Energy, Energy Service, Natural Gas & Oil Sectors
- DennisL
- Rande
- Kirk
- Rande
- Rande
- KLR
- Rande
- AL_W
- Kirk
- Rande
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
« Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next »
» DennisL - Re: Why CA People are Scared/Upset
In response to message posted by Kirk:Kirk,
Thanks for the heads-up on your energy bill. It will help prepare me for the sticker shock that I am sure to encounter when I receive my PG&E bill for the month of January next week. (My billing cycle is roughly from the 2nd of one month to the 2nd of the next month; bill arrives in the mail sometime between the 4th and the 8th of each month.) While I don't use nearly the energy that you do, I have adopted a similar measure as you have with regard to turning down the thermostat. When I leave for work in the morning, I turn it completely off. When I come home in the evening, I turn it on to 65 degrees. When I go to bed at night, I turn it down to 62 degrees. Indeed, I feel like a popsicle, too, and am pretty damn tired of it. I expect my PG&E bill, which was about $77 last month, to be around $125 this month.
At the same time that I can't wait for spring, I dread the thought of next summer. I live far inland in the Bay area, where it gets really hot in the summer. Can you imagine what those electricity bills for us hot summer climate dwellers are going to be--if the electricity to run the air conditioners is even available?
-- posted by DennisL
» Rande - Utility Profits Went Somewhere
from CBSM:An audit of Southern California Edison, ordered by the California Public Utilities Commission last month, was released late Monday, showing that as of the end of December, the utility had an undercollected balance of $4.5 billion. In the last five years SCE has paid dividends and distributions to its parent company of $4.8 billion.
Now, a state audit shows a similar story with PG&E. The company line? It's only fair, they say, that the investors who provided the capital investment receive their capital back. Even if it were only return on capital, and not profit, SO WHAT? In a capitalistic free market, when things go badly the investors eat it. This is a monumental scam being perpetrated on the public. Shuffle the money to the parent and have the taxpayers make up the artificial shortfall. PG&E has dropped the soap in the prison shower and is now ordering us to bend over and pick it up.
-- posted by Rande
» Kirk - Re: Utility Profits Went Somewhere
In response to message posted by Rande:Shuffle the money to the parent and have the taxpayers make up the artificial shortfall. PG&E has dropped the soap in the prison shower and is now ordering us to bend over and pick it up.
My feelings exactly. I am pissed that we are still paying 40ยข on every bill to pay for their screw-ups in the past that stockholders should have eaten due to crummy execution. reminds me of Walmart building a store in the middle of the desert and then saying "Oops.. nobody will come here, we'll tack on a surcharge to all our other stores so customers will pay us back for our investment mistake." Yeah, right. Customers will just walk over to Sears in my neighborhood if Walmart tried that trick!
-- posted by Kirk
» Rande - Re: Apparently, we don't like the auditors' reports
In response to message posted by KLR:
Good. The recent runup, in my mind, reflected a belief that PG&E would have the best of both worlds -- sock away the profits with the parent AND have the public pick up the difference. Perhaps the drop in share price reflects a bit of doubt on the second part of that scenario.
-- posted by Rande
» AL_W - New Technoloy Electric Generation
Here's an article about the new Combined Cycle Generators like the two units Calpine is building in Antioch area and the one they have proposed for SJ. The are 75% more efficient than a convential steam generator plant.http://www.office.com/global/0,2724,66-2...
Combined-Cycle Gas Turbines Gaining Clout
Their efficiency exceeds 50 percent compared with 30 percent for traditional turbines.
By Marceia Lathou
for Office.com
Dec 5, 2000—
Combined-cycle combustion turbines running on natural gas are the technology of choice for most new power plants being built in the United States, primarily because they are the cleanest source of fossil-fueled generation available.
The Energy Information Administration, part of the Department of Energy, forecasts that more than 90 percent of new generating capacity under construction or in the planning stages will be gas-fired, with much of that being combined-cycle technology.
"When you think of how environmentally aware we are in the industry today, and when you think of all the technology you could employ to make sure you meet all your environmental commitments, combined-cycle technology is the cleanest source there is when it comes to fossil (fuel)," said Sheri Foote, a spokeswoman at Pinnacle West Energy, a Phoenix-based power provider that is installing several combined-cycle turbines.
Gas-fired, combined-cycle units essentially use the same energy twice, burning natural gas to turn a turbine connected to a primary generator and then using exhaust heat to make steam that turns a turbine connected to a secondary generator. It's a much more efficient process than technology used in conventional power plants, which produce high-pressure steam that turns turbines to generate electricity.
"Although the fuel costs may be higher, the efficiencies of combined-cycle technology plants are exceeding 50 percent now in converting the fuel into usable electricity, as opposed to about 30 percent in a conventional type of plant."
— Robert Schnapp
director, electric-power division
Energy Information Administration
A gas turbine works on the same principle as a jet engine used to propel airplanes or boats. A fan at one end of a hollow tube sucks air into the center of the tube, where fuel is injected and burned. This mix of gas and air rushes through and propels a second fan at the other end of the tube, which generates electricity.
With combined-cycle technology, the hot exhaust generates steam for a conventional steam turbine, which functions as a second source of electricity generation.
"Although the fuel costs may be higher, the efficiencies of combined-cycle technology plants are exceeding 50 percent now in converting the fuel into usable electricity, as opposed to about 30 percent in a conventional type of plant," said Robert Schnapp, director of the electric-power division at the Energy Information Administration.
Next page: Less greenhouse gas produced
Combined-cycle technology also is appealing because it can be constructed in smaller increments than, for instance, a coal-fired plant. That translates into lower capital costs.
Pinnacle West Energy, a subsidiary of Pinnacle West Capital Corp., is using gas-fired, combined-cycle units for its new Redhawk Power Plant near Arlington, Ariz., and for the expansion of its West Phoenix Plant in metropolitan Phoenix, Foote said.
Four 530-megawatt turbines are proposed for Redhawk, each one able to generate power for about half a million homes. The two phases at the West Phoenix project will generate about 650 megawatts. Each turbine will take about 18 months to build, Foote said.
In addition to their efficiency and cost-effectiveness, gas-turbine power plants produce 40 percent to 50 percent less carbon dioxide than coal-fired power plants, industry observers say.
"It's much easier to meet environmental regulations with a gas-fired plant, as opposed to a coal-fired plant," Schnapp said.
Related Links
Energy Information Administration
American Gas Association
Electric Power Research Institute
Pinnacle West Energy
Emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, are a major concern with conventional power plants. Environmentalists contend the chief cause of rising global temperatures is carbon dioxide that is emitted when fossil fuels are burned.
"Carbon-dioxide concentrations now are much higher than they were at any time in human history, and they're going up very rapidly," said Paul Falkowski, a professor at the Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences at Rutgers University. "By the end of this century, they will almost certainly double."
-- posted by AL_W
» Kirk - $3/gallon gasoline
Just what we needed in CA.Energy Consultant on CNBC now saying $3/gallon for gasoline is possible for this year!
Reasons stated are all very similar to CA's electricity problem:
- not enough refining capacity
- not enough pipeline capacity
- no relief for summer of 2001
- too many environmental regulations
Price targets:
$3/gal in CA (at end of pipeline and has most environazi's)
$2.50 in Midwest
NJ, West of Hudson... probably ok.
-- posted by Kirk
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.