Analyses of the California electricity crisis
Question:
> The river/water control agency is not doing its job…..happened here in > Texas. > By proper management the regulatory agency can stage rain/snow runoff.
Ah…. respectfully… NO. Considering the amount of increase due to spring runoff and the limited storage behind these dams on small rivers around here, it just isn’t feasible to not spill water. To ’stage’ the water as you suggest, would displace many people along the river by raising water levels many feet in the spring. And the variance would stop navigation for a while. The best course they have is to simply let it run to the Great Lakes. But even those large bodies have an annual swing of water level that is measured in feet. It’s just somewhat disheartening to see all that hydro power go to waste 
> Ironic in that you can sue businesses ,but not government for
mismanagement. Because they (state barge canal authority) didn’t let water run fast enough two years ago, there were several homes flooded on one of the smaller feeder-lakes. They did sue the state for damages, made all the papers, but not sure how it turned out. daestrom
Response:
> The river/water control agency is not doing its job…..happened here in > Texas. > By proper management the regulatory agency can stage rain/snow runoff.
Ideally -Yes. In practice they try but nature may not co-operate as it is beyond the control of the regualtory agency. Sometimes spilling is necessary due to various factors as Daestrom has indicated. Also, in these days of de-regulation, does the utility have a good knowledge of its future load so it can draw down the hydro storage, or do the converse in consideration of their best crystal ball gazing. However, you do hit upon a valid point- the government regulatory bodies may, in fact, be quite deficient in the knowledge required to control a hydro (or any other utility system). The rest of your points do touch on real issues but don’t blame the vagaries of nature on the utilities or the government. As to aquafers- it is not the government that is to blame except that the government gives in to the demands upon it. We cannot expect, particularly in the SW USA to continually suck water out of the aquifers and spray it in the air or on "Kentucky Blue" grass in Texas. Put a real cost on the water and you would see a change in water usage -i.e. put the least amount of water where it will do the most good rather than throw it in the air to evaporate. — Don Kelly remove the urine to answer – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Ironic in that you can sue businesses ,but not government for mismanagement. > They improved after numerous homes were lost and a few people died in the > water runoff floods. > Ironic also,in that the river bordering Mexico(Rio Grande) does not run to > sea, anymore. > And hasn’t for years because of Mexico & US cities growth over the years in > that area. > City government in that area has some form of divine destiny.That says > individuals plan > growth not cities and if anything happens it is not their fault that a > farmer can’t water his cattle > anymore.Because aquaifier has fallen yards below what it was 30 years ago.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > > Okay. > > > After the meandering on this thread, what lessons does > > > anyone feel the recent California experience teaches > > > regarding the prospects for social and environmental > > > good coming out of an increased reliance on renewable > > > energy? > > The lesson I got from it all was that the people who put together > the > > sytem for deregulation in California are a bunch of chowderheads. They > > created a system which decoupled production and transmission of > electricity, > > allowed producers to charge basically whatever they wanted, but > "protected" > > the consumer by limiting what the transmission companies (local > utilities) > > could charge retail customers. When the local utilities found themselves > in > > the poition of having to pay more for the product than they could > charge, > > the obvious happened. > > Other factors of course enter in, such as a dry year, and the > > dismantling of hydro power dams in favor of white water rafting, > creating a > > condition that required importing much more power than usual from > > out-of-state. A lot more has already been said, and I have no doubt > more > > yet will be said. Essentially, though, the above paragraph covers the > > situation. > > brian > The lesson anyone should learn is that there is no way that a private > company > can produce power cheaper than a public utility that is operated > effectively. > The private company is only accountable to it’s share holders and must > turn a > profit, the public owned utility only has to produce at cost plus > expenses. Our > local public utility for over 50 years ran things perfectly and had a > substantial cushion for emergencies, when we forced to sell it to a > private > company by the Ontario government it all went to shit with