Texas power prices briefly soar to $9,000/MWh as heat wave bakes state

On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 1:52:05 AM UTC+10, Rick C wrote:
> On Friday, August 16, 2019 at 9:56:53 AM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
> > 
> > Wow, you mean free markets still work?  And just about no utilities are
> > buying "storage gear' stupid, for obvious reasons.
> 
> There's the voice of ignorance and the voice of extreme ignorance.  
> 
> The majority of energy storage is pumped hydro.  In the US alone there are 23 GW of capacity.  A single 3 GW facility has an energy capacity of 30 GWh.  
> 
> Yeah, no one is buying "storage gear"...

They should. The main takeaway message from the South Australia Tesla battery buy was that it was brilliant at stabilising voltage and frequency, and made back it's purchase price in little over a year in selling those services to the grid. Pumped storage isn't as quick, and when generators break down you can need an initial fast response to stop the disturbance knocking other generators off-line.

The Tesla battery in South Australia demonstrated that shortly after it was installed, where a grid disturbance took out a lot of generators in the two adjacent states, but none in South Australia. They did a bit of gloating at the time.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 11:35:26 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

>Unbelievable 75GW peak demand due to heat wave, almost nothing in reserve.

What is the actual population f Texas ? Some sources claim 29 million,
but with the southern border leaking like a sieve, the number must be
even greater.

Anyway, with 29 million, the consumption is just 2.5 kW/person. In
some countries the winter peaks are at 3 - 4.5 kW/person.

>And this is just the warm-up, it's going to get much worse.
>
>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-12/searing-texas-heat-pushes-power-prices-to-near-record-levels

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:615c54d5-b70a-40a6-9150-faa0cb783de8@googlegroups.com: 

> The latest generation of solar cells seem to become cheap enough
> that some of the thermal solar systems have been ripped out and
> replaced with photovoltaic devices, but big insulated tanks of
> molten salt seem to be tolerably cheap energy storage systems. 

  Yeah...  I thought they should make tall water towers and pump, 
slowly to fill them using tidal energy.  The stored water has kinetic 
energy but takes a along time to fill with free tidal energy.
Note I am not talking about using sea water in the tanks, merely sea 
energy to run the pumps that slowly fill them.  Not much juice, but 
every penny helps.

On Friday, August 16, 2019 at 11:34:41 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 05:37:36 -0700 (PDT),
> bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> >On Friday, August 16, 2019 at 7:06:32 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
> >> On Friday, August 16, 2019 at 8:58:20 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
> >> > On Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 2:35:30 PM UTC-4, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> > > Unbelievable 75GW peak demand due to heat wave, almost nothing in reserve.
> >> > > 
> >> > > And this is just the warm-up, it's going to get much worse.
> >> > > 
> >> > > https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-12/searing-texas-heat-pushes-power-prices-to-near-record-levels
> >> > 
> >> > Isn't the sun shining when it's that hot?  So much for the solar miracle.....
> >> 
> >> Trader4 hasn't noticed that while solar cells are now cheap Texan power generation firms are even cheaper, and haven't bought any (China is the big supplier), let alone the power storage gear you need when you start getting lots of power from erratic renewable sources.
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> Bill Sloman, Sydney
> >
> >Texas has a huge amount of windpower generation capacity, about 20x solar, which was facilitated years ago by Perry subsidizing the transmission system with state money. The winds dropped out during the recent heat wave and they lost about 20GW, causing overload on the non-renewable generation capacity. They probably had the backup capacity to cover it, but it couldn't react fast enough. The really big suff takes hours to spin up, and when the load fluctuates on the order of GW's per hour, they can't track it. They have so-called gas powered peaker plants that can track it, but capacity of those is limited to smaller fluctuations, few hundred MW.
> >https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Texas-has-enough-sun-and-wind-to-quit-coal-Rice-13501700.php
> 
> Texas gets hurricanes too. Fun, mixing windmills and hurricanes.

Texas is a big state. They have most of their wind power fields in the western desert part near the New Mexico border, an area that is perpetually wind swept. And they have a bunch installed in the Gulf. If they can get the generator tower anchored in bedrock, you don't want to be around for the hurricane that knocks one of them down, it would have to be record-setting in a bad way.

