Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Texas Energy Crisis

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

    Texas is an interesting case, as we have our own power grid - ERCOT - and its board of directors are not even in the state. I have a thread on this.
    I don't think it's reasonable to assume that anybody could have imagined we'd have this incredibly unusual hard freeze.
    And it's windmills and solar that's having trouble, as well as other options.
    Hm...where's the thread?
    Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

    Comment


    • Deregulation has led to an inadequate power grid. Will Texas go ‘blue’ as a result of Repub failure?
      “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
      “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
      “not all there” - you know who you are

      Comment


      • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        And factor in the policies that disallow the clearing of brush and the like In California that exacerbate the problem, turning the areas into literal tinder boxes.
        Ah, Trump’s “rake the forest!” corker. Why am I not surprised?

        Actually, California does have brush clearing rules, but brush isn’t the actual problem. The problem is young tree density and a warming planet. Here’s forest ecologist Paul Hessberg giving a TED talk on the problem.

        https://youtu.be/O6Vayv9FCLM

        Trees at higher elevations aren’t getting the moisture they used to get because summers are hotter and drier. Those trees are newer, thin barked, and tightly packed. There’s literally no patchiness and separation of these trees, so fires rage nonstop in very hot, windy weather. That’s the fuel that’s creating the mega fires. You can rake the forest till the cows come home, and mega fires will still happen, which is why everyone laughed at Trump at his suggestion the problem is lack of raking (as I said, for which there are already laws).

        The solution is thinning the trees, but that is fraught with logistical problems because, as Hessberg points out, it would have to be a continual thinning, since we can’t let those thin-barked trees to grow in again. That requires an enormous budget.

        California is talking to scientists and fire experts to figure out how this is going to be done. No governor wants to have to deal with large disasters—as Abbot has lately proved—so it makes sense California officials are talking to scientists and fire experts on what to do about that thinning and where to start.

        This has no easy solution and is hampered by idiots on the extreme. On one hand, you have the Trumpists who deny warning is happening and stupidly say that rakes will fix this. On the other, you’re gonna have extreme tree huggers who won’t listen to scientists. In the middle are the people who understand science and who know the solution.

        Suggesting this is a brush problem exacerbated by a lack of brush clearing laws only magnifies the ignorance.



        Comment


        • Originally posted by whag View Post

          Ah, Trump’s “rake the forest!” corker. Why am I not surprised?

          Actually, California does have brush clearing rules, but brush isn’t the actual problem. The problem is young tree density and a warming planet. Here’s forest ecologist Paul Hessberg giving a TED talk on the problem.

          https://youtu.be/O6Vayv9FCLM

          Trees at higher elevations aren’t getting the moisture they used to get because summers are hotter and drier. Those trees are newer, thin barked, and tightly packed. There’s literally no patchiness and separation of these trees, so fires rage nonstop in very hot, windy weather. That’s the fuel that’s creating the mega fires. You can rake the forest till the cows come home, and mega fires will still happen, which is why everyone laughed at Trump at his suggestion the problem is lack of raking (as I said, for which there are already laws).

          The solution is thinning the trees, but that is fraught with logistical problems because, as Hessberg points out, it would have to be a continual thinning, since we can’t let those thin-barked trees to grow in again. That requires an enormous budget.

          California is talking to scientists and fire experts to figure out how this is going to be done. No governor wants to have to deal with large disasters—as Abbot has lately proved—so it makes sense California officials are talking to scientists and fire experts on what to do about that thinning and where to start.

          This has no easy solution and is hampered by idiots on the extreme. On one hand, you have the Trumpists who deny warning is happening and stupidly say that rakes will fix this. On the other, you’re gonna have extreme tree huggers who won’t listen to scientists. In the middle are the people who understand science and who know the solution.

          Suggesting this is a brush problem exacerbated by a lack of brush clearing laws only magnifies the ignorance.
          And yet

          Millions of acres of California forest have been blackened by wildfires this summer, leading to the usual angry denunciations from the usual quarters about climate change. But in 1999, the Associated Press reported that forestry experts had long agreed that “clearing undergrowth would save trees,” and that “years of aggressive firefighting have allowed brush to flourish that would have been cleared away by wildfires.” But very little was done. And now fires of unprecedented size are raging across the Western United States.

