.

[turbguy + 1,543]

Just now, Old-Ruffneck said:

Moisture is drawn to cold, like a glass of ice tea sweats in the summertime humid days. That valve is cold but operating or the frost would be melting.  This is still a functioning valve!!

Not if they use nat gas to operate it!

[Orlando Frick + 5]

ERCOT was warned by experts about snow and ice storms years ago after the first storm in 2011.  And what did they do in response? Nothing.  Why? Because weatherizing the grid would have cost money and ERCOT didn't want to "hurt profits".  Greed is at the root cause of the suffering.  Indeed, it is possible to weatherize BOTH renewable AND fossil fuel energy sources.  This is done all over the world in colder climates. Even the Antarctica has wind turbines that operate without failing!  The monumental amount of damage dwarfs what it would have cost to weatherize the grid. I suspect that ERCOT is going to declare bankruptcy soon to avoid litigation. This is a tragedy that could have easily been avoided.

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

1 hour ago, NickW said:

The concerns most people have are over what happens this century. The above might concern Buck Rogers

We are looking at a temperature rise of up to 4 Deg C this century. 

Whatever moderating effect this GSM predicted event has it will be swamped by AGW effects 

Nope, new research has challenged the significance of AGW effects. That idea is approaching obsolescence. 

[turbguy + 1,543]

ERCOT did it's job. 

Nat Generators and gas suppliers may not have.

Who would you fire?

[nsdp + 449]

19 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Does the industry use nat gas to operate the controls and control valves in these locations?

That's not a great idea if you're "instrument air" freezes up.

Certainly isn't.  No standard practice beyond confusion and not spending dollars that applies on how instrument air is supplied. 

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

1 minute ago, turbguy said:

ERCOT did it's job. 

Nat Generators and gas suppliers may not have.

Who would you fire?

Your question has already been answered....the natural gas generators did ramp up by huge margins. Wind failed, but that is no surprise. Wind is the weak link in any sudden extra demand scenario. But the global warmers can get out there and talk into the blades, that should turn them around.

[turbguy + 1,543]

1 minute ago, Ecocharger said:

Your question has already been answered....the natural gas generators did ramp up by huge margins. Wind failed, but that is no surprise. Wind is the weak link in any sudden extra demand scenario. But the global warmers can get out there and talk into the blades, that should turn them around.

Ah, wind did not "fail",  Nat Gas generation did.

DUH!

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,245]

8 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Not if they use nat gas to operate it!

My eyesight is crap but looks like manual valve to me?

[turbguy + 1,543]

4 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Your question has already been answered....the natural gas generators did ramp up by huge margins. Wind failed, but that is no surprise. Wind is the weak link in any sudden extra demand scenario. But the global warmers can get out there and talk into the blades, that should turn them around.

I might be calling the out the naked king.

 I think I might just keep my mouth shut...

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

1 minute ago, turbguy said:

I might be calling the out the naked king.

 I think I might just keep my mouth shut...

Good idea to keep it shut until you have some bright new information to share.

[turbguy + 1,543]

45 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Good idea to keep it shut until you have some bright new information to share.

Yup!

Apparently deniers are not even able to DEFINE and CLEARLY STATE the problem, much less have ANY chance of solving it...

I'll just go back to stirring my pork and green chili stew.

I see WTC is over $60.  Be happy.

Edited February 24, 2021 by turbguy

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

Ah, wind did not "fail",  Nat Gas generation did.

DUH!

Now i ask you...playing with words here? Wind did not fail? or Wind turbines did not fail?...

Actually a sound question if i may? Were the wind farms the main source of energy or were the gas plants the main source...This should be fun

[turbguy + 1,543]

1 minute ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Now i ask you...playing with words here? Wind did not fail? or Wind turbines did not fail?...

Actually a sound question if i may? Were the wind farms the main source of energy or were the gas plants the main source...This should be fun

Stirring  pork & chili stew.  Almost ready. 

Yum!

[ronwagn + 6,290]

5 hours ago, turbguy said:

Hey, either you are ready to roll (which it appears nat gas WAS, for a short while, until about 1:00 AM in February 15th), or you are not.

