The Biden Administration is winging it about electrification

[Flyguy]

They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 3:38:16 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.

Why bother? The answer is well known, and was posted here years ago - about 30%. An instant google search throws up this

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmorris/2021/11/13/electricity-grids-can-handle-electric-vehicles-easily--they-just-need-proper-management/?sh=e6e6bc578629

Forbes has more recent estimates and it is a bit lower for the US and appreciably lower for the UK.

So Flyguy is the same ignorant idiot that he has always been. He seems to feel this compulsion to advertise his rapidly advancing dementia, and waste bandwidth in the process. He doesn't need to bother. We've known that he is hopeless twit for quite a while now.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Martin Brown]

On 30/07/2022 08:51, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 3:38:16 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
>> They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.
>
> Why bother? The answer is well known, and was posted here years ago - about 30%. An instant google search throws up this
>
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmorris/2021/11/13/electricity-grids-can-handle-electric-vehicles-easily--they-just-need-proper-management/?sh=e6e6bc578629
>
> Forbes has more recent estimates and it is a bit lower for the US and appreciably lower for the UK.

The UK electrification is something of a joke. We can barely make enough
electricity to provide present needs today. In fact during the recent
heatwave they had to buy electricity from Belgium on the spot market at
a price of 50x normal to keep the lights on in London and the SE.

https://www.energylivenews.com/2022/07/26/uk-bought-electricity-from-belgium-at-record-prices-last-week-to-keep-the-lights-on/

I expect they would have allowed the grid to shed load had it been short
supply in the North but London and the Home Counties are sacrosanct.

>
> So Flyguy is the same ignorant idiot that he has always been. He seems to feel this compulsion to advertise his rapidly advancing dementia, and waste bandwidth in the process. He doesn't need to bother. We've known that he is hopeless twit for quite a while now.
>

He has a fair point at least in the UK where a lack of investment in
electricity generation combined with the dash for gas and the
mothballing of major gas storage facilities leaves us incredibly exposed
to the recent fluctuations on spot market prices. Total UK gas storage
capacity is between 7 and 10 days at most (other EU countries have
between 30-90 days storage capacity depending on time of year).

https://www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2021/09/how-the-uks-low-gas-storage-capacity-leaves-it-vulnerable

We could be headed for a very interesting winter in Europe when/if Putin
turns off the Nordstream gas tap completely (as I suspect he will do).

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:92a7b429-0734-4449...@googlegroups.com:

I think you are an abject idiot.

What do you think the charge rate is on an EV? Do you even know?

The grid supports single source megwatt loads in business hours.
Pretty sure it can support distributed load sub-station loads in the
off peak hours.

The administration that has no clue is the one running in that
shitpot you call a skull cavity.

[Fred Bloggs]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 1:38:16 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
> They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.

They have no clue? Really? Do you really think the U.S. government and industry are basically doing nothing that isn't publicized in the media for mentally defectives that you watch?

DoE (Dept Energy for you) is on it. They formed and coordinated a Grid Integration Tech Team (GITT) and Integrated Systems Analysis Tech Team (ISATT) to tap into the best and most relevant knowledge about the subject. As you might expect, the teams have representatives of the electrical power generation industry as they just might have a smidge to do with the actual implementation, don't you think? Looks like the following participated:
American Electric Power,
Argonne National Laboratory, BP America, Chevron Corporation, DTE Energy, Duke Energy,
the Electric Power Research Institute, ExxonMobil Corporation, FCA US LLC, Ford Motor
Company, General Motors, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, Idaho National Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Phillips 66
Company, Shell Oil Products U.S., Southern California Edison Company, U.S. Council for
Automotive Research LLC, the U.S. Department of Energy.
And each of these participants further tap into fairly vast resources specific to their area of expertise.

You can read a summary of their work here:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f69/GITT%20ISATT%20EVs%20at%20Scale%20Grid%20Summary%20Report%20FINAL%20Nov2019.pdf

We'll eagerly await your usual highly detailed and fact based analysis of their work. I'm sure it contains manifold laws you will relish exposing.

[Ed Lee]

On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:38:16 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
> They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.

When i am charging, i am not using the A/C or heating in the office or at home. So, the net electricity usage is the same. EV also use much less electricity to heat or cool.

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 6:12:52 PM UTC+10, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 30/07/2022 08:51, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 3:38:16 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> >> They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.
> >
> > Why bother? The answer is well known, and was posted here years ago - about 30%. An instant google search throws up this
> >
> > https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmorris/2021/11/13/electricity-grids-can-handle-electric-vehicles-easily--they-just-need-proper-management/?sh=e6e6bc578629
> >
> > Forbes has more recent estimates and it is a bit lower for the US and appreciably lower for the UK.
> The UK electrification is something of a joke. We can barely make enough
> electricity to provide present needs today. In fact during the recent
> heatwave they had to buy electricity from Belgium on the spot market at
> a price of 50x normal to keep the lights on in London and the SE.
>
> https://www.energylivenews.com/2022/07/26/uk-bought-electricity-from-belgium-at-record-prices-last-week-to-keep-the-lights-on/
>
> I expect they would have allowed the grid to shed load had it been short
> supply in the North but London and the Home Counties are sacrosanct.

The current UK administration does go in for broad-spectrum incompetence. It wouldn't be all that difficult to clean up electricity generation in the UK but with a clown like Boris Johnson in charge it isn't going to happen until he is replaced, and probably by somebody who doesn't appeal to the UK Conservative Party voters. When I worked in the UK - 1971 to 1993 - upper-class twits were an occupational hazard. You had to work around them to get things done.

Brexit does seem to have made them even more over-confident than they were when I was working there. With any luck the rest of the population will put them back where they belong, as a kind of purely decorative animated bunting, letting them affirm national identity without actually doing anything.

<snip>

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[upsid...@downunder.com]

On Fri, 29 Jul 2022 22:38:13 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
<soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.

For your own calculations to get a ballpark value:

How much do you drive with your car every year ?

Divide that by 365 to get how much you drive each day on average.
Divide that by 24 to get how far you drive each hour on average.

If you have an EV, check out how far you can drive with 1 kWh.

Divide the average hour distance with how far you get with 1 kWh. This
will give the average charging power which is on for 24 hours each day
for every days of the year. In most cases, the average charging power
is well below 0.5 kW (500 W). This is the additional power drawn by
your house.

Compare those figures if an extra heater/cooler is added to your
house. Does the network crash by that addition ?

[Ed Lee]

Good idea.

I drove around 5000 miles, or 1300 kwhr per year. Around 70 days of a 1kw room heater. May be couple of weeks of whole house heating or cooling.

[Ricky]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 1:38:16 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:

> They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.

When all cars are BEVs, it will result in a 20% increase in total electrical generation from today's levels.

More than 95% of BEV charging is done at night, during the slack time of electrical demand. This 95+% will not require any additional generation or transmission capability. The remaining <5% of 20% or <1% of charging will be at peak time. So the existing grid will need to grow by 1% to accommodate charging that will happen at peak time.

