Wow ERCOT just announced that although half the wind turbines in the state were off line due to the weather over the last 5 days (and of course we know they could have been fitted with cold weather kits and worked just fine) the half that were on-line actually produced power in excess of the grid management's expectations. So the green energy sources were the only part of the grid doing their share. The gas plants, the ones that should have been (are counted on as on-demand power world wide) the most reliable failed miserably.
National Emergency declared in Texas
- Thread starter JustinTyme
- Start date
Your statement makes no sense....which isn’t surprising for you. Half the turbines shut down. The other half produced more than what was expected......of one half. Doesn’t say that wind was more than expected of total. So what did wind produce.....52%? 55%? 60%?
What percentage of nat gas shut down? What percentage of expected production did nat gas provide?
Again, get it thro your head. I said all systems failed! What the hell is so hard to understand about that? The fault is not weatherizing for extreme cold.
Ok, this is my last response to you because I agree with another poster in that you're clearly just going to continue to spew whatever MSNBC is telling you is wrong here. I"m willing to bet that most Houstonians that live on the north side of town around the IAH area don't have a clue that their homes are built on top of a GIANT storage field with a capacity of about 120 Bcf. This would be the "intermediate storage" that you're trying to tell me would have helped in this situation. Well guess what sport, it takes piping and compression to get it back out of the ground so your argument is BS. If the power plant was even a few miles away, it would still face similar issues getting gas to it. Hell, if it was right on top of it, the electric compression we installed in the late 90's obviously wouldn't work and the conventional compression may have frozen up as well because it's been sitting there on Bammel Rd longer than I've been alive and I'm getting old. I'm not even sure if it's still there to be honest as they might have gone all electric.
So if we're relying too much on fossil fuels, what is the answer? Your Swedish windmills only work when the wind blows so that is clearly not reliable either. I've been in Amarillo in August when the wind wasn't blowing and used to have video of the windmills just sitting there doing nothing. Solar only works when the sun is out. Please enlighten me all-knowing one.
Math is hard.
I honestly can't tell if he is now advocating putting windmills in critical uses.
Massive batteries that store all that wind and solar and then meter out over time when no wind or cloudy. Now what nobody talks about is the environmental issues making lithium batteries are not neglible and have large environmental impacts. Plus the amount of battery required would be gigantic.
The 'most' green we could be would be to incrementally add wind and solar at a reasonable rate, add in some battery capability to scalp some peak loads, use way more nuclear as that is the 'greenest' mass producing fuel out there, and wean ourselves off of fossil fuel over a 50 year period, not the crazy 10-20 years they are saying now.
The quote was that wind actually produced more than ERCOT had planned for over the same time. I don't know the percentage. I don't work for ERCOT.
ERCOT was quoted (in many sources) that in the winter they expected about 7% of their demand (on average) to be covered by wind power. They specifically said that the power grid failed because the demand went way up at the same time the state's gas supply was being hit very hard. In winter gas is needed to provide both home heating (about 40% of the homes in the state I think) as well as power generation.
ERCOT's planned for worst case scenario is supposed to be hot summer days and A/C, not winter cold. They never planned for this.
For the grid to work, managers must plan ahead of time how much power they will be getting from their various sources and how much demand they expect. They have to do this constantly. When your primary source, gas, fails, you are screwed.
At this point in time wind power is only window dressing in Texas. It could be a lot more, and would be reliable in all weather if it were installed properly. If I were philosopher king of Texas, I would insist on a robust mix of wind, solar, and nuclear (pronounced nuk-u-lar in Texas). Of course the few dozen gas turbine plants currently installed would remain on-line in case of inevitable spikes demand. (That's the beauty of gas turbine plants, they can be turned on very quickly) I would insist on weather-safe installation of all pipelines and power installations, pumping stations, as well as water supplies and other critical infrastructure.
This would be part of a great economic boom and make Texas the envy of many, but would never pass the insane political scene down there.
There are many green alternatives to battery storage (compressed gas, pump storage, etc.), but nobody is doing mass scale storage right now. The simpler way is to have a robust mix of wind and solar all over the state with modular nuclear plants to make sure there are no actual failures. Finally there are already a bunch of gas turbine plants and they should stay on-line and be used as peak demand fill-ins. This would drive the CO2 footprint way down. Obviously clean efficient storage would get you to zero, but that's just not ready today (I don't think).
Ideologues are difficult since you simply shift the goalposts and cite irrelevant or stupid things until we get tired.
Gas storage fields cover tens of thousands of acres across the country wherever companies were able to buy access to depleted gas fields. Then that gas is extracted as necessary and sent through ”midstream” pipelines to large “transmission pipelines.” The transmission pipelines are governed by FERC (federal) and deliver the gas anywhere in the country. The gas is then unloaded to smaller (usually state utility) pipelines for delivery to the final destinations, residential or industrial.
Onsite storage is not a thing except maybe for LNG and I don’t that is done in the US much if at all.
So the problem ahead for Texas is whether to weatherize wind or fossil. Wind has no proven ability to handle demand spikes. Wind power is fine for generating when the wind is blowing but you can’t crank it up. Fossils have a proven ability to handle spikes under any condition assuming design and maintenance are good. Where does Texas spend future dollars?
Texas has 2 Nuclear Power Plant and they don't permit new ones anymore so you can take that off the list as part of your solution.
Nuclear is quietly gaining momentum as the greenest fuel available TODAY. Safety is leaps and bounds ahead of prior generations. Remember that Fukushima would have survived even the worst case scenario if the emergency water pumps had not been placed in the basement and been flooded.
Will it actually become used is the question.
So do you just ignore the dangers of fossil fuels in your calculus or, do you not believe that fossil fuels are changing our climate?
The beauty of wind is you can install a lot more of it than you need and it's still pretty cheap (and getting cheaper every year). Although there are maintenance costs, you don't have to pay much for it once you install it. So, no it's not obvious that you can't capture demand spikes with wind.
If you have excess power, use pump-storage or compressed air for later use at peak times. These are proven low tech power storage solutions.
I would never advocate for mothballing all of the gas power plants in Texas, but there's no need to build new ones. The failure here was all due to Texas not preparing for bad weather.
If Texas cut its carbon footprint by half it would be quite a statement to the world and it would avoid future grid failures.
To be honest I am kind of agnostic on climate change. Climate will always change. Is man accelerating it is the first question.
I cringe every time someone tells me 99% of scientists agree. Scientists all agreed that Newton was right. Until Einstein proved him wrong or at least only approximately correct. I saw someone who mans a weather station in the US who said the temps were going up but then showed his station had been surrounded by a strip mall in the last 20 years. I don’t know enough to agree or not.
The second is how to cure. Some say that we can simply adapt like mankind has always done. The quickest way to cut fossils is to end air conditioning. How many people would agree to that? Without AC Miami would be uninhabitable. With AC Miami gets flooded. Same outcome.
Many people posit many effects global warming may have. Some have been proven wrong or minimal. Some will happen no matter what. The goalposts keep changing so how do you do the calculus without wasting trillions and killing many when the long term effects aren’t certain.
I am not an ideologue but I also don’t believe everything I hear. Remember the PSU prof got caught cooking the books with his ”hockey stick” analysis of data.
I agree - it’s not a technical challenge it’s a political one and a NIMBY one - and there is no where to go with the spent fuel - it’s all sitting in pools at the plants since they killed the Yucca Mountain repository.
Or if they built the sea wall twenty feet higher. Or built the facility 50 feet up the slope.
I think mini nukes will be a key energy source.
NuScale Power | Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Nuclear Technology
We are the global leaders in SMR nuclear technology, delivering our groundbreaking NuScale Power Module to customers in 4, 6, and 12-module VOYGR power plants.
When you dig a little deeper, more facts get exposed. The following is borrowed from the comments section of the linked article.
