alt.energy.renewable

"Anthony Matonak" wrote in message
news:470086f8$0$18958$4c368faf@ ...
> Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> ... The question is, once you've built that conventional power, does it
>> make economic sense to _also_ build wind power and leave the conventional
>> plants idle when the wind cooperates?
>
> I guess the economics would have to be answered by numbers. I don't
> see a lot of numbers in these arguments except the ones designed
> to scare people.
>
> I know some people seem to get by just fine powering their own homes
> with wind and/or solar so it is possible to do this, at least at the
> home scale. What makes an off-grid home powered by wind and solar
> possible but an on-grid home powered by wind and solar impossible?
>

Yes, but there are limits. Imagine if everyone was on 'net-metering'.
Sounds great when everyone *averages* out to a zero energy consumption on
their electric bill. But right now net-metering folks are using the
capacity of the grid as a storage battery. So there is a point beyond which
net-metering doesn't scale well. The alternative is a garage full of
storage batteries.

And not everyone lives in a wind/solar friendly area. Massive relocation of
people would be a problem to get them to where wind/solar *is* favorable.
Or greatly increasing the grid capabilities to carry power from far, far
away.

A combination of things is certainly doable, but it's more complicated than
just 'cloning' an off-gridders setup one million times.

daestrom