Solar and Wind Power Fail California!

[elektra]

In what is just another day in California, Solar and Wind Power has failed to supply peak power when California needs it most.

How is this possible, after 3 decades of building Wind and Solar Power plants, after spending $300 Billion dollars? After all the stories we have heard how Solar and Wind are now the #1 power source, how is it that California does not have the power it needs? And this is in the 21st century!

Without Nuclear power or Natural gas, you simply do not have electricity, Solar and Wind fail.

California power grid urges energy conservation on Monday due to heat wave

(Reuters) - The California Independent System Operator, or ISO, which operates the state's power grid, issued a Flex Alert for Monday for Southern California from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. PDT because of high temperatures expected in the region.

The ISO urged consumers to conserve electricity especially during the late afternoon when air conditioners typically are at peak use and warned that natural gas, used as fuel for many power generators in the Los Angeles area, may be tight because of limited operations at the Aliso Canyon gas storage facility.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

But.....wind and solar don't use any fuel.......

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

In what is just another day in California, Solar and Wind Power has failed to supply peak power when California needs it most.

How is this possible, after 3 decades of building Wind and Solar Power plants, after spending $300 Billion dollars? After all the stories we have heard how Solar and Wind are now the #1 power source, how is it that California does not have the power it needs? And this is in the 21st century!

Without Nuclear power or Natural gas, you simply do not have electricity, Solar and Wind fail.

California power grid urges energy conservation on Monday due to heat wave

(Reuters) - The California Independent System Operator, or ISO, which operates the state's power grid, issued a Flex Alert for Monday for Southern California from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. PDT because of high temperatures expected in the region.

The ISO urged consumers to conserve electricity especially during the late afternoon when air conditioners typically are at peak use and warned that natural gas, used as fuel for many power generators in the Los Angeles area, may be tight because of limited operations at the Aliso Canyon gas storage facility.

View attachment 78699

Not enough Progressive Liberals in the Bay not blowing this time of year?

 

[Manonthestreet]

Goodie they get to feel what third world power grid is like........everyone go home no power and shut those AC's off

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Wind and Solar power are HORRIBLY inefficient and unreliable. People will realize it eventually... just not in Califnornia.

 

[waltky]

Den how come dey doin' it in Germany?...

Study: Despite Subsidies, Solar Power More Expensive
October 19, 2016 | Sunlight is free, but harnessing solar power to make electricity “remains considerably more expensive when compared to conventional electricity sources such as coal, natural gas, or nuclear,” according to a new study commissioned by the Institute for Energy Research (IER).

“While utility-scale solar has proven more efficient than residential solar installations, both continue to lag behind traditional electricity generation methods that are able to generate greater output per dollar,” according to the study, entitled The High Cost of Rooftop Solar Subsidies. Solar power remains more expensive than electricity generated from conventional sources despite generous government subsidies estimated at more than $39 billion annually. The subsidies include a 30 percent federal Solar Investment Tax Credit which was initially set to expire at the end of this year, but was extended to 2019 by Congress in exchange for lifting a 40-year ban on the exportation of crude oil.

In addition, state-level subsidies and Renewables Portfolio Standards, which require utilities to purchase an increasing quantity of energy from renewable sources, provide added incentives to switch to solar power. But despite the billions of dollars spent on solar subsidies, “solar energy technology continues to remain a high-cost energy option – making up just 1% of U.S. and global electricity generation,” the report concluded, with residential rooftop solar panels being the “least efficient method” to harness solar energy. “The federal Solar Investment Tax Credit, state renewable energy certificates, and net metering programs lower the cost to rooftop solar users, but shift those costs to taxpayers and ratepayers,” IER communications director Chris Warren told CNSNews.com. “In many states the subsidies surpass the cost of the project.” The government incentives also force non-solar utility customers to “cross-subsidize” those who can afford the high cost of installing solar panels (which can range up to $25,000 -$35,000 for an average home) because solar users still need to be on the grid for back-up power when the sun doesn’t shine, the report pointed out.

Utilities that use “net metering” – in which customer-generated solar power is sold back to utilities at retail prices – “face unsustainable increases in cost” by “allowing solar customers to bypass grid maintenance costs, as well as by imposing additional operating stresses given that grids must transition from one-way power flow, from centralized generators to users, to a decentralized, two-way power flow…[that they] are not built to handle given the current infrastructure,” the IER report continued. “Adding insult to injury, net metering structures then subsidize this inefficient and cumbersome form of solar energy production, with the retail rate paid by utilities to residential renewable energy producers…. estimated to be anywhere between two and six times the market price for energy.”

The end result is “doubly regressive – non-solar customers, who are primarily less affluent, are forced to not only subsidize costs created by solar customers, who are primarily more affluent, but they must also pay higher prices to help make up for the utilities’ loss of revenue,” the report stated. That has led a number of states to limit solar subsidies, reduce the retail rate utilities pay rooftop solar customers for their excess power, and allow them to add a surcharge to cover solar customers’ share of the costs of operating the electric grid. For example, Louisiana state officials found that the “net metering structure resulted in an $89 million negative net benefits to electricity rate payers, meaning the net metering program costs are greater than program benefits, and that over $2 million of utility costs per year were being subsidized by non-solar consumers,” the IER report pointed out.

MORE

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Den how come dey doin' it in Germany?...

Study: Despite Subsidies, Solar Power More Expensive
October 19, 2016 | Sunlight is free, but harnessing solar power to make electricity “remains considerably more expensive when compared to conventional electricity sources such as coal, natural gas, or nuclear,” according to a new study commissioned by the Institute for Energy Research (IER).

“While utility-scale solar has proven more efficient than residential solar installations, both continue to lag behind traditional electricity generation methods that are able to generate greater output per dollar,” according to the study, entitled The High Cost of Rooftop Solar Subsidies. Solar power remains more expensive than electricity generated from conventional sources despite generous government subsidies estimated at more than $39 billion annually. The subsidies include a 30 percent federal Solar Investment Tax Credit which was initially set to expire at the end of this year, but was extended to 2019 by Congress in exchange for lifting a 40-year ban on the exportation of crude oil.

In addition, state-level subsidies and Renewables Portfolio Standards, which require utilities to purchase an increasing quantity of energy from renewable sources, provide added incentives to switch to solar power. But despite the billions of dollars spent on solar subsidies, “solar energy technology continues to remain a high-cost energy option – making up just 1% of U.S. and global electricity generation,” the report concluded, with residential rooftop solar panels being the “least efficient method” to harness solar energy. “The federal Solar Investment Tax Credit, state renewable energy certificates, and net metering programs lower the cost to rooftop solar users, but shift those costs to taxpayers and ratepayers,” IER communications director Chris Warren told CNSNews.com. “In many states the subsidies surpass the cost of the project.” The government incentives also force non-solar utility customers to “cross-subsidize” those who can afford the high cost of installing solar panels (which can range up to $25,000 -$35,000 for an average home) because solar users still need to be on the grid for back-up power when the sun doesn’t shine, the report pointed out.

Utilities that use “net metering” – in which customer-generated solar power is sold back to utilities at retail prices – “face unsustainable increases in cost” by “allowing solar customers to bypass grid maintenance costs, as well as by imposing additional operating stresses given that grids must transition from one-way power flow, from centralized generators to users, to a decentralized, two-way power flow…[that they] are not built to handle given the current infrastructure,” the IER report continued. “Adding insult to injury, net metering structures then subsidize this inefficient and cumbersome form of solar energy production, with the retail rate paid by utilities to residential renewable energy producers…. estimated to be anywhere between two and six times the market price for energy.”

The end result is “doubly regressive – non-solar customers, who are primarily less affluent, are forced to not only subsidize costs created by solar customers, who are primarily more affluent, but they must also pay higher prices to help make up for the utilities’ loss of revenue,” the report stated. That has led a number of states to limit solar subsidies, reduce the retail rate utilities pay rooftop solar customers for their excess power, and allow them to add a surcharge to cover solar customers’ share of the costs of operating the electric grid. For example, Louisiana state officials found that the “net metering structure resulted in an $89 million negative net benefits to electricity rate payers, meaning the net metering program costs are greater than program benefits, and that over $2 million of utility costs per year were being subsidized by non-solar consumers,” the IER report pointed out.

MORE

Greens.....they aren't known for their logic. Or smart spending.