Joe Manchin - Please see important comment from Willem Post
Robert Bryce - Get Ready for the Blackouts
Mismanagement and the push for renewables are degrading the reliability of the U.S. electrical grid.
Generac Power Systems, a company that produces home generators and other equipment, announced in July record sales of $920 million during the second quarter, a 68% jump over last year. But what’s good for Generac is bad for America.
That’s no slam on the Wisconsin-based company, which manufactures about three-quarters of the home standby generators sold in the U.S. Instead, Generac’s soaring sales are evidence that the U.S. electric grid is becoming less reliable, which will make Americans less wealthy and less secure. Consumers are spending billions of dollars on generators to have on hand when the power goes out. This capital would be better spent on other things such as education or home improvements.
Blackouts are deadly and create costly drags on the economy. Bad policies and lack of oversight contributed to the February blackouts in Texas. The final tally: about $200 billion in damage and some 700 people dead from hypothermia, carbon monoxide poisoning and other causes. In California—a state that is hemorrhaging residents—blackouts have become a near-daily event.
Generac says in a recent investor presentation that power outage severity is “increasing significantly.” Between 2000 and 2020, the number of what the Energy Department calls “major electric disturbances and unusual occurrences” jumped 13-fold.
The grid is the Mother Network for critical systems: GPS, communication, traffic lights, water, and wastewater treatment. Essayist Emmet Penney had it right when he declared in the American Conservative that, “there is no such thing as a wealthy society with a weak electrical grid.”
Three things are weakening the grid. One is the rush to add renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, which depend on amenable weather to function. Second, over the past few years, numerous coal and nuclear plants that provide baseload power and help keep the grid stable have closed. Third, regional transmission organizations such as Ercot in Texas and Caiso in California are mismanaging the system. They are not providing enough incentives to ensure reliability such as providing payments to generators that have on-site fuel storage.
Renewable energy promoters don’t want to admit that wind and solar are undermining the grid. But the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, a nonprofit trade group, said in a report last month that “changing resource mix” is the most urgent challenge for reliability. The group says America’s electric generation capacity “is increasingly characterized as one that is sensitive to extreme, widespread, and long duration temperatures as well as wind and solar droughts.”
The decline in reliability is especially important because President Biden has said he wants to “decarbonize” the power industry by 2035, a move that will likely require retiring all coal- and gas-fired generators in the country. In addition, activists are demanding more reliance on renewables and “electrifying everything,” including industry and transportation. Yet the grid is struggling even under existing loads.
Trying to electrify everything would be a disaster, especially for low-income consumers. Poor folks tend to live in homes that aren’t as efficient or sturdy as those occupied by the wealthy. They are more likely to suffer, or even die, during blackouts or extreme weather. They can’t afford generators or backup battery systems, which can cost $10,000 or more. Generac’s customers have a median household income of about $130,000, more than twice the U.S. median.
Please continue reading at https://www.wsj.com/articles/blackouts-generac-electric-grid-texas-...
*************************************
Fair Use Notice: This website may reproduce or have links to copyrighted material the use of which has not been expressly authorized by the copyright owner. We make such material available, without profit, as part of our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, economic, scientific, and related issues. It is our understanding that this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided by law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes that go beyond "fair use," you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Views: 202
Comment
-
Comment by Penny Gray on September 19, 2021 at 11:11am
-
Here's a vaccine poll that might be worth taking:
https://lg.headlinehealth.com/mandatory-vaccine-poll?utm_medium=cpc...
-
-
Wow. This is big news!
-
Comment by Thinklike A. Mountain on September 18, 2021 at 8:27pm
-
-
-
Thank you Willem Post for the recap. Hard to believe Manchin is the only one questioning the off-the-charts insanity of this 3.5 trillion (I can't quite grasp that much debt) bill. One has to wonder if any democratic senators passed their math classes in school. They certainly didn't study economics, unless it was the economics of printing more money in the basement to "balance the budget".
-
-
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) confirmed Sunday that he will not vote for a $3.5 TRILLION “budget reconciliation” bill that contains a number of climate, social welfare, and other initiatives, arguing that the price tag is far too high. He would CONSIDER $1.5 TRILLION
https://www.theepochtimes.com/manchin-confirms-he-will-not-vote-for...Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) won’t “have my vote on” the package, Manchin said during a CNN interview, adding that “Chuck knows that, and we’ve talked about this.”