On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 6:12:15 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
> news:615c54d5-b70a-40a6-9150-faa0cb783de8@googlegroups.com: 
> 
> > The latest generation of solar cells seem to become cheap enough
> > that some of the thermal solar systems have been ripped out and
> > replaced with photovoltaic devices, but big insulated tanks of
> > molten salt seem to be tolerably cheap energy storage systems. 
> 
>   Yeah...  I thought they should make tall water towers and pump, 
> slowly to fill them using tidal energy.  The stored water has kinetic 
> energy but takes a along time to fill with free tidal energy.
> Note I am not talking about using sea water in the tanks, merely sea 
> energy to run the pumps that slowly fill them.  Not much juice, but 
> every penny helps.



Every penny doesn't help if the power it produces costs so much that it
can't compete.  What do you think all those tanks, pumps, and most of
all the infrastructure to harness the tide energy would cost?

On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 1:49:45 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
> On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 6:12:15 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> > Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
> > news:615c54d5-b70a-40a6-9150-faa0cb783de8@googlegroups.com: 
> > 
> > > The latest generation of solar cells seem to become cheap enough
> > > that some of the thermal solar systems have been ripped out and
> > > replaced with photovoltaic devices, but big insulated tanks of
> > > molten salt seem to be tolerably cheap energy storage systems. 
> > 
> >   Yeah...  I thought they should make tall water towers and pump, 
> > slowly to fill them using tidal energy.  The stored water has kinetic 
> > energy but takes a along time to fill with free tidal energy.
> > Note I am not talking about using sea water in the tanks, merely sea 
> > energy to run the pumps that slowly fill them.  Not much juice, but 
> > every penny helps.
> 
> 
> 
> Every penny doesn't help if the power it produces costs so much that it
> can't compete.  What do you think all those tanks, pumps, and most of
> all the infrastructure to harness the tide energy would cost?

You mean like nuclear?  Yeah, I agree.  We need to phase out the overly expensive technologies. 

-- 

  Rick C.

  +- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  +- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 2:13:19 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
> On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 1:49:45 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 6:12:15 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> > > Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
> > > news:615c54d5-b70a-40a6-9150-faa0cb783de8@googlegroups.com: 
> > > 
> > > > The latest generation of solar cells seem to become cheap enough
> > > > that some of the thermal solar systems have been ripped out and
> > > > replaced with photovoltaic devices, but big insulated tanks of
> > > > molten salt seem to be tolerably cheap energy storage systems. 
> > > 
> > >   Yeah...  I thought they should make tall water towers and pump, 
> > > slowly to fill them using tidal energy.  The stored water has kinetic 
> > > energy but takes a along time to fill with free tidal energy.
> > > Note I am not talking about using sea water in the tanks, merely sea 
> > > energy to run the pumps that slowly fill them.  Not much juice, but 
> > > every penny helps.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Every penny doesn't help if the power it produces costs so much that it
> > can't compete.  What do you think all those tanks, pumps, and most of
> > all the infrastructure to harness the tide energy would cost?
> 
> You mean like nuclear?  Yeah, I agree.  We need to phase out the overly expensive technologies. 
> 
> -- 


Nuclear is competitive and viable, which is why plants continue to be built around the world. The US is unique, because we let radical obstructionists block it. The same obstructionists who say the world is being doomed by CO2. How hypocritical and stupid is that?

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:e1de98f4-60f7-4cee-8fe0-69e808070c77@googlegroups.com: 

> On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 1:49:45 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie
> wrote: 
>> On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 6:12:15 AM UTC-4,
>> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote: 
>> > Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
>> > news:615c54d5-b70a-40a6-9150-faa0cb783de8@googlegroups.com: 
>> > 
>> > > The latest generation of solar cells seem to become cheap
>> > > enough that some of the thermal solar systems have been
>> > > ripped out and replaced with photovoltaic devices, but big
>> > > insulated tanks of molten salt seem to be tolerably cheap
>> > > energy storage systems. 
>> > 
>> >   Yeah...  I thought they should make tall water towers and
>> >   pump, 
>> > slowly to fill them using tidal energy.  The stored water has
>> > kinetic energy but takes a along time to fill with free tidal
>> > energy. Note I am not talking about using sea water in the
>> > tanks, merely sea energy to run the pumps that slowly fill
>> > them.  Not much juice, but every penny helps.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Every penny doesn't help if the power it produces costs so much
>> that it can't compete.  What do you think all those tanks, pumps,
>> and most of all the infrastructure to harness the tide energy
>> would cost? 
> 
> You mean like nuclear?  Yeah, I agree.  We need to phase out the
> overly expensive technologies. 
> 

  He is an idiot.  Water tanks are cheap...  even at five time the 
price, which they are not.

