Murphy Siding Euclid MidlandMike Any method of power storage has to be cost effective, because it is competing against other forms of power storage such as pumped storage. The fact that storage systems compete against each other is beside the point. No storage system needs to be cost effective (relative to fossil fuel energy) if it is an accessory to renewable energy because renewable energy does not need to cost effective. This is because renewable energy proponents have set the terms of renewable energy conversion as being that the cost of fossil fuel energy is infinitely high. I can't conceive how that could be beside the point. Supply/demand & competition. Sounds like a good mix to me. Don't you suppose there has been a need for peak demand electricity since before we had renewable energy? Our town had an atomic power plant built in the 1950's for use during peak demand.
Euclid MidlandMike Any method of power storage has to be cost effective, because it is competing against other forms of power storage such as pumped storage. The fact that storage systems compete against each other is beside the point. No storage system needs to be cost effective (relative to fossil fuel energy) if it is an accessory to renewable energy because renewable energy does not need to cost effective. This is because renewable energy proponents have set the terms of renewable energy conversion as being that the cost of fossil fuel energy is infinitely high.
MidlandMike Any method of power storage has to be cost effective, because it is competing against other forms of power storage such as pumped storage.
Any method of power storage has to be cost effective, because it is competing against other forms of power storage such as pumped storage.
The fact that storage systems compete against each other is beside the point.
No storage system needs to be cost effective (relative to fossil fuel energy) if it is an accessory to renewable energy because renewable energy does not need to cost effective. This is because renewable energy proponents have set the terms of renewable energy conversion as being that the cost of fossil fuel energy is infinitely high.
I can't conceive how that could be beside the point. Supply/demand & competition. Sounds like a good mix to me. Don't you suppose there has been a need for peak demand electricity since before we had renewable energy? Our town had an atomic power plant built in the 1950's for use during peak demand.
When I talk about supply and demand, I am not referring to the supply and demand related to the storage of electricity for future demand. Instead, I am referring to supply and demand in the cost/benefit analysis showing what the customer is willing to pay for the benefit of a product.
Both fossil fuel and renewable sources need backup or peaking power. Fossil fuel sources need backup for fluctuation in demand. Renewable source need backup for the same fluctuation in demand. However, renewable sources also need backup for their inherent inability to provide a constant supply. So the need for backup power is fundamentally higher with renewable energy than it is with fossil fuel energy.
This is a major difference between the two sources. Basically both wind and solar require storage unless the users accept the interruption of power during the night and times of no wind; and also in times of unusually high demand.
An alternative to storage for renewable energy would be peaking with fossil fuels, but this is not deemed acceptable because the use of fossil fuel is not acceptable.
But the larger point in terms of supply/demand, cost effectiveness is this: In a free market solution, a cost/benefit consideration is made based on what the market is willing to pay for the benefit. Over the last century, coal fired plants provided power at a price that consumers accepted.
But there was a downside that was not readily accounted for in the cost side. Drawbacks such as mine accidents, black lung disease, and air pollution are external costs to coal that are outside of the direct relationship of the consumers’ price for electricity. Detractors of coal consumption said that the true cost of coal has to include these so called, “externalities” or relatively hidden costs to coal combustion.
So the industry responded with cleaning up the pollution, improving mine safety, etc. Then suddenly, the coal opposition claimed to find and prove a new problem with coal combustion that, for practical purposes, is unsolvable. They found a new component of coal pollution. They also found a new consequence of this new pollution, and the consequence is so dire that it must be avoided, no matter what the cost. The new component of pollution is CO2, and the new consequence is manmade climate change. There is no possible compromise with this unprecedented peril other than complete elimination of the use of fossil fuels. Then the only alternative is renewable energy.
So now, the cost/benefit analysis of renewable energy gifts its promoters with the advantage of no limit on the cost side of the cost/benefit analysis. The rail borne storage solution is an essential part of renewable energy, so it too is unconstrained by cost consideration.
rrnut282I may be way off in left field here, but there are two definitions of political speech and neither is very complimentary.
Rather than "political speech" as such, I interpreted the comment to mean "a political speech," as in writing the same.
Most contain ambiguous statements, presented in a way that allows the listener to interpret them as they will, but hopefully as being complimentary to the speaker...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
rrnut282 Euclid, Once again, an idea that uses rail is pooh-poohed by the denizens of a railFAN web-site. Maybe I am confused on the definition of a fan. I think an operation like this would be interesting. The doom and gloom GW crowd gets help when the wind dies down and I get a railroad to observe.
Euclid,
Once again, an idea that uses rail is pooh-poohed by the denizens of a railFAN web-site. Maybe I am confused on the definition of a fan. I think an operation like this would be interesting. The doom and gloom GW crowd gets help when the wind dies down and I get a railroad to observe.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Something still somewhat unlear in my mind- is the locomotive that rides down the hill producing the juice the same type of locomotive used to take the weighted cars back up the hill?
Murphy Siding Something still somewhat unlear in my mind- is the locomotive that rides down the hill producing the juice the same type of locomotive used to take the weighted cars back up the hill?
That's how I interpret it. This would be little different from the Milwaukee (and other electric lines) using regenerative braking - putting power back into the catenary on the downhill which is then used by identical locomotives climbing the hill on the other side.
Or, think dynamic braking, except instead of sending the power generated to resistance grids on the locomotive, it is put back out onto the grid.
While it's possible they would use conventional locomotives as a basis on which to build, unless they left the Diesels there as a backup (a la FL9's), the space where the prime mover and generator (alternator) sit could be filled by ballast and/or power handling equipment.
