How Europe can go 100% renewable and phase out dirty energy

[kristopher]

Greenpeace: Battle of the Grids
Publication - January 18, 2011

How Europe can go 100% renewable and phase out dirty energy

...Today, Europe’s electricity grid is characterised by big, polluting power stations pumping out constant energy, regardless of consumer need, along a wasteful, aging A/C (alternating current) network. The patchwork of national grids stitched together over the years is an uncomfortable, uneconomical fit.

Climate policy and consumer demand are hurtling us towards a smarter, more efficient Europe-wide grid that is already opening up vast new technological, business and consumer opportunities. Such a grid could guarantee supply despite extreme weather conditions, delivering green energy around Europe via efficient, largely below ground DC (direct current) cables. However, the report’s title, Battle of the Grids, hints at the fact that we are at a political crossroads.

Despite the remarkable growth in renewables, last year they generated more investment than any other sector, we are fast reaching a showdown between green and dirty energy. Thousands of wind turbines delivering near free energy were turned off in 2010 to allow polluting and heavily subsidised nuclear and coal plants to carry on business as usual. It is estimated Spain had to ditch around 200GWh of energy last year. The buzz on the lips of industry specialists, lobbyists and in boardrooms is about system clash and
the costs of building and running what is increasingly becoming a dual system. This groundbreaking report demonstrates the problem on a European scale. It also proves that Europe is capable of moving smoothly to a system that delivers nearly 100 percent renewable power around the clock

Taken with Greenpeace’s 2010 Energy evolution report, Battle of the Grids builds on Greenpeace’s earlier Renewables 24/7 study. It is a ‘how to’ manual for the kind of system we need to deliver 68 percent renewable energy by 2030 and nearly 100 percent by 2050....

http://www.greenpeace.org/eu-unit/en/Publications/2011/battle-of-the-grids/

PDF: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/Global/international/publications/climate/2011/battle%20of%20the%20grids.pdf






Renewables 24/7
Publication - February 4, 2010
Smart grid or super grid, decentralised or centralised renewable power plants? The discussion about the future of our power supply is running hot, and hi- tech visions are everywhere.

Executive summary: The solar and wind markets have continued to grow despite the economic crisis. So as more and more renewable power generation comes online a question arises. How do we transport and integrate renewable energy sources into existing power grids? Will the lights go out if the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining? Do we still need coal or nuclear power to provide base-load and back-up for wind and solar power?

Climate friendly infrastructure is needed in all countries. The time to build up our ‘climate friendly infrastructure’ – comprising networked smart grids and district heating pipelines – is now! The window of opportunity is available for industrialised countries as well as developing countries. While the industrialised nations in North America, Europe and Australia have to reinforce their 40- and 50-year old grids, developing countries – especially China and India – are in the process of building theirs for the first time.

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/reports/renewables-24-7/

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. Here is an answer that won't quit.

http://www.fuelcellenergy.com/

[JDPriestly]

2. This is the challenge of the so-called industrial (but not for long)

world -- accepting the imperative that we change to green energy.

If we don't do it, our grandchildren will be living in what is considered to be the underdeveloped world.

Are we up to it?

Let's stop fighting about oil and focus on the positive work we have to do. Let's work together to heat and electrify and transport ourselves cheaply and efficiently with clean energy.

End the subsidies to nuclear, oil and coal and watch how the prices on those commodities go up while the cost of clean energy sources goes down.

[robcon]

3. Ridiculous, anti-scientific nonsense.

If wishes were reality....

[kristopher]

4. What is anti-scientific or nonsensical about it?

It was prepared by a well qualified engineering firm with a firm grasp of the abilities and limitations of the technologies involved, so if you are going to make an accusation like that the burden is on you to be specific.

[robcon]

5. Using DC cables for example.

DC is much, much less efficient than AC. Needs periodic pulsers to keep the voltage up.

Installing underground... maximize maintenance costs. Incredible installation costs.

ETC.

[kristopher]

7. In other words your remarks were nothing but antirenewable claptrap...

[Throckmorton]

10. Ah no, its not worse than AC transmission.

it does require converter stations which are more expensive than your basic AC substation, but DC has less line loss than AC, no matter where you run the cables.

[jwirr]

6. This would be easier for them than it is for us because they have

a great rail system that allows for travel locally as well as between countries. Here we are still in the single car mode of transportation even in cities where it would work. Our rail is in great need of repair and expansion. And that does not even solve the problem of distances in our rural areas. We need to get a good rail system in place so that we can travel and/or transport goods in an easier fashion. In the mean time we need to get an attitude adjustment. Our mass transit needs to become the method of choice instead of the method we only use when there is no other way.

[kristopher]

8. Mass transit is really a matter of population density.

In the US it is a regional challenge that is related to population density. In some areas it has great potential but in others it can be little more than a point of connection to a national transport web. And as you indicate. that of course, is the hard part - pushing through a modern, interstate-style, national network that can form the backbone of local systems. Give Obama credit (or maybe it's Biden), he has actually been pushing hard for rail.

[jwirr]

9. I agree that rural mass transit is rare. I just happen to come from an

area where we have turned what used to be mini-buses for the disabled into transit for all people in the smaller community. This tax subsidized system has buses running daily and they also act as transportation for various agencies including some businesses. In order to serve the people in the country they have routes that run to a certain area once a week and they also run a weekly route to the nearest city - Duluth - for anyone wanting to go there. Besides that the reservation near here runs their own bus system that serves anyone wanting to get to town from the country - it is available for all not just natives.

But I am aware that this may not work in other areas. NE MN is a very special place that believes in working together to solve problems and they do not exclude the government as part of the solution. When you do not have this kind of atmosphere then it is harder to get solutions.

[kristopher]

11. I think there is another advantage to MN I hadn't realized...

I've lived in NM and now that I think of it, the extremely low population offers an interesting angle - while overall density is low, so is the amount of parallel routes taken by existing traffic flow, meaning a far fewer vehicles can cover more territory. That might put the cost per passenger mile at a bit more favorable level than I intuitively assumed.

Thanks.