From: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass)
Subject: Re: ZERO Nuclear impact (was: Is car pooling for real? etc)
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:30:28 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.150423.8028@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (dean alaska) writes:
>In article <1992Jul22.221535.11132@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes:
>>
>>    If they could, they would.  After all they're in it for the money.
>>    I notice that Luz went belly up;  PV is much worse.
>
>There is a lot of inertia in utilities.  Engineers like to build what
>they know, and most aren't familiar with these technologies.  Another
>problem is rating formulas required by PUCs usually use cost
>comparisons that don't take long-term savings of renewables into
>account.  This actually prevents utilities from investing more
>dollars at the start for long-term savings.

     So?  It is the natural tendency of engineers to underestimate
     the 'savings' of a given power-generating scheme simply because
     projections by marketing types and proponents are always overgenerous.

     My observation is still that Luz went belly up and none of these
     things possibly apply except undercapitalization, and that is
     extremely debatable.

>>>>     If one assumes market efficiency, there is always a sacrifice 
>>>>     in cutting electricity usage.  
>>>
>>>The upfront capital costs will be paid for with the savings.  Such
>>>efficiency strategies could be used to prevent the need for new
>>>capacity until PV is ready.  PG&E in CA plans to meet 75% of its
>>>new capacity requirements over the next decade or two with efficiency
>>>and the other 25% with renewables.
>>
>>     Then I suspect that economic growth will not be concentrated
>>     in PG&E-space.
>>
>This statement indicates that you are not so open-minded as your
>"Show me" statement belows indicates.  Why do you doubt their planning?
>I would point out that CA utilities use increased efficiency to generate
>"negawatts" during the 80's and had a very strong economy.

     Huh?  CA utilities did not substantially increase power generation
     during the 80's?

     As far as their planning,  no new capacity for 10 years sounds 
     like the same recipe for disaster that have seen in the northeast
     (Unless the new TI solar cell can somehow be rushed into economical
     production over the next few years and it is 'shared' with PG&E).
     Sounds more like a PR game.

>>>Hybrid solar thermal plants (they use some natural gas, too) are creating
>>>100's of MW for the grid at about $.085/kwh now.  PV may not be ready for
>>>utility scale usage now, but it may be by the time many coal plants are
>>>retired.
>>
>>     In Virginia?  You must be joking.  As far as 'may be' goes, we
>>     can never rely on guesses like this for something as critical as 
>>     power generation.
>
>Solar can be used in the east, though not as economically as in the
>southwest.  Renewables will work best if they can be placed in the
>most appropriate environment and their power distributed over the
>grid to other areas.  I don't know if the grid has the capacity for this,
>but I assume it could be enhanced if necessary.

     Bovine intestinal emanations *can* be used for power anywhere.
     It is not very smart, though, to do so.

     As far as the grid goes, it is not very smart to produce the power
     for the east in the southwest.  You'd see your necessary capacity 
     go up immensely (since most of the power is used in the east).

>>     Of course, if you are talking about Luz, they went belly up.  Not the
>>     most promising example for other power producers to follow, though
>>     it was a noble effort.
>
>Market conditions are not good for independent producers of renewables
>like LUZ, as described in the January issue of Solar Today.  Nevertheless,
>the technology has survived even if the company didn't.  Luz served as
>an inovator in an industry that is lacking in innovation.

     However, it is market conditions that should predominate in power
     generation, not wishful thinking.

                                dale bass
--
C. R. Bass                                           crb7q@virginia.edu
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia                            (804) 924-7926