I think we can manage that.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ricky]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 4:12:52 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 30/07/2022 08:51, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 3:38:16 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> >> They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.
> >
> > Why bother? The answer is well known, and was posted here years ago - about 30%. An instant google search throws up this
> >
> > https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmorris/2021/11/13/electricity-grids-can-handle-electric-vehicles-easily--they-just-need-proper-management/?sh=e6e6bc578629
> >
> > Forbes has more recent estimates and it is a bit lower for the US and appreciably lower for the UK.
> The UK electrification is something of a joke.

That has long since been established. I especially like the fact that the UK is building nuclear electricity generation facilities, which come on line years late and hugely over budget. Definitely the smart move when you are already balanced on a knife edge.

> We can barely make enough
> electricity to provide present needs today. In fact during the recent
> heatwave they had to buy electricity from Belgium on the spot market at
> a price of 50x normal to keep the lights on in London and the SE.
>
> https://www.energylivenews.com/2022/07/26/uk-bought-electricity-from-belgium-at-record-prices-last-week-to-keep-the-lights-on/
>
> I expect they would have allowed the grid to shed load had it been short
> supply in the North but London and the Home Counties are sacrosanct.

I'm glad I spend most of my time in a place that seems advanced compared to the UK, Puerto Rico.

> > So Flyguy is the same ignorant idiot that he has always been. He seems to feel this compulsion to advertise his rapidly advancing dementia, and waste bandwidth in the process. He doesn't need to bother. We've known that he is hopeless twit for quite a while now.
> >
> He has a fair point at least in the UK where a lack of investment in
> electricity generation combined with the dash for gas and the
> mothballing of major gas storage facilities leaves us incredibly exposed
> to the recent fluctuations on spot market prices. Total UK gas storage
> capacity is between 7 and 10 days at most (other EU countries have
> between 30-90 days storage capacity depending on time of year).
>
> https://www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2021/09/how-the-uks-low-gas-storage-capacity-leaves-it-vulnerable

So the UK is not only in a bad position, they are moving backwards? Wow! It's hard to imagine the UK ever ruling the waves!

> We could be headed for a very interesting winter in Europe when/if Putin
> turns off the Nordstream gas tap completely (as I suspect he will do).

Good luck! You are gonna need it!!!

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ricky]

Of course not. You are somewhere along the highway looking for a tow! That's YOUR idea of charging a BEV. LOL

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <a7c42310-3b41-45f9...@googlegroups.com>,
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com says...

>
> When all cars are BEVs, it will result in a 20% increase in total electrical generation from today's levels.
>
> More than 95% of BEV charging is done at night, during the slack time of electrical demand. This 95+% will not require any additional generation or transmission capability. The remaining <5% of 20% or <1% of charging will be at peak time. So the existing grid will need to grow by 1% to accommodate charging that will happen at
peak time.
>
> I think we can manage that.
>
>
>

While the cars are recharged at night, where are all the solar
generators going to get the sun light to power them ?

Does the wind blow at night like it does in the daytime ? That I do not
know.

[Ed Lee]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 8:41:27 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 9:59:33 AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
> > On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:38:16 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
> > > They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.
> > When i am charging, i am not using the A/C or heating in the office or at home. So, the net electricity usage is the same. EV also use much less electricity to heat or cool.
> Of course not. You are somewhere along the highway looking for a tow! That's YOUR idea of charging a BEV. LOL

Not anymore. I have 70 to 80 miles range. Enough to escape from LA and LV (while skipping Jean and Primm).

The Terrible Station at Jean is truly terrible. On my way in, it charged me $13 for around 10kwhr. On my way out (with extended battery), both chargers were broken.

I drove 50 miles plus 2000 feet up to the top of the (local) world with 16% SOC. Still have few miles left. 10% SOC is drop dead state.

I though you are not reading my posts anymore.

[Ed Lee]

Yes it does. Wind blows 24/7.

[Ricky]

It's not actually useful to calculate BEV charging as a 24 hour load, mostly because it isn't. Many people won't even charge every day. But the average demand from BEVs will look much like the inverse of the demand load curve for all other uses. There will be some use during the day from people charging while driving on trips, but mostly, the demand for charging BEVs will be at night.

The average daily demand will be 10 kWh per day (14,000 miles per year). So 1 kW for 10 hours at night would do the job just fine. 1 kW is about the load a typical microwave oven uses. If you average it over the full day, like what you did, it is about the same as a refrigerator or a hot water heater. However, that's not to say plugging in 250 million new refrigerators would not be a problem for the grid.

The important point is, this level of use, can be easily accommodated using the slack resources at night. 20% addition to the total demand load can easily be done during the slack time. It's literally a no brainer.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ricky]

Lol.

If you want to use solar power to charge your car, then charge it during the day when the duck curve is low. No one is stopping you.

You *do* have a BEV, right?

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ricky]

Does that include the energy used in all the tows?

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ed Lee]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 8:55:17 AM UTC-7, Ed Lee wrote:
> On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 8:41:27 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 9:59:33 AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
> > > On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:38:16 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.
> > > When i am charging, i am not using the A/C or heating in the office or at home. So, the net electricity usage is the same. EV also use much less electricity to heat or cool.
> > Of course not. You are somewhere along the highway looking for a tow! That's YOUR idea of charging a BEV. LOL
> Not anymore. I have 70 to 80 miles range. Enough to escape from LA and LV (while skipping Jean and Primm).
>
> The Terrible Station at Jean is truly terrible. On my way in, it charged me $13 for around 10kwhr. On my way out (with extended battery), both chargers were broken.

By the way, EA chargers are still under construction at Primm, but i am not to sure about the CDM plug working from EA. GM/Pilot/Evgo will be building some soon. But Evgo is the most expensive one with $0.6 per kwhr. I might still skip Jean/ Primm when they are done

[Ed Lee]

Yes. I had around 50 miles (including round trip tow trucks) of towing. So, less than one day of room heating.

[Fred Bloggs]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 12:01:06 PM UTC-4, Ricky wrote:
> On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 11:48:32 AM UTC-4, Ralph Mowery wrote:
> > In article <a7c42310-3b41-45f9...@googlegroups.com>,
> > gnuarm.del...@gmail.com says...
> > >
> > > When all cars are BEVs, it will result in a 20% increase in total electrical generation from today's levels.
> > >
> > > More than 95% of BEV charging is done at night, during the slack time of electrical demand. This 95+% will not require any additional generation or transmission capability. The remaining <5% of 20% or <1% of charging will be at peak time. So the existing grid will need to grow by 1% to accommodate charging that will happen at
> > peak time.
> > >
> > > I think we can manage that.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > While the cars are recharged at night, where are all the solar
> > generators going to get the sun light to power them ?
> >
> > Does the wind blow at night like it does in the daytime ? That I do not
> > know.
> Lol.
>
> If you want to use solar power to charge your car, then charge it during the day when the duck curve is low. No one is stopping you.

Care to explain what throttling back the nuclear generator output has to do with anything?

[Ed Lee]

My next challenge is to bring the 30 miles (10kwhr) Leaf to Vegas, probably with generator. Lowest i have seen is 8kwhr, on the way to 5. We can restore the main #1 battery to 24 with new pouch cells, but lots of work for 96 modules. It's much easier to add #2,#3 and #4.

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <669814fe-8865-4857...@googlegroups.com>,
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com says...

