Could Texas Avoid Blackouts With Renewable Energy? (washingtonpost.com) 169
"Around this time last year, millions of Texans were shivering without power during one of the coldest spells to hit the central United States," remembers the Washington Post. "For five days, blackouts prevented people from heating their homes, cooking or even sleeping. More than 200 people died in what is considered the nation's costliest winter storm on record, amounting to $24 billion in damages.
"Twelve months later, the state's electrical grid, while improved, is still vulnerable to weather-induced power outages." "If we got another storm this year, like Uri in 2021, the grid would go down again," said Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University. "This is still a huge risk for us."
Now, a recent study shows that electricity blackouts can be avoided across the nation — perhaps even during intense weather events — by switching to 100 percent clean and renewable energy, such as solar, wind and water energy. "Technically and economically, we have 95 percent of the technologies we need to transition everything today," said Mark Jacobson, lead author of the paper and professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University. Wind, water and solar already account for about one fifth of the nation's electricity, although a full transition in many areas is slow.
The study showed a switch to renewables would also lower energy requirements, reduce consumer costs, create millions of new jobs and improve people's health....
The team found the actual energy demand decreased significantly by simply shifting to renewable resources, which are more efficient. For the entire United States, total end-use energy demand decreased by around 57 percent. Per capita household annual energy costs were around 63 percent less than a "business as usual" scenario.... In Texas, a complete green transition would reduce the annual average end-use power demand by 56 percent. It also reduces peak loads, or the highest amount of energy one draws from the grid at a time. Jacobson said many homes would also have their own storage and wouldn't need to rely on the grid as much.
The team also found interconnecting electrical grids from different geographic regions can make the power system more reliable and reduce costs. Larger regions are more likely to have the wind blowing, the sun shining or hydroelectric power running somewhere else, which may be able to help fill any supply gaps. "The intermittency of renewable energy declines as you look at larger and larger areas," said Dessler. "If it's not windy in Texas, it could be windy in Iowa. In that case, they could be overproducing power and they could be shipping some of their extra power to us." The study stated costs per unit energy in Texas are 27 percent lower when interconnected with the Midwest grid than when isolated, as it currently is.
Interestingly, long-duration batteries aren't important for grid stability. the team found, since our current 4-hour batteries can just be connected for longer-term storage. Professor Dessler tells the Post we should think of "renewables" as a system which includes storage technology and easily-dispatchable energy solutions.
And the Post adds that a grid powered by renewables "would also produce cleaner air, which could reduce pollution-related deaths by 53,000 people per year and reduce pollution-related illnesses for millions of people in 2050."
"Twelve months later, the state's electrical grid, while improved, is still vulnerable to weather-induced power outages." "If we got another storm this year, like Uri in 2021, the grid would go down again," said Andrew Dessler, a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University. "This is still a huge risk for us."
Now, a recent study shows that electricity blackouts can be avoided across the nation — perhaps even during intense weather events — by switching to 100 percent clean and renewable energy, such as solar, wind and water energy. "Technically and economically, we have 95 percent of the technologies we need to transition everything today," said Mark Jacobson, lead author of the paper and professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University. Wind, water and solar already account for about one fifth of the nation's electricity, although a full transition in many areas is slow.
The study showed a switch to renewables would also lower energy requirements, reduce consumer costs, create millions of new jobs and improve people's health....
The team found the actual energy demand decreased significantly by simply shifting to renewable resources, which are more efficient. For the entire United States, total end-use energy demand decreased by around 57 percent. Per capita household annual energy costs were around 63 percent less than a "business as usual" scenario.... In Texas, a complete green transition would reduce the annual average end-use power demand by 56 percent. It also reduces peak loads, or the highest amount of energy one draws from the grid at a time. Jacobson said many homes would also have their own storage and wouldn't need to rely on the grid as much.
The team also found interconnecting electrical grids from different geographic regions can make the power system more reliable and reduce costs. Larger regions are more likely to have the wind blowing, the sun shining or hydroelectric power running somewhere else, which may be able to help fill any supply gaps. "The intermittency of renewable energy declines as you look at larger and larger areas," said Dessler. "If it's not windy in Texas, it could be windy in Iowa. In that case, they could be overproducing power and they could be shipping some of their extra power to us." The study stated costs per unit energy in Texas are 27 percent lower when interconnected with the Midwest grid than when isolated, as it currently is.
Interestingly, long-duration batteries aren't important for grid stability. the team found, since our current 4-hour batteries can just be connected for longer-term storage. Professor Dessler tells the Post we should think of "renewables" as a system which includes storage technology and easily-dispatchable energy solutions.
