Oklahoma Charges through the Nose: Solar Success Attracts Fees

[SunEagle]

Sorry to confuse you with facts, but according to BP, we only got about 100 years of coal reserves. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporat...-reserves.html

Hardly a long run solution.

Sure looked like BP data had North America at about 244 years. Of course that will be extended if we reduce consumption based on the new EPA rules. Maybe by then someone will have developed Fusion as a power source or something not even though about yet.

Look. I am all for developing and using renewable energy. But the fact is we still need energy 24/7 and renewable energy will not provide that. There has to be a "base" generating system of some kind to support the energy needs. Fossil fuels will be a big part. I am hoping for a rebirth of Nuclear to take the lead.

The problem is the "gap" time moving from one energy source to another. If you delay the start then there will be power shortages. Best practice for us all is to reduce the impact of an energy gap by reducing our consumption.

[JCP]

That just means nuclear needs to come along faster - PV is not the utility scale solution - if the bugs are worked out of solar thermal and there is a good storage solution then it might help.

Proven reserves of Uranium are about 80 years, and may reach 240 with new finds. And that's only based on today's consumption. We could always try to harness more uranium from the sea but right now the technology is totally cost prohibitive.

I wish that there was an easy answer out there, but it sure seems pretty bleak for my offsprings if we don't try to harness more energy from renewables and start focusing on conservation. The answer is most likely multifold.

[russ]

Sorry to confuse you with facts, but according to BP, we only got about 100 years of coal reserves. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporat...-reserves.html

Hardly a long run solution.

That just means nuclear needs to come along faster - PV is not the utility scale solution - if the bugs are worked out of solar thermal and there is a good storage solution then it might help.

[JCP]

Installing more renewable generation without adding 24/7 non-renewable generation will paint you into a corner. Eventually the lights will go out because the renewable is not 24/7 and there isn't any viable way to store the excess energy from the renewable generation.

As for reserves of non-renewable not looking good!!! Give me a break. With the new EPA rules there will be a whole lot of coal left in the ground that will not be used because it is too dirty to some people. That is until the lights go out and the people scream for power generation no matter how dirty it is.

Sorry to confuse you with facts, but according to BP, we only got about 100 years of coal reserves. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporat...-reserves.html

Hardly a long run solution.

[SunEagle]

I don't disagree that we have crazy greenies in CA, but you're oversimplifying and disregarding the fact that CA has brought on line quite a few plants in state. Electricity capacity has gone up in the last 10 years. The fact that plants are going up in neighboring states probably has more to do with our crazy CEQA process and the fact that labor is cheaper in AZ than CA.

The one point I'll grant is that as a country, we'll need more capacity as long as we keep growing our population and economy. Hopefully, renewables are a big piece of it, because proven reserves of non renewables do not look good in the long run.

Installing more renewable generation without adding 24/7 non-renewable generation will paint you into a corner. Eventually the lights will go out because the renewable is not 24/7 and there isn't any viable way to store the excess energy from the renewable generation.

As for reserves of non-renewable not looking good!!! Give me a break. With the new EPA rules there will be a whole lot of coal left in the ground that will not be used because it is too dirty to some people. That is until the lights go out and the people scream for power generation no matter how dirty it is.

[JCP]

California is trying to green itself. And it's failing. Lets make the air cleaner. Oh and get rid of the ugly power plant at the same time. That's a win-win. Oh, but we can't build a efficient replacement plant. And on a cold winter night, I want clean electric power to heat my house because gas can sometimes explode, or it makes my mother-in-law sick. And all the dammed up rivers, they should be free, so we'll knock down the dams and hydro plants. There , all pretty.

That's whats happening in California. And Arizona is building plants to sell electricity to Calif. And Mexico too.

I don't disagree that we have crazy greenies in CA, but you're oversimplifying and disregarding the fact that CA has brought on line quite a few plants in state. Electricity capacity has gone up in the last 10 years. The fact that plants are going up in neighboring states probably has more to do with our crazy CEQA process and the fact that labor is cheaper in AZ than CA.

The one point I'll grant is that as a country, we'll need more capacity as long as we keep growing our population and economy. Hopefully, renewables are a big piece of it, because proven reserves of non renewables do not look good in the long run.

[russ]

California is trying to green itself. And it's failing.

The entire west coast is playing that game in one way or another. I hate to go visit my brother in Oregon due to the loony green politics. Washington is playing catchup.

[Mike90250]

I would like to understand how importing electricity is a measure of failure. I'm missing that link. What if we built more power plants than needed in CA and then proceeded to export to neighboring states? Would that be a measure of success? Or maybe it's just markets are work. Googlers build complex algorithms and AZ operates power plants. Comparative advantage at its finest.

