Off Topic » Some texas electric bills are a shocker!

It was not a good time to be using electric power to heat your home in Texas during the recent deep freeze. Talk about getting screwed!

IMG_9794.JPG - Bild entfernt (keine Rechte)

Zitat von wessie im Beitrag #2

---

I have been conversing with a friend that lives in the La Jolla in the Socialist Republic of California. He is looking across the border with a combination of pity, bemusement and pissing himself laughing.

I am glad I live in a country with a regulated energy market where there are caps on charges and caps on annual increments

of course, such "socialist" ideals would be anathema in Texas. You reap what you sow...

---

Zitat von Ray B im Beitrag #3

---

Zitat von wessie im Beitrag #2

---

I have been conversing with a friend that lives in the La Jolla in the Socialist Republic of California. He is looking across the border with a combination of pity, bemusement and pissing himself laughing.

I am glad I live in a country with a regulated energy market where there are caps on charges and caps on annual increments

of course, such "socialist" ideals would be anathema in Texas. You reap what you sow...

---

Right. The back story is that Texas, in declaring itself the Energy Capitol of the World, has insisted on managing an energy grid separate from the rest of the country - but when push comes to shove, they're lining up for federal dollars and trying to blame it on the tiny fraction of wind and solar power they manage.... I mean, the number of times they talk about seceding from the United States.

All this to introduce those across the pond to the phrase - All hat, no cattle. (All talk, no action). I believe I use to hear my father-in-law from the east end refer to others as, "Mouth and trousers." (All mouth, no trousers)

---

Deregulation, free market competition, and arrogance . Here is a link (long) to NYT article

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/21/us/te...31494ce67a93bfb

Zitat von Ray B im Beitrag #3

---

Zitat von wessie im Beitrag #2

---

I have been conversing with a friend that lives in the La Jolla in the Socialist Republic of California. He is looking across the border with a combination of pity, bemusement and pissing himself laughing.

I am glad I live in a country with a regulated energy market where there are caps on charges and caps on annual increments

of course, such "socialist" ideals would be anathema in Texas. You reap what you sow...

---

Right. The back story is that Texas, in declaring itself the Energy Capitol of the World, has insisted on managing an energy grid separate from the rest of the country - but when push comes to shove, they're lining up for federal dollars and trying to blame it on the tiny fraction of wind and solar power they manage.... I mean, the number of times they talk about seceding from the United States.

---

I think it was several independent companies, yes not all, that took advantage of deregulation and made several economic decisions to reduce cost/increase profitably, and gave some Texans competative low power rates, which now in hind sight was a mistake.

Beyond the death and hardship this has caused, who will be picking up the bill? Certainly the people who lost power, will have to spend thousands repair broken pipes, etc, the business who's been closed, the state of Texas is given relief and now FEMA is also helping, as it should...but that is the tax $$ from all of us...paying for mistakes of private for profit companies who DID know better.

I expect the companies, their stockholders, that made these decisions, pocketed profits over the last years will NOT be assessed ANY financial liability, beyond fixing their own facilities.

Isn't unrestrained capitalism great for the "stockholder class".

It is notable that El Paso, not being part of the "Texas Grid" did just fine.

Telephone, electric power, airlines.............deregulation has delivered lower costs in exchange for lower quality and less reliable service. In much of the US, the cost of electric power production is equal to or less than the distribution cost (power line maintenance and construction). This drives major users to install on-site power production facilities (wind, solar, NG) to avoid distribution costs. However, as more "on-site" production is created, there's less power delivered on the grid and the distribution cost per kW-hr has to increase.

Yep, it's pretty easy to cut costs.

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #8

---

Telephone, electric power, airlines.............deregulation has delivered lower costs in exchange for lower quality and less reliable service. In much of the US, the cost of electric power production is equal to or less than the distribution cost (power line maintenance and construction). This drives major users to install on-site power production facilities (wind, solar, NG) to avoid distribution costs. However, as more "on-site" production is created, there's less power delivered on the grid and the distribution cost per kW-hr has to increase.

