Dan Schroeder
@dvschroeder.bsky.social
Physicist, educator, number-cruncher. Cartoon by the great Cal Grondahl. physics.weber.edu/schroeder
If Oahu has too little space for more utility-scale solar and wind farms, why don't they run a cable from Molokai?
I assume Hawaiians are smart and these questions have good answers, but I have no idea where to find them.
I assume Hawaiians are smart and these questions have good answers, but I have no idea where to find them.
November 26, 2025 at 7:39 PM
If Oahu has too little space for more utility-scale solar and wind farms, why don't they run a cable from Molokai?
I assume Hawaiians are smart and these questions have good answers, but I have no idea where to find them.
I assume Hawaiians are smart and these questions have good answers, but I have no idea where to find them.
It's just baffling to this outsider. For instance, why do EIA data show zero utility-scale wind and solar plants scheduled to come online in Hawaii in the next year? The Pakini Nui Wind Farm on the big island operates at a 60% capacity factor. Why does it have only 14 turbines?
November 26, 2025 at 7:36 PM
It's just baffling to this outsider. For instance, why do EIA data show zero utility-scale wind and solar plants scheduled to come online in Hawaii in the next year? The Pakini Nui Wind Farm on the big island operates at a 60% capacity factor. Why does it have only 14 turbines?
Yeah but the article doesn't even try to explain why Hawaii can't just install a load of solar and wind and batteries in the next 8-12 years.
November 26, 2025 at 7:11 PM
Yeah but the article doesn't even try to explain why Hawaii can't just install a load of solar and wind and batteries in the next 8-12 years.
But there are also powerful local interests who would benefit from building more solar and wind and batteries. And there's no local fossil fuel production, and the state is deep blue. Again, I ain't buying it.
November 26, 2025 at 6:48 PM
But there are also powerful local interests who would benefit from building more solar and wind and batteries. And there's no local fossil fuel production, and the state is deep blue. Again, I ain't buying it.
Never mind, just searched the pdf and came up empty.
November 26, 2025 at 6:42 PM
Never mind, just searched the pdf and came up empty.
Does it discuss Hawaii specifically?
November 26, 2025 at 6:41 PM
Does it discuss Hawaii specifically?
Sorry, I ain't buying it. In Texas, sure, but not in Hawaii.
November 26, 2025 at 6:40 PM
Sorry, I ain't buying it. In Texas, sure, but not in Hawaii.
And yet something is somehow stopping them from doing so, and it's not right-wing politics. What exactly is the holdup?
November 26, 2025 at 6:28 PM
And yet something is somehow stopping them from doing so, and it's not right-wing politics. What exactly is the holdup?
Hope for the best, plan for the worst!
November 26, 2025 at 6:28 AM
Hope for the best, plan for the worst!
Also it's taken about a dozen years for CA to build the last 50 GW, so building another 50 GW in 5 years would be a pretty big speed-up—even while tax credits and favorable feed-in tariffs for rooftop systems are going away.
Meanwhile there will be some demand increase by 2030.
Meanwhile there will be some demand increase by 2030.
November 26, 2025 at 6:26 AM
Also it's taken about a dozen years for CA to build the last 50 GW, so building another 50 GW in 5 years would be a pretty big speed-up—even while tax credits and favorable feed-in tariffs for rooftop systems are going away.
Meanwhile there will be some demand increase by 2030.
Meanwhile there will be some demand increase by 2030.
Averaged over the year, an additional 50 GW would roughly double CA's solar generation and, since gas generation is about the same as solar, be enough to replace the gas if nothing else changes. But it would be too much in summer (resulting in curtailment and lower revenue) and not enough in winter.
November 26, 2025 at 6:17 AM
Averaged over the year, an additional 50 GW would roughly double CA's solar generation and, since gas generation is about the same as solar, be enough to replace the gas if nothing else changes. But it would be too much in summer (resulting in curtailment and lower revenue) and not enough in winter.
Ah, I did miss them, since they were partly cut off in the thumbnail and I'd already taken a careful look at the original plot. Sorry about that!
Assuming your wild speculation is at least a little bit serious, have you compared the solar generation it would require to what CA has in the pipeline?
Assuming your wild speculation is at least a little bit serious, have you compared the solar generation it would require to what CA has in the pipeline?
November 26, 2025 at 5:02 AM
Ah, I did miss them, since they were partly cut off in the thumbnail and I'd already taken a careful look at the original plot. Sorry about that!
Assuming your wild speculation is at least a little bit serious, have you compared the solar generation it would require to what CA has in the pipeline?