And the Post adds that a grid powered by renewables "would also produce cleaner air, which could reduce pollution-related deaths by 53,000 people per year and reduce pollution-related illnesses for millions of people in 2050."
Missed the important part (Score:4, Informative)
Raphael Cruz fled the country while hundreds of his constituents literally froze to death and more importantly, he left his dog behind in the same freezing conditions.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The excuses just made the story worse. First he blamed his young daughters for wanting a vacation. Then it turned into he was only dropping them off, he was getting right back on the next flight. Then it was working remotely. Finally it was yeah I fucked up. Then he staged a photo op where he put a case of water into a car trunk.
Want to know what that terrible radical leftist AOC did? She raised millions of dollars in relief funds. https://www.houstonpublicmedia... [houstonpublicmedia.org]
Fuck that zodiac killer looking asshole Cr
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Nobody wants the federal gov't. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah instead of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Texas has ERCOT which was so ineffectual that all the board members resigned last year in disgrace. Meanwhile the adjacent states didn't see their power grids crash. Even this year the Texas grid strained to handle a couple of ordinary cold snaps.
As for hacking, there's zero reason to think Texas is any less vulnerable just because the grid is mostly isolated to the state. Hacks don't travel down the power lines to infect the operations network.
Re:Nobody wants the federal gov't. (Score:4, Interesting)
Hacks don't travel down the power lines to infect the operations network.
It would seem the Utilities Technology Council, FCC, and their counterparts elsewhere in the world disagree with this:
https://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-... [arrl.org]
Let this sink in: they are scared that non-adversarial amateur radio ops (hams) emitting no more than FIVE PATHETIC WATTS EIRP will take down their Power Line Comms network! Now imagine what an actual adversary could do...
(Yeah bit off topic & low hanging fruit, but needs to be said / reminded...)
Re:Nobody wants the federal gov't. (Score:4, Informative)
Let this sink in: they are scared that non-adversarial amateur radio ops (hams) emitting no more than FIVE PATHETIC WATTS EIRP will take down their Power Line Comms network!
And? No really are you just posting things you know nothing about? Taking out the comms network is not the same as gaining control and it sure as heck isn't the same as causing a power outage. I used to work for a transmission utility, the comms network strung up over power lines connecting PLCs at different stations together probably spent more time down than up. Didn't affect the power consumption one bit (did affect our metering and ability to bill out energy usage by the minute though). Also it didn't affect safety since those signals between substations are hard wired not communication links.
I'd have given you more credit if you posted yesterday's Slashdot story about solar flares when talking about risk of blackouts.
Re: (Score:2)
FEMA (any guesses what the F means?) was on the ground within 24 hours of Abbot's declaration of emergency.
Now, the machines of government that were running at the time were largely executive branch (Federal and State), but it isn't a stretch to say that 1 of the state's 2 state-wide representatives to the Federal Government probably shouldn't have been caught on camera helping him and his family onto a life boat and flipping so
All type of power generation must be winterized (Score:5, Insightful)
Wind turbines require heating elements in the blades in order to function in freezing temperatures. Water, of course, freezes when the temperature is low. Natural gas power plants didn't shut down in Texas last year because the gas froze, but because other components of those plants had not been winterized.
https://www.kut.org/energy-env... [kut.org]
I support environmentally friendly forms of power generation, but switching to these forms of power has little to do with avoiding blackouts.
Yeah but who's going to pay for it? (Score:4, Informative)
When people talk about late stage capitalism this is what they mean. It means that the basic maintenance needed to keep capitalism functional hasn't been done. You can put some Band-Aids over it like they're doing in Texas but eventually the whole system's going to collapse into a cleptocracy like it did in China.
Re:Yeah but who's going to pay for it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Zero tax increases would be needed to winterize the gas wells and methane power plants in Texas, they aren't owned by the government. It would just cost those private investors some money and they haven't wanted to spend it.
Re: (Score:2)
Zero tax increases would be needed to winterize the gas wells and methane power plants in Texas, they aren't owned by the government. It would just cost those private investors some money and they haven't wanted to spend it.
Ummm, and you think they'd just pay it out of their coffers? I know lefties like to fantasize about tearful, sobbing capitalists carrying their bags of money to give them away, but what will actually happen is they'll - as always - push that burden onto consumer by increasing prices. Oh, and they'll probably slap on some bigger margins too, price swings are always a good moment to hide margin increases. So, whether through taxes or through increased prices, YOU'll end up paying for it, not sobbing capitalis
Re: (Score:2)
The claim was that there would be "tax increases needed to winterize the grid" which is clearly incorrect, and your blabbering about 'lefties' doesn't support that claim in any way.
