Excellent post, Spyros. I may come back with more serious comments later, but for now I can't resist a flippant quip: "in latitudes where sunshine is reliably abundant, intermittency is less of an issue"...except when you want to turn on the lights or watch TV after sunset... Just a silly summer joke, nothing to do with the substance of the argument.
Thanks for the feedback Marco. I don’t want to appear humorless, but the day-night intermittency is easier to solve technically (utility scale batteries) - provided the sun shines reliably. :) That’s what I was trying to say.
Also, I will point out that one of my main concerns still stands: until we resolve the energy storage issue in a cost-effective way, we still need fossil fuels. So readers should not come to the conclusion that, since renewables have a lower LCOE, we can happily cruise to net-zero.
Spyros, I had promised a more serious comment and here I am. First a question: when I look at the IEA document you linked, I see that the value adjustment in VALCOE results in a massive improvement in competitiveness for combined cycle gas turbines (Fig 4.5 in the report). Yet if I compare the LCOE and VALCOE charts in your blog (2nd and 4th chart) I see almost no difference -- what am I missing? Thanks!
Hi Marco, I've triple checked the numbers from the table which underlie the charts (p. 301 of the report) and they are correct. Meanwhile, fig. 4.5 is about methane ... - maybe it's a different chart? Thanks.
Excellent post, Spyros. I may come back with more serious comments later, but for now I can't resist a flippant quip: "in latitudes where sunshine is reliably abundant, intermittency is less of an issue"...except when you want to turn on the lights or watch TV after sunset... Just a silly summer joke, nothing to do with the substance of the argument.
Thanks for the feedback Marco. I don’t want to appear humorless, but the day-night intermittency is easier to solve technically (utility scale batteries) - provided the sun shines reliably. :) That’s what I was trying to say.
I know, and you are right to point it out - fully agree here. However...
Also, I will point out that one of my main concerns still stands: until we resolve the energy storage issue in a cost-effective way, we still need fossil fuels. So readers should not come to the conclusion that, since renewables have a lower LCOE, we can happily cruise to net-zero.
Spyros, I had promised a more serious comment and here I am. First a question: when I look at the IEA document you linked, I see that the value adjustment in VALCOE results in a massive improvement in competitiveness for combined cycle gas turbines (Fig 4.5 in the report). Yet if I compare the LCOE and VALCOE charts in your blog (2nd and 4th chart) I see almost no difference -- what am I missing? Thanks!
Hi Marco, I've triple checked the numbers from the table which underlie the charts (p. 301 of the report) and they are correct. Meanwhile, fig. 4.5 is about methane ... - maybe it's a different chart? Thanks.