{SIGH} Gosh I miss 2020.
"Frozen Wind Turbines.." from ERCOT
16,468 Views |
274 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by fadskier
Jack and DP said:
If only periodic cleaning was figured into the maintenance costs. Oh wait it is. Germans are too smart and efficient to not figure snow into the equation when building their plants. It's pretty standard to clean them regularly, and as anyone knows it's easy to get a sunburn on the ski slopes. Irradiation calculations for solar works the same way.
I agree with part of paragraph one. Natural gas power plants make the most sense for the US and for the planet, at least until something else new is invented (aka Hydrogen storage). Cant run it all on solar and wind, but it should be a decentralized mix of all those options and more.Doc Holliday said:I'm against coal. Yes I know about reclamation.quash said:Never seen a coal mine have you?Doc Holliday said:"Intensely local" lmao, try 2000 miles of Appalachian. Try the entire Appalachian if we go fully "green".quash said:If you define earth in intensely local ways, sure. Somebody missed the turn last night in the snow and destroyed the earth. On the other side of the curb...Doc Holliday said:Mountain top removal to mine for precious metals doesn't destroy the earth or entire ecosystems?quash said:Way to spank that credibility. Do you ghostwrite for the climate change alarmists?Doc Holliday said:
earth destroying solar and wind technologies
I'm in favor of oil and gas with carbon capture because it's much cleaner and cheaper than mining for precious metals to create batteries, solar panels and wind turbines. Not to mention dangerous battery disposal.
Be smart enough not to buy into the solar and wind energy rhetoric: they clearly suck and aren't that clean. Nuclear is the real way to go but government can't siphon wealth off of something that's 98% renewable.
Solar and wind are very clean in terms of CO2e emission though, even taken over the whole cost of the project from mining to manufacturing the panels/batteries. Literally 100 times cleaner than coal. But natural gas emits half the emission of coal. So that is a good start, and an affordable one for now.
A sensible way to have a good energy grid is to diversify and decentralize the power source to all forms of energy production. And don't build any new coal fired power plants. Don't close the existing ones. Let them run their course. Then replace it with natural gas or renewables. That is the sensible way forward both financially and for the planet for the time being.
ERCOT needs to be blown up too. Stupid ****ers.
Nuclear? The most efficient, safest and cleanest option out there. You are willfully dumb to deny this.Buddha Bear said:I agree with part of paragraph one. Natural gas power plants make the most sense for the US and for the planet, at least until something else new is invented (aka Hydrogen storage). Cant run it all on solar and wind, but it should be a decentralized mix of all those options and more.Doc Holliday said:I'm against coal. Yes I know about reclamation.quash said:Never seen a coal mine have you?Doc Holliday said:"Intensely local" lmao, try 2000 miles of Appalachian. Try the entire Appalachian if we go fully "green".quash said:If you define earth in intensely local ways, sure. Somebody missed the turn last night in the snow and destroyed the earth. On the other side of the curb...Doc Holliday said:Mountain top removal to mine for precious metals doesn't destroy the earth or entire ecosystems?quash said:Way to spank that credibility. Do you ghostwrite for the climate change alarmists?Doc Holliday said:
earth destroying solar and wind technologies
I'm in favor of oil and gas with carbon capture because it's much cleaner and cheaper than mining for precious metals to create batteries, solar panels and wind turbines. Not to mention dangerous battery disposal.
Be smart enough not to buy into the solar and wind energy rhetoric: they clearly suck and aren't that clean. Nuclear is the real way to go but government can't siphon wealth off of something that's 98% renewable.
Solar and wind are very clean in terms of CO2e emission though, even taken over the whole cost of the project from mining to manufacturing the panels/batteries. Literally 100 times cleaner than coal. But natural gas emits half the emission of coal. So that is a good start, and an affordable one for now.
A sensible way to have a good energy grid is to diversify and decentralize the power source to all forms of energy production. And don't build any new coal fired power plants. Don't close the existing ones. Let them run their course. Then replace it with natural gas or renewables. That is the sensible way forward both financially and for the planet for the time being.
The Texas power grid is one example of why Texit wouldn't work. When things are working good, it would be great to be independent from the US, but when a disaster comes up, Texans want the US federal government to save them. The same thing will happen the next time a hurricane hits Texas.
