Why Texans are freezing their asses off

[Kinkster90210]

Originally Posted by Little Monster

I am also right about renewable energy not to blame for the power outage.

Yeah, you were pretty affirmatively WRONG on this.

Renewable energy shit the bed during the week long freeze.

It was not solely responsible for the power outage, but it had an outsized contribution.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Kinkster90210

Yeah, you were pretty affirmatively WRONG on this.

Renewable energy shit the bed during the week long freeze.

It was not solely responsible for the power outage, but it had an outsized contribution.

That is not true.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielco...rship-failure/

The loss of generation capacity from gas, coal and nuclear is more than five times greater than decline in output from the stalled wind turbines. In fact, wind generation has actually exceeded the grid operator’s daily forecast through the weekend, according to ERCOT data.

No, frozen wind turbines aren't the main culprit for Texas' power outages. Something that Russia, Sweden, Norway and Canada understand pretty well, it that is hard to generate electricity when it’s cold. Alaska, Maine, Vermont, and Siberia all manage to do this – because they prepare.

[Little Monster]

Originally Posted by Kinkster90210

Yeah, you were pretty affirmatively WRONG on this.

Renewable energy shit the bed during the week long freeze.

It was not solely responsible for the power outage, but it had an outsized contribution.

Do your research, you sir are WRONG. Renewable energy is not what caused the black out period end of story. Deny all you want to, that won't make you right.

https://www.npr.org/sections/live-up...%20the%20state.


"It’s estimated that of the grid’s total winter capacity, about 80% of it, or 67 gigawatts, could be generated by natural gas, coal and some nuclear power. Only 7% of ERCOT’s forecasted winter capacity, or 6 gigawatts, was expected to come from various wind power sources across the state."

[Little Monster]

Originally Posted by Kinkster90210

Again, get your Limey head out of rectal defilade and read the WSJ article above.

There is NO contradiction between being proud of gas production while simultaneously producing more wind power than any other state.

Texas wind power produces 25% of the states needs. But that is only if the wind is blowing (like every other state) and only if the turbines don't shut down in a freeze.

Fortunately, Texas is very windy, so the AVERAGE across the whole year is 25%. But the average doesn't save you if the wind drops off or if the equipment freezes. RE-read the WSJ article and learn to appreciate the distinctions between maximum capacity, peak demand, average demand, etc.

Total capacity for Texas is 83,000 MW, But Texas wind can be as high as 22,500 MW (25%) or as low as 600 MW (less than 1%). That's a huge variation.

And it is only the capacity side of the equation. The other side is DEMAND. If the demand is only 40,000 MW for the whole state, but wind turbines are producing 20,000 MW, then wind is providing 50% of the power AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

But the state average for wind is 25%.

During the polar vortex, wind power had dropped 95% from before the temperature drop. In other words, wind power shit the bed.

That doesn't mean that wind power is bad. I am a big proponent. But it cannot be relied upon as part of the state baseload. Neither can solar, which was dismal during the cold snap, since the skies were cloudy for most of the week.

It is you who needs to pull your head out of your ass. The first thing these Texas conservatives did was blame a non existent policy for the black out which has proven to be a crock of shit.

Natural gas pipe lines are what failed, you can try and spin it anyway you want but it will not make you right. There are much colder places that use windmills and theirs don't fail, why? Because they prepare for it. And no smart one, freezes here in Texas are not a once in a generation occurrence, while I admit they may not happen every year they do happen often enough to put money into winterizing our sources of energy this shit doesn't happen again.

Keep trying smart one.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Little Monster

Do your research, you sir are WRONG. Renewable energy is not what caused the black out period end of story. Deny all you want to, that won't make you right.

https://www.npr.org/sections/live-up...%20the%20state.


"It’s estimated that of the grid’s total winter capacity, about 80% of it, or 67 gigawatts, could be generated by natural gas, coal and some nuclear power. Only 7% of ERCOT’s forecasted winter capacity, or 6 gigawatts, was expected to come from various wind power sources across the state."

Hey Little Monster, we were both full of shit earlier in this thread, when we were quoting figures from the press for the percent of power Texas gets from renewables. I've since dumped a load, but you're still holding it in. Relax my friend, take a good book to the shitter, light a candle and play some spa music. It will all come out. Worked for me anyway.