------
Update: An Emergency Order from the Biden administration’s Department of Energy shows Texas energy grid operator ERCOT was instructed to stay within green energy standards by purchasing energy from outside the state at a higher cost, throttling power output throughout the state ahead of a catastrophic polar vortex.
Going into effect Sunday, Feb. 14, Emergency Order 202-21-1 shows the Energy Dept. was aware of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s statewide disaster declaration and that ERCOT was readying gas utilities in preparation for a demand surge.
The order shows Acting Energy Secretary David Huizenga did not waive environmental restrictions to allow for maximum energy output, instead ordering ERCOT to utilize all resources in order to stay within acceptable emissions standards – including purchasing energy from outside the state.
“ERCOT anticipates that this Order may result in excess emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, and carbon monoxide emissions, as well as wastewater release limits,” the order states. “To minimize adverse environmental impacts, this Order limits operation of dispatched units to the times and within the parameters determined by ERCOT for reliability purposes.”
Moreover, the order instructed an “incremental amount of restricted capacity” to be sold to ERCOT at “a price no lower than $1,500/MWh,” an increase of over 6,000 percent over February 2020 prices of $18.20.
On Wednesday, the Dallas Business Journal reported, “Electricity on the Texas grid has averaged about $1,137.33 per megawatt hour so far in February, up from $18.20 per megawatt hour in February 2020, according to data from the Electricity Reliability Council of Texas. That’s a jump of more than 6,000 percent.”
The EO shows the Biden administration basically ordered ERCOT to throttle its energy output by forcing it to comply with environmental green energy standards, while knowing full well Texans could freeze to death in their homes with zero electricity as temperatures plunged into the single digits.
www.zerohedge.com
------
Update: An Emergency Order from the Biden administration’s Department of Energy shows Texas energy grid operator ERCOT was instructed to stay within green energy standards by purchasing energy from outside the state at a higher cost, throttling power output throughout the state ahead of a catastrophic polar vortex.
Going into effect Sunday, Feb. 14, Emergency Order 202-21-1 shows the Energy Dept. was aware of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s statewide disaster declaration and that ERCOT was readying gas utilities in preparation for a demand surge.
The order shows Acting Energy Secretary David Huizenga did not waive environmental restrictions to allow for maximum energy output, instead ordering ERCOT to utilize all resources in order to stay within acceptable emissions standards – including purchasing energy from outside the state.
“ERCOT anticipates that this Order may result in excess emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, and carbon monoxide emissions, as well as wastewater release limits,” the order states. “To minimize adverse environmental impacts, this Order limits operation of dispatched units to the times and within the parameters determined by ERCOT for reliability purposes.”
Moreover, the order instructed an “incremental amount of restricted capacity” to be sold to ERCOT at “a price no lower than $1,500/MWh,” an increase of over 6,000 percent over February 2020 prices of $18.20.
On Wednesday, the Dallas Business Journal reported, “Electricity on the Texas grid has averaged about $1,137.33 per megawatt hour so far in February, up from $18.20 per megawatt hour in February 2020, according to data from the Electricity Reliability Council of Texas. That’s a jump of more than 6,000 percent.”
The EO shows the Biden administration basically ordered ERCOT to throttle its energy output by forcing it to comply with environmental green energy standards, while knowing full well Texans could freeze to death in their homes with zero electricity as temperatures plunged into the single digits.
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
I don’t know more than the headline I saw a couple months ago, but a coal company put forth a design for a coal plant that was carbon neutral. Obviously this included carbon capture technology. I don’t anything about carbon capture or it’s economics but is that possibly a cheaper alternative? Better than covering a million acres with solar panels?
i dont know the answer but if you cover a million acres with solar don’t you reduce the vegetation which does carbon capture naturally?
i dont know the answer but if you cover a million acres with solar don’t you reduce the vegetation which does carbon capture naturally?
A quick look at yearly record low temps for Dallas over the last 100 years. Since 1970 there have been 4 days (including Monday) where low temp hit single digits. In the 50 years before that it happened 12 times. Not sure if that is statistically significant, but if we blame climate change for -2 Monday, what did they blame during 1928-1935 when 4 yearly low temps were in single digits (including -3 in 1930)?
