Anyone can google this but the Berkeley CA refuse dump (franchised by the Berkeley municipal gov) had a steady waste stream of oils that could be converted to biodiesel. Of course non processed liquids have to be processed IAW EPA protocols etc etc. Well it seems like they were able to process and sell app 40,000 gals of biodiesel. What Bekeley found out in trying to open a bio diesel coop fuel station is their OWN rules and regulations etc etc kept them from doing this very logical scenario. It was sort of like we looked in the mirror and saw dah enemy.
Global warming — is there anything it can’t do?
Gore is on board, too. He’s now merely claiming rising temperatures will “create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters.”
Not “warming,” but “weirding.” Not “heating,” but “havoc.” Which is how global warming can cause more snow, less snow, no snow, avalanches, heat waves, cold snaps, wetter wets, drier dries, gingivitis, delirium tremens and irritable bowel syndrome . . . all at the same time!
Well, the one thing it apparently doesn’t do is help predict the weather. The UK’s Met Office stopped giving seasonal forecasts last year after mis-predicting warmer winters three years in a row. Meteorologists without a warmist agenda like Piers Corbyn and AccuWeather’s Joe Bastardi, on the other hand, continue to pay the bills by making predictions directly contrary to the “weirdos.” Oddly, they don’t have degrees in politics.
For a theory to be scientific, it must be fallible — capable of being proven false. If every weather condition can be used to “prove” global warming simply by being declared “weird,” then it’s not science. It’s a joke.
Which is exactly what the environmental movement has become.
My gas bill (furnance) over last year at this time used 10.5% more therms (no change in a set thermostat); to be more specifically "warmed" during global WARMING.
It is not our overnight temps that have been so low this year. It has been the daytime. We usually can depend on a warmer sun to warm the concrete roof tiles which warms the house up. Not this year. Of course it was pleasant most of the Summer as well. Less than two weeks of AC use made for smaller electric bills. I would imagine I used about $300 worth of propane in January, keeping the house at 68 degrees during the day. And it was 61 in the house this morning.
It has been clear with a bright sun and temps topping under 55 degrees. That is a good 15 degrees below our normal this time of year. I notice larsb is in balmy 27 degree Phoenix. :P
Ah yes. In the spirit of the double (double) speak that is a characteristic hallmark of global warming: IF this is global warming, I am sure wishing for global cooling!!! Shoot, I have have to wear real clothing now a days. (this might be TMI :lemon: )
I think the groundhog can be lumped in with the rest of the weather/climate experts, as being completely frivolous. It was -5F here this morning, and we're expecting more snow tomorrow. We've already had numerous roof and building collapses, and it sounds like it's going to get worse. If the Arctic is thawing, we're more than making up for it in the continental U.S. I hear Dallas is enjoying 6" of snow too! And larsb is in the 20's? I'm sure we're going to hear again from the Big Brother IPCC that 2011 was 1 of the warmest ever!
Read the news reports coming out of different areas and note how many people are killed by cold weather - the traffic accidents it causes, and the homeless. Consider how much fuel we burn to keep warm. Consider that people who have been trapped on the roads could be dead from the cold, if it were just a little worse. And you come to the conclusion that if there weren't warming of the Earth, most of the 21st century U.S. will have to be abandoned. Without fossil fuels, and reliable electrical supply from fossil fuels, Canada and much of the U.S. would have to be abandoned. Sure a smaller, more rural population based on wood-fires, hunting, and farming could survive. But our modern life of suburbs and cities would not be sustainable.
So don't worry if we are warming the Earth; worry that we're not warming the Earth before we start experiencing serious shortages of fossil fuels.
Yes and you never hear of the so called "energy overhead" needed to keep a lot of these cherished global warming hallmarks running. So for example, what is the energy draw and equivalent costs for electric light rail? You can bet it is probably more (per mile driven or however one wishes to measure it. This is probably one reason why they do not delineate it.
Gary says, "I notice larsb is in balmy 27 degree Phoenix."
Yep, that's called a "pacific low-pressure storm."
FOLLOWING A CHILLY START TO THE MORNING...A GRADUAL WARMING TREND WILL BEGIN THIS AFTERNOON AND CONTINUE THROUGH THE WEEKEND. NORMAL TEMPERATURES AROUND 70 DEGREES IN THE LOWER DESERTS ARE EXPECTED BY SUNDAY. COOLER TEMPERATURES WILL RETURN BY MID WEEK WITH HIGHS IN THE LOW TO MID 60S.
My solar panels are producing like nobody's business. Hit 24+ kwh per day for the last two days, something that has not happened often in the first 375-ish days I've had the system.
Cold and sunny means more "free" electricity. Bring it on Mother Nature !! :shades:
Even your "results" show that global "WARMING" is not a happening !! All the best. My extra cost and your extra (cash) flow is really a fine illustration fo some of the real reason/s for all this global warming BLATHER.
Well sure. Another example would be the two US political parties. Just look at the recent Murkowski / Miller suit. Just because you identify with a group of folks doesn't mean you agree with them on everything.
You have to agree that much of good environmental policy has been hijacked by eco terrorist like Al Gore. Many environmentalist are motivated by bad science and political hyperbole. Common sense environmentalism does not go off half cocked and end up with a mess like Corn Ethanol. An environmental scientist that does not buy into the hype.
Moore is the author of the book, “Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout: The Making of a Sensible Environmentalist,” in which he exposes the green movement and explains why he left the organization.
While talking with Varney, he explained that departure was in part due to the group’s “extremist positions” and it being hijacked by political and social causes as well as the left:
Key Excerpts of Ecologist Dr. Patrick Moore: “We do not have any scientific proof that we are the cause of the global warming that has occurred in the last 200 years The alarmism is driving us through scare tactics to adopt energy policies that are going to create a huge amount of energy poverty among the poor people. It’s not good for people and its not good for the environment In a warmer world we can produce more food.”
Moore was asked who is promoting man-made climate fears what are their motives?
Moore: “A powerful convergent of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue”
Moore says scientific dissent is growing: “There are many thousands of scientists’ who reject man-made global warming fears It’s all based on computer models and predictions. We do not actually have a crystal ball, it is a mythical object.”
Battle of the groundhogs: Metro Atlanta groundhog boasts more accuracy than Punxsutawney Phil
Politics, step aside. The Truth-O-Meter must address a matter of Southern pride.
The honor and reputation of our local groundhog General Beauregard Lee.
For three decades, the South’s most esteemed weather prognosticator has lived in the stout and lumpy shadow of Punxsutawney Phil.
Phil makes the rounds yearly on the morning talk shows. He’s made appearances with Oprah Winfrey and President Ronald Reagan. His agent even scored him a gig with Bill Murray in the 1993 movie "Groundhog Day."
On Wednesday, PolitiFact Georgia scribes rolled our eyes as the public fawned over Phil once again during Wednesday’s annual Groundhog Day celebration. Phil never saw his shadow, news accounts said. Spring will come early.
But should you really trust Phil? Beau’s website says our metro Atlanta celebrity is accurate 94 percent of the time. Phil’s record is a measly 85 percent, it said. That stat has been picked up by various news outlets.
Does Beau really deserve second place to that Yankee glory hog?
My favorite groundhog is the one that bit Mayor Bloomberg and sent him scurrying to the hospital a couple years ago.
have to agree that much of good environmental policy has been hijacked
Oh, I don't have to agree with that at all. Every group I've been associated with, from the local canoe club to ..., well, maybe I'm a bit too much like Groucho 'cause I can't think of too many other groups that I want to associate with. :P
But they all seem to have their spats and people trying to pull everyone else in one direction or another. Who better to test policy and ideals than the zealots in your group? With political issues, the other side likes to pick up on the internecine warfare and exaggerate it.
With political issues, the other side likes to pick up on the internecine warfare and exaggerate it.
And that characterizes man. We all have an agenda. If we find someone that shares our view we join forces with them until we have a difference of opinion and divide the group.
