Electricity prices to jump

Page 1 of 2  
There was an auction for future electricity.
"The market-clearing price for new 2015 capacity – almost all natural gas – was $136 per megawatt. That’s eight times higher than the price for 2012, which was just $16 per megawatt. In the mid-Atlantic area covering New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and DC the new price is $167 per megawatt. For the northern Ohio territory served by FirstEnergy, the price is a shocking $357 per megawatt.
"These are not computer models or projections or estimates. These are the actual prices that electric distributors have agreed to pay for new capacity. The costs will be passed on to consumers at the retail level."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/22/obamas-war-on-coal-hits-your-electric-bill/print#ixzz1vgssSqP3
The articles attributes the price rise to the closing of coal-fired power plants which, in turn, were mainly retired because of new EPA regulations.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/23/2012 6:21 AM, HeyBub wrote:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/22/obamas-war-on-coal-hits-your-electric-bill/print#ixzz1vgssSqP3
And a good thing, too. The mercury levels in our lakes in Minnesota have risen to the point where just about every type of fish in nearly every lake and stream has consumption advisories. You can fish, but it's not safe to regularly eat much of it anymore, thanks to all the mercury the coal-fired plants have been dumping into the atmosphere to end up in the lakes. We'd prefer to catch our fish and get to eat them, too, y'know. And with the price of natural gas at rock-bottom prices and expected to remain there for decades to come, NOW is the time to retire the dirty coal burning plants and replace them with natural gas. Our antiquated electrical grid sorely needs upgrading anyhow.
Per Andy Ott, marketing VP for PJM, the company that held the auction:
Ott noted that the 2015 capacity prices' overall effect on retail consumers' electricity rates is expected to be moderated by other factors. "Capacity is a fairly small component of the retail price of electricity, and the cost of capacity at the retail level tends to be averaged out over several years," Ott explained. "In addition, if natural gas prices remain low, that would tend to restrain retail electricity prices."
In other words, Fox once again plays on the fears of its sucker audience. I swear, you guys are just like little kids huddling around the campfire listening to scary stories. You _like_ to get yourselves scared to death, and Fox obliges you. It's a terrific business model: find the suckers and play to them.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hell Toupee wrote:

Ontario has lots of spare capacity, thanks to an orgy of wind-turbine building and solar panel farms that happened before the recession hit in 2008.
Owners of these new plants have signed garanteed lucrative price AND purchase agreements with the provincal power authority, meaning that there have been times over the past couple of years where the province HAD to allow these plants to put their power into the provincial grid WHILE AT THE SAME TIME the provincial power authority had to pay other networks to TAKE THE EXCESS POWER -> which meant that the spot price for electricity in this market actually went NEGATIVE.
Because of a lot of manufacturing plant closures in Ontario, we have excess capacity and Ohio and other neighboring states would be fools to be signing contracts with new producers when they can purchase Ontario electricity at cut-rate prices. Quebec has a shit-load of hydro-electric capacity as well that feeds into the eastern US grid.

Ontario has closed several coal-fired plants, and the remaining plants are scheduled to go down in a year or so.
The coal lobby in the US is HUGE, and they won't go down without a fight. You're seeing PR commercials on TV from the "clean coal" mouthpiece for the coal industry.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Uh, no. NBC nightly news alone has 7 times the viewers of O'Reilly. Then ABC and CBS news also put him in the dust. Besides, Fox has no news channel on cable It has a politics channel. No different than MSNBC, except more old white fools watching it. O'Reilly reruns probably do well because the old folks forgot they already saw it. Let me know when O'Reilly or any of the other political talking heads gets close to SpongeBob or Ax Men. Then I'll know we're in trouble.
--
Vic

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/23/2012 11:46 AM, Vic Smith wrote:

If ESPN Sportscenter is considered news it'd might win. They claim 20 million viewers on Sunday.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Vic Smith wrote:

You're right. I should have said: "... than the next five CABLE news channels combined."
I regret my error and thank you for bringing it to my attention.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

