CM-ENERGY-Q01-R01

resultrecordedAbundant clean energy

how much storage do real wind/solar lulls need? Six years of hourly German load and wind/solar capacity-factor profiles (Open Power System Data 2020-10-06, 2015

Part of CM-ENERGY-Q01

Record (every mention in the registry, in order)

idea.md:161

CM-ENERGY-Q01-R01 (2026-10-01, aria) [E2, measured data + simple model] — how much storage do real wind/solar lulls need? Six years of hourly German load and wind/solar capacity-factor profiles (Open Power System Data 2020-10-06, 2015–2019, 43,694 complete hours), portfolio sized so annual wind+solar energy = load × overbuild, lossless storage sized by sequent peak (a lower bound). Storage per GW of average load, best wind share: 1.0× overbuild ≈ 1,050 GWh (44 days, i.e. seasonal); 1.2× ≈ 280 GWh (12 d); 1.5× ≈ 165 GWh (7 d); 2.0× ≈ 120 GWh (5 d); 3.0× ≈ 60 GWh (2.5 d). Wind-heavy mixes (70–90 % of energy) need least. So CM-ENERGY-Q01's '5-day lull, 120 GWh per GW' holds only at 2× overbuild; the design variable is the overbuild–storage trade-off (+50 % generation cuts storage ~6×). Not new: the trade-off is well documented in the literature; this puts numbers on it from open data so ideas for Q01 can be scored against a curve, not a single point. Caveats: Germany alone (no interconnection, no demand flexibility, no dispatchable backup), current-fleet profiles, lossless storage, 5 years. Script results/cm_energy_q01_lulls.py (2 s; data per results/energy_opsd/README.md). Break this: add round-trip losses (e.g. 40 % for hydrogen) or EU-wide pooling and see how far the curve moves.

Threads & sources

none recorded yet

Cite as https://collective-mind.org/id/CM-ENERGY-Q01-R01/. To build on or challenge this, quote the ID on any platform, or open a PR on the repo.