Did you bother to read my link? Wind works in Texas for Texans to create electricity very reliably, cost effectively. I'm not suggesting anything to you but just telling you what we have done which is both successful and profitable. It's not building two plants to get the capacity of one, but actually doubling and tripling that capacity. You scale back the coal capacity out put to save on the coal supply, which in the long run increases your supply saving you money. Saves consumers money too.

Only a guy with half a brain would tell a guy that has done that successfully, it doesn't work. Seems you would find a way to solve your own problems with what you have rather than criticize those that have done that already. Texans are grateful for the winds to help us out. Maybe you would be better served finding something to be grateful for and helping YOU out!

So in Texas, what do you do when the wind is not blowing? How do you replace that lost power? If you do it by cranking up the coal plants, then please explain how you are not having to finance double capacity since one of them (wind) is not reliable?

Grid management which requires a bunch of investment and PLANNING.

https://thetylerloop.com/how-texas-b...to-east-texas/

Certainly helps to be blessed with a wide range of energy resources though, which regretably others don't have.

I read through your article. Perhaps you would be kind enough to quote the section where it tells what happens on those days when the wind is not sufficient to efficiently drive the turbines.

Wind and solar are similar in that neither one could make it without tens of billions of dollars in fed subsidies. I'm all for them if they can make it on their own. I don't think they can.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/...dies-billions/

"That sum includes all local, state, and federal subsidies as well as federal loans and loan guarantees received by companies on the American Wind Energy Association’s board of directors since 2000. (Most of the federal grants have been awarded since 2007.) Of the $176 billion provided to the wind-energy sector, $2.9 billion came from local and state governments; $9.4 billion came from federal grants and tax credits; and $163.9 billion was provided in the form of federal loans or loan guarantees."

In Texas wind is reliable and is blowing pretty good all the time somewhere in this huge energy rich state, just as the sun also shines most time. That's why coal is essentially being steadily pushed off the grid. ALL energy in America is subsidized, coal is just the oldest, but others are pushing it aside at least here any way. Astute of you to realize that some coal plants are indeed being shutdown. May happen in your state once you get harnessing your natural gas A$$ act together.

I apologize as I thought you could glean the answers to your questions from the links I provided, but I'm still searching for that easy for all to understand explanation of what happens when the winds dies in TEXAS, on a cloudy day.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/...-away-by-wind/

Let me know if this helps.

Quote:

---

In Texas wind is reliable and is blowing pretty good all the time

---

No, it's not. I lived in Dallas for two years. The wind blows pretty steadily but some days not so much, so you still have not explained what to do on those days. To be clear, if it works for you guys in Texas (only 18%, according to your article), then that's fine with me. I just don't care for those who suggest that wind and solar are THE answers. They are not.

Quote:

---

I apologize as I thought you could glean the answers to your questions from the links I provided, but I'm still searching for that easy for all to understand explanation of what happens when the winds dies in TEXAS, on a cloudy day.

---

Instead of giving a smart-a$$ answer, why not just quote your beloved article where it tells what they do when the wind does not blow? Why have you listed another article when you cannot yet explain the 300 or so you've already listed? Just give an answer, or admit you don't have the slightest idea. I think we both know the answer to that one.

What you say about Dallas is certainly true, but how did you miss where the wind farms are in my numerous links including the one with the maps. I mean even to have 18% of the energy market is pretty consistent over a year in of itself, and obviously it works whether you beleive it or not. So your case we should abandon the renewables and just have coal is absurd!

We haven't even talked about the biggest renewable here and that's gas. It's a hoot though that a dude from Mississippi is telling a dude from Texas how we waste our money, when you struggle to figure out how to get money yourself and explore your own resources. And stop blaming me for not being able to understand the links provided which explained things very well.

Or perhaps having spent more than 30 years in an industrial setting and know how stuff works from a production perspective as well as a maintenance one, my comprehension may be different than yours which is highly likely. What do you think?

Quote:

---

What you say about Dallas is certainly true, but how did you miss where the wind farms are in my numerous links including the one with the maps. I mean even to have 18% of the energy market is pretty consistent over a year in of itself, and obviously it works whether you beleive it or not. So your case we should abandon the renewables and just have coal is absurd!

---

I've never made that argument, but I'm still asking you a very simple question. What happens if the wind dies down for a couple of days?

Quote:

---

We haven't even talked about the biggest renewable here and that's gas. It's a hoot though that a dude from Mississippi is telling a dude from Texas how we waste our money, when you struggle to figure out how to get money yourself and explore your own resources. And stop blaming me for not being able to understand the links provided which explained things very well.

---

You can't understand the links, but they explain things very well? Really? And gas is a renewable? When did that happen?

Quote:

---

Or perhaps having spent more than 30 years in an industrial setting and know how stuff works from a production perspective as well as a maintenance one, my comprehension may be different than yours which is highly likely. What do you think?

---

I think that if you continue to insist that building two facilities to produce the electricity produced by one plant, then that is indeed a very different "comprehension".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I've never made that argument, but I'm still asking you a very simple question. What happens if the wind dies down for a couple of days?

You can't understand the links, but they explain things very well? Really? And gas is a renewable? When did that happen?

I think that if you continue to insist that building two facilities to produce the electricity produced by one plant, then that is indeed a very different "comprehension".

---

"then that is indeed a very different "comprehension" jl, you do realise that liberals have a different comprehension they see many things as acceptable, while seeing others as unacceptabile. Taxes, abortion, HC, taxes, welfare, taxes

Texas is a red state run by conservatives Cletes just like JL so you explain it to him. JL since that has seldom happened to my knowledge then demand would be met by what's available, either coal, gas, solar or rubbing two sticks together. Where ever you got the notion that I don't understand MY own links forget it. It's you behind the curb and for your knowledge each unit of energy production has it's own output so system capacity is adding them together, as is output. One of those links you cannot understand illustrates that point.

Quote:

---

I think that if you continue to insist that building two facilities to produce the electricity produced by one plant, then that is indeed a very different "comprehension".

---

You talk crazy when you want to don't you? Of course your statement makes no sense whatsoever except to YOU?

Quote:

---

"then that is indeed a very different "comprehension" jl, you do realise that liberals have a different comprehension they see many things as acceptable, while seeing others as unacceptabile. Taxes, abortion, HC, taxes, welfare, taxes

---

That is certainly true on this board.

Quote:

---

You talk crazy when you want to don't you? Of course your statement makes no sense whatsoever except to YOU?

---

OK. Have it your way. I give up and admit that it makes perfectly good sense to build two expensive power plants to do the work of one plant. Very, very reasonable to do. In fact, we should do that for many things. Two water treatment plants to do the work of one, two traffic lights at every intersection, two interstates where only one would do, two stoves and two refrigerators in every house, and two table saws in every shop. We can call it the "Rule of Tal".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

That is certainly true on this board.

OK. Have it your way. I give up and admit that it makes perfectly good sense to build two expensive power plants to do the work of one plant. Very, very reasonable to do. In fact, we should do that for many things. Two water treatment plants to do the work of one, two traffic lights at every intersection, two interstates where only one would do, two stoves and two refrigerators in every house, and two table saws in every shop. We can call it the "Rule of Tal".

---

Dude, you build power plants to ADD to what you have so you can provide more power to more people. Geez even a third grader can figure that out and it works great so what are you really stuck on? That's not Tal's way but the reality of the STATE. You argue with the success or what? It's not really an argument though just you showing off your stubborn streak to hide your lack of comprehension. Admit that and enough with the stupid analogies.

No. It's just me saying that to build two powerplants to produce what one powerplant will produce is really crazy . If you need a second plant, then fine, but in your scenario the only reason to have the second plant is because the first one doesn't produce power all the time. It's a strange idea.

If you are getting it to work in Texas, then I'm all for you. At only 18%, I can see how it could be done, and your article did state that the price of electricity had gone down, so that's good. I just don't see wind farms as anything more than a small part of the pie because of the problems of the reliability of the wind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

No. It's just me saying that to build two powerplants to produce what one powerplant will produce is really crazy . If you need a second plant, then fine, but in your scenario the only reason to have the second plant is because the first one doesn't produce power all the time. It's a strange idea.

If you are getting it to work in Texas, then I'm all for you. At only 18%, I can see how it could be done, and your article did state that the price of electricity had gone down, so that's good. I just don't see wind farms as anything more than a small part of the pie because of the problems of the reliability of the wind.

---

Just to inject some reality, there hasn't been a new coal plant in this nation in twenty years and many have been decommissioned so the argument is mote. Why, because massive installations of wind and solar have taken over. It isn't the cheapest power, but, it serves other purposes, like lessening the call for more renewables. But, like anything the more you do the more is expected, despite AGW being a northern hemisphere obscession

Quote:

---

Just to inject some reality, there hasn't been a new coal plant in this nation in twenty years and many have been decommissioned so the argument is mote.

---

Are you speaking of Australia?

Quote:

---

Why, because massive installations of wind and solar have taken over.

---

I assume you mean in your country. Here, wind and solar combine for only a little over 10%. Natural gas, coal, and nukes still carry the largest share by far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Are you speaking of Australia?

I assume you mean in your country. Here, wind and solar combine for only a little over 10%. Natural gas, coal, and nukes still carry the largest share by far.

---

yes I am speaking of Australia, I wouldn't say Coal isn't still the main base load but older coal is being retired with no replacement. Much of our natural gas is exported it being far from major cities and industrial centres. What I am illustrating is that there are alternatives without reverting to coal and we have no nuclear plants. Maybe we are living in a fool's paradise but it will take twenty years for us to find out

Same here Clete,

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ig-coal-plant/,

I know of no new facilities being built in the USA, but more are being shuttered or planned to be and at least 50 since the dufus took office.

https://phys.org/news/2019-05-coal-power-trump.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Same here Clete,

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ig-coal-plant/,

I know of no new facilities being built in the USA, but more are being shuttered or planned to be and at least 50 since the dufus took office.

[]

---

Also the banking industry has decided coal carries too must risk and will not invest

the unintended consequences of promoting wind power :

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-02-05/wind-turbine-blades-can-t-be-recycled-so-they-re-piling-up-in-landfills

Another UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE of Wind Power: Birds of prey and birds, in general, are being killed by wind driven turbines at an alarming rate....Eagle are really being taken out in large numbers.