By Brian Churchill
I read with great interest Arizona Daily Independent contributor Jonathan DuHamel’s articles on the subject of energy. I had questions about the capacity factors for solar energy in Arizona, so I decided to check the Dept. of Energy’s website for reports that could answer my question.
While the U.S. Energy Information website does contain many important reports, I still had to perform extensive calculations on my own via building spreadsheets to obtain the capacity factors for solar and other alternative energy sources (capacity factor = percentage of time that the energy source is online and generating power).
After I obtained all the information for Arizona such as total production, percentage of electricity generated, and capacity factor for each form of alternative energy, I then calculated the figures for 22 other states to obtain a broad cross-section of electricity generation in America via alternative energy. The Table below contains pertinent data for Arizona for 2014.
|
Arizona alternative energy production for electricity generation, 2014 |
|||||||
|
All production data in megawatt-hours. Total capacity data in total megawatts summer capacity X 8760 hrs. |
|||||||
|
(Capacity factor = total production / total megawatts summer capacity X 8760 hours) |
|||||||
|
Type |
Production | Renewable |
Capacity |
||||
| Alternate | Total | Percent | Percent | Less Hydro | Capacity Factor | ||
| Wind | 472,000 | 0.42% | 4.73% | 12.38% | 2,078,748 | 22.71% | |
| Solar | 3,101,000 | 2.76% | 31.09% | 81.35% | 11,871,552 | 26.12% | |
| Hydro | 6,163,000 | 5.48% | 61.78% | N/A | 23,827,200 | 25.87% | |
| Biomass | 239,000 | 0.21% | 2.40% | 6.27% | 337,260 | 70.87% | |
| Total by type | |||||||
| Alternate | 9,975,000 | 8.88% | 38,114,760 | 26.17% | |||
| Non-Hydro | 3,812,000 | 3.39% | 14,287,560 | 26.68% | |||
| Nuclear | 32,321,000 | 28.76% | |||||
| Non Fossil | 42,296,000 | 37.64% | |||||
Conclusion:
It is completely unrealistic for Arizona to meet those alternative energy targets that have been set, ie 15% of electricity from renewable other than hydro by 2025. With Arizona’s alternative energy production at just 3.39% as of 2014, and with hydro not being counted, it will require very expensive plants (solar costs up to 6 times what a conventional gas plant does) and massive taxpayer subsidies to do so. Expect that green energy surcharge on your bill and your overall power bill to go up dramatically.
Here are some other takeaways from my research:
• Alternative energy plays a small role in US energy production. Although alternative energy as a whole (wind, solar, biomass, and hydro) did pass hydro in 2014 as far as total production goes, it still accounts for just 6.87% of electricity production. In contrast coal produces 38.75%, natural gas 27.41%, and nuclear 19.47%.
• Solar is a bit player. It contributes just 0.45% – 1/220th of the electricity produced in America. The vast bulk of it is generated in just 3 states: CA, AZ, and NV. But even in Calif., the biggest solar state, it contributes just 5% of total electricity production.
• Capacity factors for alternative energy remain low. Solar’s nationwide is about 20%; Wind, 30%. That also means that solar doesn’t work 80% of the time and wind is offline 70% of the time. And, since solar is concentrated in the sunniest states, if you can’t get utility-scale solar to work well out there, where can you get it to work well? In fact, while alternative (less hydro) as a whole averages 35%, that’s because biomass buffs up the numbers dramatically with a 55% capacity factor.
• Wind comprises 65% of all alternative energy generated (excluding hydro). But biomass is second with approx. 23%, and you hear very little about it. Biomass includes: wood and wood-derived fuels, landfill gas, biogenic municipal solid waste, and other waste biomass. One biomass project I really like in N. Arizona near Snowflake takes thinned tree lumber plus downed trees from forest fires and converts them to electricity. The plant also converts unusable paper scrap produced from a nearby paper mill into electricity.
• Nothing comes close to nuclear power’ s capacity factor’s average of 91.5%. In December, when alt energy production is quite low, it generates 99.5% of the time nationally.
• Wind and solar output also vary considerably month-to-month nationally. The variance between wind’s best months and worse months is about 45%. National solar output in winter is 55% lower than summer.
• Fossil fuels are going to be around for a long time. Even counting hydro and nuclear, only 6 states get over half their electricity from non-fossil fuels: Washington, Oregon, Idaho, New York, Maine, and Illinois. All except Illinois got over 50% primarily through hydro. Illinois generates more nuclear power than any other state.
• Only four states get 15% or more of their electricity from wind: Iowa, Idaho, Oklahoma and Minnesota. Even Texas, the largest producer by far in total megawatt-hours generated, only gets 9% of its electric power from wind.
In conclusion, alternative energy is not the panacea most people think it is. While I have no problem with people putting rooftop solar onto their homes, I don’t think all the taxpayers should subsidize it. Utility-scale solar with present technology, including molten salt storage, makes no economic sense. And the growth of wind power is slowly dramatically. I suspect that’s because most of the top-tier onshore wind sites available have been located and exploited.