Rolling blackouts in Texas

173,654 Views | 1588 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by Whitetail
ABATTBQ11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Shanked Punt • 1:53p, 2/15/21
AG
Shanked Punt said:
titan said:
Shanked Punt said:
jrdaustin said:
mazag08 said:
Shanked Punt said:



Here is a good thread of what is going on. Wind may be an issue, but the delivery of natural gas is causing major problems.


Next time find an unbiased source and not a career academic who's entire life has been spent studying slanted science in an effort to force feed our country an agenda.

Quote:
Jesse leads the Princeton ZERO Lab - the Zero carbon Energy systems Research and Optimization Laboratory -- which conducts research to improve decision-making to accelerate rapid, affordable, and effective transitions to net-zero carbon energy systems. The ZERO Lab has three main areas of research
Then his comments make more sense and deserve some clarification.

First, he is correct that there are currently problems with power generation both on gas and wind. But to imply by saying that there are "some" problems with wind and that they are much less than gas is misleading at best.

First, not "some". Fully 50% of wind turbines in west Texas are currently offline due to icing, and the number is rising.

Second, the only reason it is "second" as an issue to the gas issues is that thankfully we have much less wind generated power than gas generated power. The problem would have been magnified exponentially if we were MORE dependent on wind generated power.

Overall, the problem across the board is a piss poor job of preparing for this sort of event. NG generation needs to handle a cold snap of this magnitude in this region of the country, so does wind. That is completely independent of the energy source. It can be done.
Then it needs to be clearly defined and then pushed as something to be done. 2011 was just before the full onset of social media. You could probably mobilized and light the necessary fire under feet now to get officials to order built or methods setup necessary to meet what you are describing. If it can be outlined clearly. What lesson was ignored in 2011 might be able to be used as a club now in 2021 with social media and irate customers such as on the thread.


I fully agree with that.

This is from 2014 covering a good deal of what happened in 2011, with a lesson learned that likely never was carried out.
https://www.powermag.com/prepare-your-renewable-plant-for-cold-weather-operations/

Quote:

Wind generators in places like Canada typically install "cold weather packages" to extend temperature ranges, using up to 200 kW to 300 kW of parasitic power per turbine at conditions below 20C for heating components such as the nacelle space, yaw drive and pitch motors, and the gearbox, slip ring, controller and control cabinet, and battery. GE's 2010-introduced Cold Weather Extreme package for its 2.5 x l turbine, for example, ensures operations in temperatures to 30C and a "survival mode" to 40C.

According to NERC, "it does not appear that [cold weather packages] were used in the Southwest" during the 2011 event. It recommends that all entities investigate the purchase of these packages in preparation for extreme cold events.





It's a question of cost. The cost of that cold weather package needs to be offset by the amount of time it's actually necessary. Over the life of a windmill, maybe 25-30 years, that package may be necessary to keep it operating for a few days or weeks. If it's a month, that means that cold weather package would be utilized over .3% of the turbines lifespan if its 25 years. Think of it this way: How many times in the last 10 years have we had issue with cold weather power demand? 2? And even then, for what? 2-5 days at the most? Over 25 years, you may actually need it only 3-4 times for a few days each. The added cost likely makes it not cost effective.
Reply Quote
6
Post removed:
by user
In reply to Matt Hooper • 1:55p, 2/15/21
TriAg2010
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sam callahan • 1:55p, 2/15/21
AG
sam callahan said:
How much does a nuke plant cost? Here is the last one in Texas.

Quote:
When construction on Comanche Peak began in 1974, TU Electric (the former name of EFH) estimated that it would take five years to build and cost $779 million. It took 15 years and $9.1 billion

