A Little Arithmetic: The Costs Of A Solar-Powered Grid Without Fossil Fuel Back-up

From the MANHATTAN CONTRARIAN

Francis Menton

Yesterday’s post made the point that states or countries seeking to march toward 100% “renewable” electricity don’t seem to be able to get past about the 50% mark, no matter how many wind turbines and solar panels they build. The reason is that, in practical operation, due to what is called “intermittency,” no output is available from the solar and wind sources at many times of high demand; therefore, during those times, other sources must supply the juice. This practical problem is presented most starkly in California, where the “renewable” strategy is based almost entirely on solar panels, with only a very small wind component. Daily graphs published by the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) show a clear and obvious pattern, where the solar generation drops right to zero every evening just as the peak demand period kicks in from about 6 to 9 PM.

Commenter Sean thinks he has the answer: “Given the predictable daily power generation cycle of solar in sunny places like California and the predictable daily demand which peaks in the evening perhaps solar generators should be required to have electricity storage equivalent to the daily generation of their PV system.”

I thought it might be instructive to play out Sean’s idea to see just how much solar generation capacity and storage it would take to make a system out of just those two elements that would be sufficient to fulfill California’s current electricity requirements. Note: this is an exercise in arithmetic. It is not complicated arithmetic. There is nothing here that goes beyond what you learned in elementary school. On the other hand, few seem to be willing to undertake the effort to do these calculations, or to recognize the consequences.

We start with the current usage that must be supplied. Currently, the usage ranges between a low of around 30 GW and a high of around 40 GW over the course of a day. For purposes of this exercise, let’s assume an average usage of 35 GW. Multiply by 24, and we find as a rough estimate that the system must supply 840 GWH of electricity per day.

How much capacity of solar panels will we need to provide the 840 GWH? We’ll start with the very sunniest day of the year, June 21. California currently has about 14 GW of solar capacity. Go to those CAISO charts, and we find that on June 21, 2021, which apparently was a very sunny day, those 14 GW of solar panels produced at the rate of about 12 GW maximum from about 8 AM to 6 PM, about half that rate from 7-8 AM and 6-7 PM, and basically nothing the rest of the time. Optimistically, they produced about 140 GWH for the day (10 hrs x 12 GW plus 2 hrs x 6 GW plus a little more for the dawn and dusk hours). That means that to produce your 840 GWH of electricity on a sunny June 21, you will need 6 times the capacity of solar panels that you currently have, or 84 GW. When 7 PM comes, you’ll need enough energy in storage to get you through to the next morning at around 8 AM, when generation will again exceed usage. This is about 13-14 hrs at an average of 35 GW, or around 475 GWH of storage.

That’s June 21, your best day of the year. Now let’s look at a bad day. For the past year, a good example would be December 24, 2020, which besides being one of the shortest days of the year, must also have been rather cloudy. Production from the existing 14 GW of solar capacity averaged only about 3 GW, and only from 9 AM to 3 PM. That’s 18 GWH in that window (3 GW x 6 hrs). Then there was another about 1 GWH produced from 8 to 9 AM, and another 1 GWH from 3 to 4 PM. About 20 GWH for the whole day. You need 840 GWH. If 14 GW of solar panels only produced 20 GWH for the day, you would have needed 588 GW of panels to produce your 840 GWH. (14/20 x 840) That 588 GW of solar panels is some 42 times your existing 14 GW of solar panels. And when those 588 GW of capacity stop producing anything at all around 4 PM, you are also going to need at least 16 hours worth of average usage in storage to get yourself to 8 AM the next morning. That would be around 560 GWH of storage.

So you can easily see that Sean’s idea of providing storage “equivalent to the daily generation of the PV system” doesn’t really get to the heart of the problem. Your main problem is that you will need capacity of close to 15 times peak usage (nearly 600 GW capacity to supply peak usage of around 40 GW) in order to deal with your lowest-production days of the year.

Cost? If you assume (charitably) that the “levelized cost” of energy from the solar panels is the same as the “levelized cost” of energy from a natural gas plant, then this system with 15 times the capacity is going to cost 15 times as much. Plus the cost of storage. In this scenario, that is relatively modest. At current prices of around $200/KWH the 560 GWH of storage will run around $112 billion, or around half of the annual budget of the state government of California.

But you may say, no one would build the system this way, with gigantic over-capacity in place just to cover the handful of days in the year with the very lowest solar output. Instead, why not build much less solar capacity, and save up power from the summer to cover the winter. Since the average output of the solar facilities in California is about 20% of capacity averaged over the year, then you ought to be able to generate enough power for the year with capacity of about 5 times peak usage, rather than the 15 times in the scenario above. You just will need to save up power all the way from the summer to the winter. Oh, and you will need a huge multiple more storage than for the one-day-at-a-time scenario. If 180 days per year have less production than usage, and the average shortfall of production on each of those days is 300 GWH, then you will need 54,000 GWH worth of batteries (180 x 300). At $200 per GWH, that will run you around $10+ trillion. This would be about triple the annual GDP of the state of California.