Despite the corruption and regulatory failures, there's been a fairly competitive electricity market in Texas and it is cheaper there than most places in the US. If you try to jack up the price of power your dirty energy plant generates to a level above market value, people can simply buy it from a different supplier. And then th
You don't get successful as a private investor (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Especially when you can just buy a generator if you're well enough off that you would be affected by the tax increases needed to winterize the grid.
Home backup generator sales are through the roof in Texas, to the point there's a bottleneck in the supply chain even being able to purchase a Generac or Kohler backup unit. Electrical contractors (I know) have backorder lists of 100+ customers awaiting the availability of a unit.
And besides even without that as long as you're in a pretty well to do neighborhood that's likely to vote they'll probably do the blackouts and somebody else's neighborhood who's both poor and much less likely to vote.
Not true. Rich and poor neighborhoods were equally affected, hence the demand for generators by those who can afford them. Where you wanted your home to be, to escape the rolling blackouts, was near a hospital, fire station, or gro
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The real question is why are fueled heating units apparently not required by building code to be able to run entirely on the fuel itself. Fans and a control system are so small compared to the heating that I'd bet they can be powered off of thermoelectric effect without adding too much complexity to the system. Certainly there is more than enough energy if a heat engine is used. No one not using electric heating should be stuck without heat due to power outage.
Re: (Score:2)
It's late to comment, but...
A "heat and hot water" gas appliance will contain the water needed for heating.
Most of them use forced air convection (there are some that use a flue, but they were rare even 10 years ago).
For it to function, you need:
-command circuit (thermostat connected to the gas appliance) - wired or battery wireless. The battery in the thermostat needs changing maybe twice a year. If the receiver would be also battery powered (mine is not), you'd expect a roughly similar life.
-electronics (
Re: (Score:2)
I think we should ask why there is a shortage of woolly jumpers and thick blankets in the state of Texas. I would suggest raising funds to provide for the needy, but I suspect the people would be too proud to accept any kind of charity.
You need new news sources (Score:2)
When people talk about systemic issues this is what they mean. The system puts wealthy people nearby hospitals and then hospitals naturally are prioritized for electricity distribution which in turn means that wealthy peop
Re: (Score:2)
What does financing have to do with the original article?
The article suggested that renewable energy might be the solution to blackouts. Winterizing all kinds of power generators costs money. Of course, the money ultimately comes from customers.
Re:Yeah but who's going to pay for it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Especially when you can just buy a generator if you're well enough off
Now you’re just complaining for the sake of complaining. Here in Florida, owning a portable generator is a fact of life, and ones that will keep your food from spoiling and run some lights and a small window air conditioner can be had for $250-$500. If you’re an “armed” Texan, that price roughly represents having one less gun in your collection (can’t shoot the bad guys if you freeze to death first).
Hurricane Irma knocked out my power for about a week. My cheap no-name Chinese generator ran fine the whole time (change the oil every 24 hours and you’re golden). You’d think those supposedly tough Texans would be more self-reliant than us “crazy” Floridians.
Civilized countries don't have these types of problems.
Re:Yeah but who's going to pay for it? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Hurricane Irma knocked out my power for about a week. My cheap no-name Chinese generator ran fine the whole time (change the oil every 24 hours and you’re golden). You’d think those supposedly tough Texans would be more self-reliant than us “crazy” Floridians.
Civilized countries don't have these types of problems.
I'm trying to process how someone had a week's worth of gasoline when there was no power? Was that generator running 24 hours a day? My generator uses 5 gallons in about 8 hours, so running it 24 hours a day would be impossible unless I live at a gas station and siphon from the tanks. How much gasoline does that person keep at home?
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's more like they don't think a generator is an acceptable alternative to a properly functioning power grid.
Re: (Score:2)
I have an emergency generator. How exactly is the grid supposed to deliver power in the rare case that say someone knocks over transmission lines by crashing a car into them? Hmm? Or a freak strong windstorm knocks a tree over and takes out infrastructure? It may be a rare case that I need it, but when I NEED it I have it. And maintenance is cheap and quick enough that it's cheap insurance...
And I bet you a weeks pay that any and all data centers in the EU all have both battery backup and emergency genera
Re: (Score:2)
I have an emergency generator. How exactly is the grid supposed to deliver power in the rare case that say someone knocks over transmission lines by crashing a car into them? Hmm?