Source: DMN


This is exclusively the issue that stopped nuclear power growth: the inability to complete projects on-time and on-schedule in the 70s and 80s. The Comanche Peak experience was indicative of practically every Gen 2 nuclear power station. The small minority of anti-nuclear activist would have been steamrolled if anyone had a vested interest in building more nuclear power. Instead, everyone was tired of losing their shirts and gas turbine OEMs stepped up with cookie-cutter combine cycle plants with hugely favorable commercial terms and project execution.
Reply Quote
4
Matt Hooper
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to [removed post] • 1:59p, 2/15/21
AG
Thank you!
Reply Quote
Jack Boyett
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:00p, 2/15/21
AG
No point in even talking about nuclear with 100 years worth of cheap gas in the ground. It will never be as safe as a ng generator. The only reason to even discuss nuclear power is to placate the leftist enviros.
Reply Quote
4
Shanked Punt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ABATTBQ11 • 2:01p, 2/15/21
ABATTBQ11 said:
Shanked Punt said:
titan said:
Shanked Punt said:
jrdaustin said:
mazag08 said:
Shanked Punt said:



Here is a good thread of what is going on. Wind may be an issue, but the delivery of natural gas is causing major problems.


Next time find an unbiased source and not a career academic who's entire life has been spent studying slanted science in an effort to force feed our country an agenda.

Quote:
Jesse leads the Princeton ZERO Lab - the Zero carbon Energy systems Research and Optimization Laboratory -- which conducts research to improve decision-making to accelerate rapid, affordable, and effective transitions to net-zero carbon energy systems. The ZERO Lab has three main areas of research
Then his comments make more sense and deserve some clarification.

First, he is correct that there are currently problems with power generation both on gas and wind. But to imply by saying that there are "some" problems with wind and that they are much less than gas is misleading at best.

First, not "some". Fully 50% of wind turbines in west Texas are currently offline due to icing, and the number is rising.

Second, the only reason it is "second" as an issue to the gas issues is that thankfully we have much less wind generated power than gas generated power. The problem would have been magnified exponentially if we were MORE dependent on wind generated power.

Overall, the problem across the board is a piss poor job of preparing for this sort of event. NG generation needs to handle a cold snap of this magnitude in this region of the country, so does wind. That is completely independent of the energy source. It can be done.
Then it needs to be clearly defined and then pushed as something to be done. 2011 was just before the full onset of social media. You could probably mobilized and light the necessary fire under feet now to get officials to order built or methods setup necessary to meet what you are describing. If it can be outlined clearly. What lesson was ignored in 2011 might be able to be used as a club now in 2021 with social media and irate customers such as on the thread.


I fully agree with that.

This is from 2014 covering a good deal of what happened in 2011, with a lesson learned that likely never was carried out.
https://www.powermag.com/prepare-your-renewable-plant-for-cold-weather-operations/

Quote:

Wind generators in places like Canada typically install "cold weather packages" to extend temperature ranges, using up to 200 kW to 300 kW of parasitic power per turbine at conditions below 20C for heating components such as the nacelle space, yaw drive and pitch motors, and the gearbox, slip ring, controller and control cabinet, and battery. GE's 2010-introduced Cold Weather Extreme package for its 2.5 x l turbine, for example, ensures operations in temperatures to 30C and a "survival mode" to 40C.

According to NERC, "it does not appear that [cold weather packages] were used in the Southwest" during the 2011 event. It recommends that all entities investigate the purchase of these packages in preparation for extreme cold events.





It's a question of cost. The cost of that cold weather package needs to be offset by the amount of time it's actually necessary. Over the life of a windmill, maybe 25-30 years, that package may be necessary to keep it operating for a few days or weeks. If it's a month, that means that cold weather package would be utilized over .3% of the turbines lifespan if its 25 years. Think of it this way: How many times in the last 10 years have we had issue with cold weather power demand? 2? And even then, for what? 2-5 days at the most? Over 25 years, you may actually need it only 3-4 times for a few days each. The added cost likely makes it not cost effective.
The costs of rolling blackouts never seem to be properly factored into the equation. Proper regulation to severely fine operators for preventable outages like this to account for this cost, or simply make it a requirement would go a long way. The market isn't going to do that on its own.
Reply Quote
ABATTBQ11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ag_of_08 • 2:01p, 2/15/21
AG
Ag_of_08 said:
ABATTBQ11 said:
Ag_of_08 said:
How much more over the span of a reactor's life does it cost to run than a natural gas plant? Is the up front investment that much greater than fuel costs?