The West Virginia senator argued that too much money been spent by the federal government in recent years and expressed concerns about further increasing the national debt.
“We’ve already put out $5.4 trillion and we’ve tried to help Americans in every way we possibly can, and a lot of the help that we’ve put out there is still there, and it’s going to run on and on until next year, 2022, so what’s the urgency?”
Manchin told the network. “What’s the urgency that we have? It’s not the same urgency that we had with the American Rescue Plan. We got that out the door quickly. That was about $2 trillion.”
At the same time, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a self-described Democratic Socialist, who celebrated his honeymoon in the USSR more than 30 years ago,, told ABC News on Sunday, he disagreed with Manchin’s call for a pause to debate the measure.
Sanders, the Senate Budget Committee chairman, keeps on saying, not only the $3.5 TRILLION will get passed, but he also believes the infrastructure bill will also pass.
“I think we’re gonna work it out, but it would really be a terrible, terrible shame for the American people if both bills went down,” Sanders said. HE LOVES INCREASING THE FEDERAL DEBT TO $35 TRILLION
Speaking to CNN, Sanders, in a panic, also said that it’s “not acceptable” that Manchin will not vote lockstep with ALL other Democrats on the measure. In the equally divided Senate, even one Democrat senator’s defection could doom the spending package, and Republicans have signaled they will not support the legislation.
Finally, there is a big payback for the evil of stealing elections and perpetrating a coup d’etat.
Democrats also hope to pass the bill via budget reconciliation, which allows a party to pass a bill with a simple 51-vote majority instead of a supermajority.
The Senate returns on Monday and the tentative deadline for the committees to turn in their 2500-page draft bills is Wednesday.
US Senators have complained they would need a lot of TIME just to read and digest all those 2500 pages, but they have gotten almost NOTHING this far.
Also in the CNN interview, Manchin disputed a Sept. 27 deadline that was publicly proposed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
She wants to start spending $3.5 + $1.2 = $4.7 TRILLION dollars by then. That is of-the-charts NUTS
“There’s no way we can get this done by the 27th if we do our job,” Manchin remarked. “There are so much differences that we have here. There’s so much apart from us to where we are, i.e., Bernie is, as usual, way out there in left field.
Some Democrats now say it was inevitable that the $3.5 TRILLION number was going to slip (WHY NOT TRY LESS THAN $1 TRILLION), even though it already represents a major concession, (SOB, SOB) by Communist/Socialist Senate Budget Committee Chairman, Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and other progressives, who initially pushed for a SIX TRILLION DOLLR budget reconciliation spending target, AS A NICE ROUND NUMBER.
NO ONE WILL BE RECONCILED.
THERE WILL BE MORE EXTREME DIVISION ALL-AROUND CREATED BY LEFTIST DEM/PROGS
-
-
I very much doubt “Net Zero Corporate Climate Lobbyists are “Disengaged”, because they are actively promoting wind, solar, and battery TAX SHELTERED projects all over the US.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/09/11/claim-net-zero-corporate-cli...
They do not give a damn about:1) The cost to taxpayers, ratepayers, or adding costs to government debts
2) The CRIPPLING of the competitiveness of the US economy vs OTHER so-called trading partners, aka trading predators, in Europe, Germany, China, Korea, Japan, etc. They are still using Mexico and Canada as TROJAN HORSES, even AFTER renegotiating NAFTA.
Wall Street is complicit with these folks, because RE projects bring in BIG FEES and shower the benefits of TAX SHELTERS on wealthy clients, domestic and foreign
HIGH COSTS OF WIND, SOLAR, AND BATTERY SYSTEMS IN NEW ENGLAND
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/high-costs-of-wind-sol...EXCERPT
Wind Solar and Battery Projects are Tax Shelters for the Wealthy, whether Domestic or Foreign
Per standard Wall Street practice for tax-shelters,
– The cash value of the subsidies to Owners has to be about 45 to 50% of the turnkey cost of RE projects
– The subsidies are “front-loaded”, i.e., in the first 5 years, to enable Owners to shelter as much income as possible in the early years; aka harvesting subsidies.
– The entire project cost has to be written off in about 5 years, no matter the length of the project, per MACRS IRS rules. See URL.
– Owners or VT utilities receive 9%/y on their invested capital, per Vermont Standard Offer RE-Promotion Program.
