Home » Posts tagged 'electricity' (Page 5)

Tag Archives: electricity

The EIA released the latest edition of their Electric Power Monthly on March 26th, with data for January 2019. The table above shows the percentage contribution of the main fuel sources to two decimal places for the last two months and the year 2019 to date.

In January, the absolute amount of electricity generated rose back to levels not seen since the end of summer in September 2018, probably as a result of the need for longer hours of lighting during the longer nights coupled with the increased needs for heating in the middle of winter. Coal and Natural Gas between them, fueled 61.49% of US electricity generation in January, with the contributions from Nuclear and Conventional Hydroelectric declining. The contribution from Natural Gas was up at 33.25%, from 31.71% in December, with the amount generated rising from 106,978 GWh to 118,935 GWh. Generation fueled by coal increased from 96,825 GWh to 101,019 GWh resulting in the percentage contribution falling from 28.70% to 28.24%. The amount of electricity generated by Nuclear plants increased from 71,657 GWh to 73,701 GWh with the resulting contribution actually declining from 21.24% to 20.60% in January. The amount generated by Conventional Hydroelectric increased from 23,728 GWh in December to 24,544 GWh in January with resulting contribution decreasing to 6.86% as opposed to 7.03% in December. The amount generated by Wind increased from 21,154 GWh to 22,493 GWh with the resulting contribution rising very slightly from 6.27% to 6.29% in January. The estimated total solar output rose from 4.962 GWh to 5,859 GWh with the resulting contribution rising from 1.47% to 1.56%. The contribution of zero carbon or carbon neutral sources declined from 38.59% in December to 37.41% in January.

The graph below shows the absolute monthly production from the various sources as well as the total amount generated (right axis).

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The First New Deal Ruined Energy Innovation

February 18, 2019

The First New Deal Ruined Energy Innovation

About the only disappointing aspect of Burton Folsom’s New Deal or Raw Deal is that it doesn’t go far enough in its critique of FDR’s rural electrification program.

The Roosevelt Institute claims, in all seriousness, that “while 90% of urban dwellers had electricity by the 1930s, only 10% of rural dwellers did and roughly 9 out of 10 farms had none,” as if electrons magically stopped flowing in the presence of barnyard animals and corn cribs.

But farmers used electricity before Roosevelt took office; they just produced or procured it themselves instead of taking it off a federally subsidized grid.

Strangely, pundits on the left continue to laud FDR’s Rural Electrification Administration even though it increased demand for electricity created largely by “dirty” sources, especially coal, while squelching demand for electricity generated by local, often green, means.

To this day, South Dakota’s prairie remains dotted with the skeletons of farm windmills abandoned long ago thanks to the Rural Electrification Administration.

This is not to say that all electricity from the grid was dirty, as some of it came from hydroelectric plants, like those along the Missouri and Niagara rivers, nor that all locally generated electricity came from green sources, as some of it came from fossil fuel–powered generators and flatulent mules. But the point here isn’t to count kilowatts; it is to point out what the New Deal cost us in terms of green-energy innovation.

Although, since the New Deal, farms in the United States decreased in relative terms and absolute numbers, they still number in the millions. And although farmers are notoriously “cash poor,” only a small number are “dirt poor.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

EIA’s Electric Power Monthly – January 2019 Edition with data for November 2018

February 7, 2019

EIA’s Electric Power Monthly – January 2019 Edition with data for November 2018

The EIA released the latest edition of their Electric Power Monthly on January 25th, with data for November 2018. The table above shows the percentage contribution of the main fuel sources to two decimal places for the last two months and the year 2018 to date.