          “Sen. Feinstein blames Sierra Club for blocking wildfire bill,” reads the provocative headline on a 2002 story in California’s Napa Valley Register. Feinstein had brokered a congressional consensus on legislation to thin “overstocked” forests close to homes and communities, but could not overcome the environmental lobby’s disagreement over expediting the permit process to thin forests everywhere else.

          Year after year, environmentalists litigated and lobbied to stop efforts to clear the forests through timber harvesting, underbrush removal, and controlled burns. Meanwhile, natural fires were suppressed and the forests became more and more overgrown. The excessive biomass competed for the same water, soil, and light a healthier forest would have used, rendering all of the trees and underbrush unhealthy. It wasn’t just excess biomass that accumulated, but dried out and dead biomass.


          And it appears that Sen. Feinstein (D-CA) is none to happy with the efforts to block clearing out undergrowth, so I guess in your fetid imagination, that makes her a "Trumpist."


          I'm always still in trouble again

          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
            And yet

            Millions of acres of California forest have been blackened by wildfires this summer, leading to the usual angry denunciations from the usual quarters about climate change. But in 1999, the Associated Press reported that forestry experts had long agreed that “clearing undergrowth would save trees,” and that “years of aggressive firefighting have allowed brush to flourish that would have been cleared away by wildfires.” But very little was done. And now fires of unprecedented size are raging across the Western United States.

            “Sen. Feinstein blames Sierra Club for blocking wildfire bill,” reads the provocative headline on a 2002 story in California’s Napa Valley Register. Feinstein had brokered a congressional consensus on legislation to thin “overstocked” forests close to homes and communities, but could not overcome the environmental lobby’s disagreement over expediting the permit process to thin forests everywhere else.

            Year after year, environmentalists litigated and lobbied to stop efforts to clear the forests through timber harvesting, underbrush removal, and controlled burns. Meanwhile, natural fires were suppressed and the forests became more and more overgrown. The excessive biomass competed for the same water, soil, and light a healthier forest would have used, rendering all of the trees and underbrush unhealthy. It wasn’t just excess biomass that accumulated, but dried out and dead biomass.


            And it appears that Sen. Feinstein (D-CA) is none to happy with the efforts to block clearing out undergrowth, so I guess in your fetid imagination, that makes her a "Trumpist."
            Feinstein didn't say the solution was "raking" or nor did she compare Finland to California. The "clearing of brush"--as you referred to it and for which there are currently laws--literally will do nothing to stop megafires in California. Moreover, Finland's forest management is entirely in accord with Paris Climate Agreement. That's key to your point. Trump and GOP lost a huge opportunity here disparaging the very thing that coordinates and mandates action.

            The problem is one of logistics, unmitigated free market development, and huge complications of ownership. These are neither conservative or liberal problems. They're just...problems--and ones that need to be dealt with intelligently not stupidly with embarrassing tweets and shallow posts about raking the forest. You know, so the problem isn't "exacerbated," as you say.

            In California state, the federal government owns nearly 58% of the 33 million acres of forest, according to the state governor's office. The state itself owns just three per cent, with the rest owned by private individuals or companies or Native American groups.
            Despite the ease with which this could be done, stable genius "deal maker" couldn't make it happen. Maybe he should have put Kushner on it?

            And Feinstein, to her credit, accepts climate change. Climate change--which Trump heatedly denied and the GOP notoriously mocks--would assist conservatives if they just accepted it and used respected climatologists and ecologists to prove their points and hold hands with the liberals. Instead, the worst of you decry federal intrusion as totalitarian and praise crony capitalist climate change denialists as worthy of leading the free world. That immediately puts up a wall in a debate that requires ambiguity and nuance of thought to solve the problem.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              Yeah, I don't know what to think about it.... on one hand, he's certainly entitled to some downtime -- and his absence from the state puts nobody in peril, and he's not an essential employee to fix any of the problems.....

              To me, it's like either side criticizing a president for playing golf. I'm not a golfer, but I know a lot of men who do that to ease stress and to clear their heads to think better.
              It's bad, of course, when they do it during a major crisis where they'd be better off in a command center role, but Cruz? What can he actually accomplish here that he can't accomplish there?