The upfront investment is huge, but the real risk is in permitting and bureaucracy. It is very easy, and likely, to experience delays and other problems that increase the cost of construction. Think Keystone XL level political football. It will take a long time to permit and build, and any liberal administration could kill it or severely delay it on a whim. It simply isn't worth the headache.


So it's all 100% fear mongering and political, got it.


Yeah, kind of. Modern nuclear is far cleaner and safer than the plants of the 70's and Three Mile Island, but the "N" word is a touchy subject.

It is still a large investment. Maintenance can also be very expensive. A lot of specialized equipment, parts, and disposal procedures. If they send the wrong truck to the wrong disposal site, they could find themselves buying the entire disposal site.
Reply Quote
5
webgem08
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to curry97 • 2:02p, 2/15/21
AG
In Wylie. Have had consistent blackouts since 2 am. Where in Wylie is your brother located? Part of my frustration is that winners and losers are being chosen by someone and its not all equal.
Reply Quote
8
sam callahan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:05p, 2/15/21
Quote:
The costs of rolling blackouts never seem to be properly factored into the equation. Proper regulation to severely fine operators for preventable outages like this to account for this cost, or simply make it a requirement would go a long way.

You think the operators rather be out or making electricity? Here is a hint, they don't make money from not making electricity.

The problem isn't need of more regulation. It's the need for less counterproductive regulation like letting subsidized wind be the first into the market even though it has the least reliability.

Good God its almost painful to read your posts.
Reply Quote
33
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:06p, 2/15/21
AG
When you have a significant chunk of plants offline due to freezing this is a weather event and not a problem with what sources we've picked. Wind turbines frozen. Coal plants frozen. South Texas Power, nuke, at 50%. Gas turbine plants and nat gas fired steamers down. Pipelines having freeze-offs. Insufficient gas supply for gas power and consumer heating. Common thread: coldest temps in decades.

If every conventional generation source was up, there'd be likely no issue. The problem is the cost to weatherize for an event like this outweighs the economic payback. I don't know how you fix that.

Far as I know there is no regulatory issue with insulating pipes.
Reply Quote
5
1 edit
mazag08
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sam callahan • 2:14p, 2/15/21
AG
sam callahan said:
Quote:
The costs of rolling blackouts never seem to be properly factored into the equation. Proper regulation to severely fine operators for preventable outages like this to account for this cost, or simply make it a requirement would go a long way.

You think the operators rather be out or making electricity? Here is a hint, they don't make money from not making electricity.

The problem isn't need of more regulation. It's the need for less counterproductive regulation like letting subsidized wind be the first into the market even though it has the least reliability.

Good God its almost painful to read your posts.


Almost?
Reply Quote
8
sam callahan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:17p, 2/15/21
Quote:
Far as I know there is no regulatory issue with insulating pipes.

I couldn't say, but I wouldn't be too certain. I have seen someone wanting to drill a new hole in a turbine be blocked for fear of triggering a New Source Review violation and lawsuit.
Reply Quote
3
ABATTBQ11
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Shanked Punt • 2:19p, 2/15/21
AG
Shanked Punt said:
ABATTBQ11 said:
Shanked Punt said:
titan said:
Shanked Punt said:
jrdaustin said:
mazag08 said:
Shanked Punt said:



Here is a good thread of what is going on. Wind may be an issue, but the delivery of natural gas is causing major problems.


Next time find an unbiased source and not a career academic who's entire life has been spent studying slanted science in an effort to force feed our country an agenda.

Quote:
Jesse leads the Princeton ZERO Lab - the Zero carbon Energy systems Research and Optimization Laboratory -- which conducts research to improve decision-making to accelerate rapid, affordable, and effective transitions to net-zero carbon energy systems. The ZERO Lab has three main areas of research
Then his comments make more sense and deserve some clarification.

First, he is correct that there are currently problems with power generation both on gas and wind. But to imply by saying that there are "some" problems with wind and that they are much less than gas is misleading at best.

First, not "some". Fully 50% of wind turbines in west Texas are currently offline due to icing, and the number is rising.

Second, the only reason it is "second" as an issue to the gas issues is that thankfully we have much less wind generated power than gas generated power. The problem would have been magnified exponentially if we were MORE dependent on wind generated power.

