Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 357 posts

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#211

Post by kgermino »

thephyber wrote: post #195
jldugger wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've kinda wondered this for a while -- why is SVP (Santa Clara) cheaper than PG&E?

SVP isn't weighed down with debt from {the Erin Brockavitch lawsuit, the San Bruno gas explosion, the Paradise fire} incidents (among other, less infamous ones). More likely, though, is that smaller and newer utilities are likely to be more nimble than the big behemoth that has lots of tech debt and internal and external bureaucracy.

I also wonder how much of it just comes down to serving a small dense area vs a large varied one. If you can focus on the cheapest customers to serve and avoid the overhead from needing to cover a large area it should be at least a little cheaper.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#212

Post by emmelaich »

rbanffy wrote: post #160
kryogen1c wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wild claims related to electromagnetism what follows is speculation, so you can grab your pitchforks if you want but it will be a hollow victory. I've always been suspicious of the claim that EM fields have zero effect on human beings, especially near high-volts lines. It doesnt seem possible. Our bodies function based on electrical signals and many cellular mechanisms are mediated with ions. do we have a list of a…

Wouldn't we see those effects on the animals and plants that live around the power lines?

I've seen that claimed. And then attributed to chemicals used around and in the building of power lines.

Sorry no link found right now.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#213

Post by Marsymars »

zbrozek wrote: post #208
WalterBright wrote: post #178

One way to deal with this is to have variable electric rates - cheaper rates when plenty of power is available, and more expensive when less. This incentivizes consumers to time shift their usage. For example, evening A/C use can be time shifted to the day, by cooling the house more during the day, so less is needed in the evening. The thermal mass of a house has a lot of inertia (and can be increased by adding, say,…

Making everything hopelessly complicated isn't really great either. Should water rates and gas rates do the same? Tolls already do this. It's a growing cognitive burden. I don't look forward to surge pricing for data usage. It feels inevitable.

Conveniently, you can get smart thermostats that effectively abstract away that particular cognitive burden: https://www.ecobee.com/en-ca/eco-plus/

> Take advantage of time-of-use electricity rates in your area. eco+ intelligently precools or preheats the home at times of day when electricity prices are low.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#214

Post by robomartin »

everybodyknows wrote: post #61
robomartin wrote: post #43

I think I can say that our entire neighborhood is up in arms about what's going on with SCE in general. In the last few months people have received bills that amount to 10 to 20 times their usual bill. In our case, with a 13 kW solar array, our usual bill is in the order of $15 per month and has been so for years. Last month our bill was $350 and the prior month $184. We have been sending excess energy to SCE for yea…

> auto-magically signed-up for CPA (Clean Power Alliance). This is a state-governed "CCA": https://cal-cca.org/about/members/ Legally a CCA is required to send two "opt-out" notices. Being jaded and mistrustful, I did some research, and opted-out. > Which is, as far as I am concerned, a government run scam Only a slight exaggeration, by my experience. My city has lost money on the adventure, by extending zero-interes…

> Only a slight exaggeration

Here's a good one: Each SCE bill includes two added costs that are only added to your bill if you are in CPA, these are:

"CCA Cost Responsibility Surcharge" and "CTC, NDC, PPPC".

These two are calculated based on energy utilization. This amounts to $40 to $60 per month for the bills I have seen. Which, in turn, means it makes CPA bills no different from or more expensive than SCE bills. That's why I called it a scam.

By now opting-out of CPA those two elements of the bill go away. What's just precious is that they place you in a "transitional" rate for six months.

I place this kind of stuff in the category of unnecessary complexity added to people's lives for no reason at all. It provides no benefits at all (or questionable benefits), burns time and financial resources.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#215

Post by emmelaich »

shortandsweet wrote: post #141
dtwatljfk wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but because NIMBY groups frequently oppose building or augmenting existing substations. Wild claims related to electromagnetism basically kill the project at every level. Can you elaborate? A substation is about to start construction just across the (narrow) street from my child's elementary school.

