Choose your fighter wisely:
[ ] ELECTRIC CAR GOOD
[ ] ELECTRICITY BAD
[ ] ELECTRIC CAR GOOD
[ ] ELECTRICITY BAD
No one is saying "ELECTRICITY BAD", but futile uses of electricity (most of which is derived from extremely polluting fossil fuels[1]) is bad.
[1] https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/images/outle...
Electrify everything (EVs, heat pumps, water heating, etc), and we’ll arrive at 100% clean generation and consumption around the same time.
Source: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/images/figure_6_01_c...
https://www.yahoo.com/now/renewables-dominate-u-power-capaci... ("Renewables To Dominate New U.S. Power Capacity In 2021")
https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights... ("US renewable pipeline poised to add 172.5 GW through 2024")
The statement refers to NEW energy generation, with the implication that renewable/green energy sources will eventually outpace fossil fuels as old plants are decommissioned and alternatives come online for baseload (batteries/other storage).
The grid, and thus electric cars run on fossil fuel. Contrary to your belief, expensive unereliables such as solar, and wind cannot run the grid by definition. Solar and wind are great, when they are up.
Case in point: Germany. Shut down carbon free, emission free, reliable, cheap, safe nuclear. Subsidize, install solar, wind. Find out solar & wind are unreliable. Fire up new coal power plants. Increase emissions due to constant ramp up and ramp down of carbon plants (similar to stop and go traffic on the highway). Increase cost.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/10/is-germany-making-too-m...
Solar and wind are the cheapest electrical generation technologies, even when backed by battery storage [1]. Not that Germany didn't misstep by shuttering nuclear for coal, but they also have transmission challenges between high renewable potential geographies and load centers [2].
[1] https://www.lazard.com/media/451419/lazards-levelized-cost-o...
[2] https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/germanys-stress...
>Solar and wind are the cheapest electrical generation technologies What do you think happens 90% of the time when solar & wind are not available in sufficient capacity? People shut off their lights, laundry machine, and heater/air conditioning?
The person you replied to linked to something demonstrating that solar is cheap even when counting the cost of sufficient battery storage. Perhaps you disagree with that assessment? If so, the fact that sufficient green power hasn't been built isn't an argument against building more.
As far as I'm aware this is a purely theoretical analysis since the amount of batteries required is significantly more than current lithium battery production worldwide.
Indeed, hence why Tesla is building and consuming as many cells as possible. They are bootstrapping utility scale storage supply chains as part of their EV endeavors, and every cell they produce is sold. With that said, overbuilt renewables, renewable curtailment, and robust transmission infra (HVDC, interconnects, etc) will all be components of a clean energy grid.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/03/100-tesla-gigafactori... ("100 Tesla Gigafactories could power the entire world with sustainable energy")
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/tremendous-demand-for-stati... ("'Tremendous demand for stationary storage' outstrips Tesla's 2020 supply capability, Musk says")
Solar, wind, batteries all have environmental costs, as do all other sources of energy & energy storage.
Unfortunately, hit pieces like the OP's share from the Guardian do not objectively compare benefits vs costs & risks.
The Germans invented a new term in the context of this issue - energy poverty.
Do you want to pay more for your electricity, produce more emissions so we can virtue signal that our electric production is solar & wind?
This approach means that you are depriving a billion people on Earth of reliable access to electricity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_a9RP0J7PA
>How do you get from there to 'and therefore we should give up on making more'? I do not claim this. I am stating facts in the face of unreliable energy dogma. Let the free market compete.
Beyond that, why would adding more generative capacity deprive a billion people of electricity? Are you imagining that I think that tomorrow should mark the end of fossil fuels? Regardless of the fact that yes, non-emitting generation could provide power to just about everyone on Earth with capture to balance out the rest, that is just not what I was suggesting.
https://www.energy-storage.news/news/developer-8minute-says-...
* In 2020, the U.S. had over 23.2 GW of capacity in energy storage compared to 1,100 GW of total installed generation capacity.
* Globally, installed energy storage capacity totaled 173.6 GW.
* 1,355 energy storage projects were operational globally in 2020, with 11 projects under construction. 40% of operational projects are located in the U.S.
* California leads the U.S. in energy storage with 215 operational projects (4.2 GW), followed by Hawaii, New York, and Texas.
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/broad-reach-pow...
"Two of the planned 10 MW batteries are up and running already, with a total of 10 expected online by year's end, Vavrik said. That means that BRP and Key Capture are running neck and neck for operational capacity in Texas. The title of biggest battery operator in the state could change hands repeatedly based on the order in which those companies' projects wrap up.
The broader story is that multiple experienced energy investors are converging on Texas simultaneously. The interconnection queue contains more than two dozen batteries that are each larger than 100 megawatts; some go up to 300, 400, even 500 megawatts."
Take the US case. 23.2 GW "capacity". Over what period of time? A second? A minute? An hour? A day? A month? A year?
Let's take a case study of California, the "leader" in energy storage in the US. California removes reliable and cheap organic power plants, and is surprised to find at periods of peak demand when energy is needed most (heat waves, cold spells) the system falls apart. [By the way, removing reliable access to electricity is how you expose the most vulnerable segments of the population to danger of life and safety.]
"The state’s grid operator blamed the blackouts on “a perfect storm” of extreme heat and unusually high demand, as well as a drought that’s limiting hydropower resources and a decline in electricity imports from neighboring states also struggling to keep air conditioners humming. Compounding the problem, 1 gigawatt of wind unexpectedly went offline Saturday, along with a gas plant."....
"“In some cases, we have built a reliability plan that isn’t completely realistic.”"....
"The dearth of battery storage has long been a key barrier to transitioning to a green grid. Though the price of batteries has fallen significantly, they’re still not in widespread use. California only had enough to tackle about 1% of Monday’s peak load forecast, "
California storage cannot handle 1% of battery needs. Please keep in mind when reviewing assumptions, claims, and statements about solar & wind grid.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-17/californi...
> Fire up new coal power plants
"This whole calculation is changing dramatically, however, as Germany moves to shutter its coal-fired plants (the country’s last will close, at the latest, in 2038) and nuclear power stations (which will be disconnected from the grid in 2022). On Jan. 1, 11 coal-fired plants—nine in North Rhine-Westphalia and two near Hamburg—went dark, and others will soon follow."
> Increase emissions due to constant ramp up and ramp down of carbon plants
"And after a period of stagnation in the 2010s, the greenhouse emissions of the world’s fourth-largest economy have been dropping again, last year by around 80 million tons of carbon dioxide. That puts Germany 42 percent down from its 1990 emissions level, thus surpassing its decade target by 2 percentage points."