A climate success story: How Alberta got off coal power

[Hamloc]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-020-00695-4.epdf?sharing_token=4x0WoihtczizVbdTskgqPdRgN0jAj Wel9jnR3ZoTv0PKZskfNBvMm-4XFLE8lcn7vrdafttMwBs8prsl7zfeuMZZIi1u_0B0EQTqOIu8 fmmj1nRjwab02qZSEoi7NuzucdvENjM7JjGGFcIO2tJXp9Heop QoJz5pUquG--_UlRg%3D https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-020-00695-4.epdf?sharing_token=4x0WoihtczizVbdTskgqPdRgN0jAj Wel9jnR3ZoTv0PKZskfNBvMm-4XFLE8lcn7vrdafttMwBs8prsl7zfeuMZZIi1u_0B0EQTqOIu8 fmmj1nRjwab02qZSEoi7NuzucdvENjM7JjGGFcIO2tJXp9Heop QoJz5pUquG--_UlRg%3D

A systematic review of the costs and impacts of integrating variable renewables into power grids Philip J. Heptonstalland Robert J. K. Gross

The impact of variable renewable energy (VRE) sources on an electricity system depends on technological characteristics, demand, regulatory practices and renewable resources. The costs of integrating wind or solar power into electricity networks have been debated for decades yet remain controversial and often misunderstood. Here we undertake a systematic review of the international evidence on the cost and impact of integrating wind and solar to provide policymakers with evidence to inform strategic choices about which technologies to support. We find a wide range of costs across the literature that depend largely on the price and availability of flexible system operation. Costs are small at low penetrations of VRE and can even be negative. Data are scarce at high penetrations, but show that the range widens. Nonetheless, VRE sources can be a key part of a least-cost route to decarbonization.

Chuck2 how do all your cut and paste’s(which I didn’t read lol) respond to Oneoff’s post that SaskPower no longer subsidizes solar installations and the payment for generated power has been reduced(if I understand his post correctly)?

[oneoff]

Chuck2 how do all your cut and paste’s(which I didn’t read lol) respond to Oneoff’s post that SaskPower no longer subsidizes solar installations and the payment for generated power has been reduced(if I understand his post correctly)?

I firmly stand by my post. There is no electrical utility subsidy...and hasn't been for any renewable nor carbon neutral flare gas generation projects applied for in the past year (and probably not ever into the future).

And while previous to Nov/2019 projects have a contract period of one for one Kwh exchange as long as same electrical meter installation remains current and in same customers name (I believe; but will check if anyone disputes that statement)

Too bad that all those Net Metering solar project owners wouldn't come clean concerning what the economics and performance actually is under different scenarios.
One of the expectations of those subsidy programs was that this experiment would provide information to the utility as well as in general term to evaluate the benefits and pitfalls of alternate electrical generation for the public good..

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Too bad that all those Net Metering solar project owners wouldn't come clean concerning what the economics and performance actually is under different scenarios.
One of the expectations of those subsidy programs was that this experiment would provide information to the utility as well as in general term to evaluate the benefits and pitfalls of alternate electrical generation for the public good..

And the fact that those generously unfavourable conditions have been scaled back or removed altogether says all you need to know about what has been learned about the pitfalls of alternate generation for the public good. ( as opposed to the good of the individual on the recieving end).

[oneoff]

Beware the distraction of references to megawatt solar farms and wind farms when personal experience of posters involves projects that are satisfied to only strive to reduce electrical bills of single farms and/or even a residence .

Net Metering projects are orders of magnitude smaller. Dare I say.... to the level of insignificance.

As in 10's of potential mega watts compared to Kilowatts counted on fingers and toes of farmers who are showing a bit of wear and tear.

[chuckChuck]

The solar program I signed on to was available to anyone who wanted it at the time.

Just like farmers, my self included, who receive a matching deposit subsidy into their AgriInvest account from the Federal government every year, I took advantage of the program. If you don't want to take advantage of either program, that is your choice.

There is an old adage that applies: You snooze you loose.

It is a bit more than hypocritical that farmers who have received government subsidies and support programs paid for by taxpayers over their career back as far as the 1970s,1980s to present, are now the ones who are complaining about development and support for renewable electricity generation systems.

[oneoff]

"What does renewable energy mean for utility bills?
In Alberta’s deregulated market, the system operator chooses electricity from the lowest-bidding power producers first, working its way up to more expensive bidders until demand is met. The most expensive generator chosen sets the hourly price at which all selected producers are paid. As renewable have no fuel costs, their producers bid at $0/MWh, and are selected first. Therefore, adding more renewables has the effect of drawing down electricity prices (Figure 5)"

So says the previous poster.

Here's a thought. There's no obligation for electrical power generators (solar, flare gas, geothermal to meet the "targets " they may apply to the utility to inject into the grid.


Just maybe that is a fatal flaw in the bidding process. Do you suppose that known intermittent supplies are worth only from some negative value; to zero value to a value always less than it costs to replace that which can't be provided on a demand basis.

The cure would be to penalize the cheaper winning bidders if they can't produce on a continuous basis or compensate for the production that the utility has to backup from the pool of producers who can provide reliable power........all the time.

Then we'd find out what produces the cheaper electricity

[chuckChuck]

Take it up with Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO). The Alberta government is the one who de regulated and set up the current market based system.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

"What does renewable energy mean for utility bills?
In Alberta’s deregulated market, the system operator chooses electricity from the lowest-bidding power producers first, working its way up to more expensive bidders until demand is met. The most expensive generator chosen sets the hourly price at which all selected producers are paid. As renewable have no fuel costs, their producers bid at $0/MWh, and are selected first. Therefore, adding more renewables has the effect of drawing down electricity prices (Figure 5)"

So says the previous poster.