But don’t worry, batteries to store power for six months and more and release it without loss on the exchange don’t exist. Maybe someone will invent them in time for California to meet its 2030 renewable electricity targets.

Full article here.

5 45 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

132 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dave Fair
July 31, 2021 4:34 pm

Going forward, people should plan on extended outages in CA.

July 31, 2021 5:00 pm

BATTERY DISASTER SHOWS THE FUTURE.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-30/tesla-battery-fire-moorabool-geelong/100337488?utm_campaign=news-article-share-2-desktop-0&utm_content=link&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_source=abc_news_web

A toxic blaze at the site of Australia’s largest Tesla battery project is set to burn throughout the night:

  • A 13-tonne Tesla lithium battery is on fire near Geelong
  • The battery was expected to be ready later this year
  • It was due to be the biggest battery in the southern hemisphere

The fire broke out during testing of a Tesla megapack at the Victorian Big Battery site near Geelong. A 13-tonne lithium battery was engulfed in flames, which then spread to an adjacent battery bank.

More than 150 people from Fire Rescue Victoria and the Country Fire Authority responded to the blaze, which has been contained and will be closely monitored until it burns itself out.
“If we try and cool them down it just prolongs the process,” the CFA’s Assistant Chief Fire Officer Ian Beswicke said.

“We could be here anywhere from 8 to 24 hours while we wait for it to burn down.”
The Tesla battery was expected to become the largest battery in the southern hemisphere as part of a Victorian Government push to transition to renewable energy.

Chris Hanley
July 31, 2021 5:45 pm

In Orwell’s 1984 Winston Smith listens to a minister triumphantly announcing the production figure of boots while quietly reflecting to himself that for all he knows no boots at all were produced.
The Soviet bureaucracy was too afraid to report the awful truth and that led to the final collapse.
That’s what’s happening in the UK where technocrats are either very stupid or lying to the government who seem to be oblivious of the enormous cost burden of their ‘net zero’ policies, if implemented would bankrupt the country.

Reply to  Chris Hanley
August 1, 2021 12:26 am

no need of if implement “would” bankrupt the country, it’s already happening.
I as an expat exporter am doing my utmost to avoid buy anything there any more…including high value machining and engineering services.

Bojo had good training as mayor of London.
Brexit has now entirely ruined the transport industry, and without that importing and exporting has become nightmarish, exactly just like the previous stuff,-

READ ON

“three secondhand water cannon,

“the aborted Garden Bridge, the Orbit tower in the Olympic Park” and more.

promised to totally eradicate rough sleeping on the streets of London by 2012,- “Rough sleeping has more than doubled”..

Ticket Offices promised there would “always be a manned ticket office at every station.”
Result: Boris closed all of them.

Promise: Boris was first elected on a fact that Londoners “pay the highest fares in Europe,” before immediately introducing a series of inflation-busting fares increases.
Result: Bojo increased fares by on average 4.2% and then raised them in line with inflation in subsequent years. Overall the cost of a single bus fare increased by two thirds with him.

Promise: -restore the iconic open-platformed “hop-on, hop-off” buses to London, promised, be staffed by a new army of old-fashioned bus conductors.
Result: spent hundreds of millions of pounds commissioning a new fleet of “Routemaster-style” buses… all the promised ‘open rear platforms’ on the buses were fitted with doors
The promised old-fashioned bus conductors were never re-hired due to the fact that Oyster and contactless cards made their job obsolete.

a promise to tackle London’s crippling congestion, by “re-phasing traffic lights, allowing motorcycles in bus lanes …
Result: Congestion increased significantly.

Bojo elected on a promise not to raise the congestion charge, saying “I would certainly not allow the congestion charge to go up above £8”.

Result: Boris raied the congestion charge in both his first and second term. It now stands at £15.

Bike hire schemePromise: “broker a deal with a private company to bring thousands of bikes to the capital at no cost to the taxpayer.”

Result: promise “at no cost to the taxpayer” was not delivered, either in his original sponsorship deal with Barclays, or in his subsequent deal with Santander.

The scheme continues to operate at a loss.
Santander Cycles in London Hiring a Santander Cycle costs £2 for unlimited journeys up to 30 minutes, within a 24 hour period.
For journeys longer than 30 minutes, you pay £2 for each additional 30 minutes.

Fire servicePromise: denied he had any plans to cut fire engines or fire stations,

Result: Bojo closed ten fire stations across London and removed 27 fire engines from service.
Fourteen of these were removed permanently.
Fire response times rose in many areas of London, no doubt contributing to the death toll in the subsequent devastating Grenfell Tower fire.

Police OfficersPromise: In 2012, Bojo sent a list of nine promises …..Number four on the list was “Making our streets and homes safer with 1,000 more police on the beat”.

Result: The number of police officers on London’s streets DID
not rise. Knife crime has now risen to now record levels, –

In 2019/20 the number of knife crime offences recorded in London reached almost 15.6 thousand, an increase of around 5.8 thousand offences compared with 2015/16,

Since 2015/16 the crime rate in the United Kingdom capital has increased in every reporting year, with the steepest increase occurring between 2016/17 and 2017/18.

