A more cost-competitive renewable energy future is possible according to a Peninsula Clean Energy modeling tool that measured its cost-effectiveness.
The modeling tool, called Matching Around-The-Clock Hourly Energy, or MATCH, shows renewable energy supply 99% of the time can be cost-competitive with fossil fuels while reducing greenhouse gas emissions, according to a January white paper from Peninsula Clean Energy, San Mateo County’s locally-controlled electricity provider.
Jan Pepper
Maximillian Tortoriello
PCE CEO Jan Pepper said it tries to price its electricity 5% below what Pacific Gas and Electric charges so customers can have reduced rates, saving around $90 million since the start of PCE. Pepper said the white paper results show PCE can do it at about the same cost and reduce the need for fossil fuels in the future.
“It’s also important for the industry overall to get entities like ours, other organizations that provide power to retail customers, to say we can do this too,” Pepper said. Peninsula Clean Energy has shown that it’s possible to do this and not cost more money.”
PCE is trying to meet customer electrical demand with all-renewable power by 2025, so the grid can be as clean as possible. According to the California Energy Commission, California has made it a goal that renewable and zero-carbon energy supplies 100% of electric retail sales to customers by 2045. The state also wants cars sold in California to be zero-emission vehicles by 2035, creating a bigger need for renewable resources.
The tool was developed over the past two years to show that 24/7 renewable energy was possible because people wondered if the costs and benefits were worth it. The industry looks at renewable energy annually, so a predetermined load is a certain amount, and PCE would have to procure that amount over the year.
Recommended for you
Pepper said solar energy had gone down in price significantly compared to natural gas. The cost of storage has been more affected by recent supply chain issues, but Pepper said energy storage costs would decrease in the future. The report said there are diminishing returns for the last 1% of customer demand on an hourly basis, with a 10% increase in cost needed to go from 99% to 100% all-renewable power. Most of that occurs in the winter during morning and night hours when demand increases. To help address that disparity, Pepper said unused electricity from other sources like vehicles could offset the need, or it could be traded with other agencies when excess occurs. The report noted seasonal storage could help reduce excess supply, but cost-effective seasonal storage is still unavailable.
The white paper was peer-reviewed by an advisory board from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Google, Stanford University, World Resources Institute, Zglobal, and M-RETS, Inc, according to PCE.
Procuring clean and renewable electricity on a 24/7, hour-by-hour basis is the next frontier in clean energy procurement,” said Jesse Jenkins, assistant professor at Princeton University’s Andlinger Center Energy & Environment and an advisory board member for the white paper, in a press release. “Peninsula Clean Energy’s rigorous new modeling points the way forward.”
Does anyone wonder how PCE is able to supply 'green' energy 24/7? I believe the report is well written, and PCE's management is a first class organization, but wishing for affordable, adequate storage is not a sound strategy. One must also consider that the future of our energy delivery infrastructure is wrought with uncertainties as was highlighted in an exhaustive study published last week in the SF Chronicle. Having a sufficient or even an abundant green energy portfolio is not the same as being able to deliver it on a reliable basis.
“can be cost-competitive with fossil fuels”? What about reliability – we’ve already seen what happens when the wind doesn’t blow or the sun doesn’t shine?
“solar energy had done down in price significantly compared to natural gas”? Because natural gas prices have increased considerably due to Biden’s anti-fossil fuel policies and continued demand, what is the break-even natural gas price?
“unused electricity from other sources like vehicles”? So those not using their electric cars will funnel their battery energy back into the grid? Confusing statement...
Good luck to PCE, but supplying “clean” energy to the Bay Area is a far cry from scaling up to supply “clean” energy to the entire state, regardless of what a modeling tool shows. I’m sure that with a few tweaks to assumptions, the modeling tool will show the opposite effect of PCE's claims.
Terence - the technology of using EV car batteries as storage and to be called upon during capacity shortages is pure folly. Remember that cars are 'trickle charged' meaning a very small electric load/low current coming from one's outlet using a relatively small cable. To reverse that battery capacity and supply the electric grid, or even one's own house, requires a sizable upgrade in electric wiring with all types of protective gear. Think electric welding cable or similar. Then, the car battery will be depleted and new energy, ostensibly green energy, is required to recharge which will take hours. I find it disingenuous for a PCE executive to even bring this up as it is impractical and thus unrealistic at this time. Feasible storage will be our Achilles heel for a long time. .
Dirk - thank you for the additional details. I did take a quick look at the full report and as suspected, much of the MATCH tool results can be tweaked depending upon which variables are entered into the tool. I will check news stories to see if anyone will perform an in-depth review and critique of the report, or whether the report will end up in the circular file.
Terence - it is a check-the-box report for the California regulators. No action will be taken or be further scrutinized. When I worked at the Office of the President, University of California, I had to submit reports semi-annually that nobody in Sacramento ever read or needed. But, that's government for you.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(5) comments
Does anyone wonder how PCE is able to supply 'green' energy 24/7? I believe the report is well written, and PCE's management is a first class organization, but wishing for affordable, adequate storage is not a sound strategy. One must also consider that the future of our energy delivery infrastructure is wrought with uncertainties as was highlighted in an exhaustive study published last week in the SF Chronicle. Having a sufficient or even an abundant green energy portfolio is not the same as being able to deliver it on a reliable basis.
A few items from the article stand out…
“can be cost-competitive with fossil fuels”? What about reliability – we’ve already seen what happens when the wind doesn’t blow or the sun doesn’t shine?
“solar energy had done down in price significantly compared to natural gas”? Because natural gas prices have increased considerably due to Biden’s anti-fossil fuel policies and continued demand, what is the break-even natural gas price?
“unused electricity from other sources like vehicles”? So those not using their electric cars will funnel their battery energy back into the grid? Confusing statement...
Good luck to PCE, but supplying “clean” energy to the Bay Area is a far cry from scaling up to supply “clean” energy to the entire state, regardless of what a modeling tool shows. I’m sure that with a few tweaks to assumptions, the modeling tool will show the opposite effect of PCE's claims.
Terence - the technology of using EV car batteries as storage and to be called upon during capacity shortages is pure folly. Remember that cars are 'trickle charged' meaning a very small electric load/low current coming from one's outlet using a relatively small cable. To reverse that battery capacity and supply the electric grid, or even one's own house, requires a sizable upgrade in electric wiring with all types of protective gear. Think electric welding cable or similar. Then, the car battery will be depleted and new energy, ostensibly green energy, is required to recharge which will take hours. I find it disingenuous for a PCE executive to even bring this up as it is impractical and thus unrealistic at this time. Feasible storage will be our Achilles heel for a long time. .
Dirk - thank you for the additional details. I did take a quick look at the full report and as suspected, much of the MATCH tool results can be tweaked depending upon which variables are entered into the tool. I will check news stories to see if anyone will perform an in-depth review and critique of the report, or whether the report will end up in the circular file.
Terence - it is a check-the-box report for the California regulators. No action will be taken or be further scrutinized. When I worked at the Office of the President, University of California, I had to submit reports semi-annually that nobody in Sacramento ever read or needed. But, that's government for you.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.