– Owners or VT utilities may finance up to 50% of the project cost, currently at about 3.5%/y, per Vermont SO program
– Owners or VT utilities are paid about 11 c/kWh (solar), 9 c/kWh (wind), delivered as AC to the grid, per Vermont SO program; the NE grid electricity wholesale price has been about 5 c/kWh or less, starting in 2009.This explains why Wall Street investment bankers, such as Bloomberg, Lazard, Morgan, etc., are in favor of more and more RE projects for their wealthy clients, such as Warren Buffett.
https://solarplusllc.com/macrs-and-bonus-depreciation/
https://norwichsolar.com/vermont-commercial-and-industrial-solar-in...
https://vermontbiz.com/news/2019/october/22/owner-gmp-and-vermont-g...Warren Buffett Riding the Subsidy/Rapid-depreciation Gravy Train
Quote: “I will do anything that is basically covered by the law to reduce Berkshire’s tax rate, for example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.”
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/nancy-pfotenhauer/2014/05/12/e...Green Mountain Power, GMP, Riding the Subsidy/Rapid-depreciation Gravy Train
Vermont utilities buy about 1.4 million MWh/y of hydro power, at 5.7 c/kWh, under a 20-y contract, from Hydro Quebec. The HQ electricity is not variable, not intermittent and does not cause midday solar bulges
GMP, a Canadian company, refuses to buy more hydro electricity from HQ, because that electricity would just be a “pass-through”, on which GMP would make minimal profit. HQ has plenty of electricity and is eager to sell it. This approach requires no subsidies!!
GMP rakes in millions of our hard-earned money, by investing in: 1) utility-scale solar/battery combos, 2) leasing heat pumps and 3) wall-hung Tesla batteries for playing “catch the peak games”.
GMP rides the subsidy gravy train, and plays the “green, forward-looking utility” role.
-
-
Here is another example of burdening Vermont’s economy with BS energy systems
The below excerpted article has cost analyses of wind, solar and battery systems.
Only part of the analysis of a battery system is excerpted
US electricity would be one hell of a lot MORE expensive, than at present, if the liberal-arts, Socialist/Communist, nutcases “handling” senile, in-the-basement Biden have their way.
Excerpt from
HIGH COSTS OF WIND, SOLAR, AND BATTERY SYSTEMS IN NEW ENGLAND
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/high-costs-of-wind-sol...Economics of Battery Project
If a bank makes a $3.0 million loan at 9%/y for 15 years, it would require annual mortgage payments of $365,136, to recover the loan, plus interest.
If GMP makes a $3.0 million investment in a battery system at 9%/y for 15 years, it would require annual payments of $365,136, to recover the investment, plus a 9%/y return on invested capital.
Cost of financing would be $5,477,040, total payments - $3,000,000, turnkey cost = $2,477,040, paid over 15 years.
It is assumed GMP finances the battery from its own resources
It is assumed the value of the battery system is about zero at end of Year 15.
https://www.myamortizationchart.com
The total revenue is $179,880/y, RNS and FCM reduction + $7,653/y, arbitrage gain = $187,533/y.
The revenue shortfall is $365,136, required by GMP - $187,533, revenues = $177,604/y
Total required subsidies are $177,604, revenue shortfall + $102,468, bulge control loss + $18,899, battery loss = $298,971/y, which would be charged to ratepayers and taxpayers and added to government debt. See Notes and table 4
Battery average draw from grid is 859,068 kWh/y / 365 d/y = 2,354 kWh/d
Battery rated capacity is 4000 kWh/d as AC
Battery annual average CF = 2354/4000 = 59%, which is within the 65% working range
Cost of battery throughput = ($365,136, required by GMP) / (859,068 kWh, battery annual throughput) = 42.50 c/kWh.
Cost of required subsidies is $298,971 / 859,068 kWh = 34.80 c/kWh
Total cost of battery operations 70.31 c/kWh. See Note
NOTE: This report shows values of battery owning and operating costs of 46 to 65 c/kWh, which are similar to the 70.31 c/kWh of this analysis. See page 19 of URL
https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1254196/FULLTEXT01.pdf
Ignored Costs of Solar and Battery Systems
1) O&M, which includes on-site use of electricity, labor and materials
2) Miscellaneous costs, such as insurance, etc.
3) Decommissioning and disposal of battery plant
4) Build new battery plant to serve for 10 years, i.e., 25y, life of solar plant - 15y, life of battery plant
NOTE: A minor revenue could be obtained by using the battery for frequency regulation, i.e., rapidly absorbing and discharging very small quantities of electricity to maintain the grid frequency and voltage within the prescribed ranges.
