Hulot, Minister at 100 Liters on time?

[sicetaitsimple]

An under-consumption of what ??? Sorry but I didn't follow you at all ...

Bah of gas or fuel oil, I wrote an under-consumption of gas or fuel oil, the production of the CAP will replace this, in general, right?

[Ahmed]

One trend is the extension of a fragment of curve on a graph: with this method I would make 700 or 800 Kgs! Or if you prefer, a trend continues until it diverges ...
I agree with you on the second point, but this is not what I dispute: indeed, small producers (therefore, "injectors") will be in the situation of farmers, but the situation is totally different in this regard. which concerns "serious" investors, they do not produce electricity, but money.

[sicetaitsimple]

One trend is the extension of a fragment of curve on a graph: with this method I would make 700 or 800 Kgs! Or if you prefer, a trend continues until it diverges ...
I agree with you on the second point, but this is not what I dispute: indeed, small producers (therefore, "injectors") will be in the situation of farmers, but the situation is totally different in this regard. which concerns "serious" investors, they do not produce electricity, but money.

On your first point, I may be wrongly very optimistic, but I tend to think that electric renewables will develop exponentially, for the simple reason that they are now cheaper than conventional means. What the actual shape of the curve will actually be is a question.

On the second point, here too I could be wrong, but the "small producers" who inject into the network will just disappear (well, there will be less and less "new" ones, those who have a hefty price for 20 years will of course keep this rent) they will become "self-producers".

[Christophe]

Bah of gas or fuel oil, I wrote an under-consumption of gas or fuel oil, the production of the CAP will replace this, in general, right?

I was talking about replacing a boiler so yes necessarily there will be no more consumption of fuel oil or gas ???? It is therefore not under consumption, it is more consumption at all ...

Well it's late there ...

[sicetaitsimple]

Bah of gas or fuel oil, I wrote an under-consumption of gas or fuel oil, the production of the CAP will replace this, in general, right?

I was talking about replacing a boiler so yes necessarily there will be no more consumption of fuel oil or gas ???? It is therefore not under consumption, it is more consumption at all ...

Well it's late there ...

Well, not necessarily no consumption at all, I talked about hybridization above, citing an example.

But it is indeed late. Good night!.

[Christophe]

I understood that you had not read my answer before answering it ... hence the mic mac ... no big deal eh!

[Did67]

There is no longer or there will no longer be any "nobility" in electricity, it will be like agricultural production: when there is too much of it, prices drop dramatically and we have to find a way to use them, in heating why not, when there is not enough the prices go up and indeed we will reserve it for captive uses.

Maybe you should take a closer look at thermodynamics and the notion of entropy ...

For simplicity :

- all energy sources (mechanical, kinetic, chemical, electrical) can be transformed into heat energy with a yield of 100%

- the reverse is not at all true: with heat, you can at best convert into electricity with a yield of I do not know, about 50%; chemical energy (fuel), you cannot transform it into mechanical energy with a yield of only 40% (in a heat engine) ...

There is therefore a "hierarchy" in the energies, question "ease of use". Electric energy is "noble" in the sense that you can run an electric motor with it, with very, very good efficiency (90% I think) and very fine steering. You can do an x-ray with it. Auscultation with a piece of bamboo is much coarser! Heat is the most degraded, "crappy" form of energy. Everything ends in heat, as the "ultimate waste" of transformations. Your car's engine is first and foremost a boiler!

So, philosophically, I find it hard to "waste" noble energy, electricity, with which we can do a lot of things, just to make heat ... [Since you know me elsewhere, as I have difficult to compost organic waste to dissipate heat!]

[Did67]

On the comparison with agricultural prices, no agreement either. On the contrary. It will become a real problem in the future for "commercial" renewables, those who sell their production to live, self-consumption coming under another economic model. If you have in a country like France 50GW of PV or 50GW of wind power installed, a beautiful summer day or a day with a strong gust of wind your product is no longer worth anything because there is too much of it on the market.

So certainly there was a period where whatever you produced it was bought at a fixed price over 15 or 20 years whatever the need, but this auspicious period is now almost over, and will certainly be completely within 5 in 10 years.

Hence the absurdity of the current model, designed for marginal renewable energies. And not at all thought of as a dominant model (our enarques are sometimes the kings of Excel but very bad project managers - we must ALWAYS ask ourselves the question of the "generalization" of a renewable technique - what's going on- if the model is adopted by all or a large number? If it is not, it is null. And if it collapses then, it is also null!).

An example: a methanization station produces, by a miracle, but our enarques - especially those of the brilliant Ségolène - did not notice, an immediately storable energy: gas. As the business model designed nose in Excel did not see the point of this, the price is fixed. So the operator has every interest in "burning" his gas as it goes. So to inject the current whether the weather is nice, whether there is wind or not ...

For 3 cents, we could double / triple the PVC "hats" in which to store gas, install two or three cogenerators in parallel ... No sun, or no wind. Turbine thoroughly, on 3 groups. Too much sun, too much wind, we stop everything. Luckily, always, but the enarques did not realize it, a cogeneration engine starts automatically at quarter turn!

The additional cost would be minimal. No doubt 10%. So for a slight premium for the electricity injected when it is scarce (and when it is worth much more), the designers and operators were taking the measures and investing a little more. Today it has no interest.

[sicetaitsimple]

An example: a methanization station produces, by a miracle, but our enarques - especially those of the brilliant Ségolène - did not notice, an immediately storable energy: gas. As the business model designed nose in Excel did not see the point of this, the price is fixed. So the operator has every interest in "burning" his gas as it goes. So to inject the current whether the weather is nice, whether there is wind or not ...

For 3 cents, we could double / triple the PVC "hats" in which to store gas, install two or three cogenerators in parallel ... No sun, or no wind. Turbine thoroughly, on 3 groups. Too much sun, too much wind, we stop everything. Luckily, always, but the enarques did not realize it, a cogeneration engine starts automatically at quarter turn!

The additional cost would be minimal. No doubt 10%. So for a slight premium for the electricity injected when it is scarce (and when it is worth much more), the designers and operators were taking the measures and investing a little more. Today it has no interest.

We agree. When I spoke of "good times" a little above, I was talking about good times for "rentiers" who sold and continue to sell their solar kWh for 20 years at a prohibitive price. Fortunately, this model is gradually disappearing.

[sicetaitsimple]

There is no longer or there will no longer be any "nobility" in electricity, it will be like agricultural production: when there is too much of it, prices drop dramatically and we have to find a way to use them, in heating why not, when there is not enough the prices go up and indeed we will reserve it for captive uses.

Maybe you should take a closer look at thermodynamics and the notion of entropy ...

I'm not sure I have to "lean on it", because in fact I have been rather "immersed in it" during my professional life!

I'm not sure I insisted enough that I was thinking at 20, 30, or 40. If you are considering intermittent electricity production at this time, sometimes largely in excess of the "noble" needs that you cite (motors, lighting, etc.), you have roughly 3 solutions:

- delete it (do not produce it)
- store it (but it is not given at least seen today)
- use it in less noble needs such as heating, hot water, ... in substitution for fossil or non-fossil fuels for that matter.

It is not a problem of thermodynamics, but an economic problem of the best use of a resource anyway fatal at zero marginal cost at the instant considered.