In November, the absolute amount of electricity generated declined sightly as mild fall temperatures gave way to colder winter temperatures with demand for air conditioning giving way to demand for heating. Coal and Natural Gas between them, fueled 61.99% of US electricity generation in November, with the contributions from Nuclear and Conventional Hydroelectric edging up. The contribution from Natural Gas was down at 33.18%, from 38.11% in October, with the amount generated falling from 124,027 GWh to 106,804 GWh. Generation fueled by coal increased from 87,452 GWh to 92,738 GWh resulting in the percentage contribution rising from 26.87% to 28.81%. The amount of electricity generated by Nuclear plants increased from 59,397 GWh to 63,948 GWh with the resulting contribution actually rising from 18.25% to 19.87% in November. The amount generated by Conventional Hydroelectric increased from 18,779 GWh in October to 22,174 GWh in November with resulting contribution increasing to 6.89% as opposed to 5.77% in October. The amount generated by Wind decreased from 19,507 GWh to 17,991 GWh with the resulting contribution falling from 5.99% to 5.59% in November. The estimated total solar output fell from 7,625 GWh to 5,859 GWh with the resulting contribution falling from 2.34% to 1.82%. The contribution of zero carbon or carbon neutral sources rose from 34.10% in October to 36.97% in November.

The graph below shows the absolute production from the various sources as well as the total amount generated (right axis).

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Germany Plans to Quit Coal by 2038 ‘But There’s a Problem’

January 29, 2019

Germany Plans to Quit Coal by 2038 ‘But There’s a Problem’

In an effort to fight climate change, Germany announced plans to quit coal mining and burning by 2038.

All 84 of the country’s coal-fired power plants will be shut down over the 19-year time frame, a government-appointed commission announced Saturday, according to The Los Angeles Times.

It’s a significant move as nearly 40 percent of Germany’s electricity comes from coal-fired power plants.

“This is a historic accomplishment,” Ronald Pofalla, one of four commission leaders, announced at a news conference after more than 20 hours of negotiations.

“It was anything but a sure thing. But we did it,” he added. “There won’t be any more coal-burning plants in Germany by 2038.”

The commission’s plan provides about $45 billion in aid to coal-producing regions affected by the phase-out. Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government is expected to adopt the plan.

“Good for the economy and climate: The report of the climate/coal commission is widely supported by business and environmental organizations,” Economy Minister Peter Altmaier, a trusted advisor to Merkel, tweeted on Saturday. “Less CO2, more new jobs. Security of supply and affordability: a strong signal!”

✔

Gut für Wirtschaft und Klima: Der Bericht der Klima/Kohlekommission wird von Wirtschaft- und Umweltverbänden breit getragen. Weniger co2, mehr neue Jobs. Versorgungssicherheit und Bezahlbarkeit: Ein starkes Signal!

If the exit goes according to plan, renewable energy will effectively supply 65-80 percent of Germany’s power in two decades’ time, since the country also pledged to close all its nuclear reactors by 2022, the Times noted.

Renewable energy replaced coal as Germany’s main power source for the first time last year, accounting for 41 percent of the country’s electricity, according to Reuters.

But some environmentalists warned that the commission’s recommendations are not ambitious enough for Germany to meet its obligations under the Paris climate agreement.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

EIA’s Electric Power Monthly – December 2018 Edition with data for October

December 31, 2018

EIA’s Electric Power Monthly – December 2018 Edition with data for October

chart/

The EIA released the latest edition of their Electric Power Monthly on December 26th, with data for October 2018. The table above shows the percentage contribution of the main fuel sources to two decimal places for the last two months and the year to date.

In October, as usual for this time of the year, the absolute amount of electricity generated continued to decline with the mid summer demand for air conditioning falling away further. Coal and Natural Gas between them, fueled 64.98% of US electricity generation in October, with the contributions from most other major sources edging up slightly. The contribution from Natural Gas was down at 38.11%, from 40.01% in September, with the amount generated falling from 142,745 GWh to 124,027 GWh. Generation fueled by coal declined from 96,743 Gwh to 87,452 GWh resulting in the percentage contribution falling from 27.12% to 26.87%. The amount of electricity generated by Nuclear plants decreased from 64,725 GWh to 59,397 GWh with the resulting contribution actually rising very slightly from 18.14% to 18.25% in October. The amount generated by conventional hydroelectric increased from 18,663 GWh in September to 18,779 GWh in October with resulting contribution increasing to 5.77% as opposed to 5.23% in September. The amount generated by wind increased from 16,022 GWh to 19,507 GWh with the resulting contribution rising from 4.49% to 5.99% in September. The estimated total solar output fell from 9,153 GWh to 7,625 GWh with the resulting contribution falling from 2.57% to 2.34%. The contribution of zero carbon or carbon neutral sources rose from 32.01% in September to 34.10% in October.