Um, that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about whether a generator is a good replacement for a stable power grid. The solution to Texas' problems is not for people with money to go buy generators while those without due without. The solution is to fix their damn power grid.
Re: (Score:2)
typo, "do without"
Re: (Score:2)
Propane is better. Cheaper, easier to maintain, runs about a day per tank (so you could set aside 7 tanks and you are done with prep), and when you are done- no extra prep for long term storage.
Re: (Score:2)
You could install solar panels and energy storage, then blackouts wouldn't affect you. Maybe that's what he meant.
But the real silver bullet to prevent blackouts is a smart grid that sheds the load when electricity production is low. And we can't allow collusion among energy suppliers to drive up the cost of electricity during times of high demand.
Re: (Score:3)
Solar panels fail when wintry weather comes with cloudy skies and cold. At the very least, the power output is greatly reduced. Perhaps a "smart" grid is an answer, but that also has nothing to do with renewable power generation.
Texas already HAD the most renewable power. 77F (Score:2)
Yeah Texas already had the most solar and wind, last year when the pier went out. Too much of the solar and wind shut down.
Tomorrow it's supposed to be 77F in Dallas. 78F the next day. Last year the temperature was in the single digits. It was a an incredibly rare occurrence. I'm not prepared for lions showing up in my living room either.
Re:Texas already HAD the most renewable power. 77F (Score:5, Informative)
Too much of the solar and wind shut down.
That is the narrative promoted by the Texas governor. But here are the facts:
- Total power supply needed for winter months: 82 GW
- Power lost due to inoperative wind turbines: 8 GW
- Power lost due to inoperative gas power plants: 20 GW
- Power lost due to inoperative coal power plants: 5 GW
- Solar power accounted for only 2.5 GW total in Texas at the time.
For those who want to blame renewables, sorry, the blackouts weren't primarily caused by the loss of power from wind turbines or solar panels.
Sources: https://www.texasmonthly.com/n... [texasmonthly.com]
https://www.eia.gov/todayinene... [eia.gov].
Re: (Score:2)
From the article you linked to: "Wind generation dipped as low as 0.65 gigawatts". The way that article justifies its claim that it wasn't the fault of renewables is that wind and solar power was expected to drop to worthlessly low levels during the winter and the Texas grid wasn't relying on it to supply power because of this, whereas it was relying on fossil fuel power plants, therefore the failure was the fault of the fossil fuel power plants. Which is all very well and good as a rhetorical tactic, but n
Re: (Score:3)
It doesn't matter what was expected. It remains a fact that Texas lost 4x more power due to inoperative fossil fuel plants, than renewables. Then the governor blames renewables.
Had the wind turbines been winterized, they could have kept generating power, and would not have "slipped to 0.65 GW".
Re: (Score:3)
The point is, 4 times more power was lost due to inoperative fossil fuel power plants, than was lost due to inoperative wind and solar plants.
Re: (Score:2)
What you're leaving out is that even according to the biased editorial linked above [texasmonthly.com], gas and coal retained a much higher percentage of their ability to provide power during the event than did wind and solar. They only "lost" more power because they provide even more overall.
So while it was coldest, according to their graph, Gas was providing 30 GW, Coal and Nuclear ab
Re: (Score:2)
*Gas 30x the power of Wind. (Also, Solar peaked at only a couple GW during most day times).
Do you think we're stupid? Or are you? (Score:2)
I'm curious, do you think we are all stupid?
Or are YOU not seeing that what you're saying makes no sense?
Claim: Texas would have avoided power outages by relying more on wind and solar.
Fact: The wind and solar became mostly inoperative due to the extreme weather.
Do you really, truly believe that MORE inoperative solar panels would have solved the situation?
Do you actually believe that, or are you thinking you can distract us enough to fool us into thinking that?
When someone points out that inoperative solar
Re: (Score:2)
No, it was never my claim that more wind and solar would have prevented the Texas blackouts. Rather, I'm refuting the claim that wind and solar power generation were the CAUSE of the blackouts. Even if ALL the wind turbines had stayed online, the blackouts would have swept the state because most of the lost power was from gas turbines.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So, let's see, when the 10% of Texas power that was wind and solar became inoperable because frozen windmills don't produce any power ...
the solution would be to have more frozen windmills not producing any power?