Assuming your wild speculation is at least a little bit serious, have you compared the solar generation it would require to what CA has in the pipeline?
Gas provided 39% of the electricity generated in CA in 2019, and 35% in 2024. No reasonable extrapolation of the trend would put gas below 20% in 2030.
Patience.
Patience.
November 26, 2025 at 12:30 AM
Gas provided 39% of the electricity generated in CA in 2019, and 35% in 2024. No reasonable extrapolation of the trend would put gas below 20% in 2030.
Patience.
Patience.
There are a whole lotta states that have disappointingly low solar adoption. I think AZ and NM are coming along, though. They're well ahead of TX, percentage-wise.
emp.lbl.gov/capacity-and...
emp.lbl.gov/capacity-and...
November 26, 2025 at 12:14 AM
There are a whole lotta states that have disappointingly low solar adoption. I think AZ and NM are coming along, though. They're well ahead of TX, percentage-wise.
emp.lbl.gov/capacity-and...
emp.lbl.gov/capacity-and...
I think it already has, on an annual basis, if you include rooftop.
November 25, 2025 at 4:49 PM
I think it already has, on an annual basis, if you include rooftop.
Great conversation you two, thanks!
November 25, 2025 at 4:47 PM
Great conversation you two, thanks!
I'm not sure 3 years would be long enough. On the other hand, long-term averaging would hide the recent growth in solar and batteries. My preference is to use annual data but display enough of it to show long-term trends, rather than focusing on just a couple of particular years.
November 25, 2025 at 4:43 PM
I'm not sure 3 years would be long enough. On the other hand, long-term averaging would hide the recent growth in solar and batteries. My preference is to use annual data but display enough of it to show long-term trends, rather than focusing on just a couple of particular years.
I think it's CAISO that changed their gas methodology, not CEC or CA as a whole. It's unclear to me what the change actually was, and whether the older data currently available at CAISO has been updated to reflect it or not. Very confusing but a reason to be cautious with CAISO data.
November 25, 2025 at 4:41 PM
I think it's CAISO that changed their gas methodology, not CEC or CA as a whole. It's unclear to me what the change actually was, and whether the older data currently available at CAISO has been updated to reflect it or not. Very confusing but a reason to be cautious with CAISO data.
Well, it's complicated. Here's a chart for NOx, indicating that diesel trucks probably emit more than gasoline-powered cars. Then there's the complication that other pollutants, including ammonia from agriculture, contribute to particulate formation. bsky.app/profile/dvsc...
OK, here's a first crack at a chart showing the breakdown of NOx sources in the four largest Wasatch Front counties (for 2020). This more or less confirms my vague recollection that diesel engines are worse than gasoline engines. But I have many questions!
November 24, 2025 at 6:38 PM
Well, it's complicated. Here's a chart for NOx, indicating that diesel trucks probably emit more than gasoline-powered cars. Then there's the complication that other pollutants, including ammonia from agriculture, contribute to particulate formation. bsky.app/profile/dvsc...
Is "the system" the whole western grid, or CA or CAISO only?
November 23, 2025 at 6:13 PM
Is "the system" the whole western grid, or CA or CAISO only?
I'm not understanding how CA can be "paying Utah to consume" energy that Utah is "sell[ing] into CAISO". Obviously I"m missing something and probably I'm in way over my head and won't come to understand these elaborate nuances through a quick conversation.
November 23, 2025 at 6:02 PM
I'm not understanding how CA can be "paying Utah to consume" energy that Utah is "sell[ing] into CAISO". Obviously I"m missing something and probably I'm in way over my head and won't come to understand these elaborate nuances through a quick conversation.
Next semester I'll have the privilege of again teaching out of my thermodynamics textbook, unrevised since it was first published in, um, 1999.
If I ever do revise it, though, I'll say less about mercury thermometers and the prospects for fuel cell vehicles.
If I ever do revise it, though, I'll say less about mercury thermometers and the prospects for fuel cell vehicles.
November 23, 2025 at 5:23 PM
Next semester I'll have the privilege of again teaching out of my thermodynamics textbook, unrevised since it was first published in, um, 1999.
If I ever do revise it, though, I'll say less about mercury thermometers and the prospects for fuel cell vehicles.
If I ever do revise it, though, I'll say less about mercury thermometers and the prospects for fuel cell vehicles.
So they're using virtual PPAs? But if that were the case, why would all the CA-driven projects in Utah be along the big transmission corridor that leads to southern California?
November 23, 2025 at 4:18 PM
So they're using virtual PPAs? But if that were the case, why would all the CA-driven projects in Utah be along the big transmission corridor that leads to southern California?