Renewable energy = 2x generation nuclear

[pedrodelavega]

As long as we do not know how to store electricity efficiently at the scale of our needs, renewable energy will have a hard time ...

[raymon]

As long as we do not know how to store electricity efficiently at the scale of our needs, renewable energy will have a hard time ...

Yes that is the dominant discourse what we are told on tf1 we know how to store and it is not so difficult the steps already exist in Norway for example 800 km from France. The other advantage of a step is that when it is built it is for a long time.

http://objectifterre.over-blog.org/arti ... 15930.html

France has the possibility of being connected to Norway either directly by submarine cable from Picardy (about 830 km), or through Germany and Denmark. Or even that of the United Kingdom: France signed an agreement for the construction of FABLink, a submarine HVDC cable of 2000 MW which will link France to Great Britain via the Channel Island of Normandy. 'Alderney. And Great Britain will be linked to Norway by another 800 km and 1400 MW submarine HVDC cable. “There is already a 2 GW cable between France and the United Kingdom. »Underlines Cédric Philibert, specialist in renewable energies at the International Energy Agency and in particular author of the Solar Energy Perspectives report. “In France as in Germany, we can create new STEPs. The PPI plans to increase the STEP power in France from 5 to 8 GW by 2020 ”adds the expert. “There is more than one gigawatt of WWTP under construction in Germany, and other sites have been identified, including for example 2,5 GW of potential in the black forest (RWE). There is also potential in the Bavarian Alps, certainly far from the North Sea wind turbines but close to a good fraction of the 52 GW of photovoltaic solar that is being installed in Germany. Photovoltaics will supply 2022% of Bavarian electricity in 15, and renewables together, 50%. "
.

Belgium will build a step at sea. Conclusion when we want little.

http://ecologie.blog.lemonde.fr/2013/01 ... -eolienne/

[moinsdewatt]

.....
It is logical, the CEO and the shareholders of EDF prefer to put the money in the pockets instead of "letting it sleep" ...
...

It's funny, the main shareholder of EDF (and from far away) is the state.

[moinsdewatt]

...
Yes that is the dominant discourse what we are told on tf1 we know how to store and it is not so difficult the steps already exist in Norway for example 800 km from France. The other advantage of a step is that when it is built it is for a long time.
...

sinking of open doors.

The biggest STEP dam in France is Grand Maison.

It is above my house, since I live in Grenoble.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrage_de_Grand'Maison

[hic]

Who Said Renewable Energies Have No Potential Against Nuclear?

hi Christophe

What to see,

"" "
In France, the share of nuclear power is 76,8% (2007) in electricity production. * 55% in Belgium *
Nuclear electricity represents 17,7% of final energy consumption,.

*** http://futura24.voila.net/energie/electri_nucle.htm ***
"" ""

Conclusion:
Nuclear is a minor energy; "this in the best case" 'French'.
Is it worth the risk ????

[Christophe]

Nuclear electricity accounts for 17,7% of final energy consumption

Yes but ... what annoys me a little with this kind of figures is that we compare leeks and potatoes!

Since the final consumption of a country takes into account all energies, oil, gas ... which do not have the same use as electricity ...

Otherwise yes it is urgent to reduce the share of nuclear power, I think it will take a few more accidents for the industrialists and politicians to really react ... it's sad ...

Recall that the operation of a reactor brings in around 150 M € / year (estimated calculation with 2ct of profit per kWh of nuclear power produced) that is why it is so difficult to close a power station and that Edf postpones the date of operation again and again...

[raymon]

...
Yes that is the dominant discourse what we are told on tf1 we know how to store and it is not so difficult the steps already exist in Norway for example 800 km from France. The other advantage of a step is that when it is built it is for a long time.
...


sinking of open doors.

The biggest STEP dam in France is Grand Maison.

It is above my house, since I live in Grenoble.

Door sinking open for you but it is necessary to say it for some who seem to ignore it and think that out of nuclear no point of salvation. Regarding the possible steps in France there are others possible for example on the Durance near my home we could relatively easily install a step between Serre-ponçon and the Etang de Berre the current power is 1800MW.

[Christophe]

The biggest STEP dam in France is Grand Maison.

It is above my house, since I live in Grenoble.

And the oldest (1st in the world ??) is surely that of the black lake / white lake in the Vosges: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac_Noir_%28Vosges%29

A hydroelectric plant was built there between 1928 and 1933 by René Koechlin. It is the first pumped storage power transfer station. Lac Noir is connected to Lac Blanc (120 meters higher) by a pipe that allows the production of electricity by turbines at peak hours, alternating with recharging Lac Blanc, which is higher, by pumping during off-peak hours. It develops a power of 80 MW for 4 alternators.

When it was put into operation in 1934, the pipeline connecting the two lakes broke. Water falls on the roof of the building and it collapses. The accident killed nine people and left a survivor. The factory was then put back into service in 1938.

Out of service since the floods in July 2002, the plant must be replaced by a smaller but more efficient station with 50 MW produced for 1 alternator. An investment of 50 million euros is planned at EDF by 2012. The agreement binding the operator to the community was signed on November 16, 2011. The total amount of the work will amount to almost 70 million euros . The site, planned to last 6 years, should employ around a hundred people.

[RégsB]

Hello,

Hydraulics is the oldest renewable energy that exists, which is why the vast majority of exploitable sites in industrialized countries are already. New possible STEPs are very rare in France.

The DGCE indicates that during 2020-2025 all sites of interest for onshore wind will be occupied.
Offshore and floating sites are still very largely to be exploited.

