[Timo]

http://carnegiewave.com/

I post this knowing that even those who hate to admit this is a move in the right direction will still negate it as anything but fantasy. You know who i'm referring to.

[KaiserJeep]

Yes, we discussed wave energy last year in a thread started by C8, I believe. I agree it is a promising lead, but in actual fact, there are large and difficult mechanical engineering issues involved in the design. The present status is that small wave generators are mature designs, medium scale generators still are experiencing design issues, and no one has attempted a large wave power plant as yet. As with tidal basins, there is a huge vulnerability to storm damage, the ocean/land border has always been subject to hurricanes which can cause enormous tidal surges and waves beyond design parameters.

It's still a promising idea. If you really believe in it, invest your money. I believed in offshore wind farms and gave Cape Wind $7500 of my money back in 2009, after Obama called it a "shovel ready" project during his first campaign for POTUS. I'll probably never get any of that back, but I did put my money where my mouth was.

[vtsnowedin]

Good points, vt. So at best only very marginal use as 'virtual batteries.' But every new source with its own time frame makes it that much less likely that you will have long times with no power at all, and reduces the likelihood that you would need huge actual batteries for such times.

Imagine if you will factories that had to take a one hour break each day at both low and high tide because there was no power available and that these break times would rotate ahead twenty five minutes every calendar day. You could not fire up even a gas plant to cover just that two hours a day so you are forced to have full base load capacity and just let tidal power reduce load and fuel usage when it is on.
It is a pretty interesting engineering problem that is much more complicated then the political and ideological discussions would have you believe.

Have you ever checked the tidal forecasts, you'll see that along many coastlines, the tides are a several minutes different to the next town. With a distributed tidal system and tidal lagoons you can engineer out all the "deadspots".
The largest hurdle to such systems is of course cost!

That time difference would be a function of how far east or west of each other the locations are. Locations on the same North south meridian would have tides at the same times. So the East to West lying coast line between Texas and the Florida peninsula would have a couple of hours differential to work with while Miami to New York less then an hour.
Note I did not say that the problem was insurmountable or not worth pursuing but instead that it was complicated and difficult.

[Timo]

Ahhhhh! I'm glad you recognized your own lack of faith toward progress. If it doesn't solve everything, it's not worth anything.

I humbly bow to your wisdom.

[dohboi]

Timo, I have my disagreements at times with vt, but if you were addressing him, that's pretty much the opposite of what he was saying. Am I missing something?

KJ, thanks for the info, but the point about heat generated by renewables is extremely minor, many orders of magnitude less than what GW is producing, for example.

Of course, for the people who want to pursue infinite growth on a finite planet, yes, eventually those now-relatively-tiny bits of waste mechanical heat would come back to bite you, but not for hundreds of years (depending on the growth rate, of course), iirc.

vt, some parts of MD have more than an hour difference between their high tides. Explore http://www.saltwatertides.com/dynamic.d ... sites.html

It also takes a while for the tide to propagate up long tidal estuaries, even if they run roughly north south, like the Lower Hudson River: http://tides.mobilegeographics.com/locations/6588.html
vs http://www.saltwatertides.com/cgi-local/newyork.cgi

See also: http://www.riverprojectnyc.org/riverdive_today.php

There are approximately two high and two low tides in the Hudson estuary each day. As the tide rises, a tidal current moves northward up the Hudson.

The time taken for the propagation of this current results in a significant delay between the time of high tide at the Verrazano Narrows and points upstream.

High tide at West Point is a full three hours later than at the Narrows. The propagation is so drawn out that it can be high tide at one part of the length of the Hudson while being dead low at another.

Flow patterns are further complicated by the effects of river channel width and depth on flow velocity.

But of course there aren't a lot of estuaries of that length and size to provide any kind of appreciable energy input at the desired times along most of the coasts of the US and the world. So I would say your general point still stands.

[dohboi]

Did I mention something about managing load up thread?

