Winterizing power plants and fuel delivery systems is expensive. It’s obvious that those operating power plants and systems in Texas didn’t think that a 1 in 10 years event is worth spending the money necessary to prepare for. Some wind power went offline, which seems unnecessary given that wind power systems operate year around in northern Sweden, Antarctica, Canada and Iowa! Much more natural gas and coal power went offline simply because operators chose not to prepare for severe cold weather. They are talking about changing this, but I lived in Texas for twenty years, and I don’t expect that much will actually change. They’ll put some lipstick on the pig, but the same thing will happen again.
I'm no expert by I worked in a multi fuel power plant for 4 years and my father was truly an power industry expert for 40 yrs. He truly knew the need to diversify fuel sources, weatherize, and do proper maintenance. Base load vs swing load must be figured here. If wind is so much cheaper then if the wind is blowing in Feb the trend is let it provide 50 % plus of power even in winter. What are the other sources doing?? Many appear idle or low load it seems with little to no compensation. I would rather pay a fee each month on my power bill for some guaranteed capacity(let wind/solar be capped in winter and force/penalize other base loads to deliver) than to let families w/children, seniors, and other vulnerable people go w/out power for days on end on the rare occasions these things happen.
I read the "assigning-blame-for ..." Learned about "energy market" vs. "capacity market" But it seems like El Paso's successful handling of the cold spell trumps all the points in the reasonable-sounding article.
Rather, the El Paso “experience” confirms the points made in the article. El Paso utility was mandated to adopt a capacity market approach post 2011, invested in winterization (i.e. capacity) and then passed the costs along to its customers. Besides which they are part of the SWPP which had some issues, but not to extent of ERCOT. Parts of the Texas panhandle are also part of SWPP and had similar experience as El Paso. Same goes for the Southeast Texas Utilities (Beaumont area) that are part of MISO. Finally the reason these areas are not part of ERCOT is historical in that they were already interconnected to Electric Grids that crossed state lines when ERCOT was first established.
I have permitted a dozen or so environmental facilities in my career and our storm water permits normally required at a min 100 yr flood capacity. The running joke was a 100 yr flood happened every 10 yrs. Proven true several times.
Doesn't mean anything is changing in our climate. It just means that the people who supply Texas with electricity are willing to misrepresent what a 100-year event looks like so that they don't have to pay for the processes necessary to guard against a 10-year event.
No, the fact is, your statements about Texas weather are in accurate. The NOAA webpage on this shows a graph of high-low temps from 1900 to now.
The 1940's and 50's had more hot days, on average, than we see in the 21st century. The number of days below freezing was higher in the 1970's and 80's than we see in the 21st century. There were more extreme precipitation events in the 1990s than there are in the 21st century. Number of hurricanes is roughly the same as the 1930s and 40s.
Winterizing power plants and fuel delivery systems is expensive. It’s obvious that those operating power plants and systems in Texas didn’t think that a 1 in 10 years event is worth spending the money necessary to prepare for. Some wind power went offline, which seems unnecessary given that wind power systems operate year around in northern Sweden, Antarctica, Canada and Iowa! Much more natural gas and coal power went offline simply because operators chose not to prepare for severe cold weather. They are talking about changing this, but I lived in Texas for twenty years, and I don’t expect that much will actually change. They’ll put some lipstick on the pig, but the same thing will happen again.
I'm no expert by I worked in a multi fuel power plant for 4 years and my father was truly an power industry expert for 40 yrs. He truly knew the need to diversify fuel sources, weatherize, and do proper maintenance. Base load vs swing load must be figured here. If wind is so much cheaper then if the wind is blowing in Feb the trend is let it provide 50 % plus of power even in winter. What are the other sources doing?? Many appear idle or low load it seems with little to no compensation. I would rather pay a fee each month on my power bill for some guaranteed capacity(let wind/solar be capped in winter and force/penalize other base loads to deliver) than to let families w/children, seniors, and other vulnerable people go w/out power for days on end on the rare occasions these things happen.
El Paso is also not on the same grid as most of the rest of Texas
The question is WHY did they have such lax contingency plans?
It has been suggest that this is because that gives intermittent generators a benefit.
See https://judithcurry.com/2021/02/18/assigning-blame-for-the-blackouts-in-texas
I read the "assigning-blame-for ..." Learned about "energy market" vs. "capacity market" But it seems like El Paso's successful handling of the cold spell trumps all the points in the reasonable-sounding article.
Rather, the El Paso “experience” confirms the points made in the article. El Paso utility was mandated to adopt a capacity market approach post 2011, invested in winterization (i.e. capacity) and then passed the costs along to its customers. Besides which they are part of the SWPP which had some issues, but not to extent of ERCOT. Parts of the Texas panhandle are also part of SWPP and had similar experience as El Paso. Same goes for the Southeast Texas Utilities (Beaumont area) that are part of MISO. Finally the reason these areas are not part of ERCOT is historical in that they were already interconnected to Electric Grids that crossed state lines when ERCOT was first established.
El Paso is not on the same grid as the rest of Texas.
I have permitted a dozen or so environmental facilities in my career and our storm water permits normally required at a min 100 yr flood capacity. The running joke was a 100 yr flood happened every 10 yrs. Proven true several times.
Doesn't mean anything is changing in our climate. It just means that the people who supply Texas with electricity are willing to misrepresent what a 100-year event looks like so that they don't have to pay for the processes necessary to guard against a 10-year event.
No, the fact is, your statements about Texas weather are in accurate. The NOAA webpage on this shows a graph of high-low temps from 1900 to now.
The 1940's and 50's had more hot days, on average, than we see in the 21st century. The number of days below freezing was higher in the 1970's and 80's than we see in the 21st century. There were more extreme precipitation events in the 1990s than there are in the 21st century. Number of hurricanes is roughly the same as the 1930s and 40s.
statesummaries(dot)ncics(dot)org(slash)chapter(slash)tx