The gas plants kept producing power at far high rates than windmills did. More inoperative windmills doesn't solve the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
So, let's see, failure to winterize renewable generation caused Texas to lose capacity equal to 10% of its' required power supply and failure to winterize fossil power plants caused the utility to lose capacity equal to 30% of its' required power supply, therefore the cause was obviously excess renewables, rather than failure to winterize. Really?
Since half of the natural gas pumping stations are electrically powered from the same grid that started shutting down after renewable production collapsed, sure. Natural gas power plants did not fail until hours after the power grid, and with it the pumping stations which supplied them, started shutting down.
Re: (Score:2)
Last year the temperature was in the single digits. It was a an incredibly rare occurrence.
If by "incredibly rare" you mean predictably once every ten years or so.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah I've been here for many years and I've NEVER had my pool freeze. Much less ever seen frozen pools all across the entire state.
Note that with a statewide power grid, there is a HUGE difference from one city getting cold, losing one power plant, vs all the power plants in the entire state being affected.
Re: (Score:2)
There were rolling blackouts [reuters.com] in parts of Texas in 2011.
Re: (Score:2)
Is 2021 the coldest winter in Texas since 1979?
No. This past winter (December 2020–February 2021) was the fifth coldest winter since December 1979
source [nasa.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Too much coal, natural gas and nuclear power generation went down.
Sure- wind and solar took a hit too but much smaller totals.
You are being dishonest and lying by omission- being disingenuous.
Stop doing that. It doesn't promote honorable and honest communication.
It's scummy. If you keep it up, you'll lose your sense of right and wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Wind and solar had much HIGHER failure rates, not much lower.
More frozen, inoperable windmills producing no power would not solve the problem
Re: (Score:2)
I support environmentally friendly forms of power generation, but switching to these forms of power has little to do with avoiding blackouts.
Actually it has quite a bit to do with it. Winterisation of wind turbines is absolutely trivial compared to winterising the equipment required to operate a gas turbine. There's quite a big cost and maintenance difference between them which means it's less likely for a fuckwit to "cost optimise" the winterisation away.
Re: (Score:2)
Winterisation of wind turbines is absolutely trivial compared to winterising the equipment required to operate a gas turbine
Do you have a source to back up this statement?
Re: (Score:2)
Anecdotal.
Winterising a windfarm: put rockwool on the inside of the nacelle (okay fancier than rockwool but not by much)
Winterising a gas handling unit: insulate each and every pipe, every service, paying insane attention to steam condensate handling (getting insulation here wrong can have catastrophic consequences), insulate every instrument tube and connection... but not too much since you can cook the instrument. Oh ... then since you aren't containing a self heating system inside a small enclosure like
Re: (Score:2)
Rock wool? Here's an article describing what actually is required to winterize wind turbines: https://www.asme.org/topics-re... [asme.org] These de-icing systems, whether heat-based or chemical-based, aren't cheap.
The point is, winterizing ANY kind of power generation technology isn't cheap. Renewable energy sources are not exempt.
Re: (Score:2)
We're talking two different things. The article you link to is about de-icing of turbine blades to maintain peak performance during freezing conditions an improve safety. Absence of blade de-icing machines does not cause power outages. The only part of a blade that actually needs to be heated is the pitch control and the hub, if that rotates freely then the thing spins without the need for any of what the linked article talked about. The hub is largely benefitted from radiant heat inside the nacelle (this t
Re: (Score:2)
Natural gas power plants didn't shut down in Texas last year because the gas froze, but because other components of those plants had not been winterized.
Half of the natural gas pumping stations are powered from the power grid. When sections of the power grid were shut down after loss of wind power, natural gas was cutoff from the natural gas power stations. I guess one could argue that the part of the natural gas power stations which was not winterized, or at least failed first, was the wind turbines.
Re: (Score:3)
I came to that silly idea by doing my homework.
Here's an explanation of the problems caused by ice for wind turbines, and some ways wind turbines are winterized.
https://theconversation.com/th... [theconversation.com]
Re: (Score:2)
They do not "need".
They are getting freezing protection to increase their efficiency.
Big difference. Looking at the Texas incident: the wind turbines kept spinning just fine. However: the grid was down, so they could not feed in.
Re: (Score:2)
From the article:
The uneven way ice forms on blades can create imbalances, causing a turbine’s parts to wear out more quickly. It can also induce vibrations that cause the turbines to shut down. In the case of extreme icing, restarting turbines may not be possible for hours and potentially days.
No, ice doesn't just affect efficiency.
The grid did not shut down. Had it shut down, it would have taken weeks to restart. https://www.kut.org/energy-env... [kut.org]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's not just the cold. It's the freezing rain.