I'm not against it. I just haven't studied it. It seems the destruction from accidents is less of a worry than it was years ago. The only argument from me is that there is no room for error ever with it. Placement and security of the plants has got to be perfect. No earthquakes, no hurricanes, floods, etc. If that can be overcome, then it should definitely be part of the mix.BellCountyBear said:Nuclear? The most efficient, safest and cleanest option out there. You are willfully dumb to deny this.Buddha Bear said:I agree with part of paragraph one. Natural gas power plants make the most sense for the US and for the planet, at least until something else new is invented (aka Hydrogen storage). Cant run it all on solar and wind, but it should be a decentralized mix of all those options and more.Doc Holliday said:I'm against coal. Yes I know about reclamation.quash said:Never seen a coal mine have you?Doc Holliday said:"Intensely local" lmao, try 2000 miles of Appalachian. Try the entire Appalachian if we go fully "green".quash said:If you define earth in intensely local ways, sure. Somebody missed the turn last night in the snow and destroyed the earth. On the other side of the curb...Doc Holliday said:Mountain top removal to mine for precious metals doesn't destroy the earth or entire ecosystems?quash said:Way to spank that credibility. Do you ghostwrite for the climate change alarmists?Doc Holliday said:
earth destroying solar and wind technologies
I'm in favor of oil and gas with carbon capture because it's much cleaner and cheaper than mining for precious metals to create batteries, solar panels and wind turbines. Not to mention dangerous battery disposal.
Be smart enough not to buy into the solar and wind energy rhetoric: they clearly suck and aren't that clean. Nuclear is the real way to go but government can't siphon wealth off of something that's 98% renewable.
Solar and wind are very clean in terms of CO2e emission though, even taken over the whole cost of the project from mining to manufacturing the panels/batteries. Literally 100 times cleaner than coal. But natural gas emits half the emission of coal. So that is a good start, and an affordable one for now.
A sensible way to have a good energy grid is to diversify and decentralize the power source to all forms of energy production. And don't build any new coal fired power plants. Don't close the existing ones. Let them run their course. Then replace it with natural gas or renewables. That is the sensible way forward both financially and for the planet for the time being.
Jean-Michel Connard[url=https://twitter.com/torriangray][/url]
@torriangray
so my eldest brother, who is a moron, has been playing soldier with his moron friends in the deserts of texas for the last year preparing for the collapse of civilization if biden won (lol). they were burying food and ammo stashes out in the desert, running drills, crazy stuff
[url=https://twitter.com/torriangray][/url]Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
this included getting a cb license so he could be their lifeline to other groups of white idiots when the cell towers all went offline. wouldn't want to violate federal law while communicating with your resistance groups after the fall of the federal government i guess.
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
anyways, you would assume given that they've been prepping for the end of the world for at least a year they're well situated to ride out the rolling blackouts right?
wellll
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
their plan for cooking and heating during an extended power outage was natural gas, but like a lot of homes their gas service is out. the food in their freezer and fridge is already toast due to the power outrages, so they're down to canned stuff, but there's a catch.
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
[url=https://twitter.com/torriangray][/url]
they can get into the pull top cans just fine, but the ones that require an opener? their only can opener is electric. so a good 3/4 of his canned food store is inaccessible to him unless he goes after it with a knife, which i sincerely hope he does.
so captain survival was eating unheated ravioli out of a can yesterday because i guess he doesn't know how to start a fire? they have a fire pit but it too is gas fired.
he told my mom they're probably going to break into the survival buckets soon. i'm sure that's great food.
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
he told my mom that the blackout is due to texas switching everything to "wind power" but that he didn't discount that the government was doing this on purpose. if you can figure out why they'd arbitrarily freeze out a giant state hey points to you.
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
the saving grace in all this is he's having to ration his phone usage so he can't sit on the phone with my mom for hours crying about it. he's forced to sit there and talk to his wife, who is almost as dumb as he is.
presumably he's sitting there shivering, ranting about libs while he sucks down cold beefaroni. what a life.
