5 ms·

This is factually incorrect. The winter issue in Texas was almost exclusively lack of winterization of thermal plants as well as a market setup that was unable

This is factually incorrect. The winter issue in Texas was almost exclusively lack of winterization of thermal plants as well as a market setup that was unable to predict and react to the weather. Wind generated more electricity during the event than what was committed in the market, and as such had no negative influence.

kodah 5y ago
This is factually incorrect. Winterization is about half of the issues faced. Page 4 highlights the causes pretty well. https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2021/04/28/ERCOT_Winter_Storm_Generator_Outages_By_Cause_Updated_Report_4.27.21.pdf https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2021/04/28/ERCOT_Winter_Sto...
- dpierce9 5y ago
  Page 16 is quite clear: the vast majority of missing generation capacity was natural gas. The lost wind capacity was comparable to lost coal capacity. Whether the cause is categorized as equipment failure, weather, or fuel availability, the most affected generation category was natural gas.
  - kodah 5y ago
    The point of my comment was that the supply chain issue was significant, sorenbs is saying winterization is the exclusive cause. The ERCOT report doesn't support what they had to say. Winterization accounts for ~12-15 GW while supply chain is responsible for ~5-8 GW. (Page 23-25) The comment I originally responded to said: > Isn't it a bit naive to assume the planers of these expansions didn't at one point or another had that exact thought themselves? The answer is no, it is not naive to assume that they didn't think about these things, because even in a state like Texas where energy is king it was not fully thought out. Edit: Also to be clear, I'm not ragging on Texas. I love the people of Texas and I miss being there, but I think the state has some important lessons to pay attention to and learn from.
    - dpierce9 5y ago
      What isn’t fully thought out? The categories in the report are weather related, equipment failure, and fuel supply issues. These are considered in the report mutually exclusive. But they aren’t, it is just a useful categorization. You are simply wrong to think that they don’t consider intermittent resources as part of their planning. Wind stops blowing all the time, this is known. The fact that many natural gas generators iced over, fuel was too expensive, fuel wasn’t available, or they couldn’t maintain their equipment when needed was the principal source of lost capacity.
sidewndr46 5y ago
ERCOT sets the price of electricity. There is no 'market' in the traditional sense, unless you count a government price fixing scheme as a market. In this case the price was set at the absolute maximum as allowed by the system. If the 'market' couldn't react to that absolute maximum price then the market cannot be the problem at hand.

kodah 5y ago

This is factually incorrect. Winterization is about half of the issues faced. Page 4 highlights the causes pretty well. https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2021/04/28/ERCOT_Winter_Storm_Generator_Outages_By_Cause_Updated_Report_4.27.21.pdf https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2021/04/28/ERCOT_Winter_Sto...

dpierce9 5y ago
Page 16 is quite clear: the vast majority of missing generation capacity was natural gas. The lost wind capacity was comparable to lost coal capacity. Whether the cause is categorized as equipment failure, weather, or fuel availability, the most affected generation category was natural gas.
- kodah 5y ago
  The point of my comment was that the supply chain issue was significant, sorenbs is saying winterization is the exclusive cause. The ERCOT report doesn't support what they had to say. Winterization accounts for ~12-15 GW while supply chain is responsible for ~5-8 GW. (Page 23-25) The comment I originally responded to said: > Isn't it a bit naive to assume the planers of these expansions didn't at one point or another had that exact thought themselves? The answer is no, it is not naive to assume that they didn't think about these things, because even in a state like Texas where energy is king it was not fully thought out. Edit: Also to be clear, I'm not ragging on Texas. I love the people of Texas and I miss being there, but I think the state has some important lessons to pay attention to and learn from.
  - dpierce9 5y ago
    What isn’t fully thought out? The categories in the report are weather related, equipment failure, and fuel supply issues. These are considered in the report mutually exclusive. But they aren’t, it is just a useful categorization. You are simply wrong to think that they don’t consider intermittent resources as part of their planning. Wind stops blowing all the time, this is known. The fact that many natural gas generators iced over, fuel was too expensive, fuel wasn’t available, or they couldn’t maintain their equipment when needed was the principal source of lost capacity.

sidewndr46 5y ago

ERCOT sets the price of electricity. There is no 'market' in the traditional sense, unless you count a government price fixing scheme as a market. In this case the price was set at the absolute maximum as allowed by the system. If the 'market' couldn't react to that absolute maximum price then the market cannot be the problem at hand.