coal and nuclear, nuclear and coal - 2 sides of the same planet killing coin

[kristopher]

The present 'grid' is a system built around extremely large generating plants that burn various fuels in order to make steam that will turn the shaft of a huge generator and produce electricity.

The way to make this system work in the least expensive way possible is to run these plants as much as possible.

Savings are also achieved by making the generating units as large as possible so that there is a reduction in costs by avoiding duplicating things like site work, building foundations, grid connection facilities and so on. It's the same idea as adding living space to your home - it's cheaper to build a larger house than to add extra footage in the form of a detached dwelling with separate electric, sewage, and water hook-ups.

The savings we get from making these plants larger come at a cost, which is lack of flexibility. The generators themselves are so large that shutting them down results in a very time consuming restart process - sometimes on the order to 10+ hours.

In addition to that they also ramp up and down slowly, meaning that if additional power is needed rapidly to prevent a black out, that power must come from a unit that is running but not sending its power to the grid; which of course adds cost and burns fuel. In fact, the large scale thermal grid requires far more back up and standby generation than a renewable based grid.

From this centralized system's functional perspective, coal and nuclear are largely interchangeable because the system is created and operated by a set of economic rules that reward those generators which are best fitting contributors to making it function seamlessly.

This economic and operational model is referred to as "large scale centralized generation".

Dismantling this model - both physical and economic - is the major obstacle slowing the transition to an ultra-low carbon energy system.

The model that emerges for optimizing renewable energy sources is best conceptualized by turning the centralized model on its head. Instead of starting with a large scale centralized producer of electricity needing to be distributed to end users, we start with the end user and look at the best system - economic and technical - to provide for that user's power needs with today's technology. We then link these various residential, commercial and industrial 'microgrids' together in a distribution system that not only shares the strengths of the various contributors, but that also provides a platform allowing them to buy and sell as needs and capacity dictate. This keeps a large part of the money people spend on energy in the local community.

The centralized system isn't capable of doing this.

Pollution, costs and reliability are all improved with a system that is optimized to end user needs. The elements are 'distributed' throughout various end user platforms built around the variable energy sources of solar and wind supplemented with 'dispatch-able' energy sources. Small scale hydro, smaller biofuel fired thermal generators that can switch on and off rapidly; geothermal plants, hundreds of different methods of end user and system storage; 'smart' distribution;strong and a focus on energy efficiency investment are a few of the additional tools available to round out the solar/wind core.

The way these elements fit together to build a 'distributed grid' create a system of economic rewards that is completely incompatible with the economic rewards of grid built to promote and service the needs of large scale thermal generating plants.

Within this context, coal and nuclear are but two sides of the same coin.

With that said, let me add that the examples below are predicted by a famous paper written by Amory Lovins about 40 years ago: Energy Strategy: The Road Not Taken
http://www.rmi.org/Knowledge-Center/Library/E77-01_EnergyStrategyRoadNotTaken

Experts urge coal, nuclear energy future
Natural gas supplies drying up, they say
12 Aug 2015 at 03:48
APINYA WIPATAYOTIN

Thailand must build more coal-fired and new nuclear power plants to meet its energy needs and strengthen energy security as future supplies of natural gas are uncertain, engineers said yesterday.

Academics from Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Engineering made the comments at a press briefing Tuesday.

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha late last month ordered the halt of a planned coal-fired power plant and seaport in southern Krabi province after protests against the projects. He appointed a panel comprising representatives from the government, National Reform Council, National Legislative Assembly and public sector to discuss alternative solutions, including renewable energy options.

Pinyo Meechumna, from Chulalongkorn's Department of Mining and Petroleum Engineering, said the country's energy security was at risk as its power plants rely too heavily on natural gas. Of the country's natural gas consumption, 70% is domestically produced while the rest is purchased from neighbouring countries.

He said if this situation continued...

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/652472/experts-urge-coal-nuclear-energy-future


And Not Coincidentally...

Law curbing public assembly takes effect in Thailand
Source: AP NEWS

A protester shows the three-finger salute during an anti-coup demonstration in Bangkok last year. Pic: AP.

BANGKOK (AP) — A new law has come into effect in Thailand that curbs public gatherings and bans protests at the prime minister’s office, airports and various other public places.

