5 ms·

Texas is NOT anti-renewables. We're #2 in the US for solar[0], #1 for wind[1], and #5 for nuclear[2] with roughly 25% of our power coming from wind alone. Unf

Texas is NOT anti-renewables. We're #2 in the US for solar[0], #1 for wind[1], and #5 for nuclear[2] with roughly 25% of our power coming from wind alone. Unfortunately, since weather like this doesn't occur very often (every ~60-100 years), the wind turbines aren't weatherized as they are in Canada and elsewhere. When half of that went offline on Sunday morning, it fell to natural gas to make up the difference. When the temperature continued dropping, the gas flowed more slowly and couldn't keep the right pressure levels, removing roughly a third of that production. To be fair, your criticism would be more useful if it was built on facts. 0 - https://www.chooseenergy.com/data-center/solar-energy-production-by-state/ https://www.chooseenergy.com/data-center/solar-energy-produc... 1 - https://www.chooseenergy.com/data-center/wind-generation-by-state/ https://www.chooseenergy.com/data-center/wind-generation-by-... 2 - https://www.chooseenergy.com/data-center/nuclear-generation-by-state/ https://www.chooseenergy.com/data-center/nuclear-generation-...

dataflow 6y ago
> Texas is NOT anti-renewables. It's quite bizarre to read this a day after the Texas governor literally went and blamed renewables [1] [2] when in fact their renewables have been performing better than their (far more prevalent) nonrenewables. [3] And while frozen wind turbines have contributed to the state's energy crisis, that type of energy has only slightly underperformed against published expectations for winter output. Natural gas, the state's dominant energy source, has provided drastically less energy than expected, according to experts and industry data. "Wind was operating almost as well as expected," said Sam Newell, head of the electricity group at the Brattle Group, an energy consulting company that has advised Texas on its power grid. "It's an order of magnitude smaller" than problems with natural gas, coal and nuclear energy, he said. [1] https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1361868404534112257 https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1361868404534112257 [2] https://www.yahoo.com/now/texas-governor-walks-back-fox-052453616.html https://www.yahoo.com/now/texas-governor-walks-back-fox-0524... [3] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fact-check-renewable-energy-not-blame-texas-energy-crisis-n1258185 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fact-check-renewable-en...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- caseysoftware 6y ago
  (Thanks for finishing your numerous edits. It's hard to understand someone's point when they keep changing it.) Now please re-read my comment and find where I criticized wind or any renewable. You can say "omg a politician said something bad!" all you want but it a) ignores the data and b) doesn't lead anywhere productive. Personally, I'll stick with the facts and data.
  - dataflow 6y ago
    > Now please re-read my comment and find where I criticized wind or any renewable. Please re-read mine and find where I suggested you criticized either of them? > You can say "omg a politician said something bad!" all you want but it a) ignores the data and b) doesn't lead anywhere productive. This wasn't just one random politician, this was the governor. Other prominent Texas politicians have also been bashing renewable energy for a long time too. Hope I don't need to find you quotes of this, but let me know if I do. How is it productive to ignore their blatant hypocrisy and let them keep spreading such awful disinformation to people? Do you really think they like to expand renewables and these quotes are just accidental gaffes others pick on? You don't see a pattern? To me it seems these officials are anti-renewables but still failing to prevent movement in that direction due to complex incentives and incomplete control. > Personally, I'll stick with the facts and data. You can be anti-something while still having it. Like so many people are anti-2nd-amendment but it's still there due to forces outside their control. Pointing to it doesn't imply anything about people's stances.
    - caseysoftware 6y ago
      My apologies, version 2 or 3 of your comment did say that. Thank you for removing the accusation. With regards to the governor, Texas is a little different. The Governor serves year around, according to their term but mostly applies policy and sticks within the budget that the Legislature (only serves every other year) sets. In past terms, the Legislature have expanded renewables quite successfully (as noted above) and I hope that trend will continue. Or you can focus on "omg a politician said something bad!" but I hope I don't need to convince you that what politicians say and the policies they implement are often unrelated.
krapp 6y ago
>We're #2 in the US for solar[0], #1 for wind[1], and #5 for nuclear[2] with roughly 25% of our power coming from wind alone. Not for long. Renewables are already being blamed for this (regardless of whether it's accurate or fair) and the politically expedient thing for Texas Republicans to do, in order to to be seen doing something, is to cut funding for green energy in favor of greater investment in coal, oil and natural gas.
- caseysoftware 6y ago
  Potentially, but I hope not. Diversification is incredibly useful here. The various power generation approaches have different strengths, weaknesses, and risk profiles. Despite this week, it's rare to have a situation where multiple are greatly impacted at the same time.
- munk-a 6y ago
  > is to cut funding for green energy in favor of greater investment in coal, oil and natural gas. Can someone lie and tell Texas Republicans that nuclear power is really really dirty so that they subsidize it to spite the Democrats?