The graph below shows the absolute production from the various sources as well as the total amount generated (right axis).

chart/

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Electricity won’t save us from our oil problems

December 21, 2018

Electricity won’t save us from our oil problems

Almost everyone seems to believe that our energy problems are primarily oil-related. Electricity will save us.

I recently gave a talk to a group of IEEE electricity researchers (primarily engineers) about the current energy situation and how welcoming it is for new technologies. Needless to say, this group did not come with the standard mindset. They wanted to understand what the electricity situation really is. They are very aware that intermittent renewables, including wind and solar, present many challenges. They didn’t come with the preconceived notion that oil is the problem and electricity will save us.

It wasn’t until I sat down and looked at the electricity situation that I realized how worrying it really is. Intermittent wind and solar cannot stand on their own. They also cannot scale up to the necessary level in the required time period. Instead, the way they are added to the grid artificially depresses wholesale electricity prices, driving other forms of generation out of business. While intermittent wind and solar may soundsustainable, the way that they are added to the electric grid tends to push the overall electrical system toward collapse. They act like parasites on the system.

We end up with an electricity situation parallel to the chronic low-price problem we have for oil. Prices for producers, all along the electricity supply chain, fall too low. Of course, consumers don’t complain about this problem. The electricity system also becomes more fragile, as we depend to an ever greater extent on electricity supplies that may or may not be available at a reasonable price at a given point in time. The full extent of the problem doesn’t become apparent immediately, either. We end up with both the electrical and oil systems speeding in the direction of collapse, while most observers are saying, “But prices aren’t high. How can there possibly be a problem?”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Can We Escape Control of The Wire?

November 18, 2018 / 1 Comment on Can We Escape Control of The Wire?

Can We Escape Control of The Wire?

“He’ll See Everything! He’ll See the Big Board!“
— Dr. Strangelove

What is The Wire?

Why is it so important?

Who controls it?

Answer those three questions and you can answer a number of problems plaguing our world today.

The Wire is simply a metaphor for the transmission of information. The Wire takes many forms. And if you aren’t sure whether something is The Wire just ask if you have control over it or not.

The Internet? The Wire.

Electricity? The Wire

Roads? The Wire.

Media? The Wire.

Money? The Wire.

In short, The Wire is the main conduit through which we communicate with each other. Money? Really? Yes, really. What are prices if not information about what we are willing to part with our money in exchange for?

Without The Wire modern society fails. So, government can’t shut it down but neither can it allow unconstrained access to it.

Electricity, commerce, communications, everything, goes over The Wire.

This isn’t a radical concept but like all important ideas, once it is presented to you you can’t unsee it.

But, identifying The Wire isn’t the important thing. What’s important is knowing who controls The Wire and what they are willing to do to maintain that control.

If you look at all of the things listed above you will see massive government intervention into these markets. They need control of them to maintain the illusion they have control over you.

They sell you on the idea that speech, speed, education, commerce, defense, information, etc. all need to have sensible limits placed on them. But do they really or is this just yet another example of some jackass talking his book?

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Our Delusional Economy Is Poised To Slam Into The Brick Wall Of Reality

September 29, 2018

dailyhaha

Our Delusional Economy Is Poised To Slam Into The Brick Wall Of Reality

Will you thrive, merely survive, or fail?

While life has always been uncertain, today our choices matter more than ever. The decisions each of us make today will determine if we thrive, merely survive, or fail during the future time of upheaval ahead.

The window of opportunity to change course for humanity is all but closed. There’s simpply no more time to hope that somehow, magically, the world’s entire energy complex will suddently evolve to a bountiful and sustainable new plane — whether by market forces, by maverick billionaires like Elon Musk, or by happy accident.

