ERCOT Urging For Energy Conservation

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Captainant said:

If only you could click through and read the article to see that its about the 2021 freeze and blackout and massive profit taking by NG firms during the induced blackout. 

No. Your post indicates the article is shit. What are “NG firms”?  Producers had zero choice in the matter of “massive profit taking”. 

[Captainant 27677]

26 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

No. Your post indicates the article is shit. What are “NG firms”?  Producers had zero choice in the matter of “massive profit taking”. 

The lawsuit filed and evidence backed claims by the 25-year energy trader would disagree with your assertion. If you care to, there's a four part investigative series on it. But idk why you're so defensive, its not like you were the ghoul choosing to goose profits while a couple hundred Texans froze to death in their homes. 

From the 3rd part of the investigative series by the Houston Chronicle:

Quote

“Aggravating an already stressed market, on the morning of February 16, 2021, Macquarie entered into an economically irrational natural gas trade in which it purchased natural gas for next-day delivery within Southern Star at the single highest price ever paid for Southern Star natural gas,” the suit alleges. “The trade was not a fiasco for Macquarie, but instead a resounding financial success — because the actual effect … was to manipulate the Platts Southern Star Gas Daily price for February 17, 2021, upwards.”

Macquarie had positioned itself to sell gas on Feb. 17 and made enormous profits at the expense of other traders and gas customers, including Kansas homeowners, Kobach alleges. Days after the storm, Macquarie announced in a press release that it would show a profit thanks to the storm for its fiscal year that ended in 2021.

PROFITS IN TRAGEDY: Winners, losers emerge from Texas' historic winter storm

Executives credited “higher income … driven by (natural gas) inventory management” in North America, a bullet point in the company’s May 7, 2022 presentation reported. Net profits from the sector totaled $317 million, up 50 percent, and constituted all the company’s profits for the year, a financial analysis showed.

So there's a shitload of attorneys general suing various NG firms that have been winning or forcing them to settle. There's several filings highlighted in the article I link in this post, I encourage you to challenge your assumptions about the morality of your industrial peers trading anonymous lives for personal profit

[Parliament 14260]

10 hours ago, miguelito said:

The important takeaway today is that a lot of rich people made a shitload of money. 

Thank you, by the way.

[Dahobbs 17534]

12 hours ago, miguelito said:

The important takeaway today is that a lot of rich people made a shitload of money. 

To be fair, some rich people lost a lot money too. 

[SydneyCarton 48107]

9 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

Harris county needs to join the national grid. Problem solved 

Connecting to the national grid makes sense, don't get me wrong. But everyone thinks that's a massive fix, but it's not. No one here ever talks about or even grasps this concept called Load Loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load-loss_factor

 

I hate math, I suck at it, and this is well beyond my pay grade. But what I can say, generally, is that if you put in a megawatt of wind power into the grid in Lubbuck, that shit isn't making it's way to Houston. That electricity will disappear in the powerlines before it gets there. It's why regional power stations are a necessity. Now, I don't know what the actual loss is over distance, but it's a real fucking thing. So connecting to the US grid isn't helping Houston ever if something goes wrong. 

It's also a problem with everyone who screams about wind power wind power wind power. Building more wind power in the panhandle...isn't helping Houston. Ditto solar. It helps Dallas. No power generator or operator, like ERCOT, is going to spend the money for a gallon of gasoline to get 1/10th of a tank of gas to someone in Houston, as a crude example. 

Build some wind farms in the Gulf of Mexico, that'd help Houston. Or fucking nuclear plants, which will never fucking happen in this system. 

[tx 3 putt 76970]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

Connecting to the national grid makes sense, don't get me wrong. But everyone thinks that's a massive fix, but it's not. No one here ever talks about or even grasps this concept called Load Loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load-loss_factor

 

I hate math, I suck at it, and this is well beyond my pay grade. But what I can say, generally, is that if you put in a megawatt of wind power into the grid in Lubbuck, that shit isn't making it's way to Houston. That electricity will disappear in the powerlines before it gets there. It's why regional power stations are a necessity. Now, I don't know what the actual loss is over distance, but it's a real fucking thing. So connecting to the US grid isn't helping Houston ever if something goes wrong. 

It's also a problem with everyone who screams about wind power wind power wind power. Building more wind power in the panhandle...isn't helping Houston. Ditto solar. It helps Dallas. No power generator or operator, like ERCOT, is going to spend the money for a gallon of gasoline to get 1/10th of a tank of gas to someone in Houston, as a crude example. 

Build some wind farms in the Gulf of Mexico, that'd help Houston. Or fucking nuclear plants, which will never fucking happen in this system. 

isn’t transmission the main issue with the Texas power grid ?

[SydneyCarton 48107]

1 minute ago, tx 3 putt said:

isn’t transmission the main issue with the Texas power grid ?

That's like asking me if the main problem with Aggies is that they go to Fish Camp. There are a myriad of issues.

There's no engineering or technological advancement, at this point, that is going to eliminate load loss in power lines. At least not cost effectively, but fuck, there might not be one at all. I don't know, I'm not an engineer. Load Loss exists in every state, everywhere in the world, honeslty. It's not some Texas problem becuase we have "bad transmission."

What is a problem is that Texas is about 1/3 the size of the entire continental US. That's a big fucking state, and a lot of it is empty AF. There's shockingly less issue getting electricity from point A to point B from a power station in fucking Deleware. That is just geographic fact. 

[tx 3 putt 76970]

Except for a hurricane threat, the area around Winnie is prime for a mega power plant to power Houston. Lot of land that will never be developed 

[SydneyCarton 48107]

19 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Except for a hurricane threat, the area around Winnie is prime for a mega power plant to power Houston. Lot of land that will never be developed 

Oh, except for that one thing that is an existential threat, looks to get worse every single year for the rest of our lives, and you expect some actuary to say "Yeah, this is a good idea to invest billions and billions of dollars on..." Ok. Everyone's all about those concepts when it isn't their money being invested. In that way, it's sort of like fucking NIL. 

[tx 3 putt 76970]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

Oh, except for that one thing that is an existential threat, looks to get worse every single year for the rest of our lives, and you expect some actuary to say "Yeah, this is a good idea to invest billions and billions of dollars on..." Ok. Everyone's all about those concepts when it isn't their money being invested. In that way, it's sort of like fucking NIL. 

If lng plants can mitigate that risk, power plants can too 

[SydneyCarton 48107]

Just now, tx 3 putt said:

If lng plants can mitigate that risk, power plants can too 

How are LNG plants at risk from a hurricane? The underwater pipelines? They aren't literally based on a technology that is designed to be high as fuck in the air and catch the wind. 

[MissingInAction 25082]

I lost a load in South Austin's mom.

Edited August 18, 2023 by MissingInAction

[Dahobbs 17534]

37 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Connecting to the national grid makes sense, don't get me wrong. But everyone thinks that's a massive fix, but it's not. No one here ever talks about or even grasps this concept called Load Loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load-loss_factor

 

I hate math, I suck at it, and this is well beyond my pay grade. But what I can say, generally, is that if you put in a megawatt of wind power into the grid in Lubbuck, that shit isn't making it's way to Houston. That electricity will disappear in the powerlines before it gets there. It's why regional power stations are a necessity. Now, I don't know what the actual loss is over distance, but it's a real fucking thing. So connecting to the US grid isn't helping Houston ever if something goes wrong. 

It's also a problem with everyone who screams about wind power wind power wind power. Building more wind power in the panhandle...isn't helping Houston. Ditto solar. It helps Dallas. No power generator or operator, like ERCOT, is going to spend the money for a gallon of gasoline to get 1/10th of a tank of gas to someone in Houston, as a crude example. 

Build some wind farms in the Gulf of Mexico, that'd help Houston. Or fucking nuclear plants, which will never fucking happen in this system. 

It isn't quite that bad. Worldwide, there a number of ultra high voltage lines that extend over 1,000 miles. And you have a number of high voltage lines in the US that are hundreds of miles. There are losses, but it isn't anything like 90%. 

[SydneyCarton 48107]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

It isn't quite that bad. Worldwide, there a number of ultra high voltage lines that extend over 1,000 miles. And you have a number of high voltage lines in the US that are hundreds of miles. There are losses, but it isn't anything like 90%. 

