[LDES-technology] [LDES-coremodel] Draft abstract for PVSC

[Daniel M. KAMMEN]

Good points

On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 7:51 AM Kittner, Noah <kittner at unc.edu> wrote:

> Hi Sarah,
>
>
>
> Thanks – depending on your vision for the paper or other output venues, we
> could add some more detailed information technology options to meet that
> seasonal demand and relate that with the effects of higher/lower efficiency
> of charging/discharging for storage devices – which will impact the amount
> of storage discussed in the paper.
>
>
>
> I have a few comments that I hope may help as well just as friendly
> suggestions – though I’m not sure about the space limitations for the
> methodology in this conference. For instance when using the phrase
> “straightforward approach” the methodology could be communicated a bit more
> clearly as that introduces ambiguity and lacks specificity. My
> understanding is that the analysis uses state-of-charge of
> storage+solar+wind as a way to meet resource adequacy. That could be
> written more explicitly. One question that may emerge where this approach
> differs from others is that solar, wind, and storage are effectively supply
> rather than changing the demand as is done in prior studies. Other minor
> point is does this study define resource adequacy as matching supply with
> demand or having some extra margin? The phrase inadequate resource adequacy
> sounds redundant to me.
>
>
>
> The other area that could be clarified and introduce questions is the
> statement “to simulate the grid of the future, the thermal, imports, and
> nuclear data were replaced with added solar generation.” I think many
> reviewers would want to know about the calculation on how that generation
> is replaced, i.e. on a capacity basis or on a generation basis? How many GW
> of solar to match existing “firm generation?” What is the capacity factor
> of the solar installed? It might help to include the installed solar/wind
> in a table or text. That would greatly influence the storage needed and
> results. It could also add some more specific information on how much solar
> you need to decrease the reservoir from 7.3 TWh to 6 TWh. It could be a
> trivial clarification to explain how much solar is included in these
> scenarios, but would be important so that someone can understand how much
> solar we are talking about and interpret the model.
>
>
>
> Just a few of my thoughts, so given the conference deadline don’t feel
> obligated to answer and maybe some of these questions are off-base, but I
> think some similar issues may come up in an expanded literature version of
> this paper.
>
>
>
> I also have a student that is developing a similar but different load
> duration + screening curve analysis for North Carolina where storage
> manipulates the load – if it would be interesting in the future (which is
> beyond) the code is well suited to read FERC 714 data and could compare
> results with California. That is probably a separate discussion, but could
> be good to compare at some point.
>
>
>
> Noah
>
>
>
> *From: *ldes-technology <ldes-technology-bounces at lists.ucmerced.edu>
> *Date: *Wednesday, January 20, 2021 at 5:35 PM
> *To: *Sarah Kurtz <skurtz at ucmerced.edu>, Kenji Shiraishi <
> kenjis at berkeley.edu>
> *Cc: *ldes-coremodel at lists.ucmerced.edu <ldes-coremodel at lists.ucmerced.edu>,
> ldes-technology at lists.ucmerced.edu <ldes-technology at lists.ucmerced.edu>
> *Subject: *Re: [LDES-technology] [LDES-coremodel] Draft abstract for PVSC
>
> Fantastic start.
>
>
>
> Some edits attached, and Kenji and I could work on-shore vs. off-shore
> electricity and H2 integration...
>
>
>
> dan
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 2:12 PM Sarah Kurtz <skurtz at ucmerced.edu> wrote:
>
> Here is a draft of an abstract that Abido has been working on for
> submission to the PVSC. We welcome your comments. We are trying to decide
> who should be on the author list - if you would like to be listed as an
> author, please let us know along with what contributions you would like to
> make as we take this toward the final paper. We plan to submit a longer
> paper to a peer-reviewed journal while keeping a short paper in the PVSC
> proceedings.  Please return your comments by Jan. 24. sorry for the short
> turn around - if you need more time, we may be able to submit a revised
> version a little later.
>
>
>
> Sarah
>
> _______________________________________________
> LDES-coremodel mailing list
> LDES-coremodel at lists.ucmerced.edu
> https://lists.ucmerced.edu/mailman/listinfo/ldes-coremodel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ucmerced.edu/pipermail/ldes-technology/attachments/20210121/ad5ce5c0/attachment-0001.html>