Wesley C. Rolley on thu 21 dec 00
>I'm hoping someone on the list has more knowlege and information on all this
>to share.
June,
I agree with whoever (Mel?) said that this is too complex for simple
solutions. The lack of intelligent management of these resources at either
the state or national level is one of the reasons that I joined the Green
Party. The answers that blame "the crazy environmentalists" are just as
simplistic as the "solutions" that got us into this mess in the first
place. However, I do follow it all closely and can give everyone some
factual information. It was also covered very well on ABC's Nightline news
program last night.
To start with, there is a relatively high demand for energy service right
now. However, it is not as high as it was last summer when electric demand
was high for air conditioning. In fact, the demand in the summer of 2000
was not as high as the peak demand in the summer of 1999. So, demand is
only PART of the problem.
Electric use is closely related to other natural resource considerations.
One of the largest uses of Natural Gas in California is to build up enough
steam to generate electricity. If we did not have an electri use problem,
there would not be a natural gas problem. This is also connected to the
distribution of water in California. During one recent period of electric
power constraint, the pumps that carry water from N. California to S.
California were shut down for two hours. This provided enough additional
electric power for 500,000 homes (big pumps).
Then, the designers of a "de-regulated" industry managed to screw it up
even more. First, they forced electric service companies to divest
themselves of electric generation capabilities. So, the "public" utilites
have to buy all of their power. Then, the politicians put a cap on the
amount that could be charged to the public for use. The service utilities
have to purchase power at market rates and then resell that power to the
public at controlled rates. The utilities have been hemoraghing money.
The market rates for power that were wholesaled $75 to $125 per megawatt
hr. last year are costing the utilities $1500 to $5000 to purchase this
year with much of the profit going to brokers, not the generators. It is
the same electricity coming from the same plants, including hydroelectric
projects that were installed years ago.
More complexities with water. California could generate more power from
some hydro electric plants. However, the same water is used for irrigation
and as drinking water supplies for the state. With rainfall at less than
60% of normal in most of Northern California this year, it would be
irresponsible to increase the drain on reservoirs just to satisfy electric
demand. Therefore, some hydro-electric plants are not running at capacity.
The result is that the demand for power is met by burning more natural
gas, driving up demand there also.
During last summer's peak, demand was met by deferring maintenance at some
plants. These have been offline this fall to perform that maintenance.
One of the affected plants was the Diablo Canyon Nuculear Generation plant.
This plant is back online now, but while it was down for normal
maintenance, the demand was met by burning more natural gas at the time
when normal home demand for natural gas for heating was very high.
Some things are clear.
- More power generation capacity is required. This will primarily come
from burning fossil fuels, especially natural gas (coal produces acid rain,
nuculear is bad, and the federal government is blowing up dams, not
building new ones). Therefore, the demand for natural gas will continue to
be a problem every winter for a long time.
- Deregulation that controls one side of the equation and leaves the other
completely un-constrained is a formula for failure. At a minimum, it will
take 5 years for new facilities to go through the planning process, be
constructed, and to go online. This is an ongoing problem for California,
and, I think for most of the Western US. Solving this problem requires
more political willpower than most politicians have.
- The linkage between electric, natural gas and water is complex and not
fully understood by any governmental agency. I like where I live now, but
there is some valid logic in the idea that much work is now dealing with
information product rather than manufactured product. It would be much
better if those workers lived where resources were plentiful and we moved
their work product around rather than having them all live in Silicon
Valley and moving the resources around. California has just gone through a
period of heavier than average winter precipitation. This year may just be
the start of another dry cycle and that will hit everyone harder and
require us to pump more water, using the electricity that could support
half a million homes.
- We need more investment in renewable energy sources, such as solar and
wind turbine generation. With the rise in the cost of other energy
sources, solar becomes more attractive. In particular, it produces peak
output during those hot summer afternoons when demand it highest in this
state. One Green Party member ran for office not far from here with a
platform that included mandating that all new construction include some
provision for utilizing solar power for heating water or generating
electricity. She did not win, but the issue was picked up by the winning
candidate. In my small subdivision of our town, there are home owner
association ules which preculde having visible solar panels on any
building. Such rules need to be replaced by common sense. An increased
market for solar will drive prices down.
Wes
Wes Rolley
"Happiness is to be fully engaged in the activity that you believe in and,
if you are very good at it, well that's a bonus." -- Henry Moore
http://www.refpub.com
SCOX on thu 21 dec 00
hi Wesley, I belong to Co-op America and I receive the LOHOS magazine. I read
an article about the current cost of solar power. The cost has gone from $100 a
watt to $5, i believe it was stated that for $1500 you could run a typical house
hold. Of course this does nt include the current tend in Mac mansion. When i was
a carpenter in the early eighties it was estimated then that all homes would need
to be retro fitted for energy conservation before the year 2000. I guess that word
did not translate into action. So now we are all staring energy problems straight
in the face. How nice to have someone moving in to the white house who does not
have the word conservation in his vocabulary.
