I saw a post on another board from a guy who claimed to be involved in Texas wind power generation, and he said that's exactly it. No one in Texas is going to spend extra money on turbines with all the fancy anti-freeze stuff that's used further north, because it would (almost) never be used. The problem is the "almost."Originally Posted by Dan Lehr
A lot of the senior statesmen of the Environmentalist Movement were fundamentally opposed to cheap energy, basically because it would encourage population growth, development, and all that nasty humanity defacing Mother Earth.
To be fair, 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima haven't exactly helped with public perception of nuclear power.
"You win 100% of the fights you avoid. If you're not there when it happens, you don't lose." - William Aprill
"I've owned a guitar for 31 years and that sure hasn't made me a musician, let alone an expert. It's made me a guy who owns a guitar."- BBI
Well. You say that...
Schadenfreude aside, I'd like to see a breakdown once this is all over based on source type and how much capacity they lost. I doubt wind is going to be at the top of the list, though not like it maters since its a smaller source to begin with.So while having Texas' full wind-generating capacity online would help, the problems with meeting demand appear to lie elsewhere. An ERCOT director told Bloomberg that problems were widespread across generating sources, including coal, natural gas, and even nuclear plants. In the past, severe cold has caused US supplies of natural gas to be constrained, as use in residential heating competes with its use in generating electricity. But that doesn't explain the shortfalls in coal and nuclear, and the ERCOT executive wasn't willing to speculate.
Please QUANTIFY the amount of waste produced, the number of years it remains deadly and the methods of storing it with sufficient safety that you would have your family home next door to the storage facility.
Fukushima happens.
I'm betting on Hydrogen.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
If your solar, hydro, coal, or windmill power generation fucks up, you get a blackout. When your wind power turbines freeze, it doesn't cause an irreversible existential threat.
So, I'm guessing it's something to do with the stakes, not the odds (wonder where I've heard that before). Nuclear power disasters rarely happen, but they do happen.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
Yup. Deicing systems are standard where icing is expected. The wind turbines in NH run all winter.I saw a post on another board from a guy who claimed to be involved in Texas wind power generation, and he said that's exactly it. No one in Texas is going to spend extra money on turbines with all the fancy anti-freeze stuff that's used further north, because it would (almost) never be used. The problem is the "almost."
Deregulation brought private enterprise into the energy business. Our governor in discussing Texas' current issues in generating electricity mentioned the need to get private operators up and running. Businesses flock to Texas because of fewer regulations. Perhaps we are seeing that some of our energy producers are not prepared for all situations. I have been amazed that these wind engines froze up.
This is one of the reasons my backup power generation plan includes the ability to run on all 3 fuels: gasoline, NG, propane. Hurricane Sandy demonstrated that as being desirable. Areas of south Jersey were without natural gas (system was destroyed as houses were wiped off their foundations, the lines were contaminated, and fires were erupting), but they had gasoline in quantity. North Jersey was without power, and the pumps had no backups, so we were without gasoline. NG was still flowing though.Allowing 23% of your capacity to be fulfilled by an unreliable method is idiocy. Using them as "backup" to throttled down conventional plants and/or selling the excess on the open market is one thing, but to make them mission critical is just dumb on an epic level. Hopefully the residents of TX will force a change.
My state is on the same path unfortunately, just not quite as far down it. We also have the threat of rolling blackouts and even a possible natural gas shortage due to the freezing of wells. The NG issue is very concerning. If we lose that widespread we are in a world of hurt. If I lose power my backup generator will take over so no biggie. But if I lose power after losing my gas I'm totally hosed since the backup runs on NG.
I can't get through the next three days or so soon enough.
Cross posting from here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....=1#post1185481
The power generation issue is not about wind. Coal, Nuke and Gas plants all went TU. Likely line issues or issues related to the freeze affecting controls/sensors. Not in my lane, just internet quarterbacking.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021...nder-the-cold/
Since wind in Texas generally tends to produce less during winter, there's no way that the grid operators would have planned for getting 30GW from wind generation; in fact, a chart at ERCOT indicates that wind is producing significantly more than forecast.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
Couldn’t resist the title. ;-)
https://www.renewableenergyworld.com...or-wind-power/
Workers are installing turbines perched atop 130-meter tall towers at a rate of about two a week at the site in northern Sweden, where the temperature regularly dips below minus 10 Celsius (14 Fahrenheit) and the sun is hardly seen for months on end during winter. So far, more than 170 of the machines scatter across the sparse landscape owned by some of the nation’s biggest forest companies.
“When it comes to wind power, Sweden has more in common with Texas than the rest of Europe,” Roland Flaig, head of RWE AG’s renewable energy arm in Sweden, said in an interview. “Few and big land owners makes it possible to build larger parks.”
Reply With Quote
