3 ms·

If they worry do much about storms wouldn't nuclear be the best option? Hydro is also pretty resilient.

by jeltz 6y ago

p_l 6y ago
At least one reactor had to be shut down as well, because the cooling tower froze. Winterizing is the answer, no matter the power source.
hef19898 6y ago
That still leaves the grid to worry about. Even if the power plant doesn't have issue, if grid lines fail (temperature, wind, snow, ice,...) the power will still be lost. Nulear power plants have problems with freezing temperature (frozen rivers are bad to get cooling water from) and high temps / dry weather (again, low river levels are bad to get cooling water from. That is obviously less of a problem in case nuclear power plants are build on the coast. It is also worth to note, that other countries, Canada, Russia, Northern Europe, et... have nowhere near the problems Texas had.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  > It is also worth to note, that other countries, Canada, Russia, Northern Europe, et... have nowhere near the problems Texas had. Well, of course. There was no problem of "it's cold". The problem was "it's colder than we expected". You don't prepare for things that don't happen. This actually reminds me of a comment I saw on the topic of international shipping: "Slow is fine. Late is not." The goal isn't to arrive quickly, it's to arrive when you said you would get there. And analogously for the temperature.
  - XorNot 6y ago
    Except Texas was warned this would happen again after it happened in 2011 and the conclusion was the same: cold weather proof your infrastructure. Naturally of course, the state did nothing to make this happen.
  - piva00 6y ago
    > You don't prepare for things that don't happen. Except that in this case, it happens, it happened 10 years ago and the Federal commission recommended winterisation [0] to prepare for such cold spells. It happened 32 years ago as well [1]. Shouldn't one of the richest states of the USA be prepared for an event that has happened at least twice in 30 years and that will happen again, one that not only causes extreme disruptions to its economy but deaths and suffering as well? [0] https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-05/ReportontheSouthwestColdWeatherEventfromFebruary2011Report.pdf https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-05/Reportonthe... [1] https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/A-tale-of-two-freezes-How-the-Texas-grid-stayed-16005807.php https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/A-t...
    - a3n 6y ago
      Nah. As their lieutenant governor said in recent months about covid, there are more important things than living. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=texas+%22more+important+things+than+living%22&t=fpas&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=texas+%22more+important+things+tha... Winterizing would have cost money. The facilities are insured (I assume). Whoever froze or asphyxiated to death were merely acceptable casualties in the Texas electricity cost/benefit equation. Texas power is the Ford Pinto of electricity.
bilekas 6y ago
I believe nuclear was also problematic during the storm.. As for hydro, Texas already has 23 dams, and it still only accounts for 1% .. I don't think they could build enough to make a dent.

If they worry do much about storms wouldn't nuclear be the best option? Hydro is also pretty resilient.

by jeltz 6y ago

If they worry do much about storms wouldn't nuclear be the best option? Hydro is also pretty resilient.

p_l 6y ago

At least one reactor had to be shut down as well, because the cooling tower froze. Winterizing is the answer, no matter the power source.

hef19898 6y ago

That still leaves the grid to worry about. Even if the power plant doesn't have issue, if grid lines fail (temperature, wind, snow, ice,...) the power will still be lost. Nulear power plants have problems with freezing temperature (frozen rivers are bad to get cooling water from) and high temps / dry weather (again, low river levels are bad to get cooling water from. That is obviously less of a problem in case nuclear power plants are build on the coast. It is also worth to note, that other countries, Canada, Russia, Northern Europe, et... have nowhere near the problems Texas had.

thaumasiotes 6y ago
> It is also worth to note, that other countries, Canada, Russia, Northern Europe, et... have nowhere near the problems Texas had. Well, of course. There was no problem of "it's cold". The problem was "it's colder than we expected". You don't prepare for things that don't happen. This actually reminds me of a comment I saw on the topic of international shipping: "Slow is fine. Late is not." The goal isn't to arrive quickly, it's to arrive when you said you would get there. And analogously for the temperature.
- XorNot 6y ago
  Except Texas was warned this would happen again after it happened in 2011 and the conclusion was the same: cold weather proof your infrastructure. Naturally of course, the state did nothing to make this happen.
- piva00 6y ago
  > You don't prepare for things that don't happen. Except that in this case, it happens, it happened 10 years ago and the Federal commission recommended winterisation [0] to prepare for such cold spells. It happened 32 years ago as well [1]. Shouldn't one of the richest states of the USA be prepared for an event that has happened at least twice in 30 years and that will happen again, one that not only causes extreme disruptions to its economy but deaths and suffering as well? [0] https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-05/ReportontheSouthwestColdWeatherEventfromFebruary2011Report.pdf https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-05/Reportonthe... [1] https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/A-tale-of-two-freezes-How-the-Texas-grid-stayed-16005807.php https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/A-t...
  - a3n 6y ago
    Nah. As their lieutenant governor said in recent months about covid, there are more important things than living. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=texas+%22more+important+things+than+living%22&t=fpas&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=texas+%22more+important+things+tha... Winterizing would have cost money. The facilities are insured (I assume). Whoever froze or asphyxiated to death were merely acceptable casualties in the Texas electricity cost/benefit equation. Texas power is the Ford Pinto of electricity.

bilekas 6y ago

I believe nuclear was also problematic during the storm.. As for hydro, Texas already has 23 dams, and it still only accounts for 1% .. I don't think they could build enough to make a dent.