By David Wojick
It is very simple. The cost of storing electricity is so huge it makes getting through a single windless night under a net zero wind, solar, and storage plan economically impossible.
This is especially true of cold nights where blackouts can be deadly. I recently made a legislative proposal to Pennsylvania along these lines so let’s use them as our example, keeping in mind that this is true everywhere.
Pennsylvania peaks at around 30,000 MW so let’s consider a windless night with a constant need of just 20,000 MW. There should be lots of these, especially in winter. Cold snaps are typically due to windless high pressure systems of arctic air with lots of overnight radiative cooling.
In the world of solar, “nights” are 16 hours or more long since solar systems just generate a lot of energy for 8 hours a day. It is likely less in a Pennsylvania winter where it is dark at 4 pm.
So, to get through the night we need to have stored at least 20,000 MW times 16 hours or 320,000 MWh of juice. For simplicity, we ignore all sorts of technical details that would make this number larger, like input-output losses.
The present capital cost of grid scale batteries is around $600,000 per MWh. Again this ignores all sorts of technical factors that make that number larger, like buildings, transmission, etc.
Simple arithmetic says this works out to an incredible $192 billion dollars just for the batteries. Clearly this is economically impossible. In round numbers two hundred billion dollars just to get through the night! Wind and solar plus batteries simply does not work. Even if the cost magically dropped 90% it would still be an impossible $20 billion just to buy the batteries.
This is so simple one wonders why none of the utilities, public utility commissions, independent system operators, and reliability agencies ever thought of it. Or maybe they did and decided not to mention it.
Moreover, on really cold nights the need for electricity can easily get to peak demand, which would require more like $300 billion in batteries. Then, too, there might be a cloudy or even snowy day pushing the need to 16 + 8 + 16 = 40 hours. Or several cloudy windless days at which point we are talking about a trillion dollars or more.
Clearly these simple numbers make net zero power based on wind, solar and batteries impossibly expensive. Other forms of storage are likely no cheaper. The reality is we are talking about storing an enormous amount of energy which simply cannot be done. The obvious solution is to have lots of reliable generation.
Which brings me to my legislative proposal which is also very simple. It merely requires the utilities to figure out how to meet the need for electricity on brutally cold windless nights that are likely to occur.
You can read it here. The title is “Avoiding deadly blackouts” because in severe cold, a blackout can kill people. In the horrible Texas blackout estimates run to over 700 deaths. Cold kills.
In fact, this is a requirement for today, not just some distant net zero fantasy. We are already to the point where a lot of States could not keep the heat on if they got a severe cold snap like they have already had in the past.
In “Avoiding deadly blackouts” I point out that Pennsylvania and the rest of PJM narrowly avoided blacking out in winter storm Elliot. On paper, they had a 30% margin of safety which was wiped out by the cold. But Elliot was actually mild compared to several earlier severe cold spells. We must prepare for these extreme events.
We use a tremendous amount of electricity which net zero cannot possibly provide on windless nights. But we are already under severe threat. The States must act now to prevent deadly blackouts. Storage is not the answer. We need reliable generation, much of which will be fossil fueled.
It is, indeed, easy to show the impossibility of this fantasy. However, I should point out one thing.
Actually the cost of $600/kWhr or $600,000/Mwhr does already include some minimal auxillary equipment such as a weatherproof enclosure (see Megapack) along with batteries. However, not nearly enough for a utility grade installation.
Current price of LFP cells are reaching under 1000E for 14kWh. Including tax. That is 71E/kWh. If you reach installation price of 600$/kWh you are doing obviously something wrong.
More realistic would be to count 71E/kWh cell price, and 71E/kWh rest ( storage place, installation, cabling).
Very nice David. Clear, simple, straight forward and short. I couldn’t ask for more. We do not have a climate crisis, CO2 is not the control knob for our climate, we are not going to reach a tipping point and suffer irreversible global warming, there is zero need for net zero, wind and solar should be removed from the grid and we need to build fossil fuel and nuclear generators starting today.
I copied the text of this essay and emailed it to dozens of climate idiots here in Wokeachusetts. No response of course, there never is when I send them smart climate skepticism.
There are some studies of wind droughts, solar drought and compound energy droughts.
They are much worse than a windless night.
Further reading:
“Energy Droughts” in Wind and Solar Can Last Nearly a Week, Research Shows | News Release | PNNL
The windless night is enough to make net zero impossible. And it is very simple.
With nuclear, hydro, some gas power and some batteries, a windless night, when electricity demand is relatively low, might not cause a blackout.
But a compound energy drought for a few days, that included several peak consumption breakfast hour and dinner hour periods, would likely drain the batteries enough to cause a blackout
The current goal that seems to be only 4 hours of battery backup, would not get through one windless night.
These blackout predictions depends on how fast hydrocarbon fueled power plants are permanently closed.
When the UK Royal Society were looking at large scale electricity storage they looked at 37 years of weather data and
“found variations in wind supply on a multi decadal timescale, as well as sporadic periods of days and weeks of very low generation potential.”
“For this reason, some tens of TWhs of very long storage will be needed. For comparison the TWhs needed are 1000 times more than is currently provided by pumped hydro, and far more than could be provided cost effectively by batteries”
They later realised that this estimate was an understatement because they had used the UK’s electricity use in 2018 32 times (to 2050) without allowing for the huge increase in electricity that would be required to electrify everything.
And then there is the topic of wind & solar overbuild in an attempt to reduce the amount of battery storage needed — knowing full well that overbuild will result in generation being curtailed when the battery storage is fully topped off and there is no other place to send the electricity.
A question ………….
For any wind plus solar seasonal generation pattern observed in a region like that served by PJM, what analytical and mathematical approach could one use to minimize the volume of battery storage required using only wind & solar overbuild as the battery storage minimization tool?
Overbuilding does not address the windless cold night case I describe. The impossible expensive batteries are all still needed.
The Earth is still in a 2.5 million-year ice age named the Quaternary(Glaciation) in a cold interglacial period that alternates with very cold glacial periods. Almost everyone outside the Tropics has to live and work in heated buildings it is so cold most of the year. The ice age won’t end until all of the natural ice melts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternary_glaciation
I seem to recall that South Australia had some hiccups when their ‘green’ generation was getting started. Their solution: diesel generators spread around the Adelaide suburbs.
Australia’s renewables “poster child” state South Australia has to regularly run its diesels and use more gas, plus import power from its neighbouring state, to keep its electricity working. The state is a net energy importer, even with its high percentage of solar and wind.
Replace “even with” with “because of”.
And these are the reasons that the reliable, affordable and abundant energy that fossil fuels, hydro and nuclear provide will continue to dominate power sources worldwide. Sun and wind might be utilized to provide small amounts during ideal conditions when the overall demand isn’t too great, but anyone who believes that these can replace the major providers mentioned above needs to be forced to spend a winter in the northern tier of American states or on the Canadian Prairie provinces. After a week, he’ll be ordering coal by the ton or booking a flight to Hawaii.
I really wonder if any of these wind powered experts (remember the old joke about a drip under pressure) have they never lived near the sea. I am my family live a couple of hundred yards from the waterfront on Redcliffe Peninsula a suburb of Brisbane QLD that sticks out into the greater harbour of Moreton Bay. The last few days and nights should be a lesson to all wind powered supporters it great big Moreton Bay has been as still as a mill pond not a breathe of wind to even create ripples on the water. Quiet beautiful and the air clear, it is not going to last very long but have enjoyed it while it has lasted. I also observe most nights the wind drops right off to almost nothing after the sun goes down.
Bravo.
Well written and carefully reasoned when compared to the alarmist gobbledygook.