the company > needing > to borrow money from the city to remain operating less than a year later. > Deregulation is not the answer, effective management in a public utility > is. > Mike Wilcox > The key is "operated effectively" This may be true in some cases but often > is not. Alberta (Canada)before de-regulation had the bulk of its power > generated by private companies. These were subject to a regualtory board and > any rate increases proposed were carefully scrutinised and in some > situations rate decreases were ordered. The utilities ran a tight ship. They > made a profit, true but the margin was much smaller than the margin at your > local supermarket or such places as Futureshop-yet the shareholders were > happy. In addition, long term planning and coordination between utilities > provided a basis for rational expansion of facilities. Management included a > strong contingent of engineers who were familiar with the system and tried > hard to supply the customers with reliable energy at as low a cost as was > feasible. The major public utility did not come under the same regulations > and did not do nearly as good a job of managing resources. Where the private > utility chose to put money into control and data-logging, the public utility > made sure that the front entrance to their "show" plant would look good. BC > (Canada)has a public system which, in the past, has been run well. It is now > being castrated for political rather than functional purposes. > Possibly the key to a good public utility is to have it subject to the same > regulations and taxes that a private utility faces and, more importantly, > keep the politicians and bureaucrats at arms length from the management. > De-regulation as it has been applied in Alberta as well as in California, > simply ignored the engineering principles that built the strength of > integrated utilities. Short term gain is now more important than long term > planning. No utility has a solid customer base so the option of putting in > plant which is not initially cheap and quick is not viable- the customer > loses. > Nuff said -out of steam > — > Don Kelly > remove the urine to answer
Well said….add in the variable that government mandated an increase in power usage with EV’s and at the same time 40 years of limited construction more severely than the rest of the US. KIlled natural gas production so it is piped in at a higher cost…and countless other goofs in government management. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > > Spilling in time of oversupply is *not* new, nor is it to drive up > prices. > > > You see a hydro spilling water and jump to all sorts of > unsubstantiated > > > conclusions. Do a little research into what factors are involved in > > running > > > a hydro system (on a running river or large reservoir, it’s > different). > > > You’ll find they’ve had to ’spill’ water for a variety of reasons for > as > > > long as they’ve been using hydro. You just noticed it this spring and > > think > > > it’s some sort of conspiracy to raise prices. > > > To list a few: > > > 1) Reservoir over expected level for season. Predictions of further > > > increases will raise water to dangerous level. > > > 2) Downstream economy/ecology must have more water than is possible > > > otherwise (navigable waterways too low, irrigation needs, etc…) > > > 3) Turbines already running at capacity and no more storage available. > > > 4) Upstream land is being flooded. > > > 5) Series of hydro systems on river, when upstream unit trips (for > variety > > > of reasons), the downstream are signalled in preparation for ’slug’ of > > water > > > coming down river. > > > 6) Equipment maintenance/failure. > > > Believe it or not, hydro operators have to answer to many more folks > than > > > just the energy community. > > > daestrom > > If you want to see plant operators cry- just watch them when they have > to > > spill (particular item 3 which is very common)- it is literally money > being > > flushed down the stream. > Another frustration is here on a river, we have about 5 dams with hydro, > all > in series. During spring melt, or exceptionally wet weather (like we’ve > had > this year), the excess water spills over the top of the dam. So the > heighth > of the dam fixes the max water level for the inlet. But the excessive > flow > rate means that the level at the base of the dam is higher than normal > (level rises till flow down to next dam matches flow from upstream). This > raises the tail-race level and actually *reduces* hydro-turbine output!!! > Excess water during spring, flow out the wazoo, and plant output goes down > 
> daestrom > – > Seen this in where, on the Saguenay river, the plant inflow was about > 50,000cfs, spillage was between 100,000 and 200,000 cfs and tailrace level > was about 15 ft above normal. Somewhere I still have pictures of this. Up on > the Lac St. John, the main reservoir of the system, the farmers have their > own gauges and are eager to sue if the water level is too high. > — > Don Kelly > remove the urine to answer
