For the eight days beginning on Halloween, Washington state and the Northwest got a stark look at the danger of replacing hydro power with renewables like wind power. During that period of time, there was virtually no wind across the states served by the Bonneville Power Administration, leaving hydro, nuclear, and fossil fuels to make up the gap.
This long spell with virtually no wind (or solar) electricity is a stark warning of what we would face without sufficient hydro or natural gas to back up intermittent supply from wind.
During those eight days, wind provided only 0.35 percent of the region’s energy. The maximum wind provided was two percent of generation in the middle of the night when demand for electricity is lowest.
By way of contrast, dams on the Snake and Columbia rivers supplied as much as 78 percent of the electricity during the past week. Nuclear and fossil fuels provided the rest, staying mostly constant and providing a base of reliable energy.
Without hydro, the only alternative in the future would be dispatchable energy like natural gas. This is why even those who advocate destroying dams on the Snake and Columbia admit that CO2 emissions and costs would increase without their energy. Without the energy from dams, natural gas would be the likely replacement — a source of electricity that is more expensive and increases CO2 emissions. This is the lose-lose scenario some in the environmental community prefer not to mention.
Grid managers know they can rely on hydro power to increase or decrease in response to changes in demand or the supply of renewables. For example, on Halloween, the supply of hydroelectricity doubled in the course of just a few hours, responding to increased demand and the lack of wind power.
Without that flexibility, Washington and the Northwest could face difficult times during a long windless spell like we’ve just experienced. The choice would be to buy electricity generated by fossil fuels from other states or risk brownouts.
Add to these risks the fact that wind in Washington state blows mostly in the middle of the night, when demand is lowest. During the peak hours of demand in the early evening, there is often no wind energy.
Solar power isn’t a reasonable candidate either. Currently, it provides only 0.08% of Washington’s electricity. Wood generates 16 times as much electricity as solar in our state.
Further, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory ranks the Northwest as a poor place to generate solar, and notes Western Washington state is the worst place in the lower-48 states for solar power. Additionally, the sun is setting or has already set when electricity demand hits its peak around 7 pm.
Some respond that building wind turbines in Montana could help reduce the impact when wind doesn’t blow in Washington state. This, however, means building multiple backup systems to produce the same amount of electricity, which increases costs without providing additional environmental benefit.
Finally, there are some who argue that destroying the Snake River dams would create new jobs building wind turbines to replace the lost electricity. As this period without wind demonstrates, building more wind turbines in the same location simply increases the volatility of electricity generation. Promises that jobs lost after the dams are destroyed will be made up by building wind turbines are either disingenuous or dangerous.
California is finding out what happens when government doesn’t pay attention to maintaining the stability of the grid. Thanks to our hydro power, we aren’t facing that problem despite a week without wind energy.
Source: Tri-city Herald
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
