Hacker News Reader

Comment by cavisne | Hacker News Reader

It's hilarious to look back on this HN post and the top comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14630650

Exactly the same thing happened in South Australia in 2016

1) Renewables % of generation mix grows (wind + solar)

2) Base generation sources get pushed out by economics and regulation (coal)

3) Peak generation sources get squeezed by the economics of wind + solar over summer (lots of wind, lots of sun) and begin to be relegated to backup roles

4) Something bad happens (in SA it was software misconfiguration across multiple wind generation sources)

5) The backup generation gets used for the first time, suprise suprise it doesnt work

6) chaos

View on HN

Sorry, but no. A 2011 FERC report cited problems in Texas gas/coal/nuke plants for failing to weatherize. They didn't fix the problems, and gas and sensing lines froze, taking gas/coal plants offline too.

2/3rds of the power that went offline from the storm was fossil.

Moreover, Texas's independent grid (not connected to the rest of the US) makes it difficult for them to import power from neighboring states.

Stop trying to push political tribalist stories that blame renewables for bog standard failures in traditional systems that could have been avoided.

https://www.powermag.com/ferc-nerc-february-blackouts-in-the...

The heavy reliance on natural gas is not traditional. Its a side effect of 1)

No, it's because natural gas got cheaper, and they switched to the cheaper source.

"The report also addresses the interdependency of the electric and natural gas industries. “Utilities are becoming increasingly reliant on gas-fired generation, in large part because shale production has dramatically reduced the cost of gas,”

In 2011 when this happened before, Texas had even less renewables. I realize you're trying to hard to sell an ideology to blame renewables for what is really, gross mismanagement of the Texas grid, including fossil and nuclear power, but the reality is much more complex than your simple narrative.

https://twitter.com/i/events/1361767999200317440

Which fossil source is cheaper also largely depends on individual markets. The way carbon offset and carbon pricing is implemented in Germany for example, means coal got cheaper than natural gas for electricity. Despite being bad at ramping up quick and being really worse for the climate and environment. Gas would also be a good companion to renewables, simply because a gas turbine is very reactive, something a coal plant is not.

Natural gas got cheaper if you don't include the cost of the power grid going down in the case of weather like this. I do wonder if it would still be cheaper if you do... it's not just the power plants that failed, apparently the pipelines and the natural gas production infrastructure couldn't cope either, and that sounds potentially really expensive to fix.

That doesn't explain why coal and nuclear plants failed. Or why gas power plants in other states are still running. All of which is in line with the 2011 report about TX not winterizing their power plants properly.

Frankly, it seems like you've decided that the issue is renewables and you're searching around for an argument to justify a conclusion you've already come to. Because what you're saying is simply not actually supported by the evidence or consistent with the current situation.

Yeah, but none of that appears to actually be what happened.

Renewables are down from their peak capacity in Texas, but they're actually performing above what the grid thought they'd do. So it's not like ERCOT got caught with their pants down when it comes to renewable generation.

Instead the issue appears to be that thermal (gas, coal, and nuclear) plants all over Texas are failing in the face of cold weather, and because Texas has its own grid it can't shift enough power from nearby states in order to cover the demand.

And it's not like these plants were off and everyone is surprised that they didn't turn on; Texas gets most of its power from natural gas most of the time. More to the point cold weather specific recommendations from back in 2011 weren't followed with sadly predictable consequences.

I think you might have missed this important line:

> Most of the power knocked offline came from thermal sources, Woodfin said, particularly natural gas.

backup generation (gas) is not working. As mentioned. When your only on-demand source of generation is only profitable in peak periods its a recipe for disaster.

Again, this is not what is actually happening. Texas has heaps of on demand natural gas generators. They froze up with the storm and failed to turn on. Has nothing to do with renewable.

Texas gas plants aren't "backup generation". Those are always available, almost always on, full-time-operated facilities.

Yes in Texas gas is used for base load.

Strangely the rules under which some of them operate involve them paying for gas at spot prices (or at least during peak demand), and with spot gas prices being so high (due to pipeline failures limiting supply, and gas for heating having precedence) they had the option to stop generating...

It sounds like in texas's case, the backup generation (renewables) aren't built up enough to take over for when traditional power goes down

Renewables aren’t backup generation. They can’t be activated on demand to cover dips.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com