  The pump is the tidal pump.  The tide make the energy to rotate the 
pump.  No expense there slow, high pressure pumps are easy to build 
and introduce to certain shorelines.  The offshore tanks would fill 
no problem.  Once full, they no longer need any tidal energy.  They 
are a kinetic capacitor.

  LardyTard4 cannot grasp man's use of kinetic energy.  He can barely 
reach the flush handle, much less understand its physics.

On Sunday, August 18, 2019 at 7:20:31 AM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:
> On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 2:13:19 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 1:49:45 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
> > > On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 6:12:15 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> > > > Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
> > > > news:615c54d5-b70a-40a6-9150-faa0cb783de8@googlegroups.com: 
> > > > 
> > > > > The latest generation of solar cells seem to become cheap enough
> > > > > that some of the thermal solar systems have been ripped out and
> > > > > replaced with photovoltaic devices, but big insulated tanks of
> > > > > molten salt seem to be tolerably cheap energy storage systems. 
> > > > 
> > > >   Yeah...  I thought they should make tall water towers and pump, 
> > > > slowly to fill them using tidal energy.  The stored water has kinetic 
> > > > energy but takes a along time to fill with free tidal energy.
> > > > Note I am not talking about using sea water in the tanks, merely sea 
> > > > energy to run the pumps that slowly fill them.  Not much juice, but 
> > > > every penny helps.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Every penny doesn't help if the power it produces costs so much that it
> > > can't compete.  What do you think all those tanks, pumps, and most of
> > > all the infrastructure to harness the tide energy would cost?
> > 
> > You mean like nuclear?  Yeah, I agree.  We need to phase out the overly expensive technologies.  
> 
> Nuclear is competitive and viable, which is why plants continue to be built around the world.

Where? Trader4 won't actually know.

> The US is unique, because we let radical obstructionists block it.

The US has grown quite a few of them since Love Canal. The free market loves to exploit un-monitored externalities, but the nuclear industry grew up in a world where people had started paying attention to externalities, and imposed sensible regulations.

> The same obstructionists who say the world is being doomed by CO2. How hypocritical and stupid is that?

The fact that one technology - burning fossil carbon for fuel - has created a large scale problem that is getting steadily worse, is scarcely an argument for letting the nuclear industry cheap-skate it's way into different disaster.

The nice thing about wind energy and solar power is  that they don't have the same kinds of built-in disasters. Trader4 is too stupid to have figured this out.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 5:20:31 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
> On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 2:13:19 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 1:49:45 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
> > > 
> > > Every penny doesn't help if the power it produces costs so much that it
> > > can't compete.  What do you think all those tanks, pumps, and most of
> > > all the infrastructure to harness the tide energy would cost?
> > 
> > You mean like nuclear?  Yeah, I agree.  We need to phase out the overly expensive technologies. 
> 
> Nuclear is competitive and viable, which is why plants continue to be built around the world. The US is unique, because we let radical obstructionists block it. The same obstructionists who say the world is being doomed by CO2. How hypocritical and stupid is that?

Nuclear is only economically competitive with fossil fuels if you consider the cost of adding CO2 to the atmosphere and ignore the cost of turning fairly harmless uranium ores into hazardous, radioactive waste.  

Nuclear is not being built to a significant extent anywhere in the world other than possibly china.  Nuclear power plants are becoming prohibitively expensive everywhere.  I believe I've already posted from facts on the issues the EU has had building two new reactors if the EPR design.  Both are hugely over budget and absurdly behind schedule.  Even as they approached a date for final testing and starting full scale operation the schedule continued to increase by doubling the remaining time every few months.  It's like a backgammon game.  

Here in the US we had a reactor project go belly up taking down the Westinghouse nuclear company with it.  What kind of technology takes out one of the longest lived companies promoting it because of the massive budget and schedule overruns that everyone has come to expect?  

Nuclear has simply become too expensive and uncertain to plan commercially.  What company is going to commit construction of new facilities when starting with any reasonable schedule and budget they can expect it to be blown by factors of 2 to 4?  

Oh yeah, the utilities.  They know they can always force their customers to pay for it no matter how expensive it gets, even if it never produces any power.  Well... except for in South Carolina where they are requiring the utility to give back the money they've been collecting for some years to pay for the failed project.  I seem to recall the result of all this was the sale of the utility to another larger utility company.  They aren't taking any responsibility for the problem it appears.  So there may end up being no one to pay the bills. 

-- 

  Rick C.

  ++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  ++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209