Oregon Public Broadcasting

1st congressional district 2012 election 2012 session agriculture art arts author beer births books budget business central oregon college congress crime culture death penalty eastern oregon economy education employment energy environment eugene fishing food gangs gay rights health health care high school history homeless housing jobs law legislature literature living media mental health military movies music native americans obama occupy portland occupy wall street onthejob oregon our town outdoors parenting police politics portland portland business journal portland mayor pregnancy prison public health race rebroadcast recess recession religion republicans rural schools science shooting sports supreme court talking business technology teen theater unemployment union university of oregon washington water weekend women youth

Probably the least expensive storage mechanism is through a "Smart Grid" application.  Inexpensive chips can be put into hot water heaters that would communicate with the grid.  These chips could change the temperature of the water--up a few degrees (not enough to cause scalding) when you need to store power, and then down a few degrees when the wind slows down which would cause all the water heaters to turn off for awhile.  It sounds like a small amount, but millions of water heaters could provide literally thousands of MW-hours of storage at very low cost.

Plugged in electric vehicles could be used for the same purpose.

posted 3 years ago
view in context

Water can be pumped back up into a storage dam for use later, so is a good way to store extra electricity if the wind is blowing very strong.  Pumped storage system is an old technology, but has some problems.  First, it costs a lot.  About 20% or more of the electricity is wasted in each cycle from pumping inefficiencies.  Second, it requires a large reservoir where folks don't mind having the water level go up and down drastically each day.  Not great for having your house on the lake, or  boating or fishing.  There are a number of these facilities around the country, but they are costly to use and build.

posted 3 years ago
view in context

Natural gas plants are pretty cheap to construct, (although the gas they burn is fairly expensive) and they emit only about 40% of the CO2 per unit of electricity than coal plants.   More important, as we build more renewables and conserve more energy with more efficient appliances and buildings, the existing fleet of gas-fired turbines is operated less hours.  So there is no reason to have to build more--we're facing a surplus in this region already--and most existing plants operate  less than half the hours in the year.   In general, gas is a decent "bridge" to a clean energy future, and new drilling techniques in the Rockies insure a very adequate supply at relatively low cost, so no need for imported LNG.

posted 3 years ago
view in context

Wind + hydro seems like an ideal combination, but it really isn't.  Right now, without much wind on the grid, the dams' operations are optimized to generate at times that produce the most valuable product:  i.e., produce the maximum during the mornings and afternoons when prices are high.  That means producing as little as possible at night, in order to save the water for the daytime.

But if the dams are operated to integrate wind (running high when the wind is low and throttling back when the wind is strong), then this "optimal" operation discussed above will not be followed.  Instead the dams will use water at times that the wind needs it, not when prices are highest.  Thus the dams' power output will be worth less.  Unfortunately, a lot less, because there's a limited amount of water, and generating at the "wrong" time is a waste of money.

A typical example is the fact that often the wind picks up pretty quickly at night, and it's pretty hard to predict exactly when.  To deal with this issue using hydro, the grid operator must generate pretty high all night long to be ready to ramp down when the wind comes up.  This generates a lot of extra power at night, rather than saving the water for the day when it's much more valuable.

Using natural gas turbines is a better way to integrate wind, because unlike hydro, generating at night doesn't have any effect on how much they can generate during the day. 

BPA Sr. VP Brian Silverstein emphasized this during a speech last month:  "Everyone thought wind and hydro was a marriage made in heaven. It turns out to be in another location." 

In the short term, natural gas-fired turbines are best for integrating wind.  But in the long term, a "smart grid" that can control the charging rate of plugged-in electric cars, or change our hot water heaters by a few degrees, in response to variable wind generation is the least expensive way to go.

posted 3 years ago
view in context