the death of coal?

Quote: Pacomartin

Some people are worried that California is going to get into a massive electricity shortfall as they already consume far more electricity than they make and rely on the hydraulic generation from the Pacific Northwest, plants in Mexico, and the nuclear power plant in Arizona. If they add over 10 million EVs, their demand will only increase.demand.

Time to get CA on its own grid, like Texas?

Quote: AZDuffman

Time to get CA on its own grid, like Texas?

The economy of CA would collapse.

Western Interconnect Source of electricity (~11 states and portion of 3 other + 2 Canadian provinces + Baja California northern part)
38.3% Natural Gas
27.1% Hydroelectric
14.0% Coal
8.7% Wind
5.9% Solar
2.9% Nuclear
1.1% Geothermal
2.1% Other
100.0%


As early as 2015 California had to import 24% of its electricity to meet consumption. That comes from the Pacific Northwest where they have a massive surplus of hydroelectric, and from the Southwest, in particular the huge nuclear power plant outside of Arizona.

If you look at the 11 US states in the Western Interconnection, most of them produce a surplus of electricity to feed California and Idaho (Idaho is a large percentage, but a fairly small absolute amount of energy). Washington, Oregon, and Idaho have massive hydroelectric plants.

Wyoming is still about 80% energy from coal. Even though it only has two coal generation plants, they draw a lot of their electricity from other states that use coal (Wyoming, Montana, Utah, and Colorado).

A negative -60% means that Wyoming consumes 60% less electricity than it produces. The excess is sold to user in other states. The fixed number after the state is the amount of electricity in Terra Watt hours TWh (millions of mWh) that can be exported.

-60.2% Wyoming -25.4TWH coal dominant
-44.9% Montana -12.5TWH coal
-31.4% Arizona -35.6TWH natural gas | nuclear
-29.3% New Mexico -10.3TWH even mix
-20.4% Utah -8.0TWH coal
-19.0% Oregon -11.9TWH hydropower
-14.5% Washington -15.4TWH hydropower
-7.3% Nevada -2.9TWH natural gas
0.3% Colorado 0.2TWH coal
24.1% California 48.6TWH natural gas
30.3% Idaho 5.6TWH hydropower

Western interconnect also includes a tiny portion of three other states, two Canadian provinces, and part of Baja Mexico for ~80 million people (half of which live in California).

Quote: Pacomartin

Western Interconnect Source of electricity (~11 states and portion of 3 other + 2 Canadian provinces + Baja California northern part)
38.3% Natural Gas
27.1% Hydroelectric
14.0% Coal
8.7% Wind
5.9% Solar
2.9% Nuclear
1.1% Geothermal
2.1% Other
100.0%

Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) says half electricity generated from natural gas, 20% from coal, and 10% nuclear.

Quote: Biden

The United States has set a goal to reach 100 percent carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035, which can be achieved through multiple cost-effective pathways each resulting in meaningful emissions reductions in this decade. That means good-paying jobs deploying carbon pollution-free electricity generating resources, transmission, and energy storage and leveraging the carbon pollution-free energy potential of power plants retrofitted with carbon capture and existing nuclear, while ensuring those facilities meet robust and rigorous standards for worker, public, environmental safety and environmental justice.

Although it seems possible that coal could vanish by 2035, how on earth would we get rid of natural gas?

Quote: petroglyph

"The federal government devotes
substantially more financial resources to
subsidize the production of wind power than
it does to study wind power"

"Since 2008, average capacity factors
nationwide have ranged from 31.1 to 33.5
percent."

I was rather surprised to see that the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power plant (the sole remaining plant in California) produces more electricity than all 100 wind power plants in California. Of course, the capacity factor of Diablo Canyon is 93%.

California production of electricity primarily comes from Natural Gas (48% in the year 2020).

Quote: Pacomartin

I was rather surprised to see that the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power plant (the sole remaining plant in California) produces more electricity than all 100 wind power plants in California. Of course, the capacity factor of Diablo Canyon is 93%.

California production of electricity primarily comes from Natural Gas (48% in the year 2020).

BINGO

Quote: kenarman

BINGO

Unit Two is a 1118 MWe pressurized water reactor supplied by Westinghouse. It went online on March 3, 1986, and is licensed to operate through August 20, 2025. Unit One is a 1138 MWe pressurized water reactor supplied by Westinghouse. It went online on May 7, 1985, and is licensed to operate through November 2, 2024.