If you can't get the fuel to your "bedrock" generation, who cares about the wind contribution?  You are going to suffer, somewhere in the system.

When wind is available, it's cheap!  Isn't that what a free market DEMANDS!?!?

Wrong, it is not as cheap as natural gas. It has been subsidized all along and that is the reason it was over built in Texas and elsewhere. It is time to limit the amount of wind turbines used unless natural gas is adequate for backup. I doubt that wind turbines can find a way to pay for their own backup batteries, hydrogen or whatever. We also need to be careful with overreliance on solar. 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/06/wind-energy-subsidies-billions/

https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2019/09/23/energy-subsidies-renewables-fossil-fuels/

Edited February 24, 2021 by ronwagn
reference

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

Ah, wind did not "fail",  Nat Gas generation did.

DUH!

Did you not read, or simply not understand my post? Wind contributed -93% and gas contributed +450%. Let's pretend you have an IQ over room temperature. Who failed? 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

13 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Did you not read, or simply not understand my post? Wind contributed -93% and gas contributed +450%. Let's pretend you have an IQ over room temperature. Who failed? 

He's gaming a bit shall i say..

[Coffeeguyzz + 454]

Mr. Turbguy

I empathisize with your exasperated tone as well intentioned people take these important matters seriously.

"The electrical supply crisis had a cause(s)."   Absolutely correct.

"The crisis occurred at about 1:00 AM ...".     Absolutely INCORRECT.

 

The crisis, Mr. turbguy, MANIFESTED at 1:00 AM, but it was MANY years in the 'occurring' phase.

This is NOT semantics any more than saying a person 'hitting the ground'  was a fatal event rather than saying it was the 'falling off the cliff'  part  that REALLY was the cause of death.

 

It is not necessary to go on and on for the people who already  have a broad view of how these systems function, that is, the multi faceted physical, financial, political, regulatory,  at al components that are intertwined in varying ways throughout the US electric/power systems.

I strongly recommend a reading of both the "Electricity 101 ..." and the Charles Rotter articles to start to grasp the many moving parts involved here.

Absent a comprehensive, accurate, wide encompassing perspective Mr. turbguy, even the best of us will be reduced to acting like one of the 6 wise blindfolded  sages exploring only one part of this elephant.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/02/23/ercot-members-resign-texas/

ERCOT board members who live outside of Texas are resigning in the aftermath of the power outage, winter storm

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/02/23/ercot-members-resign-texas/

Above comes the real story, How did TX ever get involved with such a cast of characters to run a power grid? International bankers to college professor's..it looks like one big intellectual gravy train stop.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Cramton

Climate policy[edit]

In 1999, Cramton co-authored a book chapter with Suzi Kerr entitled "The Distributional Effects of Carbon Regulation", published in The Market and the Environment. They proposed that an auction of carbon permits, as opposed to grand fathering, is more desirable, because it avoids windfall gains to polluters. The idea was developed further in a paper in Energy Policy. Early adopters of emission trading schemes, such as the European Union, initially grand fathered allowances in proportion to emissions. However, consistent with the Cramton-Kerr analysis, large windfall profits to these polluters ultimately drove the EU to auction allowances.^[29]

In a 2015 article in Nature, and in the book, Global Carbon Pricing, Cramton and his co-authors explain that reciprocity is an essential missing ingredient in promoting cooperation in climate negotiations among countries.^[30][31]

Edited February 24, 2021 by Eyes Wide Open

[Coffeeguyzz + 454]

Re the ERCOT resignations and examining the background of many of these influential Directors ...

Might be a good opportunity to question why a staunch wind power advocate from New York State - one Audrey Zibelman - was brought half way around the world to run Australia's AEMO outfit.

This is the Australian counterpart to Texas's ERCOT.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

7 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

So your bottom line is that the natural gas generators are the bedrock supplier of electricity, wind generation is the fluff in the system....we always knew that in our hearts but were tongue-tied by the fad of political correctness imposed by hysterical global warmers.

