On March 18, wind output reached 7,917 megawatts — more than 500 megawatts above last year's record
Austin American-Statesman
By Laylan Copelin
Published March 27, 2012
Read the complete story
The state's primary electricity grid is experiencing record amounts of electricity generated by wind this month.
March winds are only part of the story.
The Electric Reliability Council of Texas this month initiated a new computer program that fine-tunes how much wind-generated power can be safely transmitted.
"In the past, we've had some slack built into some of our transmission limits because those limits had to be set well in advance," said Kent Saathoff, ERCOT's director of grid operations. "The new tool runs an analysis on real-time conditions every 30 minutes, so it gives us a more fine-tuned analysis."
ERCOT initiated the new analysis March 6. The next day, a new wind record was established, and 11 days later, the record was broken.
At the time, wind accounted for almost 24 percent of the electricity on the grid, which serves 80 percent of the state's population, including Central Texas.
KLBJ Austin TX (March 22, 2012) – The woman in charge of public accounts in Texas says voters need to do more research on public debt, or "bond" projects before headed to the ballot box. Susan Combs, the State Comptroller, also is urging public leaders to be more fiscally prudent with projects to put before voters. She says Texas is #2 in the United States, in the ten most populous, next to New York, in the local debt on the books. She says Texas has $7,983 per person, as of 2009, while New York was $8,700.
Texas Observer | By Forrest Wilder (March 8, 2012) To Avoid Blackouts, Texas Regulators Plan to Artificially Boost Profits for Utilities – Ten years into the experiment with electric deregulation in Texas, state regulators have reached an interesting impasse. They've abdicated almost all their responsibilities as public stewards to the marketplace but face enormous pressure not to allow rolling blackouts to darken the grid this summer. With Texas' fully deregulated power market, the Public Utility Commission has few tools to bring new power generation online.
It appears the the PUC's solution is to artificially boost prices, almost assuredly driving citizens' electric bills higher (and padding some corporate bottom lines). The Austin American-Statesman reported on a meeting of the PUC commissioners, three Perry appointees, yesterday:
Texas Observer | By Forrest Wilder (March 8, 2012) To Avoid Blackouts, Texas Regulators Plan to Artificially Boost Profits for Utilities – Ten years into the experiment with electric deregulation in Texas, state regulators have reached an interesting impasse. They've abdicated almost all their responsibilities as public stewards to the marketplace but face enormous pressure not to allow rolling blackouts to darken the grid this summer. With Texas' fully deregulated power market, the Public Utility Commission has few tools to bring new power generation online.
It appears the the PUC's solution is to artificially boost prices, almost assuredly driving citizens' electric bills higher (and padding some corporate bottom lines). The Austin American-Statesman reported on a meeting of the PUC commissioners, three Perry appointees, yesterday:
The Texas Public Utility Commission on Wednesday signaled a willingness to address looming electricity shortages by allowing wholesale prices to hit new highs during peak demands for power . . . Utility commission Chair Donna Nelson suggested raising the cap to $4,500 (from $3,000 per megawatt-hour) by July 1 and phasing in an increase to $7,500 over several years, depending on a study by outside consultants. That study is to be completed by June 1 . . . "I want to send the market a strong signal so we can get the investment we need," Nelson said.
8 comments:
When the State Comptroller (a Republican) warns voters to be concerned about the mounting bond debt of counties, and when she asks counties to be prudent when they contemplate putting a bond issue to the public to vote on, THEN
you know we should be concerned about our #1 and #6 standings in measures of debt among all 254 Texas counties.
And of course when the fossil fuel controlled right wing government of Texas warns of 1) debt for projects that will reduce our dependence on fossil fuels AND 2) debt that makes it harder for the state's big energy companies who own the right wing politicians in Texas to monopolize the product, you know the debt warning is bogus.
Texas could simply pay down or pay off the wind energy debt by geting rid of the multitudes of state tax subsidies enjoyed by the energy and fossil fuel companies.
Right wingers everywhere need to get past the ridiculous ideological rigidity that ALL debt is bad.
That is especially true for the debt concept of an interim increased debt as a step to expand a good idea that will ultimately make our entire economic infrastructure better and work to solve major problems later.
