The editors of the Wall Street Journal warn of the prospect of a “summer of rolling blackouts” in most of the country:
Last week the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) warned that two-thirds of the U.S. could experience blackouts this summer. Welcome to the “green energy transition.â€
We’ve been warning for years that climate policies would make the grid more vulnerable to vacillations in supply and demand. And here we are. Some of the mainstream press are belatedly catching on that blackouts are coming, but they still don’t grasp the real problem: The forced transition to green energy is distorting energy markets and destabilizing the grid.
Progressives blame the grid problems on climate change. There’s no doubt that drought in the western U.S. is a contributing factor. NERC’s report notes that hydropower generators in the western U.S. are running at lower levels, and output from thermal (i.e., nuclear and fossil fuel) generators that use the Missouri River for cooling may be affected this summer.
But the U.S. has experienced bad droughts in the past. The problem now is the loss of baseload generators that can provide reliable power 24/7. Solar and wind are rapidly increasing, but they’re as erratic as the weather and can’t be commanded to ramp up when electricity demand surges.
They go on to explain how the market distortions created by subsidies for wind and solar energy discourage the maintenance of baseload production.
Chicago is unlikely to share in that experience since the majority of our electricity is baseload power provided by nuclear reactors. It is the only major city in the United States for which that is true. That should be a warning to at the very least keep our nuclear reactors in production so we don’t share in Germany’s experience. I don’t have my hopes up.
I reinstated my newspaper delivery last week (Sunday only) and my first edition had coverage of the city council in alarms about projected rolling blackouts this summer, to be worse next summer. We’ve apparently joined a system that stretches from Louisiana to Canada, which is losing electrical capacity much quicker than alternatives will be available. Alderman are lecturing the municipally owned plant operators about people on at-home respirators dying if they don’t get their act together. I guess we’re all supposed to be getting gasoline powered backup generators?
That was going to be the subject of a lengthy post. How do the anti-fossil fuel activists plan to deal with the situation? Make gasoline or propane powered generators illegal? The U. S. is drastically different from France, Germany, or the UK. The climate here is much less temperate and the people less compliant.
It can’t be dealt with by increasing wind and solar—the problem is not enough baseload power.
Here in the U. S. as in Germany the unintended effect of increased dependence on wind and solar may be to increase carbon emissions. France has avoided that with their nuclear power generation.
I would be shocked if there was a blackout. At worse, there are coal power plants that could be restarted, and AFAIK the world and the US is not short on coal.
As for nuclear; there’s barely a plan to counterbalance the planned retirements of existing plants. Between Canada and the US, there’s exactly 2 plants in construction. Meanwhile, Michigan just turned off one plant, Ontario will shutoff 5 plants in 24/25, and California will shutoff 2 plants in 24/25.
The problem is existing US nuclear power plants are old. Only 3 are less than 30 years; 40 are between 30 and 40 years old; 42 are between 40 and 50 years old; 7 are more then 50 years old. Even with life extensions so they can run for 80 years; practically the whole fleet needs replacement by 2050.
Turning to coal-powered plants, in the midst of all the green energy policies promoted by the progressive left, seems like a non-starter for the Biden Administration to get behind. Generators run on natural gas or gasoline are facing Biden’s war on fossil fuels as well. Natural gas alone has tripled since he took office.
@Dave would appreciate a post on backup energy, which I can derail in the comment section for consumer advice.
@CuriousOnlooker, what is expected is the operator of the regional power grid (the local one goes from Louisiana to Manitoba, but does not include Chicagoland), will mandate rolling blackouts in 15 minute increments. Given that the city’s power plant is it’s “crown jewel,” political fallout is likely to be heavy even if the mayor and alderman have fairly narrow ranges of action. They are supposed to be figuring out a warning system to minimize the impact, but they don’t believe they will get much notice.
Illinois has ordered all coal burning power plants to close by 2045, which means plants are not going to make any investments justified by a longer time-frame and some are starting to shut down now.
Oops, municipally owned coal plants to close by 2045, all others by 2030. Illinois and the leap of faith.
Its not just the editorial pages of the WSJ. Numerous serious energy related publications are making the same point. When one reads the shear surface area of wind and solar installations required to supplant fossil fuel energy production it is to laugh.
This green stuff is boneheaded policy driven by politics. Period. Blackouts or no, I think $6 gas and monthly energy bills increase 1.5 – 2x will wake people up.
Regarding no-carbon, chances are good that the Western Interconnect will be able to manage it in the long run. The region has both geographic and resource diversity of renewable, and large total renewable resources relative to demand. All of the major utilities are signing on to plans that will let them maximize dispatch of renewable generators.
The Eastern and Texas Interconnects are a whole different story.