So the feds said you can ramp up the fossils only as necessary and at 6000% price premium? No wonder the gas plants weren’t more ready.When you dig a little deeper, more facts get exposed. The following is borrowed from the comments section of the linked article.
------
Update: An Emergency Order from the Biden administration’s Department of Energy shows Texas energy grid operator ERCOT was instructed to stay within green energy standards by purchasing energy from outside the state at a higher cost, throttling power output throughout the state ahead of a catastrophic polar vortex.
Going into effect Sunday, Feb. 14, Emergency Order 202-21-1 shows the Energy Dept. was aware of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s statewide disaster declaration and that ERCOT was readying gas utilities in preparation for a demand surge.
The order shows Acting Energy Secretary David Huizenga did not waive environmental restrictions to allow for maximum energy output, instead ordering ERCOT to utilize all resources in order to stay within acceptable emissions standards – including purchasing energy from outside the state.
“ERCOT anticipates that this Order may result in excess emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, and carbon monoxide emissions, as well as wastewater release limits,” the order states. “To minimize adverse environmental impacts, this Order limits operation of dispatched units to the times and within the parameters determined by ERCOT for reliability purposes.”
Moreover, the order instructed an “incremental amount of restricted capacity” to be sold to ERCOT at “a price no lower than $1,500/MWh,” an increase of over 6,000 percent over February 2020 prices of $18.20.
On Wednesday, the Dallas Business Journal reported, “Electricity on the Texas grid has averaged about $1,137.33 per megawatt hour so far in February, up from $18.20 per megawatt hour in February 2020, according to data from the Electricity Reliability Council of Texas. That’s a jump of more than 6,000 percent.”
The EO shows the Biden administration basically ordered ERCOT to throttle its energy output by forcing it to comply with environmental green energy standards, while knowing full well Texans could freeze to death in their homes with zero electricity as temperatures plunged into the single digits.
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
These absolute fabrications should go to the test board. The entire story is a lie.When you dig a little deeper, more facts get exposed. The following is borrowed from the comments section of the linked article.
------
Update: An Emergency Order from the Biden administration’s Department of Energy shows Texas energy grid operator ERCOT was instructed to stay within green energy standards by purchasing energy from outside the state at a higher cost, throttling power output throughout the state ahead of a catastrophic polar vortex.
Going into effect Sunday, Feb. 14, Emergency Order 202-21-1 shows the Energy Dept. was aware of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s statewide disaster declaration and that ERCOT was readying gas utilities in preparation for a demand surge.
The order shows Acting Energy Secretary David Huizenga did not waive environmental restrictions to allow for maximum energy output, instead ordering ERCOT to utilize all resources in order to stay within acceptable emissions standards – including purchasing energy from outside the state.
“ERCOT anticipates that this Order may result in excess emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, and carbon monoxide emissions, as well as wastewater release limits,” the order states. “To minimize adverse environmental impacts, this Order limits operation of dispatched units to the times and within the parameters determined by ERCOT for reliability purposes.”
Moreover, the order instructed an “incremental amount of restricted capacity” to be sold to ERCOT at “a price no lower than $1,500/MWh,” an increase of over 6,000 percent over February 2020 prices of $18.20.
On Wednesday, the Dallas Business Journal reported, “Electricity on the Texas grid has averaged about $1,137.33 per megawatt hour so far in February, up from $18.20 per megawatt hour in February 2020, according to data from the Electricity Reliability Council of Texas. That’s a jump of more than 6,000 percent.”
The EO shows the Biden administration basically ordered ERCOT to throttle its energy output by forcing it to comply with environmental green energy standards, while knowing full well Texans could freeze to death in their homes with zero electricity as temperatures plunged into the single digits.
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
Read the order. It specifically says ERCOT is allowed to do what is necessary to maintain the grid. It requests that they try to avoid violating clean air standards but specifically says they should maintain the grid. It doesn't say $hit about "green energy" standards!!!When you dig a little deeper, more facts get exposed. The following is borrowed from the comments section of the linked article.
