3 ms·
That's sad. Texas is pretty green in terms of power generation - even compared to California. Texas is 20% renewables [1], California is 32% [2]. [1] https://w
by onlyrealcuzzo 6y ago
That's sad. Texas is pretty green in terms of power generation - even compared to California. Texas is 20% renewables [1], California is 32% [2].
[1] https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2019-total-system-electric-generation https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/califo...
[2] https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=TX https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=TX
- misiti3780 6y agoI'm not taking a side here, I'm telling you what is happening because I have friends and family on both sides of the isle.
- hsitz 6y agoNote that the source you're using for California lists 'large hydro' as around 15%, but doesn't count it as a "renewable". Texas, by contrast, has close to zero 'large hydro'. It's not clear to me that 'large hydro' is a non-renewable', certainly it's a lot different from most non-renewables, and it's not carbon dioxide producing. If you take that into account, then from (coal/natural gas/oil/nuclear) California has more like 53% of energy while Texas has 80%. That gives a little different perspective. Compare, e.g., with this list, which includes hydro as a category of renewables: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_electricity_production_from_renewable_sources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_electri...