So as energy gobblers ( clay people) we are really up against the 'fire brick'
wall. Solar power for kilns, parabolic mirrors, something new????? Our country
really dropped the ball after the Jimmy Carter's reign. So much for leadership.
Go Green Party, Nader for King.
Sincerely, Sue Cox in Florida where we can't count have the pres. to be brother
for gov. and its colder than it should be br 29 degrees happy Hanukah and Merry
Solstice
"Wesley C. Rolley" wrote:
> >I'm hoping someone on the list has more knowlege and information on all this
> >to share.
>
> June,
>
> I agree with whoever (Mel?) said that this is too complex for simple
> solutions. The lack of intelligent management of these resources at either
> the state or national level is one of the reasons that I joined the Green
> Party. The answers that blame "the crazy environmentalists" are just as
> simplistic as the "solutions" that got us into this mess in the first
> place. However, I do follow it all closely and can give everyone some
> factual information. It was also covered very well on ABC's Nightline news
> program last night.
>
> To start with, there is a relatively high demand for energy service right
> now. However, it is not as high as it was last summer when electric demand
> was high for air conditioning. In fact, the demand in the summer of 2000
> was not as high as the peak demand in the summer of 1999. So, demand is
> only PART of the problem.
>
> Electric use is closely related to other natural resource considerations.
> One of the largest uses of Natural Gas in California is to build up enough
> steam to generate electricity. If we did not have an electri use problem,
> there would not be a natural gas problem. This is also connected to the
> distribution of water in California. During one recent period of electric
> power constraint, the pumps that carry water from N. California to S.
> California were shut down for two hours. This provided enough additional
> electric power for 500,000 homes (big pumps).
>
> Then, the designers of a "de-regulated" industry managed to screw it up
> even more. First, they forced electric service companies to divest
> themselves of electric generation capabilities. So, the "public" utilites
> have to buy all of their power. Then, the politicians put a cap on the
> amount that could be charged to the public for use. The service utilities
> have to purchase power at market rates and then resell that power to the
> public at controlled rates. The utilities have been hemoraghing money.
> The market rates for power that were wholesaled $75 to $125 per megawatt
> hr. last year are costing the utilities $1500 to $5000 to purchase this
> year with much of the profit going to brokers, not the generators. It is
> the same electricity coming from the same plants, including hydroelectric
> projects that were installed years ago.
>
> More complexities with water. California could generate more power from
> some hydro electric plants. However, the same water is used for irrigation
> and as drinking water supplies for the state. With rainfall at less than
> 60% of normal in most of Northern California this year, it would be
> irresponsible to increase the drain on reservoirs just to satisfy electric
> demand. Therefore, some hydro-electric plants are not running at capacity.
> The result is that the demand for power is met by burning more natural
> gas, driving up demand there also.
>
> During last summer's peak, demand was met by deferring maintenance at some
> plants. These have been offline this fall to perform that maintenance.
> One of the affected plants was the Diablo Canyon Nuculear Generation plant.
> This plant is back online now, but while it was down for normal
> maintenance, the demand was met by burning more natural gas at the time
> when normal home demand for natural gas for heating was very high.
>
> Some things are clear.
>
> - More power generation capacity is required. This will primarily come
> from burning fossil fuels, especially natural gas (coal produces acid rain,
> nuculear is bad, and the federal government is blowing up dams, not
> building new ones). Therefore, the demand for natural gas will continue to
> be a problem every winter for a long time.
>
> - Deregulation that controls one side of the equation and leaves the other
> completely un-constrained is a formula for failure. At a minimum, it will
> take 5 years for new facilities to go through the planning process, be
> constructed, and to go online. This is an ongoing problem for California,
> and, I think for most of the Western US. Solving this problem requires
> more political willpower than most politicians have.
>
> - The linkage between electric, natural gas and water is complex and not
> fully understood by any governmental agency. I like where I live now, but
> there is some valid logic in the idea that much work is now dealing with
> information product rather than manufactured product. It would be much
> better if those workers lived where resources were plentiful and we moved
> their work product around rather than having them all live in Silicon
> Valley and moving the resources around. California has just gone through a
> period of heavier than average winter precipitation. This year may just be
> the start of another dry cycle and that will hit everyone harder and
> require us to pump more water, using the electricity that could support
> half a million homes.
>
> - We need more investment in renewable energy sources, such as solar and
> wind turbine generation. With the rise in the cost of other energy
> sources, solar becomes more attractive. In particular, it produces peak
> output during those hot summer afternoons when demand it highest in this
> state. One Green Party member ran for office not far from here with a
> platform that included mandating that all new construction include some
> provision for utilizing solar power for heating water or generating
> electricity. She did not win, but the issue was picked up by the winning
> candidate. In my small subdivision of our town, there are home owner
> association ules which preculde having visible solar panels on any
> building. Such rules need to be replaced by common sense. An increased
> market for solar will drive prices down.
>
> Wes
>
> Wes Rolley
>
> "Happiness is to be fully engaged in the activity that you believe in and,
> if you are very good at it, well that's a bonus." -- Henry Moore
>
> http://www.refpub.com
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at melpots@pclink.com.
| |
|
