No, Frozen Wind Turbines Did Not Cause the Texas Blackouts

[dcsports]

On the same day, the wholesale price of electricity spiked more than 10,000%, leaving many Texans with dizzying bills in the wake of the storms — ranging from four digits to one for more than $17,000.
Please see 'SKY-HIGH ENERGY BILLS ADD TO MISERY IN TEXAS' at http://e.startribune.com/Olive/ODN/StarTribune/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=MST/2021/02/22&entity=Ar00104&sk=6DB1A927&mode=text

You are referring to a specific situation, with a relatively small group of customers, not 'normal' rates.

 

[dcsports]

Yup, no money wasted on extra emergency capacity. No money invested in proper wind turbines. No money wasted on weather proofing any of their capacity. The windmills done it - just like they cause cancer.

From my electric co-op (OMG communism) blog "Connexus is not Texas":

Reliability with the addition of renewables

Renewable energy is actually helping us weather this latest Polar Vortex in Minnesota.

• Minnesota’s renewable energy is reliable. We’ve learned how to operate wind turbines in severe weather.
• Connexus’ solar arrays and battery storage have performed well during the past few weeks. In fact, they have been very productive.
• The power grid will increasingly be served by wind and solar but the change-over in generation is being carefully and methodically managed. Connexus, GRE, and MISO North are all working together to make sure that our members and the entire region have sufficient energy, capacity, and transmission.

Minnesota has 3.5 GW of wind power - about 20% of what failed in Texas. They also have costly winterization packages installed - based on the climate.

Solar is really a non- issue, but I doubt they produce significant energy on a good winter day, or any during a storm or when covered with ice.

 

[AncientGeek]

Yes, thats the typical talking points. But the truth is wind turbines did cause the blackouts, in addition to other things. And it was fossil fuels which kept everyone else up as you can see in various charts where the base load, cheap reliable NG took over generation until the grid hit capacity.

Extreme winter weather is disrupting energy supply and demand, particularly in Texas - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Had they invested the money wasted on wind and instead invested in in traditional cost effective sources, in addition to grid improvements and winterizing, things would be differnt.

Near the top of the article you linked:
Natural gas wells in the region have been affected by freezing temperatures that have disrupted production, and pipeline compressors have lost power, which have both reduced deliveries. Refineries in the area have halted production. These energy market disruptions may continue for the next several days, and it could take weeks for energy systems to resume normal operations.

 

[pamak]

Ok, if you can’t do the math I’ll help you out.

If Californians paid the same rate as Texans for their electricity they’d spend about $26 billion less on electricity every year.

So, the point is it’s a lot of money.

I suspect California hasn’t spent much on winterizing their generation assets either, frankly. Or from preventing them from burning down the state. Makes you wonder what they’re getting for that $25 billion a year.

Oh yeah, regulation, right?

There are many more variables that affect the final cost such as total consumption which is affected by regulations and the constant drive to reduce energy demands

 

[AncientGeek]

Minnesota has 3.5 GW of wind power - about 20% of what failed in Texas. They also have costly winterization packages installed - based on the climate.

Solar is really a non- issue, but I doubt they produce significant energy on a good winter day, or any during a storm or when covered with ice.

Minnesota ranks 7th in the nation for its share of in-state electricity generation from wind power. Yes, Minnesota uses wind turbines rated for the conditions. Texas has known it was vulnerable to cold since cold crashed the grid in 1989 and 2011. They did nothing to prepare.

Cold does not affect solar electric cells. The colder it gets, the fewer clouds there are blocking the sun.

 

[AncientGeek]

You are referring to a specific situation, with a relatively small group of customers, not 'normal' rates.

I am referring to factual electric bills of people who signed up to pay the wholesale rate because it sounded cheap. I am not talking about some statistical "averages".
When my (communist) electric co-op turns a profit, I get a check rather than some capitalist investor.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Actually, wind accounts for 15.7% of power in Texas, and 17.4% of the power used by ERCOT, which is where the issue is. (Some areas, including El Paso and parts of the panhandle, use a different power grid.) The state uses more wind energy as a percent than any other.

Wind power in Texas - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

.

