PC Hope you guys in Texas hold tight!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Astronomical said:
Greenland has a population of about 10 people in it's largest city. 😉

Not sure it's the best example of how to run an energy infrastructure for a large country.
Sorry I was trying not to be too political...

How about this.....

Wind turbines have been shown to work in cold environments (like Greenland and Minnesota) if the operators make the proper investments in heaters and deicing systems.  Over 67% of power issues during this cold spell is actually tied to thermal generation sources -nuclear, coal, natural gas rather than wind.  😉

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Im sorry to ask because i assume its been asked, i just dont know: where's the National Guard? I get that Texas is huge and that it has a lot of residents, but i didnt heard the Guard being deployed to at least provide food, water, anything?

I take they can operate pretty much in the hardest situations. Im just wondering what is the situation regarding them right now.

 
Without going in too deep there are simple reasons why it can work: You need a mix of renewable energy sources and you need a huge area from which you get your renewable energy. Germany can get energy from the whole european continent (and vice versa they from Germany) and the north sea. Usually somewhere the wind is always blowing.
Ok, but what most of you are missing (or outright ignoring to support your point) is that to have the corresponding amount of energy of one modern coal plant (or nuclear plant) you need a very large amount of wind turbines and/or solar panels.

The disadvantages I see with this approach are:

  1. Actually ruining the eco-system in the areas where you install them (huge landscapes full of wind turbines are not only very ugly, but also not echo friendly at all)
  2. You'll need to periodically maintain all those machines but, while in the case of a plant you only have one point of intervention, in the case of SPs/WTs you have to check each and everyone and run around all over the place.
  3. Most people ignore that the energy and ecologic cost of production of each solar panel or wind turbine is actually not negligible, especially when multiplied by the huge amount of machines you'll need.
  4. Every X years each panel or turbine will need to be completely replaced. The wear and tear they're exposed to, compared to a single (enclosed) plant, is much higher, hence the need to reinstall them from scratch with new machines every now and then. (As always, times the number of machines you installed).
  5. Finally, the most important downside of current renewable power sources is that they are simply not reliable enough. Energy accumulators can compensate up to a point but they also add to the overall cost of a "green solution". Forget also about being able to support the heavy industry (steel mills / military factories and such) just by going green.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
When you look at what happened, natural gas wells shut in because of the cold and gas couldn't be delivered to generators. One unit at a nuclear power plant went offline because a cooling pump couldn't deal with the ice. Some wind generators did freeze up. And at least one coal plant and maybe more stopped generating because of the cold.

The commission that regulates electricity in Texas recommended winterizing for very cold weather like what we had as part of their best practices list. Unfortunately this was optional not mandatory.

We're over the hump now and while there's still a lot of people out of power, almost a million people were restored this morning and more will be restored over time. Heads are going to roll over this. It never should have happened.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok, but what most of you are missing (or outright ignoring to support your point) is that to have the corresponding amount of energy of one modern coal plant (or nuclear plant) you need a very large amount of wind turbines and/or solar panels.


I did not forget, did not go there at all. We could talk for hours about all the intricacies of energy generation. I just gave an example of a country that actually provides half its electrical energy from renewable resources today. 20 years ago I heard an expert say he wouldn't know how this could ever be possible.

Talk all about costs of producing the turbines, scientists have made the same calculations, but when they include all the environmental and other costs a coal plant loses out against wind and solar power. Need I remind you there is a man made climate change going on that will cost us all trillions in damages even under best circumstances.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bordering on politics; it's an interesting thread but best to step away from that aspect of the subject.

The thing is, while renewables sound great on paper, the technology just isn't there yet.  Batteries suck.  Period.  Until those are radically improved, it's just not worth it.

 
Bordering on politics; it's an interesting thread but best to step away from that aspect of the subject.

The thing is, while renewables sound great on paper, the technology just isn't there yet.  Batteries suck.  Period.  Until those are radically improved, it's just not worth it.


The funny thing about batteries is that they would significantly help EVERY electrical grid regardless of how electricity is generated.  If you could store your excess electricity, and there will always be some because there has to be, then you would have nearly free ways to "generate" electricity when other systems fail.  Better battery technology helps everyone and not just the renewables crowd.  We should all encourage investment in better battery technology.

 
Clay Pot Heater: grab a clay pot, make sure it has a hole on bottom. Place a lit candle down and cover it with the clay pot. Works with a tealight also.

The pot is a great insulator and will act as a radiator. 360 degree heater.  

 
Clay Pot Heater: grab a clay pot, make sure it has a hole on bottom. Place a lit candle down and cover it with the clay pot. Works with a tealight also.

The pot is a great insulator and will act as a radiator. 360 degree heater.
21-clay-pot-heater-fb.jpg


 
For the record, the clay pot does nothing at all to increase heat in a room. The candle with or without the clay pot will put out the exact same amount of heat, only difference is the pot absorbs some of the heat slowing the radiant heating process down but also making the heat last a bit longer once the candle runs out, balancing the equation. Realistically though, the whole pot / candle concept is just a gimmick to anyone who doesn't understand science.

Also, keep in mind that, like all fires, the air feeding the candle has to come from somewhere. So by lighting a candle (or fireplace), you're also pulling cold air from outside into your home, unless you somehow have an airtight home, in which case the fire / candle will just die out and so would you.

