[ExI] not that rare earth (part 2 of at least 2)

[spike at rainier66.com]

-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> 
...
>
>>... Wind turbines: those use a lot of material, 600 kg of REEs per turbine.  So those are effected a lot.  But the real cost of wind energy is in power storage anyway.

>...I am not sure you can make that case for California... Keith

That depends on how much of the power supply already has intermittent non-predictables.  If we start with a local grid with no intermittent sources and add one wind turbine, that one doesn't need storage, for it always has a market any time the wind is blowing and always has sufficient generation to supply the grid when it isn't.

Once the percentage of power supplied by wind and solar goes above baseline minimum, there will be times when the wind is blowing and the sun is shining, but there is insufficient demand for all the power.  At that point it starts to make sense to add power storage.  PG&E claims that percentage is around 18%.  If renewable non-predictable (wind and solar) together are at or below 18%, they say they can handle it without storage.  That part makes sense.

Another part that makes sense, told to us by the power company: the best wind sites are already built out: Altamont Pass and Tehachapi Pass are the two best ones.  They form a wind funnel which keeps it breezy most of the time thru there.  Great places for wind power.  They have wind power already.

After the best sites are built out, later wind turbines produce less, and in some cases cost more.  Reasoning: if the wind isn't howling thru there constantly, the land is worth more.

spike