Filthy Power Plant Sued!

I have a question (4.00 / 3)

and this is something that we will all have to come to terms with as power plants age, and are replaced, and we're going to have to come up with a solution to this problem one way or another.

That is the question of the increased use of electricity over the past 50 years, and what will happen over the next 50-100 years.

As the plants are shut down, either because of environmental regulations that make existing operating plants unsustainable financially for the power companies, or as plants age and are replaced, what are we going to replace them with?

I think that electricity usage increases will exceed oil use increases, which makes me wonder how that electricity will be generated.

Here in Oregon, PGE recently agreed to retire the Boardman coal fired electricity plant. While a lot of people were lauding the decission, I haven't heard a lot of discussion about what will replace that capacity. Some talk has gone on about replacing it with an LNG fired plant, but I don't know....

Here in Oregon, I don't think hydro could take up the slack, wind and solar are fine, but not consistent enough to do more than supplement. Nuclear I think is out.

We're going to have to figure out something in a relatively short period of time. I'd say 30-40 years. Otherwise things are going to have to slow way down.

I was listening to George Nori's show one evening and his guest made the statement that if we lost electricity in this country, we'd all be up a creek. Everything we do is dependant on electricity.

As dependant on oil as we are, we are orders of magnitude more dependant on electricity.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....

---

by: Joanne Rigutto @ Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 19:36:47 PM UTC

You probably know what I'm gonna say... (4.00 / 2)

Not to be a pessimist or anything, but this is just one of the many reasons why I believe our worlds are going to get much smaller and more local over the next 50 years.  Or sooner, if we f* things up fast enough (i.e. - angry fanatics taking power in the US and starting another war or three).

Slowing life down and becoming more local doesn't at all have to be a bad thing, of course, and as a matter of fact it can lead to an even better world than we have now.  As long as we play our cards right.  Wouldn't our tax dollars do much more good staying local and improving our lives, rather than funding overseas military expeditions and propping up degenerate gamblers like Goldman Sachs and them?

But in the end, I view it as simply being a realist.  Hell, I'm only 30 after all.  I have no land, no money, no farming experience, etc.  I'd be one of the worst off if shit hits the fan big time, so it's not like I'm looking forward to constant rolling blackouts and spot shortages of food and other supplies.  But I'd rather be wrong and pleasantly surprised, than caught totally unaware and devastated.

I don't have an answer, but I can sure tell you right now that I doubt any of our "leaders" do, either.  Money is power, and fossil fuel interests have the money.  Sadly, I really just don't think anybody in power right now is serious about the future much beyond next quarter's balance sheet.

---

by: JayinPortland @ Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 21:39:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

you're so right (4.00 / 2)

that if we lost electricity we'd be up a creek. I've heard of using natural gas as a bridge fuel to get to renewables, and promoting use of solar, wind, tidal, and biomass, AND restructuring the nation's system to be like California's. In most states, power companies make money when people use more electricity. In CA, power companies make more money when people conserve. As a result, CA has done a much better job in NOT increasing the amount of electricity we use over the years compared to the rest of the nation.

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman

---

by: Jill Richardson @ Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 23:02:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

California (4.00 / 2)

CA has done a much better job in NOT increasing the amount of electricity we use over the years compared to the rest of the nation.

Wow. Is that true? If true, it's a story that probably is not widely known. It would merit broad consideration. I'd love to know more details.

Your comment surprises me, but I'm eager to learn more.

---

by: count @ Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 23:59:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I learned it directly from Robert F Kennedy Jr (4.00 / 2)

at a talk he gave when I was in NYC in November.

"I can understand someone from Iowa promoting corn and soy, but we are not feeding the world, we are feeding animals and soft drink companies." - Jim Goodman

---

by: Jill Richardson @ Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 08:25:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

How does it work? (4.00 / 1)

...power companies make more money when people conserve.

What is the mechanism?

---

by: count @ Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 09:03:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

LNG (4.00 / 1)

Are there any existing West Coast LNG terminals? Building new ones encounters so much opposition, much of which is (in my opinion) misplaced.

---

by: count @ Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 23:32:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Proposals... (4.00 / 1)

There are proposals to build 3 in Oregon, but none of them will probably be built.  They've encountered massive opposition (especially in Astoria, and demonstrations are even held here in Portland 70 miles away), and I'm not quite sure they'd be of much use anyways, by the time they get online.  Especially considering the massive investment needed to build and maintain the plants and infrastructure, we'd probably be better off looking to other (domestic) energy sources right now.

