This is the New York Post article on Bayonne's windmill. It is called a blessing and a curse.
https://nypost.com/2019/10/05/how-this ... e-a-blessing-and-a-curse/

Thanks for the detailed reply MDM. Sorry don't have time to dig make a detailed post here.

For those who are genuinely curious about the numbers and trends, the link below provides a lot of useful information.

https://ourworldindata.org/renewable-energy

In the 1960s, activists complained that the forests are being destroyed in making paper bags and we should use plastic bags. I remember those discussions. Now, the same thing is happening now, except, those batteries from electric vehicles will pile up like plastic water bottles today. Those batteries are supposed to last 100,000 miles but most likely, it is probably less than that. Those batteries are not recyclable, and graveyards of dead batteries will line urban areas.

Quote:

The issues are that the vehicles were unable to complete their routes due to battery life issues. In one case, the buses were equipped with diesel fired heaters as running the heat off battery drained it.

Stalls, stops and breakdowns: Problems plague push for electric buses



Quote:

You misread the data on the link you sent. "Renewables" are about 4% with about 1/4th coming from burning trash. EIA counts the bio portion of waste (paper, linen, food waste, sewage sludge) as part of the renewable pool.

Here is a breakout of the 2020 energy mix (data from EIA):




Here is the power mix over the past decade. You can see that solar hasn't risen much and wind is still basically a rounding error:





Quote:

Doing a thought experiment here: How much solar or wind would it take to replace natural gas, coal, and oil, based on 2020 EIA data?

For both solar and wind I am going to assume we have batteries available with infinite storage and a 100% efficiency. So there will be no need for 'buffering' (standby natural gas fired generators). I am also going to ignore the rest of the major issues with wind and solar such as: asynchronous generation (doesn't maintain frequency), lack of grid inertia, lack of reactive power, formation of destructive resonance, et.

Solar

The theoretical limit for silicon based solar PV panels is 32%. The best panels available hit 22%. In the real world, the panels operate at about 15% on average. I will assume 22% efficiency with no degradation over time or at high temperatures. NJ receives on average about 4.3 kWh/m2/day (0.935 kWh/ft2/day) in solar energy.

Using the above, you would need about 358 square miles of solar panels to replace fossil fuels.

Off-Shore Wind

The off-shore wind density per NYSERDA is 0.1 MW/acre. The capacity factor is 44% (per EIA). Turbines can't be packed densly or layered because the leading turbines will rob power from the aft turbines. So you are going to create a long line of these things.

How many? Well, the biggest ones deployed are rated at 6 MW. This means you will need over 600 turbines covering an area in excess of 128 square miles.

For illustration, here are the required areas put on a map. The big red circle is solar. The green off-shore is wind. The small red circle is the area required for a Generation 3+ nuclear plant (about 2,500 acres). The nuke has the additional advantage is that it avoids all the other issues with renewables listed earlier (i.e. grid inertia) and has no need for buffering or batteries.





Planning on running the world on wind and solar is magical thinking. It isn't going to happen. Trying to do so will only lead us to a life of energy poverty. See Europe as an unfolding example. Due to a persistent high pressure system (no wind) natural gas supplies were depleted to keep the lights on. Now there isn't enough gas in storage for winter and the forecast is for a colder than average winter.

The German government is posting PSAs on how to stay warm with clay pots and candles because they are facing rolling blackout (not enough gas to keep the light on). This is our future as well if we keep up with this "electrification" fantasy.

https://rmx.news/germany/heating-crisi ... blankets-and-tea-candles/

I think you learned three times more than me!

Some of MDM's points are valid - like the mining for the minerals and the issues with municipalities not doing a great job adopting the new technology. However municipalities usually are not great at adopting any new technology/product. Maybe it argues for them to not be at the bleeding edge of technology in general.

The issue with having enough space/time to charge electric vehicles is doable if planned right. Most buses, garbage trucks do not run 24/7 and they go sit in a parking lot when not in use. Also the battery tech (though not to hydrocarbon levels) and solar generation efficiency will improve over time.

The EIA annual report on electricity generation will give you a good idea of the trends.

https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=NJ#tabs-4

Based on the above, about 12% of energy is generated by solar + other renewable (wind, geothermal) in 2020. This has grown from 4% since 2010. The US Northeast is likely to see a significant growth in offshore wind power generation in the next few years.

https://www.google.com/search?q=us+northeast+offshore+wind




Similarly for NJ
https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=NJ#tabs-4


Quote:

Quote:

Modern vehicles pollution (real pollutants like NOx, particulates, carbon monoxide, VOCs) are low as to not cause dangerous air quality issues. EVs are driven by the politics regarding CO2.

The whole driving force behind EVs is part of a bigger electrification goal:

The nation runs on "Carbon Free" wind and solar power by 2040 or 2050. There is a better chance of flapping your arms and flying to the moon than running the grid on intermittent solar and wind. We here in NJ had our electric bills raised by about 50% to pay for putting solar PV panels everywhere. Last I checked, solar accounts somewhere around 2% of all the power generated in the state. Natural gas is #1 followed by nuclear in the generation pool.

The only "Carbon Free" option for power generation is smashing atoms. You are going to need to build nukes.. a lot of them.

WOW.

Great fact presentation MDM.

I learned a lot by reading it.

I've been watching the electric vehicle (EV) development progress on you tube presentations and I wonder if the trade off of emission pollution will be balanced out by the environmental impact (especially mining) of the battery development.

Time will tell but the manufacturers won't.