To keep it somewhat on subject I can think of so many examples in our energy policies over the last 5 years where zealots will push some so-called environmental issue and some slick company will capitalize and rape the tax payer. Of course Corn ethanol is my favorite whipping boy as it does so much more environmental damage than it can possibly do good. Now we have the Chinese selling US wind generators made in China with our tax dollars. They already got Congress to mandate light bulbs that they make because we are unable to build them due to mercury regulations. The same for the batteries in the new Government Motors Volt. Made in Korea and assembled in the USA. $billions wasted on energy projects that provide so few jobs in the USA. Those behind the waste are Eco Terrorist in my eyes. And the Congress and President are being bought with campaign contributions.
I have pulled my support of all my affiliations except the NRA. The only ones with an honest agenda. Sierra Club & Audubon are controlled by the Warmist. The NWF as neo Marxist as you can get. There are some good folks in the San Diego Audubon society that are just interested in birding. I get that local newsletter and visit them now and then.
zealots will push some so-called environmental issue and some slick company will capitalize
Nah, in those cases it's the company that's writing the regs, paying the lobbyists, creating the fake "enviro" groups and cashing in. I'm sure the ammo makers and Smith & Wesson are in thick with the NRA.
The NRA should be out there fighting GW to protect habitat loss (you'd think they'd realize they have a whole lot in common with the Sierra Club and Audubon). Too much money coming in from the gas burning ATV crowd I guess. (Daily Kos link for you :shades: )
Nah, in those cases it's the company that's writing the regs, paying the lobbyists, creating the fake "enviro" groups and cashing in. I'm sure the ammo makers and Smith & Wesson are in thick with the NRA.
S&W have common interest with NRA, so it is a natural union. It was the AGW push for less CO2 that spawned such nonsense as Corn Ethanol. ADM and friends in the mega farm industry took advantage and may well have written the law. With the full blessing of the Liberal Left Enviros in Congress. No regard for the aquifer or the Gulf Dead Zone. No proof it would save US a single gallon of oil. And a great supply of Cane ethanol for the buying in Brazil, except it was taxed out by you guessed it another Eco Nut Jimmy Carter.
I agree that NRA, Audubon and the Sierra Club have common interest. I think you will find that much of the sport license fees in many states is used for habitat protection. The difference I see is Audubon and Sierra Club have bought into the AGW and waste too many resources on AGW propaganda and not enough on real habitat saving projects.
Speaking of Kayaks, you see this yet. Not an eco nut, just a nut.
My last report was about our stimulus dollars building Wind Generators in China. Seems we are also doing the same with Solar panel production.
After receiving at least $43 million in aid from the state of Massachusetts, Evergreen Solar announced last month that it would be closing its manufacturing plant in Devens, Mass., laying off its 800 workers and moving its manufacturing operations to China.
Warning: These are the "green jobs" that President Obama has touted as part of his "winning the future" agenda.
The problem isn't that Obama wants to direct federal dollars toward research for alternative energy. It is in the national interest to have affordable options when oil sources are depleted.
The problem is that Obama thinks that green jobs are the answer to the anemic economy recovery. And he clings to that belief in the face of contrary evidence.
Last May, the president came to solar-panel manufacturer Solyndra in Fremont, Calif., to celebrate a new plant -- creating 3,000 construction jobs and 1,000 permanent workers. President Obama exclaimed, "The true engine of economic growth will always be companies like Solyndra."
Within months, Solyndra, which has yet to turn a profit, announced that it was canceling the expansion. Solyndra, the San Jose Mercury News reported, has shifted more than half of its production to -- you guessed it -- China.
At best, you can describe Obamaland's choice of venue as bad advance work.
BEIJING — Aided by at least $43 million in assistance from the government of Massachusetts and an innovative solar energy technology, Evergreen Solar emerged in the last three years as the third-largest maker of solar panels in the United States.
But now the company is closing its main American factory, laying off the 800 workers by the end of March and shifting production to a joint venture with a Chinese company in central China. Evergreen cited the much higher government support available in China.
The factory closing in Devens, Mass., which Evergreen announced earlier this week, has set off political recriminations and finger-pointing in Massachusetts.
Wind power is now cost competitive with coal power in many parts of the world, according to a new report by Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
Over the past few years, as demand for wind turbines has grown, manufacturers have lowered their prices, meaning the cost of wind power has fallen and will likely continue to remain competitive with fossil fuel power. The Bloomberg study says that last year the cost per megawatt for turbines hit $1.33 million, which is 17 percent less than in 2007.
In regions of Brazil, Mexico, Sweden and the U.S., wind power now costs $68/MWh and coal power costs $67/MWh. Natural gas remains cheapest at $56/MWh.
This is great news for the future of wind power generation. If it costs the same as or less than fossil fuels, more people will realize that the choice is obvious.
You are in denial. Ask the residents of TX what they think of Wind generation right about now. Wind IS NOT VIABLE if you have to have an equal amount of backup generation equipment ready to go when the wind don't blow or the wind generators freeze up.
Over the past year the industry in the United States, for instance, has seen the wind taken out of its sails as demand has fallen due to the economy and natural gas prices have plummeted.
According to Bloomberg, contracts signed in late 2010 for turbines to be delivered in the first half of this year this year fell 7 percent from 2009 to an average of $1.33 million a megawatt. That's a 19 percent decline since 2007.
How is Wind generation good for our economy when it all has to be imported from China? It further erodes our failing economy. Alternative energy at any cost will destroy our fragile economy and leave an enormous debt for our children to pay.
Gary says, "How is Wind generation good for our economy when it all has to be imported from China?"
Well, first of all, it *ALL* doesn't come from China.
The turbine towers are all made HERE. The installations are done HERE by AMERICANS. The maintenance is done by AMERICANS here in AMERICA. The wind generated it monitored and distributed by AMERICAN utility companies. GE Energy in NY supplied 30 percent of the turbine blades in the USA in 2007.
Second - how did you manage to falsely tie "Wind Generation" into the rolling blackout situation in TX? The blackouts are not because of anything related to "green energy" AT ALL !! They are just the state setting USAGE RECORDS. It has nothing to do with clean energy !! It ONLY has to do with UNUSUALLY HIGH DEMAND !!!
Shell Oil Co said severe winter weather triggered a malfunction in fuel production units at its 329,800 barrel-per-day (bpd) joint-venture refinery in Deer Park, Texas.
Freezing weather shut at least 600 million cubic feet per day of natural gas production in three Texas basins, according to data from Bentek Energy.
Apparently 50 out of Texas’ 550 power plants went down Wednesday morning, knocking off 8,000 mw, or about 12% of demand. Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said the problem appeared be inadequate winterization and that the trouble centered on two new coal-fired plants owned by Luminant (a subsidiary of Energy Future Holdings, formerly TXU) which suffered a broken pipe and a frozen pipe.
The wind turbines were still spinning and generating during the ice/snow storms. They don't "Freeze up" at all. At least not the huge ones in my part of Texas which I drive by four times every year.
It was the perfect storm for sure. Much of the Coal generation was down for maintenance during the normally light winter months. Gas production was down due to cold. And clear cold weather does not produce much wind.
Wind generators apparently do not work as well when it is cold. There were enough areas in Texas on Tuesday where the night was clear and cold and the wind dropped, shutting down generating capacity apparently quite rapidly.
While wind generation of electricity was high during the hours of 5 AM to 7 AM on February 2, wind generator output had dropped by the time the blackout reached my brothers house. In addition the windmills are a long way away from the Texas cities where there were rolling blackouts, and 30% to 35% 0f the wind generated electricity generated was lost during its transmission to those cities.
This was one of the wind generators that did not produce when needed. Probably cheap Chinese model now being sold across the USA.
As has been stated; winf power is fine but you do need an equivalent generation facility by other, more reliable, methods for when the wind don't blow.
