IGX

Lost in all the attention to the Trump administration’s effort to scuttle President Barack Obama’s clean power plan is its attempt to prop up the struggling coal industry by doing something very un-Republican — subsidizing it.

Last month, Rick Perry, the secretary of energy, asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission — the independent agency that regulates electricity markets — to adopt a new rule to pay certain coal and nuclear plants more than they would otherwise earn in a competitive market. In essence, consumers would pay these plants a premium for electricity that competitors could produce, and are already producing, more cheaply.

dead man walking wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2017 3:22 pm markets are good, except when your friends can't compete. when that happens, you change the rules to subsidize your friends. as long as they're rich.

Lost in all the attention to the Trump administration’s effort to scuttle President Barack Obama’s clean power plan is its attempt to prop up the struggling coal industry by doing something very un-Republican — subsidizing it.

Last month, Rick Perry, the secretary of energy, asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission — the independent agency that regulates electricity markets — to adopt a new rule to pay certain coal and nuclear plants more than they would otherwise earn in a competitive market. In essence, consumers would pay these plants a premium for electricity that competitors could produce, and are already producing, more cheaply.

nafod wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2017 7:19 pm

dead man walking wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2017 3:22 pm markets are good, except when your friends can't compete. when that happens, you change the rules to subsidize your friends. as long as they're rich.

Lost in all the attention to the Trump administration’s effort to scuttle President Barack Obama’s clean power plan is its attempt to prop up the struggling coal industry by doing something very un-Republican — subsidizing it.

Last month, Rick Perry, the secretary of energy, asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission — the independent agency that regulates electricity markets — to adopt a new rule to pay certain coal and nuclear plants more than they would otherwise earn in a competitive market. In essence, consumers would pay these plants a premium for electricity that competitors could produce, and are already producing, more cheaply.

I think this is related to the idea that as power generation gets massively distributed (private solar and wind at each house) that people only want to buy coal power when it is cloudy and calm, using their own stuff otherwise, but the coal power companies have to pay the money to be ready when the solar hippy comes knocking for juice.

DrDonkeyLove wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:50 pm Solyndra

DrDonkeyLove wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:50 pm Solyndra

Yes I Have Balls wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:34 pm

DrDonkeyLove wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:50 pm Solyndra

Tesla
Abengoa biorefinery
Cogentrix
Hugoton, KS
Beacon Power

and dozens of other success stories from that program, that by the way has turned a $30M profit ? *shrug*

dead man walking wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:31 pm

nafod wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2017 7:19 pm

dead man walking wrote: ↑Wed Oct 25, 2017 3:22 pm markets are good, except when your friends can't compete. when that happens, you change the rules to subsidize your friends. as long as they're rich.

Lost in all the attention to the Trump administration’s effort to scuttle President Barack Obama’s clean power plan is its attempt to prop up the struggling coal industry by doing something very un-Republican — subsidizing it.

Last month, Rick Perry, the secretary of energy, asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission — the independent agency that regulates electricity markets — to adopt a new rule to pay certain coal and nuclear plants more than they would otherwise earn in a competitive market. In essence, consumers would pay these plants a premium for electricity that competitors could produce, and are already producing, more cheaply.

I think this is related to the idea that as power generation gets massively distributed (private solar and wind at each house) that people only want to buy coal power when it is cloudy and calm, using their own stuff otherwise, but the coal power companies have to pay the money to be ready when the solar hippy comes knocking for juice.

these plants are not currently needed for grid reliability.

constellation had a dirty-ass coal plant that was simply essential for reliability in the balt gas & elec territory, and it was "must run" and received the highest bid in the market at all hours, no matter its operating costs. so yeah, some baseload power that can be dispacted and ramped up is essential, but we don't need the plants rick perry is talking about.

a further point, although solar and wind are intermittent, their generation is predictable, both seasonally, time of day and likely output. it's call weather forecasting. so most reliability needs can be planned for, and we've got less expensive gas to do the job.

let's be clear, the only response to perry's bullshit is: bullshit.