What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

climate change times are a changin'

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: climate change times are a changin'

unofan said:
Headed off, as in past tense. In economics terms, a sunk cost.
Click to expand...

The capital could've been put into a fossil fuel turbine or a wind turbine. It was put into the wind turbine. The fossil plant wasn't build.

What'll we build next? Good question. Show me storage tech and I'll readily listen to solar and wind. Until then, the lights have to come on 24/7/365.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

Slap Shot said:
... my office building having backup generators in case of a power outage?
Click to expand...

Honestly, those are a TERRIBLE environmental choice.
Most are unmonitored and very dirty* relative to the average fossil fuel plant.


*Even with the new TIER 4 requirements on diesel engines.
 
The Sicatoka said:
The capital could've been put into a fossil fuel turbine or a wind turbine. It was put into the wind turbine. The fossil plant wasn't build.
Click to expand...

Right, it wasn't built. Past tense. Since that wind power is already accounted for, it doesn't have any bearing on replacing the next potential coal power plant as load and demand increase and new generation is required.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

unofan said:
Right, it wasn't built. Past tense. Since that wind power is already accounted for, it doesn't have any bearing on replacing the next potential coal power plant as load and demand increase and new generation is required.
Click to expand...

2012 is an arbitrary number for what counts and doesn't for the CPP. Why not 2010? 2008?

In ND it appears to have been picked to discount/ignore the work already done. For example Minnkota Power already has 30% (of total gen cap) wind generation. None of that counts.
 
The Sicatoka said:
2012 is an arbitrary number for what counts and doesn't for the CPP. Why not 2010? 2008?

In ND it appears to have been picked to discount/ignore the work already done. For example Minnkota Power already has 30% (of total gen cap) wind generation. None of that counts.
Click to expand...

Looks to me, from browsing the final rule, that they want the plans implemented by 2022, so giving credit from 2012 on is an even 10 years.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

unofan said:
Looks to me, from browsing the final rule, that they want the plans implemented by 2022, so giving credit from 2012 on is an even 10 years.
Click to expand...

2022 is another arbitrary number, as is 10 years.

I get suspicious when I see these arbitrary numbers coincidentally cut out some major wind farms that came on line in ND.
 
The Sicatoka said:
2022 is another arbitrary number, as is 10 years.

I get suspicious when I see these arbitrary numbers coincidentally cut out some major wind farms that came on line in ND.
Click to expand...

Yes, because when implementing a plan that affects all 50 states, I'm sure there was a conspiracy to specifically screw over North Dakota.

When did you join forces with flaggy?
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

unofan said:
Yes, because when implementing a plan that affects all 50 states, I'm sure there was a conspiracy to specifically screw over North Dakota.
Click to expand...

The other piece of the puzzle you may be unaware of (that gets me asking questions):

In the draft of CPP, ND was slated to have to meet an 11% reduction by 2030.
In the final (unvetted, surprise to everyone but the authors) version that had been raised to 45%. <-- There's no current tech available to meet that.

Changes like that, out of the blue, makes one somewhat skeptical. (Cynical? Snarky? All the above?)
 
Last edited:
Re: climate change times are a changin'

Slap Shot said:
I'm sure the sun doesn't always shine nor does the wind always blow in the thousands of other locations already setup to harness either. Pretty sure they account for that when building said facilities. What's next - my office building having backup generators in case of a power outage? I know crazy talk...
Click to expand...

How do you account for that? Thats the issue. Plants just don't fire up and they don't make money idling. Wind farms are all over the mountains in Maine, be really nice to know what they actually generate instead of the BS it will run the average home for 20 years crap they spew.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

walrus said:
How do you account for that? Thats the issue. Plants just don't fire up and they don't make money idling. Wind farms are all over the mountains in Maine, be really nice to know what they actually generate instead of the BS it will run the average home for 20 years crap they spew.
Click to expand...

Colorado Springs Utilities seems to have no problem firing up a third plant on peak demand days that exceed the capacity of their two primary plants.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

jerphisch said:
Colorado Springs Utilities seems to have no problem firing up a third plant on peak demand days that exceed the capacity of their two primary plants.
Click to expand...

Natural gas plant? It takes awhile from cold to operation. Not sure how they are doing it but in Maine utilities don't own the generation facilities
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

walrus said:
Natural gas plant? It takes awhile from cold to operation. Not sure how they are doing it but in Maine utilities don't own the generation facilities
Click to expand...

Yes it's an old coal converted to natural gas. I'm not sure how they managed to keep it ready to go on peak days, I worked on the business side when I was there so I just know what the concept was :)
 
walrus said:
Natural gas plant? It takes awhile from cold to operation. Not sure how they are doing it but in Maine utilities don't own the generation facilities
Click to expand...

Depends on if they are using the the NG to create steam or the combustion product to drive the turbines.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

Almington said:
Depends on if they are using the the NG to create steam or the combustion product to drive the turbines.
Click to expand...
Mostly steam around here I believe, turbines would come up pretty quick though.

I'm all for whatever alternate energy sources work, I think the offshore wind project in gulf of Maine could be a game changer if they can figure out how to be reliable. Pretty nasty weather out there. The turbines on land I'm skeptical about.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

jerphisch said:
Colorado Springs Utilities seems to have no problem firing up a third plant on peak demand days that exceed the capacity of their two primary plants.
Click to expand...

It's probably a natural gas (NG) fired turbine. Those fire up quickly and are fast to shut down. They run like a jet engine on an airplane.

Most large plants (fossil or nuclear) are based on a steam plant. It takes 24 or more hours to bring those up or shut those down.

Oh, and the Sierra Club is on record saying after they take out coal, NG is next on their hit list.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top