As I understand it, each railcar carries a weight. At least some of them, if not all, are powered. There is no separate locomotive per se. The railcars that are powered are said to intend to use stock locomotive power trucks. I assume the rest of the car, which is essentially a flatcar, is custom built for the task. I also assume that only the powered cars will be able to also generate electricity on the downhill run. However, the weight carried on the non-powered, non-generating cars will contribute its energy by being coupled to the powered/generating cars.
I also read that the electricity for this system is handled through rail contact, as opposed to a catenary.
Would this system be regulated as railroad? Or would it just be regarded as plant machinery?
EuclidThe fact that storage systems compete against each other is beside the point. No storage system needs to be cost effective (relative to fossil fuel energy) if it is an accessory to renewable energy because renewable energy does not need to cost effective. This is because renewable energy proponents have set the terms of renewable energy conversion as being that the cost of fossil fuel energy is infinitely high.
I think what Zugman meant was that is the best doublespeak you've done in a long time. 69 words that essentially say nothing because they simply go in a circle. Yep, you'd make a good political speech writer.
Norm
Murphy SidingOur town had an atomic power plant built in the 1950's for use during peak demand.
I doubt that your nuclear plant was built as a peaking plant. All those that I am aware of are operated as base load, which is the environmental and economic reasons for that mode of operation. For physical reasons, nuclear plants don't like to have variations in their load. And since their fuel is being consumed with time, the cost is lowest if they run at rated output. Also, as the initial investment is greater than any other type of generating plant, the ecomomics require maximum output to recover the investment. Remember that the cost of generation is return on investment, plus maintenance, plus cost of fuel. In the case of a storage plant, hydro, rail, or battery, the fuel cost is the difference between what the off peak electric rate and the peak electric rate. As said in a movie, "SHOW ME THE MONEY"
Electroliner 1935 Murphy Siding Our town had an atomic power plant built in the 1950's for use during peak demand. I doubt that your nuclear plant was built as a peaking plant. All those that I am aware of are operated as base load, which is the environmental and economic reasons for that mode of operation. For physical reasons, nuclear plants don't like to have variations in their load. And since their fuel is being consumed with time, the cost is lowest if they run at rated output. Also, as the initial investment is greater than any other type of generating plant, the ecomomics require maximum output to recover the investment. Remember that the cost of generation is return on investment, plus maintenance, plus cost of fuel. In the case of a storage plant, hydro, rail, or battery, the fuel cost is the difference between what the off peak electric rate and the peak electric rate. As said in a movie, "SHOW ME THE MONEY"
Murphy Siding Our town had an atomic power plant built in the 1950's for use during peak demand.
Murphy SidingLet me rephrase that perhaps. The story that is told, is that it was built in the 50's as some sort of demonstrator type project, to explore the feasibility of small scale nuclear power plants.
Wasn't this the reactor system that used the organic coolant, which turned into ghastly sludge when it was irradiated? Piqua, Ohio?
RME Murphy Siding Let me rephrase that perhaps. The story that is told, is that it was built in the 50's as some sort of demonstrator type project, to explore the feasibility of small scale nuclear power plants. Wasn't this the reactor system that used the organic coolant, which turned into ghastly sludge when it was irradiated? Piqua, Ohio?
Murphy Siding Let me rephrase that perhaps. The story that is told, is that it was built in the 50's as some sort of demonstrator type project, to explore the feasibility of small scale nuclear power plants.
Euclid ... But the larger point in terms of supply/demand, cost effectiveness is this: In a free market solution, a cost/benefit consideration is made based on what the market is willing to pay for the benefit. Over the last century, coal fired plants provided power at a price that consumers accepted. ... So now, the cost/benefit analysis of renewable energy gifts its promoters with the advantage of no limit on the cost side of the cost/benefit analysis. The rail borne storage solution is an essential part of renewable energy, so it too is unconstrained by cost consideration.
...
In the last 10 years only a quarter of the proposed coal fired power plants were built, and over a hundred were cancelled. Only a handful are still on the drawing board. You seem to think that this was totally because of some political mandate, however, half the states are fighting it, and the Supreme Court has yet to decide. The politics is actually behind the times, as the free market (such as it is) investors have already put their money on gas fired and renewables. As I said before, the free market will weed out the more costly methods of power storage. If the cost of renewables gets out of hand, democratic societies will decide what level of cost/benefit they will bear. That an essential system is built "unconstrained by cost consideration" is not behavior that I have ever observed.
Murphy Siding Sioux Falls, S.D. I really don't know if they ever really fired it up.
Omigod, Pathfinder. Yes, they fired it up; no, they never ran it at rated power; yes, that was a really fortunate thing. Think nuclear superheater using 93% enriched uranium (that's weapons-grade to laymen) with 1960s control modality. Not quite as shudderworthy as the Soviet nuclear superheater with carbon moderation, but definitely not something you want in your back yard.
RME Murphy Siding Sioux Falls, S.D. I really don't know if they ever really fired it up. Omigod, Pathfinder. Yes, they fired it up; no, they never ran it at rated power; yes, that was a really fortunate thing. Think nuclear superheater using 93% enriched uranium (that's weapons-grade to laymen) with 1960s control modality. Not quite as shudderworthy as the Soviet nuclear superheater with carbon moderation, but definitely not something you want in your back yard.
More information here: http://www.keloland.com/news/article/other/the-pathfinders-past
And here: http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WMAT1J
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.