Live data from Hacker News

Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

ercot.com

201–210 of 266 posts

Re: Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a week about every 10 years best case , right now, where I’m at (near Austin). We lose water for twice that long every 5 years. The reliability is probably less than 99% for power, and 95% for water.

Fellow Austinite here. To what events are you referring? I have no recollection of multiday power or water outages in the last 10 years.

We had a boil water notice that lasted for a couple weeks after bad storms just a year or two ago, and now this one. I don’t think we’ve had power issues like this recently.

Re: Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right it creates perverse incentives, but so does the current system. For instance check this article [0] that shows pictures of Houston's skyline during the recent power outages where completely empty skyscrapers are wasting power while ordinary people freeze. I'd rather have poor people using electricity than rich corporations. At least keeping people warm is productive. [0] https://heavy.com/news/photos-ho…

I agree with your idea of charging more for higher earners, much like is some northern European countries fines are proportional to income... the photo linked is eye opening, I'd suggest in extreme weather cases like this, corporations should be charged more depending on how many employees/income/profit. Indeed if capitalism is meant to help create a fairer more innovative/dynamic society Corporations shouldn't be re…

Capitalism, unfortunately, is not meant to help create a fair society. It is designed to maximize shareholder value based on endless growth and consumption, and that is all it is good at. This is unsustainable both socially and ecologically.

Instead of giving corporations legal status as people, we should be giving the Earth legal personhood. Some countries are already starting to do so. [0]

[0] https://therightsofnature.org/universal-declaration/

How Jet Stream Collapse will Cause Mass Starvation Explained by Dr. Peter Wadhams:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKilc_oMbrg&feature=yout...

Here are four countries that have given nature the same legal rights as humans. #BeLikeThem. Solutions are everywhere. Let's implement them and protect people and the planet. #ActOnClimate #nature #forests

https://twitter.com/MikeHudema/status/1361531384351891456

Re: Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a week about every 10 years best case , right now, where I’m at (near Austin). We lose water for twice that long every 5 years. The reliability is probably less than 99% for power, and 95% for water.

Fellow Austinite here. To what events are you referring? I have no recollection of multiday power or water outages in the last 10 years.

Do you live near a hospital? I have seen reported in some news articles that people who live near hospitals have been less affected.

Re: Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

#204
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I reach a very different conclusion. Comparing ERCOT to other grids (PJM or CALISO), ERCOT system has delivered very low prices and very high levels of renewable penetrations. PJM wastes billions of dollars a year in capacity payments to coal plants for no reason. What you write, "The market in power should only exist to optimise" well, that is exactly what ERCOT does. As for the disaster last week, that wa…

If the market solves all problems why would the government even need to mandate winterization? Wouldn't smart businesses have done the risk analysis and done the work? Maybe the problem here is that loss of electrical power has a significant external cost that isn't absorbed by the utilities. In other words, the cost of winterization was more than the cost to fix the damage to their equipment but doesn't take into ac…

I generally agree that externalities are a common cause of problems from free markets, perhaps the most common.

But I would suggest that free markets generally create good outcomes, and when we identify bad outcomes we should correct the rules of the market.

In this case, it probably would make sense for there to be a penalty that providers had to pay if they failed to deliver service after it was committed.

My understanding is that the people who put the market together expected that the huge rate increase which would accompany an unusual storm or other peak demand event was expected to be sufficient incentive for providers to harden their equipment so that it would be able to cash in on those peak rates.

This event showed that the incentive is not enough for events that are extremely rare. It also showed that a lot of the supply infrastructure to the gas plants failed, and hardening that infrastructure is really up to the producers who aren’t directly part of the energy market.

So regulation to increase preparedness standards for gas plants supply infrastructure might make sense. But it may be possible to accomplish the same thing more efficiently via fines and penalties for market participants who go off-line during severe weather.

My point is simply: the market itself isn’t really the problem, it’s creating the right set of incentives and regulations around that market.

One last thought: living in Austin and having lived through this whole ordeal (still living it), I can’t say that I would necessarily want to pay twice as much for energy every single month to avoid one crappy week per decade. I’m thinking that I could probably get myself a backup heat and power source, and do some winterization on my own house that would be more valuable to me than paying twice as much for “the grid” to be upgraded to handle events of this rarity. I admit, we don’t know if these will become significantly more frequent due to changing climate, and that makes the decision more difficult, but I don’t see it as flat out wrong that a significant natural disaster damaged the power system, nor do I think having an “invulnerable power grid” is necessarily a realistic or achievable goal.