Lo and behold:

Another $1.2 Billion Substation? No Thanks, Says Utility, We'll Find a Better Way

Consolidated Edison, the iconic utility that provides New York City's electricity, discovered a problem in the summer of 2014. Within a few years, the demand for power in an area spanning parts of Brooklyn and Queens would outpace what existing infrastructure could supply, especially during the peak demand of the hottest summer days.

The traditional solution would be to add a substation. But that would cost $1.2 billion or more and represent a more-of-the-same approach to the electric grid—a central station with long inefficient wires, less resilience to the effects of climate change and more fossil fuel use. Con Ed was not thrilled.

So it came up with a completely different approach. Con Ed solicited ideas for smaller, cheaper, nontraditional and ideally more environmentally friendly solutions. So far, the company has received more than 80 suggestions and has turned many of them into the Brooklyn-Queens Demand Management project.

BQDM, as it's called, is a plan that reimagines the area's grid for 21st century climate changes, especially longer, hotter summers. While the specifics are not fully formed, BDQM is likely to harness state-of-the-art grid management, emissions-free on-site power generation and basic customer-side energy efficiency, which is already going into effect.

The cost: About $200 million, less than one-fifth the price of a substation.

The low price tag and the concept have utilities, regulators, public officials, electricity experts and environmentalists nationwide watching to see whether BQDM will work. The project sets ConEd apart from other big power companies that have fought rooftop solar electricity and other clean energy solutions that disrupt their established business model.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/04042 ... ate-change

[Tanada]

Ahhhhh! I'm glad you recognized your own lack of faith toward progress. If it doesn't solve everything, it's not worth anything.

I humbly bow to your wisdom.

Unfortunately I have met a lot of people both in the Peak community and otherwise who hold exactly that position. If you propose a partial solution to any problem they throw up their hands metaphorically because you didn't fix the whole thing in one magical maneuver. We used to have a rather prominent voice on here who was always decrying 'solutions in isolation' because they were piecemeal and make work and would not make BAU continue forever and a day.

News flash, most of us know BAU can not continue forever no matter what you do so crying that solution X only gets you a 10 percent BAU lifestyle is kind of missing the point. If you can deploy solution X and Y and Z in your location and have an acceptable lifestyle while Joe Blow deploys X and Q and M in his location and also has a lifestyle he finds acceptable why is that a bad thing?

[vtsnowedin]

Ahhhhh! I'm glad you recognized your own lack of faith toward progress. If it doesn't solve everything, it's not worth anything.

I humbly bow to your wisdom.

Unfortunately I have met a lot of people both in the Peak community and otherwise who hold exactly that position. If you propose a partial solution to any problem they throw up their hands metaphorically because you didn't fix the whole thing in one magical maneuver. We used to have a rather prominent voice on here who was always decrying 'solutions in isolation' because they were piecemeal and make work and would not make BAU continue forever and a day.

News flash, most of us know BAU can not continue forever no matter what you do so crying that solution X only gets you a 10 percent BAU lifestyle is kind of missing the point. If you can deploy solution X and Y and Z in your location and have an acceptable lifestyle while Joe Blow deploys X and Q and M in his location and also has a lifestyle he finds acceptable why is that a bad thing?

Hey!! I resemble that remark.
While I get your point I think you misunderstand mine. Certainly having a green solution to power generation is good even if that solution only supplies a portion of current demand. My disagreement is with those that point to a possible yet undeveloped technology and say problem solved lets shut down the old coal plants today.
If a green solution does solve say ten percent of our energy requirements fine put it in place then shut down ten percent of the older more polluting system and then turn immediately to working the remaining ninety percent of the problem.
This is especially important when managing electric grids as not having one hundred percent of demand can cause the whole grid to fail.
Currently the USA uses 4 trillion KWHs of electricity a year and the current breakdown is 33% coal , 33% natural gas, 20 % nuclear, 6% hydro, 7% percent other renewables. (wind4 .7% , bio mass 1.6%) and oil 1 %.
Considering the age of our nuclear plants and the demand to reduce coal use we have a tremendous problem in front of us with no quick or easy fixes. I would like the lights to stay on while we work the problem.
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3

[dohboi]

Here again I have the dubious honor of (mostly) agreeing with vt!