The river/water control agency is not doing its job…..happened here in Texas. By proper management the regulatory agency can stage rain/snow runoff. Ironic in that you can sue businesses ,but not government for mismanagement. They improved after numerous homes were lost and a few people died in the water runoff floods. Ironic also,in that the river bordering Mexico(Rio Grande) does not run to sea, anymore. And hasn’t for years because of Mexico & US cities growth over the years in that area. City government in that area has some form of divine destiny.That says individuals plan growth not cities and if anything happens it is not their fault that a farmer can’t water his cattle anymore.Because aquaifier has fallen yards below what it was 30 years ago. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > Okay. > > After the meandering on this thread, what lessons does > > anyone feel the recent California experience teaches > > regarding the prospects for social and environmental > > good coming out of an increased reliance on renewable > > energy? > The lesson I got from it all was that the people who put together the > sytem for deregulation in California are a bunch of chowderheads. They > created a system which decoupled production and transmission of electricity, > allowed producers to charge basically whatever they wanted, but "protected" > the consumer by limiting what the transmission companies (local utilities) > could charge retail customers. When the local utilities found themselves in > the poition of having to pay more for the product than they could charge, > the obvious happened. > Other factors of course enter in, such as a dry year, and the > dismantling of hydro power dams in favor of white water rafting, creating a > condition that required importing much more power than usual from > out-of-state. A lot more has already been said, and I have no doubt more > yet will be said. Essentially, though, the above paragraph covers the > situation. > brian > The lesson anyone should learn is that there is no way that a private company > can produce power cheaper than a public utility that is operated effectively. > The private company is only accountable to it’s share holders and must turn a > profit, the public owned utility only has to produce at cost plus expenses. Our > local public utility for over 50 years ran things perfectly and had a > substantial cushion for emergencies, when we forced to sell it to a private > company by the Ontario government it all went to shit with the company needing > to borrow money from the city to remain operating less than a year later. > Deregulation is not the answer, effective management in a public utility is. > Mike Wilcox
The key is "operated effectively" This may be true in some cases but often is not. Alberta (Canada)before de-regulation had the bulk of its power generated by private companies. These were subject to a regualtory board and any rate increases proposed were carefully scrutinised and in some situations rate decreases were ordered. The utilities ran a tight ship. They made a profit, true but the margin was much smaller than the margin at your local supermarket or such places as Futureshop-yet the shareholders were happy. In addition, long term planning and coordination between utilities provided a basis for rational expansion of facilities. Management included a strong contingent of engineers who were familiar with the system and tried hard to supply the customers with reliable energy at as low a cost as was feasible. The major public utility did not come under the same regulations and did not do nearly as good a job of managing resources. Where the private utility chose to put money into control and data-logging, the public utility made sure that the front entrance to their "show" plant would look good. BC (Canada)has a public system which, in the past, has been run well. It is now being castrated for political rather than functional purposes. Possibly the key to a good public utility is to have it subject to the same regulations and taxes that a private utility faces and, more importantly, keep the politicians and bureaucrats at arms length from the management. De-regulation as it has been applied in Alberta as well as in California, simply ignored the engineering principles that built the strength of integrated utilities. Short term gain is now more important than long term planning. No utility has a solid customer base so the option of putting in plant which is not initially cheap and quick is not viable- the customer loses. Nuff said -out of steam — Don Kelly remove the urine to answer
Response:
> The lesson anyone should learn is that there is no way that a private company > can produce power cheaper than a public utility that is operated