------
Update: An Emergency Order from the Biden administration’s Department of Energy shows Texas energy grid operator ERCOT was instructed to stay within green energy standards by purchasing energy from outside the state at a higher cost, throttling power output throughout the state ahead of a catastrophic polar vortex.
Going into effect Sunday, Feb. 14, Emergency Order 202-21-1 shows the Energy Dept. was aware of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s statewide disaster declaration and that ERCOT was readying gas utilities in preparation for a demand surge.
The order shows Acting Energy Secretary David Huizenga did not waive environmental restrictions to allow for maximum energy output, instead ordering ERCOT to utilize all resources in order to stay within acceptable emissions standards – including purchasing energy from outside the state.
“ERCOT anticipates that this Order may result in excess emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, and carbon monoxide emissions, as well as wastewater release limits,” the order states. “To minimize adverse environmental impacts, this Order limits operation of dispatched units to the times and within the parameters determined by ERCOT for reliability purposes.”
Moreover, the order instructed an “incremental amount of restricted capacity” to be sold to ERCOT at “a price no lower than $1,500/MWh,” an increase of over 6,000 percent over February 2020 prices of $18.20.
On Wednesday, the Dallas Business Journal reported, “Electricity on the Texas grid has averaged about $1,137.33 per megawatt hour so far in February, up from $18.20 per megawatt hour in February 2020, according to data from the Electricity Reliability Council of Texas. That’s a jump of more than 6,000 percent.”
The EO shows the Biden administration basically ordered ERCOT to throttle its energy output by forcing it to comply with environmental green energy standards, while knowing full well Texans could freeze to death in their homes with zero electricity as temperatures plunged into the single digits.
Zerohedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
Nice bull$hit story from the conspiracy minded crowd.
Here's a nice summary of the lies that are still being spread about what's going on in Texas
www.businessinsider.com
FACT CHECK: Fox News aired bizarre and wildly misleading claims about Texas' blackouts that pin blame on renewables and climate policies
While millions of Texans suffered from power outages, a slew of Fox News hosts and guests misled their viewers. We fact-checked their claims.
www.businessinsider.com
It doesn’t refer to green energy per se. It says the feds will waive emissions standards for the fossils to power up for the emergency. Big however...Texas would have to pay 6000% more for that power.
what I don’t understand is who got the extra money? The feds as a de facto fine? The power plants— I doubt it.
Everything in that has been discussed by both sides ad nauseum in this thread. Fact checkers may be the coopted media device in the country right now. Their opinions in that article are more shallow than this thread. That is beyond sad.Here's a nice summary of the lies that are still being spread about what's going on in Texas
FACT CHECK: Fox News aired bizarre and wildly misleading claims about Texas' blackouts that pin blame on renewables and climate policies
While millions of Texans suffered from power outages, a slew of Fox News hosts and guests misled their viewers. We fact-checked their claims.
Here's the simple take on what happened. ERCOT couldn't keep up with demand because gas pipelines froze. Right wing pols and their lackeys in the news media tried to blame "green energy." It was a lie and it backfired.
The only price jump is due to the jacking of natural gas prices as pipelines and pumps froze all over the state.
If you recall, the climate cabal was pushing global cooling in the 70s. 40 to 50 years later, we are getting a dose of it again. According to your claim, there was also a dose 40 to 50 years prior to the 70s. It's almost as if the Earth's temperatures change oscillating between minima and maxima in various cycles (11 years to be more precise). Solar Iradiance (gsu.edu). And there are macrocycles that encompass the various 11 year cycles.
But it's not like the Earth's dominant energy source is the sun or anything like that and that variations in the solar output may impact the Earth's temperature. Maybe put all our eggs in the humans precisely controlling Earth temperatures like the thermostat in our houses basket. And for bonus points, why not fund the greatest humans who fly around in private planes applying our money to their plans to intentionally alter what they deem as controllable inputs to this kids stuff easy Earth system. I'm sure they know what they are doing and we sure as heck aren't willing to learn enough to be educated on the topic to have our own thoughts. Plus, thinking for ourselves is pretty out of vogue these days. I mean, you have TVs, don't you?