It drives me nuts when I hear people praise alternatives as if, by themselves, they are a solution to anything.

Unless they are actually replacing ff sources, they are just adding energy to the system, encouraging more of all the nasty things that industrial society does.

Same with efficiency.

[Subjectivist]

Did I mention something about managing load up thread?

Lo and behold:

Another $1.2 Billion Substation? No Thanks, Says Utility, We'll Find a Better Way

Consolidated Edison, the iconic utility that provides New York City's electricity, discovered a problem in the summer of 2014. Within a few years, the demand for power in an area spanning parts of Brooklyn and Queens would outpace what existing infrastructure could supply, especially during the peak demand of the hottest summer days.

The traditional solution would be to add a substation. But that would cost $1.2 billion or more and represent a more-of-the-same approach to the electric grid—a central station with long inefficient wires, less resilience to the effects of climate change and more fossil fuel use. Con Ed was not thrilled.

So it came up with a completely different approach. Con Ed solicited ideas for smaller, cheaper, nontraditional and ideally more environmentally friendly solutions. So far, the company has received more than 80 suggestions and has turned many of them into the Brooklyn-Queens Demand Management project.

BQDM, as it's called, is a plan that reimagines the area's grid for 21st century climate changes, especially longer, hotter summers. While the specifics are not fully formed, BDQM is likely to harness state-of-the-art grid management, emissions-free on-site power generation and basic customer-side energy efficiency, which is already going into effect.

The cost: About $200 million, less than one-fifth the price of a substation.

The low price tag and the concept have utilities, regulators, public officials, electricity experts and environmentalists nationwide watching to see whether BQDM will work. The project sets ConEd apart from other big power companies that have fought rooftop solar electricity and other clean energy solutions that disrupt their established business model.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/04042 ... ate-change

I wonder how much they could make up demand by building solar panal sets on all the flat roofs of the buildings in the area? They could creat distributed generation that would support their local grid.

[dolanbaker]

The generic term for what you gentlemen are discussing is "pumped storage facility".

That's not quite what I had in mind, with coastal tidal lagoons, you can allow the tide to fill or empty the lagoon and then shut the gates. The gates are then opened when there is sufficient difference between the water levels inside and outside to generate power. Other lagoons or barrages are using the tidal flows "live" to produce power when the "store & flow" lagoon is offline.

Thus power can be generated 24/7/365 from a tidal system.

[Timo]

Just for everyone's peace of mind, i was NOT referring to vt in any way. I won't say who took the bait in his response to my post, but it was someone other than vt.

And BTW, vt is quite all right i my book. I would never chastise him (or her, or most of the users of this forum, actually) in such manner. I knew ahead of time who would read himself into my comments in my first post. That person saw his reflection, just as i predicted, and based solely on his historical dismissal of progress, posted a reply that completely lived up to his character.

[dohboi]

?

[vtsnowedin]

?

OK I'll bite.
Who is your question for and what is the question?

[dohboi]

Timo's mysterious 'person'--can't he just man up and tell us who he means?

[Timo]

No. That person knows who he is, and that is where it should stop.

[dohboi]

K, bro. But now you will be forever known as....The Mystery Man !!!

[Timo]

This thread is on Centralized Energy, not Centralized Mystery.

Back on topic, please.

I apologize for the distraction. It was juvenile. The mystery is NOT a sacred cow!

[dohboi]

"The mystery is NOT a sacred cow!" ...

I dunno...some of them sacred cows look prutty damn mysterious to me!

[Timo]

OH NOOOOO! ANOTHER ADVANCE IN WAVE ENERGY!!!!!

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-12/this-device-could-provide-a-third-of-america-s-power

This one has fewer moving parts, and can work in virtually any wave condition, meaning that it's only a significant part in our search for answers for renewable energy. Sadly, it's only forecast to be able to provide around 1/3rd of our global energy needs. Worse yet, the full-scale working prototype is still four years off.

Why bother?!

The video at the link is extremely informative.