Here in the U.K. we are said to be the "Windiest area of Europe", (but that might be just horse feathers to help promote wind turbines). Whatever, the official figures for 2010 show that wind power contributed in the region of 25% of its installed capacity over the year. During December - when we had Arctic conditions and a need for lots of power - the contribution of wind power was "effectively 0%", but the wind power Industry proudly proclaims that is was "actually 5.6%".............. so much better. The extreme cold brought flat calm with it.
Not a fan, (no pun intended), of wind power but know that we should be concentrating on wave and tidal power as we have access to lots of that and it IS reliable. Oh, and the furthest point anywhere in the U.K. is from the sea is just 72 miles. We're a relatively small island.
. . Gary says, "In addition the windmills are a long way away from the Texas cities where there were rolling blackouts, and 30% to 35% 0f the wind generated electricity generated was lost during its transmission to those cities."
Well, that's just POOR INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING, not poor use of available wind. In the places near my hometown where they have dozens of square miles of wind production, the wind blows virtually ALL the time. I have never driven past those wind farms and seen more than 1-5 not turning at all, in fields of literally hundreds of turbines.
I don't think anyone in reality will ever see or use wind as the ONLY method of electricity production for huge numbers of people - at least in many areas of the USA.
In fact, the kids and I always play "who can spot the most turbines NOT turning?" when we drive by, and it's ALWAYS a small number. And we drive by there twice in December/January.
My point remains true that "wind power problems" had virtually ZERO to do with the Texas rolling blackouts - so we should quit playing the "misplaced blame game."
Well that was from your article. You put the wind farm where the wind blows. Not always close to the demand. Our closest wind farm is about 50 miles from San Diego. The power company has had one heck of a time getting permits to get the power from the wind mills to the people. Too many eco nuts in the mix. Always something to protect in the best most direct route.
I don't think anyone in reality will ever see or use wind as the ONLY method of electricity production for huge numbers of people
1 or a million, is irrelevant. If it does not produce electricity when you need it, backup is required. We have grown accustomed to having electricity when we turn on the switch. Telling someone that they may have outages if the wind should stop blowing is not acceptable. I think our friend from the UK has given US a good example of the facts. Wind is far from dependable. Seemed like a good idea at the time. Just not working out as planned. Look for further downturns in the industry as subsidies are no longer available. It is just another form of corporate welfare stealing from the tax payers.
Wind is just like solar is to you. It's great if you have it. You have a lot of sunshine, and thus solar is viable to you. Others may have wind and it is viable for them. But to propose either to the majority of the population, is like telling everyone they shouldn't go hungry - that they can always fish.
There are too many problems with both right now to be very helpful. The price is high and the government is going broke and could not offer incentive to 10's of millions of households to install these systems, as most would be blocked by zoning problems. Wind and solar can reduce our use of fossil fuels some. However we will never produce enough windmills or solar panels to provide adequate power for the 7 billion people of this Earth. Maybe 2-3 billion people right now have adequate access to the energy they want. Unless you can 3X or 4X our energy output and do it with and solar, you're going to have a large part of the population of the Earth who are going to buy oil and natural gas from the suppliers.
Even if all of the U.S. and all of Europe stopped using oil and natural gas, what would happen? The price would plunge, and the suppliers would look to new markets. Suddenly you would find that new markets for those fuels would open up to people who previously couldn't afford them. I'll say it once again for you - unless you can supply everyone with all the energy they need in a Green manner, fossil fuels will be burned up. The genie is out of the bottle. Someone, somewhere, who needs energy, will buy and burn the fossil fuels.
Evidently that is EXACTLY what environ cons do; if the success rate in keeping projects from starting, tied up for years in court/s battle/s or being shut down is any gauge.
Neither is telling them that rolling blackouts happened because STANDARD FOSSIL FUEL generation plants failed.
But that happened.
Don't hold wind to a HIGHER standard than you do coal.
Again you just don't get it. Who is supposed to pay for keeping the backup Coal generators ready at a moments notice if the wind dies? That is what happened in TX. It can take days to get a coal generation system back up to capacity. If you have your back up gas generators torn down for maintenance, what happens when a sudden change in the climate drops the temp and the wind dies. That is the flaw in Wind and Solar. Individual solar is fine, though if it quits during a rain storm you expect the utility to make up the difference. I find that to be a welfare program. I will produce my own electricity and if it fails you can jump in and provide it. It only raises the cost to everyone else to keep maximum capacity at your beck and call.
Gary, Gary, Gary. I'm gonna end your little fallacy of knowledge right now.
Gary says, "Who is supposed to pay for keeping the backup Coal generators ready at a moments notice if the wind dies? That is what happened in TX."
Oh Really? And where, praytell, did you read that little incorrect gem?
Or is that just "Gary's Interpretation" of what happened? Oh, yes, that's what it is.
Did you miss that part that this was the LARGEST ever Megawatt requirement in the state?
Did you see ANYONE at ERCOT say "wind turbine production failures caused this problem" ??? ?
Um, No, you did not. In fact, the OPPOSITE happened:
ERCOT CEO Trip Doggett: “I’m not aware of any nuclear plant problems, and I’m not aware of any specific issues with wind turbines having to shut down due to icing. I would highlight that we put out a special word of thanks to the wind community because they did contribute significantly through this timeframe. Wind was blowing, and we had often 3,500 megawatts of wind generation during that morning peak, which certainly helped us in this situation.”
Your view is a typical Conservative view that anything bad which happens and can be "somehow associated" with Green Energy MUST OF COURSE BE BLAMED ON SAID GREEN ENERGY.
That belief is idiotic beyond words. Not the people, but the IDEA. Smart people can and do say dumb things - these forums prove that every day.
And I'm way too mad about your solar comments to even respond. Maybe later.
Did you miss that part that this was the LARGEST ever Megawatt requirement in the state?
And pray tell where you got that tidbit of misinformation. It is far from the summer load and barely matched the peak from last winter.
There are many wind farms in Texas and, as of March 2010, Texas has 9410 (MW) of capacity, which is the most wind power capacity of any U.S. state
My simple calculation says that the Wind farms were only producing about 37% of capacity max, according to your ERCOT source.
You can be mad all you want about alternative energy including solar. It is a giant waste of tax dollars and purely corporate welfare. How much ends up back in the campaign coffers of both political parties? We are the losers my friend, when it comes to green energy. To me the only viable alternative currently available is nuclear and we have let the rest of the World pass US by.
Here's my links on what failed. Looks like emissions equipment shut down the coal plants due to the cold. And wind generators DID IN FACT ICE UP.
Here’s What (Probably) Caused The Rolling Blackouts
Three of these four units only began operating in the last few years; Fraser, who chairs the Senate Committee on Natural Resources, noted that they had new emissions-control technologies, and said one question was how those technologies had handled the cold.
Dave Knox, a spokesman for NRG, another power company, said that a cold-weather problem also caused a shut-down of its Limestone coal plant near Jewitt, Texas.
Wind generators also appeared to be having problems, said Fraser; he had received reports of some turbines shutting down because of issues with ice on the blades. “The wind was blowing yesterday, but I’m not sure wind generation was available because they had problems with ice,” he said. (At an Iberdrola wind farm near Corpus Christi that the Tribune visited yesterday, most turbines were spinning steadily, in response to the grid operator’s call for maximum production. But the plant’s operator, Daniel Pitts, said that a few machines were having issues because the cold air had affected the nitrogen in the hydraulic system that helps run the turbines.) Dottie Roark, a spokeswoman for ERCOT, the grid operator, said that yesterday morning between 5 a.m. and 8 a.m., about 3500-4000 megawatts of wind was available (the state has about 10,000 Megawatts of wind installed).
Gary says, "And pray tell where you got that tidbit of misinformation. It is far from the summer load and barely matched the peak from last winter."
Right from your "opinion" page posting:
Electricity demand spiked in Texas yesterday as the cold weather struck, setting a wintertime record for usage.
So, like I said - the largest ever Megawatt requirement in winter in the state's history.
