Our wind energy in Texas completely recovered within a week. Boosting coal for a week in Texas will not destroy the earth!
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Climate Change Denial
- Thread starter mspohr
- Start date
-
- Tags
- climate change
The Geologic Survey of Norway believes the Arctic may have been free of ice at times between 6000-7000 years ago.
Less Ice In Arctic Ocean 6000-7000 Years Ago
Recent mapping of a number of raised beach ridges on the north coast of Greenland suggests that the ice cover in the Arctic Ocean was greatly reduced some 6000-7000 years ago. The Arctic Ocean may have been periodically ice free.
www.sciencedaily.com
You don't need CO2 forcing to do that!
Raffy.Roma
Rome (Italy)
DISAGREE!
This is the temperature DEVIATION in last CENTURY. As you can see the temperature DEVIATION in the early 20th Century was almost zero.
And, as usual, talking out both sides of your mouth. How are you only running the coal plant for a week when you are anti-renewable and pro-coal?!? Seems you would prefer burning coal all year round. Just more incomprehensive one-time use arguments from the pro fossil fuel lobby and politicians.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
People are short sighted, that won't happen until their feet are constantly wet in their houses. Just like the people dying from covid while claiming it isn't real with their last breath.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Then why did coal drop so much? And why do you think windmills work fine in other more northern locations but failed in TX?
SO.. MANY.. THINGS.. WRONG....Wrong. This tells the story.
Click ERCO
Go down to third graph down - electricity generation by energy source - click the gear in upper right hand corner
Set the date rage from 12 Feb to 20 Feb
The graph will display the energy usage by source. Run your cursor across the graph. It will display the megawatthours for each source.
Along the graph, look at 02/14/2021 2000 CST. There you will see a break down of for each source.
Wind 8,087 MWh
Natural Gas 43798 MWh
Coal 10,829 MWh
Nuclear 5,140 MWh
Now advance 24 hours to 02/15/2012 2000 CST
Wind 649 MWh - down 92%
Natural Gas 30,917 MWh - down 29%
Coal 8,023 MWh - down 26%
Nuclear 3,785 MWh - down 26%
Now you can clearly see that our wind turbines were knocked out by the Arctic blast. This triggered the widespread outage. Natural gas all of sudden was being used to heat freezing Texans' homes. I cranked up my natural gas logs in the fireplace when my lights went out. It kept my home temperature from dropping below 50F. The power companies then were forced to compete against the consumer to get natural gas to their power plants. They needed that natural gas to make up for the 7,438 MWh of wind energy that got knocked out. But they couldn't because Texans were using it to heat their homes. That is the story in a nutshell. Yes, there is a winterization factor that played into the widespread drop of energy production. But it was that proportional drop of wind energy is what triggered the entire blackout event.
Next time, we will know better to make sure our coal and nuclear are boosted for the next Arctic blast.
First the time of the almost crash of the Texas Grid was on 02/15/2021 between 1:40 and 2:00AM not at 8:00PM and at that time wind was producing 5300 MW not 649MW.
Second you cannot say that because wind was producing 8087MW @ 02/14/2021 2000 and 649MW @ 02/15/21 2000 that it lost 92% of it's capacity due to frozen turbines. You have to compare it to it's predicated power generation because and I can't believe I have to explain this to a supposed meteorologist wind does not always blow. Wind turbines don't have to be frozen to not generate power. If there's not much wind then there's not much power generated.
As it turns out wind was producing at or above where it was predicted to be on the 15th through the grid crash.
If you look closely you'll see their most recent prediction had wind power generating about 700MW at 02/15/21 2000 pretty close to what it actually was.
Well, there are at least a few smart people in TX. LOL
electrek.co
Ørsted is first in US to operate solar, wind, and storage at utility scale
Danish giant Ørsted completes its first utility-scale solar plus battery storage project in Texas, giving it a full clean energy portfolio.
electrek.co
As long as it is only for one week in Texas I guess that’s fine.
But it isn’t is it?
And I haven’t mentioned destroying the earth, just destroying the respiratory systems of the vulnerable (and not so vulnerable). That’s what coal burning did before it was phased out here in the UK. The killer London smogs are a thing of the past, thank Christ, but you sound like you’d happily bring them back because the nasty government makes you use renewable, or something.
Your perspective is severely distorted by your green energy fanaticism. We lost almost 8,000 MWh of wind energy during the Arctic blast event. There was plenty of wind available because it was a powerful and windy cold front that passed through Texas. We counted on that wind energy to be generated by the powerful winds. However, our relatively high dewpoint temperatures combined with freezing air temperatures iced up the wind turbine blades in West Texas. This knocked out our wind energy component that we were counting on. Natural gas was not able to make up for it because that was being used to heat homes. For the next Arctic blast, we will know to boost our coal and nuclear by 8,000 MWh before the cold front arrives. That way, if our wind turbines get knocked out again, we will have enough base supply of energy available to make up for the wind energy loss. After the Arctic freeze event, we can pull back on our coal usage as our wind turbines fully recover. Took about a week. That was it. The world will survive. Got it now EV man?
Coal burning hasn't been phased out of the UK. It has declined over the years, but by no means has it been phased out!
United Kingdom Coal Reserves and Consumption Statistics - Worldometer
Current and historical Reserves, Production, and Consumption of Natural Coal in the United Kingdom. Global rank and share of world's total. Data, Statistics and Charts.
www.worldometers.info
As a matter of fact, the UK uses fossil fuels for 80% of their energy consumption.Coal burning hasn't been phased out of the UK. It has declined over the years, but by no means has it been phased out!
United Kingdom Coal Reserves and Consumption Statistics - Worldometer
Current and historical Reserves, Production, and Consumption of Natural Coal in the United Kingdom. Global rank and share of world's total. Data, Statistics and Charts.
United Kingdom Energy Statistics - Worldometer
Energy production and consumption from nuclear and renewable sources vs non-renewable fossil fuel sources: petroleum and other liquids, natural gas, and coal in the United Kingdom.
www.worldometers.info
By the time the revised forecast was issued, it was too late. ERCOT planned the energy load 6 days in advance. They had a meeting with Gov. Abbott and assured him that they were ready for the Arctic blast. I assure you, no wind forecast will be that accurate 6 days out from the event. ERCOT was counting on that 8,000 MWh of energy 6 days out. If they had known there would have been that drastic of a wind energy drop off, they would have boosted our base energy. I hope there is an investigation to find out if the Federal Government denied Texas their application for an exemption from EPA rules before the Arctic blast event. Please note that many of the ERCOT board members DON'T LIVE IN TEXAS!!! If they did, I think they would have created a ruckus about the application denial by the EPA.SO.. MANY.. THINGS.. WRONG....
First the time of the almost crash of the Texas Grid was on 02/15/2021 between 1:40 and 2:00AM not at 8:00PM and at that time wind was producing 5300 MW not 649MW.
Second you cannot say that because wind was producing 8087MW @ 02/14/2021 2000 and 649MW @ 02/15/21 2000 that it lost 92% of it's capacity due to frozen turbines. You have to compare it to it's predicated power generation because and I can't believe I have to explain this to a supposed meteorologist wind does not always blow. Wind turbines don't have to be frozen to not generate power. If there's not much wind then there's not much power generated.
As it turns out wind was producing at or above where it was predicted to be on the 15th through the grid crash.
If you look closely you'll see their most recent prediction had wind power generating about 700MW at 02/15/21 2000 pretty close to what it actually was.
Coal burning hasn't been phased out of the UK. It has declined over the years, but by no means has it been phased out!
United Kingdom Coal Reserves and Consumption Statistics - Worldometer
Current and historical Reserves, Production, and Consumption of Natural Coal in the United Kingdom. Global rank and share of world's total. Data, Statistics and Charts.
That's based on 2016 data. It's dropped a lot just since then. The UK is in an advanced process of phase out.
That link says 2016 demand was 41.5M short tons
This link https://assets.publishing.service.g...ent_data/file/904769/DUKES_2020_Chapter_2.pdf says
"In 2019, coal comprised 2.8 per cent of UK primary energy demand. This is down from 4.0 per cent the previous year and 18 per cent in 2013."
