This is HarveyD's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following HarveyD's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Smart energy exchange can and should be beneficial to both users and suppliers. Of course, selling/buying prices will vary depending on requirements. As with any other products/services, end users will have to buy and or sell at the right times to maximize benefits. A small home computer, with the appropriate program and power switches, could manage in/outs effectively. Well managed, this could increase the use of higher level lower cost 24/7 REs and allow the progressive closing of old CPPs, NPPs, NGPPs.
Improved electricity exchange between various REs, electrified vehicles and other mobile storage units, residential and commercial fixed storage units and electrolysers/FCs systems may become one of the best solution to arrive to 24/7 REs in the not too distant future. Hope that CPPs, NGPPs and NPPs owners/operators/supporters will not try to block or delay this major development.
To maximize the use of a mix of many distributed REs, it is essential to match energy consumption with energy availability. It is not an easy task but it is possible to do. In areas with major Hydro potential, specially hydro plants with very large water reservoirs, existing and new hydro plants capacity can be increased with added turbines and varied as required to supply extra energy during the peak demand periods, to ensure 24/7 REs for all connected customers. Where no or not enough natural hydro plants exist, local mountains/hills could be used to installed pumped hydro systems to store and use e-energy to the level required to ensure 24/7 REs for all connected customers. Eventually, lower cost higher performance batteries could/will be used to do part of the job. A few million extended range BEVs/FCEVs with enough stored energy could also be used to do part of the storage job. Fixed larger Electrolysers/FCs could also do it r part of it at an acceptable cost. There are many choices/ways to ensure 24/7 REs.
By the way, it seems that New York City may buy 2,000+ megawatt of clean RE (Hydro/Wind) energy from Québec Hydro as soon as the North/South underground (Champlain/Hudson) power lines are built. The revenues from that sale, will be used to build many more high power wind turbines and Hydro plants to produce more clean REs for Eastern USA States and future local uses and for Ontario to replace some of their older CANDU NPPs whenever Ontario becomes interested enough. A Q-H certified firm will build and install 100+ curb side charging stations for NYC.
Multiply REs, multiply efficient Electrolysers to produce more clean H2 from excess energy from local and national REs, extend clean H2 distribution and storage systems, multiply FCEVs and CHPs and you could progressively squeeze CPPs, NGPPs, ICEVs and coal-Oil-NG companies and NPPs out of the market. Norway, Denmark and Sweden may be the first industrialized countries to reach a major part of the change by 2030-2040 and may be followed by Japan, So-Korea, China and a few more EU countries by 2040-2050? USA and Canada may follow by 2100-2150 or so.
It is rather useless and unfair to compare a mature mass produced technology product-services cost versus a very new very low production technology product/service equivalent.The older mature mass produced units will normally win. However, when new technology products/services mature and are mass produced worldwide and all factors are duly considered, they normally become competitive and beneficial. That's what will happen with e-drones, e-planes, e-buses, e-trucks, e-trains, BEVs, FCEVs, REs, clean H2 Electrolysers, H2 storage units, FCs, and CHPs etc. NPPs are exceptions.
Alternatively, the H2 trailer could serve as H2 local storage unit, at most distribution station, to further reduce initial and ongoing cost and while more permanent facilities are installed.
H2 stations have a lot of catching up to do but, since H2 refills are 20X to 30X faster than for EVs and FCEVs have inherently longer range and less frequent refills than the average BEVs, a lot less (50 to 150 times less) H2 stations will be required. Secondly, main H2 stations, with large production facilities, could feed 10+ neighboring H2 distribution stations, with one or two large H2 delivery trucks to increase availability at lower cost.
Contrary to USA and Canada, China has the political will and the technical and financial means to accelerate the change from current polluting ICEVs to practical smaller adapted EVs and larger e-buses, e-taxis, e-trucks and ultra high speed e-trains. For the same price of a single $130K TESLA-S, China will build and use 43+ smaller city EVs. with a much better environmental impact. A few large Chinese cities already have 100% e-bus fleets while we are still testing 1 to 4 e-buses. China has built 170,000+ km of very high speed electrified rails while we have zero. We should not be surprised to see China mass produce small eh-planes for their local and export markets by 2025 or so while we will think about it for another 10+ years. .
It is difficult to compare apples and oranges when ALL factors are not fully accounted for. For example, what is the total cost/value of the harmful effects on all living creatures from the capture, transport, refining and use of bio and fossil fuels? Is it $20, $200 or $2,000/ton? A recent study established that cleaning up the Alberta Tar sands residues will cost between $90B and $360+B and the total cost will add up month after month. The total direct and indirect cost of the damages from the pollution and GHGs created by the 500+ CPPs and 300+ million ICEVs operating in North America would need many super computers to calculate. Direct e-energy cost varies from under 1 cent/kWh to 30+ cents/kWh. The direct cost of the most abondant REs such as Solar, Wind and Hydro are moving both ways. Recent larger (10 to 15 MW) wind turbines installed on higher towers in high wind quality areas can/will soon produce energy close to 1 cent/kWh. The cost of clean e-energy from large Solar farms with higher efficiency, lower cost solar panels installed in very sunny areas, will match the same low cost by 2030 and will drive NPPs out of the energy market. Near future REs will produce all the clean low cost e-energy required to produce the clean lower cost H2 required for 2 billion FCEVs and many other uses. Many posters will have to change their mind on REs, Electrolysers, clean H2 production and storage, mobile FCEVs, H2FCs airplanes and drones, and fixed FCs power units for homes, buildings, industries etc.
