Electricity Shortage Warnings Grow Across U.S.

[The Heretic]

I may be a special case, but there is no way that a system that I describe can harm the ground water any worse that my septic system, and not even close to that!

I don't disagree with your post, but I would point out that a septic system drainage field is not buried anywhere near as deep as a geothermal exchange system that is vertical.

If the exchange is open loop then yes, the water goes back into the ground, but a closed loop adds no water to the ground, only heat.

 

[Colt Carbine]

I'm in a very rural area. The only neighbor is in a separate aquifer, so contamination (with sediment or heat, isn't a problem. My aquifer has a slow flow through the ground, and probably empties out to a small creek a quarter of a mile away. I say this because there is solid bedrock that extends up from the creek bottom in our direction. The creek is many times further away than the minimum distance from a septic tank drain field to a well.

The turbidity argument may "hold water" where houses are clustered together, but it depends on the nature of the composition of the aquifer. An open-flowing buried 'gravel bar" would let a lot of turbidity pass, but it also would be less to the "waste" flow kicking up turbidity.

Most domestic water systems use filtration. A common method is a Sand Filter, which essentially mimics the effect of water moving through the ground. A properly designed system would not kick up turbidity when it discharged. If I used well water from this aquifer to run a heat pump, and a properly designed system, I'd be pumping out drinkable water, running it through Food Grade pumps and heat exchangers, and discharging it back into the ground without adding any turbidity and just the same amount of heat as an isolated buried pipe system.

My home town attempted to store water by recharging an aquifer. It pumped treated water into the ground, and the end result was that this water disappeared, and the nearby residents wells began discharging treated water, which wasn't turbid!

Next, explain to me how heating the ground water using water pumped through pipes doesn't heat up the microbes in the ground water.

I may be a special case, but there is no way that a system that I describe can harm the ground water any worse that my septic system, and not even close to that!

Adding clarification, I see that I didn't mention I was speaking about an open loop system, not a closed system. I apologize about that.

I'm not saying a person couldn't filter the water taken from an aquifer and replace it back treated. I'm sure a person could engineer a filtration system that would suffice the DEQ's policy on this but sizing the filtration system is different than filtering the potable water you use.

Does this clear up what I was trying to say. I'm a plumber not a novelist, nor am I trying to be argumentative.

I'm willing to discuss further, if needed.

 

[Provincial]

It depends on what you call an aquifer. What I have is water moving 10-15 feet below the surface, with bedrock not far below. I would call it "subsurface flow", as it is not a pool of water in the ground.

I addressed the claim of turbidity in my response, and it was ignored. Turbidity not introduced by pumping water out of the ground. It may be introduced by returning it at too great a rate for the conditions encountered, but this is a simple engineering problem. Treating the returning water with chlorine if it has never left the out-of-the-ground-back-into-the-ground loop is ridiculous, since it is never exposed to biologic contaminants, but people get irrational about drinking water without understanding the science.

What we have is the State making a blanket "one size fits all' determination, with no attempt to address local conditions. As usual, when spending someone else's money, cost is no object, and just running some groundwater through a food-grade system is going to "pollute it." I suspect that there had been some case where groundwater was extracted and returned to the source contaminated (by who knows what) and the State made a blanket prohibition rather than address a specific problem. I have had too much experience with that mentality.

What most people don't consider is that the plastic pipe of a closed-loop system is very inefficient in conducting heat compared to a well-designed heat exchanger. This results in major expenses in excavation, and a pretty large disturbed area. The plastic pipe is only a small part of the expense.

The use of ground-source heat pumps, which should be widespread in the Willamette Valley due to their vastly superior energy efficiency, has been severely restricted by the heavy-handed actions of the State. That is a fact. Until they actually look at installations based on actual conditions, rather than a blanket prohibition, this inefficiency will continue.

 

[ATCclears]

Easements or right-of-ways take time and money, lots of it.

California wants to build more solar farms but needs more power lines

Transmission is now a big tension point for clean energy developers across the US.

arstechnica.com

 

[Provincial]

There is no problem so difficult, that by involving the Government, will not be made worse. - Provincial

 

[Colt Carbine]

.....

 

[Colt Carbine]

.......

 

[Colt Carbine]

.....

 

[Stomper]

I now declare ALL of you, "The Royal Order of Nerds of the Water Nymph"!