Overall, the problem across the board is a piss poor job of preparing for this sort of event. NG generation needs to handle a cold snap of this magnitude in this region of the country, so does wind. That is completely independent of the energy source. It can be done.
Then it needs to be clearly defined and then pushed as something to be done. 2011 was just before the full onset of social media. You could probably mobilized and light the necessary fire under feet now to get officials to order built or methods setup necessary to meet what you are describing. If it can be outlined clearly. What lesson was ignored in 2011 might be able to be used as a club now in 2021 with social media and irate customers such as on the thread.


I fully agree with that.

This is from 2014 covering a good deal of what happened in 2011, with a lesson learned that likely never was carried out.
https://www.powermag.com/prepare-your-renewable-plant-for-cold-weather-operations/

Quote:

Wind generators in places like Canada typically install "cold weather packages" to extend temperature ranges, using up to 200 kW to 300 kW of parasitic power per turbine at conditions below 20C for heating components such as the nacelle space, yaw drive and pitch motors, and the gearbox, slip ring, controller and control cabinet, and battery. GE's 2010-introduced Cold Weather Extreme package for its 2.5 x l turbine, for example, ensures operations in temperatures to 30C and a "survival mode" to 40C.

According to NERC, "it does not appear that [cold weather packages] were used in the Southwest" during the 2011 event. It recommends that all entities investigate the purchase of these packages in preparation for extreme cold events.





It's a question of cost. The cost of that cold weather package needs to be offset by the amount of time it's actually necessary. Over the life of a windmill, maybe 25-30 years, that package may be necessary to keep it operating for a few days or weeks. If it's a month, that means that cold weather package would be utilized over .3% of the turbines lifespan if its 25 years. Think of it this way: How many times in the last 10 years have we had issue with cold weather power demand? 2? And even then, for what? 2-5 days at the most? Over 25 years, you may actually need it only 3-4 times for a few days each. The added cost likely makes it not cost effective.
The costs of rolling blackouts never seem to be properly factored into the equation. Proper regulation to severely fine operators for preventable outages like this to account for this cost, or simply make it a requirement would go a long way. The market isn't going to do that on its own.


No single operator is at fault, and it isn't their responsibility to ensure everyone has power. Would you fine Wal-Mart for not selling food because there's a shortage? No. Having electricity is a privilege, not a right. We are lucky that businesses in this country are very good at it and that people choose to engage in the enterprise of generating electricity and selling it to us at very affordable prices. *****ing and complaining when they can't do it is bull**** because it wreaks of entitlement.


They aren't paying the cost of the outages. It's the people who are out of power but don't want the higher rates to to pay for the things that would ensure peak demand is met no matter what. It's the fault of politicians, particularly liberal politicians, who block new power generation facilities or make them too expensive through regulation in order to promote less reliable, but "green" and liberal pleasing, alternatives that cost more.


At times like this, there is no way wind and solar would be meeting demand everywhere, even if the turbines weren't iced over. Solar panels would be covered and blocked. My neighbor has a solar array that isn't producing a damn thing because it's under 3" of snow and on a 2 story roof covered in snow and ice, and at night, when it is the coldest, there is no sun. You think wind and hydro would keep this entire state (much less the country) warm over last night and tonight when 90% of the population will see subfreezing temps? L O ****ing L! NG (and coal!) plants and furnaces are what are keeping people from freezing, yet YOU and other liberals are doing everything you can to kill them while complaining we don't have enough power and someone (not you) must be held accountable. JFC it's communist level logic: "Punish the people doing the work instead of the ideologues mashing it impossible."
Reply Quote
43
1 edit
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sam callahan • 2:21p, 2/15/21
AG
Haha could be. Sadly wouldn't surprise me.
Reply Quote
thirdcoast
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Zobel • 2:31p, 2/15/21
AG
Zobel said:
We haven't been neglecting gas at all. There's more gas fired generation on ERCOT and more gas runs on ERCOT than ever before.

The problem is in an event like this our infrastructure is struggling. Gas delivery. The plants themselves. All of it.


