CA is the Top US Net importer of Electricity

[Guy Daley + 49]

I thought it was germane to put this article in this topic category because CA wants to lead the nation in renewables which includes being one of the first to ban the sales of ICE vehicles.  

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/california-top-us-net-importer-electricity

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

On 12/9/2020 at 3:05 AM, Guy Daley said:

I thought it was germane to put this article in this topic category because CA wants to lead the nation in renewables which includes being one of the first to ban the sales of ICE vehicles.  

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/california-top-us-net-importer-electricity

404 error for your link. Regardless, what does it matter if we import the electricity, so long as it is green?

Our power mix is here: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2019-total-system-electric-generation

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

California also has the highest population, so as a percentage, the net import is fairly modest:

    https://www.oilandgas360.com/california-was-the-largest-net-electricity-importer-of-any-state-in-2019/

California does not make the top 5 on a percentage basis. Some of the imported power is from coal plants in Arizona owned by California utilities, a consequence of the funny accounting that was put in place to create a "free market" in electricity in the year 2000 or so. I do not know what the trends look like, but California is trying to add solar at a fairly fast rate. Time will tell.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

1 hour ago, RichieRich216 said:

GO GREEN, Assclown’s 

We are but I think Texas is set to overtake us.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

6 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

404 error for your link. Regardless, what does it matter if we import the electricity, so long as it is green?

Our power mix is here: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2019-total-system-electric-generation

That is a fine mix just as it is. Just eliminate the remaining nuclear and coal. Gradually increase wind and solar if you find it works out well with the rest. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

4 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

California also has the highest population, so as a percentage, the net import is fairly modest:

    https://www.oilandgas360.com/california-was-the-largest-net-electricity-importer-of-any-state-in-2019/

California does not make the top 5 on a percentage basis. Some of the imported power is from coal plants in Arizona owned by California utilities, a consequence of the funny accounting that was put in place to create a "free market" in electricity in the year 2000 or so. I do not know what the trends look like, but California is trying to add solar at a fairly fast rate. Time will tell.

Yea and CA, Stole the cheap hydro prices from the PNW when that happened and it jacked up my electrical prices by 30% instantly.  Ah, nice tidy profits for the asshats in CA...   What is hilarious is they forced us to join their "common" pot to purchase electricity prices even though VERY LITTLE power is actually transferred to CA. 

Edited December 14, 2020 by footeab@yahoo.com

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

3 hours ago, RichieRich216 said:

GO GREEN, Assclown’s 

Its called economics and physics clown, I'll still be an ass, I'll let you be the clown. 

EDIT: When prices are so cheap in CA due to solar everywhere they start shipping free power back up here to the PNW dropping my power bills to repay us for the cheap hydropower they have stolen over the last 2 decades forcing all the aluminum plants to close forcing those jobs to Canada, China, etc, then we finally know solar has hit the big time.  Until then, don't be absurd.  CA has highest prices, they are climbing, and yet has the best solar potential. 

Edited December 14, 2020 by footeab@yahoo.com

[Selva + 252]

Some posts in this thread have been deleted due to lack of constructive content. 

[Guy Daley + 49]

Here is the article again from a different link but exact same article.  

https://www.dailyhandle.com/california-is-the-top-us-net-importer-of-electricity/

[Guy Daley + 49]

16 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

404 error for your link. Regardless, what does it matter if we import the electricity, so long as it is green?

Our power mix is here: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2019-total-system-electric-generation

I reposted the article from a different link - same identical article and I checked the link.  It's working at this time.  And the article answers some of your questions.   From the article:

According to 2019 data from the California Energy Commission, the state imported 30.68 percent of its renewables-generated electricity supply and 69.32 percent of non-renewables supply.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Guy Daley

[Boat + 1,323]

Both Texas and CA are adding huge battery storage installations. At least one in both states is 100 MW. The original size Musk put in Australia. The new and improved batteries aren’t even out yet so expect this trend to continue. Goodbye  intermittentance.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

11 hours ago, Guy Daley said:

I reposted the article from a different link - same identical article and I checked the link.  It's working at this time.  And the article answers some of your questions.   From the article:

According to 2019 data from the California Energy Commission, the state imported 30.68 percent of its renewables-generated electricity supply and 69.32 percent of non-renewables supply.

Uh no, we produced total 200,000 GWh in state and imported 77,000 GWh. Our total imports amounted to 27% of our total electricity consumption. Of our total imports 30% was renewable and 70% was non.  Though that number is misleading because for technical reasons large hydro is not considered renewable but it makes up 10% of imports so the actual mix is 40% ren and 60% non.

Renewable imports are going up as we build more interconnects across the west for more solar and wind imports. We have been working on this for a long time. 

Edited December 15, 2020 by Jay McKinsey

[Prometheus1354 + 178]

On 12/13/2020 at 9:08 PM, Jay McKinsey said:

We are but I think Texas is set to overtake us.

Well they're certainly "Taking" businesses from us. And not some lil 10-12 man shops either.  But keep thinkin you on the Left can keep crammin your Wackado BS down everyone's throat and all is well.

Per the State of CA energy supply data from 2018; CA will have an energy hole equivalent too 42% of the total power generated. This hole will be created when the state can no longer use the vast array of Natural Gas powered generating stations. At present, there's no, I repeat NO alternatives too this idiocy in the pipeline for replacing that power when it goes wanting.  

As early as the beginning of 2020 the state saw warnings from CALISO that power shortages were coming as the state transitions to the Self Mandated 100% Renewable power generated by the states utilities.

Now do I feel that some form of changes are coming with respect too our electrical grid?  Yes.  Goodness knows we Need it!!  But to just arbitrarily mandate that these specific changes are Required by (in this case) the year 2045 without realistic options for how to replace existing power production is ludicrous!!  

Gumps act as if power is generated for free.  Even Solar has costs involved.  There's no "free lunch" in power.  Shocker I know...  (ahem)

Certainly there have been significant advances in technology in power generation; and this is a great time to be getting into the sector.  Some of the new players in Water technology are or soon will be involved in this growing sector.  

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

On 12/13/2020 at 11:51 PM, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Yea and CA, Stole the cheap hydro prices from the PNW when that happened and it jacked up my electrical prices by 30% instantly.  Ah, nice tidy profits for the asshats in CA...   What is hilarious is they forced us to join their "common" pot to purchase electricity prices even though VERY LITTLE power is actually transferred to CA. 

Apparently, you do not believe that the market should set the price. The alternative would be a communist or socialist system. CA did not "steal" that power, they purchased it. It's not "your" electricity. That electricity was owned by power companies (or somebody) who chose to sell it to the highest bidder.

In fact you do have a point, the market was manipulated, but not (mostly) by Californians. It was manipulated by CEOs of for-profit corporations on behalf of their investors.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

4 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

Apparently, you do not believe that the market should set the price. The alternative would be a communist or socialist system. CA did not "steal" that power, they purchased it. It's not "your" electricity. That electricity was owned by power companies (or somebody) who chose to sell it to the highest bidder.

In fact you do have a point, the market was manipulated, but not (mostly) by Californians. It was manipulated by CEOs of for-profit corporations on behalf of their investors.

So, you have no idea how life in the west works regarding power and it has nothing to do with market.  It  is called a BIGGER market saw a small stand alone market with cheaper power and forced a bill through congress forcing both into the same market.  PNW and CA were separate systems connected by a SINGLE line which is completely UNUSED 90%-->95% of the year, and only in spring melt is it used.  This was fine, for the 5% that all dams were at maximum PNW shipped the occasional cheap power to CA depending on snow year but pricing the rest of the YEAR was based on local prices as population is lower and can STORE the hydro behind the dams thus cheaper power.  Instead CA, got the fed government to run a rider bill through congress saying, no, the two grids should act as one in terms of pricing, ALL YEAR ROUND(for the most part), irregardless of the fact that CA/PNW never use the tie between them other for less than a month a year and CA never sends any power the other direction.  Therefore the stored hydro which used to be STORED for low times of the year now gets dumped downstream to cheapen CA power demands and the PNW has to import NG/COAL instead of CA, importing NG/Coal to provide power. 