effectively. ROFLMAO!!!! What planet you from?? I’ve seen/worked with state-run power authorities and private utilities. State agencies have *no* concern about costs. The employees have some of the best job-security around and have no incentive to be competitive. The best way for public utilities that are regulated to make more money is to drive costs *up*. Anything just short of gross malfiecense flys past the public service commission. Government run utilities are exempt from a variety of taxes that private companies must pay (property taxes on a power plant can run in the millions/year). The government agencies are run *ineffectively* thanks to nepotism and chronyism filling management positions. I would say something like a third of the payroll is retired, they just keep coming into work and collecting a paycheck. > The private company is only accountable to it’s share holders and must turn a > profit, the public owned utility only has to produce at cost plus expenses. Our > local public utility for over 50 years ran things perfectly and had a > substantial cushion for emergencies, when we forced to sell it to a private > company by the Ontario government it all went to shit with the company needing > to borrow money from the city to remain operating less than a year later. > Deregulation is not the answer, effective management in a public utility
is. Maybe in Canada, but here in the states, ‘effective management’ in a government agency is an oxymoron. If the only measure of ‘effectiveness’ is how much money is spent annually, then yes, government agencies win. The way to ensure an increase in next year’s operating budget is to be sure to exceed this year’s. I’ve had government agencies call me up in November stating, "We have money left in the budget that we want to spend before we lose it at the end of the year, what can you sell us??" (seriously, worded *just* like that!!!) daestrom
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Okay. > After the meandering on this thread, what lessons does > anyone feel the recent California experience teaches > regarding the prospects for social and environmental > good coming out of an increased reliance on renewable > energy? > The lesson I got from it all was that the people who put together the > sytem for deregulation in California are a bunch of chowderheads. They > created a system which decoupled production and transmission of electricity, > allowed producers to charge basically whatever they wanted, but "protected" > the consumer by limiting what the transmission companies (local utilities) > could charge retail customers. When the local utilities found themselves in > the poition of having to pay more for the product than they could charge, > the obvious happened. > Other factors of course enter in, such as a dry year, and the > dismantling of hydro power dams in favor of white water rafting, creating a > condition that required importing much more power than usual from > out-of-state. A lot more has already been said, and I have no doubt more > yet will be said. Essentially, though, the above paragraph covers the > situation. > brian
The lesson anyone should learn is that there is no way that a private company can produce power cheaper than a public utility that is operated effectively. The private company is only accountable to it’s share holders and must turn a profit, the public owned utility only has to produce at cost plus expenses. Our local public utility for over 50 years ran things perfectly and had a substantial cushion for emergencies, when we forced to sell it to a private company by the Ontario government it all went to shit with the company needing to borrow money from the city to remain operating less than a year later. Deregulation is not the answer, effective management in a public utility is. Mike Wilcox
Response:
> Okay. > After the meandering on this thread, what lessons does > anyone feel the recent California experience teaches > regarding the prospects for social and environmental > good coming out of an increased reliance on renewable > energy?
The lesson I got from it all was that the people who put together the sytem for deregulation in California are a bunch of chowderheads. They created a system which decoupled production and transmission of electricity, allowed producers to charge basically whatever they wanted, but "protected" the consumer by limiting what the transmission companies (local utilities) could charge retail customers. When the local utilities found themselves in the poition of having to pay more for the product than they could charge, the obvious happened. Other factors of course enter in, such as a dry year, and the dismantling of hydro power dams in favor of white water rafting, creating a condition that required importing much more power than usual from out-of-state. A lot more has already been said, and I have no doubt more yet will be said. Essentially, though, the above paragraph covers the situation. brian
Response:
> Okay. > After the meandering on this thread, what lessons does > anyone feel the recent California experience teaches > regarding the prospects for social and environmental > good coming out of an increased reliance on renewable > energy?
Allow significant consumers to negotiate with suppliers for long-term contracts. When the spot-market is the only place a supplier (even a base-load plant) can sell, the uncertainty drives up prices. If a significant portion of the suppliers can get long-term (6-mo -> 3 yr) contracts, this can do a lot to stabalize supply. Do *not* force the still-regulated utility to buy power on the free-market and only sell it at regulated pricing. When spot prices go up as in summer demand, consumers will stay with regulated utility supplied power and this puts the utility in a hard spot. They must buy power at going rate and cannot recoup their energy costs from the consumer. For consumers to be sensitive to spot market pricing and willing to do something about it, more TOU metering would be needed. If consumers can pay the same rates in the peak season as they do in spring/fall (when supply exceeds demand), they have no reason to change usage habits. Although initially painful for the end consumer to be exposed to high prices during peak periods, this will drive consumers to change usage habits and make peak power alternatives more economicly viable for implementing. CA is a good example of what happens when you try to mix markets. Consumers protected from any supply/demand price fluctations leads to unrestrained demand. Demand that is not sensitive to price forces supply to meet it regardless of supply pricing. And of course, more scrutiny on ogliopolies supplying electric to prevent their trying to manipulate the market. daestrom
Response:
Okay. After the meandering on this thread, what lessons does anyone feel the recent California experience teaches regarding the prospects for social and environmental good coming out of an increased reliance on renewable energy? Or is it too early to say (in light of the fact that only the first booklength discussions are currently available)? Caldon – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >Here’s a question for people who have thought about the >recent California electricity crisis and maybe looked >into it, and read about it: can you recommend a good, >balanced book-length investigation of the California >crisis? >I live in Canada. I personally like the idea of >deregulation and decentralization of electricity >generation, but the real-life issues (as relate to the >grid, to prices, etc) seem complex and at least a >little treacherous. >My search on Amazon.com turned up a number of titles >but — uncommon for Amazon offerings — very little in >the way of reader reviews or reader evaluations. There >were books by James Walsh, Christopher Weare, and James >Sweeney — are any of these any good? If not, is there >some other book you would recommend? Thanks. >Caldon
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Spilling in time of oversupply is *not* new, nor is it to drive up prices. > You see a hydro spilling water and jump to all sorts of unsubstantiated > conclusions. Do a little research into what factors are involved in running > a hydro system (on a running river or large reservoir, it’s different). > You’ll find they’ve had to ’spill’ water for a variety of reasons for as > long as they’ve been using hydro. You just noticed it this spring and think > it’s some sort of conspiracy to raise prices. > Yes, I realise that – I’m refering to excessive spilling in order to > manipulate the volatile spot market for electricity in NZ. > Geoff T
——- I doubt whether there is "excess spilling" This is not economically sound, even in an attempt to manipulate the spot market. Water behind the dam is money. Water spilt is wasted money and the waste exceeds the benefits of higher spot market prices. Don Kelly remove the urine to answer
Response:
> Spilling in time of oversupply is *not* new, nor is it to drive up prices. > You see a hydro spilling water and jump to all sorts of unsubstantiated > conclusions. Do a little research into what factors are involved in running > a hydro system (on a running river or large reservoir, it’s different). > You’ll find they’ve had to ’spill’ water for a variety of reasons for as > long as they’ve been using hydro. You just noticed it this spring and think > it’s some sort of conspiracy to raise prices.