I understand fuel delivery or lack of fuel, but why are plants not mechanically built to operate in freezing weather? Most of North America has much colder temps...do we have lower grade generators/plants in southern states?
Reply Quote
3
thirdcoast
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:35p, 2/15/21
AG
Is it liberals or oil lobbyists keeping nuclear projects out of the mix?
Reply Quote
Ag with kids
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to thirdcoast • 2:37p, 2/15/21
AG
thirdcoast said:
Zobel said:
We haven't been neglecting gas at all. There's more gas fired generation on ERCOT and more gas runs on ERCOT than ever before.

The problem is in an event like this our infrastructure is struggling. Gas delivery. The plants themselves. All of it.


I understand fuel delivery or lack of fuel, but why are plants not mechanically built to operate in freezing weather? Most of North America has much colder temps...do we have lower grade generators/plants in southern states?
Well, it's probably a factor in the design in the south. Would you pay hundreds of millions extra just in case it froze over 1 day in a decade? Up north, the equation is different since they will have 4 months every year.
Reply Quote
6
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:43p, 2/15/21
AG
Those plants aren't prepared for this for the same reason my house isn't. I could put heat lines on my outside pipes or pay to have them buried, have a whole home backup - diesel AND natural gas even - and a battery with solar panels for good measure. And have an electric and gas furnace, and sure why not also a wood burning stove. Never ever worry about cold again. But I won't, because I have no interest in spending the money for a once a few decade event.
Reply Quote
6
titan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Shanked Punt • 2:43p, 2/15/21
S
Shanked Punt said:
Don''t know why the thumbs down. Glad the Governor is involving himself directly in this and gathering information. If some order is going to be needed to over-ride something, changes are Abbott has the means.

FrioAg 00:
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
Reply Quote
4
richardag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to titan • 2:44p, 2/15/21
titan said:
Need a movement that all it does is research and arrange the recall, firing, or primary of any official that is behind stupid and destructive policies. Something like that old `Moral Majority' did with a little bit of success in the 80's. But refine it for the times.
I like it but foresee this turning into political witch hunts.
Among the latter, under pretence of governing they have divided their nations into two classes, wolves and sheep.”
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Edward Carrington, January 16, 1787
Reply Quote
insulator_king
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fins Up! • 2:49p, 2/15/21
AG
The Chicken Ranch said:
Seriously, who heats a modern home with wood? I cannot believe you said that. And the Democrats want to ban wood burning fireplaces also.

I love my fireplace but it isn't going to heat my home.

Natural gas works the best, but you still gotta have juice.
The EPA highly regulates wood stoves.

As do states and cities.

In NM, Albuquerque has no burn days for fireplaces and wood stoves during the winter.

Some places won't allow wood stove installations, unless you buy a very low emission catalytic stove.
So no, a wood stove is not the answer. I have one, but it was already in the house when we bought it. They are dirty, and ash goes all through the house.
Reply Quote
3
wessimo
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:50p, 2/15/21
AG
When is the flippin blackout gonna roll?
Reply Quote
11
titan
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to insulator_king • 2:54p, 2/15/21
S
insulator_king said:
The Chicken Ranch said:
Seriously, who heats a modern home with wood? I cannot believe you said that. And the Democrats want to ban wood burning fireplaces also.

I love my fireplace but it isn't going to heat my home.

Natural gas works the best, but you still gotta have juice.
The EPA highly regulates wood stoves.

As do states and cities.

In NM, Albuquerque has no burn days for fireplaces and wood stoves during the winter.

Some places won't allow wood stove installations, unless you buy a very low emission catalytic stove.
So no, a wood stove is not the answer. I have one, but it was already in the house when we bought it. They are dirty, and ash goes all through the house.
Stove smoke from wood like since almost from the caves? Are you kidding? Do these idiots have the foggiest idea what even the slightest belch, not even eruption, from a volcano does in just a blink?
FrioAg 00:
Leftist Democrats "have completely overplayed the Racism accusation. Honestly my first reaction when I hear it today is to assume bad intentions by the accuser, not the accused."
Reply Quote
2
gonemaroon
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:57p, 2/15/21
AG
Hey guys just a quick update as I'm having an extremely busy day. The generation is at the lowest point of the day, they have not been able to get generation back online. Solar is currently well over 2500MW. Obviously that goes down as the sun goes down, and then we're going to be back into the twilight zone again. This looks like a multiple day issue, if you do not have power now you probably will not have it until Thursday.
Reply Quote
10
thirdcoast
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:58p, 2/15/21
AG
Ercot plants literally froze and became inoperable or they didn't have capacity to meet unprecedented demand? If it's both, what is the main culprit here?