Please review the Epri document EMF and your health. Document number 3002016508. It's free on Epris website.

https://www.epri.com/research/products/000000003002016508

Abstract This 2019 brochure is intended to explain the issues surrounding EMF. It covers the physical nature of EMF, our everyday exposures to EMF, the health research and its findings, and the conclusions reached by expert scientific panels and government agencies. It provides key updates to the review of the science that the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) published in 2002 in a booklet entitled, “EMF: Electric and Magnetic Fields Associated with the Use of Electric Power – Questions & Answers.” The 2002 booklet contains very useful information that remains current, and that the reader of this brochure may find of value.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#216

Post by Marsymars »

WalterBright wrote: post #178

One way to deal with this is to have variable electric rates - cheaper rates when plenty of power is available, and more expensive when less. This incentivizes consumers to time shift their usage. For example, evening A/C use can be time shifted to the day, by cooling the house more during the day, so less is needed in the evening. The thermal mass of a house has a lot of inertia (and can be increased by adding, say,…

It's crazy to me that it isn't a thing. There's a bunch of stuff (laundry, dishes, RAID snapshots) that I can schedule to run any time, but there's zero incentive not to run them all at peak times.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#217

Post by Baeocystin »

brudgers wrote: post #209
Baeocystin wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Gilroy, and we've had 3 days of 105+ weather. When the house I live in was built, they put in a 3-ton unit, which was complete fine for the first 20 years my family lived here. I replaced it a few years ago with a 4-ton unit, and added extra blown-in insulation. It has barely kept up with the heatwave. Next is dual-pane windows, I guess. There are a lot of folks with less who are straight-out suffering. The…

Going from a three to four ton unit was a mistake. One that's easy to make because it's counter-intuitive. And because bigger units are more expensive there's a sales incentive to sell bigger units too. To be effective at cooling people an air conditioner needs to remove latent heat in the form of water vapor. Lowering the air temperature isn't enough. Oversized units short-cycle, lowering the air temperature signifi…

I know you mean well, but I promise you, it wasn't a mistake. :) It's not rapid cycling, it's barely keeping up. It has literally gotten hotter here over the years. That's what I was trying to get at with my original post- what was appropriately-sized in decades past is no longer enough.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#218

Post by zbrozek »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #189
robomartin wrote: post #43

I think I can say that our entire neighborhood is up in arms about what's going on with SCE in general. In the last few months people have received bills that amount to 10 to 20 times their usual bill. In our case, with a 13 kW solar array, our usual bill is in the order of $15 per month and has been so for years. Last month our bill was $350 and the prior month $184. We have been sending excess energy to SCE for yea…

Yeah, I got a pretty huge power bill last month and was trying to calculate my rate to figure out how much I could save where. Doing this is actually pretty confusing with the bill you get. Tier 1 from SCE for us is $.106/kwh. Tier 2 is $.165/kwh. Plus: 1. CCA surcharge (whatever that means) is $.0224/kwh for PCIA (whatever that is) 2. CCA surcharge is $.00580/kwh for DWR bond (whatever DWR is) 3. CCA surcharge is $.…

I take total bill and total consumption and divide. It's a surprisingly high number.

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#219

Post by ponker »

aaronAgain wrote: post #156
davisr wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they're not entirely wrong about the 5G. I understand many in this forum won't agree with me. From https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no... > We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe > The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" in 2011. Last year, a $30 million study conducted by the U.S. National T…

"so we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator. " Quoting a US senator on technology is not exactly a strong argument. Like arguing about email security and quoting a senator on the technology committee saying he has never sent an email. https://www.engadget.com/2015-03-09-lindsey-graham-never-sen... In many cases senators are the least possible informed people on a topic, and are almost certainly not focused on t…

> a senator on the technology committee saying he has never sent an email

Senators who don't send emails don't do so because they don't know how to send emails -- they do it because they're doing seriously fucked up stuff and don't want a paper trail. As the fictional drug kingpin Stringer Bell says in The Wire -- "is you taking notes on a criminal fucking conspiracy?"

Re: Rolling blackouts in California have power experts stumped

#220

Post by Baeocystin »

amluto wrote: post #173
Baeocystin wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Gilroy, and we've had 3 days of 105+ weather. When the house I live in was built, they put in a 3-ton unit, which was complete fine for the first 20 years my family lived here. I replaced it a few years ago with a 4-ton unit, and added extra blown-in insulation. It has barely kept up with the heatwave. Next is dual-pane windows, I guess. There are a lot of folks with less who are straight-out suffering. The…

Fancy insulation, double pane glass, etc are great for the heating season. They reduce conductive heat transfer, which is (roughly) proportional to the indoor-outdoor temperature difference. Even on a 100F day, the indoor-outdoor difference with A/C set to 75F is only 25F, which is equivalent to heating to 70F on a mild 45F winter day. Try looking for major sources of solar heating instead. Windows and especially sky…

One unexpectedly strong benefit of the panels we put on our roof was the lower cooling bill, even before we were allowed to switch on the panels and use the power generated. Our roof geometry only allowed for a 65% solution instead of the 80% we were aiming for, and this unaccounted for improvement almost made the difference.
Post reply on HN