Yes, I realise that – I’m refering to excessive spilling in order to manipulate the volatile spot market for electricity in NZ. Geoff T
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > Spilling in time of oversupply is *not* new, nor is it to drive up > prices. > > You see a hydro spilling water and jump to all sorts of unsubstantiated > > conclusions. Do a little research into what factors are involved in > running > > a hydro system (on a running river or large reservoir, it’s different). > > You’ll find they’ve had to ’spill’ water for a variety of reasons for as > > long as they’ve been using hydro. You just noticed it this spring and > think > > it’s some sort of conspiracy to raise prices. > > To list a few: > > 1) Reservoir over expected level for season. Predictions of further > > increases will raise water to dangerous level. > > 2) Downstream economy/ecology must have more water than is possible > > otherwise (navigable waterways too low, irrigation needs, etc…) > > 3) Turbines already running at capacity and no more storage available. > > 4) Upstream land is being flooded. > > 5) Series of hydro systems on river, when upstream unit trips (for > variety > > of reasons), the downstream are signalled in preparation for ’slug’ of > water > > coming down river. > > 6) Equipment maintenance/failure. > > Believe it or not, hydro operators have to answer to many more folks > than > > just the energy community. > > daestrom > If you want to see plant operators cry- just watch them when they have to > spill (particular item 3 which is very common)- it is literally money > being > flushed down the stream. > Another frustration is here on a river, we have about 5 dams with hydro, all > in series. During spring melt, or exceptionally wet weather (like we’ve had > this year), the excess water spills over the top of the dam. So the heighth > of the dam fixes the max water level for the inlet. But the excessive flow > rate means that the level at the base of the dam is higher than normal > (level rises till flow down to next dam matches flow from upstream). This > raises the tail-race level and actually *reduces* hydro-turbine output!!! > Excess water during spring, flow out the wazoo, and plant output goes down > > daestrom
- Seen this in where, on the Saguenay river, the plant inflow was about 50,000cfs, spillage was between 100,000 and 200,000 cfs and tailrace level was about 15 ft above normal. Somewhere I still have pictures of this. Up on the Lac St. John, the main reservoir of the system, the farmers have their own gauges and are eager to sue if the water level is too high. — Don Kelly remove the urine to answer
Response:
>Deregulation and privatisation in Australia has meant we have gone from the >highest standard of infrastructure in the world to a steady decline down the >list. We now have power poles that fall over because they have not been >checked and replaced, leaking transformers are left in service and then >fail, hot joints are not attended to and then melt or fail completely. >Electricity prices are rising dramatically for less service, higher than >normal breakdowns and brown outs and overall not a pretty picture. >–
No, the picture you paint is not a pretty one. I guess you’d call this the overall picture, the "background" scene for the small energy producer. So then what of the fate of the micro electricity producer? Are energy prices providing an incentive for more small hydro, windpower, p.v.? Higher prices must have been a boon, in the short run, in California (I’m guessing) as part of the payback for investment by micro-producers. What is the experience in Oz? Caldon
Response:
Deregulation and privatisation in Australia has meant we have gone from the highest standard of infrastructure in the world to a steady decline down the list. We now have power poles that fall over because they have not been checked and replaced, leaking transformers are left in service and then fail, hot joints are not attended to and then melt or fail completely. Electricity prices are rising dramatically for less service, higher than normal breakdowns and brown outs and overall not a pretty picture. —
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> If you find any, send a description of them to the New Zealand > government and each of our deregulated power companies, because we > sure as hell didnt learn any lessons from the Californians. > We were (or maybe still are) heading for power shortages, but we were > given a reprive when we got some more rain in our hydro lakes: > http://www.comitfree.co.nz/fta/ftaPage.hydrology > I’m not sure whether they still do it, but the companies running the > hydro plants would spill water in times of over-supply to drive the > wholesale electricity price up, which would lead to shortages (and > even higher prices) in drier times. > – Geoff T
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Spilling in time of oversupply is *not* new, nor is it to drive up prices. > You see a hydro spilling water and jump to all sorts of unsubstantiated > conclusions. Do a little research into what factors are involved in > running > a hydro system (on a running river or large reservoir, it’s different). > You’ll find they’ve had to ’spill’ water for a variety of reasons for as > long as they’ve been using hydro. You just noticed it this spring and > think > it’s some sort of conspiracy to raise prices. > To list a few: > 1) Reservoir over expected level for season. Predictions of further > increases will raise water to dangerous level. > 2) Downstream economy/ecology must have more water than is possible > otherwise (navigable waterways too low, irrigation needs, etc…) > 3) Turbines already running at capacity and no more storage available. > 4) Upstream land is being flooded. > 5) Series of hydro systems on river, when upstream unit trips (for variety > of reasons), the downstream are signalled in preparation for ’slug’ of > water > coming down river. > 6) Equipment maintenance/failure. > Believe it or not, hydro operators have to answer to many more folks than > just the energy community. > daestrom > If you want to see plant operators cry- just watch them when they have to > spill (particular item 3 which is very common)- it is literally money being > flushed down the stream.