Production and capacity are not the same. Fact is that capacity went from 55GW to 74GW in 2012 (72 when deducting San Onofrio). Total annual production went down in 2012 because of the San Onofrio nuclear plant shutdown.

It sure seems like you have an axe to grind with CA, because facts are not supporting your basic argument. Thanks for trying, it's entertaining.

California is trying to green itself. And it's failing. Lets make the air cleaner. Oh and get rid of the ugly power plant at the same time. That's a win-win. Oh, but we can't build a efficient replacement plant. And on a cold winter night, I want clean electric power to heat my house because gas can sometimes explode, or it makes my mother-in-law sick. And all the dammed up rivers, they should be free, so we'll knock down the dams and hydro plants. There , all pretty.

That's whats happening in California. And Arizona is building plants to sell electricity to Calif. And Mexico too.

[SunEagle]

As long as surrounding states have surplus power they are willing to export it isn't too much of a problem. As the NW and other SW states come up against capacity and especially with the loony new rules it will become very problematic. The imported power generally comes at a premium as well.

There are a number of states that export a lot of energy produced by Coal fired generators. With the new EPA rulings I see a lot of that excess energy going away due to coal plant closings. Then those other states that rely on that exported power will be up the creek looking to purchase the power (at a premium) from somewhere else.

[russ]

Political theater but it established that Arizona can't do anything about the power flowing into California. I can just imagine AZ Governor Jan Brewer wagging her bony old finger in the face of the SCE's head honcho as he laughs in her face! Actually, Arizona knew they couldn't do anything but they used the occasion to suggest that if California wanted to boycott Arizona goods and services, they should start with the electricity. It was a good point even though I detest the "papers please" law that started it all.

Papers please law? I have lived in many countries around the world and in everyone of them you were either legal or in deep stuff - the US on that point is stupid. Enforce laws and have legal immigration. Enforce the employment side as well - nothing wrong with employers getting hit if they hire illegals.

[Ian S]

CA was protesting Arizona policies a couple of years back and not wanting to take power from there - how did that work.

Political theater but it established that Arizona can't do anything about the power flowing into California. I can just imagine AZ Governor Jan Brewer wagging her bony old finger in the face of the SCE's head honcho as he laughs in her face! Actually, Arizona knew they couldn't do anything but they used the occasion to suggest that if California wanted to boycott Arizona goods and services, they should start with the electricity. It was a good point even though I detest the "papers please" law that started it all.

[russ]

Actually, the California utilities own large shares of several power plants in Arizona. They don't really have to buy on the open market what they already own.

CA was protesting Arizona policies a couple of years back and not wanting to take power from there - how did that work.

CA does take substantial power from the NW as well - I have seen the transmission lines many times - plus read about the fights over building additional capacity lines.

[Ian S]

As long as surrounding states have surplus power they are willing to export it isn't too much of a problem. As the NW and other SW states come up against capacity and especially with the loony new rules it will become very problematic. The imported power generally comes at a premium as well.

Actually, the California utilities own large shares of several power plants in Arizona. They don't really have to buy on the open market what they already own.

[russ]

I would like to understand how importing electricity is a measure of failure.

As long as surrounding states have surplus power they are willing to export it isn't too much of a problem. As the NW and other SW states come up against capacity and especially with the loony new rules it will become very problematic. The imported power generally comes at a premium as well.

[JCP]

No it is not. From your own link in 2002 CA generated 209,685 Gwh in State, Imported 62,859 Gwh for a total use of 272.544 Gwh. In 2002 CA imported 23% of their electricity.

In 2012 CA Generated 199,101 Gwh (-10,584), Imported 102,866 Gwh (40,007) for a total use of 301,967 Gwh (29,423) In 2012 CA imported 34% (67% increase of imports)of their electricity.

Those are the facts from your own link. In 10 short years CA base capacity has shrunk 6% and use has increased 10% . CA is loosing capacity, not gaining as you are trying to imply. CA energy policy is failing period.

I would like to understand how importing electricity is a measure of failure. I'm missing that link. What if we built more power plants than needed in CA and then proceeded to export to neighboring states? Would that be a measure of success? Or maybe it's just markets are work. Googlers build complex algorithms and AZ operates power plants. Comparative advantage at its finest.

Production and capacity are not the same. Fact is that capacity went from 55GW to 74GW in 2012 (72 when deducting San Onofrio). Total annual production went down in 2012 because of the San Onofrio nuclear plant shutdown.

It sure seems like you have an axe to grind with CA, because facts are not supporting your basic argument. Thanks for trying, it's entertaining.