Another climate denier. Obfuscation is what you do best.
Too bad the science and public record contradict everything you say.
Global warming due to greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere by humans has been an established theory since at least the 70s.
More frequent extreme weather events are a well studied and predictable consequence of this warming.
Do you think the money saved by the consumer and the earnings made by the owners by being a stand alone grid, not subject to federal regulation, were worth it in comparison to the losses this year and ten years ago?
You do know that atmospheric CO2 has been hundreds of times higher in Earth's atmosphere at times both warmer and colder than today. You can't cherry pick less than 1% of the data range available and call it correlation while ignoring the rest of historical data that doesn't fit the narrative.
When you have sat in large auditoriums amongst hundreds of scientists listening to multiple "climate scientists" present their competing models whose inputs and feedbacks completely contradicted one another and can best be described as throwing crap against the wall to engineer a range of desired results that might achieve government grant funding then please let us know. Some of us have.
Last edited:
So you think we should be looking at what happened before the dinosaurs? Earth was a very different place back then with a lot more volcanic activity and no recognizable continents in the locations that we have today. Anything that gets us to that state in less than hundreds of millions of years would have to be considered drastic and severe climate change resulting in mass extinctions, maybe even mass human die offs.You do know that atmospheric CO2 has been hundreds of times higher in Earth's atmosphere at times both warmer and colder than today. You can't cherry pick less than 1% of the data range available and call it correlation while ignoring the rest of historical data that doesn't fit the narrative.
When you have sat in large auditoriums amongst hundreds of scientists listening to multiple "climate scientists" present their competing models whose inputs and feedbacks completely contradicted one another and can best be described as throwing crap against the wall to engineer a range of desired results that might achieve government grant funding then please let us know. Some of us have.
You do realize man (a very early version of man according to the fossil record) has only been on this planet for 5 million years? You want the climate to be what it was 400 million years ago?
A sensible focus would be on a much shorter duration, like since the last ice age. But sure throw out your what-about nonsense. You really are an obfuscater.
I just want to know when the hole in the ozone layer of going to kill us all. Should be any day right?
I want my beachfront property damnit! 20 years on, and I'm still 1,000 yards from the damn ocean. I think ManBearPig lied to me. Not sure, but I very much suspect it.
Your the one who needs to go the Test Board pal - what do you own stock in Windmill Companies? You beat this horse to death - windmills will never be more a partial solution at best - hydrogen is the key to the energy problem and everyone knows it Don Quixote.
They didn’t fire up before the vortex because the feds made monetary suicide. I don’t know if they exceeded the emissions standards at any point during this debacle, but it would have been a lifesaver (literally) if they had been greenlighted beforehand instead of only as necessary at great cost.
If they had been fired up and running, there likely (uneducated guess) would not have been such a surge in gas prices. So who would get the extra money?
I admit this is above my pay grade and would love more info. However your ideological wokeness requires you to call everyone liars and political hacks while you push provably false facts or strained theories as facts.
By the way Europe was in an Ice Age until 1850 so I guess we track climate since then?
They had to pay someone $6000/mwatt. That means some power generator somewhere got huge money.
And nat gas pipelines don’t freeze. It’s a gas. Pumping stations lose power. Metering stations fail. But lines don’t freeze. And these didn’t freeze as people still had gas to the cooking equipment. Nat gas dual system generators froze because they use water for cooling and to generate steam.
All systems failed!!!!
All systems failed!!!
All systems failed!!!!!
Got it yet?
All systems failed!!!!
And if wind is so winderful why was it only expected to produce a mere 7% when it is 22% of the power grid? Why do it produce only 4% instead of the expected 7%?
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Huhn and Mickens: already committed for 2026! Nice start- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley
-
-
Will this be the year we start bringing in offensive 5 stars again?- Latest: Sportfan2017