In 2006, Unit One generated 9,944,983 MW·h of electricity, at a nominal capacity factor of 101.2 percent.
In 2006, Unit Two generated 8,520,000 MW·h of electricity, at a capacity factor of 88.2 percent.
In 2020 the plant generated 12% less electricity than in 2006.

In 2016, PG&E announced that it plans to close the two Diablo Canyon reactors in 2024 and 2025, stating that because California's energy regulations give renewables priority over nuclear, the plant would likely only run half-time, making it uneconomical.

In 2020, experts at the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) warned that when the plant closes the state will reach a "critical inflection point", which will create a significant challenge to ensure reliability of the grid without resorting to more fossil fuel usage, and could jeopardize California's greenhouse gas reduction targets.

California produces electricity from:
48.0% NG Natural gas (417 plants)
15.3% SUN Solar (566 plants)
11.2% HYC Hydroelectric convention (225 plants)
8.6% NUC Nuclear (Diablo Canyon Plant)
7.1% WND Wind (103 plants)
6.0% GEO Geothernal (34 plants)
3.9% 0ther

CA runs one of the highest deficits in the country made up by importing electricity from other states. The cost of electricity to the consumers is on average double the cost of the other Western states. Even after the major dams were built in the 1930s in the Pacific Northwest, it was realized that most of the electric energy would have to be sent to CA which had half the population. The decision to build a High Voltage Direct Current Line from the Columbia River to Southern California was signed into law by JFK in 1960 and began operations in 1970.

1940 Population
6,907,387 California

1,736,191 Washington
1,123,296 Colorado
1,089,684 Oregon
559,456 Montana
550,310 Utah
531,818 New Mexico
524,873 Idaho
499,261 Arizona
250,742 Wyoming
110,247 Nevada
6,975,878

https://www.theepochtimes.com/worlds-biggest-battery-in-california-overheats-shuts-down_3998519.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge

Well then?

Quote: petroglyph

https://www.theepochtimes.com/worlds-biggest-battery-in-california-overheats-shuts-down_3998519.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge

Well then?

We need a better battery

Quote: terapined

We need a better battery

I don't imagine that batteries are ever going to be so amazing that they can handle the Terra watt hours of utility scale electrical generation. However, t's difficult to argue with a "futurist" since they are defending a yet undiscovered technology.

I've heard people say that if we resume the rate at which we added electricity generation capability in the 4 decades from 1960-2000 (~4% per year) we could easily meet the demands of an all EV fleet in less than a decade. My response is always that statement is true, but just look at the primary sources the US used to create that massive increase during that time period.

From 1960 to 2000 change in US electricity generation measured in TWh in US by source
+1563 coal
+76 petroleum
+443 natural gas
+753 nuclear
+206 renewables
+3041 total increase

In the last two decades conservation measures have greatly reduced the rate of increase of total electricity generation, But the replacement of coal and petroleum has primarily been done by natural gas and a little bit by renewables.

From 2000 to 2020 change in US electricity generation measured in TWh in US by source
-1192 coal
-88 petroleum
+1016 natural gas
+36 nuclear
+436 renewables
+208 total increase

I am seriously skeptical of how fast renewables can grow to do the job of not just replacing coal and petroleum but most of natural gas and nuclear, while at the same time providing an additional 1000 TWh of electricity for EVs.

I am beginning to think we should be banning internal combustion engines over 3.5 liters instead of switching out the entire fleet.

Quote: Pacomartin

I am beginning to think we should be banning internal combustion engines over 3.5 liters instead of switching out the entire fleet.

This is part of a strategy that would actually work. Some people favor unregulated use of all forms of fuel and "damn the pollution" but many WANT to be cleaner about things but they also WANT things to be affordable since their incomes tend not to rise as quickly as the costs do when new standards are implemented. There is a middle ground, but the zealots seem to think somehow us cleaning up everything and crippling the economy while China laughs at us and pollutes at will is a good strategy.

There were many problems in the Texas freeze--power plants not "hardened for winter" was huge--and the failure of "renewables" was part of it. We can debate Texas needing a better system (we do need some changes), but cutting out all fossil fuels is just stupid. You go far enough and even those of us with home generators in case of outages will have no reliable to power them.

They also need to figure out disposable fan blades for the wind farms; just burying them is not a good thing.