Enough "guessing." This is what ACTUALLY caused the rolling blackouts:
He noted that there were “a lot of unusual circumstances” to this storm, and that while Texas was well-prepared for spiking electricity usage in the summer, “to my knowledge we’ve never been tested for an event during the winter.”
So it was an unusual storm, catching Texas with their "winterization pants down." Wind "not working" had nothing major to do with it. Loss of wind power was a minor blip in the overall picture.
"I think the broad message is that all types of generators have different characteristics and that they all work together to try and provide a reliable system," engineer Brian Parsons of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado, wrote in an e-mail to Insider. "That said, it is a good thing that wind was able to contribute during a time of grid stress. ... So often we see (possibly overblown) concerns raised regarding wind's negative impact on the grid."
To think otherwise is just showing bias, without fact to back it up.
Gary, sometimes it appears that you get this "MMGW is a SCAM" *HAZE* which clouds your ability to see things reasonably. You might want to work on that.
The old record from last year was 57,000 MWs. This year it was 58,000 MWs. Hardly a big jump in demand. I gave you the facts. The Green weenies have to share much of the blame. They have forced coal generating power companies to put on emissions controls without adequate testing. They have pushed for wind generation with no viable backup.
Now that we are moving into a mini ice age we will have to redo a lot of our thinking and infrastructure that was pushed in the wrong direction by the Hoax known as AGW.
Gary says, "Now that we are moving into a mini ice age we will have to redo a lot of our thinking and infrastructure that was pushed in the wrong direction by the Hoax known as AGW."
By that you obviously mean that we need MORE green energy solutions than we previously thought, to help keep the heaters running. Obviously.
Who is supposed to pay for keeping the backup Coal generators ready
Didn't I post a link in hear a year or so ago about the entire city of Fairbanks having a battery backup in case the power went out?
We've always had redundant systems - that's the big excuse for all the powerlines. Seems better to have the green solutions running as much as possible, and then switch to natural gas or whatever when something goes down or needs maintenance.
The more redundancy the higher the utility cost. Not everywhere can afford the luxury of 100% redundancy. I do remember the warehouse full of batteries in Fairbanks. Last I read BESS was good for about 7 minutes of backup while they crank up the old diesel generators. It is mainly to give them time if the Anchorage grid they ride on goes down. I don't think Alaska has much Wind generation. With 8 months of possible icing it probably would be a waste of money. Not to mention3 months of no sun for solar when the power consumption is highest. If I was going to live off the grid, I would use plain old cheap Lead acid batteries. Not those expensive Nicads they used in Fairbanks.
While this link is not directly tied to GW, I'm posting it here to show you another example of the liars and fools that are giving us data and information.
How many times do these guys cry "Wolf" & lie to support their agenda, and then expect us to believe their next scam. Our leaders in the U.S. government, the U.N. and all its agencies are mainly looking out for their own power and wealth. How can you believe anything these guys say, when day after day we see the lies, scams, and hypocrisy in every corner of the governments.
The demand for electricity for the DFW area of TX on the day of the blackouts was 58,000 MWs. That is more electricity than the whole country of Spain uses. If they provided 75% of their demand with only 16,000 MWs they don't use very much electricity. TX alone has nearly that much Wind generation and it provides about 1% of the states needs.
They hope to be generating 20,000 MW from wind by 2010 up from the 16,000 MW they're currently producing.
Last week, during a spell of particularly strong wind gusts, Spain set a world record by having 40 percent of their energy requirement generated by wind power. The high winds in the northwest of the country generated a whopping 11,180 MW during the strongest gust.
Gary says, "The demand for electricity for the DFW area of TX on the day of the blackouts was 58,000 MWs."
Gary, that demand number was actually the WHOLE STATE, not just the DFW area.
The typical daily usage for Texas in April is about 40,000 megawatts, but the state pushed 52,000 megawatts on Monday, said ERCOT spokesman Paul Wattles. By 6:15 p.m., ERCOT declared the emergency over and stopped the rolling blackouts.
I visited over the Christmas holidays a year or two ago (got cousins in Midland too - no, they aren't Bushes :-)).
The locals seem to like the mills. There's not much other industry there besides huge ranches with poor carrying capacity and some oil and gas. I have to say that Sweet smells better than Midland. Didn't notice the cows and the windmills don't stink. But the stripper wells around Midland are enough to give you headaches.
The typical daily usage for Texas in April is about 40,000 megawatts
OK, so that is about twice the load for the whole country of Spain. If the 11,000 MW of installed Wind generation was working to maximum the state of TX could supply 50% of Spain's need. We know from this last episode that 35% is about as good as it gets with wind.
My concern is not if Wind works. I am concerned that we are paying double by having backup ready to go. I do not see the benefit. If the residents of TX were given a special deal on electricity with the understanding they may not have 24/7 availability, I could understand. I don't think it is right that tax payers in Georgia have to subsidize the utilities in TX. When the Feds steal tax dollars and subsidize a wind or solar farm in TX or CA it is flat wrong.
PS Steve Midland stinks. Both in TX and Michigan. My dad was born in Midland MI.
That is a great question that some here would like covered up. I know Wind generators from the late 1970s cost US $millions and are all part of the scrap heap of waste.
True Cost of Electricity from Wind Is Always Underestimated and Its Value Is Always Overestimated
Probably the most common wind energy question that I receive from analysts, reporters, and interested citizens deals with the cost of electricity from wind. The frequency of the question is understandable since estimates provided by the wind industry, federal and state agencies and contractors, and the media understate the true cost and ignore the fact that electricity from wind is very low in value.
Typically, those asking the question would like a simple way to compare the cost of electricity from wind with the cost of electricity from other sources. Unfortunately, that isn’t possible. For those who insist:
* The first short answer is that the true financial cost of electricity from wind is huge compared to electricity from reliable generating sources.
* The second short answer is that the cost of electricity from wind should not be compared with the cost of electricity from reliable generating sources because the value of electricity from wind is much lower.
Pervasive misunderstanding of the true cost and value of electricity from wind
In fact, few people in the general public, media or government know the facts about the high true cost and low true value of electricity from wind. For example, not long ago, the delegate to the General Assembly representing our district in Virginia stated repeatedly during a telephonic “town hall” that electricity from wind “is now competitive” with electricity from coal. The delegate has a degree in electrical engineering and a long record of accomplishments in electronics. His statement is consistent with claims often made by wind industry lobbyists but, unfortunately, the statement is false.
The delegate’s false statement is understandable since the US Department of Energy (DOE), DOE’s National “Laboratories” and other contractors (all paid with tax dollars), the wind industry; and other wind energy advocates have, for years, issued false and misleading claims about the cost and value of electricity from wind.
The above article is a must read for all those misinformed about Wind generation:
Point 1: There is a fundamental difference between wind turbines and reliable electric generating units.
There is a vast difference between electric generating units that produce electricity only intermittently, such as wind turbines, and reliable generating units that can be counted on to produce electricity when it is needed. To be more specific:
1. Electricity cannot be stored in significant amounts and, therefore, must be produced as it is needed (or “demanded”) by customers. Demand for electricity by customers – whether residential, commercial, or industrial — varies widely by time of day, day of week, season of the year, prevailing weather and temperature, strength of the economy, and other factors
2. Managers of electric grids are responsible for assuring that enough electricity is always available to meet customers’ demand and, while doing this, must keep the gird in balance (in terms of supply & demand, voltage and frequency) . To do this, grid managers must always have available and under their control generating units that are:
1. Reliable, that is, the unit(s) must be available or operable and have necessary fuel so that it can be counted on to produce electricity when its output is needed, and
2. Dispatchable, that is, the unit(s) must be subject to the grid manager’s control so that it can be brought on line (i.e., begin production) or taken off line (i.e., stop production), and, for a unit on line, it can be ramped up or down (i.e., increasing or decreasing its output).
In addition to keeping the grid in balance at all times, grid managers must also have reliable and dispatchable generating capacity in reserve , which capacity can be called upon immediately if there is an unplanned outage of one or more on line generating units (or transmission lines), or if there is a significant, unexpected increase in electricity demand.