              Don't know if you were being facetious or not, but him staying in Texas isn't going to make the weather any less cold, or fewer people being miserable.
              True. His only real role has been to ask Biden for federal aid for Texas, and that was going to be done over the phone in any case.

              I could easily feel sorry for him if he was a more likable guy.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                True. His only real role has been to ask Biden for federal aid for Texas, and that was going to be done over the phone in any case.

                I could easily feel sorry for him if he was a more likable guy.
                87FB5B63-B529-4DD8-984C-611E4D707DF3.jpeg
                Attached Files

                Comment


                • Originally posted by whag View Post

                  Feinstein didn't say the solution was "raking" or nor did she compare Finland to California. The "clearing of brush"--as you referred to it and for which there are currently laws--literally will do nothing to stop megafires in California. Moreover, Finland's forest management is entirely in accord with Paris Climate Agreement. That's key to your point. Trump and GOP lost a huge opportunity here disparaging the very thing that coordinates and mandates action.

                  The problem is one of logistics, unmitigated free market development, and huge complications of ownership. These are neither conservative or liberal problems. They're just...problems--and ones that need to be dealt with intelligently not stupidly with embarrassing tweets and shallow posts about raking the forest. You know, so the problem isn't "exacerbated," as you say.



                  Despite the ease with which this could be done, stable genius "deal maker" couldn't make it happen. Maybe he should have put Kushner on it?

                  And Feinstein, to her credit, accepts climate change. Climate change--which Trump heatedly denied and the GOP notoriously mocks--would assist conservatives if they just accepted it and used respected climatologists and ecologists to prove their points and hold hands with the liberals. Instead, the worst of you decry federal intrusion as totalitarian and praise crony capitalist climate change denialists as worthy of leading the free world. That immediately puts up a wall in a debate that requires ambiguity and nuance of thought to solve the problem.
                  Those laws cover private property and what homeowners are required to do, not out in the wilds and public land where FWIU, most wildfires start. So you can settle down, stop with the hysteria, and address the actual issue here rather than your constant battling with straw men.

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    Those laws cover private property and what homeowners are required to do, not out in the wilds and public land where FWIU, most wildfires start. So you can settle down, stop with the hysteria, and address the actual issue here rather than your constant battling with straw men.
                    Handwave gif

                    Comment


                    • Texas man hit with $16,752 electric bill, and he's not alone


                      Scott Willoughby must have thought he was one of the lucky ones last week, able to keep his lights on while others in the Dallas suburbs suffered in the cold and darkness.
                      Then he got the bill from his power company, which had helpfully deducted what they were owed from his credit card. The amount? $16,752.




                      As reported by the New York Times:
                      “My savings is gone,” said Scott Willoughby, a 63-year-old Army veteran who lives on Social Security payments in a Dallas suburb. He said he had nearly emptied his savings account so that he would be able to pay the $16,752 electric bill charged to his credit card — 70 times what he usually pays for all of his utilities combined. “There’s nothing I can do about it, but it’s broken me.”
                      Mr. Willoughby is among scores of Texans who have reported skyrocketing electric bills as the price of keeping lights on and refrigerators humming shot upward. For customers whose electricity prices are not fixed and are instead tied to the fluctuating wholesale price, the spikes have been astronomical.
                      As the Times’ article explains, the astronomical bills now being charged to many Texans are “in part a result of the state’s uniquely unregulated energy market, which allows customers to pick their electricity providers among about 220 retailers in an entirely market-driven system.”

                      The theory behind this “free market” scheme is that when prices spike due to increased overall demand, consumers should naturally reduce their power consumption to save money, and power companies will respond by producing more electricity. Or at least that’s the way it’s supposed to work.
                      But when last week’s crisis hit and power systems faltered, the state’s Public Utilities Commission ordered that the price cap be raised to its maximum limit of $9 per kilowatt-hour, easily pushing many customers’ daily electric costs above $100. And in some cases, like Mr. Willoughby’s, bills rose by more than 50 times the normal cost


                      https://www.dailykos.com/stories/202...VjPxbjYc4Xtccc

                      --
                      The article seems to be blaming the "free market" ERCOT for the problem, but to me it looks like it is the Public Utilities Commision who is to blame who raised the cost to $9/kwh.

