« Unless China boosts efficiency, most extra renewables will be used to meet increasing energy requirements rather than replace coal in the next few years.»
Already #decarbonisation of industries wasn't feasible with #renewables but add #AI to the electricity demands and the energy transition will not work with renewables.
«Instead of going all in on solar and wind power, tech companies like Microsoft and Google are increasingly turning to the idea of small modular reactors (SMRs), which are scaled-down power plants that aim to reduce construction costs through the standardization of components and systems. Despite dozens of designs being considered worldwide, there are zero SMRs currently in operation in the US.
Permitting and construction for SMRs is still incredibly expensive, per the WSJ. As such, Microsoft is teaming up with nonprofit Terra Praxis, which told the WSJ that AI could cut 90 percent of the human hours required to get a new plant approved.»
«The International Energy Agency now projects oil, gas, and coal use will all peak this decade. This constitutes a dramatic shift from the last 150 years when the thirst for fossil fuels persistently rose. But now this growth is nearing its end sooner than many expected, driven in part by a surge in renewables.
This significant event, however, masks a more striking possible future: One in which total global energy use peaks and energy’s weight in world affairs diminishes. [...]
In a broader sense, just as history has included the stone, bronze and iron ages, we have been living since the Industrial Revolution in an energy age. But this age, during which energy has dominated so many economic, geopolitical and other dimensions, may be coming to an end with peak energy.»
A bit confusing is the author's talk of "energy peak" which seems to lumb together energy and electricity demands. Thus, whereas I can see a decline in energy demands, I don't see them with regard to electricity demands. (Esp. with all the decarbonisation of industries necessary to accomplish mitigation with climate change.)
Anyway, an interesting piece with a lot of interesting links. Surely countering my musings on #peakrenewables with #peakenergy as the broader concept.
« The energy transition isn’t. Despite years of unending hype, hundreds of billions of dollars in federal tax credits, and some $600 billion spent on wind and solar in the U.S. since 2004, investors are abandoning alternative energy in droves. »
«It has long been known some “AAA” backsheet films – made of triple-layer polyamide and widely deployed from 2010 to 2013 – can become brittle and tear. [...] Some 15% of Germany’s solar capacity – 10 GW – could be affected. That equates to up to €2 billion ($2.18 billion) in replacement costs, with only a fraction of the affected panels likely detected thus far.
There are safety risks, too. Affected modules could electrocute if handled in wet weather and are more susceptible to fires. With some severely damaged panels showing only minor performance loss, how can damage be assessed? How long can such modules operate safely after initial premature aging signs? [...]
HaWe’s Weinreich estimated the 10 GW figure, including 2 GW of severely-affected panels installed between 2010 and 2012; and 6 GW installed between 2004 and 2014, that feature other backsheet types and are expected to fail before their 20-year lifespan. »
10 GW installed power of PV is ≈8 TWh/a in 2022. (Calculation mine) Service life of PV panels is ≈20 years. Deterioration in half the time undercuts all calculations for armortisation and profit.
«At the time, industry experts told ministers that unless the government’s financing approach was changed to take into account the steep increase in costs, developers would be forced to scrap or delay their plans.»
«Several factors may have put a damper on developer interest, the newsletter Heatmap reported last week. Gulf wind speeds are often lower than other coastal areas’, requiring the use of specific turbines for which a robust supply chain must be developed. No Gulf states’ energy policies specifically require the use of offshore wind. And analysts say building out offshore wind in the Gulf will be more expensive than in the north-east, making it harder for wind projects to compete in local energy markets, where existing energy prices are lower.»
« In part, the explosive growth is down to plummeting prices for solar panels being mass-produced in China. The war in Ukraine also created a major incentive for countries to push ahead with solar installations as a way to lower their dependency on Russian energy. [...]
But those gains are also raising questions about the sector's future.
As solar becomes increasingly widespread and electricity prices plummet in the middle of the day when the sun is brightest, some see a risk that the incentive to deploy solar power also decreases, said Esparrago.
That makes grid improvements and the rapid rollout of storage technologies like batteries crucial, experts argue. But the EU is still lagging behind in that area.»
« Siemens Energy shocked the wind sector in late June when it warned of faulty components and possible design faults in its onshore wind turbines.
It said it could not yet quantify the cost, but anticipated the issues would take at least 1 billion euros ($1.1 billion) to fix. Company sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, have said the final bill could be even higher. »
« [Christoph Zipf, spokesman for industry body WindEurope] said that 20 years ago, a typical wind turbine would have 1 million watts of capacity; today, European original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, are testing 15 MW turbines.
“This means that turbines have become bigger as well, posing challenges to components (quality, materials, longevity). The introduction of competitive auctions has also been a driving factor in this cost reduction,” Zipf added. [...]
According to ONYX Insight, which monitors wind turbines and tracks over 14,000 across 30 countries, most turbines are designed and certified for 20 years but contain components that will fail during that time due to a “compromise between the cost of the system and reliability. [...]
In turbines built in 2023, more than 40% of gearboxes will need to be replaced after 20 years of project life, according to ONYX, along with over 20% of main bearings and more than 5% of blades. »
Talking about "reducing the demand for FF" is ridiculous in at least four ways:
a) It prevents states in Africa to jumpstart their economies to benefit their citizens with cheap energy systems (resources and power plants), and, via surplus value, become capable in the first place to invest in environmental protection. (Not to forget the #ecocolonialism involved in the vast green land grap in Africa.)
b) It ignores the life cycle of #energy systems because even after a new source of energy has been found and disseminated, the older energy sources keep delivering and *increase* their output. It takes roughly 60 years for a new energy source to substitute and leave behind an older one.
c) It ignores how much FF are involved in the production, the spread, and the integration of "renewable" energy systems in a given #infrastructure: From mining and processing of materials, to production and spreading of units, to the hitherto unsolved problems of recycling of these new systems (and thus "loss" of the engery invested in their production).
d) Even in the sub-sector of electricity production, relying on #renewables means relying on fossil fuels (esp. when #nuclear power is abandoned). As demand increases, #peakrenewables is already in play, only sugarcoated by high subsidies. (Germany alone will have 14,000 wind turbine units of its 30,000 onshore units decommissoned after 2026. Germany will be lucky to keep the current electricity output of the wind turbine units; it rather becomes increasingly harder and less likely that more output will be generated in the future -- at least within a market economy.)
The chatter about "reducing the demand" is the result of an individualist consumer approach, which suggests to cut back on holiday flights etc. With regard to infrastructures of whole societies, that is a mistaken approach.
«Aiming to both curb reliance on Russian gas and radically reduce the use of CO2-emitting fossil fuels, the nine countries aim to boost their combined North Sea offshore wind capacity to 120GW by 2030 and 300GW by 2050.»
«Britain has 45 offshore wind farms producing 14GW, with plans to expand capacity to 50GW by 2030. Germany has 30 producing 8GW, followed by the Netherlands with 2.8GW and Denmark and Belgium, both with 2.3GW.
France aims to expand massively to 40GW by 2050, an official said. They added: “Offshore wind energy will probably be the main source of renewable energy production between 2030 and 2050, far ahead of solar energy and land wind farms.”
The investment required to ensure the North Sea wind energy targets are met is huge – the EU recently calculated €800bn would be needed to reach 300GW by 2050 – and wind energy companies have said significant state funding will be essential.
Britain has 45 offshore wind farms producing 14GW, with plans to expand capacity to 50GW by 2030. Germany has 30 producing 8GW, followed by the Netherlands with 2.8GW and Denmark and Belgium, both with 2.3GW.»
We will never see the open sea again. They are destroying landscapes to an extent comparable only to the most awful industrialisation.
« Asia provides a vast majority of the products that the developed economies — led by the EU and the U.S. — consume. We are essentially asking (with our dollars and euros) China, India and other manufacturing nations to produce our stuff, use coal to keep it cheap and emit CO2 so we can be “clean.” This CO2 shell game does not reduce emissions into our single global atmosphere. »
« Net-zero poverty to accelerate net-zero emissions. »
«Renewable energy should account for 21.5% of generation capacity by the end of the decade, according to a draft of the nation’s long-term power supply plan, down from 30.2% under the previous version, the energy ministry said Tuesday in a statement, citing a government advisory group. Most of the gap would be met by nuclear while coal and gas are little changed from the prior proposal. [...]
If the draft is finalized, it will mark a turning point under the new government led by President Yoon Suk Yeol that focuses on nuclear energy rather than renewables to meet climate goals.»
#nuclear (given climate change its risks are minuscle compared to other means of electricity generation incl. renewables)
#peakrenewables (my hunch that, given supply issues, environmental impacts of mining and production, economic cost-benefit ratios, etc., we already face the peak of construction of renewables; idea: we're set to see a stagnation, even shrinking, not an increase in the construction of renewables)
#postdoom (not scientism nor blind faith in technical progress (which usually ignores the social fall-out) but the stance that the complexity of our world is the main source of hope and the main reason why the chatter of doom is less about reality but a psychology)
#rain (we have too little where I live; and I love its sound)
#renewables (mostly technical developments, liabilities, and economic viability)
#sources (instead of "bookmarks" a collection of info sources that caught my eyes)
#talkingtomyselflettingyoulisten (personal musings in which I develop (or rather: follow the trait of) thoughts and ideas; not to provoke, or troll, or to invite heated discussions)