moonbat

Trump-Appointed Regulators Reject Plan to Rescue Coal and Nuclear Plants

Rate this topic

115 posts in this topic

Ruh-Roh. 

 

One term president.

 

#Winning

 

 

Quote

(from Washington Post)

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Monday unanimously rejected a proposal by Energy Secretary Rick Perry that would have propped up nuclear and coal power struggling in competitive electricity markets.

 

The independent five-member commission includes four people appointed by President Trump, three of them Republicans. Its decision is binding.

 

 

 

Edited by TimS
Links removed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good.  Natural gas is king, economically, for the next couple of decades. no reason to piss into the wind on this, no matter how generous Murray Brothers coal was to DJT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 mins ago, BrianBM said:

Good.  Natural gas is king, economically, for the next couple of decades. no reason to piss into the wind on this, no matter how generous Murray Brothers coal was to DJT.

:agree:

2 mins ago, Riverboat33 said:

No government subsidies, good !

That should go for solar too. 

:agree:

 

I'm no fan of subsidies. That said, it's better on wind and solar if we have to pick a lesser evil. 

I firmly believe with the needed incentive advances can be made to make both of them viable alternatives. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The technical state of the art in both wind and solar is advancing at a brisk pace.  

 

I can mentally accommodate a subsidy for an occasional nuke too. If global warming predictions hold up, there will be major changes in rain distribution here and elsewhere. Dams on the Colorado River are not getting the rain needed to maintain the water pressure that irrigates and powers a lot of the southwest.  Reactors aren't ideal, but they're one of those baseline facilities that can provide a stable, long term power load.  They can be part of the solution.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are not viable in their markets then they should not be propped up.

 

More modern plants that are more efficient, safer, and cleaner are needed to replace them.

 

That being said some New England communities found out that their wind power projects were not enough to keep them warm in this cold snap.  They had to fire up some old coal plants to supplement them. They would have been better off building a mix of more modern and efficient power plants.

 

We may have the largest reserves of Natural Gas in the world and it burns clean. Water vapor is the primary gas produced when you burn natural gas. Propane which is byproduct of producing Natural gas and some petroleum products is not as efficient, does not create as many BTU's and also produces ethylene gas when you burn it.

 

Obama blocked the construction of new liquefied natural gas production facilities when Europe and other countries were in desperate need of an alternative sources of natural gas.  The only reason I can think of to block the construction of the plants was to please Putin who has the European Countries by the short hairs when it comes to selling them their natural gas supplies. Maybe it could also be will full blindness in thinking that any fossil fuel is bad fuel no matter how clean and plentiful it is.

Edited by Jay Blair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I recall correctly, wasn't coal country in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania Trump country?

 

I wonder what they are thinking right about now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 mins ago, moonbat said:

If I recall correctly, wasn't coal country in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania Trump country?

 

I wonder what they are thinking right about now.

They have access to the free market now, instead of Obama trying to crush them.  Why would that bother them ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 mins ago, moonbat said:

If I recall correctly, wasn't coal country in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania Trump country?

 

I wonder what they are thinking right about now.

I would guess they are thinking they are glad Hillary is not POTUS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I recall correctly, wasn't coal country in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania Trump country?

 

I wonder what they are thinking right about now.

 

Those coal producers are thinking that they are thankful some naïve liberals in New England were stupid enough to think wind power would create enough power to keep them warm in the Winter, so the had to fire up there old coal power plants and buy more of their coal.

Edited by Jay Blair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 mins ago, Jay Blair said:

If I recall correctly, wasn't coal country in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania Trump country?

 

I wonder what they are thinking right about now.

 

They are thinking that they are thankful some naïve liberals in New England were stupid enough to think wind power would create enough power to keep them warm in the Winter so the had to fire up there old coal power plants.

I don’t doubt this but am interested, tried google to no avail.

Can you point me to a story? Not asking for proof, just piques my curiosity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am trying to remember the source, but I did not see it on Google when I tried to find it again.  What a surprise. I would probably have to go 10 or more pages deep.

 

It was a Federal FERC report that stated with the polar vortexes the last few years the Wind Turbines were freezing up and turning slowly, so they had to use a lot of power to de-ice them and a large number of old coal power plants that were slated to be closed had to be fired up on an emergency basis to take up the slack to insure New England stayed warm.

 

This Winter has been particularly bad for the Northeast.

 

Go figure. who would have guessed wind turbines would be affected by winter snow and ice storms. Maybe someone with a working brain.

 

Where is Al Gore when you need him.

 

 

Edited by Jay Blair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 mins ago, Jay Blair said:

..............This Winter has been particularly bad for the Northeast...........

 

It's only January 8th. :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 mins ago, Jay Blair said:

I am trying to remember the source, but I did not see it on Google when I tried to find it again.  What a surprise. I would probably have to go 10 or more pages deep.

 

It was a Federal FERC report that stated with the polar vortexes the last couple of years the Wind Turbines were freezing up and turning slowly, so they had to use a lot of power to de-ice them and a large number of old coal power plants that were slated to be close had to be fired up on an emergency basis to take up the slack to insure New England stayed warm.

 

 

Sounds quite dubious since there are 2-3 functional coal plants in New England. (One I believe closed in Somerset, so maybe 2). 

But I’ll have take your word for it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PlumFishing said:

Sounds quite dubious since there are 2-3 functional coal plants in New England. (One I believe closed in Somerset, so maybe 2). 

But I’ll have take your word for it. 

 

They were slated to be closed permanently and had to be fired up again on an emergency basis. That is all the government report said.

 

A lot of New England depends on power from Quebec Canada and some of the plants may have been up there and Quebec sells power on the grid as far south as NYC. Much of their power comes from hydro, but they also have some coal and natural gas plants.

 

Many of the power companies in the US have sold their power generation divisions due to environmental regs and buy their power elsewhere. They are mostly power transmission and sales companies maintaining their own transmission lines, sub stations, and service to their customers. A large portion of your bill is to support the local infrastructure and power service company. They maintain your service and buy your energy for you on the grid.

 

If the grid goes down you have a big problem like the blackout they had in NYC.

 

Power Generation has turned into a highly regulated and specialized business that many power companies no longer want to deal with. Much easier just to buy it.  It is sold on the open market like most other things and its price is mostly affected by the price of natural gas since many of the plants have converted to natural gas to deal with the environmental regs. Hydro is generally the cheapest form of energy, but it is now frowned upon by environmentalists just like nuclear energy, but for different reasons.

 

If you live in a highly regulated state like Mass. it is reasonable to assume that most of your power now comes from out of state. 

 

It is good if you don't want power plants in you community or state, but bad if there is a problem with the grid.  It is one of the reasons were are so vulnerable to a terrorist attacking or hacking our electrical grid systems.

Edited by Jay Blair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.