>
> If you want to use solar power to charge your car, then charge it during the day when the duck curve is low. No one is stopping you.
>
> You *do* have a BEV, right?
>
>

You just said charge at night when the demand is low, now you want to
charge during the day when the demand is low. What is it demand low at
night or day in your opinion ?


I doubt I would ever have a BEV. Not paying thousands more for a car
over a gas one .
At my age (72) I may have already bought my last car, a 2017 and 2007
truck with only 75,000 miles on it. The wife has a 2020 car with less
than 5000 miles on it. For me, time is too short to worry about when and
where to plug in and wait while there are plenty of gas stations.

[rbowman]

In general, no. Excluding weather fronts thermal heating is responsible
for a lot of air motion. This is particularly noticeable in the desert.
The wind picks up when the sun rises and usually calms down after
sunset. If you don't like sand in your hamburgers grill after dark.

[rbowman]

Never lived in the desert, did you?

[Rich S]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 5:38:16 AM UTC, Flyguy wrote:
> They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.

Speaking for US only, the "Residential", and "Commercial/Public Services" are the roughly at top
consumers of electricity (each 36-38% of total energy consumed per year). If we've talking about
electric vehicles, both of those sectors are relevant.

In the Residential sector, for many homes, typically, the appliance with highest electricity use is
the refrigerator. (typical ~ exclude extra heating).

And so the move has been for many years, getting people to replace the old inefficient
models with modern more efficient ones. Refrigerators & such, via Energy Star program
have advertised the benefit at retail, when most people make their shopping choices.

Getting individuals to be aware of how their individual choices impact the collective society, is (ahem)
quite difficult & touchy, I think we'd all agree......

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <jklenh...@mid.individual.net>, bow...@montana.com
says...

>
> In general, no. Excluding weather fronts thermal heating is responsible
> for a lot of air motion. This is particularly noticeable in the desert.
> The wind picks up when the sun rises and usually calms down after
> sunset. If you don't like sand in your hamburgers grill after dark.
>
>
>
>

I thought something like that but did not know for sure. My thinking
was that not too long after sunset there was no heat to make much wind
where the wind generators would be at.

[Ed Lee]

Perhaps to a lesser degree. But there is wind as long as the Earth is turning. We have rather windy nights near the ocean as well.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

There is a war on natural gas in several places in California. No gas
hookups allowed on new construction. They want houses to be all
electric.

That could get interesting. And expensive.

[upsid...@downunder.com]

On Sat, 30 Jul 2022 08:33:39 -0700 (PDT), Ricky
<gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 1:38:16 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
>> They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.
>
>When all cars are BEVs, it will result in a 20% increase in total electrical generation from today's levels.
>
>More than 95% of BEV charging is done at night, during the slack time of electrical demand. This 95+% will not require any additional generation or transmission capability. The remaining <5% of 20% or <1% of charging will be at peak time. So the existing grid will need to grow by 1% to accommodate charging that will happen at peak time.

Depends on the electric production mix in a particular country.

If you have plenty of nuclear power, charging by night (and weekends)
makes perfectly sense.

However, if you have to use expensive peak power gas turbines during
the day, extending the high demand to the night would force to use
these expensive turbines into the night.

With plenty of solar power, charging during the day is also viable.

If you live in a sunny area and only drive short distances daily, you
could even live without external charging :-) :-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightyear_One
That car has 5 m^2 solar panels of its own, so it would charge
batteries with a few hundred watts while driving on a sunny road or
when parked in a sunny car park.

[jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com]

Really funny. If the solar panels add 40 miles per day of range, it
would run about 5 MPH on solar power. In the summer. For $170,000.

[Ed Lee]

The panel itself is only couple hundreds. I think i can put around 2 m^2 on my Leaf, for around $500 at 300W. It will add around 10 miles per day. Actually, i have to worry about overcharging, if I don't drive it for 4 or 5 days.

I have around 10kW solar panels in storage.

[Ed Lee]

By the way, you can get 30% solar ITC with 10% to 20% add-on with battery. So, your Uncle Sam will pay half of the cost.

[Flyguy]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 12:51:23 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

> On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 3:38:16 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.

> Why bother? The answer is well known, and was posted here years ago - about 30%. An instant google search throws up this
>
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmorris/2021/11/13/electricity-grids-can-handle-electric-vehicles-easily--they-just-need-proper-management/?sh=e6e6bc578629
>
> Forbes has more recent estimates and it is a bit lower for the US and appreciably lower for the UK.
>

> So Flyguy is the same ignorant idiot that he has always been. He seems to feel this compulsion to advertise his rapidly advancing dementia, and waste bandwidth in the process. He doesn't need to bother. We've known that he is hopeless twit for quite a while now.
>

> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

SNIPPERMAN's mind seems to be clouded by his own dementia, almost as much as Lyin' Biden's.

The point is that the electrical grid is strained to the max right now, with absolutely NO initiative by Lyin' Biden's administration to fix it. If anything, they are pulling fossil-fueled facilities offline. We are being warned - around the world - of this problem:
https://www.nerc.com/news/Headlines%20DL/May%2018%202022%20SRA%20Announcement.pdf
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/06/02/blackout-states-summer-heat/
Even SNIPPERMAN's beloved OZ is not immune:
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/australia-power-market-halted-dramatic-move-avert-blackouts-2022-06-15/

The average home uses 11,000 kwh. If it added two EVs driven a total of 15,000 miles that would add another 5,200 kwh, for a total of 16,200 kwh. As there are 140 million homes in the US, that would add 730 BILLION kwh to the grid. As total demand is about 3.9 trillion kwh, this represents a 19% increase in unplanned for demand.

Given that we are at the breaking point now, and that there are no new generating facilities planned for other than undispatchable renewables, and aging plants are being shut down, we are headed for a crisis. Actually, we are ALREADY in a crisis.

Note: instantaneous charging capacity is a red herring, and the province of fools.

[Flyguy]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 5:55:41 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:

> On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 1:38:16 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
> > They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.

> They have no clue? Really? Do you really think the U.S. government and industry are basically doing nothing that isn't publicized in the media for mentally defectives that you watch?
>
> DoE (Dept Energy for you) is on it. They formed and coordinated a Grid Integration Tech Team (GITT) and Integrated Systems Analysis Tech Team (ISATT) to tap into the best and most relevant knowledge about the subject. As you might expect, the teams have representatives of the electrical power generation industry as they just might have a smidge to do with the actual implementation, don't you think? Looks like the following participated:
> American Electric Power,
> Argonne National Laboratory, BP America, Chevron Corporation, DTE Energy, Duke Energy,
> the Electric Power Research Institute, ExxonMobil Corporation, FCA US LLC, Ford Motor
> Company, General Motors, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Oak Ridge National
> Laboratory, Idaho National Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Phillips 66
> Company, Shell Oil Products U.S., Southern California Edison Company, U.S. Council for
> Automotive Research LLC, the U.S. Department of Energy.
> And each of these participants further tap into fairly vast resources specific to their area of expertise.
>
> You can read a summary of their work here:
> https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f69/GITT%20ISATT%20EVs%20at%20Scale%20Grid%20Summary%20Report%20FINAL%20Nov2019.pdf
>
> We'll eagerly await your usual highly detailed and fact based analysis of their work. I'm sure it contains manifold laws you will relish exposing.

