Solar and Wind can't generate electricity 24/7, where does the electric grid store power for the down time?

Batteries are not efficient enough and definitely not affordable yet to supply a grid. Only home systems.

The normal sources of electricity will have to take over when wind and solar don't produce.

Power authorities cringe at the mention of 'green energy' as their sole purpose is to keep electricity flowing at a smooth, metered rate. When a wind farm suddenly stops producing, it sets off alarms all over the U.S. grid much like a mains line going down.

There are peaking generators that the power company fires up when demand for electricity is high. Those are intermittent in a sense, too, but yet their energy does not need to be stored.

Solar and wind have their place in offsetting other forms of generation. No one is thinking of powering the grid 100% from solar or wind any time in the conceivable future. I think we have room to put in a lot more solar before the stability of the grid is threatened.

It seems that most of the responders aren't seeing the question for what it really is: Where - in the electric grid - is power stored? Not: how dependable is solar and wind? Not Where - if anywhere - might a new "smart" grid store electricity?

No - the question is: what electrical storage methodology is currently used in the North American continental electrical distribution network? I invite the Asker to correct me if I perceive the root question inaccurately.

Answer: It doesn't. There IS no storage - of any kind.

BTW the idea of pumping water uphill for storage of electricity is nonsense - the cost of pumping the water uphill far exceeds the potential energy in its downhill flow. The only reason this is currently done with water is to provide adequate water pressure for customers by the water utility.

Electrical energy is a form of energy that cannot be stored. It can however be traded as a commodity. It must be generated, shipped to the point where it is needed, and immediately consumed. Consequently, for the generation and distribution of electrical power, load management is a subject that is continually on the minds of the electrical network operators.

The unvarying (or slowly varying over many hours) portion of the electric demand is known as the "base load", and is generally served best by large facilities (and therefore efficient due to economies of scale) with low variable costs for fuel and operations, i.e. nuclear, coal, hydro. Renewable sources such as solar, wind, ocean/tidal, etc. are not considered "base load" but can still add power to the grid whenever their energy source is present in usable amounts.

Load Management might be achieved in the utility using any combination of tools and programs including: construction and operation of new power plants (especially peak generation units), participation in a power pool, demand side management programs (such as operation of a load control system and customer programs to improve energy conservation), as well as demand response programs. New technologies are always under development -- both by private industry and public entities.

Firstly, no one is talking about complete dependency on solar and wind power. Integrating alternatives is the most intelligent thing we can do. Secondly, there's wind, solar, tidal, wave, hydro, bio diesel, hydrogen...the list goes on. I think righties need to realize that fossil fuels and sweet crude are a finite resource and not utilizing alternative energy sources is completely asinine. The world has hit peak oil. Alternative energies coupled with conservation and efficiently designed machination is key to answering our energy questions.

It is not really feasible to store the amount of electricity needed for peak time.

Usually the electric companies use what they call "spinning reserve" and "peaker units".

They will have gas or coal fired plants either in a fast startup mode or already "hot" and not connected to the grid to make up for the peak hours of electricity usage (usually morning and night).

Nuke units do not lend themselves to being used as "peaker" units due to the time for startup and heatup.

thats one of the fundamental flaws in solar and wind power. they are weather depent and variable by season and hour. this makes this source of power a poor candidate as a "baseload" supplier. power can be stored to some extent. the most common way is to pump water uphill into a storage resouivour(sp) during periods of low demand. then at peak times letting the water go back downhill turning a turbine in the process. this is currently the most efficient large scale energy storage method in use today. the drawback is the limited storage capacity available and the geography has to be conducive to such a system. chemical batteries are prohibitavely expensive to use on such a large scale. the most common solution to meet peak energy usage is to have fast start units usually running on fossil fuels go online to meet demand when needed.

another possible solution is to concentrate on making transmission technology more efficient. in otherwards to move power more efficiently from areas of high demand to low demand (ie smart grid tech). but its a catch 22. the larger the grid, the more diversification in demand levels, however the larger the grid the more energy is wasted as heat from power lines, transformers, etc.

green tech is not at the point or at least scale that provides an ideal baseload source of power. promising thechs are biofuel, waste to energy. but these techs arent economically feaseable. the closest compromises we have now are natural gas, clean coal, hydro and nuclear.

just a final note about nuclear power. it seems to be a great eco friendly power source. in my opinion nuclear power is a bigger threat to the environment than any other power source. why?

1) spent fuel, where do we put it? some of this stuff is incredibly toxic for thousands of years. currently we store spent fuel in pools of water on site at the power plants. in most cases outside the biological containment structure! these sites make great targets for terrorism or theft. which brings me to point 2) proliferation of nuclear materials which can be used as a radiological weapon. finally point 3) risk of a release of radioactive material into the environment. although a meltdown is very rare. when it does happen its potential to wreck the environment is unmatched. just ask the ukranians and belorussians. hundreds of square miles of farmland, cities and towns are uninhabited after chernobyl, and will be for hundreds of years to come. even though such a catastrophe is rare, loss of coolant incidents and radioactive releases arent as rare as we might think. within the last couple of years The Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant, one of the largest in the world released readioactive coolant into the enviroment following an earthquake. some may say that chernobyl couldnt happen today becauses of advances in nuclear safety, i would disagree by saying that there are 12 RBMK units currently in operation in eastern europe. the same failure prone graphite moderated design that caused the chernobyl catastrophe. although nuclear accidents are very rare when they do happen they have the potential to do unimaginable damage.

ARSAMLUPAN, i know the storage of water is inneficient. but your wrong. naturally elevated water provides 12% of our energy production(hydro). artifically elevated water is our largest supplier of storageable energy. name a power storage device used on a larger scale? the question was how is generated energy stored. sure its innifficient, but its used!! in areas wheres its feaeable its more efficient than an old clunky oil peak power plant!. and btw peak power plants dont qualify as energy storage!

Down time is when coal plants kick it up a notch. Nuclear does not need solar or wind.

why are you so against clean technology?

Uh, since when can you not store electricity in a battery? I have brushed up, see source:

What you need is all technologies working in tandem as a fail safe.

Guide To Solar Power - http://solar.eudko.com/?Lxg

Solar and wind energy cannot be stored, at least not in significant capacity. You can store some in batteries but on a large scale....no. In regards to your other question about e-cars, you can recharge a car's cells using solar or wind but the time most people would recharge is at night unless the car has solar panels for use in the company parking lot.

Neat thought....recharge during the day and stick it back to the OPEC.

Do they make solar powered motorcycles? Let's ride. There's nothing better than the feel of boobs in my back and bugs in my teeth. ; )

Wow...by the time I finished editing, I was way thumbs-down. Most people are saying batteries. I disagree for the reasons I wrote. Batteries will not be able to store the energy needed to recharge everyone's car if we all plug in overnight. Anyone who thinks so is living in a dream world.....

.....the ssme dream world as me getting you on my bike, huh? Hahaha..... Disregard the small minds that gripe about your icon. Enjoy life!

Having trouble reading the answers from the previous question? Go back and try again. We'll wait.

I'm familiar with electric generation. What would you like to discuss?