Another frustration is here on a river, we have about 5 dams with hydro, all in series. During spring melt, or exceptionally wet weather (like we’ve had this year), the excess water spills over the top of the dam. So the heighth of the dam fixes the max water level for the inlet. But the excessive flow rate means that the level at the base of the dam is higher than normal (level rises till flow down to next dam matches flow from upstream). This raises the tail-race level and actually *reduces* hydro-turbine output!!! Excess water during spring, flow out the wazoo, and plant output goes down daestrom
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > Here’s a question for people who have thought about the > > recent California electricity crisis and maybe looked > > into it, and read about it: can you recommend a good, > > balanced book-length investigation of the California > > crisis? > If you find any, send a description of them to the New Zealand > government and each of our deregulated power companies, because we > sure as hell didnt learn any lessons from the Californians. > We were (or maybe still are) heading for power shortages, but we were > given a reprive when we got some more rain in our hydro lakes: > http://www.comitfree.co.nz/fta/ftaPage.hydrology > I’m not sure whether they still do it, but the companies running the > hydro plants would spill water in times of over-supply to drive the > wholesale electricity price up, which would lead to shortages (and > even higher prices) in drier times. > Spilling in time of oversupply is *not* new, nor is it to drive up prices. > You see a hydro spilling water and jump to all sorts of unsubstantiated > conclusions. Do a little research into what factors are involved in running > a hydro system (on a running river or large reservoir, it’s different). > You’ll find they’ve had to ’spill’ water for a variety of reasons for as > long as they’ve been using hydro. You just noticed it this spring and think > it’s some sort of conspiracy to raise prices. > To list a few: > 1) Reservoir over expected level for season. Predictions of further > increases will raise water to dangerous level. > 2) Downstream economy/ecology must have more water than is possible > otherwise (navigable waterways too low, irrigation needs, etc…) > 3) Turbines already running at capacity and no more storage available. > 4) Upstream land is being flooded. > 5) Series of hydro systems on river, when upstream unit trips (for variety > of reasons), the downstream are signalled in preparation for ’slug’ of water > coming down river. > 6) Equipment maintenance/failure. > Believe it or not, hydro operators have to answer to many more folks than > just the energy community. > daestrom
If you want to see plant operators cry- just watch them when they have to spill (particular item 3 which is very common)- it is literally money being flushed down the stream. — Don Kelly remove the urine to answer
Response:
> Here’s a question for people who have thought about the > recent California electricity crisis and maybe looked > into it, and read about it: can you recommend a good, > balanced book-length investigation of the California > crisis?
If you find any, send a description of them to the New Zealand government and each of our deregulated power companies, because we sure as hell didnt learn any lessons from the Californians. We were (or maybe still are) heading for power shortages, but we were given a reprive when we got some more rain in our hydro lakes: http://www.comitfree.co.nz/fta/ftaPage.hydrology I’m not sure whether they still do it, but the companies running the hydro plants would spill water in times of over-supply to drive the wholesale electricity price up, which would lead to shortages (and even higher prices) in drier times. – Geoff T
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Here’s a question for people who have thought about the > recent California electricity crisis and maybe looked > into it, and read about it: can you recommend a good, > balanced book-length investigation of the California > crisis? > If you find any, send a description of them to the New Zealand > government and each of our deregulated power companies, because we > sure as hell didnt learn any lessons from the Californians. > We were (or maybe still are) heading for power shortages, but we were > given a reprive when we got some more rain in our hydro lakes: > http://www.comitfree.co.nz/fta/ftaPage.hydrology > I’m not sure whether they still do it, but the companies running the > hydro plants would spill water in times of over-supply to drive the > wholesale electricity price up, which would lead to shortages (and > even higher prices) in drier times.
