Top US Grid Official Sounds The Alarm On Coal And Gas Power Plant Closures

[Into the Night]

We shall see. It is about pollution so we shall see if congress goes after them

Neither the EPA nor Congress has any authority to declare what 'pollution' is. Indeed, I have yet to get any definition of this 'pollution' from anyone. What is being polluted??
Carbon is not pollution. It is a fuel.
Carbon dioxide is not pollution. It is a naturally occurring gas that is absolutely essential for life to exist on Earth.
Methane is not pollution. It is a naturally occurring gas. It is also a fuel.

If either the EPA or Congress goes after them they are breaking the law.

 

[LurchAddams]

So you think the solar panels will produce enough electricity to replace fossil fuels? Get ready for blackouts since new EPA rules will shut down fossil fuel power plants

I have friends here in WA whose solar panels are contributing enough to offset their entire electric bill, 8 months out of the year - and that's in WA - where it rains constantly. Even if they were only pulling zero off the grid 4 months out of the year, isn't that better than nothing? Don't shit on solar just 'cause you think it's a "lib sponsored lovefest".

 

[ptif219]

I have friends here in WA whose solar panels are contributing enough to offset their entire electric bill, 8 months out of the year - and that's in WA - where it rains constantly. Even if they were only pulling zero off the grid 4 months out of the year, isn't that better than nothing? Don't shit on solar just 'cause you think it's a "lib sponsored lovefest".

Read the OP link it can't keep up with demand expect black outs

 

[LurchAddams]

Read the OP link it can't keep up with demand expect black outs

So, if it can't keep up with demand, why not do all we can to reduce demand? Just cause you think solar is a "libtard lovefest" is not a good reason to shit on solar.

 

[ptif219]

So, if it can't keep up with demand, why not do all we can to reduce demand? Just cause you think solar is a "libtard lovefest" is not a good reason to shit on solar.

Getting rid of power plants before you can replace their output is stupid and you can't see that

 

[LurchAddams]

Getting rid of power plants before you can replace their output is stupid and you can't see that

I am NOT saying "get rid of power plants". Please read what I'm saying - I'm saying lets do all we can to reduce demand on existing power plants. What's wrong with that?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Wind and solar provided more energy this year than coal did. Biden was right,

And, how much did they supply at night and on calm days...?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

I am NOT saying "get rid of power plants". Please read what I'm saying - I'm saying lets do all we can to reduce demand on existing power plants. What's wrong with that?

Using wind and solar to do that duplicates, unnecessarily, and at great cost, generation sources that otherwise wouldn't be needed. That is, if you build say, a solar array, and then build a natural gas power plant such that the solar array provides power when the sun shines and the natural gas plant provides it when the sun isn't shining then you have duplicated production at great cost. It'd be much cheaper to just build the natural gas plant and not bother with unreliable solar at all.

 

[LurchAddams]

Using wind and solar to do that duplicates, unnecessarily, and at great cost, generation sources that otherwise wouldn't be needed. That is, if you build say, a solar array, and then build a natural gas power plant such that the solar array provides power when the sun shines and the natural gas plant provides it when the sun isn't shining then you have duplicated production at great cost. It'd be much cheaper to just build the natural gas plant and not bother with unreliable solar at all.

You're absolutely wrong. Solar stores energy in batteries and works even when the sun isn't shining, as does wind. It supplements power from power plants. It doesn't duplicate, it supliments.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You're absolutely wrong. Solar stores energy in batteries and works even when the sun isn't shining, as does wind. It supplements power from power plants. It doesn't duplicate, it supliments.

Batteries are grotesquely expensive. Right now they run about $225 per KW installed. To put in batteries in a large solar array like Solar Star I and II, to provide say, 16 hours of capacity you are looking at close to a Trillion dollars. Most solar arrays that have batteries have no more than about 4 hours of capacity, often less, in them.

The natural gas plant is cheap enough to build and supply natural gas to that it could run for centuries and not equal the cost of the solar array and batteries while providing equal power 24/7.

Solar is a total loser.

 

[LurchAddams]

Batteries are grotesquely expensive. Right now they run about $225 per KW installed. To put in batteries in a large solar array like Solar Star I and II, to provide say, 16 hours of capacity you are looking at close to a Trillion dollars. Most solar arrays that have batteries have no more than about 4 hours of capacity, often less, in them.