What that summary fails to say ANYTHING about are brownouts and blackouts (I searched for it), which is the crisis facing us RIGHT NOW! Adding more electrical loads are just going to make this crisis worse. This report is just another example where they decided on the conclusion and wrote a piece of shit to back it up.

[Flyguy]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 8:23:17 AM UTC-7, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2022 22:38:13 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy

> <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.

> For your own calculations to get a ballpark value:
>
> How much do you drive with your car every year ?
>
> Divide that by 365 to get how much you drive each day on average.
> Divide that by 24 to get how far you drive each hour on average.
>
> If you have an EV, check out how far you can drive with 1 kWh.
>
> Divide the average hour distance with how far you get with 1 kWh. This
> will give the average charging power which is on for 24 hours each day
> for every days of the year. In most cases, the average charging power
> is well below 0.5 kW (500 W). This is the additional power drawn by
> your house.
>
> Compare those figures if an extra heater/cooler is added to your
> house. Does the network crash by that addition ?

You make things FAR TOO COMPLICATED! The average EV uses 0.346 kwh/mi. The average home drives 15,000 miles per year, for 5190 kwh. The average home, less EVs, consumes 11000 kwh, so switching to EVs will increase the average home's energy consumption by 47% (this may be low because it doesn't account for conversion inefficiencies, so it could be above 50%). So, FORGET about where they use their electricity - that just muddles the analysis.

[Ed Lee]

15,000 miles may be on the high side. I personally drove around 5,000 per year.

11000 kwh per yr -> 30 kwh per day -> 1200w per hour -> 10A average. Most house have 200A panel. Using only 5% seems too low.

[Flyguy]

That data maybe low - if you search for "average household car mileage" you get miles driven per DRIVER, not household. Men drive more miles than women, so if you add the two together 15,000 is a reasonable, and certainly not high, number per household. Of course, some will drive more and some less. In any case, it gives an approximate number for doing the whole USA calculation.

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 11:02:16 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 12:51:23 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 3:38:16 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > They have NO CLUE what will be required of the electrical grid to support the quantity of EVs envisioned by these idiots. How much increase in grid capacity do YOU think will be required? Post your answers below.
> > Why bother? The answer is well known, and was posted here years ago - about 30%. An instant google search throws up this
> >
> > https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmorris/2021/11/13/electricity-grids-can-handle-electric-vehicles-easily--they-just-need-proper-management/?sh=e6e6bc578629
> >
> > Forbes has more recent estimates and it is a bit lower for the US and appreciably lower for the UK.
> >
> > So Flyguy is the same ignorant idiot that he has always been. He seems to feel this compulsion to advertise his rapidly advancing dementia, and waste bandwidth in the process. He doesn't need to bother. We've known that he is hopeless twit for quite a while now.
>

> Sloman's mind seems to be clouded by his own dementia, almost as much as Lyin' Biden's.

Which is to say, not at all. Trump falsely claimed that Bidenm was suffering from dementia, and Flyguy is silly enough to believe him. Both Flyguy and Trump believe what it suits them to believe, and ignore inconvneient realities

> The point is that the electrical grid is strained to the max right now, with absolutely NO initiative by Lyin' Biden's administration to fix it. If anything, they are pulling fossil-fueled facilities offline. We are being warned - around the world - of this problem:
> https://www.nerc.com/news/Headlines%20DL/May%2018%202022%20SRA%20Announcement.pdf

Global warming does put the US grid under strain - it wasn't designed to cope with the extra air-conditioning load that unexpectedl hot weather imposes.

It's not hard to fix - solar cells generate power cheaply, during the day when the sun is shining and pushing up the demand for air-conditioning. They generate electricty more cheaply than any other power source, so the only problem is buying the solar cells and hooking them up to the grid (which takes time and costs money)
>
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/06/02/blackout-states-summer-heat/
>
> Even Sloman's beloved OZ is not immune:
> https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/australia-power-market-halted-dramatic-move-avert-blackouts-2022-06-15/

It wasn't global warming that created that problem - a bunch the old coal-fired power generating plants so beloved by the previous National-Liberal government (who got voted out in May for this and other incompetence) all broke down at the same time. Getting the expensive gas-fired generators all fired up at the same time cost money.

The electricity generating utility companies are investing in new wind turbines and solar farms - and the grid scale batteries to fill in the gaps - because this is now the cheapest way of generating electricity, but this does take time and costs money. They do like shutting down old and unreliable coal-fired generating stations which produce expensive electricity when they are working, and buy coal from the mining interests who have the National-Liberal conservative party in their hip pocket - we don't ship all our coal to China (or at least not yet).

> The average home uses 11,000 kwh. If it added two EVs driven a total of 15,000 miles that would add another 5,200 kwh, for a total of 16,200 kwh. As there are 140 million homes in the US, that would add 730 BILLION kwh to the grid. As total demand is about 3.9 trillion kwh, this represents a 19% increase in unplanned for demand.

The US electricity generating capacity went up by 69 billion killowatt hours per year from 1950 to 2000 from about 400 billion in 1950 to about 3,800 billion in 2000

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us-generation-capacity-and-sales.php

It has levelled off since then, probably because industry has got more efficient, but adding another 730 billion kilowatt hours of capacity as the population moved to electric cars isn't going to be difficult, and the only way that this could be unplanned would be if the people running the utility generating companies were as stupid as you are.

This is one market that can really exploit solar generation - you can charge you car while it is parked during the day (and cars spend 95% of their time parked), and of course parked cars could be exploited as grid scale batteries, not that electric car owners are all that enthusiastic about that idea at the moment (though they might get happier with it if paid enough to take part).

> Given that we are at the breaking point now, and that there are no new generating facilities planned for other than undispatchable renewables, and aging plants are being shut down, we are headed for a crisis. Actually, we are ALREADY in a crisis.

The utility companies haven't invested enough in grid scale batteries so far, but electric vehicle drivers may do it for them.

Complaining about the way you run your grid - after you privatised it under Reagan, and did it inexpertly enough that ENRON ripped you off- is just evidence of your terminal incompetence. If you looked a the way other countries do it, you might be able to find a scheme worth copying. American exceptionalism does offer an excuse for not doing that, but that's just one more aspect of your terminal incompetence.

> Note: instantaneous charging capacity is a red herring, and the province of fools.

Instant charging is handy on long trips. It does depend on the charging station having an even bigger battery than your car, so it s going to be an expensive convenience, but there's nothing foolish about spending extra money to solve the occasional short term problem.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Ricky]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 12:32:43 PM UTC-4, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 12:01:06 PM UTC-4, Ricky wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 11:48:32 AM UTC-4, Ralph Mowery wrote:
> > > In article <a7c42310-3b41-45f9...@googlegroups.com>,
> > > gnuarm.del...@gmail.com says...
> > > >
> > > > When all cars are BEVs, it will result in a 20% increase in total electrical generation from today's levels.
> > > >
> > > > More than 95% of BEV charging is done at night, during the slack time of electrical demand. This 95+% will not require any additional generation or transmission capability. The remaining <5% of 20% or <1% of charging will be at peak time. So the existing grid will need to grow by 1% to accommodate charging that will happen at
> > > peak time.
> > > >
> > > > I think we can manage that.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > While the cars are recharged at night, where are all the solar
> > > generators going to get the sun light to power them ?
> > >
> > > Does the wind blow at night like it does in the daytime ? That I do not
> > > know.
> > Lol.
> >
> > If you want to use solar power to charge your car, then charge it during the day when the duck curve is low. No one is stopping you.
> Care to explain what throttling back the nuclear generator output has to do with anything?

Perhaps you can explain the context? I don't see where anyone has mentioned the nuclear reactors, at least in this subthread.

--

Rick C.

--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ricky]

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 2:47:30 PM UTC-4, Ralph Mowery wrote:
> In article <669814fe-8865-4857...@googlegroups.com>,
> gnuarm.del...@gmail.com says...
> >
> > If you want to use solar power to charge your car, then charge it during the day when the duck curve is low. No one is stopping you.
> >
> > You *do* have a BEV, right?
> >
> >
> You just said charge at night when the demand is low, now you want to
> charge during the day when the demand is low. What is it demand low at
> night or day in your opinion ?

Perhaps you are not familiar with the fact that the electric demand curve has a peak around 6-8 pm. During the night, demand is much lower. During the day, demand is generally lower, but can be a lot lower, depending on the amount of solar generation there is. On sunny days in California (the state with the most BEVs) the demand curve drops significantly from solar generation, creating what is called a "duck" curve.

Look it up. You can probably learn a lot if you try reading about it.

> I doubt I would ever have a BEV. Not paying thousands more for a car
> over a gas one .

I think that is a wise idea for you. You probably would not be able to adapt to a change in paradigm. By the time electric cars have pushed out the ICE in 20 years, you will be long dead. Essentially, nothing you do from this point on will make any difference to anyone. No one cares what you do.

> At my age (72) I may have already bought my last car, a 2017 and 2007
> truck with only 75,000 miles on it. The wife has a 2020 car with less
> than 5000 miles on it. For me, time is too short to worry about when and
> where to plug in and wait while there are plenty of gas stations.

Just don't live too long. In 10 to 15 years, you will find the number of gas stations to decline seriously. But then you probably won't still be driving, and possibly not much else either. Yeah, your life expectancy is only 13 more years. Enjoy it while you can. If your wife is the same age, she will likely get to see the gas stations mostly closed.

--

Rick C.

--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Flyguy]

> SNIPPERMAN, Sydney

SNIPPERMAN is living in LA-LA Land. No, solar cells ARE NOT going to bridge the gap in electrical power demand growth. SNIPPERMAN has a child-like faith in renewables that doesn't match reality. Renewables aren't growing fast enough to even meet the growth in energy demand. And Europe has discovered the folly of depending upon nondispatchable energy sources. This hit Europe HARD last winter:
https://time.com/6124191/winter-europe-energy/
The Woke crowd simply can't listen to reason. Like SNIPPERMAN they think that it will all just, somehow, work out.

[Ricky]

Not sure where you get your data. The daily wind profile varies a lot depending on location.

This one shows a typical profile of lower wind during mid day.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/G-Ermolenko/publication/315613300/figure/fig7/AS:661215160320011@1534657387778/Daily-power-output-curves-unit-capacity-factor-by-3-MW-wind-turbines-at-the-height-of.png

This one shows pretty constant wind speeds over the ocean.

https://www.kyos.com/ppa-insight-on-solar-radiation-and-wind-speed-data/

Of course, all of these are at an altitude that suits windmills and is different from the surface speeds.

--

Rick C.

--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Flyguy]

I think that it is you that better worry: the number of EV charging stations is not going to keep up with the growth of EVs. And pity the poor dolt that lives in an apartment and must depend upon public charging stations that will be over-whelmed with like citizens. Same thing goes when you are on the road and are forced to wait in line for hours to charge your EV while I spend 5 min to fill up at a gas station.

[rbowman]

Throw in the ocean and you have a whole different set of conditions.

You need a physics 101 brush up too. The rotation brings the Coriolis
Effect into play, and controls the daily local heating but you're still
talking temperature gradients. When I was about 5 I thought the trees
caused wind by moving their branches but then I got a little better
grasp on reality. I also thought cows were female horses and cats were
female dogs and I got that straightened out. Sadly a lot of people
haven't gotten past gender confusion.

https://www.cactushugs.com/coachella-valley-winds-explained/

That's about San Gorgonio pass but a similar dynamic applies to Altamont
and Tehachapi. It's slightly different in desert areas with flatter
terrain because you're not getting the funnel effect.

[rbowman]

No, I'll pay half the cost. Sam is a deadbeat and doesn't work for a
living unless you call the Mafia style collection racket work.

[upsid...@downunder.com]

On Sat, 30 Jul 2022 09:32:40 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 12:01:06 PM UTC-4, Ricky wrote:

>> On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 11:48:32 AM UTC-4, Ralph Mowery wrote:
>> > In article <a7c42310-3b41-45f9...@googlegroups.com>,
>> > gnuarm.del...@gmail.com says...

>> > >
>> > > When all cars are BEVs, it will result in a 20% increase in total electrical generation from today's levels.
>> > >
>> > > More than 95% of BEV charging is done at night, during the slack time of electrical demand. This 95+% will not require any additional generation or transmission capability. The remaining <5% of 20% or <1% of charging will be at peak time. So the existing grid will need to grow by 1% to accommodate charging that will happen at
>> > peak time.
>> > >

>> > > I think we can manage that.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > While the cars are recharged at night, where are all the solar
>> > generators going to get the sun light to power them ?
>> >
>> > Does the wind blow at night like it does in the daytime ? That I do not
>> > know.

>> Lol.

>>
>> If you want to use solar power to charge your car, then charge it during the day when the duck curve is low. No one is stopping you.
>

>Care to explain what throttling back the nuclear generator output has to do with anything?

In countries with lots of nuclear capacity (like France), they have to
throttle back some nuclear reactors during the weekends due to lower
consumption. Thus, in such countries, it makes sense to concentrate EV
charging to the weekends (and also ordinary nights).

[Ricky]

They actually do little to throttle back their nukes. They have smaller daily variations in demand load and manage that through 30% other generation sources.

--

Rick C.

-+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 3:00:31 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 7:14:47 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 11:02:16 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 12:51:23 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 3:38:16 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:

> Sloman is living in LA-LA Land. No, solar cells ARE NOT going to bridge the gap in electrical power demand growth.

One has to wonder why Flyguy thinks that.

> Sloman has a child-like faith in renewables that doesn't match reality.

Flyguy has no connection with any kind of reality.

> Renewables aren't growing fast enough to even meet the growth in energy demand.

Renewables provided 826 billion kW.hrs in 2021 (in a total or 4.100 billion), up from 381 billion kW.hrs in 2008. Solar cells got a lot cheaper when China started producing cheap relatively high efficiency solar cells in tens time the volume that anybody had before

https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/2021/documenting-a-decade-of-cost-declines-for-pv-systems.html

Somebody needs to invest even more in making them in much higher volume - only about 1% of global electricity production comes from solar cells, and they are quite a bit cheaper than every other source, so there is a huge market out there.

> And Europe has discovered the folly of depending upon nondispatchable energy sources.