There are 2 big issues at play. 1) the tremendous demand on electricity due to the weather - record breaking. The primary contributor is electric heat, which is the norm in apartments here (it's cheap and easy to install, and doesn't get used much). However, there have been a rising number of 'all electric' 'green' homes - discovering that the electricity isn't as efficient as gas in cold weather. 2) About 25 % of the generating capacity is offline. Wind is a big part of that - you can't run turbines in extreme cold, or when blades are coated with ice. Solar also doesn't work when panels are coated with freezing rain. True - there were other issues. A nuclear plant went off line. Some other plants ran into issue as well. Also several coal plants - normally very reliable for reserve capacity, have been decommissioned.

It's not 'wind's fault' - but to say it wasn't a key contributor is foolish. This highlights the need to understand the limitations of any technology.

Wind was a minor contributor. There are windmills all over Iowa, the state is absolutely carpeted with them, when it was -2 in Dallas, it was colder than -20 across much of Iowa.

Ars has an excellent article about what caused the power outages in Texas here: https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/02/texas-power-grid-crumples-under-the-cold/. Wind was a very minor factor. The biggest problem was that natural gas plants in Texas had not been properly weatherized for the possibility of extreme cold.

As to your "all electric" "green" homes comment. That has zero to do with being green. From a green perspective, a high efficient gas furnace is far more efficient in terms of energy usage in heating a home than electric heat. The reason why you see a lot of all electric homes in Texas is simply that it is cheaper to build them. They are shit for consumers though as electric is significantly more expensive to operate than gas, the same is true for water heaters.

The fact is, the green movements have made mistakes, and I total disagree with them on the keystone pipeline, but Texas' power outages have nothing to do with anything related to the green movement.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Minnesota ranks 7th in the nation for its share of in-state electricity generation from wind power. Yes, Minnesota uses wind turbines rated for the conditions. Texas has known it was vulnerable to cold since cold crashed the grid in 1989 and 2011. They did nothing to prepare.

Cold does not affect solar electric cells. The colder it gets, the fewer clouds there are blocking the sun.

Yeah the main problem you have with solar as you go further north is not the cold, but rather the lower angle of the sun.

 

[poweRob]

Minnesota has 3.5 GW of wind power - about 20% of what failed in Texas. They also have costly winterization packages installed - based on the climate.

Solar is really a non- issue, but I doubt they produce significant energy on a good winter day, or any during a storm or when covered with ice.

"Costly"
"I doubt"

Seems kind of like a lot of guess work there.

 

[AncientGeek]

Yeah the main problem you have with solar as you go further north is not the cold, but rather the lower angle of the sun.

Yup, gotta point 'em south but it still passes through more atmosphere. The colder it gets, the clearer it gets.
My driveway is not accidentally black asphalt sloping to the southwest.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Yup, gotta point 'em south but it still passes through more atmosphere. The colder it gets, the clearer it gets.
My driveway is not accidentally black asphalt sloping to the southwest.

Yeah I think up in the Nordic countries they often put them on the side of buildings. As to Texas having a lot of windmills, it's because the Western half of the state has a ton of wind. It not like Texas is an environmentally friendly state. I mean hell, this is the state's largest city:

Much of Texas is an environmental cesspool. It is like America's China, with the exception that China is getting cleaner and they put in sidewalks in China. To blame the power outages on the Green Movement assumes that the Green Movement has an ounce of power in that state, it doesn't. Texas has windmills because they made financial sense.

 

[poweRob]

Yup, gotta point 'em south but it still passes through more atmosphere. The colder it gets, the clearer it gets.
My driveway is not accidentally black asphalt sloping to the southwest.

Sicily looks to be around the same longitude as Virgina and Northern Italy looks to be around Maine. 9.2% of their entire energy production is solar. Hell Denmark looks to be around the same as Anchorage, Alaska and produces 3.2% by solar to USA's 2.3%. It's all just a matter of political will to stop our politicians from being for sale to the fossil fuel industry. America isn't allowed to do big things anymore. We have to do everything incrementally so that the rich old industry leaders can milk their industry for as much as possible no matter how much we really don't need their buggy whips anymore.

Solar Penetration
Wind Penetration

 

[poweRob]

Yeah I think up in the Nordic countries they often put them on the side of buildings. As to Texas having a lot of windmills, it's because the Western half of the state has a ton of wind. It not like Texas is an environmentally friendly state. I mean hell, this is the state's largest city:

Much of Texas is an environmental cesspool. It is like America's China, with the exception that China is getting cleaner. To blame the power outages on the Green Movement assumes that the Green Movement has an ounce of power in that state, it doesn't. Texas has windmills because they made financial sense.