Reply Quote
1
wessimo
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:59p, 2/15/21
AG
Space city wx update. As prior poster said, if your power is out (like mine) it probably ain't coming back any time soon .

https://spacecityweather.com/the-power-situation-is-disastrous-and-it-likely-wont-be-fixed-tonight/
Reply Quote
2
richardag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Matt Hooper • 3:00p, 2/15/21
Matt Hooper said:
Your posts have been interesting but for a layman such as I - hard to follow. Here is what I think you have said:

1. Wind energy production has been substantially reduced because of the cold temps.
2. This puts greater demand on remaining forms of generation. Gas, Coal, and STP (don't know what STP is).
3. ERCOT tripped all their Coal and STP production - Tripped as in used or off line? Either way - no longer on line.
4. This puts big pressure on the remaining gas generation production.
5. There are some price caps in place - as in people have signed contracts for the cost of their electricity that is now mismatched with current cost of production as current natural gas prices??? Not sure I got this right.

6. The EROC should have started shedding (dropping) load late last night (maybe 10 meg watts) and that would have prevented the much larger shedding that occurred later. Was this mis-management OR a play to save massive cash losses related to number 5 above?
7. If the EROC had shed load earlier, they would have been able to keep more people on line and recover customers quicker. But with the being upside down on the cost of power generation vs what power is being sold at this creates massive losses for multiple large parties.
8. This loss is exacerbated by parities that have short positions (edited) on the cost of natural gas and parities that have LOC's (letters if credit) with large electricity generators.

AS SUCH - shedding more customers for longer periods of time is a way of mitigating the economic losses.

Please correct me if my summary is off in multiple areas. No pride here - just trying to understand.

Somehow the Kinder pipeline fits in as well. If that fall short - then larger scale blackout?
Thank you for interpreting. Seems some of the power loss was due to concerns over corporate profits not people's safety?
Among the latter, under pretence of governing they have divided their nations into two classes, wolves and sheep.”
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Edward Carrington, January 16, 1787
Reply Quote
1
Ag In Ok
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ABATTBQ11 • 3:02p, 2/15/21
AG
Honest question - how does what you are saying reconcile with this (granted it is a rumor) from Gonemaroon:

ERCOT ran credit under this situation of price caps for 3 days straight and the risk to the market was in the 10's of billions and the powers that play in this space made calls all the way up to POTUS. Massive load shedding seems to be the bail out (opinion of everyone I know in the space) to the shorts in the market that were all going to go under - shorts include all the REP's. Most of the traders think the grid is trying to bail out Vistra and NRG through black outs. Even the likes of Morgan Stanley have billions in credit risk on these companies and wind farms, solar farms, etc.
Reply Quote
YouBet
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to thirdcoast • 3:05p, 2/15/21
AG
thirdcoast said:
Is it liberals or oil lobbyists keeping nuclear projects out of the mix?


Also has to be lack of public education on current nuke tech. I'm willing to bet 95% of the population assumes we haven't progressed beyond 3 Mile Island tech (Gen 2?).

I wasn't until I saw some posts on here about molten and modular something or other that has like 10% of the footprint of what we all think of as a nuke plant. I'm still not educated; I'm just aware that there is greatly improved tech from an efficiency and safety perspective.

However, convincing the public (many of whom have now seen the Chernobyl Netflix film in the last year) and whose only awareness of nuke here in this county is the 3M island fiasco, would take a massive PR campaign. Half the population at a minimum is already built in against it (all Democrats) and then probably half of Republicans if not more would be against it as well.

