Texas gov knew of natural gas shortages days before blackout, blamed wind anyway(arstechnica.com)
arstechnica.com
Texas gov knew of natural gas shortages days before blackout, blamed wind anyway
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/05/texas-gov-knew-of-natural-gas-shortages-days-before-blackout-blamed-wind-anyway/
105 comments
I think this is a tell that Abbot is bought and paid for. This is what corruption looks like.
I think you really need some sources if you're going to accuse someone, otherwise you're just spouting baseless accusations (at best), which do not improve either the target or the conversation. IANAL but this looks pretty close to libel to me.
[0] https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/libel
[0] https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/libel
Nope
I heard the following quote in a youtube piece† outlining what happened, and thought it was interesting and relevant to this disaster: "Energy providers are paid for what they produce, not how reliable their production is."
This kind of policy benefits solar and wind power, which are not reliable (without storage), but it hurts the consumers when abnormal weather hits.
And with how the Ercot energy market works, being unreliable can actually be profitable, since it drives the prices of what you are producing up past the generation shortfall.
Quite the mismatch between what behavior is needed, and what is rewarded.
† https://youtu.be/08mwXICY4JM
EDIT: Accuse wind and solar of not being reliable on HN (even with the storage caveat), and you're punished. But it's true. It happened here. Wind turbines were shut down. Solar panels were covered in snow. They didn't have storage attached to make up for these shortfalls.
Even a nuclear power plant went down due to problems with its water supply.
This kind of policy benefits solar and wind power, which are not reliable (without storage), but it hurts the consumers when abnormal weather hits.
And with how the Ercot energy market works, being unreliable can actually be profitable, since it drives the prices of what you are producing up past the generation shortfall.
Quite the mismatch between what behavior is needed, and what is rewarded.
† https://youtu.be/08mwXICY4JM
EDIT: Accuse wind and solar of not being reliable on HN (even with the storage caveat), and you're punished. But it's true. It happened here. Wind turbines were shut down. Solar panels were covered in snow. They didn't have storage attached to make up for these shortfalls.
Even a nuclear power plant went down due to problems with its water supply.
>And with how the Ercot energy market works, being unreliable can actually be profitable, since it drives the prices of what you are producing up past the generation shortfall.
If the generator can profit off unreliablity it also means a grid storage provider can profit off reliability and undercut the generator.
If the generator can profit off unreliablity it also means a grid storage provider can profit off reliability and undercut the generator.
I did not mean to say that producers were doing this intentionally.
Energy storage entities would only really profit in extreme circumstances where the prices are driven up so high - where production has decreased to the point where the grid is in danger of destabilizing.
The rest of the time they'd be operating in the margins, picking up the solar and wind excesses to sell later. Given the investment and operating costs (battery farms, taking over hydro (or constructing new hydro), etc), I doubt it would be worth picking up given the current incentives.
Energy storage entities would only really profit in extreme circumstances where the prices are driven up so high - where production has decreased to the point where the grid is in danger of destabilizing.
The rest of the time they'd be operating in the margins, picking up the solar and wind excesses to sell later. Given the investment and operating costs (battery farms, taking over hydro (or constructing new hydro), etc), I doubt it would be worth picking up given the current incentives.
Thanks for your regular dose of leftist journalism
Wind was going to get the blame no matter what because energy sources are now partisan. There is the coal and oil party and the solar and wind party.
This matters very little at this point. Wind and solar are being deployed in Texas very rapidly (tens of GW of capacity are in the queue [1]). FERC has a recent ruling, encouraged along by Tesla, to make utility storage a first class citizen within ERCOT [2]. By the end of 2023, wind and solar will eclipse Texas’ gas fired generation capacity, before accounting for rooftop solar deployments “behind the meter.”
With that said, this illustrates death gasps of a dying ideology. Let the market continue to do its thing and drive out fossil generation.
(disclosure: an extended family member comes from rural Texas oil money, so these are frequent heated discussions in our family)
[1] https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights...
[2] https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/court-upholds-f...
With that said, this illustrates death gasps of a dying ideology. Let the market continue to do its thing and drive out fossil generation.
(disclosure: an extended family member comes from rural Texas oil money, so these are frequent heated discussions in our family)
[1] https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights...
[2] https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/court-upholds-f...
For what it's worth, ERCOT is not subject to FERC regulation, so order 841 doesn't apply to ERCOT.
While ERCOT is not required to adhere to 841, their documentation to stakeholders indicates they intend to.
I think it matters policy wise. If you have folks trying to put out false information and it emboldens politicians to change policies, good choices become very difficult.
[deleted]
Good choices becoming difficult explains 90% of American problems. It's such a common pattern that simply tearing away the crap and doing the absolute minimum would turn you into one of the greatest politicians of all time with almost zero competence needed beyond the willingness to not make obviously bad choices.
It's certainly a political issue that comes with partisanship. And folks will do it to spite their face.
Trump could have made fighting COVID a great nationalistic crusade.... he might even have been reelected had he done so.
But he didn't like the news and picked his hill to die on despite the fact that there was no real political reason to do so.
Trump could have made fighting COVID a great nationalistic crusade.... he might even have been reelected had he done so.
But he didn't like the news and picked his hill to die on despite the fact that there was no real political reason to do so.
I really don't see the types of energy as a partisan issue at all anymore, compared to policies that threaten to put the US on a dependence on foreign sources of energy. Nobody wants to burn dirty coal if they can help it, but coal plants in lieu of importing oil as long as there isn't any smog around their homes, most people would take the former.
Granted those families or counties that historically have depended economically on specific forms of energy, it's another story, but they're a relatively small segment of the population.
Granted those families or counties that historically have depended economically on specific forms of energy, it's another story, but they're a relatively small segment of the population.
That's just not true.
There are people who absolutely want other people to burn dirty coal because aligning themselves with the coal industry affects their bottom line in a positive way.
The Republican Party of Texas is highly anti-regulation when it comes to energy sources. Much of the party constituents' money is tied up in oil and gas. They were completely fine with people losing property and time if it could be used as a political wedge issue to get more donations.
I lost all the food in my house because I was without power for a week in the recent ice storms. Several of my pipes were damaged despite my best efforts to mitigate the issue. My work week was completely disrupted, and I was forced to scramble to keep my family and family pets warm.
I wasn't remotely alone. There is still no effort by the state to winterize the state's energy grid. Turns out that once your home costs past a certain point out here, you're probably running gas and they start to include generators too.
There are people who absolutely want other people to burn dirty coal because aligning themselves with the coal industry affects their bottom line in a positive way.
The Republican Party of Texas is highly anti-regulation when it comes to energy sources. Much of the party constituents' money is tied up in oil and gas. They were completely fine with people losing property and time if it could be used as a political wedge issue to get more donations.
I lost all the food in my house because I was without power for a week in the recent ice storms. Several of my pipes were damaged despite my best efforts to mitigate the issue. My work week was completely disrupted, and I was forced to scramble to keep my family and family pets warm.
I wasn't remotely alone. There is still no effort by the state to winterize the state's energy grid. Turns out that once your home costs past a certain point out here, you're probably running gas and they start to include generators too.
> Nobody wants to burn dirty coal if they can help it
This is, sadly, very much untrue.
Climate change, and particularly the way our energy sources affect it, have become so partisan that I have seen people with strong right-wing leanings express the desire to burn the dirtiest coal they can, as dirty as they can possibly burn it, largely to "own the libs".
This is, sadly, very much untrue.
Climate change, and particularly the way our energy sources affect it, have become so partisan that I have seen people with strong right-wing leanings express the desire to burn the dirtiest coal they can, as dirty as they can possibly burn it, largely to "own the libs".
Unfortunately, there is partisanship among clean energy proponents, they're split into the nuclear party and the solar/wind party, and they keep fighting each other while we keep burning fossil fuels.
It's a textbook display of the narcisissm of small differences: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_difference...
It's a textbook display of the narcisissm of small differences: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_difference...
> Nobody wants to burn dirty coal if they can help it, but coal plants in lieu of importing oil
Outside of a few places (i.e Hawaii) oil is not burned for electricity, so in that sense there isn't really a trade off between coal and oil in that way.
When electric vehicles become broadly prevalent, then the tradeoff will exist, but only if we haven't done the job of deploying enough renewables by that time.
Outside of a few places (i.e Hawaii) oil is not burned for electricity, so in that sense there isn't really a trade off between coal and oil in that way.
When electric vehicles become broadly prevalent, then the tradeoff will exist, but only if we haven't done the job of deploying enough renewables by that time.
Note that generation capacity doesn’t say much of the actual amount of electricity available throughout the year.
Wind and solar don’t provide dispatchable electricity and will always need a backup plant.
Wind and solar don’t provide dispatchable electricity and will always need a backup plant.
[deleted]
Man do you think the guy you are responding to doesn't know that? Do you think a significant % of people here on HN don't know that? The guy you responded to clearly had a pretty advanced understanding of the issues in this field, and the fact that wind doesn't always blow is very very basic. He even talked about storage!
Storage firmed renewables are rapidly reaching cost parity with natural gas. In many US geographies, storage backed solar already is.
“Jim Robo, chief executive of renewables giant NextEra, made the same point on the company’s January earnings call to discuss the company’s 2020 results: "There is not a regulated coal plant in this country that is economic today full period and stop when it’s dispatched on any basis, not a single one, OK."
https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2021/04/14/solar-and-storage-are...
http://ieefa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/US-Power-Sector-...
“Jim Robo, chief executive of renewables giant NextEra, made the same point on the company’s January earnings call to discuss the company’s 2020 results: "There is not a regulated coal plant in this country that is economic today full period and stop when it’s dispatched on any basis, not a single one, OK."
https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2021/04/14/solar-and-storage-are...
http://ieefa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/US-Power-Sector-...
[deleted]
We need a spent fission rod party, which when I write it down reads like "fishing rod" which could cause a lot of confusion later.
In any case, spent uranium, solar and wind is the way forward regardless.
In any case, spent uranium, solar and wind is the way forward regardless.
The nuclear power plant shut down because its water supply froze and the pumps to cool the reactor shut down.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/energy/how-and-why...
> “It’s very rare for weather issues to shut down a nuclear plant," said Brett Rampal, director of nuclear innovation at the Clean Air Task Force. "Some equipment in some nuclear plants in Texas has not been hardened for extreme cold weather because there was never a need for this.”
> According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the shutdown of the nuclear reactor was caused by a disruption in a feedwater pump to the reactor, and that caused the plant to trip automatically and shut down early Monday.
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-ne...
> Rowland said Feb. 16 the unit shut "due to cold weather-related issues in the plant's feedwater system." Weather conditions did not impact the 1,312-MW South Texas Project-2, which operated at 100% early Feb. 15-18, according to NRC.
> Rowland said the unit shut at 5:37 am CT Feb. 15. STPNOC said in an event report filed with NRC that the unit tripped at 5:26 am due to low steam generator levels. "The low steam generator levels were due to loss of Feedwater pumps 11 and 13," according to the report.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/energy/how-and-why...
> “It’s very rare for weather issues to shut down a nuclear plant," said Brett Rampal, director of nuclear innovation at the Clean Air Task Force. "Some equipment in some nuclear plants in Texas has not been hardened for extreme cold weather because there was never a need for this.”
> According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the shutdown of the nuclear reactor was caused by a disruption in a feedwater pump to the reactor, and that caused the plant to trip automatically and shut down early Monday.
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-ne...
> Rowland said Feb. 16 the unit shut "due to cold weather-related issues in the plant's feedwater system." Weather conditions did not impact the 1,312-MW South Texas Project-2, which operated at 100% early Feb. 15-18, according to NRC.
> Rowland said the unit shut at 5:37 am CT Feb. 15. STPNOC said in an event report filed with NRC that the unit tripped at 5:26 am due to low steam generator levels. "The low steam generator levels were due to loss of Feedwater pumps 11 and 13," according to the report.
That’s why you use spent rods in a TWR. Which obviously needs built first but the science is sound.
As far as I know, it was a malfunctioning sensor.
I generally that it’s a poor design decision to build the steam engines on the outside with no weather protection.
I generally that it’s a poor design decision to build the steam engines on the outside with no weather protection.
Yes we in texas understand that basically ALL of our energy production methods were hampered by the cold (not our solar panels tho!), because none of them were prepped for cold. Which in some cases makes sense, in others it does not because it would have been cheap to do, up front.
How long does it take a pressurized water reactor to start up again? Is there some kind of "idle neutron balance" they can use when coolant flow is interrupted, or do they have to shut down the pile?
From https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=45956
> About 25% of U.S. power plants can start up—going from being shut down to fully operating—within one hour, based on data collected in EIA’s annual survey of electric generators. Some power plants, especially those powered by coal and nuclear fuel, require more than half a day to reach full operations. The time it takes a power plant to reach full operations can affect the reliability and operations of the electric grid.
https://engineering.stackexchange.com/questions/7394/why-doe... goes into it a bit more.
> About 25% of U.S. power plants can start up—going from being shut down to fully operating—within one hour, based on data collected in EIA’s annual survey of electric generators. Some power plants, especially those powered by coal and nuclear fuel, require more than half a day to reach full operations. The time it takes a power plant to reach full operations can affect the reliability and operations of the electric grid.
https://engineering.stackexchange.com/questions/7394/why-doe... goes into it a bit more.
It's complicated. Nuclear fission generates a load of by-products, and some of those are known as fission "poisons", mainly Iodine-135 decays to Xenon-135, which very easily absorbs neutrons and inhibits fission. During normal operation, there are plenty of neutrons flying around, so there are enough for some to be absorbed by Xenon-135, and the rest to continue the fission reaction. However, when the power output is reduced, the Xenon-135 can inhibit the nuclear reaction. This can make it less safe to restart the reactor, because the operator would need to increase the reactivity of the system - if they increase it enough to overcome the inhibition caused by the Xenon-135, then the increased nuclear activity can burn off the Xenon-135, and then you have excessive reactivity and the reactor could go out of control. For that reason, when a reactor is shut down, you typically need to wait several hours for the Xenon-135 to decay by itself - this is called the "Xenon dead time". Failure to do this was partially the cause of the Chernobyl disaster.
That joined in too, a reactor had an unplanned shut down as well during the storm.
Energy sources have been partisan since before Reagan had the White House solar panels removed.
Before that. Reagan had them removed not to create a new partisan issue, but because it was already a partisan issue.
That's why I wrote 'since before' and not 'since'.
What happened in Texas was Sum of all fears. Every type of energy production failed, and entire state from Dalhart to Del Rio were under winter storm at the same time.
The core issue is whether to winterize the infrastructure or not, in 2011 North Texas was effected by rest of the state did not have to endure cold front, that was thought to be once a generation thing. (Remember the cold snow superbowl in DFW in 2011?).
The core issue is whether to winterize the infrastructure or not, in 2011 North Texas was effected by rest of the state did not have to endure cold front, that was thought to be once a generation thing. (Remember the cold snow superbowl in DFW in 2011?).
What happened in Texas was the sum of all of its past elections and policy decisions. Texas has the government that it wants and rightfully deserves and I’m not about to interfere with that.
If only all the Californians moving here felt the same way.
With those unusually severe storms covering such a huge area, I don't think it's safe to say any US or EU state would have done better that Texas.
Heck, once energy distribution fails because cables have broken, even no-fuel-input needed for the duration of the storm plants like nuclear can't supply consumers.
Heck, once energy distribution fails because cables have broken, even no-fuel-input needed for the duration of the storm plants like nuclear can't supply consumers.
It has happened several times in the past and it can happen again in the future. I was most saddened by a kid falling asleep and dying of hypothermia.
I'm shocked AND stunned.
While you are not shocked that this is the case we should be alarmed that a large percentage of the U.S. population doesn't care. They will not let this fact dissuade them from their ideological servitude to the GOP. That we have come to the point where rampant hypocrisy is the norm and does nothing to get people to question their political affiliations is shocking to me.
The electorate has largely given up or been brainwashed to think this is ok.
All you have to do in Texas to deflect political blame is point to a Democrat and say "get a rope." I don't think the state was even entirely thawed before they started blaming the Biden Administration and AOC personally somehow.
It's terrifying to think that the problem in 2021 has largely gone un-addressed at its core.
I personally have little hope. The "left" and the "right" can't find any common ground. And you have powerful entities (media, social media) that make billions a year who benefit from this. And also entrenches government officials in power as they can play on the partisanship to get easily elected. The Unity 2020 movement was interesting. I thought it had no chance of working but seeing it shutdown by social media companies basically eliminated all hope in my mind of a grassroots movement emerging.
The "best" case scenario in (left and right) people's heads is that one side will magically "win" but naively thinks that'll happen without violence. That they can convince the other side to change their minds by just making moral arguments. Not acknowledging that each side has fundamentally different values (tradition's tension with progress for example) that they use to make moral judgements. I'm just hoping i have the ability and foresight to go someplace quiet when everything kicks off. Maybe that'll bypass the whole conflict, maybe just allow me to have a few extra weeks of peace.
The "best" case scenario in (left and right) people's heads is that one side will magically "win" but naively thinks that'll happen without violence. That they can convince the other side to change their minds by just making moral arguments. Not acknowledging that each side has fundamentally different values (tradition's tension with progress for example) that they use to make moral judgements. I'm just hoping i have the ability and foresight to go someplace quiet when everything kicks off. Maybe that'll bypass the whole conflict, maybe just allow me to have a few extra weeks of peace.
> The "left" and the "right" can't find any common ground.
And would-be centrists presenting it as if this is equally the fault of both sides is a significant contributor to the problem.
The "right" has collectively decided that reality doesn't matter if it makes them look bad or disagrees with their increasingly-extreme dogma, that other people's lives are less important than rich people's money, and that democracy is bad if it means they have a harder time getting power. Oh, and that Nazis are good, actually.
There are certainly elements of the "left" that are unhelpfully unwilling to compromise, but they're not even in the same zip code as the problems with today's American right wing, and painting them with the same brush makes it much harder to approach genuine solutions to these problems.
And would-be centrists presenting it as if this is equally the fault of both sides is a significant contributor to the problem.
The "right" has collectively decided that reality doesn't matter if it makes them look bad or disagrees with their increasingly-extreme dogma, that other people's lives are less important than rich people's money, and that democracy is bad if it means they have a harder time getting power. Oh, and that Nazis are good, actually.
There are certainly elements of the "left" that are unhelpfully unwilling to compromise, but they're not even in the same zip code as the problems with today's American right wing, and painting them with the same brush makes it much harder to approach genuine solutions to these problems.
This is the same concept as a blameless post-mortem. Or the difference between the end of WWI and WWII peace treaty wise. You can blame and morally demonize the right all you want; and you make a reasonable argument why you'd be correct to do so.
And yet, that mindset will not convince them to change. it'll just make things worse and eventually the unstoppable force will meet the immovable object.
"There are certainly elements of the "left" that are unhelpfully unwilling to compromise, but they're not even in the same zip code as the problems with today's American right wing, and painting them with the same brush makes it much harder to approach genuine solutions to these problems. "
Sounds like an argument for solving problems at the most local level possible. Something that the right used to champion and the left is fundamentally against. But also where there could be common ground if people wanted to actually solve problems instead of "dunking" on people and scoring more partisan points.
And yet, that mindset will not convince them to change. it'll just make things worse and eventually the unstoppable force will meet the immovable object.
"There are certainly elements of the "left" that are unhelpfully unwilling to compromise, but they're not even in the same zip code as the problems with today's American right wing, and painting them with the same brush makes it much harder to approach genuine solutions to these problems. "
Sounds like an argument for solving problems at the most local level possible. Something that the right used to champion and the left is fundamentally against. But also where there could be common ground if people wanted to actually solve problems instead of "dunking" on people and scoring more partisan points.
>The "left" and the "right" can't find any common ground.
Party loyalty is the biggest scam ever. Only an idiot would align himself along any party line. No, politicians exist to bow down to us and serve us. We don't exist for the sake of our political parties.
I only like Biden because current macroeconomics dictates that what he is doing must be done. Here, I'll admit that Trumps trade war was a good idea in the short term because it increases domestic employment and inflation until you reach a point where it makes sense to stop the trade war. His tax cuts happened with awful timing because they go against what macroeconomics dictated at the time.
Considering the inability to rely on politicians to do things that must be done at all costs, yes I mean things where there is no room for negotiation and the decision has been forced upon you we still routinely see politicians refuse to to do them for no gain whatsoever. If anything they come up with fake explanations to repair the mental imbalance. We have decided that certain bad things are ok and let them happen in the real world, therefore we must create a positive fake narrative which balances out the negative impact of the bad decisions we have made so that we end up net zero mental impact on the population. Absolutely fantastic.
Come on central banks, just skip the dumb politicians and do the damn helicopter money. Yes, we could have gotten modernized infrastructure (may even include green investments for climate change prevention as a completely unrelated bonus) for free but who cares.
Party loyalty is the biggest scam ever. Only an idiot would align himself along any party line. No, politicians exist to bow down to us and serve us. We don't exist for the sake of our political parties.
I only like Biden because current macroeconomics dictates that what he is doing must be done. Here, I'll admit that Trumps trade war was a good idea in the short term because it increases domestic employment and inflation until you reach a point where it makes sense to stop the trade war. His tax cuts happened with awful timing because they go against what macroeconomics dictated at the time.
Considering the inability to rely on politicians to do things that must be done at all costs, yes I mean things where there is no room for negotiation and the decision has been forced upon you we still routinely see politicians refuse to to do them for no gain whatsoever. If anything they come up with fake explanations to repair the mental imbalance. We have decided that certain bad things are ok and let them happen in the real world, therefore we must create a positive fake narrative which balances out the negative impact of the bad decisions we have made so that we end up net zero mental impact on the population. Absolutely fantastic.
Come on central banks, just skip the dumb politicians and do the damn helicopter money. Yes, we could have gotten modernized infrastructure (may even include green investments for climate change prevention as a completely unrelated bonus) for free but who cares.
[deleted]
I hate the hypocrisy because it doesn't solve any problems, it creates even more and just makes the whole system more dysfunctional than it needs to be.
This is a standard government cover up. You fucked up and just blame some bystander. The actual problem never gets solved and people will attack the bystander. You end up with a net loss.
This is a standard government cover up. You fucked up and just blame some bystander. The actual problem never gets solved and people will attack the bystander. You end up with a net loss.
The Texas Legislature, which meets every two years, is wrapping up a session right now. To get a sense for how the Legislature has prioritized addressing the grid failure relative to other issues, and what they propose to change, see this list of pending bills at the Texas Tribune: https://apps.texastribune.org/features/2021/permitless-carry...
The bills introduced are watered down with no meaningful enforcement. Texas will forget about it in 2 years and we will have this whole problem happen again.
I was reading that list and burst out laughing. I tend to lean right of center but realize we have a Kakistocracy.....
That list of bills is...distressing to say the least.
I don't understand why people keep feeling indignation from these kinds of news. Politics have entered the post-truth age wordwide, and thinking that trying to present the facts will amount to any sort of sensible change is either delusional, or an excess of optimism at best. We failed to adapt to the massive cultural changes brought by mass media first and social media later, and these are the results.
People do now believe in what they want to believe in, no matter what the news or expert say. Needless to say, what they want very often ("coincidentally" of course) happens to match perfectly with the economic and policy interests of a few powerful people or corporations.
It's a waste of time and effort trying to rebut these people, because they deliberately try to stray away from logic (where they know they would often lose) and always attempt to move debate to a plane of emotions and feelings, where any kind of confrontation becomes basically impossible.
People do now believe in what they want to believe in, no matter what the news or expert say. Needless to say, what they want very often ("coincidentally" of course) happens to match perfectly with the economic and policy interests of a few powerful people or corporations.
It's a waste of time and effort trying to rebut these people, because they deliberately try to stray away from logic (where they know they would often lose) and always attempt to move debate to a plane of emotions and feelings, where any kind of confrontation becomes basically impossible.
Has politics ever not been post-truth? To win a debate you just need to sway the audience. It has been known since ancient times that's not limited to presenting facts.
I think the information age has introduced a lot of people to the public square who've no idea what rhetoric is.
We crossed this threshold almost 20 years ago during the GWB administration. A senior administration official, believed to be Karl Rove, responded to a reporter:
“People like you are still living in what we call the reality-based community. You believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality. That’s not the way the world really works anymore. We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you are studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors, and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” [1][2]
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community
2: https://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/faith-certainty-...
“People like you are still living in what we call the reality-based community. You believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality. That’s not the way the world really works anymore. We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you are studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors, and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” [1][2]
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community
2: https://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/faith-certainty-...
This is an absolutely mind-blowing quote, thanks for sharing.
The only difference is that now echo chambers and communication speeds are so fast and far reaching that every kind of lie can spread like wildfire in seconds, with basically no consequence of sort.
Now you can close yourself in a bubble without ever having to confront any view you do not like.
I think it's kinda like how technology hasn't changed the reasons behind wars, or their intrinsic nature, but has definitely changed their impact and their scale.
You can now lie yourself into and out of basically anything, without ever having to face the reality of what you are saying or suffering basically any consequence. I think that in one way or another, our society and political structures will have to evolve in order to take this into account.
Now you can close yourself in a bubble without ever having to confront any view you do not like.
I think it's kinda like how technology hasn't changed the reasons behind wars, or their intrinsic nature, but has definitely changed their impact and their scale.
You can now lie yourself into and out of basically anything, without ever having to face the reality of what you are saying or suffering basically any consequence. I think that in one way or another, our society and political structures will have to evolve in order to take this into account.
Well, the point is that wind was already expected to provide much less than its installed capacity. So expectations weren’t underwhelmed much.
The only electricity source that delivered with 100% capacity, minus a short outage of one reactor due an unfortunate sensor problem, was nuclear.
Nuclear power has - by far - the highest capacity factor of all sources of energy and if you don’t want to risk power outages in winter, your best bet is more nuclear.
> https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/what-generation-capacity
The only electricity source that delivered with 100% capacity, minus a short outage of one reactor due an unfortunate sensor problem, was nuclear.
Nuclear power has - by far - the highest capacity factor of all sources of energy and if you don’t want to risk power outages in winter, your best bet is more nuclear.
> https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/what-generation-capacity
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-ne...
> TP Nuclear Operating Co.'s 1,312-MW South Texas Project-1, which automatically shut Feb. 15 amid bitter cold, connected to the grid at 9:07 pm CT Feb. 17 "and is currently ascending to 100% power," company spokeswoman Vicki Rowland said Feb. 18.
> The unit, located in Bay City, Texas, was operating at 36% of capacity early the morning of Feb. 18, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a daily reactor status report.
> Rowland said Feb. 16 the unit shut "due to cold weather-related issues in the plant's feedwater system." Weather conditions did not impact the 1,312-MW South Texas Project-2, which operated at 100% early Feb. 15-18, according to NRC.
> TP Nuclear Operating Co.'s 1,312-MW South Texas Project-1, which automatically shut Feb. 15 amid bitter cold, connected to the grid at 9:07 pm CT Feb. 17 "and is currently ascending to 100% power," company spokeswoman Vicki Rowland said Feb. 18.
> The unit, located in Bay City, Texas, was operating at 36% of capacity early the morning of Feb. 18, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a daily reactor status report.
> Rowland said Feb. 16 the unit shut "due to cold weather-related issues in the plant's feedwater system." Weather conditions did not impact the 1,312-MW South Texas Project-2, which operated at 100% early Feb. 15-18, according to NRC.
Yes, that’s what I mentioned.
The reactor was offline for just a few days and the shutdown is more a result of the rather unfortunate decay to build the steam turbines on the outside with no weather production.
Nuclear plants have no problems with arctic temperatures, just look at Russia (Pevek, Kola NPPs).
The reactor was offline for just a few days and the shutdown is more a result of the rather unfortunate decay to build the steam turbines on the outside with no weather production.
Nuclear plants have no problems with arctic temperatures, just look at Russia (Pevek, Kola NPPs).
Abbott should work at Comcast and supervise outage communications.
The thing that worries me about this is that it’s being increasingly clear that the US is becoming too partisan to do anything.
Despite all evidence to the contrary, I’m guessing that a very high percentage of people will continue to blame wind. And I’m guessing this splits pretty heavily on party lines.
It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that this removes all accountability from the government. If your constituents are always arguing about something other than your governance (I.e constantly in some ideological battle), what incentive do you really have to govern well?
The US still does many things well. But I think the system supporting the ability to do things well is decaying.
Despite all evidence to the contrary, I’m guessing that a very high percentage of people will continue to blame wind. And I’m guessing this splits pretty heavily on party lines.
It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that this removes all accountability from the government. If your constituents are always arguing about something other than your governance (I.e constantly in some ideological battle), what incentive do you really have to govern well?
The US still does many things well. But I think the system supporting the ability to do things well is decaying.
It's disingenuous to just call this an partisanship problem, this is specifically a problem with the modern conservative movement, and it's specifically due to the influence of Fox News and other similar media organizations that back up Conservative politician in their lies. As we are currently seeing with Liz Cheney the modern conservative movement in this country has no time for someone who is unwilling to agree with their lies.
Specifically the denial of man made global climate change.
I am libertarian and conservative leaning, although, modern day "conservatives" are far from conservative in any sense of the word. For example, true conservatives advocated for abortion rights, because the government has no business regulating what a citizen can do to their body.
TLDR; I will never side with a party that insanely denies climate change.
I am libertarian and conservative leaning, although, modern day "conservatives" are far from conservative in any sense of the word. For example, true conservatives advocated for abortion rights, because the government has no business regulating what a citizen can do to their body.
TLDR; I will never side with a party that insanely denies climate change.
The most Orwellian thing I have recently witnessed was around the days prior to the inauguration. MSNBC was covering the border and commentators frequently used the phrase "kids in cages", after Biden took office they suddenly went from frequent coverage of "kids in cages" to infrequent coverage of "migrant overflow facilities". Nothing had changed policy wise, the man took office less than a week prior.
Point being, Fox News aren't the only ones like that, they are just the only mainstream conservative outlet like that.
Point being, Fox News aren't the only ones like that, they are just the only mainstream conservative outlet like that.
Arizona is currently hiring a disreputable security firm to scan the ballots for bamboo based on the belief that China sent over thousands of prefilled ballots to sway the election in the state.
A republican congressman said that the people who stormed the capital and killed a police officer were participating in a normal tourist visit.
Meanwhile MSNBC might have changed the phrasing they used but they are still publishing articles critical of Biden's immigration: https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/biden-s-immigration-promises-a...
Sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory, next they will be saying the president is an Manchurian candidate/agent of Russia and launch a similar fruitless investigation.
If you come out of the sports team, we are the good guys mentality it's obvious this is tit for tat depending on who is currently in office. Many MSNBC viewers think the 2016 election was illegitimate just like Fox News viewers feel about 2020.
If you come out of the sports team, we are the good guys mentality it's obvious this is tit for tat depending on who is currently in office. Many MSNBC viewers think the 2016 election was illegitimate just like Fox News viewers feel about 2020.
Fruitless? Are you referring to the Mueller investigation? I admit I’m an outsider to the US, but didn’t that “witch hunt” catch a hell of a lot of real witches?
It did. Mueller specifically stopped short of recommending indictments (based on Department of Justice policy of not indicting sitting Presidents), but he found ten counts of obstruction of justice, and explicitly said that his report does NOT exonerate Trump.
To be clear, the assessment of the US NSA, FBI, and CIA was that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to assist Donald Trump, and multiple people affiliated with the Trump election have been arrested for violating election laws. You making a false equivalency here is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about that is specific to the modern conservative movement.
Then there was the Obama birthers, they were preceded by people who thought Gore won...
Ask the fans of a party about any election they lost and they will tell you the other team cheated going back a couple of decades. Interestingly we seem to have the safest and most secure elections on the planet should their preferred candidate win.
Ask the fans of a party about any election they lost and they will tell you the other team cheated going back a couple of decades. Interestingly we seem to have the safest and most secure elections on the planet should their preferred candidate win.
Bush v Gore was about a legitimate issue, deciding how a ballot should be evaluated when it is ambiguous who the person intended to vote for, and how long the process for recounting should go. Comparing it to the 2020 election controversy or the Obama birtherism conspiracy just goes to show how far apart the modern conservative and liberal movements in the US are.
To be really clear here, if you think arguing over how to count an improperly bunched out ballot is the same thing as alleging without proof that China sent thousands of fake ballots to the US are equivalent, then you really need to stop and reflect.
To be really clear here, if you think arguing over how to count an improperly bunched out ballot is the same thing as alleging without proof that China sent thousands of fake ballots to the US are equivalent, then you really need to stop and reflect.
Legitimate or not doesn't even really matter, you are going around complaining about the other team as opposed to holding your representatives feet to the fire. If you are perfectly happy with the state of things, that's fine but it's exactly what the grandparent described.
You won't live to see Medicare for All, but AOC sure dunked on Ted Cruz on Twitter.
You won't live to see Medicare for All, but AOC sure dunked on Ted Cruz on Twitter.
I'm not sure what you are arguing at this point? Do you acknowledge that the modern conservative movement has embraced conspiratorial thinking and lies in a way that the liberal movement in the US hasn't? If so your pivot to saying that I need to hold my representatives feet to the fire is very odd, since the reason my congressional representatives can't pass legislation is due to Republican obstructionism, not because of AOC's twitter account.
Taking you down rabbit holes _away_ from their argument is a method modern conservatives have perfected.
It is what-aboutism all the way down. :)
> since the reason my congressional representatives can't pass legislation is due to Republican obstructionism, not because of AOC's twitter account
Democrats can end the filibuster if they wish, however if the emperor actually has no clothes like I and grandparent suggest that would make it obvious.
Democrats can end the filibuster if they wish, however if the emperor actually has no clothes like I and grandparent suggest that would make it obvious.
The parent comment was saying that there was too much partisanship, you are saying the way to solve this issue is by getting rid of the filibuster? Or that if the democrats got rid of the filibuster it would prove they weren't partisan? That makes no sense whatsoever, it's essentially arguing that the democrats need to be more partisan.
>Obama birthers
Clinton opposition dossier v1.0
Clinton opposition dossier v1.0
I don’t think it’s a thing specific to conservatism, although I do think conservatives are more susceptible to this thinking for various reasons.
It absolutely is a partisanship problem, and you're just echoing a partisan line. If you look at it from outside the bubbles, it's clear that both sides have lost their minds, and MSNBC and CNN are just as bad as Fox News. Arguably even worse in effect, because unlike Fox, their propaganda is still taken seriously by the rest of the media, most of tech, most of the government and academia. They have far more institutional power.
To be fair, MSNBC has a smaller viewership and is taken with a "grain of salt" by even the most consistent viewers. Fox News is scripture for many people in ways that are scary to see.
I'd also add in that there's no need for a constant 24 hrs news cycle.
Further, many of the cable "news" TV stations (MSNBC, CNN, Fox, etc) are largely opinion and analysis and not news anyway.
I encourage people to (a) Read their news as much as possible, including opinion pieces and (b) If you watch/listen to news, find specific news segments (e.g. your local TV station's new hour). Tune in for 30 minutes to an hour and leave it at that. Tivo it if that's an option for you.
There's no need to have a cable news channel playing all hours of the day.
Further, many of the cable "news" TV stations (MSNBC, CNN, Fox, etc) are largely opinion and analysis and not news anyway.
I encourage people to (a) Read their news as much as possible, including opinion pieces and (b) If you watch/listen to news, find specific news segments (e.g. your local TV station's new hour). Tune in for 30 minutes to an hour and leave it at that. Tivo it if that's an option for you.
There's no need to have a cable news channel playing all hours of the day.
That's because the left is spread among more outlets. MSNBC, CNN, NYTimes, NPR. Whereas Fox is the only major media outlet for the right.
You can see the partisan breakdown here:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/01/americans-m...
Also you can find many "blue checks" and their followers on Twitter who take MSNBC as scripture to a frightening degree.
You can see the partisan breakdown here:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/01/americans-m...
Also you can find many "blue checks" and their followers on Twitter who take MSNBC as scripture to a frightening degree.
OAN is increasingly relevant for average republicans.
I blame r/all for such 'original' opinions. People in China are less brainwashed than this. Who's free?
I don’t know if it’s so much an issue of partisanship - you don’t see the democrats pulling this sort of science denial + distraction + reframing technique, and I think it only exacerbates the situation to lay blame on both sides equally. The crazy in our government is not distributed equally. The obstinance in our government is not distributed equally.
I’m sure there are crazy and obstinate folks on both sides, but one side does this sort of thing much, much more often. Maybe their constituents who care about that stuff should change parties, or force their party to change?
I’m sure there are crazy and obstinate folks on both sides, but one side does this sort of thing much, much more often. Maybe their constituents who care about that stuff should change parties, or force their party to change?
We are all assigned opinions - some of us have self-awareness to acknowledge it.
Compare the amount of power generated by source the day of the blackouts and one year prior. Wind fell to nothing whereas gas production was way up. But because gas didn't increase enough to meet the crazy demand it is blamed.
The problem is larger than the power mix. Wind turbines & gas pipes can be winterized (which still hasn't been done yet). However, the Texas Interconnect is purposefully isolated because it does not want to be federally regulated and join the Eastern Interconnect. That is absolutely atrocious IMO. El Paso had power (West Interconnect) while the rest of the state went into the stone age. Crazy demand can happen in the summer as well. San Antonio almost every summer has rolling brownouts due to high demand from the heat. Cooling centers are a regular occurance.
The "unreinforced cockpit door" in the blackout seems to have been turning off power to gas facilities (that send gas to create power) [1] because of failure to complete paperwork on both sides, causing a Factorio-style negative feedback loop.
[1] https://archive.is/cTZV4 / https://www.wsj.com/articles/as-texas-went-dark-the-state-pa...
[1] https://archive.is/cTZV4 / https://www.wsj.com/articles/as-texas-went-dark-the-state-pa...
"Wind turbines were a factor, but only a small one. Wind in Texas doesn’t produce as much power in the winter, and regulators don’t typically rely on wind turbines to provide significant amounts of power. Instead, regulators anticipated that natural gas and coal power plants would meet demand."
This is a key paragraph that the author waves over without elaboration. Wind power makes up 25% of the power grid. When winter storm hit wind production collapsed and the load all shifted to natural gas which couldn't sustain the load.
Here is a thought experiment, if that 25% of the grid had been coal power plants instead of wind would the grid have still failed?
This is a key paragraph that the author waves over without elaboration. Wind power makes up 25% of the power grid. When winter storm hit wind production collapsed and the load all shifted to natural gas which couldn't sustain the load.
Here is a thought experiment, if that 25% of the grid had been coal power plants instead of wind would the grid have still failed?
Why didn't Texas import power from other parts of the country? Or Mexico?
Because those grids were strained by the winter storm too.
No, Texas’ electric grid is not connected to any others to enable power sharing. They do this so they are not subject to federal oversight and regulations about the electric grid.
ERCOT has the ability to share power with Eastern grid and Mexican grid. This is done through high voltage DC interconnects so they do not need to sync the AC transmission. That is why they are still considered separate grids.