Jump to content

Fucking electric rates are nuts

Quagmire
 Share

Recommended Posts

royiv

royiv 9317

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Quagmire said:

 

My 2 year contract is up was at 9.1 now the cheapest I can find is 13.9

 

Getting sick of everything going up.

 

Fucking Energy Ogre moved me to a plan at 16.5 this week because my latest contract was up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
royiv

royiv 9317

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Quagmire said:


I just signed up with them hopefully they don’t do the same

I signed up for them last year after a bunch of recommendations I had seen here and on TOS. Haven’t really been impressed so far. They switched me only after I emailed them to ask the status as my contract was coming up and then didn’t ask for my approval on the new plan before just switching me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Enchubben

Enchubben 5510

Posted
Posted

No to fracking. No to drilling. Cancel the pipelines. Regulate LNG. Why is electricity and gas so expensive? lol

it’s not the winterization costs, fyi. Look at spot natural gas prices, which is the biggest driver for variation in electricity costs. Went from $4/mmbtu to $8 in 6 months, and it’s still rising. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paper_jam

Paper_jam 831

Posted
Posted

I keep hearing suggestions that high energy prices are because environmental nuts have killed production of fossil fuels. But based on the data I can find, domestic oil production is only a few percent down from it's high (2019): 
2018: 5,588,101,000 barrels of crude oil + petroleum products  
2019: 6,246,598,000 barrels of crude oil + petroleum products 
2020: 6,023,457,000 barrels of crude oil + petroleum products  
2021: 6,052,509,000 barrels of crude oil + petroleum products 

The EIA says 2022 oil production is running above 2021, and forecasts that 2023 will set a record for US crude oil production.

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/us_oil.php

When it comes to natural gas, the story is about the same--steadily increasing US production with a peak in 2019, a slight decline in 2020, and we are now nearly back up to 2019 production levels.

So at least for oil & gas, the numbers I can find don't support the theory that we've slashed production. Whether current production is enough to keep up with demand is another matter.

Now coal production in the US has indeed fallen off a cliff in the last 10 years. I'm not too broken up about that as coal is nasty and I'd prefer it only be used in situations where natural gas isn't available in sufficient quantities.

 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bernard

Bernard 879

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Paper_jam said:

So at least for oil & gas, the numbers I can find don't support the theory that we've slashed production. Whether current production is enough to keep up with demand is another matter.

I seem to recall OPEC cut production 10 million barrels per day during the pandemic, and they’ve only increased by 500,000 barrels per day since the world opened back up. It’s time to tell the Saudi Royal Family to open the spigots before we start talking about democracy and regime change in their backyard.

Bernard

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17534

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Moby Ric said:

I went ahead and saved the post since I knew the libtopia mods would delete it.  Enjoy.

 

And just where do you think Natgas comes from?  It comes from drilling or fracking it out of the ground.

The US Gov't has halted drilling on 9,000 leases out of roughly 26,000 total leases on federal lands.  Recently halted one of the largest leases in Alaska and two in the Gulf of Mexico.  Also because demand is up due to people going back to work finally after the lockdowns from Covid.  That is why Natgas is rising amongst other resources.  It is not costs to winterize plants, but maybe when you shut one or two plants down the costs goes up.  And don't spout out Russia, this was happening well before that bullshit excuse started.  But of course now the US, who was energy independent just 2 years ago is now begging others for oil, and one of those suppliers was Russia.  But like I said this was all in motion before that.  Now we are diverting imports to Europe to have them avoid Russian gas.  But again, this is afterwards and did not start this.  It only recently plays a part.  If you have not figured out that this Admin is attacking the O&G industry and driving the costs up in order to get you to accept their green energy bullshit you are not paying attention at all.  I get daily reports on this stuff from some of the biggest suppliers in the country if not the world.  JFC you fucking fantasyland CR folks live in an alternate reality where the laws of economics exist only to meet a certain narrative.  Like I said if you did not see this coming 18 months ago and did not prep you are going to be unhappy for a while.  Or maybe you are some twisted delusional moron who roots for this shit cause you are a useful idiot to the D party.  Enjoy your .14/kwh and rising, you voted for it.

Rant over.  See you in another 24 -48 hours after my ban cause I am not a deranged lib and imma only gives them a pass.  Have a good weekend.

Take your deranged rant to the cloakroom. 

Anyway, as stated, it isn't so much decreased US natural gas production that has raised prices, but decreased production elsewhere. And, the other reality is that electric prices aren't only being driven by increase in natural gas prices, but also by increased peak demand due to warming. Tons of cheap renewables are coming online, but we still have to deal with higher peaks with less capacity until it does. Oh, yeah, don't forget about the winter storm thing in Texas. We are just starting to pay the bill for that as consumers now. 