The folly is not investing in grid scale batteries when you start relaying on wind and solar for an appreciable part of your generation.

This hit Europe HARD last winter:
> https://time.com/6124191/winter-europe-energy/

Read what you post. It's dated 28th November, 2021 1:16 PM EST before winter had actually hit. It was simple alarmism.

> The Woke crowd simply can't listen to reason. Like Sloman they think that it will all just, somehow, work out.

As if Flyguy could produce or comprehend a reasoned argument. He quotes an alarmist forecast from last November, and thinks that that reflects what actually happened.

Nobody is saying that it isn't going to take work to move the generation system to the point where it can rely on mainly renewable sources, and they've got to be capable of supplying a a higher peak current, and storing a lot of it for a day or two, in a way the current system can't manage.

It helps that renewable electricity is quite a bit cheaper than power from any other sources - though Flyguy doesn't seem to have noticed this, even if the Australian generating industry won't invest in any other generating capacity because its too expensive - but it is going to take time.

Flyguy can't learn anything new and doesn't think than anybody else can do any better. He's clearly not "woke" and doesn't seem to have been awake for years now.

There's no claim that it "will all just somehow work out". There is a claim that if we spend quite a lot of money on the right hardware, it will actually work out, but Flyguy is much too dim to have any clue about how much money or what kind of hardware.

He also thinks that a transition to electric vehicles will overload the electricity generating system, even though he couldn't look up the predictions of how much it would load the generating system, nor notice that the extra load for the US would be about ten years worth of the annual growth from 1950 to 2000, while electric cars are gong to take more than ten years to entirely take over the car market.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Fred Bloggs]

The main power provider in Florida claims 99.98% reliability, which I take to mean availability- it's there when you want it. There are a bunch of causes totally outside the control of the power company that can make the power go down. The power provider then needs to switch distribution around to maintain system stability- avoid things like an overload that cascades into a massive blackout that takes a real long time to fix. You are right about observing the relation between more grid infrastructure and vulnerability to failures. That's just the laws of chance, and since everything is so interconnected, what is perceived as a small local failure turning into a seemingly system wide shortfall makes people think it's a capacity problem.
https://www.fpl.com/reliability/power-disturbances/flickers.html

Western U.S. and the central plains states, do have a capacity problem. They're still learning the ins and outs of reliably integrating renewables into their grids. NERC has major heartburn with the inverter technology used. It's going to take a awhile for them to get it right.

A major challenge in the U.S. is that, with the exception of a few government owned utilities like the TVA, government can't order private enterprise to build excess capacity and transmission infrastructure.

[Flyguy]

On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 1:12:38 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 3:00:31 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 7:14:47 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 11:02:16 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 12:51:23 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 3:38:16 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > Sloman is living in LA-LA Land. No, solar cells ARE NOT going to bridge the gap in electrical power demand growth.
>
> One has to wonder why Flyguy thinks that.
>
> > Sloman has a child-like faith in renewables that doesn't match reality.
>
> Flyguy has no connection with any kind of reality.

No, that would be YOU, SNIPPERMAN. The reality is that Europe has already experienced a near-total electrical grid blackout because of the dependence on renewables. Adding significantly more loads will make this inevitable.

> > Renewables aren't growing fast enough to even meet the growth in energy demand.
> Renewables provided 826 billion kW.hrs in 2021 (in a total or 4.100 billion), up from 381 billion kW.hrs in 2008. Solar cells got a lot cheaper when China started producing cheap relatively high efficiency solar cells in tens time the volume that anybody had before
>
> https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/2021/documenting-a-decade-of-cost-declines-for-pv-systems.html

Investments simply are not being made to meet future electricity demands, and this is WITHOUT the added loads that Lyin' Biden and the rest of the Woke crowd want to throw into the mix. And the shortfall is not minor - it is HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS:
https://www.ebp-us.com/en/projects/failure-act-electric-infrastructure-investment-gaps-rapidly-changing-environment-2020

>
> Somebody needs to invest even more in making them in much higher volume - only about 1% of global electricity production comes from solar cells, and they are quite a bit cheaper than every other source, so there is a huge market out there.
> > And Europe has discovered the folly of depending upon nondispatchable energy sources.
> The folly is not investing in grid scale batteries when you start relaying on wind and solar for an appreciable part of your generation.
> This hit Europe HARD last winter:
> > https://time.com/6124191/winter-europe-energy/
> Read what you post. It's dated 28th November, 2021 1:16 PM EST before winter had actually hit. It was simple alarmism.

You might try READING the article as well as looking at the date. The lack of wind has already hit the UK, TWICE!
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/29/sse-says-low-wind-dry-conditions-hit-renewable-energy-generation.html
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/27/uk-summer-wind-drought-puts-green-revolution-into-reverse

>
> > The Woke crowd simply can't listen to reason. Like Sloman they think that it will all just, somehow, work out.
>
> As if Flyguy could produce or comprehend a reasoned argument. He quotes an alarmist forecast from last November, and thinks that that reflects what actually happened.

Well, SNIPPERMAN, I am STILL waiting for you to make one. You have exactly the same plan for expanding electric generation and transmission as Lyin' Biden does - NONE AT ALL!

>
> Nobody is saying that it isn't going to take work to move the generation system to the point where it can rely on mainly renewable sources, and they've got to be capable of supplying a a higher peak current, and storing a lot of it for a day or two, in a way the current system can't manage.

As I pointed out, there is a huge shortfall in the investment required to make this happen. Plus, the Woke crowd is throwing all sorts of permitting roadblocks in the way.

>
> It helps that renewable electricity is quite a bit cheaper than power from any other sources - though Flyguy doesn't seem to have noticed this, even if the Australian generating industry won't invest in any other generating capacity because its too expensive - but it is going to take time.
>
> Flyguy can't learn anything new and doesn't think than anybody else can do any better. He's clearly not "woke" and doesn't seem to have been awake for years now.

I can "learn" that there ARE NO plans in place to make this happen. If you know of any then CITE THEM.

>
> There's no claim that it "will all just somehow work out". There is a claim that if we spend quite a lot of money on the right hardware, it will actually work out, but Flyguy is much too dim to have any clue about how much money or what kind of hardware.

Sorry, SNIPPERMAN, but I cited a reference above (unlike you) that makes this very clear.

>
> He also thinks that a transition to electric vehicles will overload the electricity generating system, even though he couldn't look up the predictions of how much it would load the generating system, nor notice that the extra load for the US would be about ten years worth of the annual growth from 1950 to 2000, while electric cars are gong to take more than ten years to entirely take over the car market.

Hey SNIPPERMAN, I already did that calculation (again, unlike you). And our system is ALREADY overloaded without ANY new loads:
"Ahead of summer 2022, federal officials have released several warnings about anticipated reliability risks and higher electricity prices compared to 2021."
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11943

"Midcontinent ISO (MISO) faces a capacity shortfall in its North and Central areas, resulting
in high risk of energy emergencies during peak summer conditions"
"Extreme drought across much of Texas can produce weather conditions that are
favorable to prolonged, wide-area heat events and extreme peak electricity
demand."
https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_SRA_2022.pdf

And the USA and Europe aren't the only ones:
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/australians-urged-save-electricity-ease-power-crunch-2022-06-16/

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 12:41:11 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 1:12:38 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 3:00:31 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 7:14:47 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 11:02:16 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 12:51:23 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 3:38:16 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > Sloman is living in LA-LA Land. No, solar cells ARE NOT going to bridge the gap in electrical power demand growth.
> >
> > One has to wonder why Flyguy thinks that.
> >
> > > Sloman has a child-like faith in renewables that doesn't match reality.
> >
> > Flyguy has no connection with any kind of reality.

