4 ms·

But this leaves for potentially unethical situations like vulnerable populations who cannot afford batteries or winterized electricity. Im thinking someone disa

But this leaves for potentially unethical situations like vulnerable populations who cannot afford batteries or winterized electricity. Im thinking someone disabled living on disability probably can’t afford premium electricity bills even if they need to maintain their lifesaving and expensive equipment yknow?

anonporridge 5y ago
There's still a dark balancing act going on. We don't have the collective power to save everyone, and if we overextend ourselves trying to do that, then there is a risk that the whole system collapses for everyone, or partially collapses and causes more pain than might have happened without spreading ourselves too thin. We obviously need to struggle to make a good world for everyone, but nature is fucking brutal and it doesn't care about our sense of ethics.
- PaulHoule 5y ago
  Back before electricity deregulation we were paying more for electricity but in the process of rate setting we were looking at it from a systems perspective in which reliability was considered holistically. (The lower rates were not just from ‘efficient markets’ but also it being possible for high cost producers such as steam turbine coal fired power plants to go bankrupt in the fracked gas age w/o bankrupting the whole utility.)
- cortesoft 5y ago
  > We don't have the collective power to save everyon Except we do? We have plenty of resources if they were distributed more evenly. In this particular example, other states are able to provide energy during rare events because they did not choose to go with a pure market based system. They aren’t on the verge of collapse.
- magicalist 5y ago
  This is a platitude ignoring the actual facts of what went on. Producers of natural gas and electricity didn't implement the winterization mechanisms they needed to, in spite of the rest of the country doing so and decades of recommendations to do so. No one required them to do it, though, so they didn't.
- Retric 5y ago
  The grid is a tiny fraction of our economy but the economy is extremely dependent on it. Ensuring the Texas grid could survive a winter storm costs less than 1% as much as even a single large scale blackout in cold weather. The difference is simply who needs to pay. Grid operators only see the costs they don’t see the benefits thus an inefficient allocation of resources is guaranteed.
- 8note 5y ago
  Saving everyone isn't even a consideration. Saving the wealthy's profits is, and we can't save all the wealthy people's profits, so we prioritize the richest's
nexuist 5y ago
The solution is to cut off industrial and commercial sites first, which draw the most power anyways, and keep residential zoning online as much as possible. The economy can take a break for one day.
- anonporridge 5y ago
  Depends. Some industrial customers like datacenters have strict availability agreements with customers and won't be able to accept prolonged cutoffs. Forcing non residential customers like these to curtail their use would likely end up driving the industry (and corresponding tax revenue) elsewhere. But what you're talking about does already exist, and it's called demand response, https://www.energy.gov/oe/activities/technology-development/grid-modernization-and-smart-grid/demand-response https://www.energy.gov/oe/activities/technology-development/...
  - cortesoft 5y ago
    If people are freezing in their homes, then damn any availability agreement a datacenter has.
    - anonporridge 5y ago
      I'm inclined to agree, because I think our civilization should exist to serve humanity, not use humanity simply as another disposable cog in the machine. But that's not the way our legal and political system actually works.
      - epgui 5y ago
        I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying, but you’re confusing “what is” for “what ought to be”. It’s Hume’s classic “is-ought problem”. Edit: I’ve interpreted the second part of your comment as an objection to the first part, but if that wasn’t the intended message it’s my bad :)
        5y ago
sremani 5y ago
In Texas when you are filling information to your RETAIL provider, you can notify them that you have health equipment that relies on electricity. I do not exactly know what kind of actions they take -- when you provide that info but I am assuming they are legally required to make certain accommodations.
caf 5y ago
That's not an argument for overpaying to winterize all the electricity, though - it's an argument to subsidise winterized electricity for those vulnerable populations, and the most efficient way to do that may well be to directly subsidise behind-the-meter or community-level batteries (it may instead be most efficient to subsidise or socialise winterizing of the grid as a whole, though).

anonporridge 5y ago

There's still a dark balancing act going on. We don't have the collective power to save everyone, and if we overextend ourselves trying to do that, then there is a risk that the whole system collapses for everyone, or partially collapses and causes more pain than might have happened without spreading ourselves too thin. We obviously need to struggle to make a good world for everyone, but nature is fucking brutal and it doesn't care about our sense of ethics.

PaulHoule 5y ago
Back before electricity deregulation we were paying more for electricity but in the process of rate setting we were looking at it from a systems perspective in which reliability was considered holistically. (The lower rates were not just from ‘efficient markets’ but also it being possible for high cost producers such as steam turbine coal fired power plants to go bankrupt in the fracked gas age w/o bankrupting the whole utility.)
cortesoft 5y ago
> We don't have the collective power to save everyon Except we do? We have plenty of resources if they were distributed more evenly. In this particular example, other states are able to provide energy during rare events because they did not choose to go with a pure market based system. They aren’t on the verge of collapse.
magicalist 5y ago
This is a platitude ignoring the actual facts of what went on. Producers of natural gas and electricity didn't implement the winterization mechanisms they needed to, in spite of the rest of the country doing so and decades of recommendations to do so. No one required them to do it, though, so they didn't.
Retric 5y ago
The grid is a tiny fraction of our economy but the economy is extremely dependent on it. Ensuring the Texas grid could survive a winter storm costs less than 1% as much as even a single large scale blackout in cold weather. The difference is simply who needs to pay. Grid operators only see the costs they don’t see the benefits thus an inefficient allocation of resources is guaranteed.
8note 5y ago
Saving everyone isn't even a consideration. Saving the wealthy's profits is, and we can't save all the wealthy people's profits, so we prioritize the richest's

nexuist 5y ago

The solution is to cut off industrial and commercial sites first, which draw the most power anyways, and keep residential zoning online as much as possible. The economy can take a break for one day.

anonporridge 5y ago
Depends. Some industrial customers like datacenters have strict availability agreements with customers and won't be able to accept prolonged cutoffs. Forcing non residential customers like these to curtail their use would likely end up driving the industry (and corresponding tax revenue) elsewhere. But what you're talking about does already exist, and it's called demand response, https://www.energy.gov/oe/activities/technology-development/grid-modernization-and-smart-grid/demand-response https://www.energy.gov/oe/activities/technology-development/...
- cortesoft 5y ago
  If people are freezing in their homes, then damn any availability agreement a datacenter has.
  - anonporridge 5y ago
    I'm inclined to agree, because I think our civilization should exist to serve humanity, not use humanity simply as another disposable cog in the machine. But that's not the way our legal and political system actually works.
    - epgui 5y ago
      I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying, but you’re confusing “what is” for “what ought to be”. It’s Hume’s classic “is-ought problem”. Edit: I’ve interpreted the second part of your comment as an objection to the first part, but if that wasn’t the intended message it’s my bad :)
      - 5y ago

sremani 5y ago

In Texas when you are filling information to your RETAIL provider, you can notify them that you have health equipment that relies on electricity. I do not exactly know what kind of actions they take -- when you provide that info but I am assuming they are legally required to make certain accommodations.

caf 5y ago

That's not an argument for overpaying to winterize all the electricity, though - it's an argument to subsidise winterized electricity for those vulnerable populations, and the most efficient way to do that may well be to directly subsidise behind-the-meter or community-level batteries (it may instead be most efficient to subsidise or socialise winterizing of the grid as a whole, though).