Or, you can blame the Dems because it makes you feel better. Whatever. 

Edited by Dahobbs
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17534

Posted
Posted
Just now, fattyflattie said:

...

Yes, renewables are cheaper than gas. I can cite you to hundreds of studies and statistics for that if you'd like. For instance, that's why like 80% of new capacity planned in Texas is either solar or wind. It has nothing to do with politics (because obviously the Dems have a ton of fucking say in Texas). It is all economic and is fairly fucking obvious  But the capacity isn't there to replace gas right now and won't be for a long time. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17534

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

You cannot separate the politics from hydrocarbon energy, or renewables.  They both benefit from TONS of governmental help.  Renewables greatly benefit from subsidies, just like their counterparts.   

Without subsidies, renewables are the same or slightly cheaper than gas. With subsidies, renewables are significantly cheaper. None of that accounts for the indirect subsidies oil and gas receives. Or from the massive subsidy they receive in the form of externalized costs (which incidentally are a good part of what are driving the increase electric prices in Texas this summer). 

Again, Texas doesn't have 80% of new capacity being renewable because of democrats. And it is just ridiculous to suggest that is the reason. Prices suck right now because we are emerging from a massive pandemic, have huge global supply chain issues, and now have one of the largest exporters of natural gas significantly cut off from much the world. Oh, and it is fucking hot. It isn't because of Dems. Just accept that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fattyflattie

fattyflattie 4639

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Without subsidies, renewables are the same or slightly cheaper than gas. With subsidies, renewables are significantly cheaper. None of that accounts for the indirect subsidies oil and gas receives. Or from the massive subsidy they receive in the form of externalized costs (which incidentally are a good part of what are driving the increase electric prices in Texas this summer). 

Again, Texas doesn't have 80% of new capacity being renewable because of democrats. And it is just ridiculous to suggest that is the reason. Prices suck right now because we are emerging from a massive pandemic, have huge global supply chain issues, and now have one of the largest exporters of natural gas significantly cut off from much the world. Oh, and it is fucking hot. It isn't because of Dems. Just accept that.  

I didn't say it was.  I'll leave the CR out but they have their record on O&G and it speaks for itself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17534

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I didn't say it was.  I'll leave the CR out but they have their record on O&G and it speaks for itself. 

Well, I was originally responding to someone who did and then you jumped into the fray. 

The reality is we need to ween ourselves off of oil and gas both for the environment and because they are going to run out eventually. Fortunately, not only is it in our best long term interests to do so, it is also better economically in the short term for many use cases as well. However, we can't go cold turkey. And there are some areas where burning hydrocarbons will be necessary for a long time (even electric generation to an extent). But, we'd be better off converting as many of those hydrocarbons to goods as possible rather than burning them. 

Anyway, prices still suck regardless of the reasons. Extra glad I have home solar right now. 

Edited by Dahobbs
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Upgrayedd

Upgrayedd 5812

Posted
Posted
On 5/18/2022 at 2:05 PM, Quagmire said:

 

My 2 year contract is up was at 9.1 now the cheapest I can find is 13.9

 

Getting sick of everything going up.

 

 

On 5/18/2022 at 2:55 PM, royiv said:

Fucking Energy Ogre moved me to a plan at 16.5 this week because my latest contract was up.

 

On 5/18/2022 at 10:44 PM, Dutchrudder said:

hehehe, I locked in for 3 years at 10.6c per kwh in January.  Fucking nailed it!

Out of curiosity, are these all $/kwh (or cents/kWh)?

I’m $0.45/kWh.  Although in San Diego I used 535 kWhs last month, so there’s that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fattyflattie

fattyflattie 4639

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Well, I was originally responding to someone who did and then you jumped into the fray. 

The reality is we need to ween ourselves off of oil and gas both for the environment and because they are going to run out eventually. Fortunately, not only is it in our best long term interests to do so, it is also better economically in the short term for many use cases as well. However, we can't go cold turkey. And there are some areas where burning hydrocarbons will be necessary for a long time (even electric generation to an extent). But, we'd be better off converting as many of those hydrocarbons to goods as possible rather than burning them. 

Anyway, prices still suck regardless of the reasons. Extra glad I have home solar right now. 

As someone who doesn't eat without them, I hope we are burning them long after I'm gone.  Narrator: we will be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17534

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

As someone who doesn't eat without them, I hope we are burning them long after I'm gone.  Narrator: we will be. 

If we are, then there will be a lot less of us. Pretty sure you could find a way to do something other than burn them. Pretty valuable and almost irreplaceable stuff for everything except energy. For energy, we can replace it with a shit load of stuff. 

 

Edited by Dahobbs
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Enchubben

Enchubben 5510

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Prices suck right now because we are emerging from a massive pandemic, have huge global supply chain issues, and now have one of the largest exporters of natural gas significantly cut off from much the world. Oh, and it is fucking hot. It isn't because of Dems. Just accept that.  