> No, that would be you Sloman.

Gnatguy does love his delusions.

> The reality is that Europe has already experienced a near-total electrical grid blackout because of the dependence on renewables.

You posted an alarmist link claiming that it might. When I was there in the UK and the Netherlands - in May and June this year, nobody was complaining that it had.
You are just as full of shit as ever.

> Adding significantly more loads will make this inevitable.

Rubbish.

> > > Renewables aren't growing fast enough to even meet the growth in energy demand.

You've got to spend money to install the capacity you are going to need. Renewable energy supply doesn't grow at any kind of arbitrary rate that's easy to predict - it grows because people invest in installing more solar farms and wind turbines. More money means more power, and you aren't stuck with installing it in huge chunks - you can build up the capacity in lots of little increments, which is exactly what is happening.

> > Renewables provided 826 billion kW.hrs in 2021 (in a total or 4.100 billion), up from 381 billion kW.hrs in 2008. Solar cells got a lot cheaper when China started producing cheap relatively high efficiency solar cells in tens time the volume that anybody had before
> >
> > https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/2021/documenting-a-decade-of-cost-declines-for-pv-systems.html
>
> Investments simply are not being made to meet future electricity demands, and this is WITHOUT the added loads that Lyin' Biden and the rest of the Woke crowd want to throw into the mix. And the shortfall is not minor - it is HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS:
> https://www.ebp-us.com/en/projects/failure-act-electric-infrastructure-investment-gaps-rapidly-changing-environment-2020

They aren't being made as fast as the people who sell the infra-structure would like - they'd like the government to give them even more money to spend, and they aren't likely to say that their industry is making more money than they'd like.

> > Somebody needs to invest even more in making them in much higher volume - only about 1% of global electricity production comes from solar cells, and they are quite a bit cheaper than every other source, so there is a huge market out there.
> >
> > > And Europe has discovered the folly of depending upon nondispatchable energy sources.
> > The folly is not investing in grid scale batteries when you start relaying on wind and solar for an appreciable part of your generation.
> > This hit Europe HARD last winter:
> > > https://time.com/6124191/winter-europe-energy/
> > Read what you post. It's dated 28th November, 2021 1:16 PM EST before winter had actually hit. It was simple alarmism.
>
> You might try READING the article as well as looking at the date. The lack of wind has already hit the UK, TWICE!
> https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/29/sse-says-low-wind-dry-conditions-hit-renewable-energy-generation.html
> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/27/uk-summer-wind-drought-puts-green-revolution-into-reverse

It happens, but not very often. It's not an an excuse to give up on renewable energy, which is remarkably cheap when the wind is blowing ant the sun is shining.

> > > The Woke crowd simply can't listen to reason. Like Sloman they think that it will all just, somehow, work out.
> >
> > As if Flyguy could produce or comprehend a reasoned argument. He quotes an alarmist forecast from last November, and thinks that that reflects what actually happened.
>

> Well, Sloman, I am STILL waiting for you to make one.

Which is to say you imagine that you could process it or even recognise it as reasonable if you ran into it.

> You have exactly the same plan for expanding electric generation and transmission as Lyin' Biden does - NONE AT ALL!

Since your capacity to understand any such plan is absolutely zero, it's no surprise that you can't recognise the plans that do exist.

> > Nobody is saying that it isn't going to take work to move the generation system to the point where it can rely on mainly renewable sources, and they've got to be capable of supplying a a higher peak current, and storing a lot of it for a day or two, in a way the current system can't manage.
>
> As I pointed out, there is a huge shortfall in the investment required to make this happen. Plus, the Woke crowd is throwing all sorts of permitting roadblocks in the way.

You didn't. You posted a link to a report from an industry group that makes money out of this kind of investment and would like to see even more of it.

> > It helps that renewable electricity is quite a bit cheaper than power from any other sources - though Flyguy doesn't seem to have noticed this, even if the Australian generating industry won't invest in any other generating capacity because its too expensive - but it is going to take time.
> >
> > Flyguy can't learn anything new and doesn't think than anybody else can do any better. He's clearly not "woke" and doesn't seem to have been awake for years now.
>
> I can "learn" that there ARE NO plans in place to make this happen. If you know of any then CITE THEM.

Why bother? You wouldn't be able to make sense of them if I did.

> > There's no claim that it "will all just somehow work out". There is a claim that if we spend quite a lot of money on the right hardware, it will actually work out, but Flyguy is much too dim to have any clue about how much money or what kind of hardware.
>

> Sorry, Sloman, but I cited a reference above (unlike you) that makes this very clear.

Gnatguy can always read any document as supporting his preferred point of view. He can't understand what they actually say, but he can always misunderstand them in a way that he finds comforting.

> > He also thinks that a transition to electric vehicles will overload the electricity generating system, even though he couldn't look up the predictions of how much it would load the generating system, nor notice that the extra load for the US would be about ten years worth of the annual growth from 1950 to 2000, while electric cars are gong to take more than ten years to entirely take over the car market.
>

> Hey Sloman, I already did that calculation (again, unlike you).

So why were you asking us to do it for you?

> And our system is ALREADY overloaded without ANY new loads:
> "Ahead of summer 2022, federal officials have released several warnings about anticipated reliability risks and higher electricity prices compared to 2021."
> https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11943
>
> "Midcontinent ISO (MISO) faces a capacity shortfall in its North and Central areas, resulting
> in high risk of energy emergencies during peak summer conditions"
> "Extreme drought across much of Texas can produce weather conditions that are
> favorable to prolonged, wide-area heat events and extreme peak electricity
> demand."
> https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_SRA_2022.pdf

And nobody wants to spend extra money on installing a bit more generating capacity than they won't be able to keep on exploiting 100% of the time.

> And the USA and Europe aren't the only ones:
> https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/australians-urged-save-electricity-ease-power-crunch-2022-06-16/

That was aging and unreliable coal-fired generating plants all being unreliable at once. Nothing to do with renewables - though if the previous Australian administration had subsdised renewable generation with the same enthusiasm as they'd insisted that the ageing coal-fired plants weren't retired there might have been enough extra generating capacity spread around the country to carry the load.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Flyguy]

CONGRATULATIONS! You finally ADMIT that energy crises ARE happening!! And they will happen more frequently as we continue to put loads onto the electrical grid at a faster rate than we are adding generation and transmission capacity.

> > > > The Woke crowd simply can't listen to reason. Like Sloman they think that it will all just, somehow, work out.
> > >
> > > As if Flyguy could produce or comprehend a reasoned argument. He quotes an alarmist forecast from last November, and thinks that that reflects what actually happened.
> >
> > Well, Sloman, I am STILL waiting for you to make one.
>
> Which is to say you imagine that you could process it or even recognise it as reasonable if you ran into it.

