|
|
|
|
|
by pyrale
1615 days ago
|
|
Cost per unit of energy is talked about a lot, but it's not that relevant, though. What people buy is usually guarantees to be able to provide. There are different types of contract (peak power vs base load, futures vs. forwards, spot vs. month- or year-ahead contracts), but overall, what people buy is a guarantee that they will get power when they need it. Whether they actually use it or not is not as relevant from the contract's pov. The ability to load-follow is unrelated to energy price, but to grid stability. Regardless of what contract exists between a provider and a consumer, there is a third party, the grid operator, who can ask the generating parties to adapt their production to actual consumption. > solar+wind + storage Simply doesn't exist at scale currently. We don't really have good estimates of what a storage-balanced grid costs at scale, and we don't have the industrial bandwidth to build storage at scale with the current technologies. To give you a back-of-the-envelope calculation, current estimates are that european countries relying on wind/solar would need 8 days worth of batteries to avoid most of negative-generation events. For a country like Germany which consumes 1.5TWh a day on average, that would be more than many thousand units of the large battery Tesla built in Australia. |
|
Case in point: wind in Europe https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/180592/european-cooperation-...