And it's an easy google so you are kinda foolish to have replied so aggressively without double checking that heating is required for windmills in cold climates. (for example: Wicetect OY's patented Ice Prevention System)
see also:
"Sweden tells Texas how to keep turbines spinning in freezing weather
The country uses heating technology to keep its wind turbines operational."
Re: (Score:2)
Freezing rain does not freeze on a spinning turbine made from glass fiber or carbon fiber.
You could have googled that yourself ... pft.
"Sweden tells Texas how to keep turbines spinning in freezing weather
The country uses heating technology to keep its wind turbines operational."
Sweden is not Texas.
Swing and miss (Score:4, Interesting)
"The team also found interconnecting electrical grids from different geographic regions can make the power system more reliable and reduce costs. " -- No shit
No. (Score:5, Insightful)
The answer is 'no', not because it's not possible, but because that's not the problem. The problem is a Texas-only power grid. TFA is talking about connecting it to other regions of the US, but Texas does not want to do that, because once they do they have to follow federal rules for their power grid, and they DO NOT want to do that.
The problem isn't technological, it's Texas Politics.
Tried that (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean connect to the same grid as California?
How's that been working for them?
The answer, in case you're unaware, is that in California you are nine times more likely to have a power outage raining Texas. That's the grid that's going to magically become more reliable?
It's also based on a mistaken impression. Texas has connections to both of the other grids. The difference vs California and other states is that somebody has to *decide* to intentionally close the switch to make that connection when it's actually needed. It doesn't stay connected 24/7 because remember the cascading blackouts that took out the entire northeast and parts of Canada? 99% of those people wouldn't have lost power if there weren't unnecessary connections connected 24/7.
Here in Dallas it's supposed to be 77-78F the next couple days. Last year we had an extremely unlikely event happen. Much like the biggest hurricanes or tornadoes can interrupt your plans, a once-in-century storm caused some issues we had to deal with for a few days.
I'm about to go take a shower. I'm not going in prepared to find a warthog in there simply because it's such a rare occurrence.
Re: (Score:3)
California's been doing fine. Nobody I know has a backup generator and I've not had a blackout in well over a year. That one started in the middle of the night and lasted 7 hours, not even long enough for me to wake up to no electricity.
Last year we had an extremely unlikely event happen. Much like the biggest hurricanes or tornadoes can interrupt your plans, a once-in-century storm caused some issues we had to deal with for a few days.
Didn't you guys have the same thing happen 10 years ago?
Re: (Score:2)
The answer, in case you're unaware, is that in California you are nine times more likely to have a power outage raining Texas. That's the grid that's going to magically become more reliable?
Yes it is. This is Slashdot so let me give you a technical example. Suppose you had a HDD that can fail. It fails and you lose data. *crying face* and now need to go for a backup. Now suppose you have 2 HDDs, you've just doubled you failure rate. DOUBLED. It's horrible. Heck you can add a 3rd HDD and TRIPLE the failure rate. No one in their right mind would do that right?
Now what if these HDD could somehow share the load so that when one goes down the others can continue to provide the necessary data, a sor
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not going in prepared to find a warthog in there simply because it's such a rare occurrence.
That's the thing about life. There is always something unexpected that you have to deal with. In your case, it is an infestation of warthogs in the bathroom. I don't expect I will have to deal with that, but you never know, do you? Maybe I could take out an insurance policy, in case my home is flooded with peanut butter. You can't be too careful.
Re: (Score:3)
And which politics in particular would those be? The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission isn't elected and funded by a political party, and the states adjacent to Texas didn't have blackouts that lasted for up to a week.
Power plants and gas wells in Texas are ultimately regulated by the Railroad Commission, which is notoriously corrupt and is basically just an arm of the industries it regulates. The commissioners are elected and they get millions in donations from those industries.
Re: (Score:3)
It wasn't just a couple of days. In Texas (which is where I live) we had no power in many places for up to a week, with daytime temperatures in single digits and teens. And also the roads were completely iced up, you couldn't even drive to somewhere warm or to get food. Many people had their pipes freeze up and had no water either. That's pretty grim to have to live through.
Re:No. (Score:4, Informative)
When my roads are completely iced up and I can't drive anywhere my power stays on. My heat stays on. My lights are on.
Why? Because the power companies in my area aren't allowed to fuck around. The grid is winterized, maintained, and it has an interconnect to neighboring regions so if we lose some generation we can tap into others.
Yeah, it would be pretty grim to live through a natural disaster if the local politics doesn't allow for ANY of that.
