California ISO hits all-time peak of more than 97% renewables
https://discussion.fool.com/ca-iso-hits-record-97-renewables-351…
Jaak
2 Likes
While a notable achievement, they don’t say how much NG backup they had in standby during that time period.
I’m sure they’ll get to 98% and even 100% some day soon. All sort of depends on where the renewable generation is located and what the regional demand is. But when they actually shut down standby plants is even more telling.
Mike
1 Like
California ISO hits all-time peak of more than 97% renewables… ~ jaagu
That is good to hear jaagu. Was this for one whole second, or was it for two?
-=Ajax=-
1 Like
Was this for one whole second, or was it for two?
==============================================================
Look it up and tell me.
Jaak
1 Like
All sort of depends on where the renewable generation is located and what the regional demand is. But when they actually shut down standby plants is even more telling.
Mike
=============================================
Battery storage does not need to be shutdown.
Pumped storage does not need to be shutdown.
Other energy storage does not need to be shufdown.
Hydro does not need to be shutdown.
Geothermal does not need to be shtdown.
Biomass does not need to be shutdown.
Import of electricty from Western grid does not need to be shutdown.
Jaak
Battery storage does not need to be shutdown.
Except when it does. The largest battery storage facility in the US (the world?) is located in Moss Landing, California. It went online in December 2020. From last month:
www.redbluffdailynews.com/2022/04/18/tesla-megapack-battery-….
Both Phase I and II of the Vistra storage system at Moss Landing have been shut down since September 2021 and February 2022 respectively. The cause of both incidents was reportedly overheating batteries that activated the sprinkler systems. The company is further investigating and taking action to mitigate the possibility of similar future events.
DB2
6 Likes
https://www.caiso.com/Documents/California-ISO-Hits-All-Time…
California ISO hits all-time peak of more than 97% renewables
From the news release…
The peak, which occurred briefly at 3:39 p.m., broke the previous record of 96.4 percent set on March 27, 2022.
This 97% claim is suspicious, and didn’t seem likely. Upon looking at the actual generation numbers reported by the ISO, it appears to be some kind of accounting sleight-of-hand to make the percentage look higher than it really was.
At the time they say the 97% record occurred, natural gas-fired power plants in California were producing 2722 MW, the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant was producing 1131 MW, and 861 MW of large hydro was also feeding into the grid. Natural gas, nuclear, and large hydro are not considered renewable energy sources in California*.
(* Yes, it is crazy they don’t count large hydro as renewable, but that is the official policy in California. I didn’t make the rules.)
Total combined generation was around 22,800 MW, so non-renewable sources were about 20% of total generation, not the 3% claimed.
https://www.caiso.com/TodaysOutlook/Pages/supply.html
In the link, scroll down to Supply trend, and choose 4/3/22 for the date…
April 3 2022, 3:40 pm, California power generation
Renewables : 18,058 MW
Natural Gas : 2722
Large Hydro : 861
Nuclear : 1131
Coal : 10
Total in-state generation : 22,782 MW
Exports: 3086 MW
Battery Charging : 97
Net in-state supply : 19,599
Non-renewable sources, as a percentage of total generation : 4724 / 22782 = 0.207 or about 21%.
Renewables were 79% of total generation at that time.
I’m guessing they arrive at the 97% number by somehow fiddling with the 3086 MW that was exported at the time, but even that doesn’t make complete sense. They also might need to adjust for line losses. Tell me how Diablo Canyon was cranking out 1131 MW that Sunday afternoon and the natural gas burners were producing 2722 MW AND ALSO renewables were 97% of the total…
Lastly, if you are wondering if small scale rooftop solar is included in the calculation, the following article says it is not included. That makes sense, since power from rooftop solar often does not go out “on the grid”, so the ISO doesn’t really manage it.
https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/clean-energy/did-califo…
- Pete
9 Likes
Small scale solar is something north of 10,000 MW in CA. That’s almost certainly the missing info from your numbers.
—Peter
2 Likes
Well played, sir.
Small scale solar is something north of 10,000 MW in CA. That’s almost certainly the missing info from your numbers.
I already addressed that in my post.
https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/clean-energy/did-califo…
Understanding the full picture requires first unpacking how CAISO calculated the 97% figure. California’s in-state renewable energy production was calculated as a percentage of energy demand after accounting for transmission losses. **This demand figure omits demand met by rooftop solar,** which generates power for more than 1 million California customers. Because large hydropower does not qualify for the state’s renewable portfolio standard, it is also not included in this figure.
You can argue that small scale solar should be included in the calculation, but in this case it doesn’t appear to be.
- Pete
2 Likes
California ISO hits all-time peak of more than 97% renewables
This is physically impossible.
Impossible because wind and solar renewables are non dispatchable sources of electricity, meaning, without back up gas or diesel generators wind and solar cannot supply the grid.
Therefore, in order to supply the grid with wind and solar you need to take into account the fact that your back up generators are producing a minimum of around 30% of your renewable capacity.
So claiming that wind and solar supplied the grid at the 97% level is not realistic.
-=Ajax=-
You can argue that small scale solar should be included in the calculation, but in this case it doesn’t appear to be.
- Petes
Indirectly it is partially counted as missing demand in the denominator to come up with the percentage. If it was fossil fuels the percentage would not have hit 97%.waterfell writes:
I’m guessing they arrive at the 97% number by somehow fiddling with the 3086 MW that was exported at the time, but even that doesn’t make complete sense. They also might need to adjust for line losses. Tell me how Diablo Canyon was cranking out 1131 MW that Sunday afternoon and the natural gas burners were producing 2722 MW AND ALSO renewables were 97% of the total…
==============================================================
waterfell geta stuck on minutia and does not trust the engineers at CASIO to tell the truth to the Californians, the country and the world.
The important part of my OP is that renewable energy is getting bigger and better every year in California.
Jaak
1 Like
California announces plan to reach zero carbon by 2045.
https://fortune.com/2022/12/19/california-plan-carbon-neutral-green-energy-2045/
Plan includes elimination of gasoline fueled vehicles presumably replaced by electric or hydrogen fueled vehicles. Converting home heating and appliances to all electric. Capture and underground storage of carbon dioxide. And reliance on green energy.