CNN: “One of America’s oldest power companies is going carbon free” apart from coal and natural gas.

Guest “you couldn’t make this sort of schist up if you were trying” by David Middleton

H/T to Chuck Wortman

One of America’s oldest power companies is going carbon free

By Matt Egan, CNN Business
Updated 6:48 AM ET, Thu July 25, 2019

New York (CNN Business) PSEG has relied on fossil fuels to keep the lights on for the past 116 years. Now, New Jersey’s largest and oldest power company is pledging to deliver carbon-free electricity to fight climate change.

[…]

To get there, the power company is shutting down its coal plants, betting big on offshore wind and working hard to keep its existing nuclear plant alive. PSEG said it won’t build or acquire any new fossil-fueled power plants, including those running on dirt-cheap natural gas.

[…]

Last month, PSEG announced an agreement to sell its stake in a pair of coal plants in western Pennsylvania. The company plans to shut its final coal-powered unit, located in Connecticut, within 18 months.

[…]

PSEG’s plan not to open new fossil fuels comes just after it recently expanded its footprint in that space, capitalizing on the abundance of natural gas in the United States. The company has finished three natural gas plants over the past year-and-a-half, but now it’s planning to shut down some of the less efficient gas plants.

PSEG also supplies natural gas to customers in New Jersey, and it will continue that business. The carbon-free goal is for its power business.

[…]

Darth Vader: This is CNN

Matt Egan, 2007 BS in journalism.

It must really suck to live in New Jersey ($0.17/kWh), although not nearly as bad as New England ($0.22/kWh)…

Table 5.6.A. Average Price of Electricity to Ultimate Customers by End-Use Sector,
by State, May 2019 and 2018 (Cents per Kilowatthour)

Residential customers in States that still rely on coal and/or “dirt-cheap natural gas” only pay about $0.10 to $0.12/kWh.

Last month, PSEG announced an agreement to sell its stake in a pair of coal plants in western Pennsylvania.

Darth Vader: This is CNN

Did PSEG agree to “to sell its stake in a pair of coal plants in western Pennsylvania” to Tom Steyer, so he can tear them down?

Item 2.05 Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities

On June 20, 2019, PSEG Fossil LLC (“Fossil”) and PSEG Power Fuels LLC (“Power Fuels” and together with Fossil, the “Sellers”), direct wholly owned subsidiaries of PSEG Power LLC (“Power”), entered into Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with Chief Conemaugh II, LLC and Chief Keystone II, LLC (collectively, the “Buyers”) relating to the sale by the Sellers of their ownership interests in the Keystone and Conemaugh generation facilities and related assets, including the assumption by the Buyers of related liabilities. The transaction is targeted to close during the second half of 2019, subject to customary closing conditions and regulatory approvals.

As a result of the transaction, the Seller’s ownership interests in the Keystone and Conemaugh generation facilities and related assets will no longer be classified as held for use in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. In the second quarter of 2019, Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated (“PSEG”) and Power expect to recognize a one-time pre-tax impairment charge of $375 million to $415 million as the anticipated sale price is less than the current book value.

FORM8-K

PSEG is selling them to an entity that will keep them running. The
Keystone units went into service in 1967-1968, the Conemaugh units went into service in 1970-1971 and none of them were scheduled for retirement as of the 2017 Form EIA-860 Data – Schedule 3, the most recent final survey.

The only “closing” here, is the closing of a deal with a buyer who fully understood that…

You really can’t.

PSEG may be divesting the Keystone and Conemaugh generation facilities, but there’s no “carbon free” here.

Oh, but it gets better…

The company plans to shut its final coal-powered unit, located in Connecticut, within 18 months.

Darth Vader: This is CNN

This fracking story is over three years old… And the coal-fired power plant is being replaced by a natural gas-fired power plant!!!

Connecticut’s Last Coal-Fired Power Plant To Be Closed

By GREGORY B. HLADKY
FEB 12, 2016

Connecticut’s last coal-fired power plant, Bridgeport Harbor Station, is scheduled to be closed by 2021 and replaced by a new cleaner-burning natural gas facility, according to the plant’s owner, PSEG.