                      Cow Poke, are you going to be stuck with such a huge bill?

                      (my current cost for electricity is about 10 cents per kwh by comparison.)

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        Texas man hit with $16,752 electric bill, and he's not alone


                        Scott Willoughby must have thought he was one of the lucky ones last week, able to keep his lights on while others in the Dallas suburbs suffered in the cold and darkness.
                        Then he got the bill from his power company, which had helpfully deducted what they were owed from his credit card. The amount? $16,752.




                        As reported by the New York Times:
                        “My savings is gone,” said Scott Willoughby, a 63-year-old Army veteran who lives on Social Security payments in a Dallas suburb. He said he had nearly emptied his savings account so that he would be able to pay the $16,752 electric bill charged to his credit card — 70 times what he usually pays for all of his utilities combined. “There’s nothing I can do about it, but it’s broken me.”
                        Mr. Willoughby is among scores of Texans who have reported skyrocketing electric bills as the price of keeping lights on and refrigerators humming shot upward. For customers whose electricity prices are not fixed and are instead tied to the fluctuating wholesale price, the spikes have been astronomical.
                        As the Times’ article explains, the astronomical bills now being charged to many Texans are “in part a result of the state’s uniquely unregulated energy market, which allows customers to pick their electricity providers among about 220 retailers in an entirely market-driven system.”

                        The theory behind this “free market” scheme is that when prices spike due to increased overall demand, consumers should naturally reduce their power consumption to save money, and power companies will respond by producing more electricity. Or at least that’s the way it’s supposed to work.
                        But when last week’s crisis hit and power systems faltered, the state’s Public Utilities Commission ordered that the price cap be raised to its maximum limit of $9 per kilowatt-hour, easily pushing many customers’ daily electric costs above $100. And in some cases, like Mr. Willoughby’s, bills rose by more than 50 times the normal cost


                        https://www.dailykos.com/stories/202...VjPxbjYc4Xtccc

                        --
                        The article seems to be blaming the "free market" ERCOT for the problem, but to me it looks like it is the Public Utilities Commision who is to blame who raised the cost to $9/kwh.

                        Cow Poke, are you going to be stuck with such a huge bill?

                        (my current cost for electricity is about 10 cents per kwh by comparison.)
                        Our Governor has just declared no, but we'll see --- my highest electric bill during the summer is about $130, so we shall see.
                        It gets automatically deducted from my account, so I might have to turn that off until I see what it is!

                        In fact, turning off "auto-pay" as we speak!
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                          Our Governor has just declared no, but we'll see --- my highest electric bill during the summer is about $130, so we shall see.
                          It gets automatically deducted from my account, so I might have to turn that off until I see what it is!

                          In fact, turning off "auto-pay" as we speak!
                          OK - our electric use was less this month than same month last year, but with still a few days remaining in the month.

                          bbe 2.jpg
                          HOWEVER.... our heat is Natural Gas, not Electric, so....

                          Attached Files
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                            OK - our electric use was less this month than same month last year, but with still a few days remaining in the month.

                            bbe 2.jpg
                            The question is how much will you be charged this month for the same usage as last month thanks to the government (The Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC or PUCT) is a state agency) ordering that price cap be ordered to be increased.

                            Apparently, they are claiming that the rates were not increased for most Texans

                            1f60a849-df6f-4507-8b0a-0d6654e74a5e.jpg
                            You can GO HERE to click on the various links provided in the Tweets for more info

                            I'm always still in trouble again

                            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                            Comment


                            • And for an idea how this is being covered by the MSM:

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                                The question is how much will you be charged this month for the same usage as last month thanks to the government (The Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC or PUCT) is a state agency) ordering that price cap be ordered to be increased.

                                Apparently, they are claiming that the rates were not increased for most Texans

                                1f60a849-df6f-4507-8b0a-0d6654e74a5e.jpg
                                You can GO HERE to click on the various links provided in the Tweets for more info
                                We are on a rural co-op - they are regulated differently than for-profit electric distributors, so it will be interesting to see.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                231 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                299 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X