Posted on 02/11/2011 6:30:19 AM PST by radioone
Let's see if I get this straight. During the early February cold spell in the southern plains, when wind chills in Dallas dipped to minus twenty degrees, Texans were going without power to heat their homes and businesses even as the state was sitting on massive surpluses of natural gas. Even hospitals were having to switch to emergency generating systems. And this in the state with the largest energy production capacity in the continental US.
How was it that Texas suffered an extended period of rolling blackouts at a time when there's a glut of coal and natural gas waiting to be used?
The answer may be quite simple. It seems that a great deal of natural gas got "stuck in the pipes" because there was not enough electricity to operate the pumps to move it along. And there was not enough electricity to operate the pumps because environmentalists had seen to it that plans for new coal-powered generating plants had been shuttered back in 2007. So without the coal, there was no electricity, and without the electricity, there was no natural gas. And since much of the natural gas was intended to supply electrical power generating plants, there was even less electricity to supply the pumps and everything else.
The Texas power blackouts affected millions of homeowners and businesses, as well as vital services such as hospitals, schools, and police and fire services. An extended loss of power during periods of extreme temperatures endangers everyone. It cuts off emergency responders from those in need, and it leaves citizens freezing in their homes. The loss of power reduces modern society to an anarchic level where each is left to fend for himself.
Unfortunately, environmentalists in Texas who blocked the construction of coal-powered plants and shut down others during the last decade did not consider these consequences. All that they thought of was that coal is "dirty," so coal must go. They did not consider what would take its place. Had the coal generating facilities that were planned a decade ago by Texas Power been in place, the rolling blackouts of 2011 might well have been avoided.
As it happened, plans for construction of eight large coal-powered plants were scrapped in 2007 in a private equity deal crafted by the environmental action group, Environmental Defense. Under the agreement, TXU, the Texas power company, agreed to discontinue plans for eight Texas plants, halt construction of coal-powered plants in other states, reduce its carbon footprint to 1990 levels, and endorse the US Climate Action Partnership agenda. This radical transformation of TXU contributed to regulatory approval for takeover of the company by private equity group KKR (Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts).
It is ironic, considering the freezing temperatures that Texans endured during the first week of February, that an agreement to discontinue construction of coal-powered plants was predicated on the now discredited theory of man-made global warming. In order to lower global temperatures, as they imagined, environmentalists pressured TXU to accept a plan that made it impossible for the citizens of Texas to heat their homes.
Can there be any doubt that the agreement to discontinue eight large power plants was a contributing factor in the rolling blackouts of February 2011? The generating capacity supplied by these plants would not have been dependent on the pumping of natural gas. It would have continued to heat homes and businesses, and to power emergency services, throughout the storm. Instead, the state was left depending on an inherently less reliable mix of power sources.
The Texas blackouts are a foretaste of what the rest of the country can expect, given the concerted effort of the Obama administration to shut down coal generating plants and to place obstacles in the way of coal mining. Just weeks ago, the EPA revoked the permit for Arch Coal's Spruce Number One mine in Virginia, one of the largest coal mining projects in the country. For the past two years, in fact, the EPA has pursued a hyper-aggressive program of enforcement that seems intended to price coal electrical generation out of the market. As in Texas, plans for new coal power plants have been scrubbed. They have been replaced by plants powered by natural gas, and by heavily subsidized wind and solar generation.
The problem is that natural gas plants have not come on line quickly enough to replace the coal generation that has been lost, and wind and solar, which make up only 1% of power generation anyway, are inherently unreliable. The wind does not blow all the time, nor does the sun shine at night. Had the US retained its reliable base of coal power generation, there would be less danger of further blackouts. As it is, much of the country is in danger of experiencing outages similar to those in Texas.
Ironically, the US is in danger of power blackouts at a time when it is exporting greater and greater amount of coal to China and other countries. Already, America is sending 80 million tons of coal overseas, but plans are underway to increase exports by 10% in 2011. Countries overseas understand that coal is the cheapest and most reliable form of energy available for producing electrical power. At a time when America is curtailing its coal generating capacity, China and India are building one new coal generating plant every week. And America is shipping its vital resources overseas even as its citizens are left, quite literally, out in the cold.
This has been a demonstration of the difference between wind power and actual base load power sources.
It is also a demonstration why power grid design and power grid policy should involve people who are called “electrical engineers” instead of people called “environmental activists” or “community organizers.”
What did we say in the 70’s?
May all you ecology freaks freeze to death in the dark...
Environmentalists are cut-your-nose-off-in-spite-of-your-face nutjobs that are protected by the judicial system.
we need a common sense leader who will tell all these nut jobs to go F themselves.