The gas-powered plant is expected to be in operation by 2019 and will be capable of producing 485 megawatts of electricity, company officials said Thursday. 

[…]

The Hartford Courant

Bridgeport Harbor Station is a 418.6 MW power plant. It’s being replaced by a 485 MW natural gas-fired power plant. That’s a net gain of 66.4 MW for fossil fuels!

How significant is 418.6 MW compared to the overall coal-fired generating capacity in the US?

EIA

Coal-fired generating capacity currently stands at around 225 GW (225,000 MW). 418.6 is 0.19% of 225,000. Dean Wormer would describe this as…

And it kept getting better…

This is priceless… They swear off fossil fuels right after…

PSEG’s plan not to open new fossil fuels comes just after it recently expanded its footprint in that space, capitalizing on the abundance of natural gas in the United States. The company has finished three natural gas plants over the past year-and-a-half, but now it’s planning to shut down some of the less efficient gas plants.

PSEG also supplies natural gas to customers in New Jersey, and it will continue that business. The carbon-free goal is for its power business.

Darth Vader: This is CNN

Matt Eagan, earns a Tommy Lee Jones implied facepalm…

Speaking of Bridgeport…

I was born, raised and educated in Connecticut and lived there until I emigrated to Texas in 1981. Any mention of the city of Bridgeport always brings back memories of a band that used to play in some of the bars I frequented during my college days in New Haven…

The Bridgeport Song is sung by the Uncle Chick Band, 1980. Sung by The Uncle Chick Band, Written by Mike Luciani & Kevin Perry, Produced by Pequot Records Walter Marcinowski, Arranged by Greg Allen. Video by Bridgeport In The Know.
Advertisements

59 thoughts on “CNN: “One of America’s oldest power companies is going carbon free” apart from coal and natural gas.

  1. re: “PSEG has relied on fossil fuels to keep the lights on for the past 116 years. Now, New Jersey’s largest and oldest power company is pledging to deliver carbon-free electricity to fight climate change.”

    So, HR (Human Resources) is now making ‘technical decisions’ at the company, having whittled the engineering staff down to zero?

    • The genius HR personnel must have been hired away from from Domino Foods, where they previously helped save the world with their Carbon- free sugar.

    • Not at all. This is a marketing deal. If your customers begged you for an eco-friendly, inferior, more expensive product a higher margin, subsidized by somebody else’s money you’d be stupid not to take the money AND shame everyone and the politicians into saying thanks.

      • BTW what is the picture of the giant Orange doing next to your..Oh wait. Never mind..

        Of course that has nothing to do with the earth..

    • Is renewable energy produced carbon free, really? It takes no real energy to produce the steel for the wind turbines? They get transported by solar trucks and assembled by solar cranes? Solar panels also, no energy required, and neither wind or solar needs any service that may consume energy and produce any emissions. And they last forever, Great stuff!
      What happens when the suns not shining or the wind blowing?
      Do we now have to depend on natural gas and coal? What if combusted coal power plants were to put into the atmosphere less CO2 than a natural gas power plant? Could coal then again be the main player?
      The EIA provided a report recently and the question was asked “How much natural gas does America have and how long will it last?”
      If our grand kids are going to have reliable power 50 to a hundred years from now, I believe America is going to need to prioritize how it uses it’s energy sources.
      Clean Coal should be used to used to produce our electricity. https://youtu.be/RQRQ7S92_lo
      http://www.SidelGlobal.com
      Natural gas should be used efficiently for building space heating and by industry to produce those products we use every day. http://www.SidelSystems.com
      Our oil should be used for transportation.
      Increasing Energy Efficiency needs to be Americas main focus. From there things will fall into place.

      • re: “Is renewable energy produced carbon free, really? It takes no real energy to produce the steel for the wind turbines? They get transported by solar trucks and assembled by solar cranes? Solar panels also, no energy required, and neither wind or solar needs any service that may consume energy and produce any emissions.

        Are you asking me, or area you asking the ‘liberal arts majors’ who inhabit the HR department and who have (apparently) eliminated the engineering staff?

        If it were up to me, we would have a mix of coal, nat gas and nuclear in the system, and in the not too distant future the Hydrino-powered SunCell thermal and MHD plants with wind and solar a no-no except for isolated remote-island use.

        re: What happens when the suns not shining or the wind blowing?
        Do we now have to depend on natural gas and coal? What if combusted coal power plants were to put into the atmosphere less CO2 than a natural gas power plant? Could coal then again be the main player?

        Again, are you asking me or the (presumed SJWs) who inhabit the HR department?

        If it were up to me, we would have a mix of coal, nat gas and nuclear, and in the not too distance future Hydrino-powered SunCell thermal and MHD plants with wind and solar a no-no except for isolated island use.

        Very few people are familiar with the last option(s) I mention above, another few will find their hackles raised (for they have been indoctrinated by what is now ‘old info’) and may resent mention of the Hydrino and SunCell on these hallowed pages … I took a good year to come up to speed (and do due diligence; reviewing experimental data, white paper review, et al) on this tech, and would advise anyone with a brain to take some time and do likewise.

    • That’s a lot better than the CNN article, with a lot more factual information… But it reads like a slow motion train wreck.

      They’re literally making dumb business decsisions on the basis of junk science…

      Public Service Enterprise Group intends to shutter all but its three of its newest natural-gas-fired power plants by 2046, a step driven by a company push to reduce climate-warming emissions to net zero by 2050.

      Realizing those goals, however, depend on policy changes, like putting a price on carbon, along with technological advances, such as lower costs for energy storage and nuclear power, according to Ralph Izzo, PSEG’s CEO, president and chairman.

      The announcement aligns with PSEG’s recent moves to shift away from fossil fuels by closing or selling its coal-fired units and switching to cleaner ways of producing electricity, as well as encouraging customers to use less energy.

      “The science of climate change is clear, and we believe society must move beyond simply ‘heeding warnings’ to acting on them,’’ Izzo said. His company plans to reduce its carbon emissions by 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2046.

      […]

      “If we make this transition too quickly, it will be expensive for customers, and we don’t want to do that,’’ Izzo said. “Candidly, a patchwork quilt of renewable energy state by state will not get us where we need to get rid of fossil fuels.’’

      They have to realize that selling their coal-fired plants to other operators doesn’t have any affect on carbon emissions. Particularly since most States aren’t that stupid…

      Cheap natural-gas prices created by plentiful supplies in Pennsylvania and elsewhere have cushioned some of the impact of states like New Jersey switching to cleaner but more expensive ways of producing electricity, including solar energy and offshore wind. It also has offset some of the costs of making the electric and gas grids more reliable.

      Natural gas is projected to be the dominant generating source out to at least 2050.

      “We have for a decade been trying to solve the problem of climate change,’’ Izzo said. Public policy is not allowing it to happen, he said.

      Because we live in a constitutional republic, not an Enviromarxist people’s republic.

      PSEG provides about 90 percent of the state’s carbon-free power from its fleet of nuclear plants, including three in South Jersey. This past April, the state approved $300 million in annual ratepayer subsidies to prevent the units in New Jersey from closing.

      Those plants are projected to close beginning in 2036 and over the next 10 years, but recent modeling done by the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities anticipates they will remain open until 2050, assuming they can extend their licenses.

      PSEG also has invested heavily in solar and is partnering with Ørsted, a Danish company that has won the rights to build the state’s first offshore wind farm off Atlantic City.

      There’s exactly one minuscule (30 MW) offshore wind farm operating, Block Island off Rhode Island. While it’s averaging about a 50% capacity factory, it’s energy output is about the same as one average Marcellus gas well. There are currently only 30 MW of offshore wind capacity in the permitting process in the entire US: 18 MW in Lake Eerie and 12 MW offshore Virginia… None of these are even under construction.

      • Dave

        Block Island plant operating well under 40% nameplate.
        Monthly output runs ~12,000 Mwh in winter to ~7,500 in summer.

        Numbers available at EIA electricity database page.

        Regarding Marcellus well comparisons …
        2 pair of Chesapeake wells, the Nickolyn 6 and 7 and Joeguswa 4 and 5 have been online 5 and 6 months.
        With a cumulative output already exceeding 24 Billion cubic feet, these 4 wells easily provide the annual residential gas needs of Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Cincinnati COMBINED.
        When one considers that the cost to drill and complete these 4 wells to be less than $40 million, the economics clearly prove to be highly favorable for natgas.

        • I just ran the Block Island numbers the other day. Unfortunately I don’t think I save the spreadsheet. Over the past year, it was over 50% most months, if I remember correctly. I was surprised how well it was doing.

          I ran the numbers about a year ago, just using the average Marcellus production rate and it was funny.

      • re: “Natural gas is projected to be the dominant generating source out to at least 2050.”

        Love straight-line projections into-the-future; they are always (cough cough) right.

          • AND they are always (cough cough) ‘right’.

            David Middleton in response to _Jim:
            No… They’re just projections… It’s just statistics.

            No, no they’re NOT Dave. It’s GUESSING. You don’t have enough factors to extrapolate,
            to ‘foretell’ the future at that level. You don’t any idea what the future holds 20 years out.
            No one does. On top of that, I’ll add what I addressed to Joe B. You only “see” the present
            options as presently, seen, as presently observed, and the future will have choices and
            energy sources outside of what you see today and what you can conceive today. Like it
            or not, you can bank on that.

            Besides that, you completely missed the implied humor. Completely missed it Dave, a
            full ” r/whoosh ” right over your head. When was the LAST time straight-line projections
            in tech fields worked out in the detail in which they were initially conceived?

        • Jim
          Natgas use for electricity generation is exploding on a worldwide scale thanks, in large part, to the rapid implementation of FSRUs (Floating Storage and Regasification Units) coupled with ultra efficient Combined Cycle Gae Plants.
          From Bangladesh, Brazil (check out Sergipe’s numbers), Jamaica, Kaliningrad (!!!), to the ‘Galleon’ heading to Port Kembla, Australia … all over the globe, nations are rushing to embrace this new, highly disruptive technology.

          World’s biggest FSRU – Challenger – just departed Turkey to set up in Hong Kong.

          BTW, that Port Kembla unit will be supplied by Cheneire.
          When the wider public realizes that 70% of New South Wales’ gas needs are coming from the USA, heads will explode.

          • Joe B re: “Natgas use for electricity generation is exploding on a …

            Isn’t this what I just wrote – NONE OF THESE STRAIGHT LINE PROJECTIONS WILL WORK OUT.

            THEY NEVER DO.

            CITE FOR ME STRAIGHT-LINE PROJECTION THAT HAS.

            YOU CAN’T, BECAUSE, NONE OF THEM DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            AND Joe B confirms this when he says “Natgas use for electricity generation is exploding” AND, OF COURSE, THIS ENTAILS A POWER, A LOGARITHMIC CURVE!

            But, Joe B, I wrote that for a different reason, for a reason you will never “in a millyun years” guess … the reason being, even you, Joe B, think only in ‘linear’ terms, unable to see any new forms of energy on the horizon, thereby ‘picking’ as tomorrow’s winners ONLY from the field of ‘knowns’ _you_ know today.

  2. The coal plant in the meadowlands ( Bergan Generating) was converted to natural gas years ago. They will be building another gas plant in the meadowlands to supply NYC after Andy C shuts down Indian Point. The new plant it not being built by PSEG. By some one else. The gas supply line is run by I do not know but could be PSEG. There is a lot of gas transmission running thru North Jersey. Algonquin and Texas Eastern to name biggies. Also gas connectors from Pa are in process.

    A company I worked for in the 70s supplied the coal handling conveying systems for PSEG. Also the Bridgeport plant. Hewitt Robbins. We handled coal all over the country and around the world. Always had a 90 day supply at the power plant. Was the safest, cheapest, most reliable power available. At the early 80s oil price spike, Europecame to the US to get its coal, cheap and stable.

    The climate always has and always will change, so!

    • “Diversity” – diversification of fuels – suitable ANYWHERE save for the exception in practical applications.

      Access to varied fuel sources (nat gas, coal, nuclear) used to allow the power generating companies a ‘hedge’, a bargaining chip, against price rises in fuel costs; Don’t they conduct classes in commodity market economics anymore?

    • Always had a 90 day supply at the power plant.

      I think that is called carbon capture and storage. Works well.

    • “Always had a 90 day supply at the power plant.”

      This is the least mentioned and extremely important fact about the benefit of coal… ease of storage. Good luck with generating power 24/7 from Nat Gas when storage fields leak, such as Aliso Canyon (SoCalGas) and McDonald Island (PG&E) or worse, when a major pipeline gets shut down. The warnings to reduce gas use to avoid outages was akin to third world reliability.

      The transition away from traditional sane energy generation to eco-nut fantasy land unreliable will be very expensive and disruptive to modern life. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, all policies based on such are total BS.

      • Yep… Coal and nuclear power are the most resilient fuels for electricity generation.

    • Yes. They’re biased against fuels-of-color. Which the much-used phrase doesn’t make sense as black/dark is actually no/less color than white, which is all colors.

  3. That corporations are collectively making stupid decisions is not new.
    Boeing has been doing buybacks, which is buying their own stock out of the market. The reason is that it reduces the number of shares outstanding. Which, even with modestly growing overall earnings increases the earnings per share number.
    Just as bad is that fund managers admire the financial engineering and bid the stock up. Boeing executives have stock options so the ploy enhances their personal net worth. But all ordinary shareholders do not have that privilege.
    So, Boeing spent billions on financial engineering that could have been spent engineering a totally new 737.
    Instead, they put the new, bigger and more efficient engines at a different thrust center that changed the handling characteristics of the plane.
    ‘And then did not spend enough to makes sure the software was correct in all circumstances.
    Stock goes down depreciating the potential worth of the options.
    What’s next?
    Re-price the options for personal advantage.
    “Come on in. It feels good. All the lemmings are doing it!”

  4. All this from the state where PSEG places solar panels on telephone poles that have a street light above it. This way they get 24 hour solar power.

    Simply amazing!

    And Ralph Izzo is an asshat. He wants Jeff Tittles job. If you added up both their IQs it might break 90.

  5. More virtue signalling by the corporate executive class, magnified by the climate media and soon echoed by the chattering alarmists as proof that AGW/climate change/climate weirding/climate chaos is happening before our eyes. I just wish someone would challenge the so called smart executives at companies like this, or Apple, or GE or any number of organizations that tout their “green credentials” as to how they explain the broken models, the normalcy of hurricanes/drought/heat wave/tornado/snow cover data, the grossly inaccurate use of climate sensitivity by the IPCC and the bias of climate science based on RCP 8.5. I honestly think most of them would be dumbfounded by how little we know, how little they themselves understand the issue and how badly they have been duped into expensive and ineffective efforts to control something we can’t control.

    • Michael

      Crescendo is rapidly building around the imminent Grand Solar Minimum.
      Will be interesting to see how the ‘reporting’ in MSM responds to the growing preponderance of irrefutable evidence in the coming months.

  6. It must really suck to live in New Jersey ($0.17/kWh), although not nearly as bad as New England ($0.22/kWh)…

    If you google Ontario (Canada) electricity prices, you will get the idea that the cost of electricity there is quite reasonable. Unfortunately, there is a bewildering array of extra charges that make the cost of electricity in Ontario anything but reasonable. link

    When we see American electricity prices quoted here, is that what the consumer actually pays?

    • Bob

      Yes, that above chart is the average price the end user (res/com/industrial) pays.
      Generally, the monthly invoice contain 4 categories … cost of fuel, cost of transmission, utilities expenses/profit, and taxes/fees.

      The USA has several different structures throughout the country with the dominant model being interstate organizations (RTOs) that manage region wide electricity generation, pricing (wholesale level), and distribution.

      3 states … California, Texas, and New York keep complete authority within state lines.

      The power (eletricity) topic in the USA is a fascinating yet little understood industry

      • Not exactly for Texas. ERCOT covers about 90% of the State. Parts of far west and far east Texas fall into different regional authorities.

    • Check the prices of electricity for the Province of Quebec, they sell electricity to many of the Northern States and also Ontario, more power than they know what to do with.

      • Electricity is cheaper in Quebec Province because of the extensive array of hydroelectric dams in a sparsely populated province. New Jersey and New York state are much more densely populated, and do not have enough fast-flowing rivers to generate much hydroelectric power.

    • My last bill was $0.113/kw plus 6% tax. No other charge. (Cobb County, Georgia).
      That translates to keeping a 3100 sq ft house nicely cooled in the middle of summer in GA, plus meeting all other electrical needs for less than $6/day. That’s a good deal in my book, but I could bring that cost down substantially by replacing my old central AC units with more efficient ones.

        • If he is served by Georgia power, yes he has.

          My most recent bill included:

          Environmental Compliance Cost: $32.25
          Nuclear Construction Cost Recovery: $27.20
          Municipal Franchise Fee: $4.66
          Sales Tax: $32.77

        • No. I am served by Cobb Electric Membership Cooperative. Our power is generated by hydro, natural gas, and coal.
          What I showed were the total charges on my power bill – useage plus taxes. Even that bill is deceptively greater tban the true cost. Since the company is a cooperative, every customer is also an owner. The coop sets their rates to ensure no shortage of revenue, then refunds the surplus to each of us every year.

  7. Does that $0.17 a KWH include all the taxes and fees that they pile on , which is always the most expensive part of the your bill by far.

  8. I checked that chart for the per kilowatt hour charge. Mine is $0.189504, about $.045+/KwH higher, but no big deal where I’m concerned. I did not include the taxes in this. Of course, the way to beat higher prices is to buy more fuel-efficient/usage-efficient household or other equipment. Gas goes to $3.199/gallon? Buy a more fuel-efficient car.

    I have no issues with closing a coal-fired plant if it is less efficient and more costly to run than a natural gas-fired plant. However, I object to anyone trying to transfer me to unreliable and NOT environmentally-friendly power producers like wind turbines or solar generators. I cannot think of a good reason that I or anyone else should have to pay for such foolishness, especially when it is more vulnerable to severe storms like tornadoes that can and will completely wreck that trash, never mind the destruction of wildlife like migrating birds.

    Ecohippies are just plain nuts. They think electricity falls out of the sky. (Well, it does, kind of. It’s called lightning, but try to harness that erratic phenomenon.) I hope that when they’re all converted to sky power they enjoy the regular and routine loss of electricity. Couldn’t happen to a better crowd.

    • We should keep a mix; they can’t really stockpile natural gas like they can with coal, so some “resiliency” needs to be maintained, even if the plant-to-plant “efficiency” isn’t quite as good.

      • “Stockpile” natural gas? Why?

        Gas is continuously supplied as needed as long as sufficient pipeline capacity is maintained.

        And Yes, gas is stored during low use month for higher use months, just not on site. Do a little search.

        http://ir.eia.gov/ngs/ngs.html

        • AGW is referring to stockpiling it at the power plant. Seasonal gas storage is entirely different. Coal and nuclear are not susceptible to pipeline disruptions that occasionally occur.

          • David,

            That was understood but thank you for your comment since it lead to do research on MY part regarding natural gas capacity and reliability.

            As with the continuing dearth of ongoing improvements in “the electrical grid” and due to the extensive retirements of coal plants and other capacity being replaced by mostly natural gas, natural gas infrastructure requires extensive capacity and redundancy increases.

            I live primarily in Las Vegas NV. 80% of our natural gas comes from the Kern River pipeline. The old Reid Gardner 557 MW coal plant has been shut down and the baseline power has been replaced by natural gas plants mostly supplied by the Kern River pipeline. The Las Vegas Valley is in dire straights if a pipeline failure (or terrorist attack) were to occur.

            Luckily a new pipeline system with storage capacity, the WEST Header project, is underway. (Luckily, not really. A need was identified by a “capitalist” company and a solution to fill the need has been devised.)

            https://westhp.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/WEST-Header-Project-Description-6-27-18.pdf

            I am having difficulty getting down into the details of pipeline siting, however this is a NEW pipeline that will serve from Salt Lake city to near the Mexican boarder, providing redundancy to Las Vegas. My fear is that it will be 50 feet from the Kern line due to federal government restrictions since most of Utah and Nevada are federally controlled. If that is the case, it will not really be redundant supply since one terrorist act could easily take out both pipelines.

            Reading the above document, it is interesting to see a major need for this project is due to the indeterminacy of solar power and the need for fluctuating supply to natural gas plants that serve as backup “batteries”. Yes they use that term.

            So my point was: There is storage for natural gas. It is not on site, but as long as sufficient and, I should have added redundant, pipeline capacity is provided, there is no need for on site storage.

            This situation has been created by both government intervention and the fracking “revolution” essentially pricing old coal plants out of the market. As is a common theme of mine, we just need the government to get out of the way. The free market will determine what level of “stockpiling” (read redundancy) is required to ensure continuity of service.

      • Up here in my little slice of heaven, we have a fairly sizable LNG plant that does in fact stockpile natural gas. So it can be done. Whether it is done to a large extent, across the US, I am not sure.

  9. Nice cherry picking, ya got there.

    You see, there is also Florida Power and Light. Their NextEra power generating subsidiary is the world’s largest producer of renewable energy. FPL features 100% coal-free power production – getting all its power from a combination of renewables, combined cycle gas, and nuclear. They operate huge solar power plants, among others.

    FPL’s consumer power rate is 9.9 cents per KW-hr, a bit lower than those coal burning utilities up north you mentioned at 10 to 12 cents per KW-hre.

    The costs charged consumers by electric utilities in the US is much less a function of which sources of power they use, but rather, are a function of how well managed they are as utilities. FPL is a very well managed utility, and their utility rates are lower than most other utilities in the State of Florida.

    • They operate huge solar power plants, among others.

      Since you bring it up, please elaborate — huge doesn’t cut it. Percentage of total generation?

        • Wouldn’t that be 260/1400 = 0.18 MW/acre (at noon)?

          Coal power plant I worked at was 360MW/25 acres (area includes coal storage pile & transmission yard) = 14.4 MW/acre (w/a 90% capacity factor).

          • It’s 500 MWh/acre… not 500 MW/acre… per year.

            It sucks even worse now that I figured out the the 500 MWh/acre listed on Wiki is actually 500 MWh/acre*year.

      • Huge means “covers vast tracts of land” not “produces appreciable amount of required energy”, dispatchable or not.

    • Try quoting what I wrote, rather than lying about what I wrote.

      It must really suck to live in New Jersey ($0.17/kWh), although not nearly as bad as New England ($0.22/kWh)…

      Residential customers in States that still rely on coal and/or “dirt-cheap natural gas” only pay about $0.10 to $0.12/kWh.

      FPL is very well managed. However, the average residential rate in Florida is $0.117/kWh… right around the national average

      https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=epmt_5_6_a

      The vast majority of Florida’s electricity comes from natural gas generation and coal-fired generation currently tops non-hydro renewables by a wide margin.

      https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=FL#tabs-4

  10. PSEG used to be the acronym for Public Service Electric and Gas, meaning natural gas used for heating and generating electricity.

    Even if they sell all their coal-fired plants and replace them with natural gas-fired plants, they will certainly reduce their emissions but will not be “carbon-free”. Natural gas is mostly methane, whose chemical formula is CH4, where C represents carbon.

    To their credit, natural gas does burn much more cleanly than coal, and the recent development of fracking has narrowed the price gap between natural gas and coal. Utilities are switching from coal to natural gas for economic reasons, as well as the fact that it’s easier to obtain environmental permits for gas-fired plants.

Comments are closed.