Originally Posted by
CBreezy
Also many articles I've read point out that one of the major limitations on renewables is that, in order to become more reliable, there needs to be a battery storage option on the grid like California is developing to be able to smooth out the dips. Most in Europe did not add energy storage as they added wind and solar. Many US states are even dipping their toes into the Virtual Power Plant by subsidizing power walls in homes with the agreement to be able to reach into those batteries when needed. Tesla seems to be on the cutting edge of this.
LoL. Here we go with California - again. They are NOT the place to benchmark any energy grid off of, they've absolutely totaled theirs. You are obviously not an electrical engineer or do you understand the capacity required to store megawatts of energy. The battery tech doesn't exist yet and if and when it does it will come at a huge cost. Much easier to build a few nat gas plants or one nuke plant. Boom. Done. Bob's your uncle.
Near where I live they just converted a coal plant to a nat gas one. It took them about 2 years to complete it. It produces more energy than the old coal plant (nat gas is tremendously more efficient) and it's much "cleaner" as well.
Again, the experiment is over. It failed. I'm fine with augmenting the grid with some solar and some wind. However, it should not be the primary provider for the grid. It just doesn't work.