T-Boone Pickens got in on the ground floor to make big $'s with wind turbines in Texas.

 

[roguenuke]

You are struggling and flinging out accusations to try to save face here. You still haven't pointed out where I was wrong.

The fact is that the wind production failed at a tremendous rate, and that's a concern. It wasn't 'the cause' (quoting you) - it was a big cause of the issue. Expensive retrofits may be an answer, but it would also add greatly to the cost and make wind less viable.

The reason that those turbines failed is part of the problem, because it is a major part of why all the power generation systems in Texas failed in at least some ways there, taking down some production power for each form, because none were properly safeguarded against cold weather. It wasn't those specific systems that are truly the issue, it is little to no regulation and cost cutting allowances within their systems that caused the problems.

Should their nuclear power plants be simply allowed to cut corners to save money, without any regard to what that might do in the name of deregulation?

 

[roguenuke]

Sicily looks to be around the same longitude as Virgina and Northern Italy looks to be around Maine. 9.2% of their entire energy production is solar. Hell Denmark looks to be around the same as Anchorage, Alaska and produces 3.2% by solar to USA's 2.3%. It's all just a matter of political will to stop our politicians from being for sale to the fossil fuel industry. America isn't allowed to do big things anymore. We have to do everything incrementally so that the rich old industry leaders can milk their industry for as much as possible no matter how much we really don't need their buggy whips anymore.

Solar Penetration
Wind Penetration

I knew people living in Washington state, near Seattle (you know, that place that is known to get a shit ton of rain?), who set up solar power panels on their houses and were selling power back to the power company a good portion of the time because even there they produced more than enough power for their own use.

 

[roguenuke]

Yeah, that sort of thinking doesn’t seem to register when the only goal is to buy into an anti renewable meme.

This isn’t the only flat earther who suggested solutions that drive up the cost of gas fired power.

Another incited that gas fired plants should be retrofitted to provide several days of gas storage on hand. Never mind that gas has to be stored cooled and under pressure, a very expensive process and an unnecessary and large capital investment.

Better to make the power and store it in a battery farm.

But most of the flat earthers still peddling this discredited meme don’t even understand the concept.

More nuclear power plants (using the modular reactors) should be built, which don't need such things to run. Just use what you need. Really the only thing you need is trained operators. Oh, and you actually have to invest in safety measures.

I'm for renewables being pushed as much as possible (with things like freeze protection and whatever other safeguards may be needed to keep them running or protect the environment/people) and having nuclear is that "just in case", stable backbone system.

 

[poweRob]

I knew people living in Washington state, near Seattle (you know, that place that is known to get a shit ton of rain?), who set up solar power panels on their houses and were selling power back to the power company a good portion of the time because even there they produced more than enough power for their own use.

Germany leads Europe and they are one of the cloudiest nations in Europe.

 

[MTAtech]

Depends on the source.... but yes. 2-3 X the rate.

Well, no. https://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/
It's not even twice.

Texas

11.36¢ / kWh

California

19.90¢ / kWh

 

[Vern]

So... given the discussion was California vs. Texas cost of electricity, and not windmills.....

In any case, you've made it abundantly clear that you aren't interested in a reasonable, fact based, discussion. I'm not interested in lobbing personal attacks back and forth, or perpetually correcting your statements. So go talk to someone else.

er uh DC, I know your latest debunked narrative was the "California vs. Texas cost of electricity". You provided no link of course but someone else did (post 475) . I'm just pointing out a consistent trend on your part to not process facts that dispute your obedient narratives. Tucker, Hannity, Abbot and Perry blame wind generation for the outages. You say "no one blamed wind generation". Dan Woodfin says wind was 13% of the outages. You claim wind was 1/3 of the outages. You say electricity in CA is 2-3 times texas. somone posts a link showing its 80% higher not 300% higher. Your inability to process reality when you are wrong is what makes you a conservative. and since you're back, can we deal with your first falsehood.

Tucker said: The windmills failed, like the silly fashion accessories they are, and people in Texas died.
you said: Again, no one is saying it's 'all wind power's fault'. That's a typical left wing strawman.

 

[Vern]

This, and imbedded links do a pretty good job explaining the Texas problems

Check out this chart:

View attachment 67319405

That little green wave is wind power.

More on sources:
View attachment 67319406

Doesn’t speak very well on “renewables”, does it?