Much like oil reserves, it's also quite likely that gas reserves are overstated as well (a British company was just caught late last year wildly overstating their natural gas reserves in Turkmenistan; The Oil Drum is a great blog to check out if you haven't read it yet), and from what I understand the existing 5 US LNG terminals (on the East Coast and in the Gulf of Mexico) are operating well under capacity as is.  Also, when gas reserves deplete it's like Wile E. Coyote when he realizes he's gone off the cliff.  There's no slope, it just stops.  I'm certainly no expert, but to me it does seem like an insanely expensive band-aid.

---

by: JayinPortland @ Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 00:19:24 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

And unreliable... (4.00 / 1)

Oops, meant to add that to this sentence -

I'm certainly no expert, but to me it does seem like an insanely expensive [and unreliable] band-aid.

After all, we'd be importing from many of the same unstable regimes / regions from which we're already seeing problems with oil imports.  And when it comes down to it, frankly we're nobody else's favorite country these days.  It would really suck to pour billions into a system which would be totally worthless if, in the nightmare scenario a President Teabagger squirms into office, they bomb yet another country within a few months, and the entire world decides that we're officially a rogue nation and cuts us off or worse.

Again, just considering all realistic and sadly somewhat plausible scenarios here.

---

by: JayinPortland @ Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 00:28:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

gas burner (4.00 / 1)

A gas-fired power plant is not necessarily a no-go without an LNG plant, but I think Joanne is in the bullseye.

I don't know...

---

by: count @ Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 00:33:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

"I don't know"... (4.00 / 1)

Exactly.

The one area where I probably veer way off from most of my fellow people on the left is that I think nuclear energy could have been a major part of our energy future at one point (look at France); but of course, I realize there are also many problems there as well to which I don't have an answer or a solution - the waste, mining the material, etc...

And now, I also think that window's long been closed on nuclear for the same reason as LNG.  We just simply don't have the resources anymore to build and maintain meaningful capacity.  Maybe 20 or 30 years ago, it could have worked?

Oh, if only America didn't fall for Ronald Reagan over the one modern American President who probably came closest to understanding our future energy predicament.

Back to gas...

There's also the fact that natural gas extraction is just as tragic and scarring to the landscape in the West (Wyoming specifically), as coal mining has been (and still is) to West Virginia and other nearby locales.

So, yeah.

I don't know, either.

---

by: JayinPortland @ Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 00:54:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

extraction (4.00 / 1)

and more recently from the shale fields in Oklahoma and Texas.

---

by: count @ Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 09:10:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Conservation (4.00 / 1)

electricity usage increases will exceed oil use increases...

Investing in energy conservation equates with investing in efficiency. What does Sarah Palin think is un-American about that? Our constitution enshrines out right to be as wasteful as we wish, but it does not mandate that we must be profligate.

PBO's jousting with the spectre of energy profligracy has been timid, tentative, diffident, and ineffective, although he has nodded his head in favor of increasing the energy efficiency of federal buildings.

---

by: count @ Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 00:23:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think that Obama's timidity as far as encouraging energy efficiency (4.00 / 2)

especially when directed toward private citizens as any kind of mandatory program/system, is seen as potentially overly intrusive on the part of the federal government.

New regs like this kind of support the argument.

Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....

---

by: Joanne Rigutto @ Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 11:38:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I have to wonder if making individual homes independant of the grid (4.00 / 2)

or at least partially independant, is going to be one of the answers.

Right now solar for the home doesn't pencil out, but the technology is changing and improving so rapidly. Costs are also starting to come down fairly rapidly. Thin film solar looks very promising. So promising that the German government has already bought the first 3 years of production from one California plant.

Also, individual wind generation might hold some promise. I've read about some of those systems over the past couple of years. I've been investigating ways to remove the farm from the grid to a greater or lesser extent. I think I've mentioned in the past here, that one of the first fire stations Harold was posted to when he joined the fire department in LA County, was completely electrified, but not on the grid. They used wind to generate the power, and large banks of batteries to store it.

One of the problems with the two suggestions I've made is that it requires people to do a lot of their own work and maintenance. I don't know how many people are into that.

Just like doing your own cooking is a pain for some, so is being your own electrical engineer. Although that could be a nifty service industry niche for an electrician. I mean, not everyone services their HVAC systems, now do they?


Regarding locavores as elitists - explain to me how supporting local business is elitist....

---

by: Joanne Rigutto @ Mon Feb 08, 2010 at 11:09:35 AM UTC