dataflow 6y ago

> Texas is NOT anti-renewables. It's quite bizarre to read this a day after the Texas governor literally went and blamed renewables [1] [2] when in fact their renewables have been performing better than their (far more prevalent) nonrenewables. [3] And while frozen wind turbines have contributed to the state's energy crisis, that type of energy has only slightly underperformed against published expectations for winter output. Natural gas, the state's dominant energy source, has provided drastically less energy than expected, according to experts and industry data. "Wind was operating almost as well as expected," said Sam Newell, head of the electricity group at the Brattle Group, an energy consulting company that has advised Texas on its power grid. "It's an order of magnitude smaller" than problems with natural gas, coal and nuclear energy, he said. [1] https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1361868404534112257 https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1361868404534112257 [2] https://www.yahoo.com/now/texas-governor-walks-back-fox-052453616.html https://www.yahoo.com/now/texas-governor-walks-back-fox-0524... [3] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fact-check-renewable-energy-not-blame-texas-energy-crisis-n1258185 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fact-check-renewable-en...

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
caseysoftware 6y ago
(Thanks for finishing your numerous edits. It's hard to understand someone's point when they keep changing it.) Now please re-read my comment and find where I criticized wind or any renewable. You can say "omg a politician said something bad!" all you want but it a) ignores the data and b) doesn't lead anywhere productive. Personally, I'll stick with the facts and data.
- dataflow 6y ago
  > Now please re-read my comment and find where I criticized wind or any renewable. Please re-read mine and find where I suggested you criticized either of them? > You can say "omg a politician said something bad!" all you want but it a) ignores the data and b) doesn't lead anywhere productive. This wasn't just one random politician, this was the governor. Other prominent Texas politicians have also been bashing renewable energy for a long time too. Hope I don't need to find you quotes of this, but let me know if I do. How is it productive to ignore their blatant hypocrisy and let them keep spreading such awful disinformation to people? Do you really think they like to expand renewables and these quotes are just accidental gaffes others pick on? You don't see a pattern? To me it seems these officials are anti-renewables but still failing to prevent movement in that direction due to complex incentives and incomplete control. > Personally, I'll stick with the facts and data. You can be anti-something while still having it. Like so many people are anti-2nd-amendment but it's still there due to forces outside their control. Pointing to it doesn't imply anything about people's stances.
  - caseysoftware 6y ago
    My apologies, version 2 or 3 of your comment did say that. Thank you for removing the accusation. With regards to the governor, Texas is a little different. The Governor serves year around, according to their term but mostly applies policy and sticks within the budget that the Legislature (only serves every other year) sets. In past terms, the Legislature have expanded renewables quite successfully (as noted above) and I hope that trend will continue. Or you can focus on "omg a politician said something bad!" but I hope I don't need to convince you that what politicians say and the policies they implement are often unrelated.

krapp 6y ago

>We're #2 in the US for solar[0], #1 for wind[1], and #5 for nuclear[2] with roughly 25% of our power coming from wind alone. Not for long. Renewables are already being blamed for this (regardless of whether it's accurate or fair) and the politically expedient thing for Texas Republicans to do, in order to to be seen doing something, is to cut funding for green energy in favor of greater investment in coal, oil and natural gas.

caseysoftware 6y ago
Potentially, but I hope not. Diversification is incredibly useful here. The various power generation approaches have different strengths, weaknesses, and risk profiles. Despite this week, it's rare to have a situation where multiple are greatly impacted at the same time.
munk-a 6y ago
> is to cut funding for green energy in favor of greater investment in coal, oil and natural gas. Can someone lie and tell Texas Republicans that nuclear power is really really dirty so that they subsidize it to spite the Democrats?