Posted on 07/14/2019 4:38:41 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Just about three weeks ago, I did a piece headlined: “Will You Survive the Coming Blackout?”
On the heels of this weekend’s mini-blackout in New York City, this is not about “See, I told you so!” but is about reminding people that a large and sustained blackout could and would cripple much of society as we know it – and it could and would have a devastating impact upon our very lives, and survival.
Such a blackout is coming. It is only a matter of time.
Again, leaving aside the growing threats of cyber and terrorist attacks upon our power grid, the fact of the matter is that much of our grid is antiquated junk desperately in need of billions of dollars in repair. Antiquated infrastructure which unfortunately, is connected to other outdated infrastructure.
Sometimes, the slighted bump to our ancient electrical power infrastructure triggers a chain reaction power loss which spreads in seconds and leaves millions of people literally in the dark and much worse.
In 2003, a tree branch fell on a power line in Ohio and, instantly, over 50 million people in the United States and Canada were hit with cascading blackouts.
A tree branch.
These weather-related events happen every single day in the United States and collectively cause multiple blackouts to our very old, very weak, and very vulnerable infrastructure.
The mini-blackout in New York City affected about 73,000 people. Because it hit parts of midtown Manhattan, some of the city’s top tourist attractions and hot-spots went dark. Including Madison Square Garden in the middle of a Jennifer Lopez concert.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Yes, what happened to all the infrastructure money that was spent during the Obola years?
Amen. The book One Second After is a great source to get you thinking.
Try it. Try going for just two days with no electricity and no water. Then imagine months of that.
Food pantries in your area would probably take it.
As you say, expiration dates are more suggestion than fact.
Renewable energy is distributed, but it is so variable that it ADDS instability to the grid. Whether fast winds shutting down wind turbines to solar dropping from an unplanned storm front, the sheer variation increases the odds of an overload somewhere.
If the grid goes down and someone uses that as an opportunity to smoke 1000 anti-fa supporting democrats, is that a tragedy?
Credit: By Michael J. Trebilcock, April 08, 2009, network.nationalpost.com ~~
There is no evidence that industrial wind power is likely to have a significant impact on carbon emissions. The European experience is instructive. Denmark, the world’s most wind-intensive nation, with more than 6,000 turbines generating 19% of its electricity, has yet to close a single fossil-fuel plant. It requires 50% more coal-generated electricity to cover wind power’s unpredictability, and pollution and carbon dioxide emissions have risen (by 36% in 2006 alone).
Flemming Nissen, the head of development at West Danish generating company ELSAM (one of Denmark’s largest energy utilities) tells us that “wind turbines do not reduce carbon dioxide emissions.” The German experience is no different. Der Spiegel reports that “Germany’s CO2 emissions haven’t been reduced by even a single gram,” and additional coal- and gas-fired plants have been constructed to ensure reliable delivery.
Indeed, recent academic research shows that wind power may actually increase greenhouse gas emissions in some cases, depending on the carbon-intensity of back-up generation required because of its intermittent character. On the negative side of the environmental ledger are adverse impacts of industrial wind turbines on birdlife and other forms of wildlife, farm animals, wetlands and viewsheds.
Industrial wind power is not a viable economic alternative to other energy conservation options. Again, the Danish experience is instructive. Its electricity generation costs are the highest in Europe (15¢/kwh compared to Ontario’s current rate of about 6¢). Niels Gram of the Danish Federation of Industries says, “windmills are a mistake and economically make no sense.” Aase Madsen , the Chair of Energy Policy in the Danish Parliament, calls it “a terribly expensive disaster.”
The U.S. Energy Information Administration reported in 2008, on a dollar per MWh basis, the U.S. government subsidizes wind at $23.34 – compared to reliable energy sources: natural gas at 25¢; coal at 44¢; hydro at 67¢; and nuclear at $1.59, leading to what some U.S. commentators call “a huge corporate welfare feeding frenzy.” The Wall Street Journal advises that “wind generation is the prime example of what can go wrong when the government decides to pick winners.”
The Economist magazine notes in a recent editorial, “Wasting Money on Climate Change,” that each tonne of emissions avoided due to subsidies to renewable energy such as wind power would cost somewhere between $69 and $137, whereas under a cap-and-trade scheme the price would be less than $15.
Either a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system creates incentives for consumers and producers on a myriad of margins to reduce energy use and emissions that, as these numbers show, completely overwhelm subsidies to renewables in terms of cost effectiveness.
