4 ms·

You should always be doubtful of the thesis from editorial articles, but you could be less contemptuous... and more correct. >...between the mornings of Feb. 7

You should always be doubtful of the thesis from editorial articles, but you could be less contemptuous... and more correct. >...between the mornings of Feb. 7 and Feb. 11, wind as a share of the state’s electricity fell to 8% from 42%, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). >Gas-fired plants produced 43,800 MW of power Sunday night and coal plants chipped in 10,800 MW—about two to three times what they usually generate at their peak on any given winter day—after wind power had largely vanished. In other words, gas and coal plants held up in the frosty conditions far better than wind turbines did. https://www.wsj.com/articles/texas-spins-into-the-wind-11613605698?mod=hp_opin_pos_1 https://www.wsj.com/articles/texas-spins-into-the-wind-11613... so wind power cratered and other sources are running at 2-3x their normal despite problems from the cold like equipment freezing and water at water intake facilities freezing. this is despite a just in time operational mindset that is causing shortages of natural gas. power plants are shutting down because they don't have gas to burn. so you can't blame it on wind power really. but your comment is fantastically derisive.

wffurr 6y ago
Not sure how to reconcile those numbers with the OP and other sources.
- arkis22 6y ago
  the 42 to 8 statistic is from a government organization. generation is not equal to consumption because texas lacks batteries to store excess energy. the politifact article is correct that the failure is on carbon based plants, and its on plants that are not used to cold weather for obvious reasons. but its also silly because the implication is that you just need more windmills. which is obviously silly because texas has one of the highest wind energy %s in the US. but carbon based plants are running 3 times as hot as theyre used to and plants are shutting down because they dont have fuel. So you obviously need carbon fuel to help out. the carbon plants are stepping up as much as they can but its not enough. thats it. no huge conspiracy theory. but lots of people like to make fun of the other side. they need more power, and you cant magically sprout up wind turbines
  - wffurr 6y ago
    I don’t think that’s the implication at all. The implication is that some people are blaming wind generation for this shortage because of a few iced over turbines. When the cause is a system-wide failure to prepare for cold weather conditions. I don’t know how to reconcile your claim of “wind power cratered” with plenty of other sources claiming “wind power generation exceeded expectations.” It makes me suspect you are not arguing in good faith.
    - arkis22 6y ago
      sorry what? my point is that it is a system wide failure. but the wind power dropped to 8% of power generated. carbon power obviously has to make up the difference and there are plants shutting down because they dont have fuel. all wind power has to do to exceed expectations is to lose 50% as opposed to the expected 60%. (random numbers) its easier to pump gas than it is to construct a wind turbine? the politifact article is blaming carbon plants, and I said that's true, but you need to understand the context. theyre blaming carbon plants because theyre the only source of power you can ramp up quickly without the wind complying
      - wffurr 6y ago
        Weird way to make your point. At least you are calling them “wind turbines” instead of “windmills” now.
      - wffurr 6y ago
        The politifact article is responding to nonsense like this blaming wind turbines for the shutdown: https://mobile.twitter.com/Acyn/status/1361868404534112257 https://mobile.twitter.com/Acyn/status/1361868404534112257 Note that's the governor of Texas in that clip, not some internet armchair grid operator.
  - mehlmao 6y ago
    I think the 42 to 8 statistic is measuring a different metric. My understanding is that natural gas, coal, and other fossil fuel-based electric sources only run when it is profitable to do so. When the price of natural gas is low and the price of electricity is high, it makes sense to use natural gas to generate electricity. When it's the other way around, turning natural gas into electricity is a money-losing proposition. By contrast, wind and solar power have no input cost. So long as there is wind or sunlight, renewable power is being provided to the grid. Last week, temperatures were higher and there was less demand for electricity. Prices were lower, so less fossil fuel energy was needed/wanted/generated. This week, the temperature drop greatly increased demand for energy, increasing prices with it. More fossil fuels are burned. While the amount of wind/solar power generated did not greatly chang, the total amount of electricity generated increased, reducing renewables' share.

wffurr 6y ago

Not sure how to reconcile those numbers with the OP and other sources.

arkis22 6y ago
the 42 to 8 statistic is from a government organization. generation is not equal to consumption because texas lacks batteries to store excess energy. the politifact article is correct that the failure is on carbon based plants, and its on plants that are not used to cold weather for obvious reasons. but its also silly because the implication is that you just need more windmills. which is obviously silly because texas has one of the highest wind energy %s in the US. but carbon based plants are running 3 times as hot as theyre used to and plants are shutting down because they dont have fuel. So you obviously need carbon fuel to help out. the carbon plants are stepping up as much as they can but its not enough. thats it. no huge conspiracy theory. but lots of people like to make fun of the other side. they need more power, and you cant magically sprout up wind turbines
- wffurr 6y ago
  I don’t think that’s the implication at all. The implication is that some people are blaming wind generation for this shortage because of a few iced over turbines. When the cause is a system-wide failure to prepare for cold weather conditions. I don’t know how to reconcile your claim of “wind power cratered” with plenty of other sources claiming “wind power generation exceeded expectations.” It makes me suspect you are not arguing in good faith.
  - arkis22 6y ago
    sorry what? my point is that it is a system wide failure. but the wind power dropped to 8% of power generated. carbon power obviously has to make up the difference and there are plants shutting down because they dont have fuel. all wind power has to do to exceed expectations is to lose 50% as opposed to the expected 60%. (random numbers) its easier to pump gas than it is to construct a wind turbine? the politifact article is blaming carbon plants, and I said that's true, but you need to understand the context. theyre blaming carbon plants because theyre the only source of power you can ramp up quickly without the wind complying
    - wffurr 6y ago
      Weird way to make your point. At least you are calling them “wind turbines” instead of “windmills” now.
    - wffurr 6y ago
      The politifact article is responding to nonsense like this blaming wind turbines for the shutdown: https://mobile.twitter.com/Acyn/status/1361868404534112257 https://mobile.twitter.com/Acyn/status/1361868404534112257 Note that's the governor of Texas in that clip, not some internet armchair grid operator.
- mehlmao 6y ago
  I think the 42 to 8 statistic is measuring a different metric. My understanding is that natural gas, coal, and other fossil fuel-based electric sources only run when it is profitable to do so. When the price of natural gas is low and the price of electricity is high, it makes sense to use natural gas to generate electricity. When it's the other way around, turning natural gas into electricity is a money-losing proposition. By contrast, wind and solar power have no input cost. So long as there is wind or sunlight, renewable power is being provided to the grid. Last week, temperatures were higher and there was less demand for electricity. Prices were lower, so less fossil fuel energy was needed/wanted/generated. This week, the temperature drop greatly increased demand for energy, increasing prices with it. More fossil fuels are burned. While the amount of wind/solar power generated did not greatly chang, the total amount of electricity generated increased, reducing renewables' share.