No problem. I knew what you meant. This is usenet, so I feel required to play asshole now and then. Just doing my civic duty.
--
Vic



Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Vic Smith wrote:

Perhaps you should include in your calculation the consequences. In the instant case, immediately when you pointed out my error, I scampered to a dark corner of my library, sat on a low stool, and felt shame. For five hours.
I don't like to make mistakes.
I'm still searching for a suitable act of contrition. Right now, the contribution of a three-piece dinner from KFC to the Salvation Army is at the top of the list.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

ROFLMAO!
I suspect even our resident idiot, with his closet full of stockpiled 100 watt incandescent bulbs, will switch to CFL or LED.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


except that lighting is not the biggest part of people electric usage,it's a relatively small part.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A miniscule part.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/25/2012 11:22 AM, Jim Yanik wrote:

So watt! The smart thing to do is take care of the low-hanging fruit first.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

evolution in action
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

How is conservation not an alternative source? Reducing demand (negawatts) frees up power (megawatts) and does it cheaper
California has 50% more people than Texas and uses 33% less total energy. If more states did that, why would we need to produce more power
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On May 25, 6:10 pm, "Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds" <atlas-

Because you can only conserve so much and with most things as you get more desperate to squeeze efficiency out of it, the cost and complexity increase greatly. For example, you think we can just keep going from 10 SEER to 16 SEER to infinite SEER AC? Look at the cost of a 14 or 15 SEER system and compare it to the cost of an 18 SEER.

You think just maybe that could be because unlike CA, Texas hasn't driven out much of it's industry? Intel for example, founded in CA stopped building any manufacturing facilities there decades ago.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Because you can only conserve so much and with most things as you get more desperate to squeeze efficiency out of it, the cost and complexity increase greatly. For example, you think we can just keep going from 10 SEER to 16 SEER to infinite SEER AC? Look at the cost of a 14 or 15 SEER system and compare it to the cost of an 18 SEER.

You think just maybe that could be because unlike CA, Texas hasn't driven out much of it's industry? Intel for example, founded in CA stopped building any manufacturing facilities there decades ago.
{{
Much of Texas industry has moved to Mexico. It's just over the back fence after all.
Company I used to consult for does 99% of their work in Mexico hauls the sub assemblies to Texas and inserts part A into part B and tighten a nut ... then labels the product ASSEMBLED IN USA.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

true, but you can use much simpler technology like CFL's or LED's (yes, lighting is a small part of the energy load, unless you look at office buildings and commercial spaces) or you can have stricter building codes so that that 14 SEER is sufficient. You can also subsidize the replacement of inefficient appliances, white roofing programs and more weatherization programs for older houses. California has been doing that for over 40 years and it has worked.

This is 2008 data http://www.census.gov/epcd/susb/2001/us/US--.HTM
California has about 3 times the national average for over 500 employees firms Texas has about 4.65 times the national average.
In the All Industries section California had 668068 firms. Those with over 500 employees accounted for .9% which is approximately 6012 large firms/industries
Texas had 369330 Firms. Those with over 500 employees accounted for 1.4% which is approximately 517 large firms/industries
so the answer is no
--

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Cras lobortis volutpat
commodo. Morbi lobortis, massa fringilla adipiscing suscipit, velit urna
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/26/2012 6:14 PM, Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:

Californians can also do some things that invoke "The Law Of Unintended Results" I remember reading something about problems in San Francisco with the sewer system due to all the water saver toilets. It seems that there is not enough water flowing down sewer pipes to "flush" away all the excreta. I always knew Liberals were full of crap. ^_^
http://www.americantradition.org/?p 32
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/03/02/low-flush-toilets-the-san-francisco-treat /
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/02/28/BAVP1HUSUD.DTL&tsp=1
TDD
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Imagine that. Cities all across the continent are reducing water and all you can find is one example from a city with sewers over a hundred years old?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

the only thing proven false is that SF has a, pardon the pun, a shitty sewer system
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.