By the way, the Utilities are Federal --> Bonneville Power Administration.  A couple dams(I think 3) on the Columbia are privately owned and they are small and one of them still is selling cheap power to a single aluminum plant. 

The CEO's etc who are getting fat, are those in CA. 

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

8 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

So, you have no idea how life in the west works regarding power and it has nothing to do with market.  It  is called a BIGGER market saw a small stand alone market with cheaper power and forced a bill through congress forcing both into the same market.  PNW and CA were separate systems connected by a SINGLE line which is completely UNUSED 90%-->95% of the year, and only in spring melt is it used.  This was fine, for the 5% that all dams were at maximum PNW shipped the occasional cheap power to CA depending on snow year but pricing the rest of the YEAR was based on local prices as population is lower and can STORE the hydro behind the dams thus cheaper power.  Instead CA, got the fed government to run a rider bill through congress saying, no, the two grids should act as one in terms of pricing, ALL YEAR ROUND(for the most part), irregardless of the fact that CA/PNW never use the tie between them other for less than a month a year and CA never sends any power the other direction.  Therefore the stored hydro which used to be STORED for low times of the year now gets dumped downstream to cheapen CA power demands and the PNW has to import NG/COAL instead of CA, importing NG/Coal to provide power. 

By the way, the Utilities are Federal --> Bonneville Power Administration.  A couple dams(I think 3) on the Columbia are privately owned and they are small and one of them still is selling cheap power to a single aluminum plant. 

The CEO's etc who are getting fat, are those in CA. 

Thank you for the info. You are saying that the power comes from dams that were built by the Federal government using US tax dollars. Californians are US citizens and we (our grandparents) paid a lot of money for those dams.

I really do think California should try hard to become "energy independent". We should quit using electricity generated by NG and especially coal, and I specifically include the "imported" coal and NG-fired electricity.

California uses far too much of our electricity to pump water from north to south for irrigation: This is the largest single use of electricity in California (this is net consumption after using the power provided by the big dams.) We could quit doing that ,which would balance our energy budget,  and still have plenty of food for California, but it would raise the cost of food here and especially in the rest f the country. We are all in this together.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

9 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

So, you have no idea how life in the west works regarding power and it has nothing to do with market.  It  is called a BIGGER market saw a small stand alone market with cheaper power and forced a bill through congress forcing both into the same market.  PNW and CA were separate systems connected by a SINGLE line which is completely UNUSED 90%-->95% of the year, and only in spring melt is it used.  This was fine, for the 5% that all dams were at maximum PNW shipped the occasional cheap power to CA depending on snow year but pricing the rest of the YEAR was based on local prices as population is lower and can STORE the hydro behind the dams thus cheaper power.  Instead CA, got the fed government to run a rider bill through congress saying, no, the two grids should act as one in terms of pricing, ALL YEAR ROUND(for the most part), irregardless of the fact that CA/PNW never use the tie between them other for less than a month a year and CA never sends any power the other direction.  Therefore the stored hydro which used to be STORED for low times of the year now gets dumped downstream to cheapen CA power demands and the PNW has to import NG/COAL instead of CA, importing NG/Coal to provide power. 

By the way, the Utilities are Federal --> Bonneville Power Administration.  A couple dams(I think 3) on the Columbia are privately owned and they are small and one of them still is selling cheap power to a single aluminum plant. 

The CEO's etc who are getting fat, are those in CA. 

Here is the type of "Californian" CEO you are talking about, the current CEO of PG&E:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_D._Johnson_(CEO)

Member of the 0.1%, former CEO of several energy companies in the east, became CEO of PG&E in 2019. These parasites do not consider themselves to be citizens of CA, or of any other state, and often of any particular country. Some of them move between residences to avoid becoming official residents for tax purposes.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

2 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

Thank you for the info. You are saying that the power comes from dams that were built by the Federal government using US tax dollars. Californians are US citizens and we (our grandparents) paid a lot of money for those dams.

I really do think California should try hard to become "energy independent". We should quit using electricity generated by NG and especially coal, and I specifically include the "imported" coal and NG-fired electricity.

California uses far too much of our electricity to pump water from north to south for irrigation: This is the largest single use of electricity in California (this is net consumption after using the power provided by the big dams.) We could quit doing that ,which would balance our energy budget,  and still have plenty of food for California, but it would raise the cost of food here and especially in the rest f the country. We are all in this together.

It is not a market when for a mere 1 month a year, when the snowmelt is extremely high and temperatures in PNW mild, CA pays for some power that the PNW cannot use, but then FORCING said market(PNW) to now buy power ALL YEAR LONG at the CA price point, but thankfully hydro is hydro and old rights built into the BPA assign electricity to PNW so we do not pay as high a price as CA.

And no it is not the CEO's, it was the CA representative thieves who saw a good steal and outvoted PNW representatives to lower their electricity prices year round. 

No, we are NOT ALL in this together.  If we were, CA would be sending power to the PNW, you know how a market works..., bilateral trade.  Or better yet, paying for a pumped hydro storage dam or 2 or 3 as upwards of 20% of the Columbia etc rivers still gushes downstream over the dams during snowmelt season.  Then yes, it would be a win-win and yes, we would all be in this together.  But they WILL NOT.  Why?  Because the PNW with those hydro storage dams would be PRIME land to increase crop irrigation as currently only 1/3 of the inland empire is irrigated and this would put CA farmers out of work.   So, no, "we" are not in this together as everytime "we" up here in the PNW try getting another dam built for irrigation/pumped hydro, it is CA representatives as the biggest voting block in HoR, going through the Bonneville Power Administration who effectively own the water rights on the Columbia/Snake river watershed, blocking said attempts. 

Oh right for "environmental" reasons... uh huh. 

So, no, "we" are not "all" in this "together".

[Prometheus1354 + 178]

On 12/20/2020 at 12:05 PM, footeab@yahoo.com said:

It is not a market when for a mere 1 month a year, when the snowmelt is extremely high and temperatures in PNW mild, CA pays for some power that the PNW cannot use, but then FORCING said market(PNW) to now buy power ALL YEAR LONG at the CA price point, but thankfully hydro is hydro and old rights built into the BPA assign electricity to PNW so we do not pay as high a price as CA.

And no it is not the CEO's, it was the CA representative thieves who saw a good steal and outvoted PNW representatives to lower their electricity prices year round. 

No, we are NOT ALL in this together.  If we were, CA would be sending power to the PNW, you know how a market works..., bilateral trade.  Or better yet, paying for a pumped hydro storage dam or 2 or 3 as upwards of 20% of the Columbia etc rivers still gushes downstream over the dams during snowmelt season.  Then yes, it would be a win-win and yes, we would all be in this together.  But they WILL NOT.  Why?  Because the PNW with those hydro storage dams would be PRIME land to increase crop irrigation as currently only 1/3 of the inland empire is irrigated and this would put CA farmers out of work.   So, no, "we" are not in this together as everytime "we" up here in the PNW try getting another dam built for irrigation/pumped hydro, it is CA representatives as the biggest voting block in HoR, going through the Bonneville Power Administration who effectively own the water rights on the Columbia/Snake river watershed, blocking said attempts. 

Oh right for "environmental" reasons... uh huh. 

So, no, "we" are not "all" in this "together".

Well if it makes ya feel any better; "we" {Non-eco freaks} here in Commiefornia; have been pushin that massive bolder of More surface water storage uphill for decades too no avail.  Our state legislators & that huge voting block in the HoR you mention always find any excuse they can too keep us from building more dams.  Even when it's specifically called for in a proposition (Prop 1 2016) that passed with a solid margin too the Yes side.  Afterwards, the legislature pulled the ole bait & switch too divert the monies towards their eco projects while saying that Prop 1 was really just a "We'll study it" measure...  BS!!!