|
Lots of industrial customers accept lower rates (or have them imposed) as the price of being at the head of the line for load shedding to keep the grid up. It doesn’t matter if you have redundant connections if you’re deliberately disconnected to keep hospitals and residential customers on in an emergency.
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2019 04:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 20:46 |
|
|
Orvin posted:Having 2 or 3 AC to DC converters for a single facility can’t be cheap. If they were economical, Texas would have a lot more ties to the Eastern interconnect. Texas avoids interconnection to limit federal regulation. ERCOT is something of a mysterious foreign land to FERC. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Sep 29, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I'm not saying blackouts. I'm arguing that we simply turn stuff off entirely. Who is “we” and what is “stuff”? The only practical way to do this is for the power companies to shut off neighborhoods entirely through rolling blackouts.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2019 00:43
|
|
|
I’m at a regional entity conference and a NERC director claimed in his presentation during an aside on the rate of battery storage rollout that it would take 200 years at current production rates to run the US grid for one night. Looking good!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
Trump is in the White House preventing regulation of gas, so let’s use magic to do other things despite Trump being in the White House is a good take.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2019 00:35
|
|
|
One of you is famous. https://twitter.com/realsaavedra/status/1179908480322289664?s=21
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 03:19
|
|
|
Venomous posted:I mean, someone has to modernise A Modest Proposal for TYOOL 2019, https://twitter.com/comfortablysmug/status/1180110188952588288?s=21
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 15:30
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:
Chop the head off and it's a decent representation.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1188805779496882183
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2019 14:17
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:......so, just from looking over their Twitter and their articles, a lot of arguments about "Cheap Energy" and they don't like rooftop solar, and are kind of in the middle over PG&E? Lot of emphasis on Natural Gas And...? Whether climate change exists and how much is a scientific issue. Whether to do anything about it, how, and how much, are political and economic issues.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2019 19:36
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Rooftop solar is an expensive boondoggle, right now. But it has some benefits, largely offset usage costs, but the bigger problem is local power companies going out of their way to attack rooftop solar by charging for it being attached to the grid. You either pay for it to be attached to the grid, or you don't get attached to the grid and live or die by your solar. Otherwise rich people with solar are being subsidized by poor people paying the full freight of the transmission/distribution system that goes directly into their MW consumed price. You can save on your avoided generation capital/fuel costs, but cost shifting away the distribution/transmission share is a bad idea. Incidentally, our local rooftop solar shuts down entirely when the grid goes down, so as to avoid feeding surplus energy into the line and shocking crews fixing the grid. I imagine they've gone with this scheme rather than making the solar units entirely island the house as a cost saving measure. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 22:57 on Oct 28, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2019 22:52
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:"Whether to do anything about it" is not an economics issue. It may be a political issue, even if it's dismaying to say that "should the human race continue to persist" is a political issue If the costs of fixing/delaying climate change are higher than the costs of living with it, that's an economic issue. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Oct 28, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Is it straightforward to ramp the electricity generation from nuclear power plants up and down quickly? I suspect that it probably isn't done very often, and that the people running nuclear power plants usually run them as much as possible. Running a nuclear power plant only part of the time would make nuclear electricity even more expensive, and it is already very expensive. No, but gas is great at this.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2019 00:37
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:This is why nuclear should be built right downtown and not in remote areas so they can be part of a district heating system! PURPA cogeneration attached.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1190094817084051456 I can drop bricks on a gas turbine, check mate, enviroweenies.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2019 17:14
|
|
|
MomJeans420 posted:The energy generation megathread attracts spergs like moths to a flame, and they will never answer your question because there isn't an answer that they actually like. It also attracts people who assume willingness to pay for massive changes to the energy infrastructure on a very short timeline at a ruinous cost and think that's a reasonable answer; see above.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2019 18:26
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:Ok, so let's take pumped storage as an example: Trump is building a wall around Colorado so that we have enough land area for pumped storage to matter.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2019 20:35
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Versus the guy ignoring the fossil fuel industries long and sordid history of outright fabrication and lying. It doesn't matter that they lie, what needs to happen isn't going to happen. This is all fantasy wanking about necessary solutions that cannot and will not be implemented.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Ah cool, another stage of Global Warming Denialism: Do you scream at your doctor about “Eternal Life Denialism” and rant about your plan to replace all your organs every 30 months.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2019 00:33
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Got it. Drill, baby, drill because actually addressing issues and confronting the perpetrators is too hard for you. Both death and AGW are real problems without solutions. In the latter case because the political/legal/economic factors make it impossible. I’m sorry you’re incapable of understanding this.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2019 00:39
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Death is an inevibility. AGW is inability to confront greedy exploitation of our environment. This pointless moralizing and emoting is a big reason you can’t understand why no government can or will make the decisions necessary to fix things.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2019 00:44
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:We have tackled large issues before, your nihilism is just pathetic. “We” have never tackled an issue of such long term, global, and speculative impact with such enormous, global, unequally distributed costs subject to so much incentive to defect. I’ll believe it’s possible when politicians start talking about dropping all health care and pension funding on top of huge tax increases to fund the infrastructure changes at home and pick out a biggish medium sized country to preemptively nuke to demonstrate the need for others to play ball. Brazil comes to mind, but maybe there’s someone smaller who would work. It’s an existential crisis, not a bullshit campaign by western leftists to advance their preferred domestic policies behind a smokescreen by duping gullible morons marching in the street and posting on Internet forums, after all.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2019 00:59
|
|
|
Kaal posted:This is just stupid, especially given that there's plenty of governments that have already acknowledged global warming and are making strides to remediate the situation. Just because the US is not currently leading this effort does not mean it is not happening. It’s not happening fast enough or seriously enough.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2019 01:09
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:So your solution is to just give up, accept we cannot change exploitative gas and petroleum companies, and just roll over. I am employed in the energy industry and this thread has much of interest. Your Underpants Gnome solutions to AGW are not among them. Maybe try filling out step #2.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2019 01:13
|
|
|
LOL Germany. https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2019/11/germany-wind-power-fact-of-the-day.html
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2019 20:24
|
|
|
LOL China. http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2019/11/china-fact-of-the-day-57.html
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/maartenzam/status/1190253562267340800?s=21
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2019 13:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/zackkanter/status/1201259377816027138?s=21
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2019 03:16
|
|
|
Pander posted:Good God, why? There's like zero reason to have screening more stringent than any typical construction work for renewables. You can't install malware in a road overpass and you have unique ways to injure yourself or others on the job when handling electricity and with union benefits and future contract negotiations driven by those injuries. He was specifically talking about sites worked on by utilities, who probably go ahead and apply that sort of screening to everyone who works for them, even if they don't need Critical Infrastructure Protection clearances that specifically require drug and background screening. It would be awkward for them to apply for a transfer or promotion to a CIP position or more high risk substation construction/lineman job and belatedly learn about their drug, gambling, or wife beating habit. It's just efficient HR practice. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Dec 3, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:Unless people are too high to do their job it shouldn't matter at all, hth. Unless people are planning to shoot coworkers it shouldn’t matter at all if they’re carrying at work, hth.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2019 20:53
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Okay but these workers weren't carrying marijuana in their pockets so maybe rethink this profoundly stupid analogy that you've developed I write the FAA about this all the time, leave those pilots alone. I realize goons are not generally overburdened with practical knowledge or decision-making skills, but consider the possibility that it's impractical to trust people prone to drug use to refrain from use during times when they put the public at risk or might cost their employer a poo poo load of money if they decide to just say gently caress it. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Dec 3, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
Taffer posted:Do you also assume that everyone who has a beer or a glass of whiskey after work will get wasted on the job? Because by your framework you need to be constantly worried that over half the human race is about to get trashed and kill everyone. I encourage you to write to the FAA, the DoT, and the various states who mandate drug testing for employees in certain public trust positions and quit wasting your time on some dude on the internet. Revising OSHA regulations and various worker's comp laws to exclude from coverage and leave with sole legal liability those who test positive post-accident would also help to convince employers to forgo drug testing in situations where it is permitted but not mandatory. Be the change you want to see in the world. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Dec 3, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Occasional drug and alcohol use at home is not the same as coming to work drunk and/or high. hth Yes, I know that many posters are too stupid or ignorant to understand how adults with real responsibilities choose to manage risk and liability and are taking their frustrations out on me. I'm sure they'll feel better after they smoke a joint and play some more video games. Broke: Nuclear power is doomed by a coalition of fossil fuel lobbyists and misguided greens. Woke: Nuclear power is doomed by its refusal to hire people who indulge in recreational drugs to construct reactors. Apparatchik Magnet fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Dec 3, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mowermanjimmy/status/1202917012932042752
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2019 22:45
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mackaymiller/status/1205501040331829254
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/16/climate/methane-leak-satellite.html
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2019 01:01
|
|
|
LOL Germany. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-10-31/germany-s-nationalist-party-has-wind-industry-in-limbo
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2019 15:59
|
|
|
Government can't successfully regulate the natural gas industry due to a lack of political will and too much industry power, so instead we're going to shut down the natural gas industry is an amazing take. In other news, the wind industry needs to accept more regulation. http://bronx.news12.com/story/41505358/massive-coop-city-wind-turbine-collapses
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2019 23:38
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:That's not what I'm supporting. I 'm explaining how I ideally envision Oil & Gas if they were to be nationalized which they should be and all the wealth ripped out from the shareholders, executives, etc. but with that I would suspect parts of the company are quite useful. Nationalization of the oil and gas industry in the US means purchasing it at taxpayer expense at current market value. It doesn’t take wealth away from shareholders. You wan expropriation, which isn’t possible without getting rid of a constitutional amendment.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2019 14:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 20:46 |
|
|
Kaal posted:That's not hard to get around, you just need cooperative representatives and courts.  Step one, assume a can opener. Also multinational oil and gas companies are...multinational. Your fantasy US government can't regulate the value of their assets in other jurisdictions. You either pay that market value or they split the company. None of this matters because of China and India anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2019 17:34
|
|