These are true, and exporting more natural gas to Europe to replace capacity lost from Russia is a real thing.  The leading cause is still a lack of production compared to previous years. Demand has increased and extraction/production has either stayed static or dropped since really December of last year. Natural gas increased prices almost identically match that time frame. And beside the point, even if we did produce more, not sure we could do anything with it because we don’t have infrastructure to transport it, convert it to LNG etc. because of lawsuits, regulation/permitting issues etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo 13577

Posted
Posted

Once we switch to 7th generation nuclear plants that are stable, use non-weaponizable fissile material, and easily disposable waste, we will be golden. What generation are our current nuclear facilities?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
immamac

immamac 42850

Posted
Posted

The amount of stupidity in this thread is staggering. 

The population of Texas has been increasing at a rapid, breakneck pace for the last 5-10 years. High consumption companies have also been moving into Texas during that time (part of the reason for all the population moving here). Do people think electricity is just magically produced? You combine that with our shitty infrastructure and a retail market for electricity when bad things happen to our shitty infrastructure and poof you have price gouging. 

Our electricity is still "cheap" relative to other places, but Texas is rapidly becoming a shit hole because of our complete lack of reinvestment. The people of Texas are subsidizing multi billion dollar conglomerates and wondering why they aren't doing anything to help when shit goes slightly off the rails. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MonkeyDoughnut

MonkeyDoughnut 10235

Posted
Posted

Agree with much of the above, but what the big companies are waiting on and investing in is the grid level storage technologies which are rapidly getting closer to implementation in various forms, many with the next few years, certainly in within next 10 years. This is absolutely game changing and the future of the grid. It's also why you will see more and more renewables come online knowing they will have a greater use soon.  Renewable off-peak energy will allow for so many options like hydro-pump storage, robotic block storage (same as hydro but basically machines moving weights around) and MIT's TPV being the big "cheap" storage breakthrough that looks extremely promising.

Right now we are in a game of risk though hoping those technologies show up before more hell breaks loose vs the upgrade infrastructure knowing it likely (hopefully) will be obsolete right as its about to be activated. 

TLDR; next 1-7 years we're going to have problems... 10+ years out power price swings will be way less frequent and severe

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
immamac

immamac 42850

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Right now PEC is at around 9.5¢ plus a $22.50 monthly service fee. Haven’t gotten any notice of increase.  0.7¢ of that rate is winter storm related.  

PEC is a model for how the rest of Texas electricity should actually work.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
52-80

52-80 19159

Posted
Posted

This is not a Texas specific issue, or an oil specific issue, or wind specific issue.

Norway is 70% renewables and has for years been self-sufficient with cheap domestic prices, until it opened its energy trading to Europe, and now exposed to the regional supply/demand dynamics, resulting in avg household monthly electricity cost of a few hundred USD for the last year.

Welcome to the global market, with a growing count of 8 billion people needing energy to literally participate in everyday life and be productive.  If society decides it wants to feed that engine, it needs to welcome every source of Watt available, be it something 'dirty' as coal, or unpopular as gas, or divisive as nuclear.  Stifling any of those levers will raise prices.  If you favor one over another as a matter of policy, that's a deliberate choice.  Just don't blame anyone else for the side effect of your decision.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MonkeyDoughnut

MonkeyDoughnut 10235

Posted
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

This is not a Texas specific issue, or an oil specific issue, or wind specific issue.

Norway is 70% renewables and has for years been self-sufficient with cheap domestic prices, until it opened its energy trading to Europe, and now exposed to the regional supply/demand dynamics, resulting in avg household monthly electricity cost of a few hundred USD for the last year.

Welcome to the global market, with a growing count of 8 billion people needing energy to literally participate in everyday life and be productive.  If society decides it wants to feed that engine, it needs to welcome every source of Watt available, be it something 'dirty' as coal, or unpopular as gas, or divisive as nuclear.  Stifling any of those levers will raise prices.  If you favor one over another as a matter of policy, that's a deliberate choice.  Just don't blame anyone else for the side effect of your decision.

Norway is 90%+ hydro electric... Would love to be in there shoes when it snows.... When it doesn't... Ehh

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by MonkeyDoughnut
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skipper

Skipper 6135

Posted
Posted

I'm sure there are threads on home solar.  But at the energy price points is it actually going to become of decent investment?  When energy was cheap I always thought it fell into the "good for the environment but will take too long to recoup the cost to justify solely from an investment perspective".  Wondering if that is still the case.  Of course with inflation/supply chain issues I'm sure solar job costs have jumped the shark as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52498

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Skipper said:

I'm sure there are threads on home solar.  But at the energy price points is it actually going to become of decent investment?  When energy was cheap I always thought it fell into the "good for the environment but will take too long to recoup the cost to justify solely from an investment perspective".  Wondering if that is still the case.  Of course with inflation/supply chain issues I'm sure solar job costs have jumped the shark as well.