Texas nipping at the heels of number one Liberal Yankee Elitist New York State in debt per capita?? Never woulda thunk. Is this an alternate universe or are southern conservative republicans just full of it?
Rocky B why don't you read before you mindlessly respond with an attack on "right wing politicians".
The "debt" is not a debt for wind energy. You have combined two completely unrelated stories.
The wind energy story was indicating that due to the amount of wind in March, nearly 24% of all the electricity supplied to the grid was due to wind power when wind power was peaking.
The debt story relates to DEBT BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT. The statement by Combs had absolutely nothing to do with windpower, energy, electricity rates, etc. The statement by Combs related generally to a warning about debt of local governments such as counties.
Your concept of "interim debt" is laughable. The term "interim" suggests a beginning and an ending. But what you really promote is never-ending debt. All we have seen in this county is an ever-increasing debt load with no end in sight.
Your "interim" has a fundamental flaw. You are all too willing to ignore the current state of affairs (i.e., level of debt) since you are only too happy to leap into more debt despite the large debt load local government already has.
Blow harder - maybe we'll make it up to 25% wind power this month.
Anonymous, I stand corrected. I need to learn to get past Ochoa combining two separate stories in one headline.
However, I have to really give myself a break on the erroneous assumption I made.
Anytime I read something about too much debt, I am so used to having it be some right wing nonsense about too much big government this or that.
You got me on this one. But In the end you and your right wing political party are about as ignorant about economics as they come.
Interim debt will only br permanent if you keep lowering taxes for the special interest beneficiaries of that corporate welfare debt that you Republicans are so fond of.
Be a man and give your name - and I will set up a public forum for you and I to debate these economic issues. I will pay for the room at the community center, publicize it in the Roundup.
You can prepare questions for me and I for you.
What do you say? Wanna dance?
@ Rock B April 2, 2012 11:48 PM who said:
Anytime I read something about too much debt, I am so used to having it be some right wing nonsense about too much big government this or that.
Rocky, the only one making it "right wing nonsense" is you.
You got me on this one. But In the end you and your right wing political party are about as ignorant about economics as they come.
Rocky, you "got" yourself. You are certainly welcome to your opinion even though you have no facts to base it on. You made completely unsubstantiated assumptions about party affiliations. Then you made unsubstantiated assumptions about my knowledge or education with respect to economics. Are you so rash with respect to business decisions regarding your clients' monies as a financial advisor?
Interim debt will only br permanent if you keep lowering taxes for the special interest beneficiaries of that corporate welfare debt that you Republicans are so fond of.
Are you even capable of communicating without making assumptions about political party affiliations or attempting to turn every statement on every subject into a rant about particular political parties?
Your economic view is rather interesting and hardly befitting of one of such self-assurance as to your economic skills. The debt exists when borrowing is rising faster than payments made on the debt. There is a current state of affairs (balance sheet) and an income and an outflow which don't support reducing the debt that is the current state of affairs.
Your rant about corporate welfare is economically irrelevant or at least missing some major components. Your argument focuses only who you expect to pay down the debt. Implicitly you don't want it to be you. You also fail to address continued borrowing.
Be a man and give your name - and I will set up a public forum for you and I to debate these economic issues. I will pay for the room at the community center, publicize it in the Roundup.
You can prepare questions for me and I for you.
What do you say? Wanna dance?
Rocky (or should we call you macho Rocky now?): much to your chagrin, "anonymous" is all you are going to get. From your unsolicited statements on this and other postings, you've already demonstrated the following:
i) superiority complex
ii) lack of logical reasoning
iii) lack of attention to detail
iv) inability to effectively communicate
So why don't you quit trying to proclaim your superiority (I didn't buy it!); improve the logical reasoning between your hypothesis and conclusion; pay better attention to detail when reading articles; and quit trying to convert every communication into your rant about political parties and an accusation that anyone disagreeing with you must inherently be a "right winger" or "Tea Party member".
Good luck.
In other words, still a weasel - and not man enough to dance. Very predictable.
Don't understand why you keep asking other men to dance with you Rocky and then berate them for declining the invitation. I suppose you want it to be a "swing" dance? Maybe they aren't interested in being your dance partner in any sense of the phrase.
Post a Comment