By that definition I don't think there is such a thing as renewable yet considering you need storage/batteries for just about any "renewable" energy source out there. Energy will always cost us something imho.
One alternative approach to storage/batteries is trying to provide over 100% of the average daily demand of electricity. Excess electricity could be priced lower. Consumers & industries could use those cheaper hours for certain tasks. This is already done in many areas. Run your dishwasher, charge your car, etc. at night.
Which leads me to think storage/batteries is not the issue & that manufacturing, installation & infrastructure is. I also imagine getting land permits, regulations, politics, etc. is also a huge factor.
Are there any simulations done on actual historical weather data on how much you need for that to work.
I would be far less sceptical about massive deployment of renewables if somebody could point me to a study that shows:
Given this grid, this amount of wind, solar and storage in that areas and the historical weather data of the last 30 years it would have resulted in this amount of overproduction, blackouts....
Not all energy uses can be shifted. IT infrastructure, the pumps delivering plumbing to your house, streetlights, HVAC, all needs to be running at all times. Furthermore, if shifting energy demand is the plan, then renewables need to factor in the cost of shifting that energy demand into the equation.
Gasification of woody biomass waste streams (walnut shells, wood chips, corn stover, bigasse) is quite renewable, and can be run 24/7 regardless of weather. The CO2 emmitted comes from the atmosphere and therefore is cyclical in nature (thus sustainable). If you take biochar into account the carbon generation is actually negative, as you have carbon left over that can be used for other things or put back into the soil in a form that is stable for thousands of years and beneficial to the soil quality for life.