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like you don't live in a state where the oil and power companies basically own the regulating agency. And what's even more sad is that the rural population keeps electing them.
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't just a couple of days. In Texas (which is where I live) we had no power in many places for up to a week, with daytime temperatures in single digits and teens. And also the roads were completely iced up, you couldn't even drive to somewhere warm or to get food. Many people had their pipes freeze up and had no water either. That's pretty grim to have to live through.
I went through the same thing near St. Louis during the January 2007 North American ice storm. I burned a months worth of wood in a week in the fireplace to keep warm and prevent the pipes from freezing.
After that experience, I bought a backup generator sufficient to power the furnace, backup propane heating, and backup kerosene heating.
Re: (Score:3)
People up north have to deal with iced up roads, freezing pipes, etc and they somehow manage. Seems to me, you just got caught flat-footed and ill-prepared because you'd had so many good years that you forgot all about preparing for a hard winter freeze.
Again we are talking about Texas here. Texas where it normally does not freeze. That's like if people starting dying in the north due to a unusually hot summer: "People down south have to death with 100 degree days all the time and somehow they manage. Seems to me you northerners just caught flat-footed . . . "
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Some numbers from ASHRAE listing the median of annual extreme low temperatures for Texas cities - i.e., half of the years experience temperatures below these numbers:
Austin: 20F
Brownsville: 31F
Corpus Christi: 25F
Dallas: 14F
Houston: 24F
Laredo: 28F
San Antonio: 22F
Wichita Falls: 7F
Note that where multiple numbers were listed for a single city, such as for different airports, I only included the warmest temperatur
Re: (Score:2)
Some numbers from ASHRAE listing the median of annual extreme low temperatures for Texas cities - i.e., half of the years experience temperatures below these numbers:
So when I say "normal" and you pull up data for "extreme low temperatures" let us be clear on what "normal" means. It does not mean "extreme low temperatures".
Re: (Score:3)
It's easy to fire up some wood to stay warm and cook.
Except for that people that do not cook with wood normally. Or have fireplaces. Because it is the South.
Re: (Score:2)
Uhh, SRP is a "community-based not-for-profit water and energy company". (https://www.srpnet.com/menu/about/generalinformation.aspx)
Not really private sector. It's a co-op. You're a shareholder only if you own property within their service area. Socialist, nearly communist. %^)
Texas has the resources to be (Score:2)
It's always Mark Jacobson (Score:5, Interesting)
Remember the name of the head of this study: Mark Z. Jacobson. As far as I can tell, every single study touting "we can do everything with 100% renewables No Nuclear, it's easy no problem" is written by Mark Z. Jacobson.
There is clearly a strong scientific consensus that Mark Z. Jacobson is very sure that 100% renewables No Nuclear is feasible, plausible, and the best way to stop global warming. But are there any studies showing that 100% renewables No Nuclear is a feasible and plausible outcome ... that don't have Mark Z Jacobson's name on them? I doubt it, but by all means prove me wrong.
The thing about Mark Z Jacobson is... well, I would direct you to the Mark Z Jacobson Hydro Explainer [wordpress.com].
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Nuclear definitely ain't going to do it. Unless we want to wait 15-20 years for a bunch of totally uneconomical nuke plants to be built by the government. Private industry sure won't touch it.
My solar panels stop working (Score:2)
When the power grid fails. Does not matter how sunny it is, the inverter will not work. To have one that will work when the power fails costs roughly double, as few are made.
The cells also fail to produce much power when it is raining. It does not snow here, but I cannot imagine a layer of snow would do them much good.
I understand it don't rain or snow in places like Arizona. But that ain't Texas and they sure ain't going to have any of that dirty west coast electricity in their wires.
Rang a Bell (Score:5, Informative)
Dr. Spork [slashdot.org]
Here's TFA:
So basically, to make Nuclear just fall off his chart, he assumes that building more powerplants will lead to nuclear war, and calculates how much stuff that will burn. Is that not completely absurd?
Basically, the gist of what he's saying about Nuclear is this: "We have to pretend like it's a bad idea, because if we don't, other countries will want to do it, and then they might build bombs. So, say it with me: Nuclear is a baad idea."
Does somebody want to break it to the guy that Iran and other states will pursue weapons programs no matter what sort of powerplants we build in the US? And besides, what's more likely to cause war: Clean and cost-effective nuclear powerplants that the rest of the world will want to copy, or an energy shortage which sends us looking to secure fossil fuels? I think the latter.
Anyway, this calculating methodology is so incredibly bizarre that I suspect it's bought.