Yep, it's pretty easy to cut costs.

---

Zitat von Richard230 im Beitrag #9

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #8

---

Telephone, electric power, airlines.............deregulation has delivered lower costs in exchange for lower quality and less reliable service. In much of the US, the cost of electric power production is equal to or less than the distribution cost (power line maintenance and construction). This drives major users to install on-site power production facilities (wind, solar, NG) to avoid distribution costs. However, as more "on-site" production is created, there's less power delivered on the grid and the distribution cost per kW-hr has to increase.

Yep, it's pretty easy to cut costs.

---

In California, Pacific Graft and Explosion, a publicly traded and state-regulated utility company that supplies both electric and natural gas power to much of northern California have managed over the years to both keep their prices and profits high, maintenance and improvements low, and lawsuits for damages really high - most of which will be paid by their ratepayers, being as they are the only game in town. So you can have it all, even if the government is keeping an eye on you.

---

I spent 32 years of my life working for a major electric utility here in Minnesota. I ran the generators that made the power. I stopped crushing/burning coal in 2007, good riddance to that crap. I spent the rest of my career burning natural gas.

The company I worked for is a very well-run company, despite the local plant management douchebags. Extreme weather does have a detrimental effect on power generation and transmission.

Utility companies all hate regulation, but I believe it's a necessary evil.

Zitat von MrVvrroomm im Beitrag #11

---

I spent 32 years of my life working for a major electric utility here in Minnesota. I ran the generators that made the power. I stopped crushing/burning coal in 2007, good riddance to that crap. I spent the rest of my career burning natural gas.

The company I worked for is a very well-run company, despite the local plant management douchebags. Extreme weather does have a detrimental effect on power generation and transmission.

Utility companies all hate regulation, but I believe it's a necessary evil.

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #12

---

When the plant switched from Coal to NG, was there a reduction in required staff?

---

Zitat von MrVvrroomm im Beitrag #13

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #12

---

When the plant switched from Coal to NG, was there a reduction in required staff?

---

Yes, the whole yard (coal handling crew) went away. We used to have nine man crew to operate two coal-burning generating units as well as one coal-burning boiler for a steam process line. Our 1950's vintage unit put out a total of about 270 MW.

We built a new natural gas-fired combined cycle plant on the same property, but new building. Two on one Mitsubishi units with an initial staffing of three per crew, putting out about 630 MW at winter peak. We went from 38 operators to 15, now down to 11. The coal handling crew was about 12.

Not a single person lost their job in this transition. Most at the top retired, others were offered opportunities at other local plants.

The Mitsubishi units we installed were originally built for a plant in Wyandotte, Michigan. My company purchased them, gray market, because original project went belly up. We purchased them as NOS (new old stock).

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #14

---

Zitat von MrVvrroomm im Beitrag #13

---

Zitat von Mr. 36654 im Beitrag #12

---

When the plant switched from Coal to NG, was there a reduction in required staff?

---

Yes, the whole yard (coal handling crew) went away. We used to have nine man crew to operate two coal-burning generating units as well as one coal-burning boiler for a steam process line. Our 1950's vintage unit put out a total of about 270 MW.

We built a new natural gas-fired combined cycle plant on the same property, but new building. Two on one Mitsubishi units with an initial staffing of three per crew, putting out about 630 MW at winter peak. We went from 38 operators to 15, now down to 11. The coal handling crew was about 12.

Not a single person lost their job in this transition. Most at the top retired, others were offered opportunities at other local plants.

The Mitsubishi units we installed were originally built for a plant in Wyandotte, Michigan. My company purchased them, gray market, because original project went belly up. We purchased them as NOS (new old stock).

---

Next door to my old workplace, a coal-fired plant was converted to NG but retained the old boiler steam turbine system. With the elimination of the bag house and coal hopper, the footprint of the facility shrunk by over 2/3rds. No more coal truck traffic and space for a new classroom building (the former Bag House). I asked about the staffing reductions, but being a sensitive issue, no one would comment.

---