You can right click on this link and download an Excel table, which will show ERCOT's numbers by month for 2020,

http://www.ercot.com/content/wcm/lis...yFuel2020.xlsx

If you do that, you'll see wind accounted for around 26% or 27% of electricity generated on the ERCOT system during each of January, February, March and December of 2020. On some days it would have been higher and some days lower, but that's the monthly average.

[oeb11]

Tiny - One casts the Pearls of Facts and Truth in front of the religiosity of marxist DPST ideology.
None so blind as refuse to see.
Thank you for your reasoned and well documented contributions.


Below - can be interpreted a couple of ways - if fiden comes out for nuclear energy.

[GastonGlock]

Originally Posted by oeb11

Tiny - One casts the Pearls of Facts and Truth in front of the religiosity of marxist DPST ideology.
None so blind as refuse to see.
Thank you for your reasoned and well documented contributions.


Below - can be interpreted a couple of ways - if fiden comes out for nuclear energy.

Nah, it's a nuclear football, that's a pretty specific thing.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Hey Little Monster, we were both full of shit earlier in this thread, when we were quoting figures from the press for the percent of power Texas gets from renewables. .

For once, I'll not take a contrarian view.

Here was the problem I had earlier with say lustylad's article. Many were comparing apples to oranges. No matter the rate of wind BEFORE the freeze ....it held close to its projected output during a freeze.

I'm not one saying to get rid of fossil fuels.... I'm just saying you can't let someone like lustylad read the opinion pieces of the WSJ while he is taking a crap. He comes out fuller of more shit than when he went in!

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by oeb11

Tiny - One casts the Pearls of Facts and Truth in front of the religiosity of marxist DPST ideology.
None so blind as refuse to see.
Thank you for your reasoned and well documented contributions.


Below - can be interpreted a couple of ways - if fiden comes out for nuclear energy.

I know exactly what this means. Biden does view nuclear energy favorably, unlike many in his party.

Ironically many progressives like Sanders would do away with it. They're bat shit crazy. How, as Sanders proposes, do you do away with carbon based fuels for electricity generation and transportation by 2030 without nuclear? It would be a huge bet on storage technology coming way down in price in a hurry. And a huge burden on the economy to make that transition.

[GastonGlock]

Originally Posted by oeb11

Tiny - One casts the Pearls of Facts and Truth in front of the religiosity of marxist DPST ideology.
None so blind as refuse to see.
Thank you for your reasoned and well documented contributions.


Below - can be interpreted a couple of ways - if fiden comes out for nuclear energy.

Originally Posted by Tiny

I know exactly what this means. Biden does view nuclear energy favorably, unlike many in his party.

Ironically many progressives like Sanders would do away with it. They're bat shit crazy. How, as Sanders proposes, do you do away with carbon based fuels for electricity generation and transportation by 2030 without nuclear? It would be a huge bet on storage technology coming way down in price in a hurry. And a huge burden on the economy to make that transition.

Guys, that's not what that comic is talking about.

THIS is what that comic is talking about.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by GastonGlock

Guys, that's not what that comic is talking about.

THIS is what that comic is talking about.

Interesting

[oeb11]

GG is correct
and - they want to give the nuclear football to AOC.

anyOne concerned ?

anyone?????????

[pfunkdenver]

Originally Posted by oeb11

GG is correct
and - they want to give the nuclear football to AOC.

anyOne concerned ?

anyone?????????

Well, clearly you are.

Please, explain your concerns, and please, give factual evidence to support those concerns. I'm listening.

[winn dixie]

Have you looked at let alone listened to that bitch? That should settle any questions!

[GastonGlock]

Originally Posted by oeb11

GG is correct
and - they want to give the nuclear football to AOC.

anyOne concerned ?

anyone?????????

Originally Posted by pfunkdenver

Well, clearly you are.

Please, explain your concerns, and please, give factual evidence to support those concerns. I'm listening.

Originally Posted by winn dixie

Have you looked at let alone listened to that bitch? That should settle any questions!

AOC doesn't strike me as the nuke type. Concentration Camps, yeah, but not nukes.