Last edited Sun Feb 26, 2012, 06:00 PM - Edit history (1)
Even the 2009 report states the 20% limit:
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12619&page=258
A grid can support some intermittent resources without electricity storage if sufficient excess capacity is available to maintain resource adequacy. As described below and in Chapter 7, in many cases the amount of intermittent renewable resources that can be supported is approximately 20 percent, particularly for utilities that rely primarily on hydropower or natural-gas-fired generation. Hydropower and natural-gas-fired plants can ramp levels of generation up or down fairly rapidly, and are able to incorporate a higher fraction of renewables than utilities that rely on nuclear and coal-fired generation, which cannot ramp up or down quickly.
Even for the BEST case, which is for utilities with a lot of hydro and gas which can ramp up/down quickly; the NAS study states that the amount of intermittent renewables that can be supported is approximately 20%.
I WIN, Kris!!!
I don't need to get you to read the 2004 report or the 1992 report - the 2009 that you are so enthralled with says it too!!
The NAS states above; in the BEST case in which you have hydro / gas that can ramp up / down quickly; the amount of renewables that can be supported without storage is about 20%!!
That's what I've been saying all along!!! If you go 100% or 90% or what-ever ill-conceived dream that Kris has; you won't have enough reserve in the other more reliable plants to compensate for the intermittent nature of renewables.
VICTORY!! VICTORY!!! Kris LOSES again!! Science WINS again!!!
PamW
= new reply since forum marked as read