The wind industry often pretends that this operating reserve of generating capacity should be or is a “free good” that should be available for its use – preferably at no cost — to make up for the fact that their wind turbines can’t be counted on to produce electricity when it is promised or needed (i.e., the turbines have little or no real capacity value), especially at the time of peak electricity demand. However, cutting into a grid’s operating reserve means that there would be less of a reserve available to its real purpose.
3. Wind turbines are not reliable or dispatchable. They produce electricity only when the wind is blowing within the right speed range (shown in footnote #1). Their output is intermittent, volatile, largely unpredictable, and unreliable. If wind turbines are connected to the grid serving the control area, the grid manager must have reliable generating capacity immediately available to “back up” the intermittent, volatile and unreliable output from wind turbines and keep the grid in balance.
4. Generating units that qualify as reliable and dispatchable are those with turbine-generators powered by natural gas, oil, coal, nuclear energy and hydropower. How quickly a generating unit can be brought on line or ramped up or down varies widely, depending on such factors as the generating technology (e.g., using steam turbine or gas turbine), the energy source, and the age and condition of the unit.
Just like the AGW Scam, Follow the money. It has nothing to do with saving the planet and everything to do with filling the pockets of snake oil salesmen.
I wonder how much that free electricity actually cost, compared to coal?
I don't much like wind either, but every little bit of power generation available should help depress the cost of coal and oil and natural gas. Less competition usually means higher prices.
I don't understand the argument against backups. When I lived in Chattanooga, TVA lopped off the top of nearby Raccoon Mountain to make a water storage facility. When demand is slack overnight they pump water uphill. When AC demand peaks, they drain the water to run generators.
It cost a lot of money to build and costs a lot to maintain. And it costs more to pump the water uphill than it earned by releasing it later. Pretty dumb in some ways but typical.
Seems like Idaho Power had a lot of self contained generators built on semi trailers that they could move around in event of outages.
Nuclear plants require scheduled shutdowns for maintenance; they must have something in place to supply power during those times (not to mention the accidental shutdowns).
Seems to me that solar would be pretty ideal as a main power generation utility with backups available from the grid or other sources. The capital costs should be cheaper than nukes and the running costs should be cheaper than coal or oil or gas. You have to plan for backup power no matter what your generation source is.
Fuel cells are still around too btw. New ones are getting installed in San Diego by Cox. (Yahoo News). There's another potential backup source. (SIEI).
Comments
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review
Gore is on board, too. He’s now merely claiming rising temperatures will “create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters.”
Not “warming,” but “weirding.” Not “heating,” but “havoc.” Which is how global warming can cause more snow, less snow, no snow, avalanches, heat waves, cold snaps, wetter wets, drier dries, gingivitis, delirium tremens and irritable bowel syndrome . . . all at the same time!
Well, the one thing it apparently doesn’t do is help predict the weather. The UK’s Met Office stopped giving seasonal forecasts last year after mis-predicting warmer winters three years in a row. Meteorologists without a warmist agenda like Piers Corbyn and AccuWeather’s Joe Bastardi, on the other hand, continue to pay the bills by making predictions directly contrary to the “weirdos.” Oddly, they don’t have degrees in politics.
For a theory to be scientific, it must be fallible — capable of being proven false. If every weather condition can be used to “prove” global warming simply by being declared “weird,” then it’s not science. It’s a joke.
Which is exactly what the environmental movement has become.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1314036
It has been clear with a bright sun and temps topping under 55 degrees. That is a good 15 degrees below our normal this time of year. I notice larsb is in balmy 27 degree Phoenix. :P
Read the news reports coming out of different areas and note how many people are killed by cold weather - the traffic accidents it causes, and the homeless. Consider how much fuel we burn to keep warm. Consider that people who have been trapped on the roads could be dead from the cold, if it were just a little worse. And you come to the conclusion that if there weren't warming of the Earth, most of the 21st century U.S. will have to be abandoned. Without fossil fuels, and reliable electrical supply from fossil fuels, Canada and much of the U.S. would have to be abandoned. Sure a smaller, more rural population based on wood-fires, hunting, and farming could survive. But our modern life of suburbs and cities would not be sustainable.
So don't worry if we are warming the Earth; worry that we're not warming the Earth before we start experiencing serious shortages of fossil fuels.
Yep, that's called a "pacific low-pressure storm."
FOLLOWING A CHILLY START TO THE MORNING...A GRADUAL WARMING TREND WILL BEGIN THIS AFTERNOON AND CONTINUE THROUGH THE WEEKEND. NORMAL TEMPERATURES AROUND 70 DEGREES IN THE LOWER DESERTS ARE EXPECTED BY SUNDAY. COOLER TEMPERATURES WILL RETURN BY MID WEEK WITH HIGHS IN THE LOW TO MID 60S.
My solar panels are producing like nobody's business. Hit 24+ kwh per day for the last two days, something that has not happened often in the first 375-ish days I've had the system.
Cold and sunny means more "free" electricity. Bring it on Mother Nature !! :shades:
Well sure. Another example would be the two US political parties. Just look at the recent Murkowski / Miller suit. Just because you identify with a group of folks doesn't mean you agree with them on everything.
Just look at all us Edmunds posters.
Moore is the author of the book, “Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout: The Making of a Sensible Environmentalist,” in which he exposes the green movement and explains why he left the organization.
While talking with Varney, he explained that departure was in part due to the group’s “extremist positions” and it being hijacked by political and social causes as well as the left:
Key Excerpts of Ecologist Dr. Patrick Moore: “We do not have any scientific proof that we are the cause of the global warming that has occurred in the last 200 years The alarmism is driving us through scare tactics to adopt energy policies that are going to create a huge amount of energy poverty among the poor people. It’s not good for people and its not good for the environment In a warmer world we can produce more food.”
Moore was asked who is promoting man-made climate fears what are their motives?
Moore: “A powerful convergent of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue”
Moore says scientific dissent is growing: “There are many thousands of scientists’ who reject man-made global warming fears It’s all based on computer models and predictions. We do not actually have a crystal ball, it is a mythical object.”
Metro Atlanta groundhog boasts more accuracy than Punxsutawney Phil
Politics, step aside. The Truth-O-Meter must address a matter of Southern pride.
The honor and reputation of our local groundhog General Beauregard Lee.
For three decades, the South’s most esteemed weather prognosticator has lived in the stout and lumpy shadow of Punxsutawney Phil.
Phil makes the rounds yearly on the morning talk shows. He’s made appearances with Oprah Winfrey and President Ronald Reagan. His agent even scored him a gig with Bill Murray in the 1993 movie "Groundhog Day."
On Wednesday, PolitiFact Georgia scribes rolled our eyes as the public fawned over Phil once again during Wednesday’s annual Groundhog Day celebration. Phil never saw his shadow, news accounts said. Spring will come early.
But should you really trust Phil? Beau’s website says our metro Atlanta celebrity is accurate 94 percent of the time. Phil’s record is a measly 85 percent, it said. That stat has been picked up by various news outlets.
Does Beau really deserve second place to that Yankee glory hog?
My favorite groundhog is the one that bit Mayor Bloomberg and sent him scurrying to the hospital a couple years ago.
Staten Island Chuck Predicts A Shorter Winter
Groundhog bites Bloomberg at ceremony
Charles G. Hogg, my kind of groundhog.
Oh, I don't have to agree with that at all. Every group I've been associated with, from the local canoe club to ..., well, maybe I'm a bit too much like Groucho 'cause I can't think of too many other groups that I want to associate with. :P
But they all seem to have their spats and people trying to pull everyone else in one direction or another. Who better to test policy and ideals than the zealots in your group? With political issues, the other side likes to pick up on the internecine warfare and exaggerate it.
And that characterizes man. We all have an agenda. If we find someone that shares our view we join forces with them until we have a difference of opinion and divide the group.