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
he's tried contacting his best friend in his little larping group, but he's gone to ground. i sincerely hope that means he thinks this is the start of the great purge or whatever and he's disappeared to the mountains to evade fema and child support bailiffs
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
i'm trying to get more details from my mom but i have to play it cool. if i laugh she'll stop telling me about it, so i have to pretend this is very serious and i'm concerned for his safety while i'm imagining him hitting a can of baked beans with a screwdriver repeatedly
on the plus side they've got plenty of guns and ammo, so they can shoot the **** out of the snow.
locking two people with marital strife in a house with no supplies, no access to power, but plenty of access to guns and ammo seems like a great idea. i think this should work out great.
@torriangray
so my eldest brother, who is a moron, has been playing soldier with his moron friends in the deserts of texas for the last year preparing for the collapse of civilization if biden won (lol). they were burying food and ammo stashes out in the desert, running drills, crazy stuff
[url=https://twitter.com/torriangray][/url]Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
this included getting a cb license so he could be their lifeline to other groups of white idiots when the cell towers all went offline. wouldn't want to violate federal law while communicating with your resistance groups after the fall of the federal government i guess.
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
anyways, you would assume given that they've been prepping for the end of the world for at least a year they're well situated to ride out the rolling blackouts right?
wellll
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
their plan for cooking and heating during an extended power outage was natural gas, but like a lot of homes their gas service is out. the food in their freezer and fridge is already toast due to the power outrages, so they're down to canned stuff, but there's a catch.
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
[url=https://twitter.com/torriangray][/url]
they can get into the pull top cans just fine, but the ones that require an opener? their only can opener is electric. so a good 3/4 of his canned food store is inaccessible to him unless he goes after it with a knife, which i sincerely hope he does.
so captain survival was eating unheated ravioli out of a can yesterday because i guess he doesn't know how to start a fire? they have a fire pit but it too is gas fired.
he told my mom they're probably going to break into the survival buckets soon. i'm sure that's great food.
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
he told my mom that the blackout is due to texas switching everything to "wind power" but that he didn't discount that the government was doing this on purpose. if you can figure out why they'd arbitrarily freeze out a giant state hey points to you.
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
the saving grace in all this is he's having to ration his phone usage so he can't sit on the phone with my mom for hours crying about it. he's forced to sit there and talk to his wife, who is almost as dumb as he is.
presumably he's sitting there shivering, ranting about libs while he sucks down cold beefaroni. what a life.
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
he's tried contacting his best friend in his little larping group, but he's gone to ground. i sincerely hope that means he thinks this is the start of the great purge or whatever and he's disappeared to the mountains to evade fema and child support bailiffs
Jean-Michel Connard
@torriangray
i'm trying to get more details from my mom but i have to play it cool. if i laugh she'll stop telling me about it, so i have to pretend this is very serious and i'm concerned for his safety while i'm imagining him hitting a can of baked beans with a screwdriver repeatedly
on the plus side they've got plenty of guns and ammo, so they can shoot the **** out of the snow.
locking two people with marital strife in a house with no supplies, no access to power, but plenty of access to guns and ammo seems like a great idea. i think this should work out great.
The problem with nuclear is not the risk of accidents, but the consequence. The only defense against consequence is to move them great distances from population centers, but that invariably places them where there is insufficient water supply to keep the core cool. Not opposed, but hard to find situations where nukes make practical sense.Buddha Bear said:
Never seen a coal mine have you?I'm not against it. I just haven't studied it. It seems the destruction from accidents is less of a worry than it was years ago. The only argument from me is that there is no room for error ever with it. Placement and security of the plants has got to be perfect. No earthquakes, no hurricanes, floods, etc. If that can be overcome, then it should definitely be part of the mix.Quote:Nuclear? The most efficient, safest and cleanest option out there. You are willfully dumb to deny this.Quote:I agree with part of paragraph one. Natural gas power plants make the most sense for the US and for the planet, at least until something else new is invented (aka Hydrogen storage). Cant run it all on solar and wind, but it should be a decentralized mix of all those options and more.Quote:
I'm against coal. Yes I know about reclamation.
I'm in favor of oil and gas with carbon capture because it's much cleaner and cheaper than mining for precious metals to create batteries, solar panels and wind turbines. Not to mention dangerous battery disposal.
Be smart enough not to buy into the solar and wind energy rhetoric: they clearly suck and aren't that clean. Nuclear is the real way to go but government can't siphon wealth off of something that's 98% renewable.
Solar and wind are very clean in terms of CO2e emission though, even taken over the whole cost of the project from mining to manufacturing the panels/batteries. Literally 100 times cleaner than coal. But natural gas emits half the emission of coal. So that is a good start, and an affordable one for now.
A sensible way to have a good energy grid is to diversify and decentralize the power source to all forms of energy production. And don't build any new coal fired power plants. Don't close the existing ones. Let them run their course. Then replace it with natural gas or renewables. That is the sensible way forward both financially and for the planet for the time being.
it's amazing how often the obvious solution is the one precluded at the premiuse - coal.
Coal doesn't need pipelines.
Coal doesn't freeze.
The reclaimed land is every bit as handsome, sometimes moreso, than what was removed in the mining. You should see the old Alcoa mine at Rockdale. It's amazing.
China has 250 coal plants under construction right now.
We are damned fools for not having new technology coal plants under construction.
There is simply no way renewables can meet population growth. Cannot happen.
Laura Miller won an EPA award for stopping a TXU proposal for 11 coal plants. Only three got built. If we had the other 8, we would not be having this conversation right now.
It's uncanny how often whatever the environmentalists hate most is the thing we need most to do, and the things they insist we must do are the things we should fight hardest against..
https://www.forbes.com/sites/salgilbertie/2021/02/15/texas-outages-put-reliability-of-renewable-energy-in-the-spotlight/?fbclid=IwAR1NMAG2O8WdeErEVzSF3fKmkiUCRTqE3Y2KttfC2cYRMBnGNbr1X6EZX94&sh=592a823a3d32
Abbott told Hannity that the disaster "shows how the Green New Deal would be a deadly deal" but Dan Woodfin of ERCOT told Bloomberg that the frozen wind turbines wonly supply about 10% of Texas's power in the winter and that they were the smallest factor in the crisis.
Which man do you believe?
What happened is that instruments at gas, coal and nuclear plants froze up. There was also a shortage of natural gas. ERCOT didn't prepare for a crisis like this storm so the grid nearly collapsed.
El Paso isn't part of ERCOT; it uses a larger grid that includes other states. That grid weatherized their equipment. Its customers only lost power briefly.
Which man do you believe?
What happened is that instruments at gas, coal and nuclear plants froze up. There was also a shortage of natural gas. ERCOT didn't prepare for a crisis like this storm so the grid nearly collapsed.
El Paso isn't part of ERCOT; it uses a larger grid that includes other states. That grid weatherized their equipment. Its customers only lost power briefly.
Deregulation has consequences. Those other grids are subject to federal regs in ways that ours is not (by design). For Abbott to A) be spending any time on Hannity at all during this crisis, and B) to immediately deflect blame to a non-existent "Green New Deal" takes some massive chutzpah and a complete lack of integrity.
We're having a big discussion here about forcing social media platfforms to host Parler which is regulating them.HuMcK said:
Deregulation has consequences. Those other grids are subject to federal regs in ways that ours is not (by design). For Abbott to A) be spending any time on Hannity at all during this crisis, and B) to immediately deflect blame to a non-existent "Green New Deal" takes some massive chutzpah and a complete lack of integrity.
Texas runs its own energy grid in most of the state to avoid federal regulation and now you're seeing the results of that in that the grid can't withstand severe winter weather.
Which is most important to regulate--the abilty to guys like Abott to lie on Parler about why the Texas grid collapsed or the supply of power to millions of Texans?
Can someone please help me understand how we, Texas who is the largest producer of Nat Gas in the country, can't power it's power plants? Hell, I've been flaring my gas wells and basically paying someone to take it over the past couple years. What am I missing here?
I'm not excusing it, but it's basic science. What happens to natural gas lines when it freezes for long periods of time?J.R. said:
Can someone please help me understand how we, Texas who is the largest producer of Nat Gas in the country, can't power it's power plants? Hell, I've been flaring my gas wells and basically paying someone to take it over the past couple years. What am I missing here?
What I'm hearing is that theres a gas shortage but the electric and nuc power is fine--it's the transmission lines and distribution instruments that froze up and couldnt deliver because since Texas regulates its own grid, they didnt do anything to winterize it.J.R. said:
Can someone please help me understand how we, Texas who is the largest producer of Nat Gas in the country, can't power it's power plants? Hell, I've been flaring my gas wells and basically paying someone to take it over the past couple years. What am I missing here?
Extreme and unusual weather events will be more common b/c of climate change but when your leaders deny science you dont prepare for that. So Texas didnt.
Yeeaaaa, but that's not really it.contrario said:I'm not excusing it, but it's basic science. What happens to natural gas lines when it freezes for long periods of time?J.R. said:
Can someone please help me understand how we, Texas who is the largest producer of Nat Gas in the country, can't power it's power plants? Hell, I've been flaring my gas wells and basically paying someone to take it over the past couple years. What am I missing here?
https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/investigations/blackouts-in-texas-lack-of-winterization-of-generators/285-2e13537b-b2fb-476f-8c33-5ecce3be0fc8
https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/08-16-11-report.pdf
J.B.Katz said:What I'm hearing is that theres a gas shortage but the electric and nuc power is fine--it's the transmission lines and distribution instruments that froze up and couldnt deliver because since Texas regulates its own grid, they didnt do anything to winterize it.J.R. said:
Can someone please help me understand how we, Texas who is the largest producer of Nat Gas in the country, can't power it's power plants? Hell, I've been flaring my gas wells and basically paying someone to take it over the past couple years. What am I missing here?
Extreme and unusual weather events will be more common b/c of climate change but when your leaders deny science you dont prepare for that. So Texas didnt.
So not global warming, but climate change?
Maybe if you deny it some more it'll go away and leave us alone!
Can we agree there are probably lots of reasons why there were failures? That article chose to focus on one topic, but there are other issues at play. One of my top clients is Reliant, and while I am no energy expert, I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. The overall point I was trying to make to JR is that it isn't the lack of Natural Gas that led to the failure(s), can you at least agree on that?BaylorBJM said:Yeeaaaa, but that's not really it.contrario said:I'm not excusing it, but it's basic science. What happens to natural gas lines when it freezes for long periods of time?J.R. said:
Can someone please help me understand how we, Texas who is the largest producer of Nat Gas in the country, can't power it's power plants? Hell, I've been flaring my gas wells and basically paying someone to take it over the past couple years. What am I missing here?
https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/investigations/blackouts-in-texas-lack-of-winterization-of-generators/285-2e13537b-b2fb-476f-8c33-5ecce3be0fc8
https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/08-16-11-report.pdf
The issue is waste disposal. Everybody's for nuclear as long as the waste dump is in another state nowhere near them.Buddha Bear said:I'm not against it. I just haven't studied it. It seems the destruction from accidents is less of a worry than it was years ago. The only argument from me is that there is no room for error ever with it. Placement and security of the plants has got to be perfect. No earthquakes, no hurricanes, floods, etc. If that can be overcome, then it should definitely be part of the mix.BellCountyBear said:Nuclear? The most efficient, safest and cleanest option out there. You are willfully dumb to deny this.Buddha Bear said:I agree with part of paragraph one. Natural gas power plants make the most sense for the US and for the planet, at least until something else new is invented (aka Hydrogen storage). Cant run it all on solar and wind, but it should be a decentralized mix of all those options and more.Doc Holliday said:I'm against coal. Yes I know about reclamation.quash said:Never seen a coal mine have you?Doc Holliday said:"Intensely local" lmao, try 2000 miles of Appalachian. Try the entire Appalachian if we go fully "green".quash said:If you define earth in intensely local ways, sure. Somebody missed the turn last night in the snow and destroyed the earth. On the other side of the curb...Doc Holliday said:Mountain top removal to mine for precious metals doesn't destroy the earth or entire ecosystems?quash said:Way to spank that credibility. Do you ghostwrite for the climate change alarmists?Doc Holliday said:
earth destroying solar and wind technologies
I'm in favor of oil and gas with carbon capture because it's much cleaner and cheaper than mining for precious metals to create batteries, solar panels and wind turbines. Not to mention dangerous battery disposal.
Be smart enough not to buy into the solar and wind energy rhetoric: they clearly suck and aren't that clean. Nuclear is the real way to go but government can't siphon wealth off of something that's 98% renewable.
Solar and wind are very clean in terms of CO2e emission though, even taken over the whole cost of the project from mining to manufacturing the panels/batteries. Literally 100 times cleaner than coal. But natural gas emits half the emission of coal. So that is a good start, and an affordable one for now.