I literally qualified my post by saying Im not an engineer, I hate math, and I had no idea what the actual load loss was, dude. What I do know is I work with a fuck ton of guys who do know this shit backwards and forwards and theirs is the opinions I have co-opted. That being said, you're suggesting there are a ton of high voltage lines that extend over 1,000 miles without a substation in between them? Because I'll tell you the average distance around here between long distance substations is a few hundred miles. 

I'm pretty much checking out of this conversation now. I've given you guys some perspective on something I never see discussed here. I'm going back to the Ukraine thread, and maybe do some work. 

[Dahobbs 17534]

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I literally qualified my post by saying Im not an engineer, I hate math, and I had no idea what the actual load loss was, dude. What I do know is I work with a fuck ton of guys who do know this shit backwards and forwards and theirs is the opinions I have co-opted. That being said, you're suggesting there are a ton of high voltage lines that extend over 1,000 miles without a substation in between them? Because I'll tell you the average distance around here between long distance substations is a few hundred miles. 

I'm pretty much checking out of this conversation now. I've given you guys some perspective on something I never see discussed here. I'm going back to the Ukraine thread, and maybe do some work. 

Woah, calm down. I'm not attacking you. I'm just saying that while it is definitely a problem, let's not exaggerate the extent of it. Long distance transmission is definitely possible without getting extraordinary losses. Getting power from Lubbock to Houston (500 miles) isn't an impossible task. I think the longest distance line we have in the US is like 800 miles. Unfortunately, we don't have any ultra high voltage lines, and we'd need those if we really wanted to carry electricity across the country. And our existing lines are really fucking old (which is going to increase losses). 

[SydneyCarton 48107]

10 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Woah, calm down. I'm not attacking you. I'm just saying that while it is definitely a problem, let's not exaggerate the extent of it. Long distance transmission is definitely possible without getting extraordinary losses. Getting power from Lubbock to Houston (500 miles) isn't an impossible task. I think the longest distance line we have in the US is like 800 miles. Unfortunately, we don't have any ultra high voltage lines, and we'd need those if we really wanted to carry electricity across the country. And our existing lines are really fucking old (which is going to increase losses). 

I'm calm dude. I use profanity like every 4th word, it's not necessarily an indicator of my mood or mindset at any given time.

I'm not pissed off, at all, but inevitably whenever these threads pop up, and I show up to offer insight, it inevitably turns into some dynamic where it appears like I'm defending the state of the Texas grid, which is not exactly a position I want to be in or believe in, but it always appears that way when I share my limited knowledge and perspective on how some things work. And at the end of the day, that's not how I want to spend all that much of my time on this website doing.

That being said, you have basically agreed with me that to do the things you want to do, they do not exist in Texas at the moment, due to technology and old technology. And desptie an Infrastructure Act that has passed, I'm skeptical how much of that will be used to improve our grid. And even if those resources were used for ultra high voltage lines, now you're talking time for project implentation and installation. So probably like a decade away. So as I've said in other threads...look at the Texas politicians. 

Edited August 18, 2023 by SydneyCarton

[Brisketexan 105147]

2 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

Connecting to the national grid makes sense, don't get me wrong. But everyone thinks that's a massive fix, but it's not. No one here ever talks about or even grasps this concept called Load Loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load-loss_factor

 

I hate math, I suck at it, and this is well beyond my pay grade. But what I can say, generally, is that if you put in a megawatt of wind power into the grid in Lubbuck, that shit isn't making it's way to Houston. That electricity will disappear in the powerlines before it gets there. It's why regional power stations are a necessity. Now, I don't know what the actual loss is over distance, but it's a real fucking thing. So connecting to the US grid isn't helping Houston ever if something goes wrong. 

It's also a problem with everyone who screams about wind power wind power wind power. Building more wind power in the panhandle...isn't helping Houston. Ditto solar. It helps Dallas. No power generator or operator, like ERCOT, is going to spend the money for a gallon of gasoline to get 1/10th of a tank of gas to someone in Houston, as a crude example. 

Build some wind farms in the Gulf of Mexico, that'd help Houston. Or fucking nuclear plants, which will never fucking happen in this system. 

 

1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

I'm calm dude. I use profanity like every 4th word, it's not necessarily an indicator of my mood or mindset at any given time.