After that, it's hard to think of a good reason everything this zealot (or shill . . . it doesn't even matter at this point) puts out shouldn't be dismissed outright.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As far as I can tell, every single study touting "we can do everything with 100% renewables No Nuclear, it's easy no problem" is written by Mark Z. Jacobson.
You have nailed the problem right there. What we need is to invent more names of authors of informative papers, such as Jason Q. Waterbutt, who is of course highly distinguished in the field of talking bollocks, and well loved in his home town of Dooferville, which is, God be praised, a damn long way away from anywhere.
Please STOP anything from Mark Jacobson, (Score:4, Insightful)
He continues to put out trash and then gets REAMED by his peers. WHy? Because he is full of shit.
At this time, he is only published on crazy journals, nothing respected or reviewed. At one time, he was WELL-RESPECTED, but has stepped way out there.
Just as we suffer from the far right nut jobs that continue to deny AGW, then we have the far left nut jobs, that continue to manipulate as much as they can, in HOPES that they are right.
But there is a REAL reason why he is no longer published in decent journals.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, completely trash journals such as Nature, Science, PNAS. And what crappy university: Stanford!
I guess also your yelling and name calling makes it pretty obvious who is who in this discussion.
Utterly pointless "study". (Score:2)
Why on earth would you even *start* a study like this? If Texans aren't going to pay for winterizing their current infrastructure, then there's 0 chance they'll ever even remotely consider this option.
The person writing and 'studying' all this seems to be so completely blind to reality it's actually kind of funny.
Just go back to oil lamps (Score:2)
Weather-proofing and grid stability (Score:5, Insightful)
The problems Texas had were insufficient weatherproofing and not enough backup for their isolated Grid. They were told about this long before the storm and were given permission to charge more money in order to update the grid.
They charged more money and gave it to their shareholders instead of updating their grid and weatherproofing their generators.
After the storm, the government refused to admit that was the problem and falsely claimed it was the renewables not being able to stand up to a Texas Winter. Despite the fact that their natural gas went down first and clearly caused the problem. Also, funny how renewables can stand up to Canadian Winter but not a Texas Winter. Not to mention a Swedish winter, Finnish Winter, etc.
Can Texas benefit from more renewable energy sources? Definitely. But it will never solve the problem as long they insist on letting their Utility companies budget for the average winter rather than once in a century storm. Especially as the once a century storms seem to be happening once a decade.
Re: (Score:2)
It's far easier and cheaper to winterise renewable energy sources (for most wind turbines that is placing household rockwool in the nacelle) than it is to winterise a gas handling plant.
There's less incentive to "cost optimise" this.
I won't let Texas connect to *MY* grid (Score:3)
The crony capitalism of Texas state government has festered on for too long and there is absolutely no way we can let Texas join our grid without several billion dollar upgrade of every last piece of equipment.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you should read up how interconnects actually work.
Your rant makes no sense at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Fact is, that Texas grid IS connected to western and eastern grid. However, at this time, even combined, these 2 can not provide the power for texas. Why? Because the connections are too small. They are being worked on, but that will take time.
Re: (Score:2)
We agree on more things than you think, but I do not always comment on it :P /. had a "like button".
Would be cool if
It can. (Score:3)
Of course it fucking can. It can be done if they spend a total of about $10K per person over 20 years -- it can be done with or without government help ... but lets say private doesn't want to fund it .. the state government has the money to loan for such an enterprise. Will it? I don't know. Thanks for asking me though. The biggest barrier seems to be that it isn't upfront-cheaper than fossil fuel because fossil fuel doesn't have to pay the health and environmental costs of pumping waste gases into the air.
Uphill battle (Score:2)
Saw this [imgur.com] posted on LinkedIn today
wasn't part of the reason for the blackouts (Score:2)
because of the wind generators they already had installed iced up and weren't functional?
Well duh (Score:2)
Doesn't work when whether is bad (Score:2)
Insanity (Score:2)
Texas leads the country in installed renewable energy. Did not help. Yeah, but, and if only that, and this, would've.
Idiotic (Score:2)
In order to lecture about Texas blackout, here are the requirements:
1. You cannot be from Texas.
2. You cannot understand power in Texas.
3. You must write as an expert about power in Texas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Another clue. Paying pro-renewable lobbyists and organizations is NOT how you do renewable energy. You must DO it.
Electricity doesn't come via "magic". Using electricity does NOT make you "green". Usage of poor storage toxic containers does NOT make you green. In fact, not using them wo