As we hammer home constantly here at Peak Prosperity, energy is everything. Without it, our society simply can’t function.

And it’s critical to appreciate that it takes an investment of energy to migrate from energy solution to another.

Imagine you heat your house with wood, but want to switch to a forced air gas furnace. Is there energy involved in doing so? You bet there is. Besides the obvious new need for natural gas, there’s a huge amount of embodied energy in the manufacture and installation of your new furnace, all the duct work, and the delivery lines that will bring the gas to the furnace. Further, there will be electricity required to force the air from the furnace, through the ducts, and into your house.

The same is true when making transitions at the national level. What’s involved in the much larger projects of switching industrial agriculture away from the fossil fuel driven process of plowing, planting, fertilizing, irrigating, harvesting, drying or cooling, and then transporting food from the field to your table?

At each stage there’s an enormous amount of energy infrastructure that needs to be rebuilt and reconfigured to run on “something else.” Let’s examine the current dream that we’ll switchover to powering all of our farming needs with electricity.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The impacts of electrification – the example of France

September 28, 2018

The impacts of electrification – the example of France

A number of “100% renewable” studies foresee wholesale electrification as the best way to cut emissions. In this post I compare load curves from three European countries where electric heating is not widely used (Spain, Germany and Poland) with one where it is (France). The annual load curves for Spain, Germany and Poland do not show large seasonal load variations or high winter peak loads, but because of electric heating the load curve for France shows both large seasonal variations and a strong winter peak. France’s electric heaters will therefore have offset a substantial tonnage of CO2 emissions at the expense of making the grid more difficult to manage. Considerations such as the performance of France’s nuclear fleet and the impact of France’s electric heaters on “demand response” are also discussed.

Figure 1 shows the locations of the four countries considered. They have a combined population of 235 million, a combined GDP of $8.1 trillion and cover an area of 1.8 million square kilometers:

Figure 1: Country locations

A few basic statistics are listed in Table 1 for reference:

As discussed in numerous previous posts, matching electricity supply to demand (load) 24/365 in a country where a high fraction of generation is provided by intermittent renewables is problematic if not impossible. Regardless of the generation mix, however, the problem will usually be lessened if the annual load curve does not show significant seasonal variations. Three of the four countries considered, Poland, Spain and Germany, show no large seasonal variations except during the Christmas/New Year holiday season in Germany. (All the data used in this post are from the P-F Bach hourly data for 2015except where otherwise specified:)

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Assembly Bill 100 and a 100% renewable California

September 12, 2018

Assembly Bill 100 and a 100% renewable California

The California legislature just passed Assembly Bill 100 (AB100), which according to the inset calls for “100% clean energy by 2045”. The brief review presented in this post shows that AB100, which targets electricity, not energy, will cut California’s greenhouse gas emissions by only about 16% even in the unlikely event its target is met. Its main impact will be to add to the regulatory overload from which California’s electricity providers already suffer. The fact that the bill was passed at all indicates that California legislators, as well as being unable to tell the difference between megawatts and megawatt-hours, are also unable to tell the difference between electricity and energy.

AB100 (Senate version SB100) is California’s latest attempt to convert its dream of a 100% clean, renewable and sustainable energy future into reality. Media outlets were near-unanimous in concluding that it finally commits California to 100% renewable energy:

Los Angeles Times: The bill …. would require California to obtain 100% of its power from clean sources by 2045

Forbes: California has approved a measure requiring all energy used in the sunshine state to be from renewable sources by 2045

ZME Science: Last week, California’s legislators passed Senate Bill 100, a bill to power the state exclusively on clean energy

Even Senator Kevin de León, who introduced the bill, claims on his website that AB100 will power the state on “100% clean, renewable energy”. California Senate President pro Tempore Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) on Tuesday introduced Senate Bill 100, The California Clean Energy Act of 2017, which puts the state on the path to 100 percent clean, renewable energy by 2045. If the politician responsible for drafting AB100 believes this we can assume that the 42 other California legislators who voted for it don’t understand the difference between electricity and energy either.

