4 ms·

> they are too dependent on renewables and basically ran out of power generating capability as the sun was setting Actually it's more complicated than that: "

> they are too dependent on renewables and basically ran out of power generating capability as the sun was setting Actually it's more complicated than that: "Several gas plants that were supposed to provide power failed to operate or tripped off, the CAISO said in a press conference last Wednesday. ... The CAISO also confirmed that demand was no greater than on previous very hot days."[0] You could equally make the case that the state was too dependent on unreliable gas plants. [0] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/08/why-renewables-arent-reason-california-blackouts/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/08/why-renew...

gwright 6y ago
This is just another way of saying there the margin of error has been reduced to an unacceptable level. It is only going to get worse if California continues towards its renewable goals. I found this article helpful: https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-8-16-h7249j4l4p0o64aod9n6qltzirnm6i https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-8-16-h7249j4l4... From that article: Take out all of the solar and wind capacity, and California has only about 43 GW of capacity to meet demand that could well exceed that on any hot summer day. And to get to that 43 GW, you would need all other facilities up and running at absolutely full capacity with no scheduled or unscheduled outages, which is not realistic. Yes, you could try to import some power from the neighboring states, but at times of peak usage they probably need all of their own power. In short, you have put yourself in a position where regular intentional blackouts are inevitable. And, as more and more reliable fossil fuel and nuclear facilities get closed in favor of wind and solar, the problem looks set to worsen dramatically over the next several years
- mturmon 6y ago
  What a tendentious blog that is! Here's another one from April on how COVID is no big deal: https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-4-15-what-is-the-proof-that-this-covid-19-thing-really-is-a-crisis https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-4-15-what-is-t... Doesn't it seem like the author is reasoning backward from a preferred conclusion, the way a lawyer might?
  - gwright 6y ago
    That article isn't about COVID in isolation it is about whether the drastic economic shutdown was an appropriate response. I think that is still a very debatable item, but data from Sweden, for example suggests that it wasn't a good tradeoff. There is also evidence that social distancing and masks would have been a reasonable approach vs full shutdown mode. I'm not sure what to make of your "reasoning backward" statement. Just not sure what it means.

gwright 6y ago

This is just another way of saying there the margin of error has been reduced to an unacceptable level. It is only going to get worse if California continues towards its renewable goals. I found this article helpful: https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-8-16-h7249j4l4p0o64aod9n6qltzirnm6i https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-8-16-h7249j4l4... From that article: Take out all of the solar and wind capacity, and California has only about 43 GW of capacity to meet demand that could well exceed that on any hot summer day. And to get to that 43 GW, you would need all other facilities up and running at absolutely full capacity with no scheduled or unscheduled outages, which is not realistic. Yes, you could try to import some power from the neighboring states, but at times of peak usage they probably need all of their own power. In short, you have put yourself in a position where regular intentional blackouts are inevitable. And, as more and more reliable fossil fuel and nuclear facilities get closed in favor of wind and solar, the problem looks set to worsen dramatically over the next several years

mturmon 6y ago
What a tendentious blog that is! Here's another one from April on how COVID is no big deal: https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-4-15-what-is-the-proof-that-this-covid-19-thing-really-is-a-crisis https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-4-15-what-is-t... Doesn't it seem like the author is reasoning backward from a preferred conclusion, the way a lawyer might?
- gwright 6y ago
  That article isn't about COVID in isolation it is about whether the drastic economic shutdown was an appropriate response. I think that is still a very debatable item, but data from Sweden, for example suggests that it wasn't a good tradeoff. There is also evidence that social distancing and masks would have been a reasonable approach vs full shutdown mode. I'm not sure what to make of your "reasoning backward" statement. Just not sure what it means.