YES, my bottom line is that the NG generators are fundamental to the system for reliable generation of electricity in Texas today, and this pretty much generalizes to just about everywhere. Wind and solar are not reliable energy sources, they are variable. NG is unexcelled for energy storage and transport, and NG generators are inexpensive to build in terms of dollars/MW. The availability of wind and solar generating capacity does not reduce the need for NG generation capacity. Even batteries only reduce the need for NG generation capacity by a little bit.

The rolling blackouts occurred because a large amount of the NG capacity froze. If the NG generators had not frozen, rolling blackouts would probably not have occurred at all. It would still have been a close call because the event caused unprecedented demand and ERCOT has only a 5% reserve, so you might have had a tiny rolling blackout like the one in California last summer, but not the massive life-threatening situation you got into.

Wind and solar are cost-effective because when the are used yo do not need to burn NG, so you save money.

At some point in the future, it will be cheaper to use wind and solar to produce hydrogen, ammonia, or methane to replace the NG. The generators will still be needed. to burn this stuff.

[turbguy + 1,543]

1 hour ago, Coffeeguyzz said:

Mr. Turbguy

I empathisize with your exasperated tone as well intentioned people take these important matters seriously.

"The electrical supply crisis had a cause(s)."   Absolutely correct.

"The crisis occurred at about 1:00 AM ...".     Absolutely INCORRECT.

 

The crisis, Mr. turbguy, MANIFESTED at 1:00 AM, but it was MANY years in the 'occurring' phase.

This is NOT semantics any more than saying a person 'hitting the ground'  was a fatal event rather than saying it was the 'falling off the cliff'  part  that REALLY was the cause of death.

 

It is not necessary to go on and on for the people who already  have a broad view of how these systems function, that is, the multi faceted physical, financial, political, regulatory,  at al components that are intertwined in varying ways throughout the US electric/power systems.

I strongly recommend a reading of both the "Electricity 101 ..." and the Charles Rotter articles to start to grasp the many moving parts involved here.

Absent a comprehensive, accurate, wide encompassing perspective Mr. turbguy, even the best of us will be reduced to acting like one of the 6 wise blindfolded  sages exploring only one part of this elephant.

I feel that the VAST MAJORITY here don't have a CLUE about what "the grid" even IS!

Let's try this: the grid is NOT:

• Policy
• Politics
• Boards
• Commissions
• A "market"

It's a MACHINE!  A machine that was "put in place" by the points above. Texas got what it asked for, and now Texas must manage it.

To be absolutely clear, ERCOT "manages" that machine.

 

The pork and green chili was great!

Edited February 24, 2021 by turbguy

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

37 minutes ago, turbguy said:

I feel that the VAST MAJORITY here don't have a CLUE about what "the grid" even IS!

Deleted.  No longer relevant after your edit.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Dan Warnick

[turbguy + 1,543]

Just now, Dan Warnick said:

Alright, I'll bite.  I assume I know but accept I may not.

Educate me, please.

Read the edited response above.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

3 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

No Dan it doesn't work like that. You're blaming gas which was producing 100% more power than the week before, for not continuing to do so indefinitely. All told, gas production went up 450% over the period. But gas is the bad guy?? My analogy about the doctor applies.

You keep quoting these deceptive "percentages". Wind went from approximately 100% to approximately 0%. That's right, its a variable source and everybody knows it. That is expected behaviour. On the other hand, NG went from about 20% of its full capacity when the rest was not needed, up to nearly 100% of its full capacity when it was needed: That's your "450%". NG is supposed to be able to do that. That's what you, me, ERCOT, and everybody else expects it to do.  No, gas is not the bad guy for doing its job.

You then complain that NG did not get credit for doing its job during the unprecedented event, but instead was blamed when it could not continue to do its job. It's true that is was blamed. It was supposed to continue to do its job, but it failed. That's the way life is for any provider of any basic service. You never get credit for doing your job: you are not even noticed. But the instant you fail, everybody dumps all over you. If the plants had not frozen and ERCOT had maintained a 15% reserve, the NG would have met all of the unprecedented demand, and NG STILL would not have been praised as it deserved. If the plants had not frozen but without any extra reserve, the unprecedented demand might have resulted in an hour of rolling blackout in a few places, and everybody in the universe would have STILL dumped on you as they dumped on California last summer.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

21 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Read the edited response above.

I thought that all was obvious.