Here's a thought. There's no obligation for electrical power generators (solar, flare gas, geothermal to meet the "targets " they may apply to the utility to inject into the grid.


Just maybe that is a fatal flaw in the bidding process. Do you suppose that known intermittent supplies are worth only from some negative value; to zero value to a value always less than it costs to replace that which can't be provided on a demand basis.

The cure would be to penalize the cheaper winning bidders if they can't produce on a continuous basis or compensate for the production that the utility has to backup from the pool of producers who can provide reliable power........all the time.

Then we'd find out what produces the cheaper electricity

And the simple solution is to demand thate every generating source has to bid including a dispatchable contingency reserve. The intermittent sources can then either install mythical battery technology, or install/partner with fossil fuel generation back up( which cannot rightly be called back up when in reality it will do most of the work most of the time). Then bid on a level playing field, without downloading the costs of the back up to the grid, and therefore to the consumer. If they can still compete, then that is good news for everyone, if they can't, then good news for the consumer who will no longer be subsidising them.

[chuckChuck]

Take a look.

[chuckChuck]

A $500 million dollar investment that proves once again that solar pv must not be viable in Alberta! LOL

https://greengatepower.com/travers-solar-465-mw https://greengatepower.com/travers-solar-465-mw

ABOUT THE TRAVERS SOLAR PROJECT

The Travers Solar Project (Project) began development in 2017 and includes approximately 3,330 acres of land located eight kilometres southwest of the Village of Lomond, in Vulcan County. The Project is located in Township 15, Ranges 20 and 21, west of the Fourth Meridian, on privately owned, cultivated and grazing land. The Project area has a strong solar resource, which is characteristic of Alberta’s resource, and the project will generate clean energy over its 35+ year lifetime. The Project is expected to be fully operational by Q4 2022.

The Project will be 465 megawatts (MW) in size and is anticipated to be under construction in late 2020. The Project involves installing solar PV modules, power conversion stations, an electrical collection system, access roads and the construction of the Little Bow Project Substation to connect to the Alberta Interconnected Electric System. During construction, the Project will look to the local community, where possible, for trades and other business opportunities.

[shtferbrains]

Take it up with Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO). The Alberta government is the one who de regulated and set up the current market based system.

Do they not have some very stiff mandates set by a more virtuous federal government who want to lead the world in virtue signaling but little else?

What are the current mandated "goals" that we are signed on to and how likely are we to make them?

[TASFarms]

A $500 million dollar investment that proves once again that solar pv must not be viable in Alberta! LOL

https://greengatepower.com/travers-solar-465-mw https://greengatepower.com/travers-solar-465-mw

ABOUT THE TRAVERS SOLAR PROJECT

The Travers Solar Project (Project) began development in 2017 and includes approximately 3,330 acres of land located eight kilometres southwest of the Village of Lomond, in Vulcan County. The Project is located in Township 15, Ranges 20 and 21, west of the Fourth Meridian, on privately owned, cultivated and grazing land. The Project area has a strong solar resource, which is characteristic of Alberta’s resource, and the project will generate clean energy over its 35+ year lifetime. The Project is expected to be fully operational by Q4 2022.

The Project will be 465 megawatts (MW) in size and is anticipated to be under construction in late 2020. The Project involves installing solar PV modules, power conversion stations, an electrical collection system, access roads and the construction of the Little Bow Project Substation to connect to the Alberta Interconnected Electric System. During construction, the Project will look to the local community, where possible, for trades and other business opportunities.

If it’s like Brooks solar farm the original owners backed out, money better spent somewhere else.

[oneoff]

JQUOTE Just like farmers, my self included, who receive a matching deposit subsidy into their AgriInvest account from the Federal government every year, I took advantage of the program. If you don't want to take advantage of either program, that is your choice.UNQUOTE

For the record....I don't covet any one else possessions. But don't EVER EVER again call me selfish for taking advantage of any taxpayer funded program...unless the selfish label applies to all who take advantage of grants, subsidies; incentives and tax dollars that just happens to benefit the same people, over and over and over.

[oneoff]

Take it up with Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO). The Alberta government is the one who de regulated and set up the current market based system.

That cop out has grown tired. Heard it before about Sask Power expertise. It can be difficult to gracefully back down when reputations are seen to be in danger. Even more so when it makes the boss look bad.

Some organizations have a vision and the capability to get it done. Just because a company; a crown corp or an organization lays down the rules doesn't necessarily mean their plan is best. Obvious shortcomings and flaws should be debated; and truly wise people can admit mistakes and incorporate changes that make a plan; a better plan.

[chuckChuck]

JQUOTE Just like farmers, my self included, who receive a matching deposit subsidy into their AgriInvest account from the Federal government every year, I took advantage of the program. If you don't want to take advantage of either program, that is your choice.UNQUOTE

For the record....I don't covet any one else possessions. But don't EVER EVER again call me selfish for taking advantage of any taxpayer funded program...unless the selfish label applies to all who take advantage of grants, subsidies; incentives and tax dollars that just happens to benefit the same people, over and over and over.

It is a bit more than hypocritical that farmers who have received government subsidies and support programs paid for by taxpayers over their career back as far as the 1970s,1980s to present, are now the ones who are complaining about development and support for renewable electricity generation systems.