NOTE:
- The GMP battery project is similar to a person buying a big house, without having enough income to make the monthly mortgage payments. Luckily, that person has parents, who voluntarily make up the shortage each month!!
- The GMP battery project does not have enough revenues. Luckily for GMP, ratepayers and taxpayers are coerced to make up the shortage each month!!
- GMP wants to spread many heavily subsidized solar/battery combos all over Vermont, as part of its expensive “micro-grid, climate fighting” strategy, which will be good for GMP financial results, but not good for ratepayers and taxpayers and the Vermont economy.
Comments on table 4
1) Gain from FCM and RNS Reduction
Significant revenue can be obtained by having the batteries reduce GMP peak demands, and thereby reduce RNS and FCM charges. These charges, imposed by ISO-NE, are a major expense of any utility.
The “Game of Picking Peaks” amounts to cost shifting from clever, early-adopter utilities, onto other utilities.
The ISO-NE costs of running the grid do not decrease. They continue to be spread among utilities.
The Game will end after more utilities learn to play the game.
The RNS value is $116.11/kW-year, or $9.68/kW-month, for 2020/2021
The FCM value is $5.30/kW-month, for 2020/2021
RNS reduction would be 1,000 kW x $9.69/kW-month = $9,690 for a month, or $116,280 for 12 months
FCM reduction would be 1,000 kW x $5.30/kW-month = $5,300 for a month, or $63,600 for 12 months.
Total reduction = $179,880/y
https://www.sandia.gov/ess-ssl/publications/SAND2017-6164.pdf
https://www.iso-ne.com/static-assets/documents/2017/02/20170228_pr_...
https://www.iso-ne.com/about/key-stats/markets/
2) Gain from Arbitrage
A very minor revenue can be obtained by “buying low, at night-time, and selling high, during peak hours”.
The battery could be partially charged from the grid from 10 pm to 6 am, at about 4 c/kWh, and be charged some more by absorbing a part of the bulge from 8 am to 4 pm, after which it would be discharged to the distribution grid from 4 pm to 10 pm, when, on average, grid prices are 7 c/kWh.
The arbitrage gain would be $7,653/y.
3) Loss due to Midday Solar Bulge
The battery could absorb 0.45 MW of solar output from 8 am to 4 pm = 0.45 x 8 h = 3.6 MWh as DC; which after a 7% loss, would add 3.35 MWh DC to the battery charge, which after a 10% loss, would deliver 3.01 MWh AC to the distribution grid, from 4 pm to 10 pm, when, on average, grid prices are 7 c/kWh.
The bulge control cost would be $102,468/y. See Note
Expensive solar electricity at 17.27 c/kWh, of which 20% is lost, due to charging/discharging, with the left-over sold at 7 c/kWh!!
Would that loss be charged to owners of solar systems, who are the grid disturbers?
Oh no, because that would "rain on the solar parade"
The bulge electricity costs 17.27 c/kWh. The quantity should be determined by measurement.
This calculation uses 4 c/kWh for all charging, i.e., the arbitrage gain is overstated!!
4) Battery loss is $18,899/y, as shown under Here is a More-Detailed Analysis
-
-
HIGH COSTS OF WIND, SOLAR, AND BATTERY SYSTEMS IN NEW ENGLAND
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/high-costs-of-wind-sol...
WIND AND SOLAR TO PROVIDE 50 PERCENT OF FUTURE NEW ENGLAND ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-and-solar-provide...
WORLD AND US PRIMARY ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND CAPITAL COST
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/world-total-energy-con...
THE VAGARIES OF SOLAR AND WIND IN NEW ENGLAND
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-vagaries-of-solar-...
NEW ENGLAND IS THE LEAST FAVORABLE FOR PV SOLAR, except areas near rainy Seattle
http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/new-england-is-the-leas...
WORLD AND US PRIMARY ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND CAPITAL COST
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/world-total-energy-con...
Maine as Third World Country:
CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power
Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.
Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT
******** IF LINKS BELOW DON'T WORK, GOOGLE THEM*********
(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/From Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-swept-task-force-set-the-rules/From Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.” https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/flaws-in-bill-like-skating-with-dull-skates/
Not yet a member?
Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?
We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
-- Mahatma Gandhi
"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi
Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!
Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law
Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future
"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."
https://pinetreewatch.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/
© 2024 Created by Webmaster.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!
Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine