On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>wrote:
It is the difference in the two loads that must be supplied by sources > such as coal, oil, and gas because nuclear can supply the constant need > portion of the power. > I get the impression that the nuclear plants are as much a challenge to be dealt with as anything. Because of their constant input into the grid, they force any adjustments that will need to be made onto gas and coal. > Then the worst case is the PV generation becomes greater than the daytime > demand of the system. ... This problem can be solved by adding storage at > home. > In this context it is interesting that Southern California Edison and PG&E have been rejecting applications for net metering from consumers that have both solar panels and batteries, unless they have two meters installed [1]. I believe the reason given is that there's currently no way to know whether the customers are simply filling up the batteries during certain times and then returning the power back to the grid later on, and hence the energy may not be renewable energy. This explanation only makes sense to me if there's some kind of rebate for selling renewable energy back to the grid. There was an interesting article in the Economist about how Europe's utilities have lost half a trillion euros since 2008 and are facing very difficult technical challenges as a result of the increasing presence of and variability resulting from renewable energy [2]. Eric [1] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-07/battery-stored-solar-power-sparks-backlash-from-utilities.html [2] http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21587782-europes-electricity-providers-face-existential-threat-how-lose-half-trillion-euros
