Reply With Quote
Oregon and Washington are probably in the lead of green energy production.
Illinois Powers 91 Communities With 100 Percent Clean Energy
Many people don’t know of a state with more than one community using 100-percent renewable electricity, but one state has nearly 100 of them.
Illinois has 91 communities that have achieved 100-percent renewable energy, according to “Leading from the Middle: How Illinois Communities Unleashed Renewable Energy,” a report released Friday by the Environmental Law & Policy Center, Sierra Club, World Wildlife Fund, LEAN Energy US, the Illinois Solar Energy Association and George Washington University Solar Ins ute. Each of the communities used group buying power to purchase electricity with renewable energy credits.
Illinois is one of six states in the country that allows community choice aggregation (CCA), a system where residents can use their bulk purchasing to solicit bids from energy providers.
According to the reporting agencies, bid requests can demand a mix of energy sources. In Illinois, the 91 communities stipulated that all electricity is offset by renewable energy credits, or energy that comes from the likes of wind, solar and geothermal sources.
New Jersey, Ohio (oops!), California, Rhode Island and Massachusetts are the other states that allow CCA.
http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/08/illinois-clean-energy/
Why aren't any deeply red states allowing CCA? Because they are pro-business, allowing, protecting carbon energy corps to suck excessive wealth from their citizens?
Oregon and Washington are probably in the lead of green energy production.
My question is why do they, especially, not have CCA?
CCA... With over 80% of the energy green already, why bother with a fluffy label?
I just looked up Oregon's power plants. Here is a breakdown:
Oregon has:
21 hydroelectric plants with a total capacity of 8,286 MW
16 Wind Farms with a total capcity of 2,606 MW
9 Biomass stations with a total capacity of 129.3 MW
1 Geothermal plant with a capacity of 30.1 MW
4 natural Gas/Oil plants with a total capacity of 1,649 MW
1 Coal plant with a capacity of 550 MW... I though this was already shut down...
Total green power is 11,051.4 MW
Total Fossil power is 2,199 MW.
Total power generation capacity is 13,250.4, 83.4% of which is green.
4 Wind Farms under construction with a total capacity of 439.3 MW
Texas produces 3x as much wind energy as any other state.
With the new transmission lines going up to major population centers, Texas will be the 5th largest wind power producer in the World.
Not bad. And with the technology improving, it's only going to get better. The upside on solar is also huge.
I don't think Oregon will start any more wind projects, unless states wanting power upgrade the power lines between us and them.
Texas will keep increasing. Projects planned and many underway are not finished.
They are almost 100% centralized generation by the electricity cartel with no state-wide and very few cities with a strategy for distributed/rooftop solar.
As always, TX ranks near the bottom in progressive policies, near the top in pro-corporate subsidies and wealth sucking.
The electric energy cartel...
So we were each suppose to put up our own wind powered blades designed by ourselves to run our own homes.
Peachy...
Do you have any idea how much trouble it was just to get a plan to put up transmission lines? It was a huge problem YOU were going to solve?
Still, with all the fossil fuel power generation Texas uses, wind and other green power is still a drop in the bucket...
On some summer days 25% of the energy is green. That's not a drop in the bucket compared to where we were. I expect the methane power plants coming on line will temper the green output, but methane is a lot cleaner than coal. Coal that mainly is brought by rail from Wyoming.
Maybe so. When I did a quick look, the power of stations in Texas was incomplete. Now are you talking of come regions close to the wind farms, or all of Texas. It looked like to me that wind generation was only about 2% of the capacity of all the Texas power plants.
Would these be cool, summer days when no one is using AC?
If the wind is not blowing.
The average capacity over a year is 9% from my findings. But this changes so rapidly as new stuff comes online.
If it's hot and windy, and these often go together, the air conditioning pulls a huge load, residential and industry, so wind power has become important. Once the new transmission lines are up, it's going to be a nice addition.
That wiki article does not even have the Taft facilities that are now supplying Corpus.
This stuff is growing very rapidly.
I watched the construction. Even went on site and took pictures of the blades which are absolutely amazing. They would not let me take pictures of the gearing in the turbine. Siemens turbines.
10 Huge Lessons We’ve Learned From Solar Power Success In Germany
http://cleantechnica.com/2013/02/09/...power-lessons/
pgarden FEAR-MONGERING about the grid vs distributed solar generation
I don't know enough about solar to even compare it Boots. I have pictures of the plant mirrors south of San Antonio. But that's about it.
Nice try though. I do know a little about wind, which is what I was referring to.
You are wasting you time arguing with Boutons. Texas never does anything right according to him.
Wind was supply what? 8.3% during 2013...
Still a long ways to go to get off of coal. For Texas, power was in 2010:
36.5% Coal
00.2% Petroleum
45.4% Natural gas
0.08% Other gas
10.0% Nuclear
00.3% Hydroelectric
06.7% Other renewable
00.1% Other
The "other renewable" was likely the solar and wind. Improvements 1.6% over 3 years... Take a long time to replace coal...
Here is the report that data came from:
http://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/pdf/sep2010.pdf
I found the report interesting. There are about 6 pages for each state. Texas, in 2010, was rated to put out 2.3 lbs/MWh of sulfur dioxide, 1.1 lb/MWh of Nitrogen Oxide, and 1,346 lbs/MWh of Carbon Dioxide. Oregon for these were 0.6, 0.6, and 404. Washington was 0.3, 0.4, and 298. The highest Sulfur came from Ohio at 9.4. The lowest from California, and/or Rhode Island. Indicated by an asterisk for <.05. The highest Nitrogen Oxide came from Alaska at 5.2, the lowest from Washington at 0.4. The state with the highest CO2 was not a state... Washington DC, at 2104. Their only power source is petroleum. The state with the lowest carbon footprint per KWh was Idaho, at 222.
The northwest rocks...
Carbon Footprint lbs per MWh...
1st place 222 Idaho
2nd place 298 Washington
3rd place 404 Oregon
30th place 1346 Texas
Sulfur footprint:
4th .03 Washington
7th 0.6 Oregon
12th 1.2 Idaho
23rd 2.3 Texas
Nitrogen Oxide footprint
1st 0.4 Washington
4th 0.6 Oregon
8th 0.8 Idaho
21st 1.1 Texas
You guys have a long way to go.
We don't have cool summer days when no one uses AC.
For 3 or 4 years, I watched wind turbine blades being haul east AND west on I10 between SA and Kerrville.
And the construction of the $200M LCRA transmission line from a n/w wind farm to the substation at Comfort.
Of course, many more trucks have been hauling drilling pipe in both directions.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 03-10-2014 at 01:15 PM.
Don't be a dumbass and try to compare Texas to Idaho/Washington/Oregon. We don't have the luxury of unlimited Hydroelectric power.
LOL...
I know, but our hydro power isn't unlimited.
I will admit to going overboard after Boutons brought up the CCA thing.
I wish they wouldn't put windmills up here in Oregon. We don't need them, but the liberals of course will do what they want here. I can see doing it in Texas, along with solar. I just wonder how much more expensive it will make your power when the subsidies completely dry up. What happens when the replace the power, then yank out the cheaper power, then yank out the subsidies?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...ns_in_Illinois
LOL Blue Illionois. Lol blue coal.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
