Well new mexico governor decided to make electricity unaffordable
- Thread starter Oilpan4
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
Most of what is being written is quite polite enough. A few posts, though, are unnecessarily snarky. A good argument, with good supporting data, doesn't need that. In fact, a bad attitude can undermine a great argument...
SageBrush said:
Politely written BS is allowed, mainly because it isn't always intentional. I suggest the user filter for that. Click on the user's name, and then "add foe."
I don't answer for the joy of responding to a BS'er, but so that others know, or at least might consider, that it is BS. I realize that a polite, referenced, fully explained rebuttal in 6th grade English is the best possible rejoinder but the internet is flooded with Trumpers and wack-a-mole is doomed to failure.LeftieBiker said:
I think that WetEV probably has the best approach (that I intend to emulate): politely demand references to back up the opinions and statements or call them out as BS.
That's fine, with emphasis on "politely."
WetEV
Well-known member
WetEV said:
Going to back up your words, or eat them?
I figured a lot of this renewable energy stuff would be paid for by the states 1.2 billion dollar surplus. Nope.
Trujillo, D-Santa Fe, said “We already spent the surplus,” to reporters on Thursday.
They probably could have nearly doubled the states wind capacity with that much money, if it can be done for closer to $1 per watt. Typically price being between $1 and $2 per watt.
http://nmpoliticalreport.com/2019/03/14/senate-panel-pares-back-proposed-tax-increases/
If any thing this demonstrates how infrequent wind power is. If it averages 50% utilization and clearly the wind does not blow late at night or early morning rather often then how is wind supposed to cover base load reliably?
This is one of the renewable traps, relying on averages and assuming that all will be well.
I will admit I don't blindly rely on green washed, 3rd or 4th hand information like everyone else.
Trujillo, D-Santa Fe, said “We already spent the surplus,” to reporters on Thursday.
They probably could have nearly doubled the states wind capacity with that much money, if it can be done for closer to $1 per watt. Typically price being between $1 and $2 per watt.
http://nmpoliticalreport.com/2019/03/14/senate-panel-pares-back-proposed-tax-increases/
If any thing this demonstrates how infrequent wind power is. If it averages 50% utilization and clearly the wind does not blow late at night or early morning rather often then how is wind supposed to cover base load reliably?
This is one of the renewable traps, relying on averages and assuming that all will be well.
I will admit I don't blindly rely on green washed, 3rd or 4th hand information like everyone else.
Would you like to support your statements with data ?Oilpan4 said:
No ... you think you are an expert based on a couple mornings of a few seconds observation of a few windmills near your home.
Look at the graph below. Once again, this is the *entire* ERCOT wind system.
If you think this data is green washed, or 3rd or 4rth hand information, try to prove it. The raw data file from ERCOT is linked above in this thread. Feel free to analyze it yourself, it only takes a minute.
When does the wind stop blowing ?
When is the nadir ?
Is there more wind at night or during the day ?
jlv
Well-known member
Did you post the wrong link? That doesn't discuss wind power at all.Oilpan4 said:
WetEV
Well-known member
Oilpan4 said:
You don't provide sources when challenged.
Oilpan4 said:
So I just came into this thread and read it all.
Oilpan, I know you feel like the push towards renewables is super expensive and hurts the people of NM. However, look at the data from the utilities that others have posted. Everyone talking to you has cited facts, sources, and raw data when making assertions. The raw data does not support the arguments you're making. Instead of providing data to support your position, you have posted anecdotal evidence (I see 4 turbines idle outside my window) and the appeal to authority fallacy ("I worked on these, I know what I'm talking about"). Consider the possibility you may be wrong.
SageBrush said:
Not all Trumpers are idiots, bigots, or racists (Note: I'm not saying you stated any of them were the last two, but it's a common argument made). There are valid reasons for supporting Trump. Your arguments (prior to the insults) are well written and backed up by data. Most people will be intelligent enough to read this thread and grow their understanding of the cost and viability of renewables. Insulting people will only end discussion and further divide all of us.
Free speech does work--it is not doomed to failure, but arguments do take a while to change people's minds.
So which one of you is the trump supporter?
I must have missed that post.
I will indulge the fantasy that wind can cover base load or even if wind isn't stabile enough that grid batteries become cheap enough in 10 years to fill the gaps.
In 2016 NM generated about 11% of its electricity with about 1,110mw of installed wind capacity. It's on Wikipedia.
Up until 2014 wind generation in new mexico was being installed actually quite cheaply. Towards the low end of the range, $1 per watt of capacity. Because wind farms like the house and Caprock project were put right next to existing transmission lines so their transmission line budget was almost $0.
You can see it on Google earth.
What happened after 2014, I don't know I haven't watched it as closely.
So it's safe to say they will cost some where between 1 and 2 dollars per watt of capacity, search that pretty much any where.
If we look at a really big year for federal green energy spending, say 2010 with 15 billion in direct spending, credits, tax breaks. We will say the Fed breaks that down to the states roughly by population, then new mexico might get around 100 million dollars a year since New mexico has about 0.63% of the US population.
So the Fed isn't going to pay for much of it.
Federal dollars might be able to double existing NM wind capacity by 2030 if green energy spending is ramped back up to 2010 levels, stays at that level and is given to the states.
The new mexico population is only 2.1 million people. The per capita income is only around $17,000. The tax base to pay for a few billion dollars worth of wind turbines just isn't here.
So, how do these wind turbines get paid for?
I must have missed that post.
I will indulge the fantasy that wind can cover base load or even if wind isn't stabile enough that grid batteries become cheap enough in 10 years to fill the gaps.
In 2016 NM generated about 11% of its electricity with about 1,110mw of installed wind capacity. It's on Wikipedia.
Up until 2014 wind generation in new mexico was being installed actually quite cheaply. Towards the low end of the range, $1 per watt of capacity. Because wind farms like the house and Caprock project were put right next to existing transmission lines so their transmission line budget was almost $0.
You can see it on Google earth.
What happened after 2014, I don't know I haven't watched it as closely.
So it's safe to say they will cost some where between 1 and 2 dollars per watt of capacity, search that pretty much any where.
If we look at a really big year for federal green energy spending, say 2010 with 15 billion in direct spending, credits, tax breaks. We will say the Fed breaks that down to the states roughly by population, then new mexico might get around 100 million dollars a year since New mexico has about 0.63% of the US population.
So the Fed isn't going to pay for much of it.
Federal dollars might be able to double existing NM wind capacity by 2030 if green energy spending is ramped back up to 2010 levels, stays at that level and is given to the states.
The new mexico population is only 2.1 million people. The per capita income is only around $17,000. The tax base to pay for a few billion dollars worth of wind turbines just isn't here.
So, how do these wind turbines get paid for?
smkettner
Well-known member
Mostly sure the wind turbines will create electricity at lower cost than coal. Your rate can stay level until the cap ex is covered. That is what pays for the new energy.
smkettner
Well-known member
Yes once the alternative is the low cost supply the transition can be very fast.Oilpan4 said:
We are not just paying for wind turbines and solar panels.
I posted an article showing electrical customers will also be on the hook to pay back investors for early closing of the coal fired power plant up in Farmington.
No one seems to have any idea how much that will cost.
I posted an article showing electrical customers will also be on the hook to pay back investors for early closing of the coal fired power plant up in Farmington.
No one seems to have any idea how much that will cost.
Oilpan4 said:
I agree that costs to close coal-fired plants should not come from the pockets of consumers. That doesn't mean that the plants should stay open, because the environmental costs involved in that case are paid by everyone in the region (and often beyond it).