To keep it somewhat on subject I can think of so many examples in our energy policies over the last 5 years where zealots will push some so-called environmental issue and some slick company will capitalize and rape the tax payer. Of course Corn ethanol is my favorite whipping boy as it does so much more environmental damage than it can possibly do good. Now we have the Chinese selling US wind generators made in China with our tax dollars. They already got Congress to mandate light bulbs that they make because we are unable to build them due to mercury regulations. The same for the batteries in the new Government Motors Volt. Made in Korea and assembled in the USA. $billions wasted on energy projects that provide so few jobs in the USA. Those behind the waste are Eco Terrorist in my eyes. And the Congress and President are being bought with campaign contributions.
I have pulled my support of all my affiliations except the NRA. The only ones with an honest agenda. Sierra Club & Audubon are controlled by the Warmist. The NWF as neo Marxist as you can get. There are some good folks in the San Diego Audubon society that are just interested in birding. I get that local newsletter and visit them now and then.
Nah, in those cases it's the company that's writing the regs, paying the lobbyists, creating the fake "enviro" groups and cashing in. I'm sure the ammo makers and Smith & Wesson are in thick with the NRA.
The NRA should be out there fighting GW to protect habitat loss (you'd think they'd realize they have a whole lot in common with the Sierra Club and Audubon). Too much money coming in from the gas burning ATV crowd I guess. (Daily Kos link for you :shades: )
S&W have common interest with NRA, so it is a natural union. It was the AGW push for less CO2 that spawned such nonsense as Corn Ethanol. ADM and friends in the mega farm industry took advantage and may well have written the law. With the full blessing of the Liberal Left Enviros in Congress. No regard for the aquifer or the Gulf Dead Zone. No proof it would save US a single gallon of oil. And a great supply of Cane ethanol for the buying in Brazil, except it was taxed out by you guessed it another Eco Nut Jimmy Carter.
I agree that NRA, Audubon and the Sierra Club have common interest. I think you will find that much of the sport license fees in many states is used for habitat protection. The difference I see is Audubon and Sierra Club have bought into the AGW and waste too many resources on AGW propaganda and not enough on real habitat saving projects.
Speaking of Kayaks, you see this yet. Not an eco nut, just a nut.
http://www.dump.com/2010/11/30/highest-waterfall-in-a-kayak-189-ft-video/
After receiving at least $43 million in aid from the state of Massachusetts, Evergreen Solar announced last month that it would be closing its manufacturing plant in Devens, Mass., laying off its 800 workers and moving its manufacturing operations to China.
Warning: These are the "green jobs" that President Obama has touted as part of his "winning the future" agenda.
The problem isn't that Obama wants to direct federal dollars toward research for alternative energy. It is in the national interest to have affordable options when oil sources are depleted.
The problem is that Obama thinks that green jobs are the answer to the anemic economy recovery. And he clings to that belief in the face of contrary evidence.
Last May, the president came to solar-panel manufacturer Solyndra in Fremont, Calif., to celebrate a new plant -- creating 3,000 construction jobs and 1,000 permanent workers. President Obama exclaimed, "The true engine of economic growth will always be companies like Solyndra."
Within months, Solyndra, which has yet to turn a profit, announced that it was canceling the expansion. Solyndra, the San Jose Mercury News reported, has shifted more than half of its production to -- you guessed it -- China.
At best, you can describe Obamaland's choice of venue as bad advance work.
Green jobs sent to China
BEIJING — Aided by at least $43 million in assistance from the government of Massachusetts and an innovative solar energy technology, Evergreen Solar emerged in the last three years as the third-largest maker of solar panels in the United States.
But now the company is closing its main American factory, laying off the 800 workers by the end of March and shifting production to a joint venture with a Chinese company in central China. Evergreen cited the much higher government support available in China.
The factory closing in Devens, Mass., which Evergreen announced earlier this week, has set off political recriminations and finger-pointing in Massachusetts.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/business/energy-environment/15solar.html
.
.
Watch out Nasty King Coal !!! Prince Windy is right on your tail !!!
Wind power now competitive with coal in some regions
Wind power is now cost competitive with coal power in many parts of the world, according to a new report by Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
Over the past few years, as demand for wind turbines has grown, manufacturers have lowered their prices, meaning the cost of wind power has fallen and will likely continue to remain competitive with fossil fuel power. The Bloomberg study says that last year the cost per megawatt for turbines hit $1.33 million, which is 17 percent less than in 2007.
In regions of Brazil, Mexico, Sweden and the U.S., wind power now costs $68/MWh and coal power costs $67/MWh. Natural gas remains cheapest at $56/MWh.
This is great news for the future of wind power generation. If it costs the same as or less than fossil fuels, more people will realize that the choice is obvious.
Over the past year the industry in the United States, for instance, has seen the wind taken out of its sails as demand has fallen due to the economy and natural gas prices have plummeted.
According to Bloomberg, contracts signed in late 2010 for turbines to be delivered in the first half of this year this year fell 7 percent from 2009 to an average of $1.33 million a megawatt. That's a 19 percent decline since 2007.
How is Wind generation good for our economy when it all has to be imported from China? It further erodes our failing economy. Alternative energy at any cost will destroy our fragile economy and leave an enormous debt for our children to pay.
Well, first of all, it *ALL* doesn't come from China.
The turbine towers are all made HERE.
The installations are done HERE by AMERICANS.
The maintenance is done by AMERICANS here in AMERICA.
The wind generated it monitored and distributed by AMERICAN utility companies.
GE Energy in NY supplied 30 percent of the turbine blades in the USA in 2007.
Second - how did you manage to falsely tie "Wind Generation" into the rolling blackout situation in TX? The blackouts are not because of anything related to "green energy" AT ALL !! They are just the state setting USAGE RECORDS. It has nothing to do with clean energy !! It ONLY has to do with UNUSUALLY HIGH DEMAND !!!
Shell Oil Co said severe winter weather triggered a malfunction in fuel production units at its 329,800 barrel-per-day (bpd) joint-venture refinery in Deer Park, Texas.
Freezing weather shut at least 600 million cubic feet per day of natural gas production in three Texas basins, according to data from Bentek Energy.
Apparently 50 out of Texas’ 550 power plants went down Wednesday morning, knocking off 8,000 mw, or about 12% of demand. Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said the problem appeared be inadequate winterization and that the trouble centered on two new coal-fired plants owned by Luminant (a subsidiary of Energy Future Holdings, formerly TXU) which suffered a broken pipe and a frozen pipe.
The wind turbines were still spinning and generating during the ice/snow storms. They don't "Freeze up" at all. At least not the huge ones in my part of Texas which I drive by four times every year.
Wind generators apparently do not work as well when it is cold. There were enough areas in Texas on Tuesday where the night was clear and cold and the wind dropped, shutting down generating capacity apparently quite rapidly.
While wind generation of electricity was high during the hours of 5 AM to 7 AM on February 2, wind generator output had dropped by the time the blackout reached my brothers house. In addition the windmills are a long way away from the Texas cities where there were rolling blackouts, and 30% to 35% 0f the wind generated electricity generated was lost during its transmission to those cities.
This was one of the wind generators that did not produce when needed. Probably cheap Chinese model now being sold across the USA.
Here in the U.K. we are said to be the "Windiest area of Europe", (but that might be just horse feathers to help promote wind turbines). Whatever, the official figures for 2010 show that wind power contributed in the region of 25% of its installed capacity over the year. During December - when we had Arctic conditions and a need for lots of power - the contribution of wind power was "effectively 0%", but the wind power Industry proudly proclaims that is was "actually 5.6%".............. so much better. The extreme cold brought flat calm with it.
Not a fan, (no pun intended), of wind power but know that we should be concentrating on wave and tidal power as we have access to lots of that and it IS reliable. Oh, and the furthest point anywhere in the U.K. is from the sea is just 72 miles. We're a relatively small island.
.
Gary says, "In addition the windmills are a long way away from the Texas cities where there were rolling blackouts, and 30% to 35% 0f the wind generated electricity generated was lost during its transmission to those cities."