"Coal demand in the UK is at a record low because of falling demand for electricity generation. Demand fell by 33 per cent from 11.9 million tonnes in 2018 to 8.0 million tonnes in 2019 (Table 2.4), with a 56 per cent decrease in the use of coal for electricity generation to a record low."
Coal use fallen further since then. Every year the UK has more coal-free generation periods.
The last coal power plant will close in 2024 or 2025.
There's still some coal use in homes, but it's limited. New rules on solid fuel heating are also being introduced to try to stop the increased pollution from wood burning (especially wet wood), which are a significant source of particulates.
The UK government will also phase out natural gas home heating. From 2025 in the UK no new homes will be hooked up to the natural gas grid (2024 in Scotland).
The government (Conservatives, the main party on the right), has a clear policy of shifting as much as possible to renewable electricity, (although they'd like to have backed it with nuclear), which would include home heating and electric vehicles, and if anything, the other main parties would want to accelerate.
The UK has incentives for EVs, with a gradually-shrinking point-of-sale rebate, a large tax break for electric company cars and currently no annual fee replacing the large fuel tax.
So by your own statement they relied on this 8000MW estimate (link it up buddy) from 6 days earlier but also according to you no estimate is reliable 6 days early. Finally you state that the more accurate estimates they release are worthless because they come too late but these estimates are being produced anyway. Yet we’ve been successfully running wind turbines in Texas for decades.
Hmm this sounds like your post is completely made up with absolutely nothing to support it. Care to try?
Edit. Oh and even if you are right wind was producing 5300MW not 649MW (a loss of 2700MW) while ERCOT loadshed over 10,000MW making the bulk of the loss not due to wind - even using your numbers.
Last edited:
You are using the wrong units! MW is a unit of power. MWh is a unit of energy. That was 649 MWh that wind energy had dropped to after producing over 8,000 MWh just 24 hours prior to that. There is no way that was predicted days in advance. Plus, the icing effects on the wind turbines were not factored in. Nothing this widespread has happened to Texas before. We've learned our lesson now. Arctic blasts knock out wind turbines. We will have our base load boosted ahead of time for the next one. If the DOE disapproves, to heck with them. We will battle their fines out in the courts.
80% of energy consumption in the UK comes from fossil fuels.
That is old data - any quick look can find that.
UK set for a new generation of giant onshore wind turbines
The UK is about to see the appearance of a new generation of onshore wind turbines ? rivalling those in Scotland at Queensferry Bridge and approaching the elevation of the Eiffel To...
www.renewableenergymagazine.com
For those that don't want to read - wind alone provided 24.2% of UK electricity in 2020; up from 19.8% in 2019
Nuclear was 20% (updated 2/2021 but looks like 2018 data)
Nuclear Power in the United Kingdom |UK Nuclear Energy - World Nuclear Association
Nuclear energy in the UK, nuclear power in the United Kingdom, the history of nuclear energy in the UK including nuclear power plants and facilities at Sellafield, Sizewell, Bradwell, Berkely, Hinkley, Hunterston, Hartlepool, Heysham, Oldbury, Wylfa, Dungeness, Braystones, Kirksanton
www.world-nuclear.org
Why are we talking about the UK anyway? Because it has made the some of the best moves on wind despite having a Trump-like idiot in executive?
Why would you keep repeating easily debunked facts? To show your lack of intellect/thoroughness?
You: the UK hasn't phased out coal (using 2016 data)
Me: UK use is much lower than (using 2019 data), coal electricity generation ends 2024/2025, examples of government electrification policy
You: 80% of energy consumption in the UK comes from fossil fuels
It was 78.4% in 2019, down from 79.4% in 2018. Looks like it's still heading in the right direction.
In point of fact if you look at the plots I linked they are in MW not MWH. However if you would like to know how much energy just calculate the average power generation per hour and there's your MWH. So the estmated energy wind would produce from 19:00-20:00 was about 700MWH.
The Texas grid also crapped out back in 2011 due to cold weather. As it was then and now it was due to natural gas wells freezing over and cooling water lines at thermal plants freezing over because they didn't feel the need for trace heaters.
As a result I'm adding a whole home generator for the next time this happens since we apparently haven't learned anything in the last decade.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Article
