tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9864176.post4763381743587188803..comments2023-12-01T16:56:04.415+11:00Comments on Peak Energy: Wind's latest problem: it ... makes power too cheapBig Gavhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00682404837426502876noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9864176.post-5840684085948004672010-04-26T15:49:17.543+10:002010-04-26T15:49:17.543+10:00It is great to hear that wind energy can sometimes...It is great to hear that wind energy can sometimes (out)compete even coal energy. However, it also means that energy producing companies cannot just build windmills and earn money; they also have to deal with the windy periods (and, incidentally, the windless periods) in which the produced electricity outstrips demand and therefore might - in normal power markets - only be sold for cellar-bargain prices. This has been the situation for years for Danish wind-mill owners, who regularly sell their electricity for pennies to Norwegian hydro plants, where it is used to raise dam levels. <br /><br />In this example, the Norwegians benefit greatly, often at the expense of the Danes. To even out this imbalance, regulatory agreements could (and should) be made. In general, such agreements would greatly support the implementation and stabilisation of wind- and other renewable energy sources, in Europe and elsewhere. Such agreements can either be made (while retaining market mechanisms) between power companies, or be set down in laws between regions and countries. Or, if your power company is big enough to own a wide portfolio of energy sources, then agreements are not even necessary - such portfolios are certainly to be recommended for all sufficiently big power companies.Thomasnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9864176.post-74741234577517650882010-04-26T02:39:21.238+10:002010-04-26T02:39:21.238+10:00This is the argument I've been making (but on ...This is the argument I've been making (but on more of an intuitive basis as opposed to data based) that new nuclear and coal are in trouble.<br /><br />Nuclear and coal, not being dispatchable, must sell to the market 24/7. They need an average kWh rate to stay in business and if other sources eat up the off-peak demand, causing them to sell below survival rates, they have to sell higher during other parts of the day.<br /><br />That means that during peak demand hours wind becomes even more profitable (at least in the short term) as average rates rise because nuclear and (new) coal must now ask a higher price allowing wind to increase their asking price. Solar reaches grid parity sooner. <br /><br />Higher profit for wind and profit for solar means more of these activities coming to market thus causing new nuke and coal even more problems.<br /><br />That again narrows the window of profitability for nuke and coal causing them to further raise their prices. And at that point storage becomes profitable eating up the last part of nuclear and coal business. (Craig Severance calculates CAES stored wind at $0.13 per kWh.)Bob Wallacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09823785572625960890noreply@blogger.com