That isn't how it works. W&S make "excess power" in the Summer months, primarily. The grid dumps those extra volts into the batteries then. The grid needs the most back-up in the winter months, it can rarely add power during the Spring or Fall, and almost never in the Winter.
Thus the power goes in in the Summer & is needed to be drawn out in the winter, some 4 months later. Same exact thing for thermal salt, which afaik hasn't been done on more than a very small scale. Nothing remotely close to a power grid.
There are no more large hydroelectric sites available in the developed world. None. Any small sites would be cost prohibitive. Geothermal is VERY location specific. As is tidal, (Edit: which includes "wave generation" too, right?) which has failed every test so far AND would cause massive disruption to shipping and nature if installed in anything approaching grid scale (Edit: that's for wave power, IDK how pure tidal power could possibly generate enough power to make a difference). Even as much as 20% of a local grid would be both expensive and disruptive.
Biomass = burning things. Sure it's a pretty good way to get rid of some trash & waste materials. But it stinks, people hate that, and it is limited by how much very heavy materials you have stored to be burned. In Europe they import wood pellets from the USA as back-up material to their trash. They cut down trees, ship them by diesel (Well, dirty bunker oil actually, which is, iirc, 3x more polluting) across the ocean and ship them to the Biomass sites by train & truck. Not green by any measure.
Biomass = burning things. Sure it's a pretty good way to get rid of some trash & waste materials. But it stinks, people hate that, and it is limited by how much very heavy materials you have stored to be burned. In Europe they import wood pellets from the USA as back-up material to their trash. They cut down trees, ship them by diesel (Well, dirty bunker oil actually, which is, iirc, 3x more polluting) across the ocean and ship them to the Biomass sites by train & truck. Not green by any measure.
Biomass can be perfectly green. You depolymerize a bunch of agricultural waste, and you get oil. Then you use it in the plant.
It's not like burning oil is inherently bad. The Earth has a carbon cycle just like it has a water cycle. The problem is that we're digging up carbon that's been locked in the ground for millions of years, thus adding net carbon to the cycle. If you depolymerize and and burn agricultural waste, everything stays in the same cycle, and it's no more harmful to the environment than releasing steam into the air.
That isn't how it works. W&S make "excess power" in the Summer months, primarily. The grid dumps those extra volts into the batteries then. The grid needs the most back-up in the winter months, it can rarely add power during the Spring or Fall, and almost never in the Winter.
Thus the power goes in in the Summer & is needed to be drawn out in the winter, some 4 months later. Same exact thing for thermal salt, which afaik hasn't been done on more than a very small scale. Nothing remotely close to a power grid.
There are no more large hydroelectric sites available in the developed world. None. Any small sites would be cost prohibitive. Geothermal is VERY location specific. As is tidal, (Edit: which includes "wave generation" too, right?) which has failed every test so far AND would cause massive disruption to shipping and nature if installed in anything approaching grid scale (Edit: that's for wave power, IDK how pure tidal power could possibly generate enough power to make a difference). Even as much as 20% of a local grid would be both expensive and disruptive.
Biomass = burning things. Sure it's a pretty good way to get rid of some trash & waste materials. But it stinks, people hate that, and it is limited by how much very heavy materials you have stored to be burned. In Europe they import wood pellets from the USA as back-up material to their trash. They cut down trees, ship them by diesel (Well, dirty bunker oil actually, which is, iirc, 3x more polluting) across the ocean and ship them to the Biomass sites by train & truck. Not green by any measure.
Biomass can be perfectly green. You depolymerize a bunch of agricultural waste, and you get oil. Then you use it in the plant.
It's not like burning oil is inherently bad. The Earth has a carbon cycle just like it has a water cycle. The problem is that we're digging up carbon that's been locked in the ground for millions of years, thus adding net carbon to the cycle. If you depolymerize and and burn agricultural waste, everything stays in the same cycle, and it's no more harmful to the environment than releasing steam into the air.