By Robert Bradley Jr.
The forced energy transformation crowd continues to be in denial about how badly the California grid has been compromised by wind and solar, how expensive the battery solution is, and the prospect of Big Brother in the home (setting temperatures and restricting power use at will). As Ludwig von Mises observed, the failure of government intervention leads to more and more intervention, posing a choice between free markets and Leviathan.”
Social media is where the industry experts and talented professionals are effectively challenging the “magical thinking” behind climate alarmism/forced energy transformation, given the blackout of the mainstream media. As yet another example, Mike Hassaballa, energy engineer and consultant, reported on LinkedIn: “California’s Duck Curve Hits Record Lows.” His comment and graphics follow.
———————
The famous “Duck Curve” that symbolizes the challenges of integrating renewable energy into the grid has reached an all-time low.
The Duck Curve, initially coined by the California Independent System Operator (CAISO), illustrates the daily electricity demand and supply patterns in California. Its distinctive shape resembles a duck with its head and neck representing the daily net load, i.e., the difference between electricity demand and generation.
But why is this curve so important? The Duck Curve showcases the impact of renewable energy sources, particularly solar power, on the grid. As solar panels proliferate across California, the curve’s belly – symbolizing midday surplus energy – has been steadily growing. This phenomenon poses a challenge as it can result in excess electricity during the day, followed by a rapid ramp-up in demand as the sun sets. Managing this imbalance is crucial for a stable and reliable energy system.
This highlights the pressing need for energy storage solutions, demand response programs, and further integration of renewable energy into the grid. By effectively managing the duck curve, we can accelerate our transition to a more sustainable and resilient energy future.
—————
More than 200 comments followed, most from the pro-renewables crowd arguing, in effect, “okay, this presents a challenge that the next phase of energy transformation, such as batteries and demand-reduction, must address.”
The critics of forced grid solar had comments ranging from “That is one ugly duckling,” which elicited the response: “It’s bound to be, it’s based on ‘quack’ climate science.” Then came the more serious. Dan Fowler commented in part:
The takeaway is that no new solar projects should be permitted (or are needed) without an equal amount of storage being made available.
And another:
No amount of batteries will address this problem at a fiscally sensible level. Pursuing further penetration of solar and wind, along with batteries will push California’s electricity rates ever higher to the point of impoverishing the population and driving any sensible business away.
Scott Tinker made the obvious point of more-of-the-same-is-worse:
… the logic of integrated more of the thing that is causing the duck into the system is somewhat lost on people who understand and have to manage these things. Perhaps additional dispatchable sources like natural gas and nuclear to create reliable electricity would be useful. And also have the benefit of bringing California’s highest in the nation [lower-48] electricity prices down for the consumer. Or, you could continue to follow Europe…
The obvious solution is to stop the wounding and treat the wound. No more wind and solar. And retire existing capacity to allow market signals to bring in combined power plants fueled by either natural gas or fuel oil. Coal-by-wire should also be encouraged. The electricity rate debacle can be solved and Big Brother kept out of the home.
Conclusion
The forced energy transformation crowd continues to be in denial about how badly the California grid has been compromised by wind and solar, how expensive the battery solution is, and the prospect of Big Brother in the home (setting temperatures and restricting power use at will). As Ludwig von Mises observed, the failure of government intervention leads to more and more intervention, posing a choice between free markets and Leviathan.
When net demand regularly reaches zero at the belly (they are there) then nuclear power is dead in California.
Why a chart background photo of a dinosaur instead of s duck?
I think there is a lot of confusion expressed in the comments.
In the past, the duck curve was a problem for the late pm early evening grid demand, with demand going up but solar going down. As can be seen in this graph, this problem is easing. The new problem is the surplus of solar power at noon. Since current storage solutions are very expensive perhaps CA can export that excess energy. That of course would make fossil fuel power plants in surrounding states even more difficult to maintain, thus making the grid even more liable to blackouts.
This situation simply shows that the push to green energy is premature and very poorly thought out.
Its easing? Not according to the graph.
