Don Stauffer wrote in news:dc7zf.1691$ snipped-for-privacy@news.uswest.net:
Michael Pardee wrote:
>>
>> Sadly, wind and solar fall into the category of the least desirable
>> of all forms of generation, "intermittent generation." Utility
>> electricity as we know it is entirely on-demand; we don't have to
>> schedule when we turn lights on and off. In contrast, public grids
>> are a remarkably delicate real-time balance of generation, loss and
>> load. Some "peaking" generation must always be held in reserve to
>> maintain the balance, while "base" generation like coal, nuclear and
>> hydro provide the cheaper electricity to meet the expected minimum
>> demand. As used today, solar and wind do not fit into this at all.
>> If base generation is like public transportation and peaking
>> generation is like private cars, intermittent generation is like
>> hitchhiking. Maybe it will get you where you are going, but you can't
>> count on it. Worse, factors that affect one wind or solar site will
>> likely affect all the neighboring sites in the same way at about the >> same time.
>
> But there ARE ways to store electricity or even to store the energy in
> some other form and reconvert it to electricity later. One simple
> scheme is to use turbines to pump water up a hill to a reservoir, let
> it flow down through the turbines to generate electricity when you > need it.
IF you have the water(or can spare it),and if you have a reservoir.(or a place to build one) Also water evaporates,or freezes(bummer,that one).
> You can hydrolize water with it, burn the hydrogen when you need it. >
> You can compress gases with it.
>
> Lots of ways to store the energy.
>
Lots of very inefficient ways.
Then there's nuclear;clean,efficient,safe,and ready when you are.