The natural gas plant is cheap enough to build and supply natural gas to that it could run for centuries and not equal the cost of the solar array and batteries while providing equal power 24/7.

Solar is a total loser.

People in my home state are reducing their monthly electric bills to zero with solar. You're just wrong.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

People in my home state are reducing their monthly electric bills to zero with solar. You're just wrong.

No, they are just paying for 20 years of electricity today...

 

[Lightbringer]

People in my home state are reducing their monthly electric bills to zero with solar. You're just wrong.

Are they now? What state do you live in?

 

[ptif219]

I am NOT saying "get rid of power plants". Please read what I'm saying - I'm saying lets do all we can to reduce demand on existing power plants. What's wrong with that?

Read the OP link. Biden wants people to buy EV so it will put more strain on the grid

 

[LurchAddams]

Read the OP link. Biden wants people to buy EV so it will put more strain on the grid

Your OP link doesn't even discuss EV's. The subject of the OP link is fossil-fuel power plants. Did you even read your own OP?

So, I'll ask one last time, and then I give up - what is wrong with doing all we can to reduce the load on fossil fuel plants?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Your OP link doesn't even discuss EV's. The subject of the OP link is fossil-fuel power plants. Did you even read your own OP?

So, I'll ask one last time, and then I give up - what is wrong with doing all we can to reduce the load on fossil fuel plants?

Nothing so long as we're doing it sensibly. Wind and solar are stupid. More hydroelectric? Great! More nuclear? Fantastic! Geothermal? All for it! Wind and solar suck as electrical production sources.

 

[ptif219]

Your OP link doesn't even discuss EV's. The subject of the OP link is fossil-fuel power plants. Did you even read your own OP?

So, I'll ask one last time, and then I give up - what is wrong with doing all we can to reduce the load on fossil fuel plants?

So the fact of millions of cars charging will have no effect? HAHAHAHAHA

 

[Into the Night]

Using wind and solar to do that duplicates, unnecessarily, and at great cost, generation sources that otherwise wouldn't be needed. That is, if you build say, a solar array, and then build a natural gas power plant such that the solar array provides power when the sun shines and the natural gas plant provides it when the sun isn't shining then you have duplicated production at great cost. It'd be much cheaper to just build the natural gas plant and not bother with unreliable solar at all.

The natural gas plant generates a hell of lot more power than solar does too.

 

[Into the Night]

Nothing so long as we're doing it sensibly. Wind and solar are stupid. More hydroelectric? Great! More nuclear? Fantastic! Geothermal? All for it! Wind and solar suck as electrical production sources.

Lurch doesn't understand that there are no fossils fuel power plants. Fossils don't burn. I suppose he is using the term to mean coal, or oil, or natural gas, or perhaps all three.

You are correct. Wind and solar are stupid. They don't produce power reliably and are horrifically expensive. Trying to balance a load with these power stations is impossible.
Hydroelectric can't be built in all locations. Further, it can only produce so much power per installation. The Hoover dam, which is generating power mostly for California, is using more water than can be sustained in normal river flow. The result is predictable. Headwater (Lake Mead) is falling while waters downstream are normal (such as around Lake Havasu, on the same river). At least hydroelectric plants can adjust power generation to load quickly.

Nuclear energy uses very little 'fuel' for the power plant. California is closing them because they are 'hazardous' and 'poisoning the environment' (or some other stupid Church of Green phrase). They can also adjust power to load quickly.

Geothermal is only available in limited areas, due to the difficulty pumping coolant very far vertically. You basically need a nearby active volcano, and they just aren't available everywhere.

Which leaves natural gas...a renewable fuel, clean burning; or
oil...a renewable fuel, can be pretty clean burning; or
coal...a cheap and possibly renewable fuel, can be pretty clean burning.

All of these types of power plant can easily adjust themselves quickly to changing loads and can produce a lot of power in a small space. All of these fuels are cheap (meaning they are available). Two of them are renewable fuels, and coal may be renewable, but it is not known yet. There certainly seems to be a lot of it though.

Most power generation is via natural gas. This is for a reason.

This unnatural fear of any of these fuels is ridiculous. CO2 is not a pollutant, these fuels can burn quite cleanly in a properly designed power plant, and they are plentiful, making it more attractive for grid operators to buy energy from it.