What was the consumption for the other 73% of the new LDVs.
Will this be one of the last diesels?
Good news for FCEVs, Hyundai, Toyota and Honda and others. Near future mass produced FCEVs will also come from half a dozen and more China vehicle manufacturers in 2020-2021-2022 etc. New H2 on board storage tanks will soon allow up to 4x the H2 in about the same space as current tanks, for possible extended range of up to 2000 km or to allow much smaller H2 tanks. New mass produced containerized high performance transportable electrolysers, fed with clean REs, will promote the installation of many thousands small H2 stations.
By constantly refuting the recent major progress made with 24/7 REs, FCs and clean H2 production and distribution, SAEP has become one of the oil compagnies best supporter.
Good news for greater clean H2 production and distribution in California and USA?
These new H2 tanks, at five times cheaper than Lion Batteries for five times the range, coupled with new lighter FCs may become the 5-5-5 energy storage units that future extended range, all weather EVs, have been waiting for. With much lower price clean H2 available in the near future, FCEVs owners could have their own clean low cost H2 storage unit at/near their home garage for quick refills and other uses? The H2 economy is not dead.
Total decarbonizing of US (and Canada) economy, including, fossil fuel refineries, light and heavy industries, cement factories, light and heavy road transport vehicles, trains, ships, boats, light and heavy machinery, agriculture, forestry, food and clothing industries, buildings, residences, aircraft and drones, roads-streets highways and bridges etc will probably never happen, even with 100 clean REs or clean nuclear energy. We have had a huge capacity-surplus of clean very low cost REs (Hydro-Wind) for years but we still produce 9.4 ton of CO2 per capita, mainly due to many inefficient polluting activities: 1) Aluminum factories 2) Fuel refineries 3) light and heavy industries 4) Cement factories 5) 99.4% of transport ICE vehicles 6) agriculture 7) forestry 8) buildings and residences 9) many other activities. Even the McGill University fossil fuel heating system emits 30,000 tons/year of CO2. Conversion to cleaner electric system has been delayed for many decades and not seriously supported by their own environmental teaching. The large 100% electric aluminum factories have refused to update their process that would reduce CO2 emission and GHGs by 80+% due to initial update cost. One of the best way to force McGill U and the aluminum factories and many others to modify their process would be with a progressive carbon-pollution tax of $20 to $120 ton/year applied on the next 10 years. This is now applied in Que and BC @ $20/ton but all other Provinces are fighting it. A new Federal Law will try to enforce it but the anti-environment groups will try their best to have the law reversed. The pro and anti environment groups will fight it for many decades. It will not be an easy fight!
A minor improvement over current equivalent ICEVs but not good enough. Here are the best (lowest consumption 2019 non-plug-in Hybrids) according to Transport Canada: 1) Hyundai Ioniq = 4.1 L/100 km 2) Toyota Prius = 4.4 L/100 km 3) Kia Niro = 4.7 L/100 km 4) Honda Insight = 4.9 L/100 km 5) Toyota Camry = 4.9 L/100 km (excellent for a larger vehicle) 6) Honda Accord = 5.0 L/100 km 7) Chevrolet Malibu = 5.1 L/100 km 8) Toyota Prius C = 5.1 L/100 km 9) Toyota Lexus ES 300 H = 5.3 L/100 km 10 Ford Fusion = 5.6 L/100 km
Good news for depleted uranium and USA. With $2.2T to $3.0T and 15 to 20 years, current NPPs could be triple (from 100 to 300) and produce enough energy to phase out all current 425+ CPPs. Coupled with 125,000,000 EVs, the impact on pollution and GHGs would be important. Who will do it?
Sorry but heavy commercial is currently less than 2% and should rise to about 18% in 2040.
TESLAs seem to have certain difficulties seeing large trucks/trailers sideways?
Ride and vehicle sharing could become cheaper than owning a vehicle, specially for people retired or with lesser use.
Leasing batteries for EVs (all sizes) may become one of the best way to lower initial vehicle price closer to ICEVs and allow easier upgrades. EVs with multiple plug-in battery modules could start with a minimum for short daily e-range and add-on more modules for longer e-range when batteries lease or purchase become more affordable.
Electric buses with 50% (now) and 80+% in 2040 of the market are doing well and much better than the rest with barely 3%. (now) and 20% to 47% in 2040. Norway, China and few other countries are already doing better than the above.
The obvious took many years to come out. Electric tugs could certainly lower the harmful emissions?