Knowing Jersey City here's hoping that they keep a couple of ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles around for emergencies.

WOW.

Great fact presentation MDM.

I learned a lot by reading it.

I've been watching the electric vehicle (EV) development progress on you tube presentations and I wonder if the trade off of emission pollution will be balanced out by the environmental impact (especially mining) of the battery development.

Time will tell but the manufacturers won't.

Knowing Jersey City here's hoping that they keep a couple of ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles around for emergencies.

WOW.

Great fact presentation MDM.

I learned a lot by reading it.

I've been watching the electric vehicle (EV) development progress on you tube presentations and I wonder if the trade off of emission pollution will be balanced out by the environmental impact (especially mining) of the battery development.

Time will tell but the manufacturers won't.

Knowing Jersey City here's hoping that they keep a couple of ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles around for emergencies.

The Alternative:

Dimethyl Ether (DME)

DME is an isomer of ethanol and is a gas at atmospheric pressure. It is an excellent substitute for diesel fuel that offers the following advantages:

1. It is non-toxic (DME is used as a propellant in spray cans like deodorant).
2. If DME is spilled, it breaks down in less than 24 hours.
3. It is an oxygenated fuel and burns without soot. There is no need to use a filter on the truck exhaust.
4. It stores like propane (liquid under modest pressure) so there is no need to develop special technology to store it (this is a huge issue with hydrogen).

Downsides:

DME has a lower energy density than diesel. 1 gal of DME = 0.56 gal of diesel. However, this is not a deal killer. Volvo states a 600 mile cruising range on their trucks. The fill-ups are quick vs. hours of charge time for a battery.

DME powered vehicles exist

The vehicles are already commercially available. Volvo partnered with Delphi to develop the engines and are currently marketed in Europe. Volvo offers the vehicles through it subsidiary Mack Truck here in the USA. DME powered garbage trucks were successfully testes at the Fresh Kills landfill by the NY Dept. of Sanitation.

DME can be produced from the organic portions of the municipal waste stream. Organic portions is about 2/3rd of the waste stream by mass.

Rough back-of-the-napkin calcs:

JC has a population of about 293K which would produce about 585 tons of waste per day. That would translate into about 8 million gallons of DME per year. Jersey City could turn its own waste into fuel for its trucks with millions of gallons to spare.

Wasn't able to fix a typo in my previous post"

"The cost of upgrading will make electricity UNaffordable. "

Quote:

MJ = Mega-joules
1 MJ = 948 Btu
1kg = 2.2 lbs

Issue 1: Theoretical Energy Limits

The last big advance in battery storage was the introduction of the lithium-ion battery back in the '90s. Lead acid batteries can store about 0.1 MJ/kg. Li-ion batteries have hit 0.5 MJ/kg, which is a big improvements, but nowhere near what you get from fossil fuels. Diesel has about 45 MJ/kg, which means a Li-ion battery has less than 2% the energy density of diesel fuel. The theoretical-limit of Li-ion technology is about 3 MJ/kg. No technological advance is going beyond this point. There just aren't enough electrons available via oxidation beyond this point. So your limit on Li-ion is about 6% to 7% of diesel fuel.

This means you need a massive battery to get the similar performance and range. This is especially challenging in very hot and colder climates where battery performance drops dramatically. The batteries need to be heated and cooled to maintain performance. (which greatly increases the power drain). This problem is especially acute with trying to run large commercial equipment on a battery. Some examples:

Albuquerque’s $133-million electric bus system is going nowhere fast

Report: Philadelphia’s Proterra Fleet in Complete Shambles

Electric buses from Berliner BVG have a cold problem

Nikola and Republic Services scrap their electric garbage truck



Issue 2: Electric Infrastructure

The issues go beyond the long charge times, which may require having multiple trucks to do the work of what was done with one. Charging a number of large vehicles at a time means power draw in the megwatts level. Bottom line: The electric infrastructure (power lines, sub-stations, peaking power plants, etc.) doesn't exist to support electrification of transportation. The cost of upgrading will make electricity affordable. This is what is happening in Germany which needs to impose rationing of power, which includes vehicle charging stations.


Issue 3: Environmental

There is no way to run transportation on batteries without devastating environmental consequences.

It is easier to make new Li-ion batteries that recycle existing ones. Li-ion batteries typically end up in incinerators (Li-ion batteries are a major fire hazard in landfills). There is tech out there now that claims to recycle the lithium, but I have no idea if any of these processes are economically viable. As of now, electrification is driving a huge increase in the mining of lithium.

Beyond lithium you have a pressing need for cobalt, which is a transition metal used in Li-ion batteries. Cobalt is a much rarer / expensive metal and primarily comes from Africa.


Issue 4 - Safety

Li-ion batteries are bombs. The battery contains everything needed to burn on its own without an supply of oxygen. The fires are difficult to damn near impossible to put out. In Europe electric cars that catch fire are put in a tank of water for 72 hours before transporting to the dump. The reason is that the cars have re-caught fire while be towed to the junk yard. To make matters worse is that the fires are so intense they set the adjacent vehicles on fire as well. The chain reaction in a parking garage could take out a building.






The issues go beyond what I stated above. There is a commercially viable alternative, which I will put together a post on later.

> This will end up being a very expensive mistake.

Why and how is that?

Robin.

This will end up being a very expensive mistake.

The City of Jersey City has begun taking delivery of five fully electric garbage trucks.

https://jcitytimes.com/jersey-citys-garbage-trucks-go-electric/