Here is what AB100 actually says. The text from which the following extracts are taken is here:

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Uncomfortable Hiatus

September 3, 2018

The Uncomfortable Hiatus

And so the sun seems to stand still this last day before the resumption of business-as-usual, and whatever remains of labor in this sclerotic republic takes its ease in the ominous late summer heat, and the people across this land marinate in anxious uncertainty. What can be done?

Some kind of epic national restructuring is in the works. It will either happen consciously and deliberately or it will be forced on us by circumstance. One side wants to magically reenact the 1950s; the other wants a Gnostic transhuman utopia. Neither of these is a plausible outcome. Most of the arguments ranging around them are what Jordan Peterson calls “pseudo issues.” Let’s try to take stock of what the real issues might be.

Energy: The shale oil “miracle” was a stunt enabled by supernaturally low interest rates, i.e. Federal Reserve policy. Even The New York Times said so yesterday (The Next Financial Crisis Lurks Underground). For all that, the shale oil producers still couldn’t make money at it. If interest rates go up, the industry will choke on the debt it has already accumulated and lose access to new loans. If the Fed reverses its current course — say, to rescue the stock and bond markets — then the shale oil industry has perhaps three more years before it collapses on a geological basis, maybe less. After that, we’re out of tricks. It will affect everything.

The perceived solution is to run all our stuff on electricity, with the electricity produced by other means than fossil fuels, so-called alt energy. This will only happen on the most limited basis and perhaps not at all. (And it is apart from the question of the decrepit electric grid itself.) What’s required is a political conversation about how we inhabit the landscape, how we do business, and what kind of business we do.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Caught in a Trap of Our Own Making: Climate Change, Blame, and Denial

June 25, 2018

Caught in a Trap of Our Own Making: Climate Change, Blame, and Denial

Photo by Marco Verch | CC BY 2.0

Come morning, I throw my covers aside, throw my legs over the edge of the bed, turn on my bedside lamp, turn on my bedside radio for a first dose of the daily news, then pull on some clothes and head for the kitchen to get a pot of coffee going. That done, it’s time to turn on my computer and pick my way through the latest reports on all things climate.

Put another way, I start my climate-oriented day by doing my bit to heat the planet just a little more, simply because everything from my bedside lamp and radio to my kitchen stove and computer are powered by electricity.

Electricity where I live is powered by coal. So, here I sit, typing these words into a coal-fired computer, sipping coffee heated on a coal-fired stove, listening to news and music on a coal-fired radio, effectively pushing atmospheric CO2 density higher than the normal background levels that have kept the planet from being too cold to support Life. It boils down to my own daily creation of too much of an otherwise good thing.

I do all this knowing full well that I’m adding to the increasing risk for things that many people care about deeply, including children going outdoors to play and adults going outdoors to work. A team led by the University of Hawaii’s Camilo Mora cites evidence that “it is unlikely that human physiology will evolve the necessary higher heat tolerance, highlighting that outdoor conditions will remain deadly.”

Mora has since said, “What we’re understanding is that the human body is actually very sensitive to heat, and that suggests pretty much everybody’s at risk. ” He went on to warn that “This is coming at our doors right now.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

China’s Global Electricity Takeover

June 14, 2018

China’s Global Electricity Takeover

Powered by low-cost state-funded capital

There has been no shortage of stories recently about looming trade wars and foreign investments with questionable implications for national security. But the business press recently took notice of one particularly large investment number: $452 billion. This is the amount China’s state controlled power companies have invested abroad over the past five years.

The list of actual and potential Chinese utility investment locations includes Pakistan, Russia, Nigeria, Brazil, Chile, Portugal, Philippines, Germany, and the UK.

Roughly one third of this almost half a trillion dollars of investment relates to power transmission projects. The Chinese are exporting their ultra-high voltage transmission technology. This, supposedly, is the secret of China’s technology-export success. Generally speaking, moving bulk electricity at higher voltages reduces line losses, which in turn reduces the cost of transmission.