The Ontario Power Authority advises that wind producers will be paid 13.5¢/kwh (more than twice what consumers are currently paying), even without accounting for the additional costs of interconnection, transmission and back-up generation. As the European experience confirms, this will inevitably lead to a dramatic increase in electricity costs with consequent detrimental effects on business and employment. From this perspective, the government’s promise of 55,000 new jobs is a cruel delusion.
A recent detailed analysis (focusing mainly on Spain) finds that for every job created by state-funded support of renewables, particularly wind energy, 2.2 jobs are lost. Each wind industry job created cost almost $2-million in subsidies. Why will the Ontario experience be different?
In debates over climate change, and in particular subsidies to renewable energy, there are two kinds of green. First there are some environmental greens who view the problem as so urgent that all measures that may have some impact on greenhouse gas emissions, whatever their cost or their impact on the economy and employment, should be undertaken immediately.
Then there are the fiscal greens, who, being cool to carbon taxes and cap-and-trade systems that make polluters pay, favour massive public subsidies to themselves for renewable energy projects, whatever their relative impact on greenhouse gas emissions. These two groups are motivated by different kinds of green. The only point of convergence between them is their support for massive subsidies to renewable energy (such as wind turbines).
This unholy alliance of these two kinds of greens (doomsdayers and rent seekers) makes for very effective, if opportunistic, politics (as reflected in the Ontario government’s Green Energy Act), just as it makes for lousy public policy: Politicians attempt to pick winners at our expense in a fast-moving technological landscape, instead of creating a socially efficient set of incentives to which we can all respond.
Michael J. Trebilcock is Professor of Law and Economics, University of Toronto. These comments were excerpted from a submission last night to the Ontario government’s legislative committee On Bill 150.
As long as cans aren’t swollen the food is likely safe, though the nutritional value will diminish somewhat. If you have canned fruits and vegetables that you don’t want, they can make a very good start to a compost pile so you can start your own small garden.
What ^he said!
“canned goods that are in good condition are still safe to eat years after their expiration date”
I was actually going through some of my old canned foods, soups, and stews and it tastes better than the ones I brought at the store a few weeks ago.
Its kinda like opening a box or a bag of snacks and its only half full these days - I think the companies are skipping on the ingredients. The new ones tasted really bland.
oh the out of date canned food was 10-12 years old and still just fine as long as the tins dont get compromised its good.
Our power went out for days due to a snow storm. I learned that you can’t buy gas without cash. Those pumps don’t work without power.
Well. I have seen and discussed studies on this so-called “tree” outage in Ohio. That is simply a WAY simplistic and incorrect statement. Trust me, there was a whole lot more going on when that happened. Additionally, this was some years ago and technology and standards have improved a ton since then.
And yeah, mostly leftists will die if the grid fails. They congregate together and don’t know how to do much for themselves. So yeah. They will die first.
Put it outside a dumpster in a busy part of town, someone will take it.
*** Texas also has it’s own power grid. ***
Something Texas did which I find stupid was to replace the natural gas powered pumping generation system to keep the natural gas flowing in emergencies/outages with electric powered ones.
If the cause is EMP vs a squirrel, multiple studies, both government and civilian written, say that up to 90% fatalities should be expected within a year. With a total shutdown, generators won’t make a difference because gas distribution would halt immediately. Same with food, medicine, baseball cards and chewing gum. A great book on the subject, “One Second After”, gives a terrifying account of what WOULD happen. It’s a real possibility and it’s a really BAD possibility.
for me, it was the tv show “Jericho”
It is just a matter of time til we see a massive blackout. We prepared 10 years ago as did a handful of our friends. At the time I warned all my friends “I can warn you but I can’t feed you”.
re: “In 2003, a tree branch fell on a power line in Ohio and, instantly, over 50 million people in the United States and Canada were hit with cascading blackouts.
A tree branch.”
NO. There was a LOT more too it.
Tree growth below HV transmission lines (on power line ROWs) was only one aspect ...
THE SKY IS FALLING!!!
re: “It is just a matter of time til we see a massive blackout. “
ONLY if you say so; we’ve never had a blackout in Texas ...we’ve had selective cutoff, called “Load Shedding” on account of a shortage of natural gas due to well-head freeze-up a few years back (during a severe cold snap), but that load shedding was PLANNED to maintain the grid as opposed to stumbling into that condition as has happened in the northeast several times since 1965.
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.