He is a nature lover. HIs engineering ability is zero, and he will be dead in a few years.
He is a token figurehead, Greta’s pal.
The moral case for fossil fuels
A sure-to-be-controversial defense of the fossil fuel industry Conventional wisdom says fossil fuels are an unsustainable form of energy that is destroying our planet. But Alex Epstein shows that if we look at the big picture, the much-hated fossil fuel industry is dramatically improving our planet by making it a far safer and richer place.