For the PV, heuuuu, frankly, I would wait for better yields and efficient storage means before installing them on my roof, if I have one, one day.

frankly, nuclear, I would do well! But I find it hard to accept the angelism that surrounds certain EnRe.

I keep in mind that the first objective must be to decarbonate our primary and final energy consumption as quickly as possible, otherwise we will be frankly badly. It is too late to be complicated, it must be simple and not to be mistaken.

To get up to date:

From Wikipedia:
...
The Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems published in November 2012 a study entitled "100% renewable energy for electricity and heat in Germany" for 2050:

the researchers simulated an electric system operating hour by hour and over a whole year from renewable energies, taking as demand hypothesis the success of an energy saving policy reducing electricity consumption by about 25% compared to 2011, a very proactive hypothesis since so far only the crisis has succeeded in lowering this consumption (but only in industry). The energy mix to which their work leads is as follows:

170 GW of onshore wind and 85 GW of offshore wind, or 255 GW compared to 29 GW in 2010;

200 GW of photovoltaics, against 17 GW in 2010;

70 GW of "Power-to-gas" plants transforming electricity from renewable energies into gas (hydrogen) during periods of production in excess of demand;

95 GW of gas-fired power stations used in "back-up", when renewable energy production is not sufficient, and optionally coupled with heat recovery systems for re-injection into the heating networks;

numerous heat storage facilities enabling the share of biomass (50 TWh / year) to be reduced in the production of heat and electricity. Thus, most of the biomass will be devoted to transport and industrial processes;

130 GW of solar thermal, directly producing hot water which is not part of the electrical system but which should be mentioned because they replace current electrical systems.

The electricity production capacities would therefore total 550 GW, an enormous figure in comparison with the installed capacity of France: 125 GW, including 64 GW of nuclear power.

On its own, the fleet of gas power stations would have a power far greater than the current French nuclear fleet!

In total, around four times more production capacity, for actual production of the same order of magnitude. It is the price of the intermittence of the winds and the sun. And the target of 100% renewable energy has not been reached since this huge fleet of gas power plants remains.
...

Or :

http://www.contrepoints.org/2014/04/29/ ... -une-folie

I am indeed convinced that even Germany will not bear such an additional cost!

[I Citro]

Hydraulics is the oldest renewable energy that exists, which is why the vast majority of exploitable sites in industrialized countries are already.

I do not share your opinion and in a large part of the French territory, there were mills on all the rivers sometimes spaced 500 meters in the plain and even spaced less than 2 kilometers in the Landes, department renowned for its lack of relief ... Tens of thousands of energy deposits with a power between 5kW and 50kW just waiting to be exploited for the energy autonomy of their operators and decentralized supply to the local network, i.e. without the considerable line losses resulting from the excessive centralization of the French network (it is estimated that 1kWh consumed at the outlet in France required 2,54kWh at the outlet of the power plant) ...

For the PV, heuuuu, frankly, I would wait for better yields and efficient storage means before installing them on my roof, if I have one, one day.

20m² on my roof produce 3000kWh per year, my electricity bill (household of 4 people) was 4000kWh (excluding gas heating). Between tiles that consume energy to make and do not produce and solar panels that will make 4 or 5 times the amount of energy used to make and recycle them during their life cycle, my choice is made ... Waiting better is useless since the prices inflated by subsidies are finally reasonable and at levels so low thatin Spain, a "royal decree" prohibits individuals from making their own solar electricity because it is cheaper than electricity sold through the grid... The yield of the tiles is negative, I much prefer the 20m² of panels with the "meager yield" of 15% which gave me 12MWh (yes, MegaWatt hour) in 4 years than the tiles which cost me for their purchase and their maintenance without producing anything ...

In total, around four times more production capacity, for actual production of the same order of magnitude. It is the price of the intermittence of the winds and the sun. And the target of 100% renewable energy has not been reached since this huge fleet of gas power plants remains.

This incompetence seems to be maintained, but technological solutions exist and go through storage ... This will be the major challenge of the century that has just started.

Or :
http://www.contrepoints.org/2014/04/29/ ... -une-folie

I just discovered this site which seems to emanate from anti-ecological lobbies.
It seems obvious that the Vice-Chancellor is in the pay of non-renewable energy suppliers ...

the imperative to stabilize the electricity network despite the massive and erratic influx of solar and wind power plants that produce energy unrelated to real needs, has pushed operators to their limits. Now, with a combined share of only 13% of total electricity production, the contribution of renewables is unreliable and massively jeopardizes the stability of the electricity network.

When we point the finger at the fluctuating aspect of renewable energies, we must ALSO remember that consumption is fluctuating, even if this consumption is globally predictable.
It should also be admitted the MAJOR handicap of nuclear energy which is very difficult and slow to modulate and also requires the addition of energies which are easy to regulate, currently, hydraulics is the most reactive energy with a instant response time, unlike thermal power plants ...

I am indeed convinced that even Germany will not bear such an additional cost!

Nor will it be able to bear the additional cost of dismantling nuclear power plants ...

As far as I'm concerned, I've been running on electricity for more than 120.000km, and I'm therefore trying to make my own energy transition, for more autonomy and economy ... But I am mocked and criticized by people who don't want to know or are afraid, like I was afraid 6 years ago ...
Now I go for it and railing all the time I have lost listening to others ...

What I have achieved with few skills (at the start) is achievable by many people, and I do not intend to stop, and even less to let say the nonsense that I read ...

As with electric mobility, the energy transition is an accessible grail which powerful lobbies do not want to see happen ...