The solution becomes curtailment. The question is who gets to curtail, and with what compensation (if any), and do those who continue to produce see an adequate return on anything they sell. See my post below.
Can’t share it to the west. That gives California less flexibility than Texas.
The late PM reduction in the duck bill over time is possibly due to demand restrictions and (minor) short-term storage usage. If the central controllers can cut off individual A/C units in the very hot early evening then your quality of life goes to hell [pun intended].
Fooling around with the data from CAISO, and using only 8:00pm data, which is the max net power load, it looks like the demand in net load reduction is mainly due to wind power, on an annual average basis. The data from CAISO showing net load only seems to count wind and solar in load reduction. So, I suspect that battery discharge is trivial at this point.
“ID-ten T’s”… California’s biggest problem… Get rid of them
For comparison here’s the picture for generation on an average summer day in South Australia – 5th Jan 2023. The total generation potential is given by the area of the solid bars, and includes the blue amount of curtailment at the top of the heap. That curtailment was applied to wind and utility solar, which is fairly evident from the data of what they did produce. Some of the surplus was exported (shown negative below the line, and also as difference between local demand on the grid and total generation from the grid. A large chunk of demand was met by rooftop solar. The red line running through it shows taht if the commercial generators were not curtailed, about half the rooftop solar would have had to be curtailed. The orange line above it removes the export volume to give total local demand met by grid and rooftop. The very puny contribution of the batteries to solving the problems is also evident: more detailed examination shows they were really mainly being used for grid stabilisation rather than serious storage.
With grid prices running negative for so much of the day it is hardly an incentive to invest in more renewables capacity. Backup generation from gas and diesel barely figures on this day, so must aim for high profits when it is run to cover its fixed costs. The crunch for rooftop solar will eventually be painful as the cost of the subsidies and all the necessary grid curtailment and extra transmission capacity and interconnector links it causes becomes unsustainable.
Click on the image for an enlarged version.
Is anybody talking about the days when the sun don’t shine much or at all? That curve will look a whole lot different and it won’t be pretty.
Well in Mediterranean climate Adelaide South Australia winter is upon us with overcast drizzle while snow and ice are predicted for the SE States over the coming week. Now I have 6.64kW of nameplate solar panels that can nudge over 6kW output on fine sunny days at the optimum temp around 25C. However I noticed this morning at 10.30 am the inverter was pumping out a massive 110W and I wouldn’t be alone across Adelaide with rooftop solar.
RC inverter aircon running full time and we’re all electric but I do wonder how the poor folk are getting on as we’re still living off a very healthy spring and summer solar FIT credit. This planet saving is a tough gig but somebody has to do it eh lefties?
Here’s the flip side of the coin: almost nothing from wind, not a lot from solar, and dependence on gas and coal (via interconnector imports) and diesel ot keep the lights on. Exactly the same colour key. There is of course no curtailment and essentially no exports. The need to ramp the gas up in the morning so that Victoria can meet its own demand is marked.
Just keep telling yourselves….renewables are cheap…renewables are cheap…
Electricity prices to rise by up to a quarter in parts of Australia after energy regulator issues market default decision (msn.com)
“This highlights the pressing need for energy storage solutions, demand response programs, and further integration of renewable energy into the grid. By effectively managing the duck curve, we can accelerate our transition to a more sustainable and resilient energy future.” Talk about some who spent far to much time in LaLa land. As Ron White puts it “you can’t fix stupid”
“and further integration of renewable energy into the grid.”
Like pumping more bullets into a body will cure the murder victim.
We’ve been installing renewables at 4 times the rate per capita of you lot so aren’t you envious?
Energy regulator has ‘warned of lack of power’ in NSW (msn.com)
Are you lot cool enough yet and can we stop now?
There’s a problem with the ugly duckling. It has two different values for 12 AM (16&20).
oops, wrong look, my mistake demand could change that much in 24 hours.
1/3 of bermudas system of electric buses were inoperable yesterday due to rain .
The climate changers will no doubt be thrilled to hear that-
Bermuda Electric Light Company – Wikipedia