 

[arakboss]

Dennis Quaid documentary 'Grid Down, Power Up' explores dangers of sudden electric grid failure

Film star Dennis Quaid joined "Jesse Watters Primetime" to tout his documentary on the catastrophic danger a power grid outage would have on the United States.

www.foxnews.com

 

[arakboss]

Wind and solar power generators wait in yearslong lines to put clean electricity on the grid, then face huge interconnection fees they can't afford

Interconnection applications and fees make it slow and expensive for clean energy providers to connect to the electrical grid.

www.cnbc.com

 

[arakboss]

Wind and solar power generators wait in yearslong lines to put clean electricity on the grid, then face huge interconnection fees they can't afford

Interconnection applications and fees make it slow and expensive for clean energy providers to connect to the electrical grid.

www.cnbc.com

This article along with others reinforces my belief that if you want job security and decent pay, become a lineman or an electrician.

 

[ATCclears]

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2...litics-diplomacy/g7-nuclear-energy-promotion/

 

[The Heretic]

Gas Generators Get Caught With Their Plants Down - CleanTechnica

The failure of gas-burning power plants to provide energy in cold weather is back in the Gas Generators Get Caught with their Plants Down

cleantechnica.com

 

[Provincial]

Gas Generators Get Caught With Their Plants Down - CleanTechnica

The failure of gas-burning power plants to provide energy in cold weather is back in the Gas Generators Get Caught with their Plants Down

cleantechnica.com

If you only take a narrow window and compare a short period where conditions favored one power source, you can make it sound like a no-brainer to favor the source that outperformed.

To be fair, one should find a situation where there was extreme cold or heat and also no wind.

Notice that the gas-fired power plants produced a lot of extra power during the time reported. That was glossed over in the article.

Not that the gas-powered plants failed to meet expectations. The biggest reason for underperformance was that they apparently didn't secure enough fuel to meet expectations, and there needs to be an investigation as to why.

The second biggest reason for underperformance was "freezing", which means that either they didn't properly prepare the plants for cold weather, or their suppliers didn't. Water content in Natural Gas probably is variable, and suppliers are tempted to let more water vapor exist in the gas, saving cost when temperature isn't critical, but exposing users to freeze-up when the weather turns colder. The fault may be with the gas supplier, rather than the power plant operator, but the operator should be monitoring water vapor levels and have severe penalties in the contracts if the gas causes freeze-ups in cold spells.

The next three factors are plant equipment, turbine, and boilers. Taken together, these are the biggest part of the problem. Management probably cut corners on maintenance and operation preparedness. This one lays squarely on the shoulders of management, and especially, "bean-counters" who try to make themselves look good by cutting operational costs that they hope are never needed.

Emissions is the last of the significant shortfalls. It is likely that regulators make emission standards to be broad, and ignore short-term conditions where normal emission control systems are overwhelmed. This results in systems that are too expensive to operate long-term, so power is reduced in short-term, adverse conditions to meet standards. A proper way to address this is to allow short-term emissions in uncommon conditions, as long as the excess is within reasonable limits and of short duration. This is a failure of regulators, clear and simple.

When you read the article , remember that this is from a group pushing "green" agenda. There is no way that they would publish an article that spotlighted underperformance of wind turbines when there was an un-forecast lack of winds due to natural atmospheric conditions. In this case, the low temperatures and strong winds were the Perfect Storm to showcase wind generation, and it was a rare event. In normal conditions, wind is a fickle and marginal source of power. This is a propaganda piece, made possible by bad management in the Natural Gas power industry.

 

[The Heretic]

https://www.reddit.com/r/solar/comments/12hobyp

 

[Provincial]

Flat rates for poor people are a great way to encourage waste. If your electric bill is the same, no matter what, why not run the electric heat on high and keep the dwelling really hot in cold weather. And why not keep the temperature at 72 degrees on a 100 degree day? It doesn't cost you a penny!

This is likely proposed by the same people that years ago backed higher cost per kwh as your consumption increased above a minimum amount because it would discourage waste of electricity. They can't keep anything straight!

 

[arakboss]

The real-world costs of the digital race for bitcoin

In Texas, the computers kept running until just after midnight. Then the states power grid operator ordered them shut off, under an agreement that allowed it to do so if the system was about to fail. In return, it began paying the bitcoin company, Bitdeer, an average of $175,000 an hour to keep...

www.google.com

 

[The Heretic]

Flat rates for poor people are a great way to encourage waste. If your electric bill is the same, no matter what, why not run the electric heat on high and keep the dwelling really hot in cold weather. And why not keep the temperature at 72 degrees on a 100 degree day? It doesn't cost you a penny!

This is likely proposed by the same people that years ago backed higher cost per kwh as your consumption increased above a minimum amount because it would discourage waste of electricity. They can't keep anything straight!

The flat rate is the service charge (fee for providing the service - doesn't change with how much you use), not the usage charge (per KWH).

 

[Provincial]

The flat rate is the service charge (fee for providing the service - doesn't change with how much you use), not the usage charge (per KWH).

It would have been nice if the article had mentioned that. The whole article was about "flat rate", which isn't metered use. It should have said "service charge" if that is what is at issue.