A sensible way to have a good energy grid is to diversify and decentralize the power source to all forms of energy production. And don't build any new coal fired power plants. Don't close the existing ones. Let them run their course. Then replace it with natural gas or renewables. That is the sensible way forward both financially and for the planet for the time being.
HuMcK said:
Maybe if you deny it some more it'll go away and leave us alone!
Will we know we've defeated climate change when it's always 72 degrees?
And everyone is for wind turbines, as long as they aren't in their own backyard. It seems energy is something everyone wants, but can't agree on how or where to produce it.J.B.Katz said:The issue is waste disposal. Everybody's for nuclear as long as the waste dump is in another state nowhere near them.Buddha Bear said:I'm not against it. I just haven't studied it. It seems the destruction from accidents is less of a worry than it was years ago. The only argument from me is that there is no room for error ever with it. Placement and security of the plants has got to be perfect. No earthquakes, no hurricanes, floods, etc. If that can be overcome, then it should definitely be part of the mix.BellCountyBear said:Nuclear? The most efficient, safest and cleanest option out there. You are willfully dumb to deny this.Buddha Bear said:I agree with part of paragraph one. Natural gas power plants make the most sense for the US and for the planet, at least until something else new is invented (aka Hydrogen storage). Cant run it all on solar and wind, but it should be a decentralized mix of all those options and more.Doc Holliday said:I'm against coal. Yes I know about reclamation.quash said:Never seen a coal mine have you?Doc Holliday said:"Intensely local" lmao, try 2000 miles of Appalachian. Try the entire Appalachian if we go fully "green".quash said:If you define earth in intensely local ways, sure. Somebody missed the turn last night in the snow and destroyed the earth. On the other side of the curb...Doc Holliday said:Mountain top removal to mine for precious metals doesn't destroy the earth or entire ecosystems?quash said:Way to spank that credibility. Do you ghostwrite for the climate change alarmists?Doc Holliday said:
earth destroying solar and wind technologies
I'm in favor of oil and gas with carbon capture because it's much cleaner and cheaper than mining for precious metals to create batteries, solar panels and wind turbines. Not to mention dangerous battery disposal.
Be smart enough not to buy into the solar and wind energy rhetoric: they clearly suck and aren't that clean. Nuclear is the real way to go but government can't siphon wealth off of something that's 98% renewable.
Solar and wind are very clean in terms of CO2e emission though, even taken over the whole cost of the project from mining to manufacturing the panels/batteries. Literally 100 times cleaner than coal. But natural gas emits half the emission of coal. So that is a good start, and an affordable one for now.
A sensible way to have a good energy grid is to diversify and decentralize the power source to all forms of energy production. And don't build any new coal fired power plants. Don't close the existing ones. Let them run their course. Then replace it with natural gas or renewables. That is the sensible way forward both financially and for the planet for the time being.
Indeed, what are a few deaths here and there...quash said:Yeah, if you lose alternative energy every night and a few days every decade or so then might as well replace all that power with coal-fired power plants. Won't change MY life so...Baylor3216 said:Bexar Pitts said:Just a friendly "PSA" :-) I did find it a "brow raiser" that in the day of Alternative energy sources....the turbines were frozen and that natural gas (that is so plentiful that it's burned off at the well site) was in limited supply to the generating units. Just bored I guess...probably shouldn't have put it up. Hope everybody stays warm..take care of the pets..tommie said:
And
People may get cold or die but by God they are saving the planet!
As a Republican, you are in favor of bigger govt. and more regulation? Hmmm.J.B.Katz said:We're having a big discussion here about forcing social media platfforms to host Parler which is regulating them.HuMcK said:
Deregulation has consequences. Those other grids are subject to federal regs in ways that ours is not (by design). For Abbott to A) be spending any time on Hannity at all during this crisis, and B) to immediately deflect blame to a non-existent "Green New Deal" takes some massive chutzpah and a complete lack of integrity.
Texas runs its own energy grid in most of the state to avoid federal regulation and now you're seeing the results of that in that the grid can't withstand severe winter weather.
Which is most important to regulate--the abilty to guys like Abott to lie on Parler about why the Texas grid collapsed or the supply of power to millions of Texans?
