GRA
Posts: 9243
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

U.S. regulator rejects coal, nuclear bailout, says renewable energy may double by 2020

Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:48 pm

Via GCR: https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1114687_u-s-regulator-rejects-coal-nuclear-bailout-says-renewable-energy-may-double-by-2020

For much of last year, U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry pursued a plan that, in essence, would prop up the financially challenged U.S. coal and nuclear industries. His proposal, submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission last fall, provided financial subsidies to electric-generation plants that kept 90 days of fuel onsite. Natural-gas plants are supplied continuously via pipelines, and renewable-energy sources have no "fuel" on site, so that helped only plants powered by coal or nuclear energy.

On Monday, Perry's plan was unanimously rejected by FERC. Its decision is binding and cannot be appealed. The commission's reasoning was that giving government-backed financial advantages to specific types of generation plants would interfere with natural competition on cost among numerous sources of electricity. In other words, it would distort the free market . . . .

Not only wind and solar trade groups but also natural-gas and oil-industry advocates joined together against the Perry proposal.

As The Washington Post noted on Monday, four of the five FERC commissioners who voted unanimously against the plan had been appointed by Trump. . . .
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

SageBrush
Posts: 2791
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: U.S. regulator rejects coal, nuclear bailout, says renewable energy may double by 2020

Wed Jan 10, 2018 4:38 pm

This is easy.

Fire the current FERC members;
Bring in even *more* moronic members
Submit the bail-out again
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

User avatar
LTLFTcomposite
Posts: 4541
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:06 pm
Delivery Date: 10 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Central FL

Re: U.S. regulator rejects coal, nuclear bailout, says renewable energy may double by 2020

Thu Jan 11, 2018 7:50 am

Two questions:

Does a solar farm qualify as storing its fuel on site?

Is the oxidizer required for combustion of fossil fuels considered part of the "fuel"?
LTL
White 2012 SV delivered 10 Dec 2011 returned 25 Nov 2014 replaced with stopgap ICE Sentra
[35 months] [35K miles] [9 Bars]
2013 Volt replaced after 36 months/30k miles with ICE Rogue
2016 SV-adjacent May 2016 lost 4th bar March 2018

GetOffYourGas
Posts: 1905
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 6:56 pm
Delivery Date: 09 Mar 2012
Location: Syracuse, NY

Re: U.S. regulator rejects coal, nuclear bailout, says renewable energy may double by 2020

Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:08 am

LTLFTcomposite wrote:Two questions:

Does a solar farm qualify as storing its fuel on site?


It's really hard (although not technically impossible) to "store" a photon. Solar farms' fuel is streamed in continuously.

LTLFTcomposite wrote:Is the oxidizer required for combustion of fossil fuels considered part of the "fuel"?


No, the oxidizer is not typically considered part of the fuel. But even if it were, it is more accurate to say that it is "stored on site" than for a solar farm.

In the end, both of these are scientific answers to scientific questions. IOW, they are moot since this administration does not want its policies to be affected in any way by actual science.
~Brian

EV Fleet:
2011 Torqeedo Travel 1003 electric outboard on a 22' sailboat
2012 Leaf SV (traded for Bolt)
2015 C-Max Energi (302A package)
2017 Bolt Premier

Return to “Business / Economy and Politics”