While impressive, renewables, specifically solar and wind, have limitations.

​

                                                     Limitations - Solar and Wind

 

As regards to Solar, the apout of the panel is contingent upon latitude.   The higher the latitude, the fewer sun light hours, the lower the more.

 

In the Northeast US, a typical solar panel can produce peak energy, or peak sun, only 4 hours a day.  By comparison a typical gas or oil fired electric power can produce electricity 20 hours a day or 80 percent of the time.

 

In addition the power output of both sources, solar especially, can vary dramatically\ whereas the output from a fossil fueled plant is a steady level source of power something the grid craves.

 

Wind is better but typically generate the amount of electricity they would generate only 40 % of the time for on shore turbines and 50 % for offshore.   And again the output varies.

 

In both cases, the only way to mitigate the electric supply is to pair the power source with a battery plant.  In this scenario, the solar or wind farm charges the pack and then the load, the amount of electricity being consumed, is "pulled" from the battery bank, and in this way a steady stream of power is provided.

 

A fossil fuel power plant is of course very different.  Once it reaches the needed heat input, the steam spins a turbine which is term produces steady stream of electricity and so long as the water turns to steam and the turbine spins electricity is produced. 

 

                                                          Real Life Comparison

​

By way of example, AGS, the Astoria Generating Station in NYC, has a nameplate rating of one giga watt or 1,000 megawatts.  It will provide this output 20 hours a day (a nuclear reactor by the way will hit its nameplate rating 95% of the time or 23 hours a day).

 

To equal the electrical output of the AGS, a comparable solar farm, utilizing the the 5 to 1 rule would require 15 million, 350 watt solar panels, such a farm, battery storage facility taking up 9,200 acres or 3/4 the size of Manhattan.  The AGS by comparison takes up 10 acres.  To be blunt, at least in terms of land use, it is no contest.

​

                                                     Separate Before the Fact, Not After

​

In terms of reducing CO2 emissions it would be far better to, rather than replace the power source, simply separate CO2 at the point of emission. 

​

Which is exactly what CO2 separation does.  Using High Temperature Disassociation (HTD) technology, the CO2 output from the AGS could be reduced to zero with a very minor adjustment to the physical plant.  

​

                                                         Credit Where Credit Is Due

​

It is important to recognize that in essence, aside from excessive CO2 output, power plants are not inherently bad.  In fact just the opposite.  They have made civilization possible.  But without reducing their CO2 emissions to zero they will continue to pump CO2 into the atmosphere, which unfortunately in large quantities is bad for the health of a plant that they inhabit as well as we do.