Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 53

Thread: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

  1. #11
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    By building less power plants, we use less "generated" electricity. Of course, not everybody is going to be able to install their own wind or solar, so most power plants will still be needed. There will be a bit less profit for the power companies, but there will still be plenty of profit. And there will be greener technology that is less expensive, since the power companies won't need to purchase as much coal or oil.
    I think I'll use your "a bit less profit" to mean you don't have a clue, and don't really care. Fair enough. I thought since you were following it, you'd know if there was any discussion on the issue.

  2. #12
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,764

    Re: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    I think I'll use your "a bit less profit" to mean you don't have a clue, and don't really care. Fair enough. I thought since you were following it, you'd know if there was any discussion on the issue.
    Nice dodge, and nice attack. I DO care. I care about America relying on it's own resources, without having to be blackmailed by foreign energy. I care about reducing the effects of global warming. I care about people being able to install solar and wind on their own property without having to be taxed for it, or being forced to give it away to the energy companies. Seems that you, on the other hand, only care about profits, even if those profits come by stealing the electricity produced by the average citizen who installs wind or solar on their own property.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  3. #13
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Nice dodge, and nice attack. I DO care. I care about America relying on it's own resources, without having to be blackmailed by foreign energy. I care about reducing the effects of global warming. I care about people being able to install solar and wind on their own property without having to be taxed for it, or being forced to give it away to the energy companies. Seems that you, on the other hand, only care about profits, even if those profits come by stealing the electricity produced by the average citizen who installs wind or solar on their own property.
    LOL

    Actually all you seem to be wanting to do is pound the politics of the green agenda without applying any understanding of how it can be accomplished.

    Solar and wind are not always available. At peak production, it's going to be imperative that any excess be stored for later use. That means it will need to be transmitted some kind of distance to then be released back to the grid, whether local or larger scale, when needed.

    Obviously, your agenda can't see that far. Fair enough. Emotionalism isn't going to address the issue, no matter how wound up enviros get.

  4. #14
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,635

    Re: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    Seems you are ignoring the obvious. Now it could be that not having to build new power plants could offset the cost of replacing powerlines and other equipment. What if it doesn't? If 20 people out of 100 no longer need much energy from the grid, do the remaining 80 have to cover all the costs?
    Seems you are ignorant of the obvious... as conservation of energy has been the buzzword slogan for a few years now, everything from light bulbs CONs hate to more efficient HVAC, the trend has been for reduced consumption and more responsive forms of energy production- such as gas turbine power plants instead of slow to respond boiler plants.

    But what part of the TOTAL consumption is home use vs business??? How much energy does a single Walmart consume? Whining over buying a few kilowatts of power is bogus.

    The issue was the ability to sell surplus DIY energy to the power company, not people using less- which is a trend not connected to home production of power. The power companies are already dealing with a trend toward more efficient home use of power- try and stay focused on the issue...

  5. #15
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    Seems you are ignorant of the obvious... as conservation of energy has been the buzzword slogan for a few years now, everything from light bulbs CONs hate to more efficient HVAC, the trend has been for reduced consumption and more responsive forms of energy production- such as gas turbine power plants instead of slow to respond boiler plants.

    But what part of the TOTAL consumption is home use vs business??? How much energy does a single Walmart consume? Whining over buying a few kilowatts of power is bogus.

    The issue was the ability to sell surplus DIY energy to the power company, not people using less- which is a trend not connected to home production of power. The power companies are already dealing with a trend toward more efficient home use of power- try and stay focused on the issue...
    Actually, I am extremely well informed on the subject. I'm sorry you are so willing to prove you are not.

    Had you been able to get past your reactionary desire to respond, you would have seen I was not questioning the transition to renewable energy, I was just asking how revenue to maintain the grid is going to be dealt with as more and more people convert over to solar and wind. Pretty simple, and a real issue, if you were informed.

    Obviously that is not something enviros want to think about. Good thing rational people do.

    However, thanks for your opinion, despite it's substantial gaps in relevance and reality.