Bullseye, welcome back. As a favor to you, I'm going point out some things to help you see the bias in your "editorial". First, it said "despite roughly 30 GW being inoperable due to frozen pipelines holding up fuel." It wasnt just pipelines. Wells froze and equipment at the plants froze. And "frozen gas pipes" didnt explain the nuclear and coal plants that failed to meet their expected load. Second "30 GW" was about half of the expected load. Your "editorial" tries to slip that in as if its not a big deal. 30 out 65 is a big deal. and I'm sure you didnt notice that it didnt give you that same stat for wind generation. I'll let the Senior Director of Ercot Dan Woodfin give you that stat

Wind shutdowns accounted for 3.6 to 4.5 gigawatts -- or less than 13% -- of the 30 to 35 gigawatts of total outages, according to Woodfin.

Outages is the key. Its expected vs realized. Maybe thats why your editorial left out those important details. So your editorial showed nothing to conclude: : "It was the “green” energy sources that failed to show up for work". In fact it left out the facts that showed otherwise. Your welcome.

 

[Bullseye]

Bullseye, welcome back. As a favor to you, I'm going point out some things to help you see the bias in your "editorial". First, it said "despite roughly 30 GW being inoperable due to frozen pipelines holding up fuel." It wasnt just pipelines. Wells froze and equipment at the plants froze. And "frozen gas pipes" didnt explain the nuclear and coal plants that failed to meet their expected load. Second "30 GW" was about half of the expected load. Your "editorial" tries to slip that in as if its not a big deal. 30 out 65 is a big deal. and I'm sure you didnt notice that it didnt give you that same stat for wind generation. I'll let the Senior Director of Ercot Dan Woodfin give you that stat

Wind shutdowns accounted for 3.6 to 4.5 gigawatts -- or less than 13% -- of the 30 to 35 gigawatts of total outages, according to Woodfin.

Outages is the key. Its expected vs realized. Maybe thats why your editorial left out those important details. So your editorial showed nothing to conclude: : "It was the “green” energy sources that failed to show up for work". In fact it left out the facts that showed otherwise. Your welcome.

The charts tell the story Vern. Notice the source that delivered power and those that didn’t.

 

[dcsports]

Minnesota ranks 7th in the nation for its share of in-state electricity generation from wind power. Yes, Minnesota uses wind turbines rated for the conditions. Texas has known it was vulnerable to cold since cold crashed the grid in 1989 and 2011. They did nothing to prepare.

Cold does not affect solar electric cells. The colder it gets, the fewer clouds there are blocking the sun.

Wind - And they have far less production than Texas.

Solar - There's also shorter days, and again - the solar cells don't work when covered with ice and snow.

 

[dcsports]

Wind was a minor contributor. There are windmills all over Iowa, the state is absolutely carpeted with them, when it was -2 in Dallas, it was colder than -20 across much of Iowa.

Ars has an excellent article about what caused the power outages in Texas here: https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/02/texas-power-grid-crumples-under-the-cold/. Wind was a very minor factor. The biggest problem was that natural gas plants in Texas had not been properly weatherized for the possibility of extreme cold.

As to your "all electric" "green" homes comment. That has zero to do with being green. From a green perspective, a high efficient gas furnace is far more efficient in terms of energy usage in heating a home than electric heat. The reason why you see a lot of all electric homes in Texas is simply that it is cheaper to build them. They are shit for consumers though as electric is significantly more expensive to operate than gas, the same is true for water heaters.

The fact is, the green movements have made mistakes, and I total disagree with them on the keystone pipeline, but Texas' power outages have nothing to do with anything related to the green movement.

The houses are being marketed as being 'green' because they don't have furnaces. (And as I said - more marketing hype than reality. It's cheaper for developers on the furnace - and in not running gas lines.)

 

[dcsports]

The reason that those turbines failed is part of the problem, because it is a major part of why all the power generation systems in Texas failed in at least some ways there, taking down some production power for each form, because none were properly safeguarded against cold weather. It wasn't those specific systems that are truly the issue, it is little to no regulation and cost cutting allowances within their systems that caused the problems.

Should their nuclear power plants be simply allowed to cut corners to save money, without any regard to what that might do in the name of deregulation?

Again - on the power plants, it's not a regulation issue. They have to meet the federal regulations.

Deregulation refers to the sale.

 

[dcsports]

Well, no. https://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/
It's not even twice.

Texas

11.36¢ / kWh

California

19.90¢ / kWh

As I said, it depends on the source. You found one where it was slightly under half. That's still a big deal.