I'm not pissed off, at all, but inevitably whenever these threads pop up, and I show up to offer insight, it inevitably turns into some dynamic where it appears like I'm defending the state of the Texas grid, which is not exactly a position I want to be in or believe in, but it always appears that way when I share my limited knowledge and perspective on how some things work. And at the end of the day, that's not how I want to spend all that much of my time on this website doing.

That being said, you have basically agreed with me that to do the things you want to do, they do not exist in Texas at the moment, due to technology and old technology. And desptie an Infrastructure Act that has passed, I'm skeptical how much of that will be used to improve our grid. And even if those resources were used for ultra high voltage lines, now you're talking time for project implentation and installation. So probably like a decade away. So as I've said in other threads...look at the Texas politicians. 

I certainly think that some Gulf wind farms, maybe even some wave generation, should be on the table.  But on the nuclear front, some good news:

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dows-seadrift-texas-location-selected-for-x-energy-advanced-smr-nuclear-project-to-deliver-safe-reliable-zero-carbon-emissions-power-and-steam-production-301821847.html

Looks like it would be a 200MW generation asset, on-site at Seadrift, to power the site.  Which means that it would free up 200MW of generation elsewhere that the site would no longer need to draw upon...so, maybe more generation is freed up to be available for Houston to draw upon.  I have high hopes (founded on nothing, because we always find a way to go "full stupid") for SMR technology.

As for transmission, yes, there's some energy loss, but several hundred mile transmission happens regularly.  And again, the fungibility issue.  If windpower from the Panhandle can serve Dallas's demand, then the more central and eastern resources that might have gone to serve Dallas are now freed up to serve load in central and east Texas.  The issues with transmission in Texas aren't really loss of power in transmission -- they are that we don't have enough transmission capacity in the necessary places yet.  Metaphor: when the road to get power from W. Texas to the rest of the state is two-lane blacktop, and we build a fleet of 1,000 trucks to ship it....there's a traffic jam, and only so many of those trucks can get to the destination when they are needed.  We need to be building an 8-lane highway.  Which takes planning, time, and money.  And yes, there's lots of dueling interests, business and political, that complicate the process.

TLDR; we need more generation/energy storage (which functions as "insurance" for the times that demand spikes).  We need more robust transmission infrastructure.  But we built a grid that rewards and incentivizes scarcity (which reaps great financial rewards for certain players).  What we NEED and what we have DESIGNED are largely at odds with each other.

Edited August 18, 2023 by Brisketexan

[Post Oak 20215]

Dow is putting in a SMR facility in Seadrift.

Dow and X-energy to build U.S. Gulf Coast nuclear demonstration plant

Spoiler

WASHINGTON, March 1 (Reuters) - Dow Inc (DOW.N) and private company X-energy said on Wednesday they have agreed to develop and demonstrate the first grid-scale next-generation nuclear reactor for an industrial site in North America.

The X-energy Xe-100 plant featuring four high-temperature, gas-cooled reactors is set to be built at one of Dow's sites on the U.S. Gulf Coast. The companies plan to finalize the location this year.

Nuclear reactor developers want to build a new generation of atomic plants that are smaller than today's, but if successful, could be used in a wide variety of settings from industrial plants to rural towns to help transition off fossil fuels that emit large amounts of greenhouse gases.

 

Backers of next-generation nuclear reactors, including the Biden administration, say the technology is crucial to fight climate change. Critics say they are more expensive than renewable energy and energy storage technologies and take too long to develop.

The X-energy plant will provide a Dow facility with process heat and power to make products. Dow, a chemicals company, makes a wide variety of products including polyethylene used in packaging, paints, and foams.

 

"X-energy’s collaboration with Dow brings added significance because of the immense opportunity to further reduce emissions in the energy-intensive industrial sector," said X-energy Chief Executive Clay Sell.

The reactors would likely be fueled by high assay low enriched uranium, or HALEU, of which Russia is the only producer. U.S. company Centrus Energy Corp (LEU.A) is trying to produce a domestic source of HALEU.

 

The agreement includes up to $50 million for engineering work, up to half of which is eligible to be funded through the U.S. Department of Energy's Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program, and the other half by Dow. The companies will submit a construction application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

During the administration of Republican President Donald Trump in 2020, the Department of Energy selected X-energy to receive up to $1.2 billion in federal cost-shared funding to develop, license, build and demonstrate an operational advanced reactor and fuel fabrication facility by the end of the decade.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/dow-x-energy-build-us-gulf-coast-nuclear-demonstration-plant-2023-03-01/

 

 

 

[Brisketexan 105147]

8 minutes ago, Post Oak said:

Dow is putting in a SMR facility in Seadrift.

Dow and X-energy to build U.S. Gulf Coast nuclear demonstration plant

  Reveal hidden contents

WASHINGTON, March 1 (Reuters) - Dow Inc (DOW.N) and private company X-energy said on Wednesday they have agreed to develop and demonstrate the first grid-scale next-generation nuclear reactor for an industrial site in North America.

The X-energy Xe-100 plant featuring four high-temperature, gas-cooled reactors is set to be built at one of Dow's sites on the U.S. Gulf Coast. The companies plan to finalize the location this year.

Nuclear reactor developers want to build a new generation of atomic plants that are smaller than today's, but if successful, could be used in a wide variety of settings from industrial plants to rural towns to help transition off fossil fuels that emit large amounts of greenhouse gases.

 

Backers of next-generation nuclear reactors, including the Biden administration, say the technology is crucial to fight climate change. Critics say they are more expensive than renewable energy and energy storage technologies and take too long to develop.

The X-energy plant will provide a Dow facility with process heat and power to make products. Dow, a chemicals company, makes a wide variety of products including polyethylene used in packaging, paints, and foams.

 

"X-energy’s collaboration with Dow brings added significance because of the immense opportunity to further reduce emissions in the energy-intensive industrial sector," said X-energy Chief Executive Clay Sell.

The reactors would likely be fueled by high assay low enriched uranium, or HALEU, of which Russia is the only producer. U.S. company Centrus Energy Corp (LEU.A) is trying to produce a domestic source of HALEU.

 

The agreement includes up to $50 million for engineering work, up to half of which is eligible to be funded through the U.S. Department of Energy's Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program, and the other half by Dow. The companies will submit a construction application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

During the administration of Republican President Donald Trump in 2020, the Department of Energy selected X-energy to receive up to $1.2 billion in federal cost-shared funding to develop, license, build and demonstrate an operational advanced reactor and fuel fabrication facility by the end of the decade.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/dow-x-energy-build-us-gulf-coast-nuclear-demonstration-plant-2023-03-01/

 

 

 

[Biff Tannen 45690]

3 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

Except for a hurricane threat, the area around Winnie is prime for a mega power plant to power Houston. Lot of land that will never be developed 

 

3 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

Oh, except for that one thing that is an existential threat, looks to get worse every single year for the rest of our lives, and you expect some actuary to say "Yeah, this is a good idea to invest billions and billions of dollars on..." Ok. Everyone's all about those concepts when it isn't their money being invested. In that way, it's sort of like fucking NIL. 

I read his suggestion as a nuclear plant, but maybe I misunderstood.

[South Austin 52511]

Guys, guys . . . it's pronounced "nuc-u-ler."

[SydneyCarton 48107]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

 

I read his suggestion as a nuclear plant, but maybe I misunderstood.

Considering the context was wind, I assume he meant a windmill farm. He also liked my post, so...

[Biff Tannen 45690]

2 hours ago, South Austin said:

Guys, guys . . . it's pronounced "nuc-u-ler."

Ok Shrub

[utee94 15824]

Worst case scenario load loss across the entire state could hit maybe 15%.  That's transmission loss plus distribution loss.  Typically it would be less than 10% to go across something like 1000 miles.  But I mean, that's not peanuts.  That 10% drop could mean your power is going to cost you 20% more at the long end of the line, than it would cost you next to the generator.

Also, line losses increase with heat.  So Texas has that going for it, which is (not) nice.

 

[Beau Vine 54230]

5 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

To be fair, some rich people lost a lot money too. 

[YGIFS 19450]

36 minutes ago, utee94 said:

Worst case scenario load loss across the entire state could hit maybe 15%.  That's transmission loss plus distribution loss.  Typically it would be less than 10% to go across something like 1000 miles.  But I mean, that's not peanuts.  That 10% drop could mean your power is going to cost you 20% more at the long end of the line, than it would cost you next to the generator.