Fires are effective at warming you up only if you're within the proximity of the radiant heat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
https://www.skilledsurvival.com/clay-pot-candle-heater/#:~:text=Once constructed%2C the heater body,to heat the clay pots.

Tldr if you don't want to read entire article.

The pot acts as a heat battery basically keeping the warm air close to the floor and not the ceiling. Enough to warm your hands, etc. Meaning after the pot saves up enough heat you'll be able to feel it radiate off. Candles by themselves send the heat straight up where it gets stuck.

They do work at making the heat of a candle more useful. 

 
-21 C here at night, no trouble at all as we are used to such temps, thus it is not common for us for years now. I do remember winters in my childhood when we had -25-29C and it was common. Now days I do not even turn on the heaters if it is not -5 outside...

It all is a matter of getting used and being prepared to something.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The state did not prepare properly for a cold snap that affected all their power sources, including natural gas which they not only use internally for their power needs but export to other locations.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The funny thing about batteries is that they would significantly help EVERY electrical grid regardless of how electricity is generated.  If you could store your excess electricity, and there will always be some because there has to be, then you would have nearly free ways to "generate" electricity when other systems fail.  Better battery technology helps everyone and not just the renewables crowd.  We should all encourage investment in better battery technology.
Absolutely; the difference between say, a coal plant and a wind/solar source is that batteries are *required* on the latter.  That makes those techs not yet a viable solution.  I'm happy with Nuclear, tbh.

Well, it's still sub-freezing here and I've been cutting away my dead banana tree (it *was* big enough to bear fruit) but we'll supposedly be back in the 70's (f) this weekend.  Then I'll have a true grasp of how many plants I lost.  I've been fortunate, we only lost power for 4 hours and so far nothing has burst.  So far. 

We keep the heat on high and the fireplace going to produce enough ambient temp to *hopefully* keep the pipes thawed.  We haven't lost any pressure so I'm optimistic.  The issue with pipes isn't the freezing, it's the thawing.  The copper expands WITH the frozen water, but that process thins it out too much and it can no longer handle the full pressure of running water.  So we're not out of the woods yet.

Roads are fine, but stores are bare and gas is hard to find, which is odd since no one is supposed to be traveling, but whatever... I guess for generators, and of course those caught up in the fear mongering.

I've plenty of food so ain't worried about that... I'm more concerned about my plants than anything. 😃 We just bought this house, and one reason was because the yard was full of mature plants.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Absolutely; the difference between say, a coal plant and a wind/solar source is that batteries are *required* on the latter.  That makes those techs not yet a viable solution.  I'm happy with Nuclear, tbh.


Where I live there is a new coal plant put in a number of years ago (well before I moved here).  Many local coal mines and other sources are far less available now (closures and such) so the price of electricity is steadily rising here.  Coal is becoming less available and more expensive as more and more coal mines get shut down.  I can't imagine this new-ish coal plant will still be used in 10 years because the price of coal produced electricity will not be able to compete.

I think of battery technology as the fuel of renewable energy systems (even though it isn't, but it plays a similar role). At one point coal was easy to find and cheap to mine so we used that for quite a while.  Natural gas became more plentiful and cheap so it started to be used more commonly.  Nuclear was never cheap on the startup but has always had long term potential.  As technology changes the dynamics of what makes more sense to generate electricity changes.  Solar and other renewables make sense now but will become much more friendly to scale once battery tech gets cheaper with higher capacity.

Renewables can make a lot of sense on smaller scales today.  I have a solar setup that is smaller than it needs to be but I'm using it as a learning project.  I plan to go completely off grid with my farm within a few years.  Where I live solar makes the most sense and is the most accessible for my needs.  I can't gain energy independence with anything except renewables at this point.

 
Solar and other renewables make sense now but will become much more friendly to scale once battery tech gets cheaper with higher capacity.


Note that "batteries" for solar/wind/biomass include things like pumped hydro, molten salt, compressed air, and other technologies. One company has been funded to try robots stacking heavy blocks - a sort of dry pumped hydro. Several countries are >90% renewable energy by combining direct generation + existing storage technology - sometimes actual electrochem batteries, of course. The technology is out there, what is lacking is willpower and investment. There is a lot of money behind not moving to renewable energy, which unfortunately creates drag on both.

 
-21 C here at night, no trouble at all as we are used to such temps, thus it is not common for us for years now. I do remember winters in my childhood when we had -25-29C and it was common. Now days I do not even turn on the heaters if it is not -5 outside...

It all is a matter of getting used and being prepared to something.
It's easy to mock from a position of self aggrandizement. Texas is typically hot. Ice is quite uncommon. They had no system in place for this kind of weather. I remember when I lived there and we had two inches of snow and everyone stayed home. 

It's not about a 150 car pile-up, it's about never having a chance to learn to drive on ice. Same as people who live in incredibly cold areas never learning to swim because the water is too cold. If you never have a chance to learn, you are likely going to fail spectacularly. 

I think we're all willfully missing the point and that is: we're fighting among ourselves over things we had no control over and it isn't helping anything. How do we get something useful from this now? What do we change from here? I'm more worried about ERCOT changing the price of energy from $25 per unit of electricity to $9,000. That is going to crush so many people. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm sure those affected appreciated the initial sympathies.  But this thread got political, which is still against the rules, and that's why we're closing it.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top