Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time • Hacker News Board

Re: Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time

#111

Post by CydeWeys » Sat, Jul 27, 2019, 1:08 PM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #77

elamje wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Texas resident here. If you have ever driven by a refinery of any type you will see where energy goes. The shear amount of energy to convert oil to usable gas/plastics/etc. is pretty crazy. Texas has the biggest oil refinery presence in the US ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_refining_in_the_Un... ) Refineries don’t just make gasoline, but plastic, engine oil, industrial lubricant. That being said, wiki wi…

Thanks. That was my guess. I mean, I didn't think that aluminum production was big there. I wonder what the energy efficiency of petroleum refining is. From the US DOE,[0] I get: TBtu 3542 primary energy 2082 applied energy 1460 energy lost So ~59%. That's a lot of energy to blow off. 0) https://www.energy.gov/eere/amo/dynamic-manufacturing-energy...

This illustrates something that is curiously lacking from most ICE vs BEV energy efficiency calculations, namely:

More electricity is spent just refining the gasoline used by an ICE than is used in total by a BEV to go the same distance.

Re: Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time

#112

Post by CydeWeys » Sat, Jul 27, 2019, 1:10 PM UTC

briandear wrote: post #98

radicalbyte wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why inland wind is basically banned in the UK. I totally understand the argument and if it wasn't for the fact that the climate disaster will end us I would agree. However what 2+ degrees of warming will do will dwarf anything that the turbines will do. There are also arguments about birds dying and the such. Only that's a BS argument considering that glass buildings kill 10x as many birds and are ubiquitous.

So why not do nuclear?

Why not both?

Also, nuclear has the whole radioactive waste and potential meltdown thing, which wind does not.

Re: Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time

#113

Post by jabl » Sat, Jul 27, 2019, 1:10 PM UTC

6thaccount2 wrote: post #47

WhompingWindows wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How should climate change or air pollution or any of it be partisan? When Republican voters are polled, many say they love the environment and the outdoors too. The truth is fossil fuel has bought and sold most R politicians and many D politicians too. Until we get money out of politics or make the energy companies go bankrupt, they will continue to pay politicians to prevent the cleaning of our environment and energ…

I think many energy companies would love (or at least not be opposed) to get a large amount of renewables and energy storage...etc. The problem is that doing so costs money (a lot of it) which means raising customer rates which are highly regulated. Many of those companies are still paying off coal assets and aren't allowed by regulators to retire those units until they're paid off even though they aren't economic an…

In deregulated power markets, which AFAIK covers a fairly large fraction of US electricity supply (including Texas) power generators are businesses like in any random industry. The transmission grid, otoh, is a natural monopoly and is tightly regulated (or outright publicly owned).

In such markets, uneconomical units tend to be shut down fairly quickly. Which in the absence of a some type of price on carbon (be it a carbon tax, cap and trade, clean portfolio standards or whatever) unfortunately can mean replacing clean energy with dirtier but cheaper.

Re: Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time

#114

Post by grumpydba » Sat, Jul 27, 2019, 1:11 PM UTC

hyperbovine wrote: post #95

Spare_account wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is a subjective notion, of course. I look at a landscape full of wind turbines and I see the beauty of a species recognising it needed to change.

Ditto, they make me feel like I’m living in a near-future sci-fi film. And let’s be honest, whatever natural beauty once existed in the UK was largely destroyed over the course of millennia.

Yeah so let's destroy pristine nature landscapes with ugly turbines (which kill a lot of birds and cost an arm to decommission). I've seen wild landscapes in Brittany completely ruined by still wind turbines. It's a disgrace.

I'd rather go nuclear in select ugly places.

What is beautiful is good. He who creates ugliness is evil.

Re: Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time

#115

Post by CydeWeys » Sat, Jul 27, 2019, 1:12 PM UTC

6thaccount2 wrote: post #49

benmccann wrote: post #46

If you live in Texas you can switch your home's power to wind via a YC company and probably save money: getgex.com

Unless you're hooking up your rural house to a turbine, your comment is misleading. The power going to your house will still be a mix of coal, natural gas, wind, solar, and others.