Doubt you ever see it happen unless we find ourselves in a perpetual 100 yr event without power.
Reply Quote
3
YouBet
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to gonemaroon • 3:07p, 2/15/21
AG
gonemaroon said:
Hey guys just a quick update as I'm having an extremely busy day. The generation is at the lowest point of the day, they have not been able to get generation back online. Solar is currently well over 2500MW. Obviously that goes down as the sun goes down, and then we're going to be back into the twilight zone again. This looks like a multiple day issue, if you do not have power now you probably will not have it until Thursday.


If that happens, people are going to die. Literally.

Our power just came back on for first time since around 9. Will see if it holds.
Reply Quote
3
thirdcoast
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to gonemaroon • 3:08p, 2/15/21
AG
gonemaroon said:
Hey guys just a quick update as I'm having an extremely busy day. The generation is at the lowest point of the day, they have not been able to get generation back online. Solar is currently well over 2500MW. Obviously that goes down as the sun goes down, and then we're going to be back into the twilight zone again. This looks like a multiple day issue, if you do not have power now you probably will not have it until Thursday.


What are the black and red lines?
Reply Quote
richardag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sam callahan • 3:09p, 2/15/21
sam callahan said:
Quote:
Far as I know there is no regulatory issue with insulating pipes.

I couldn't say, but I wouldn't be too certain. I have seen someone wanting to drill a new hole in a turbine be blocked for fear of triggering a New Source Review violation and lawsuit.
Correct me if I am wrong but it sounds like "triggering a New Source Review" may be a somewhat burdensome regulation? I am not familiar withe this industry's regulations at all.
Among the latter, under pretence of governing they have divided their nations into two classes, wolves and sheep.”
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Edward Carrington, January 16, 1787
Reply Quote
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to thirdcoast • 3:09p, 2/15/21
AG
Black is demand red is capacity. Red needs to be above black to avoid sad times.
Reply Quote
3
Kenneth_2003
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:11p, 2/15/21
AG
Do we know what tripped some of these plants offline at 2am when the grid was being pulled down?

What I know.... The system is designed to work at 60Hz. Every system on the grid is carefully monitored to keep it in sync. When there is sufficient power on the grid it will more or less maintain itself at that frequency. If you were to (don't try this if you don't have the right equipment) plug a generator into the grid you would want to bring it in sync, not just at 60Hz but be at the same place in the cycle, with the rest of the grid. If you're off by a 1/10 or so it'll sync up just fine. If you're way off the grid will wreck your genset instantly and violently. Think about it in terms of driving a stick and shifting without the clutch, oh the awful grinding!

The grid, and its load can be thought of like a push mower. You get into grass that's too deep and the engine starts slowing down and will eventually die if you don't lessen the load.

I know, and GoneMaroon mentioned, circuit breakers and other equipment to isolate systems are in place. Did they work? Do we know if generators or transformers were damaged by the frequency variation? So as load began to match capacity the frequency began to drop, just like a lawnmower slowing down. But what's now keeping that equipment offline? Is it cooling water infrastructure frozen? Or have they destroyed transformers, generators, or switching equipment?
Reply Quote
3
gonemaroon
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ag In Ok • 3:12p, 2/15/21
AG
The statement of 10's of billions of credit risk is a fact. The generators in particular GDF Suez lobbied for a $9,000 price cap. When I started in ERCOT it was $999 for reference. GDF Suez always manipulated the market and I sued them (PUCT granted them all sorts of legal rights to manipulate the market) and manipulate the futures exchange. PUCT allowed it and loved them manipulating price they sponsored it. GDF pushed for higher and higher prices and the other gens loved it got on board. I lost my lawsuit but FERC saw it and tasked their ass in PJM and MISO. GDF saw the risk of manipulating and sold all of their assets to guess who? Dynegy then Vistra - Vistra just bigger and bigger. Guess who has 4,000MW of plants in outage this week? Vistra.

Anyhow point being the gens wanted more volatility because they could handle it but the REPS couldn't. The fake manipulation bankrupted the REPS and forced them to sell to guess who? Vistra and NRG.

All the credit of frozen wind farms, REPS buying $7500 power. NRG and Vistra being stuck short. My friends and I thought Vistra was on the hook for a billion dollar upcoming loss. A black out zeros that loss out.

Lots of rambling but the credit risk was designed by the generators.
Reply Quote
7
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.