Minnesota: 100% Renewables Not A Pipe Dream, Study Shows

[NickB79]

http://www.greenchipstocks.com/articles/100-renewables-not-a-pipe-dream-study-shows/1620

"According to a study released Tuesday, March 13, the state of Minnesota could feasibly receive all its electricity needs from solar and wind power as long as it had sufficient energy storage and some improvements on the grid.

Reducing damage on the grid would be a major necessity before the transformation process could achieve reality, but the study proves that full power from renewables is not unlikely.

Of course, it won’t happen overnight, or even at minimal cost increase. Electricity prices would probably increase from 10.6 cents per kilowatt to about 13.6 cents.

And the time frame for necessary grid improvements, as well as actual solar and wind project construction, would come in at about 40 years."

Of course, the study also says such a set-up would require substantial storage systems be installed as well (they discuss CAES systems as their system of choice).

[PamW]

1. Not what our best scientists say..

Yes - if you had reliable, safe, energy storage, you could use a high percentage of renewables.

Yes - if Minnesota had the oil reserves of Saudi Arabia sitting below her surface, she could be self-sufficient for oil.

What else do you want to wish for while we're playing the wishing game?

However, as the USA's best scientists at the National Academy of Sciences point out in their numerous studies on energy, the prospects for that type of storage technology are not good, and that the prospects for 100% renewables are not likely.

I don't know what your vocabulary definition of "proof" is - but in the vernacular of science, the Minnesota study "proved" nothing.

Nobody has a CAES system anywhere near large enough to store what is needed for a typical powerplant. The amount of energy that is required to back up a single power plant for a day is measured in kilotons - similar to the energy of atomic bombs.

Nobody has such a system.

PamW

[kestrel91316]

4. Well, then, there's obviously no point in using any renewables at all.

[GliderGuider]

2. "And the time frame ... would come in at about 40 years."

I'm glad they're working on it. With that kind of a time horizon though, what comes out the far end probably won't resemble the artists' conceptions in the brochures. Over that interval different people expect everything from space elevators and solar power satellites to nations of tin shacks heated with garbage fires.

But as long as they manage to shut down some FF power plants without exporting the coal or gas to be burned somewhere else or waking the ghost of Jevon in the process, I'm all for it.

[kristopher]

3. Minnesota Electricity Could Be 100% Renewable, 100% Local

Minnesota Electricity Could Be 100% Renewable, 100% Local
By John Farrell March 13, 2012

A new report released today by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research shows that Minnesota can meet 100% of its electricity needs with in-state wind and solar power, and (with ample energy efficiency investments) at a comparable cost to its existing electricity supply.

The notion that solar and wind energy cannot be the mainstay of an electricity generation system because they are intermittent is incorrect...it is technically and economically feasible to meet the entire 2007 electricity demand of Xcel Energy [in Minnesota] using only renewable energy generation combined with storage technology and energy efficiency improvements...a 100 percent renewable energy-based electricity system for Minnesota increases rates by a mere 1-2 cents per kilowatt hour when sufficient reasonable and economical investments are made in energy efficiency

The renewable energy mix would include approximately 13,000 megawatts of wind power and 4,600 megawatts of distributed solar PV. The expenditures for the new renewable energy, storage (via underground compressed air) and energy efficiency would pump more than $90 billion into the state's economy and create 50,000 jobs.

With the combination of new renewable energy and significant energy efficiency, electricity rates rise slightly but Minnesota ratepayers are held relatively harmless. The following chart from the report illustrates, with some relatively conservative estimates, the cost of wind and solar:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2012/03/minnesota-electricity-could-be-100-renewable-100-local?cmpid=SolarNL-Thursday-March15-2012

[PamW]

6. Real simple!!

So you are adding 13 Gigawatts of wind and 4.6 Gigawatts of solar; which totals 17.6 Gigawatts.

What is the capacity of the storage system? How many Gigawatt days of storage will be built?

Keep in mind that ONE Gigawatt-day is about 20.6 kilotons, or about the energy of the Nagasaki atomic bomb.

So to back up your new solar and wind for one day worth; you need 17.6 atom bombs worth of energy storage.

Good luck with that. I don't want to be anywhere near it.

PamW

[FogerRox]

5. HVDC projects are becoming the shiznit

Atlantic Wind Connection a 350 mile long offshore HVDC project, from Nj to Virginia, to support 1750 4Mw turbines. China just finished a 7 gig UHVDC project about 87 miles long, to feed a coastal city. The grid is starting to be rebuilt right now.

SO I'm really not digging the 40 yr timeframe. Just using HVDC for 20% of transmission would save 7 gigs of power, equal to 8 coal plants.