On that, I totally agree.contrario said:The overall point I was trying to make to JR is that it isn't the lack of Natural Gas that led to the failure(s), can you at least agree on that?BaylorBJM said:Yeeaaaa, but that's not really it.contrario said:I'm not excusing it, but it's basic science. What happens to natural gas lines when it freezes for long periods of time?J.R. said:
Can someone please help me understand how we, Texas who is the largest producer of Nat Gas in the country, can't power it's power plants? Hell, I've been flaring my gas wells and basically paying someone to take it over the past couple years. What am I missing here?
https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/investigations/blackouts-in-texas-lack-of-winterization-of-generators/285-2e13537b-b2fb-476f-8c33-5ecce3be0fc8
https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/08-16-11-report.pdf
Some things need regulation. The national power grid is one of them. Airways are another. Borders are another.Mothra said:As a Republican, you are in favor of bigger govt. and more regulation? Hmmm.J.B.Katz said:We're having a big discussion here about forcing social media platfforms to host Parler which is regulating them.HuMcK said:
Deregulation has consequences. Those other grids are subject to federal regs in ways that ours is not (by design). For Abbott to A) be spending any time on Hannity at all during this crisis, and B) to immediately deflect blame to a non-existent "Green New Deal" takes some massive chutzpah and a complete lack of integrity.
Texas runs its own energy grid in most of the state to avoid federal regulation and now you're seeing the results of that in that the grid can't withstand severe winter weather.
Which is most important to regulate--the abilty to guys like Abott to lie on Parler about why the Texas grid collapsed or the supply of power to millions of Texans?
We also need national freeways that are maintained, railroad tracks that are maintained, and other government sponsored or supervised systems and resources that enable us to function as a nationand that support national security by making sure we can get resources where they're needed fast and deploy military troops fast.
How's Texas functioning right now?
What we don't need is for federal or state govts to step in and tell an internet platform it has to host Parler. My observation of Trump Republicans like you is that you're fine with heavyhanded regulation when it suits your purposes while saying you're against it and you ***** and moan about regulation designed to support infrastructure and public safety until an epic fail like the TX power grid happens and then you lie and blame it on the Green New Deal or anything but your management like Abbott did last night on Hannity.
No business that ran with planning like that and denying basic facts would still be in business.
Other grids subject to federal regs for winterization aren't having the same level of issues we are, despite enduring the same weather. Imagine that.
Booray said:
Have relatives in Abilene, pretty rough go of it. No water or power for an extended time now.
Our power went out yesterday around 4:30. Our water is back on, but it's not potable and we can't heat it because the electricity is out. It's a mess out here for sure.
contrario said:
The Texas power grid is one example of why Texit wouldn't work. When things are working good, it would be great to be independent from the US, but when a disaster comes up, Texans want the US federal government to save them. The same thing will happen the next time a hurricane hits Texas.
Unless we are at war, no real Texan wants the "US federal government to save them." Pull your panties up Nancy.
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Do you prefer FERC?BellCountyBear said:
ERCOT needs to be blown up too. Stupid ****ers.
Lots of things froze. The real question is how much money do you want to pay over time to make sure you don't freeze up for a few days in a 3 sigma event. That's the overarching question whether it's government mandated or priced in through private companies (which would still be a lot more efficient). This is a whole lot like asking do you want to build hospital capacities to anticipate a once every 50 years viral overload.
Are you joking? I lived in both California and Connecticut for extended periods, and BOTH states had the exact same issues we are now experiencing. I recall living in Los Angeles during the Gray Davis admin when we had rolling brown outs. I would come home to my apartment, and find a warm refrigerator and all my appliances blinking 12:00. Luckily I lived off ramen noodles during those days instead of refrigerated food, so I was not as effected as my neighbors. I recall one evening going to sleep in my car to cool down because the AC wasn't working.HuMcK said:
Other grids subject to federal regs for winterization aren't having the same level of issues we are, despite enduring the same weather. Imagine that.
The year-and-a-half I lived in Connecticut, we had black outs in both the summer and the winter. We were still able to heat our home because we had kerosene heaters, but I can't tell you how many times we had the electricity shut off in ice storms and hot summer days.
The idea that the current issues we are experiencing are unique or due to de-regulation is absurd, like many of your opinions.