Also, line losses increase with heat.  So Texas has that going for it, which is (not) nice.

 

You say 'load loss' a lot.  I guess ambient heat above the pavement is hot, and limestone is hard to dig in/around, but I would think at some point somebody would have thought, "Hey, the lines up there........they're blasted by the sunlight with no shade.  But sadly, not high enough where  they're  not still blasted by ambient radiating heat from the roads/sidewalks below.  We could bury them and save money, outages, and improve maintenance safety in the long run.  Or...and hear me out...we could use those same funds and buy razor wire to keep out the people that could dig the lines we're worried about.  Just an idea."  

[Dahobbs 17534]

4 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

You say 'load loss' a lot.  I guess ambient heat above the pavement is hot, and limestone is hard to dig in/around, but I would think at some point somebody would have thought, "Hey, the lines up there........they're blasted by the sunlight with no shade.  But sadly, not high enough where  they're  not still blasted by ambient radiating heat from the roads/sidewalks below.  We could bury them and save money, outages, and improve maintenance safety in the long run.  Or...and hear me out...we could use those same funds and buy razor wire to keep out the people that could dig the lines we're worried about.  Just an idea."  

I don't think burying long distance transmission lines is feasible, either economically or technically. Cost is something on the order of 10-15x per mile. Typically when we talk about burying power lines, we are talking about burying local lines or small segments of higher voltage lines around a city or other obstacle that makes overhead lines undesirable. And you're certainly not solving a heat issue by burying them since it is harder to cool lines underground (the sun isn't the thing generating the vast majority of heat). 

[Armybrat 40850]

2 hours ago, South Austin said:

Guys, guys . . . it's pronounced "nuc-u-ler."

*nuc-yew-lar.

[YGIFS 19450]

22 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I don't think burying long distance transmission lines is feasible, either economically or technically. Cost is something on the order of 10-15x per mile. Typically when we talk about burying power lines, we are talking about burying local lines or small segments of higher voltage lines around a city or other obstacle that makes overhead lines undesirable. And you're certainly not solving a heat issue by burying them since it is harder to cool lines underground (the sun isn't the thing generating the vast majority of heat). 

Oh, I know it's costly.  I just know that other countries do it.  Countries that we pride ourselves on looking like, but not acting like.  But yeah, our urban sprawl is an issue too, the way our cities have grown outwards.  The cooling thing, I meant was the two-fold issue of our heavily paved-over areas plus sun.  But yeah, the actual self-generating heat is a thing.  But we can certainly solve for it in northern states.  Texas would be a huge fucking issue in that regard.  It also really comes down to safety as well.  But we're Texas, that's a pussy afterthought.  

[Brisketexan 105147]

26 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Oh, I know it's costly.  I just know that other countries do it.  Countries that we pride ourselves on looking like, but not acting like.  But yeah, our urban sprawl is an issue too, the way our cities have grown outwards.  The cooling thing, I meant was the two-fold issue of our heavily paved-over areas plus sun.  But yeah, the actual self-generating heat is a thing.  But we can certainly solve for it in northern states.  Texas would be a huge fucking issue in that regard.  It also really comes down to safety as well.  But we're Texas, that's a pussy afterthought.  

Yeah....long-distance transmission lines aren't buried anywhere that I'm aware of.   Maybe a few miles here and there, but worldwide, I'd bet 99%+  are aboveground.  It's just not economically feasible.

Even burying local lines, when it's a retro-fit (that is, they weren't buried during the initial infrastructure buildout when an area was developed) is rarely economically feasible.

I mean, we could incur the expense of burying all those lines, and pay 3X what we're paying now on our monthly bills, but I'm pretty sure Steve and Suzy Ratepayer ain't gonna cotton to that.

[fattyflattie 4639]

33 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Oh, I know it's costly.  I just know that other countries do it.  Countries that we pride ourselves on looking like, but not acting like.

We do it here, in nice places.  That’s exclusively what I’ve been doing since the week after the last election.   It is expensive but warranted in certain locales.  

[YGIFS 19450]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

We do it here, in nice places.  That’s exclusively what I’ve been doing since the week after the last election.   It is expensive but warranted in certain locales.  

Tall power lines going underground?  Damn Height People.  Wait, certain locales?  I meant, Damn White People.  

