New York’s march toward climate utopia — is Watt supportive?

FROM MANHATTANCONTRIAN

In a post a few weeks ago on December 21, I observed that Germany seemed to have won the race to be the first among all countries and states to hit the “green energy wall.” Its pursuit of the fantasy of “renewable” wind and solar power has put it in a situation where regular wind/solar droughts have caused electricity prices to skyrocket, and major industries have become uncompetitive. It has no way out and cannot go further.

If Germany has “hit the wall”, what is the appropriate metaphor for New York? New York passed the Climate Act in 2019 with much fanfare. The first strict deadline is 2030, with the official requirement that 70% of electricity generation come from “renewable energy sources” (also known as “70 x 30”). That deadline is now just five years away. Over the past year, all efforts toward the 70 x 30 goal have failed, and anyone who has thought critically about the subject knows they will inevitably fail. But those in power are not yet willing to admit that this has become a farce.

My analogy is this: New York is like the cartoon character Wile E. Coyote, who ran off a cliff and is now suspended in mid-air, obviously not knowing what's going to happen next.

We know what's coming next: Soon, he'll be crashing to Earth.

Consider a few data points:

Offshore wind power procurement

Scope plans drawn up under the Climate Act call for around 9,000 MW of offshore wind power by 2035. ;But maybe this is at least a serious start. It is reported that by early 2023, about 4,300 MW of 9,000 MW are in “active development”, and wholesale prices have been agreed with developers at US$100/MWh.

But then reality started to hit. In this article of October 15, 2023, I reported that “essentially all” 4,300 MW offshore wind developers “actively developing” have pulled out and are demanding 30-50% price increases before they can proceed . New York rejected this strategy, but ultimately had no choice but to rebid the contract and get the bid within the limits required by the developer.

On February 29, 2024, New York State announced that it had accepted rebids for two of the projects, with a total capacity of only about 1,700 megawatts and a price of more than $150 per megawatt hour. (This price level requires retail electricity prices of at least $0.40 per kilowatt hour, which would be completely uneconomical if it became the standard for electricity production in New York.)

Meanwhile, the rest of offshore wind procurement appears to be in complete disarray. On April 19, E&E News reported that New York State had canceled three large offshore wind development projects: Attentive Energy, Community Offshore Wind and Excelsior Wind. If these three projects go ahead, the 2035 target of 9,000 MW will total about 4,000 MW. excerpt:

New York on Friday canceled power contracts for three offshore wind projects, citing plans by the turbine maker to scrap its largest machines. The news is a blow to the U.S. offshore wind industry and a major setback for the climate ambitions of New York and President Joe Biden. The three projects will provide the state with 4 gigawatts of offshore wind power, nearly half of New York's 2035 target.

Currently, no one knows how to develop large amounts of offshore wind around New York at a price anyone is willing to pay. Of course, no one can solve the intermittency problem.

green hydrogen

New York regulators have recognized that a decarbonized power generation system dominated by wind/solar will require something called a “dispatchable emission-free resource” (DEFR) to work. Anyone's best idea for DEFR is so-called “green” hydrogen, i.e. hydrogen produced by non-emission systems such as wind, solar or hydro.

Currently, only a negligible amount of green hydrogen is produced in the world and none in New York. But somehow New York figured it could pull it off. Two green hydrogen facilities have received state subsidies and are said to be under construction. One is being developed by a company called Plug Power in an industrial park called STAMP west of Rochester; the other is being developed by Air Products in Massena on the St. Lawrence River. In a world that relies mostly on wind and solar power, these two facilities are almost laughably small compared to the amount of hydrogen needed to fully support New York's electricity generation. But at least they'll make a difference.

On October 18, Batavia reported that the Plug Power hydrogen facility was “on hold.” excerpt:

Chris Suozzi, vice president of business and workforce development for the Genesee County Economic Development Center, reportedly told a Washington, D.C., commercial real estate firm that Plug Power's STAMP project has been put on hold. . . . “They're not ready to go,” Sozzi reportedly said. “They're on pause. We don't know what's going to happen to them right now.

The suspension or cancellation of green hydrogen projects should surprise no one. Last year, major Australian companies such as Fortescue and Origin canceled large-scale such projects. In fact, the cost of producing green hydrogen is a significant portion of the cost of extracting natural gas from the ground for the same energy content, and on top of that, natural gas is a superior fuel in every way (higher energy density, easier to produce ). At the same time, STAMP green hydrogen project developer Plug Power announced its third-quarter 2024 results, showing revenue of US$174 million and a loss of US$211 million. They hope to get a loan from the federal Department of Energy to keep themselves afloat. I wonder what Chris Wright would think about this.

The Air Products plant in Massena plans to use hydroelectric power from a dam on the St. Lawrence River to produce hydrogen. Excuse me? Hydropower is already dispatchable. How could it possibly make sense to use dispatchable electricity to produce hydrogen with the purpose of making dispatchable electricity? At least about 40% of the energy is lost in the round trip from electricity to hydrogen and back to electricity. There are certainly better uses for St. Lawrence River hydropower than converting it into hydrogen and then using the hydrogen. But it doesn't make any sense here.

Clean path transmission line

Another key facility for providing renewable energy to New York should be Clean Path transmission lines. This is a proposed 175-mile high-capacity (4 GW) transmission line designed to carry electricity generated by a variety of new “renewable” (wind and solar) facilities being developed in New York City and the Upstate to New York City and the state. Southern region. The estimated cost of this major project is $11 billion.

On November 27, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority notified the Public Service Commission that the Clean Paths Project had been cancelled. Here is a copy of NYSERDA's letter. This is an article about the cancellation published by Utility Dive on December 3rd.

I didn't find any discussion of the reason for the cancellation, but it must have been that the developers found it financially unviable. The problem: Since wind and solar generators only work about 20-40% of the time, this extremely expensive transmission line won't be able to operate anywhere near its capacity. Most likely, it only accounts for about a third of capacity on average. This means that transmission costs are approximately three times higher than lines operating at or close to 100% capacity.

The cancellation of this line has only happened within the past month and I have not seen any plans for a re-tender or alternative strategy. So far, no one has said “This can't possibly work.” But no matter how you solve the problem, the cost of transmitting intermittent wind and solar power from far north to New York City will be about three times the cost of transmitting electricity from natural gas plants that run almost all the time.

So here we are, suspended in the air, and no one seems to realize that we'll soon be plummeting to Earth. Everyone involved is trying to squeeze every last dollar out of taxpayers before the collapse happens.

Relevant