Re: Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

#205
I seems to me that the owners of natural gas fired power plants in Texas are being incentivized to find a way to store a few days of natural gas on site, and winterizing that storage, so they can win the lottery the next time things freeze over.

[edit - back of the napkin math]

Extrapolating from https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=667&t=3 it looks to me like it takes about 8 ft^3 of natural gas for 1 kwh of electricity. So, to run a 1 GW plant for 24 hours would take 192,000,000 square feet... a cube about 575 feet on each side. That's a huge tank farm.

Coal is about 1 lbs/kwh, according to https://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/fuel.html#:~:text=Nat.... so the 24 Gwh pile would be 24,000,000 pounds, or 12,000 tons. (an 80 foot cube)

This matches up fairly well with https://www.brighthubengineering.com/power-plants/52544-basi...

Re: Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

#206
post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I've got a prepper bent and am OK with losing power for a few days in a 1:100 year event? Can I still get cheap, slightly unreliable power? Not to make light of the events in Texas - it sounds scary and they need to be prepared for next time. But the answer isn't automatically "they should have had a gold plated the grid!". The answer might be "they should be have been prepared for a few days without power in…

This is a week about every 10 years best case , right now, where I’m at (near Austin). We lose water for twice that long every 5 years. The reliability is probably less than 99% for power, and 95% for water.

thechao is probably referring to the 2011 outage - dunno if that was multi-day though

Re: Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

#207
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free markets do account for huge shortages, but we’ve eliminated the motivation for actors to do something about it with anti price-gouging regulations. There would be tons of stockpiles if businesses could appropriately upcharge when there was mass panic buying. Instead we stupidly lock prices, which wipes out most of the point of paying extra storage costs compared to a just in time competitor. The problem is we’ve…

I don’t think what you’re saying jives with the reality of what happened in Texas. The price of electric and natural gas skyrocketed during the shortage. A company that winterized their equipment stood to make a killing. And yet, despite the massive profit incentives, large swaths of Texas were blacked out due to lack of preparation. Besides that, the economic damage of the outages far outweigh how much winterization…

there is also another externality, due to perception (regardless of whether it is true) that it affects non rich people more means that it build distrust. trust (and in particular systemic trust, e.g. rule of law) reduces transaction costs; i.e. you can rely on others to do their job properly without having to continually monitor them and build in unnecessary contingencies.

Re: Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

#208
I’ll point out that it’s already 50 degrees in Austin today with a projected high of 70. Plus it’s a Sunday, so many businesses are closed. Plus we just had a freak storm that required a lot of 24/7 industrial operations to shut down, and they likely haven’t powered back up yet since the roads were still icy as recently as yesterday.

TLDR; demand is now very low, and since the electrical supply has to be matched very closely to demand, this is how ERCOT tells plants that can shut off easily to shut off.

Re: Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

#209
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free markets seem to do a bad job with resiliency. Redundancies, winterisation, warehousing N95 masks just in case, etc is treated as inefficiency by a free market and eliminated. These aren’t externalities - is there an economics name for this? I’m sure it’s been noticed before.

Free markets do account for huge shortages, but we’ve eliminated the motivation for actors to do something about it with anti price-gouging regulations. There would be tons of stockpiles if businesses could appropriately upcharge when there was mass panic buying. Instead we stupidly lock prices, which wipes out most of the point of paying extra storage costs compared to a just in time competitor. The problem is we’ve…

Yes. And then the incentive will be to buy up all available capacity and create artifical scarcity. If you believe that we are dealing with profit maximizing actors then this is the likely outcome in the absence of any price control. Lets say you believe that a competitor may come up to provide the service as soon as the price becomes attractive. Power generation is not something that can be stood up (at least not yet) at the drop of a hat. There are far better solutions to this problem and they all involve more and not less regulation.

Re: Clearing price for supplying power to Texas grid –$31.65

#210

SSL Not Supported Error 29 www.ercot.com 2021-02-21 14:25:55 UTC If you believe you have a valid business reason for accessing ERCOT resources, please contact the ERCOT HelpDesk at 512-248-6800 or 1-866-870-8124 (USA) or HelpDesk@ercot.com. Please provide the HelpDesk with the information supplied below. Your IP: x.x.x.41 Error code: 29 SSL is not supported What happened? SSL is not supported Your IP: x x.x.41 Proxy…

Same here. Primitive security rules? I guess they just chose to ban all non-US IP addresses.
Post reply on HN