[Dahobbs 17534]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yeah....long-distance transmission lines aren't buried anywhere that I'm aware of.   Maybe a few miles here and there, but worldwide, I'd bet 99%+  are aboveground.  It's just not economically feasible.

Even burying local lines, when it's a retro-fit (that is, they weren't buried during the initial infrastructure buildout when an area was developed) is rarely economically feasible.

I mean, we could incur the expense of burying all those lines, and pay 3X what we're paying now on our monthly bills, but I'm pretty sure Steve and Suzy Ratepayer ain't gonna cotton to that.

Germany is apparently planning on building a 700km underground HVDC line. So I guess that counts. 

[fattyflattie 4639]

6 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Tall power lines going underground?  Damn Height People.  Wait, certain locales?  I meant, Damn White People.  

Lily white and sunkissed brown, in my experience.  

[Judge Roybeanbag 11819]

16 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yeah....long-distance transmission lines aren't buried anywhere that I'm aware of.   Maybe a few miles here and there, but worldwide, I'd bet 99%+  are aboveground.  It's just not economically feasible.

Even burying local lines, when it's a retro-fit (that is, they weren't buried during the initial infrastructure buildout when an area was developed) is rarely economically feasible.

I mean, we could incur the expense of burying all those lines, and pay 3X what we're paying now on our monthly bills, but I'm pretty sure Steve and Suzy Ratepayer ain't gonna cotton to that.

You know who buries their lines?  Google fiber and the cable companies.  Could there be some cost savings piggy backing on those efforts?  Nah.  Government wouldn’t be broken, if it was a joint cooperative effort with some successful outcome.  Who benefits when government is broken?  

[Dahobbs 17534]

1 minute ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

You know who buries their lines?  Google fiber and the cable companies.  Could there be some cost savings piggy backing on those efforts?  Nah.  Government wouldn’t be broken, if it was a joint cooperative effort with some successful outcome.  Who benefits when government is broken?  

That isn't the same thing at all. You don't need to stand back 20 ft from a downed fiber or coax cable line. I mean, fuck, google got in trouble with its buried fiber lines in Tenn I think because it basically just dropped them on the ground and covered them in a very small amount of dirt. You can't do that at all with a high voltage line.  For instance, buried high voltage lines need ample insulation and a ton of room for cooling, sometimes including water cooling.

[utee94 15824]

Lots of places bury the stepped down local distribution lines.  It's most common in modern subdivisions for obvious reasons.  

Pretty much nobody buries the long distance high voltage transmission lines, although there are a handful of HVDC installations in the US and, apparently, a proposed 800km one in Germany.

[Brisketexan 105147]

20 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

You know who buries their lines?  Google fiber and the cable companies.  Could there be some cost savings piggy backing on those efforts?  Nah.  Government wouldn’t be broken, if it was a joint cooperative effort with some successful outcome.  Who benefits when government is broken?  

 

14 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

That isn't the same thing at all. You don't need to stand back 20 ft from a downed fiber or coax cable line. I mean, fuck, google got in trouble with its buried fiber lines in Tenn I think because it basically just dropped them on the ground and covered them in a very small amount of dirt. You can't do that at all with a high voltage line.  For instance, buried high voltage lines need ample insulation and a ton of room for cooling, sometimes including water cooling.

Yep.  The "dig a big fat trench and cooperate on multiple buried utilities" works reasonably well for local utility lines.  For big-ass high voltage lines (which are 1) big, 2) carry unreal voltage, and 3) get hot as FUCK), not so much.

That's a big project in Germany (700 km of transmission being buried).  Of course, German energy decisions are often a solid combination of really stupid and really expensive, so that checks out.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11819]

26 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

That isn't the same thing at all. You don't need to stand back 20 ft from a downed fiber or coax cable line. I mean, fuck, google got in trouble with its buried fiber lines in Tenn I think because it basically just dropped them on the ground and covered them in a very small amount of dirt. You can't do that at all with a high voltage line.  For instance, buried high voltage lines need ample insulation and a ton of room for cooling, sometimes including water cooling.

Ok so let’s just continue to hang them up overhead, what could go wrong?

[Brisketexan 105147]

4 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Ok so let’s just continue to hang them up overhead, what could go wrong?

