5 Comments
User's avatar
New Thinks's avatar

Very well done - a couple of points:

"Hydropower offers unparalleled flexibility." Actually, not as much as you might think - hydropower has limits to what it can discharge and when, based on requirements for instream resources like fish. You can ramp, but within strict limits.

A second issue - we already have spikes in demand due to consumers. What wind and solar do is add supply spikes. And one problem makes the other worse, so it isn't arithmetic, it is a logarithmic increase in the difficulty in management.

Expand full comment
jabster's avatar

What about some combination solutions--say nukes with pumped hydro? I know the TVA has had success with that.

I'm surprised the Army Corps of Engineers and Georgia Power/SoCo haven't done more with that in Georgia, although both have done some. There are two Georgia Power lakes and three USACE lakes that aren't far from Vogtle.

Nukes are probably the worst for adjusting to demand except for coal.

Expand full comment
New Thinks's avatar

They actually have this in California.

Expand full comment
Payson Tucker's avatar

Curious why you would exclude natural gas reciprocating engines from the list. Far less derating in temp and altitude. Rich burn recips have better local emissions and quicker ramp times - they do have higher heat rates - but why pay for heat rate in a scarcity driven market?

Expand full comment
David Thielen's avatar

I don't select power sources for the utilities.

Expand full comment