Well, that's just POOR INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING, not poor use of available wind. In the places near my hometown where they have dozens of square miles of wind production, the wind blows virtually ALL the time. I have never driven past those wind farms and seen more than 1-5 not turning at all, in fields of literally hundreds of turbines.
I don't think anyone in reality will ever see or use wind as the ONLY method of electricity production for huge numbers of people - at least in many areas of the USA.
In fact, the kids and I always play "who can spot the most turbines NOT turning?" when we drive by, and it's ALWAYS a small number. And we drive by there twice in December/January.
My point remains true that "wind power problems" had virtually ZERO to do with the Texas rolling blackouts - so we should quit playing the "misplaced blame game."
Well that was from your article. You put the wind farm where the wind blows. Not always close to the demand. Our closest wind farm is about 50 miles from San Diego. The power company has had one heck of a time getting permits to get the power from the wind mills to the people. Too many eco nuts in the mix. Always something to protect in the best most direct route.
I don't think anyone in reality will ever see or use wind as the ONLY method of electricity production for huge numbers of people
1 or a million, is irrelevant. If it does not produce electricity when you need it, backup is required. We have grown accustomed to having electricity when we turn on the switch. Telling someone that they may have outages if the wind should stop blowing is not acceptable. I think our friend from the UK has given US a good example of the facts. Wind is far from dependable. Seemed like a good idea at the time. Just not working out as planned. Look for further downturns in the industry as subsidies are no longer available. It is just another form of corporate welfare stealing from the tax payers.
There are too many problems with both right now to be very helpful. The price is high and the government is going broke and could not offer incentive to 10's of millions of households to install these systems, as most would be blocked by zoning problems. Wind and solar can reduce our use of fossil fuels some. However we will never produce enough windmills or solar panels to provide adequate power for the 7 billion people of this Earth. Maybe 2-3 billion people right now have adequate access to the energy they want. Unless you can 3X or 4X our energy output and do it with and solar, you're going to have a large part of the population of the Earth who are going to buy oil and natural gas from the suppliers.
Even if all of the U.S. and all of Europe stopped using oil and natural gas, what would happen? The price would plunge, and the suppliers would look to new markets. Suddenly you would find that new markets for those fuels would open up to people who previously couldn't afford them. I'll say it once again for you - unless you can supply everyone with all the energy they need in a Green manner, fossil fuels will be burned up. The genie is out of the bottle. Someone, somewhere, who needs energy, will buy and burn the fossil fuels.
That's just ludicrous.
You have a clean energy resource, free from Mother Nature, it needs to be utilized to it's maximum degree.
Gary says, "Telling someone that they may have outages if the wind should stop blowing is not acceptable."
Neither is telling them that rolling blackouts happened because STANDARD FOSSIL FUEL generation plants failed.
But that happened.
Don't hold wind to a HIGHER standard than you do coal.
But that happened.
Don't hold wind to a HIGHER standard than you do coal.
Again you just don't get it. Who is supposed to pay for keeping the backup Coal generators ready at a moments notice if the wind dies? That is what happened in TX. It can take days to get a coal generation system back up to capacity. If you have your back up gas generators torn down for maintenance, what happens when a sudden change in the climate drops the temp and the wind dies. That is the flaw in Wind and Solar. Individual solar is fine, though if it quits during a rain storm you expect the utility to make up the difference. I find that to be a welfare program. I will produce my own electricity and if it fails you can jump in and provide it. It only raises the cost to everyone else to keep maximum capacity at your beck and call.
Gary says, "Who is supposed to pay for keeping the backup Coal generators ready at a moments notice if the wind dies? That is what happened in TX."
Oh Really? And where, praytell, did you read that little incorrect gem?
Or is that just "Gary's Interpretation" of what happened? Oh, yes, that's what it is.
Did you miss that part that this was the LARGEST ever Megawatt requirement in the state?
Did you see ANYONE at ERCOT say "wind turbine production failures caused this problem" ??? ?
Um, No, you did not. In fact, the OPPOSITE happened:
ERCOT CEO Trip Doggett: “I’m not aware of any nuclear plant problems, and I’m not aware of any specific issues with wind turbines having to shut down due to icing. I would highlight that we put out a special word of thanks to the wind community because they did contribute significantly through this timeframe. Wind was blowing, and we had often 3,500 megawatts of wind generation during that morning peak, which certainly helped us in this situation.”
Your view is a typical Conservative view that anything bad which happens and can be "somehow associated" with Green Energy MUST OF COURSE BE BLAMED ON SAID GREEN ENERGY.
That belief is idiotic beyond words. Not the people, but the IDEA. Smart people can and do say dumb things - these forums prove that every day.
And I'm way too mad about your solar comments to even respond. Maybe later.
And pray tell where you got that tidbit of misinformation. It is far from the summer load and barely matched the peak from last winter.
There are many wind farms in Texas and, as of March 2010, Texas has 9410 (MW) of capacity, which is the most wind power capacity of any U.S. state
My simple calculation says that the Wind farms were only producing about 37% of capacity max, according to your ERCOT source.
You can be mad all you want about alternative energy including solar. It is a giant waste of tax dollars and purely corporate welfare. How much ends up back in the campaign coffers of both political parties? We are the losers my friend, when it comes to green energy. To me the only viable alternative currently available is nuclear and we have let the rest of the World pass US by.
Here’s What (Probably) Caused The Rolling Blackouts
Three of these four units only began operating in the last few years; Fraser, who chairs the Senate Committee on Natural Resources, noted that they had new emissions-control technologies, and said one question was how those technologies had handled the cold.
Dave Knox, a spokesman for NRG, another power company, said that a cold-weather problem also caused a shut-down of its Limestone coal plant near Jewitt, Texas.
Wind generators also appeared to be having problems, said Fraser; he had received reports of some turbines shutting down because of issues with ice on the blades. “The wind was blowing yesterday, but I’m not sure wind generation was available because they had problems with ice,” he said. (At an Iberdrola wind farm near Corpus Christi that the Tribune visited yesterday, most turbines were spinning steadily, in response to the grid operator’s call for maximum production. But the plant’s operator, Daniel Pitts, said that a few machines were having issues because the cold air had affected the nitrogen in the hydraulic system that helps run the turbines.) Dottie Roark, a spokeswoman for ERCOT, the grid operator, said that yesterday morning between 5 a.m. and 8 a.m., about 3500-4000 megawatts of wind was available (the state has about 10,000 Megawatts of wind installed).
http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/02/03/heres-what-caused-the-rolling-blackouts/
Right from your "opinion" page posting:
Electricity demand spiked in Texas yesterday as the cold weather struck, setting a wintertime record for usage.
So, like I said - the largest ever Megawatt requirement in winter in the state's history.
Enough "guessing." This is what ACTUALLY caused the rolling blackouts:
He noted that there were “a lot of unusual circumstances” to this storm, and that while Texas was well-prepared for spiking electricity usage in the summer, “to my knowledge we’ve never been tested for an event during the winter.”
So it was an unusual storm, catching Texas with their "winterization pants down." Wind "not working" had nothing major to do with it. Loss of wind power was a minor blip in the overall picture.
"I think the broad message is that all types of generators have different characteristics and that they all work together to try and provide a reliable system," engineer Brian Parsons of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado, wrote in an e-mail to Insider. "That said, it is a good thing that wind was able to contribute during a time of grid stress. ... So often we see (possibly overblown) concerns raised regarding wind's negative impact on the grid."
To think otherwise is just showing bias, without fact to back it up.
Gary, sometimes it appears that you get this "MMGW is a SCAM" *HAZE* which clouds your ability to see things reasonably. You might want to work on that.
Now that we are moving into a mini ice age we will have to redo a lot of our thinking and infrastructure that was pushed in the wrong direction by the Hoax known as AGW.
By that you obviously mean that we need MORE green energy solutions than we previously thought, to help keep the heaters running. Obviously.