For transmission lines?  We've pretty much figured out what could go wrong, and we're pretty successful at guarding against it.  Massive outages becasue of transmission lines being in the open are pretty rare.  And the juice ain't worth the squeeze when it comes to burying them.

Local distribution lines?  That's a different story.  Treemageddon out front told us that.  Still, going in and retrofitting an area.....hey, all we have to do is pay for it.  If you want to double your electric bill or more, making all electric power transmission and distribution "bulletproof" is a great way to do that.  All it takes is money.  Lots, and lots, and lots of money.

[Dahobbs 17534]

Just now, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Ok so let’s just continue to hang them up overhead, what could go wrong?

I think overhead long distance high voltage lines, if correctly maintained, aren't a real problem. But, to the extent there is an issue, I'm just saying the answer is very unlikely to be to bury thousands of miles of high voltage lines. That's just not practical or necessary. Now, if you operate like PG&E and have 100 year old lines that are shoddily maintained in area prone to wild fires, yeah, that is going to cause a problem. 

[Dahobbs 17534]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

For transmission lines?  We've pretty much figured out what could go wrong, and we're pretty successful at guarding against it.  Massive outages becasue of transmission lines being in the open are pretty rare.  And the juice ain't worth the squeeze when it comes to burying them.

Local distribution lines?  That's a different story.  Treemageddon out front told us that.  Still, going in and retrofitting an area.....hey, all we have to do is pay for it.  If you want to double your electric bill or more, making all electric power transmission and distribution "bulletproof" is a great way to do that.  All it takes is money.  Lots, and lots, and lots of money.

Fuck, it cost me 10 grand just to bury the service drop to my house (totes worth it by the way). 

[utee94 15824]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

For transmission lines?  We've pretty much figured out what could go wrong, and we're pretty successful at guarding against it.  Massive outages becasue of transmission lines being in the open are pretty rare.  And the juice ain't worth the squeeze when it comes to burying them.

Local distribution lines?  That's a different story.  Treemageddon out front told us that.  Still, going in and retrofitting an area.....hey, all we have to do is pay for it.  If you want to double your electric bill or more, making all electric power transmission and distribution "bulletproof" is a great way to do that.  All it takes is money.  Lots, and lots, and lots of money.

I have an old boss who always said, "Speed costs money.  How fast do you want to go?"

 

Applies across a broad range of ideas and topics.  

Edited August 18, 2023 by utee94

[Brisketexan 105147]

Just now, utee94 said:

I have an old boss who always said, "Speed costs money.  How fast do you want to go?

 

Applies across a broad range of ideas and topics.  

Tried that in the bedroom the other night.

Results were.....mixed.

[royiv 9321]

Underground transmission line talk not going away.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11819]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I think overhead long distance high voltage lines, if correctly maintained, aren't a real problem. But, to the extent there is an issue, I'm just saying the answer is very unlikely to be to bury thousands of miles of high voltage lines. That's just not practical or necessary. Now, if you operate like PG&E and have 100 year old lines that are shoddily maintained in area prone to wild fires, yeah, that is going to cause a problem. 

I was just being surly.  No offense intended.   Although of all the horrible wildfires I’ve ever seen, most of them were started by, wait for it, overhead power lines.  Not to mention I grew up in the shadow of the STNP lines from Matagorda to Austin and have six testicles. 

[Brisketexan 105147]

Just now, Judge Roybeanbag said:

I was just being surly.  No offense intended.   Although of all the horrible wildfires I’ve ever seen, most of them were started by, wait for it, overhead power lines.  Not to mention I grew up in the shadow of the STNP lines from Matagorda to Austin and have six testicles. 

The four you keep in your mouth don't count.

[Armybrat 40850]

 About General Milley’s comments on US military drag shows, has he never crossed a geographic line with the pollywogs and witnessed what the Navy shellbacks are up to?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/18/gen-milley-ukraine-tuberville-wokeness/

 

 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11819]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The four you keep in your mouth don't count.

When I say it’s for all the marbles, I mean it!

[utee94 15824]

2 minutes ago, royiv said:

Underground transmission line talk not going away.

You're right, we shouldn't be discussing energy transmission on the Energy Conservation thread.

Tell me all about Charleston, South Carolina...