“Unfortunately, environmentalists in Texas who blocked the construction of coal-powered plants and shut down others during the last decade did not consider these consequences.”
Utter hogwash. The environmentalists knew this would happen. Their goal is reducing energy consumption far below current levels. Blackouts are the inevitable result of their policies.
Not if I can help it.
The second shock will come in this month’s electric bills. The rate per kwh went from $50 to $3000, which of course, will be billed to consumers. (Wonder how much Mexico will charge Texans for for rescuing us?)
If they weren’t owned by lobbyists, the Texas legislature would insist that the bill for this poor planning and service by the power companies would be paid by them, not the customers who sat in the dark and froze while the power companies tried to get their act together. It’s high time such evident incompetence is punished.
I love how they think they’re saving the world by stopping a few needed coal plants in America while China is bringing a new coal plant online every month.
No wonder Trump said yesterday that China is laughing at us.
Any lawyers out there?
It seems to me that there should be a class action suit on behalf of the electric consumers of Texas (and other states) who have been harmed by the named environmental groups and their sponsors.
Let’s bankrupt the bastards who want to force their AGW religion on us!
The reason why environmentalists try to create circumstances where we are forced to use less power is because they believe that by making us use less power, science and technology will advance in a magical fashion to find an abundant source of environmentally friendly energy.
Don’t you mean Mwh?
What magical energy source will supplement the power demand this summer when the temps hit the mid 90’s?
Starting to look like we will have lots of blackouts this summer.
“The reason why environmentalists try to create circumstances where we are forced to use less power is because they believe that by making us use less power, science and technology will advance in a magical fashion to find an abundant source of environmentally friendly energy.”
Perhaps a few of the more gullible environmentalists believe that. But the real environmentalists believe that we must reduce our standard of living and forcing us to use less power is how they bring that about.
They wouldn’t care if power were abundant and environmentally friendly. For example, try to build windmills and they fight to prevent building transmission lines. They fight to stop solar power plants to prevent ‘eyesores’.
That’s not their problem.
That’s your problem.
“Environmentalists” fall into two categories (and I use the term “environmentalist” very loosely):
Group 1 - The Power: This is a group that is anything BUT concerned about the environment. They are power-hungry people who will use whatever tool is necessary to gain the power they desire over people. They are universally hard-core Marxists who hate the free market, who hate capitalism, and who have the cash to sucker in the second group.
Group 2 - the Useful Sheep: This group are the foot soldiers of Group 1. They are mostly made up of Gaia-worshippers (though they may not admit it) - falling for Satan’s wiles. They value mold, mildew, bugs, and animals over humanity. They may even be lurking in our churches (and a few mainline denominations have chosen to join in - though I think some in the higher-ups of those organizations may actually be of Group 1). Group 2 does include some well-meaning, big-hearted people who are just simply easily fooled. Others are radicals who have a similar view of capitalism as Group 1 members - but also fall for the environmental schemes.
Most politicians who buy into the Environmentalist fraud are actually Group 1 types. Some began or were indoctrinated through the ranks of Group 2, but they were smart enough to see it for what it is - an avenue to power.
I am a lawyer in Texas, and the answer, unfortunately, is there’s probably no potential law suit here. You can’t really sue someone for lobbying and filing law suits, which is pretty much all the environmental groups did here.
What happened here was that Gov. Perry issued an executive order after Katrina and the natural gas price spike to expedite the permit hearing process for new power plants, and it was under that expedited process that the permits for the eight TXU plants were sought. The environmental groups and others sued Perry arguing that his executive order was unconstitutional because he did not have the authority as Governor to impose expedited hearing procedures on the Administrative Law Judges who conduct the permit hearings. The judge agreed, even though the Chief ALJ agreed to comply with Perry’s ruling, which is within her discretion. I haven’t heard whether Perry appealed.
It was a ridiculous ruling, in my opinion. Unfortunately, though, there’s nothing there that gives rise to a private cause of action by consumers against the environmental groups.
The only thing I could think of that could form the basis of a suit by consumers would be if you could find some sort of anticompetitive practice by TXU. I don’t see how, though - the buyout doesn’t seem to implicate any antitrust issues, and the decision not to seek permits for new power plants is not the sort of thing that implicates consumer protection statutes like the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act or the consumer protection provisions of the Texas Utilities Code.
That’s exactly it. Their real enemy isn’t pollution. Their real enemy is our entire way of life. It’s about time people started realizing that.
No coal? Stoke the boilers with Liberals!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.