tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post6591719296343155400..comments2024-02-16T17:52:44.944-06:00Comments on The Nuclear Green Revolution: California wind fails againCharles Bartonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-79339128661750764962008-05-24T01:12:00.000-05:002008-05-24T01:12:00.000-05:00Before I read the CEC report, I would've guessed t...Before I read the CEC report, I would've guessed that a combined cycle plant had a limited operating range. Say from 90% to 100% of the rated capacity. I was surprised to learn that this is not the case. In appendix B. of the CEC report it is mentioned that combined cycle plants have a power range down to 50% of the rated power. Moreover, it is claimed that new CC units can cycle down to 30%. Since appendix B. was prepared by GE Energy Consulting, I would assume that they knew what they were talking about.Mike Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04144230907352708643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-24420810901117611072008-05-23T20:15:00.000-05:002008-05-23T20:15:00.000-05:00Well, my point is just the opposite, in fact you c...Well, my point is just the opposite, in fact you can use GTs, both the peaker type and the combined cycle type. The issue is that you HAVE TO use these fossil burning plants.<BR/><BR/>My plant is to use nuclear in my state for all base load power, or about 21,000 MWs and let all other forms, in the mean time, take up the over-baseload through peak power, which could include any source, EXCEPT wind because the capacity rating, *in California* is so low that it doesn't make it worth it to build withough huge subsidies.<BR/><BR/>So...my plan eliminates wind (but not CSP solar) but would eventually, by 2050, replace all power sources except hydro and geothermal, with LFTRs, which can be build smaller, safer and can load follow.<BR/><BR/>DavidDWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03070034894266417461noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-3581121204509768972008-05-23T12:20:00.000-05:002008-05-23T12:20:00.000-05:00Mike> Actually you cannot use combined cycle natga...Mike> Actually you cannot use combined cycle natgas burners to balance wind: they have too much of thermal momenta. You need to use single cycle plants for that, which further decreases efficiency.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-36806582010238737272008-05-23T04:01:00.000-05:002008-05-23T04:01:00.000-05:00Mike, there is a big difference between wind and h...Mike, there is a big difference between wind and hydro. Hydro is dispatchable, wind is not. Because water supplies are limited, hydro is reserved fro periods of peek demand. It is then used when it is most useful. Not only is wind not dispatchable, data shows that it is consistently not generating when it is most needed. If concentrated solar thermal with storage will produce power when it is needed, why would you spend your money on wind generation that won't. You are simply adding to the cost of the electrical generating system by building a redundant electrical generating system that wont generate electricity when you need it. Of course if the people of California want to waste their money on wind generation, more power too them.Charles Bartonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01125297013064527425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597656451205429515.post-67571022428472838122008-05-22T22:25:00.000-05:002008-05-22T22:25:00.000-05:00The variability of wind can be dealt with (in Cali...The variability of wind can be dealt with (in California at least) due to the large amount hydro and combined cycle power plants. See the California Energy Commission report <BR/><BR/>"Intermittency Analysis Project" (http://www.energy.ca.gov/pier/final_project_reports/CEC-500-2007-081.html). <BR/><BR/>As for the fact that the wind does not blow consistently year-round, the same can be said of hydro. Some years are wet and some years are very dry, but they still use hydropower when they can. A kilowatt hour from wind is 2 kWh of natural gas saved. You do have a point that the true costs of wind is somewhat higher since combined cycle plants, hydro, and pump storage are needed to follow the electrical load. Concentrating solar with thermal storage could also help balance the load.Mike Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04144230907352708643noreply@blogger.com