Didn't I post a link in hear a year or so ago about the entire city of Fairbanks having a battery backup in case the power went out?
We've always had redundant systems - that's the big excuse for all the powerlines. Seems better to have the green solutions running as much as possible, and then switch to natural gas or whatever when something goes down or needs maintenance.
http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/09/our-dollar-chinas-2-trillion-problem/
How many times do these guys cry "Wolf" & lie to support their agenda, and then expect us to believe their next scam. Our leaders in the U.S. government, the U.N. and all its agencies are mainly looking out for their own power and wealth. How can you believe anything these guys say, when day after day we see the lies, scams, and hypocrisy in every corner of the governments.
He just passed this tidbit along:
Renewables Supplied 75% of Spain's Electricity on January 6 (Ecogeek)
I guess it was nice and windy that day.
They hope to be generating 20,000 MW from wind by 2010 up from the 16,000 MW they're currently producing.
Last week, during a spell of particularly strong wind gusts, Spain set a world record by having 40 percent of their energy requirement generated by wind power. The high winds in the northwest of the country generated a whopping 11,180 MW during the strongest gust.
http://www.ecogeek.org/wind-power/2631
Gary, that demand number was actually the WHOLE STATE, not just the DFW area.
The typical daily usage for Texas in April is about 40,000 megawatts, but the state pushed 52,000 megawatts on Monday, said ERCOT spokesman Paul Wattles. By 6:15 p.m., ERCOT declared the emergency over and stopped the rolling blackouts.
Sweetwater is not farm from my hometown and the couple of other towns I visit twice a year on my trips "home."
I actually went to college (technical school) in Sweetwater for 2 years in the mid-80s.
They are almost ALWAYS producing electricity. There are a LOT of turbines there.
The locals seem to like the mills. There's not much other industry there besides huge ranches with poor carrying capacity and some oil and gas. I have to say that Sweet smells better than Midland. Didn't notice the cows and the windmills don't stink. But the stripper wells around Midland are enough to give you headaches.
OK, so that is about twice the load for the whole country of Spain. If the 11,000 MW of installed Wind generation was working to maximum the state of TX could supply 50% of Spain's need. We know from this last episode that 35% is about as good as it gets with wind.
My concern is not if Wind works. I am concerned that we are paying double by having backup ready to go. I do not see the benefit. If the residents of TX were given a special deal on electricity with the understanding they may not have 24/7 availability, I could understand. I don't think it is right that tax payers in Georgia have to subsidize the utilities in TX. When the Feds steal tax dollars and subsidize a wind or solar farm in TX or CA it is flat wrong.
PS Steve
Midland stinks. Both in TX and Michigan. My dad was born in Midland MI.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
True Cost of Electricity from Wind Is Always Underestimated and Its Value Is Always Overestimated
Probably the most common wind energy question that I receive from analysts, reporters, and interested citizens deals with the cost of electricity from wind. The frequency of the question is understandable since estimates provided by the wind industry, federal and state agencies and contractors, and the media understate the true cost and ignore the fact that electricity from wind is very low in value.
Typically, those asking the question would like a simple way to compare the cost of electricity from wind with the cost of electricity from other sources. Unfortunately, that isn’t possible. For those who insist:
* The first short answer is that the true financial cost of electricity from wind is huge compared to electricity from reliable generating sources.
* The second short answer is that the cost of electricity from wind should not be compared with the cost of electricity from reliable generating sources because the value of electricity from wind is much lower.
Pervasive misunderstanding of the true cost and value of electricity from wind
In fact, few people in the general public, media or government know the facts about the high true cost and low true value of electricity from wind. For example, not long ago, the delegate to the General Assembly representing our district in Virginia stated repeatedly during a telephonic “town hall” that electricity from wind “is now competitive” with electricity from coal. The delegate has a degree in electrical engineering and a long record of accomplishments in electronics. His statement is consistent with claims often made by wind industry lobbyists but, unfortunately, the statement is false.
The delegate’s false statement is understandable since the US Department of Energy (DOE), DOE’s National “Laboratories” and other contractors (all paid with tax dollars), the wind industry; and other wind energy advocates have, for years, issued false and misleading claims about the cost and value of electricity from wind.
http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/true-cost-of-electricity-from-wind-is-always- -underestimated-and-its-value-is-always-overestimated/
Point 1: There is a fundamental difference between wind turbines and reliable electric generating units.
There is a vast difference between electric generating units that produce electricity only intermittently, such as wind turbines, and reliable generating units that can be counted on to produce electricity when it is needed. To be more specific:
1. Electricity cannot be stored in significant amounts and, therefore, must be produced as it is needed (or “demanded”) by customers. Demand for electricity by customers – whether residential, commercial, or industrial — varies widely by time of day, day of week, season of the year, prevailing weather and temperature, strength of the economy, and other factors
2. Managers of electric grids are responsible for assuring that enough electricity is always available to meet customers’ demand and, while doing this, must keep the gird in balance (in terms of supply & demand, voltage and frequency) . To do this, grid managers must always have available and under their control generating units that are:
1. Reliable, that is, the unit(s) must be available or operable and have necessary fuel so that it can be counted on to produce electricity when its output is needed, and
2. Dispatchable, that is, the unit(s) must be subject to the grid manager’s control so that it can be brought on line (i.e., begin production) or taken off line (i.e., stop production), and, for a unit on line, it can be ramped up or down (i.e., increasing or decreasing its output).
In addition to keeping the grid in balance at all times, grid managers must also have reliable and dispatchable generating capacity in reserve , which capacity can be called upon immediately if there is an unplanned outage of one or more on line generating units (or transmission lines), or if there is a significant, unexpected increase in electricity demand.
The wind industry often pretends that this operating reserve of generating capacity should be or is a “free good” that should be available for its use – preferably at no cost — to make up for the fact that their wind turbines can’t be counted on to produce electricity when it is promised or needed (i.e., the turbines have little or no real capacity value), especially at the time of peak electricity demand. However, cutting into a grid’s operating reserve means that there would be less of a reserve available to its real purpose.
3. Wind turbines are not reliable or dispatchable. They produce electricity only when the wind is blowing within the right speed range (shown in footnote #1). Their output is intermittent, volatile, largely unpredictable, and unreliable. If wind turbines are connected to the grid serving the control area, the grid manager must have reliable generating capacity immediately available to “back up” the intermittent, volatile and unreliable output from wind turbines and keep the grid in balance.
4. Generating units that qualify as reliable and dispatchable are those with turbine-generators powered by natural gas, oil, coal, nuclear energy and hydropower. How quickly a generating unit can be brought on line or ramped up or down varies widely, depending on such factors as the generating technology (e.g., using steam turbine or gas turbine), the energy source, and the age and condition of the unit.
Just like the AGW Scam, Follow the money. It has nothing to do with saving the planet and everything to do with filling the pockets of snake oil salesmen.
I don't much like wind either, but every little bit of power generation available should help depress the cost of coal and oil and natural gas. Less competition usually means higher prices.
I don't understand the argument against backups. When I lived in Chattanooga, TVA lopped off the top of nearby Raccoon Mountain to make a water storage facility. When demand is slack overnight they pump water uphill. When AC demand peaks, they drain the water to run generators.
It cost a lot of money to build and costs a lot to maintain. And it costs more to pump the water uphill than it earned by releasing it later. Pretty dumb in some ways but typical.
Seems like Idaho Power had a lot of self contained generators built on semi trailers that they could move around in event of outages.
Nuclear plants require scheduled shutdowns for maintenance; they must have something in place to supply power during those times (not to mention the accidental shutdowns).
Seems to me that solar would be pretty ideal as a main power generation utility with backups available from the grid or other sources. The capital costs should be cheaper than nukes and the running costs should be cheaper than coal or oil or gas. You have to plan for backup power no matter what your generation source is.
Fuel cells are still around too btw. New ones are getting installed in San Diego by Cox. (Yahoo News). There's another potential backup source. (SIEI).