Transmission expenses, however, account for slightly less than 10% of end-use electricity costs, a relatively small piece of cost of the final product. A typical high voltage transmission line experiences losses of about 4% on average. An ultra-high voltage line brings losses down to about 1%. But reducing losses in this fashion requires more capital. Obtaining meaningful savings elsewhere in the power production process should count for far more.

In the semi-deregulated power markets common nowadays, transmission operators run the power grid – somewhat like policemen at a busy intersection directing traffic. Although only minor government functionaries, those directing traffic have a considerable amount power. They decide who proceeds and who shall have extra time to respond to text messages. In the context of the power transmission grid, grid operators as traffic cops have a considerable amount of power and responsibility. For this reason, some local authorities have been reticent about ceding this vital function to Chinese investment and control.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Puerto Rico: Hurricane destroyed wind, solar. Plus five months on, 15% still blacked out.

February 28, 2018

Puerto Rico: Hurricane destroyed wind, solar. Plus five months on, 15% still blacked out.

In South Australia, when the lights went out, Olympic Dam took two entire weeks to get operational again. Spare a thought for those in Puerto Rico. Right now, five months later, and one in 6 still don’t have electricity. That’s five full months of blackout – surviving off candles, car batteries, small diesels and whatever anyone can get. Some people will be waiting til May. Though that’s “95%” connected, so still no joy or lights, for one in 20 people. How do you put a roof back on your house when you can’t even power up your drill? (See The Atlantics photo montage from January 27th to get some idea of what life is like, months after the storm).

Puerto Rico has 3.6 million people, was poor and corrupt, with failing infrastructure and huge debts before Hurricane Maria hit on Sept 20th. The government has a budget of $10b per year, but owes more than $70b. The hurricane wiped out 80% of the infrastructure, completely trashing some of the solar and wind “farms”, and bringing down transmission lines.

The remains of one solar plant:

Solar Panels, damaged, Puerto Rico, Hurricane Maria.

…

See the complete destruction here:

Brett Adair with Live Storms Media

One wind farm that survived the hurricane sat idle for weeks because there was no grid running and a wind farm can’t start a grid up (so much for microgrid resilience). Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, or PREPA had oil powered generation plants which were 44 years old on average, and not surprisingly (with no access to coal or nuclear power) the people paid very high electricity rates. Government entities and a few chosen private industries got it for free though.

Puerto Rico in the Caribbean was right in the path.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Getting real with renewable energy

February 19, 2018

Getting real with renewable energy

(Vermont Digger) Editor’s note: This commentary is by Steve Comeau, a business intelligence developer in South Burlington, VT who designs and builds databases, reports and data visualization for the manufacturing industry. Vermont has set a statewide goal of powering 90 percent of its economy with renewable energy by 2050.

Many people believe that 100 percent of our electricity can come from renewable energy. Such a goal is not only unachievable, it also diverts action from realistic strategies that will benefit the environment and our energy future.

Electric utilities in Vermont try hard to present an image of being green and providing clean energy. But since the electricity that we use is part of a large interconnected system, it is better to think regionally instead of locally. Vermont is connected to the New England electric grid operated by ISO New England. It is this regional electricity grid that really matters when examining the environmental impact of the electricity that we use.

The ISO New England website provides real-time charts and trends that show the electricity generation fuel mix, system loading, and wholesale prices that are occurring in New England. This real-time data provides insight into the operation of this amazing electrical machine known as the electrical grid.

A vision of 100 percent renewable energy is a denial of the physics and engineering of the electrical grid.

The grid delivers reliable electricity to local utilities at the correct voltage and frequency, while the electrical load constantly changes throughout the day in the short term, and changes seasonally in the longer term. Maintaining a stable grid is a huge challenge that requires the coordination of hundreds of generators throughout New England to match demand across a wide geographic area. Power is also imported to the New England grid from Quebec, New Brunswick and New York state.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Tag Archives: electricity

Content

Post categories

Economic Links

Energy/Resource Links

Environmental Links

Geopolitical Links

Liberty Links

News Links

Other Links

Survival Skills

Post Archives by Category

Post navigation

Latest Posts