Spilling in time of oversupply is *not* new, nor is it to drive up prices. You see a hydro spilling water and jump to all sorts of unsubstantiated conclusions. Do a little research into what factors are involved in running a hydro system (on a running river or large reservoir, it’s different). You’ll find they’ve had to ’spill’ water for a variety of reasons for as long as they’ve been using hydro. You just noticed it this spring and think it’s some sort of conspiracy to raise prices. To list a few: 1) Reservoir over expected level for season. Predictions of further increases will raise water to dangerous level. 2) Downstream economy/ecology must have more water than is possible otherwise (navigable waterways too low, irrigation needs, etc…) 3) Turbines already running at capacity and no more storage available. 4) Upstream land is being flooded. 5) Series of hydro systems on river, when upstream unit trips (for variety of reasons), the downstream are signalled in preparation for ’slug’ of water coming down river. 6) Equipment maintenance/failure. Believe it or not, hydro operators have to answer to many more folks than just the energy community. daestrom
Response:
>Here’s a question for people who have thought about the >recent California electricity crisis and maybe looked >into it, and read about it: can you recommend a good, >balanced book-length investigation of the California >crisis?
Probably still too early. I think the biggest problem was energy resellers playing games in order to drive prices up. When it is all said and done I suspect the conclusion will be that the crisis was manufactured.
Response:
>>Here’s a question for people who have thought about the >recent California electricity crisis and maybe looked >into it, and read about it: can you recommend a good, >balanced book-length investigation of the California >crisis? >Probably still too early. I think the biggest problem was energy >resellers playing games in order to drive prices up. When it is all >said and done I suspect the conclusion will be that the crisis was >manufactured.
Thanks, Chris. Do you think this is why there are no reader reviews, on Amazon, of the several books that have been published to date? (i.e., still too early) Caldon
Response:
The Cato Institute in Washington DC published a detailed paper on this subject. It’s not a book, but it is fairly lengthy. You can get it at their website.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Here’s a question for people who have thought about the > recent California electricity crisis and maybe looked > into it, and read about it: can you recommend a good, > balanced book-length investigation of the California > crisis? > I live in Canada. I personally like the idea of > deregulation and decentralization of electricity > generation, but the real-life issues (as relate to the > grid, to prices, etc) seem complex and at least a > little treacherous. > My search on Amazon.com turned up a number of titles > but — uncommon for Amazon offerings — very little in > the way of reader reviews or reader evaluations. There > were books by James Walsh, Christopher Weare, and James > Sweeney — are any of these any good? If not, is there > some other book you would recommend? Thanks. > Caldon
Response:
>I live in Canada.
But not in Alberta, I assume. > I personally like the idea of >deregulation and decentralization of electricity >generation, but the real-life issues (as relate to the >grid, to prices, etc) seem complex and at least a >little treacherous.
It put several electricity-consuming companies out of business here, by doubling or tripling prices. — Calgary, Alberta, Canada. "Helping People Prosper in the Information Age"
Response:
Your reply to my question about books is a bit hard to decipher, though I take it as an expression of criticism or dismay at deregulation (??). Fair enough. Anyway, I hope other frequenters of this board may know of a good book about the California crisis. Caldon – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I live in Canada. >But not in Alberta, I assume. > I personally like the idea of >deregulation and decentralization of electricity >generation, but the real-life issues (as relate to the >grid, to prices, etc) seem complex and at least a >little treacherous. >It put several electricity-consuming companies out of business here, >by doubling or tripling prices. >– >Calgary, Alberta, Canada. >"Helping People Prosper in the Information Age"
Response:
Here’s a question for people who have thought about the recent California electricity crisis and maybe looked into it, and read about it: can you recommend a good, balanced book-length investigation of the California crisis? I live in Canada. I personally like the idea of deregulation and decentralization of electricity generation, but the real-life issues (as relate to the grid, to prices, etc) seem complex and at least a little treacherous. My search on Amazon.com turned up a number of titles but — uncommon for Amazon offerings — very little in the way of reader reviews or reader evaluations. There were books by James Walsh, Christopher Weare, and James Sweeney — are any of these any good? If not, is there some other book you would recommend? Thanks. Caldon
Response:
Related Posts