I would still prefer that any solar i was to generate would be used by me directly either as it is generated or via personal capacitance, rather than having to send it through a meter into the grid. 
Then pay for any power that I need over and above that availability.

is there a valid reason why it has to be that way?  Aren’t there transmission losses doing it like that, that make the entire system inefficient?  
 

is it too complex for a home to integrate two power sources seamlessly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
immamac

immamac 42850

Posted
Posted
Just now, Pato del Muerto said:

I would still prefer that any solar i was to generate would be used by me directly either as it is generated or via personal capacitance, rather than having to send it through a meter into the grid. 
Then pay for any power that I need over and above that availability.

is there a valid reason why it has to be that way?  Aren’t there transmission losses doing it like that, that make the entire system inefficient?  
 

is it too complex for a home to integrate two power sources seamlessly?

One is set up for the homeowner one is set up for a distributed grid and feedback. You can't have both, but you can install a battery back and effectively run the house "off grid" and feed solar to it first, then the grid 2nd. With no battery bank you just always feed back to the grid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17534

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Skipper said:

I'm sure there are threads on home solar.  But at the energy price points is it actually going to become of decent investment?  When energy was cheap I always thought it fell into the "good for the environment but will take too long to recoup the cost to justify solely from an investment perspective".  Wondering if that is still the case.  Of course with inflation/supply chain issues I'm sure solar job costs have jumped the shark as well.

Before the recent spike, I estimated the payback period on my panels at 8-10 years after accounting for the tax credit. As the panels were originally financed as part of a home refi, they were actually cash flow positive from day one (reduction in electric bill was greater than the monthly loan payment for the panels portion of the refinance). The payback period is even less if you account for the panels adding see value to property (certainly not 100% of what was paid, but also certainly substantially more than $0).  Recent rate increases could probably knock a year or two off that number. But it'll just depend on the overall trend in prices. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17534

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I would still prefer that any solar i was to generate would be used by me directly either as it is generated or via personal capacitance, rather than having to send it through a meter into the grid. 
Then pay for any power that I need over and above that availability.

is there a valid reason why it has to be that way?  Aren’t there transmission losses doing it like that, that make the entire system inefficient?  
 

is it too complex for a home to integrate two power sources seamlessly?

Generally, the way it works is that your the energy flows first to the house and then any excess to the grid. In the case of battery backup, excess first goes to the battery and then to grid if you have grid connected solar. I don't really understand why you'd want non grid connected solar without a battery. 1) I don't believe that is even an option in most places, 2) practically I don't think this option is compatible with how systems work (perhaps micro inverter systems could shut down the appropriate amount of panels on the fly?) and 3) even if it were, you'd just be throwing away the excess and losing some of the money from your investment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52498

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Generally, the way it works is that your the energy flows first to the house and then any excess to the grid. In the case of battery backup, excess first goes to the battery and then to grid if you have grid connected solar. I don't really understand why you'd want non grid connected solar without a battery. 1) I don't believe that is even an option in most places, 2) practically I don't think this option is compatible with how systems work (perhaps micro inverter systems could shut down the appropriate amount of panels on the fly?) and 3) even if it were, you'd just be throwing away the excess and losing some of the money from your investment. 

Apparently I’m wrong, but I thought in Texas all of your generation feeds then grid, you draw from the grid for all of your needs, and you pay the difference between the two or get credited. 
 

that is what the post is about, so if that isn’t correct than the post is faulty from ignorance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
HiggyBaby

HiggyBaby 2529

Posted
Posted
Fucking Energy Ogre moved me to a plan at 16.5 this week because my latest contract was up.

Wish I checked this thread earlier so I wasn’t so shocked when I saw my new bill with my new provider. I just got switched by the Ogre to a 12.3¢ plan, up from 9.5¢ I had before. Guess I can’t complain from the rates I’m seeing here and on powertochoose.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Quagmire

Quagmire 2147

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Before the recent spike, I estimated the payback period on my panels at 8-10 years after accounting for the tax credit. As the panels were originally financed as part of a home refi, they were actually cash flow positive from day one (reduction in electric bill was greater than the monthly loan payment for the panels portion of the refinance). The payback period is even less if you account for the panels adding see value to property (certainly not 100% of what was paid, but also certainly substantially more than $0).  Recent rate increases could probably knock a year or two off that number. But it'll just depend on the overall trend in prices. 

Have heard rumblings that it’s sometimes hard to sell your home with solar , especially if you still owe for the panels . Not sure if true
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...