… on his failure to increase police numbers back in 2013,
Boris claimed that any suggestion he had actually promised 1,000 more police officers was a “wilful misconstruction”.

Cabinet-style governmentPromise: – promised to introduce cabinet-style government to “strengthen the decision-making process in City Hall”.

“The Cabinet will meet on a regular basis, formal minutes will be taken, and the full agenda papers will be put on the Mayor’s website.”
Result: No mayoral cabinet was ever set up.

Cabbies…promised to set up a “cabbies cabinet” to deal with the concerns of London taxi drivers.

Result: Plans for a formal cabbies cabinet were were scrapped in 2013 City Hall’s relationship with the London taxi trade continued to deteriorate
culminating in large disruptive protests both inside and outside City Hall.

There is plenty more..

Just do the arithmetic.
200k to rebuild his kitchen….

No education could be finer training for lying with ex-Eton and Harrow boys.

Reply to  pigs_in_space
August 1, 2021 6:11 am

I think it is most unfair to attack Bojo using facts!!

Fred Chittenden
July 31, 2021 9:06 pm

And what happens to this model when everyone is mandated to be charging their e-vehicle? Asking for friend…

John Sandhofner
July 31, 2021 9:34 pm

Not clearly discussed is the extra generation you will need to charge those batteries. Your existing resources plus new ones will be used to meet max demand which leaves no energy to charge your batteries. So you will need additional solar panels to charge them. You already need 6 times what is already available just to met the daily light demand. Now you have to build new panels to charge your batteries. You have got a lot more panels to build which will take up an incredible amount of land. Who will want that in their back yard? Anyone with half a brain can see how this will never work.

Reply to  John Sandhofner
July 31, 2021 9:57 pm

“ Anyone with half a brain can see how this will never work.”

I think I see the problem, 4 leftists together don’t add up to 1/2 a brain

July 31, 2021 9:56 pm

You need enough panels to supply the 30GW load during the day while charging the batteries for the evening peak and overnight needs

So you need ~3x as many panels as discussed here

Dean
July 31, 2021 11:48 pm

And lets not forget that batteries will be 75 to 80% efficient, thus you will need even more generating capacity to cover that.

Kiwi Gary
August 1, 2021 2:02 am

I must have missed something, but there doesn’t appear to be enough solar megawatts to recharge the batteries or whatever storage system will be used if it is only the 840 MWH production. My guess is that you will need close to triple the daily demand to cover recharge including all the losses in battery efficiency, conversion equipment, etc. I am not an electrical Engineer, so explanations welcome.

D M
August 1, 2021 4:58 am

V good article.

I suggest a follow on article which adds the “social cost of intermittency” to the analysis. The social cost of intermittency includes the value of:

  • Economic activity LOST while electricity supplies are less than contemporaneous demand
  • Discomfort and inconvenience suffered while the grid trims use of some equipment (such as air conditioners) powered by electricity
  • Adapting to intermittency

One will find the social cost of intermittency DWARFS the social cost of carbon.

I also suggest a real life demonstration of intermittency’s intolerable social cost. Force green energy advocates to function solely using green energy and to pay green energy’s full costs while doing so. Six months experience (from mid summer to mid winter) should suffice to convince many about the error of their ways. Half wits may need a full twelve months;-}

lgl
August 1, 2021 9:39 am

15 mill cars. 70 kWh each. 1 TWh storage. Problem solved.

August 1, 2021 11:30 am

Stop being so negative and just BELIEVE HARDER and we can do it!

Lawrence Edward Todd
August 1, 2021 4:07 pm

there was a big Tesla battery fire in Australia.

August 1, 2021 10:46 pm

We have a pumped storage scheme in Wales, water is pumped up hill to a reservoir when there is excess power, and let out through turbines when there isnt. I dont know what the cost is, but apart from evaporation and leaks it can store energy for long periods.

I dont know what its efficiency is though, I imagine about 70% at best. Possibly a lot worse.

And with efficiency that bad, you end up needing not 15 times, but 30 times capacity.

D M
Reply to  Matthew Sykes
August 4, 2021 4:54 am

And, too few potential pump storage sites exist in most countries. Also, think of the environmental degradation caused by building dams, transmission lines …

Thatsallottaland
August 1, 2021 11:50 pm

How many square miles is that?

Jay in Kitsap
August 2, 2021 2:24 am

It seems crazy how Hydro and Natural Gas are just so ‘bad!’, let the crusade be just against coal for now until modular nuclear like NuScale comes to fruition. With the base load on nuclear, peaking power being natural gas when not enough solar.

For California operating desalinization plants from excess solar during the day, then off for the evening peak load, back on during the low demand night

Samson
August 11, 2021 11:06 pm

Has the production capacity been taken into account, which is required to fill the storage?

Dennis G Sandberg
August 12, 2021 5:16 pm

Misleading to state $200/kWh, that’s only the battery and does not include site preparation, delivery, interconnections, switching, auxiliary systems including fire suppression, etc. Current cost for a commissioned operating system is at least $400/kWh. Elon’s Australia battery, that the eco’s love, was $900/kWh

Verified by MonsterInsights