Electricity is fungible. It doesn't make sense to build out multiple entire electric grids, one per type of energy generation.

Re: Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time

#116

Post by CydeWeys » Sat, Jul 27, 2019, 1:14 PM UTC

WhompingWindows wrote: post #36

tracker1 wrote: post #14

One thing I'm amused (not in a good way) by, is that there's so much FUD and marketing around the use of Coal etc. for energy and alternatives (Nuclear, wind, solar) ... I'm not necessarily knowledge enough to favor some over others. But I always felt, "because pollution," should be enough reason alone to look at alternatives, and considering the impact of building/supplying/disposing of the materials in the alternat…

How should climate change or air pollution or any of it be partisan? When Republican voters are polled, many say they love the environment and the outdoors too. The truth is fossil fuel has bought and sold most R politicians and many D politicians too. Until we get money out of politics or make the energy companies go bankrupt, they will continue to pay politicians to prevent the cleaning of our environment and energ…

The Democrats are demonstrably better on climate change issues right now than the Republicans are. The "both sides are bad" argument doesn't hold water here.

Re: Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time

#117

Post by espeed » Sat, Jul 27, 2019, 1:14 PM UTC

Fej wrote: post #37

The majority of the US electorate is underinformed and/or misinformed. The most popular cable news network is Fox News, which pushes straight-up falsehoods as propaganda for the right. That's not to say the left-wing networks are innocent, just that the most popular one is also the most dishonest. It has a wide reach and many voters get all of their news from only this network. The right-wing party is completely boug…

During periods of transition, it can help to take the meta perspective. Fox began its remake first. It began during the Obama administration. Hollywood is being tested now. Some have been late to get the memo.

Re: Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time

#118

Post by 6thaccount2 » Sat, Jul 27, 2019, 1:14 PM UTC

dagss wrote: post #79

6thaccount2 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're hooking up your rural house to a turbine, your comment is misleading. The power going to your house will still be a mix of coal, natural gas, wind, solar, and others.

I am sure you also like to point out that when people are using cash, they are "really" exhanging rectangular pieces of cotton/paper/plastic.

No.... seriously. Your bill might be going toward green energy, but dirty coal is still fueling your home.

Granted, many understand that and are perfectly fine with it as you're helping to effect change. However, a lot of folks have been really confused by that marketing line, so it deserves clarification. HN users are probably more educated than the general public of course, but I work in this industry and strive for clarity.

Re: Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time

#119

Post by krapp » Sat, Jul 27, 2019, 1:20 PM UTC

grumpydba wrote: post #114

hyperbovine wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ditto, they make me feel like I’m living in a near-future sci-fi film. And let’s be honest, whatever natural beauty once existed in the UK was largely destroyed over the course of millennia.

Yeah so let's destroy pristine nature landscapes with ugly turbines (which kill a lot of birds and cost an arm to decommission). I've seen wild landscapes in Brittany completely ruined by still wind turbines. It's a disgrace. I'd rather go nuclear in select ugly places. What is beautiful is good. He who creates ugliness is evil.

>What is beautiful is good. He who creates ugliness is evil.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Re: Wind is outpacing coal as a power source in Texas for the first time

#120

Post by grumpydba » Sat, Jul 27, 2019, 1:32 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #119

grumpydba wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah so let's destroy pristine nature landscapes with ugly turbines (which kill a lot of birds and cost an arm to decommission). I've seen wild landscapes in Brittany completely ruined by still wind turbines. It's a disgrace. I'd rather go nuclear in select ugly places. What is beautiful is good. He who creates ugliness is evil.

>What is beautiful is good. He who creates ugliness is evil. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Indeed and I do not think Anglo Saxon protestants make correct beholders in this regard. Totally subjective I admit. However I stand for my views on aestetics. I think it's an important matter and that it is open for discussion.

Also, I have a deep aversion for relativism.