  6. #16
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,635

    Re: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    Actually, I am extremely well informed on the subject. I'm sorry you are so willing to prove you are not. Had you been able to get past your reactionary desire to respond, you would have seen I was not questioning the transition to renewable energy, I was just asking how revenue to maintain the grid is going to be dealt with as more and more people convert over to solar and wind. Pretty simple, and a real issue, if you were informed. Obviously that is not something enviros want to think about. Good thing rational people do. However, thanks for your opinion, despite it's substantial gaps in relevance and reality.
    What is most apparent is you give ZERO facts or figures to back any claim of being informed. You just sound like a typical CON deflector. You conjure up a 20% number for who will be paying less (no mention of how much) with ZERO support for that number, and no support to how the grid is paid for now. (most 'providers' buy their power from others and act as middlemen, the grid is as much for the power companies as any end user.) The amount of 'sell back' is a pittance to the amount being sent by the power companies.

    Will the sell back be at the same price the end user pays for the energy? no

    Will the feedback energy tax the grid? no

    What percent of the total production on that part of the grid is your fantasy numbers?

    Fact is if you had used ANY realistic numbers to ask your CON deflection questions I would have walked on by. But you asked a bogus question- the grid will be paid for as it always has, less than 1% of people will set-up an alternative energy source that is capable of selling any readable amount of power. Since the power company buys at it's costs and resells the home produced at their retail rate, they really have nothing to bitch about.

  7. #17
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    What is most apparent is you give ZERO facts or figures to back any claim of being informed. You just sound like a typical CON deflector. You conjure up a 20% number for who will be paying less (no mention of how much) with ZERO support for that number, and no support to how the grid is paid for now. (most 'providers' buy their power from others and act as middlemen, the grid is as much for the power companies as any end user.) The amount of 'sell back' is a pittance to the amount being sent by the power companies.

    Will the sell back be at the same price the end user pays for the energy? no

    Will the feedback energy tax the grid? no

    What percent of the total production on that part of the grid is your fantasy numbers?

    Fact is if you had used ANY realistic numbers to ask your CON deflection questions I would have walked on by. But you asked a bogus question- the grid will be paid for as it always has, less than 1% of people will set-up an alternative energy source that is capable of selling any readable amount of power. Since the power company buys at it's costs and resells the home produced at their retail rate, they really have nothing to bitch about.
    LOL

    It wasn't a Dog Whistle, it was just a question. Obviously you treated it as if it were the former. I just used an example of 20% as an illustration. Why are you being so partisan about a legitimate question?

    If you want to be treated other than what you're proving yourself to be, I'd be interested in your take on how the grid of the future will be maintained, when the rate payer model currently in place is no longer feasible.

    If you can't accomplish this simple feat, them by all means, please ignore my posts and find a different windmill to tilt at Mr. Quixote.

  8. #18
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,402

    Re: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    WTH?

    Why answer if you're not going to answer the question? It's a legitimate issue.
    The answer is the utilities can buy less coal and oil to pay for the green energy. Duh..

  9. #19
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    The answer is the utilities can buy less coal and oil to pay for the green energy. Duh..
    I didn't realize my question would afford me an opportunity to witness how completely uninformed enviros are on the entire concept. Thanks for more evidence.

  10. #20
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,093

    Re: U.S. court upholds FERC rules on electric grid planning

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    LOL

    Actually all you seem to be wanting to do is pound the politics of the green agenda without applying any understanding of how it can be accomplished.

    Solar and wind are not always available. At peak production, it's going to be imperative that any excess be stored for later use. That means it will need to be transmitted some kind of distance to then be released back to the grid, whether local or larger scale, when needed.

    Obviously, your agenda can't see that far. Fair enough. Emotionalism isn't going to address the issue, no matter how wound up enviros get.
    This is the problem with the debate... you talk about "storing excess".. no, you use solar and wind to the max when it is available and when it is not.. use coal, oil, nuclear or what ever there else is. The idea is not to replace oil/coal here and now, because we dont have the technology to do that... our battery storage tech is pathetic and we dont invest enough in it. The idea is to lower the usage as much as possible to extend the life span of fossil fuels while we invest in R&D on alternative energies.
    PeteEU

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •