Quote (duffman316 @ Feb 22 2021 03:26pm)

Brief google search indicated failing to weatherproof the infra is the source of the power outtage. Why do you bend over backwards trying to blame green energy sources for it in a failed attempt to own the libs?



In fact, what happened this week in Texas was "unfortunate, but not unforeseen," said Francis Bradley, president and CEO of the Canadian Electricity Association, which represents electricity utilities and companies across Canada.

He said a review following a previous extreme freeze in 2014 identified the problems that devastated the state this week and recommended steps such as winterizing generating plants. But upgrades take time.

The problem wasn't just lack of time, but the fact Texas is a fully deregulated electricity market that doesn't necessarily have the same central long-term planning authorities that exist in Canada, Bradley said.

"The market signals don't necessarily move in the right direction to facilitate these kinds of long-term investments that are required."

Tom Seng, director of the School of Energy Economics, Policy and Commerce at the University of Tulsa, summed up the utilities' perspective in that context: "Up until now, it's been an issue of, 'Well, we don't think that's worth it to ratepayers for what might be a very infrequent weather event.'"

Quote (EndlessSky @ Feb 22 2021 02:38pm)

I dont care about the libs.

The libs are just brainwashed when it comes to green energy. If we didnt have mainstream newspapers saying that the outage was caused by muh fossil fuels I wouldnt even have to say it.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 22 2021 03:44pm)

All of this started because Fox and the like felt the need to blame windmills for outages, when in reality the outages were caused by failing fossil fuels.

Saying windmills also failed and therefore wouldn't have saved Texas from this situation is a legitimate point to make, but only after you acknowledge fossil fuels failing was the larger problem, since most of the energy still come from fossil fuels.

Quote (Knoppie @ 22 Feb 2021 21:09)

It's a cheap ass hillbilly way to mitigate such a crisis for sure and there are better solutions, this is one of the cheapest ones, indeed having its own risks. You can also have a power wall, fossil electric or hot air generator, warm water boilers for heating systems or even the wood indoor stove. But in any case, if you go for a potentially volatile energy price system as this company did: Then it should be emphasized that this could become extremely expensive during a crisis if you don't have a backup system. This could imo be made mandatory through legislation, or subsidized in order to support libertarian local energy storage or communist micro grids.

In general you'd like a system to not be so locally vulnerable and usually it's cheaper to shut down large energy consumers (factories) and financially compensate them, to compensate for having a bad grid.. Dunno that much about the complete system in Texas to judge about that though ^

Quote (EndlessSky @ Feb 22 2021 03:12pm)

Failure in this case makes more sense when you report percentages.

Both power supplies had inadequate infrastructure for cold weather but if there was no wind or solar there would be less outages.

The big problem is that the power plants are probably from the 80’s and werent designed to operare the same way as in the Northeast.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 22 2021 04:21pm)

Almost like regulations have a reason behind them.

Quote (EndlessSky @ Feb 22 2021 03:23pm)

Which regulation would force power plants to be able to operate at sub zero temperatures in a tropical climate?

Youre making a few assumptions.

Quote (Thor123422 @ 22 Feb 2021 13:25)

Federal regulations have requirements for winterizing and minimum operating temperatures and every other state follows them

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Feb 22 2021 03:33pm)

This question was posed back during the 2011 freeze. On it's face, winterizing the grid seems decent. In reality, the cost to retroactively winterize the Texas grid would cost billions. It was determined then that the extra cost to the customer base was not "feasible". At that time though, they hadn't experienced freezes of safety features on nuclear plants, causing reactor safety shutdowns, and they only had some 8% reliance on wind, not 25% reliance on wind. At this point, it's hard not to justify winterizing it, even without regulation. I think the most difficult part isn't winterizing nuclear/coal/gas, it's retrofitting the Turbines for freezing. Texas has the largest Wind Farm footprint in the US, by far. That's a LOT of turbines. The cost to have a turbine built and installed with winterized precautions is only like 5% extra, from what I read. To retroactively install anti-freezing measures is almost prohibitively expensive.

It'll be interesting to see what they do. They have to do something, and likely will without the need of any regulation.

Quote (Thor123422 @ 22 Feb 2021 13:36)

This is why regulations make you do it when you install it, not after you have an issue. Forward thinking saves money.

Sucks that theyre gonna have to pay so much extra