Human rights groups have criticized the Public Assembly Act and its stiff penalties. It is the latest restrictive measure put in place since the military ousted an elected government in a coup last year. The coup followed years of political demonstrations that led to violence and often paralyzed the country’s capital.

The law that took effect Thursday requires protesters to inform police about rallies at least 24 hours before they are held. It bans demonstrations within 150 meters (500 feet) of government offices, courts, airports, train and bus stations.

Deputy government spokesman Sansern Kaewkamnerd called the law “a necessity for Thailand.”

http://asiancorrespondent.com/134796/law-curbing-public-assembly-takes-effect-in-thailand/


We see that same trend within current hard-right Japanese government - exemplified by the draconian states secrets law they passed to help enable wrenching the nation back onto the hard energy path.

Abe’s secrets law undermines Japan’s democracy
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2014/12/13/commentary/japan-commentary/abes-secrets-law-undermines-japans-democracy/

A bit more from an old classmate...

Japan Passes Draconian Secrecy Bill Into Law: Journalists, Whistleblowers are now “terrorists”
POSTED BY JAKEADELSTEIN ON SATURDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2013
December 9th, Tokyo* (Updated from December 7th post)

The Prime Minister Abe Shinzo (LDP) led ruling coalition passed the ominous new Designated Secrets Bill yesterday in the middle of the night on December 7th (Friday, Tokyo time), apparently fearing that the light of another day, or the harsh radiation of the truth, would cause the legislation to shrivel up and die. The ruling government cut off debate and forced a vote in the upper house of Japan’s parliament, The Diet, before the clock could strike midnight. 130 were in favor, 82 were opposed.

The law will punish journalists and whistleblowers who divulge government secrets with up to ten years in prison, and up to five years for those who “instigate leaks” (ask questions about state secrets). There is no independent third-party organization set in place to monitor how the law is applied and it gives every ministry and the smallest government agency or related committee carte blanche to declare any inconvenient information “top secret.”

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, the LDP, Komeito, and “Your Party” relentlessly pushed the bill forward, despite a sudden dip in cabinet support rates to below 50% and increasing opposition within Japan and the world. Earlier this week, the LDP Secretary General, Shigeru Ishiba, labeled the growing protests “tantamount to terrorism” which prompted more public outcry. There were estimated to be 15,000 people outside Japan’s parliament (The Diet) chanting in protest when the bill was passed.

We don’t know what will be a secret. We don’t know who will be kept private under this law. And it’s a law that doesn’t inform the citizens of anything, so I oppose it… The current administration is slowly trying to create a country that has the ability to fight a war. I’ll continue to fight against this law, because it is the beginning of such a country. —Unemployed, 53, Yoriko W●●●, who protested the bill on December 6th.

More at http://www.japansubculture.com/japan-passes-draconian-secrets-law-journalists-whistleblowers-are-now-terrorists/

[kristopher]

1. Can wind power the grid?

They've done detailed modeling in the low-wind NE portion of the country in PJM's territory (using actual demand data and detailed, recorded weather data. You might be startled at the results.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2012.09.054

"Cost-minimized combinations of wind power, solar power and electrochemical storage, powering the grid up to 99.9% of the time"
Abstract
We model many combinations of renewable electricity sources (inland wind, offshore wind, and photovoltaics) with electrochemical storage (batteries and fuel cells), incorporated into a large grid system (72 GW). The purpose is twofold:

1) although a single renewable generator at one site produces intermittent power, we seek combinations of diverse renewables at diverse sites, with storage, that are not intermittent and satisfy need a given fraction of hours. And

2) we seek minimal cost, calculating true cost of electricity without subsidies and with inclusion of external costs. Our model evaluated over 28 billion combinations of renewables and storage, each tested over 35,040 h (four years) of load and weather data. We find that the least cost solutions yield seemingly-excessive generation capacity—at times, almost three times the electricity needed to meet electrical load. This is because diverse renewable generation and the excess capacity together meet electric load with less storage, lowering total system cost.

At 2030 technology costs and with excess electricity displacing natural gas, we find that the electric system can be powered 90%–99.9% of hours entirely on renewable electricity, at costs comparable to today's—but only if we optimize the mix of generation and storage technologies.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378775312014759