Lame excuse for not presenting one. The truth is that you DON'T have a plan.

> > You have exactly the same plan for expanding electric generation and transmission as Lyin' Biden does - NONE AT ALL!
> Since your capacity to understand any such plan is absolutely zero, it's no surprise that you can't recognise the plans that do exist.

So WHY don't you present one? You can't is the answer.

> > > Nobody is saying that it isn't going to take work to move the generation system to the point where it can rely on mainly renewable sources, and they've got to be capable of supplying a a higher peak current, and storing a lot of it for a day or two, in a way the current system can't manage.
> >
> > As I pointed out, there is a huge shortfall in the investment required to make this happen. Plus, the Woke crowd is throwing all sorts of permitting roadblocks in the way.
> You didn't. You posted a link to a report from an industry group that makes money out of this kind of investment and would like to see even more of it.

False equivalency. By this logic, ANY professional group's opinion will be rejected by you.

> > > It helps that renewable electricity is quite a bit cheaper than power from any other sources - though Flyguy doesn't seem to have noticed this, even if the Australian generating industry won't invest in any other generating capacity because its too expensive - but it is going to take time.
> > >
> > > Flyguy can't learn anything new and doesn't think than anybody else can do any better. He's clearly not "woke" and doesn't seem to have been awake for years now.
> >
> > I can "learn" that there ARE NO plans in place to make this happen. If you know of any then CITE THEM.
> Why bother? You wouldn't be able to make sense of them if I did.
> > > There's no claim that it "will all just somehow work out". There is a claim that if we spend quite a lot of money on the right hardware, it will actually work out, but Flyguy is much too dim to have any clue about how much money or what kind of hardware.
> >
> > Sorry, Sloman, but I cited a reference above (unlike you) that makes this very clear.
>
> Gnatguy can always read any document as supporting his preferred point of view. He can't understand what they actually say, but he can always misunderstand them in a way that he finds comforting.

More of SNIPPERMAN's demented ramblings that make no sense whatsoever.

> > > He also thinks that a transition to electric vehicles will overload the electricity generating system, even though he couldn't look up the predictions of how much it would load the generating system, nor notice that the extra load for the US would be about ten years worth of the annual growth from 1950 to 2000, while electric cars are gong to take more than ten years to entirely take over the car market.
> >
> > Hey Sloman, I already did that calculation (again, unlike you).
>
> So why were you asking us to do it for you?

To get you to commit to an actual calculation, which you DID NOT DO! If you did do it, you would see the extent of the problem facing us. And you can't hardly deny your OWN NUMBERS, and you don't find ANY fault with mine!!

> > And our system is ALREADY overloaded without ANY new loads:
> > "Ahead of summer 2022, federal officials have released several warnings about anticipated reliability risks and higher electricity prices compared to 2021."
> > https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11943
> >
> > "Midcontinent ISO (MISO) faces a capacity shortfall in its North and Central areas, resulting
> > in high risk of energy emergencies during peak summer conditions"
> > "Extreme drought across much of Texas can produce weather conditions that are
> > favorable to prolonged, wide-area heat events and extreme peak electricity
> > demand."
> > https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_SRA_2022.pdf
> And nobody wants to spend extra money on installing a bit more generating capacity than they won't be able to keep on exploiting 100% of the time.

Which is what you HAVE to do with renewables due to their unreliability. People WILL NOT tolerate an unreliable power supply, even YOU!

> > And the USA and Europe aren't the only ones:
> > https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/australians-urged-save-electricity-ease-power-crunch-2022-06-16/
> That was aging and unreliable coal-fired generating plants all being unreliable at once. Nothing to do with renewables - though if the previous Australian administration had subsdised renewable generation with the same enthusiasm as they'd insisted that the ageing coal-fired plants weren't retired there might have been enough extra generating capacity spread around the country to carry the load.

Hey SNIPPERMAN, it is ALL OF THE ABOVE! The Woke crowd wants to replace these aging plants with an even MORE unreliable source: renewables. And there IS NO PLAN to do even that.

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Anthony William Sloman]

It wasn't any kind of "energy crisis". It was just a brief and predictable occasional local shortfall in supply. Europe has transnational high-voltage links to shoip power from areas that still have power to areas that have that kind short term problem. It takes an idiot like you to promote it in a "crisis".

> And they will happen more frequently as we continue to put loads onto the electrical grid at a faster rate than we are adding generation and transmission capacity.

Happily, the people who plan the expansion of the grid pay attention to the way the market can be expected to expand. Clowns like you may apply for that kind of job, but they don't get hired to do it. The US grid supplied some 800 billion kilowatt hours in 950 and was supplying some 4,000 billion in 2000, when industry started getting more efficient, so the market stopped expanding - at least for a while. The switch from gasoline-power top electric cars will call for another 1200 billion kilowatt hours of capacity over the next decade or so, and there will be entrepreneurs out there investing in being able to supply it (probably from solar farms).

And there will be clowns like you telling us that it couldn't possible happen, while your pension fund will be investing in making it happenm

> > > > > The Woke crowd simply can't listen to reason. Like Sloman they think that it will all just, somehow, work out.
> > > >
> > > > As if Flyguy could produce or comprehend a reasoned argument. He quotes an alarmist forecast from last November, and thinks that that reflects what actually happened.
> > >
> > > Well, Sloman, I am STILL waiting for you to make one.
> >
> > Which is to say you imagine that you could process it or even recognise it as reasonable if you ran into it.
>
> Lame excuse for not presenting one. The truth is that you DON'T have a plan.

Of course I don't. I invest in companies that do - they do exist. Your pension fund will too, even if you haven't got a clue about it.

> > > You have exactly the same plan for expanding electric generation and transmission as Lyin' Biden does - NONE AT ALL!
> >
> > Since your capacity to understand any such plan is absolutely zero, it's no surprise that you can't recognise the plans that do exist.
>
> So WHY don't you present one? You can't is the answer.

If I had billions to invest, I would. As it is, I invest in companies that do. You want to a prospectus? Search the web yourself.

> > > > Nobody is saying that it isn't going to take work to move the generation system to the point where it can rely on mainly renewable sources, and they've got to be capable of supplying a a higher peak current, and storing a lot of it for a day or two, in a way the current system can't manage.
> > >
> > > As I pointed out, there is a huge shortfall in the investment required to make this happen. Plus, the Woke crowd is throwing all sorts of permitting roadblocks in the way.
> >
> > You didn't. You posted a link to a report from an industry group that makes money out of this kind of investment and would like to see even more of it.
>
> False equivalency. By this logic, ANY professional group's opinion will be rejected by you.

They weren't actually talking a bout any "huge shortfall" - they'd just like to see more inverstment. As usual you were misrepresenting what they said to fit with you bizarre delusions.

> > > > It helps that renewable electricity is quite a bit cheaper than power from any other sources - though Flyguy doesn't seem to have noticed this, even if the Australian generating industry won't invest in any other generating capacity because its too expensive - but it is going to take time.
> > > >
> > > > Flyguy can't learn anything new and doesn't think than anybody else can do any better. He's clearly not "woke" and doesn't seem to have been awake for years now.
> > >
> > > I can "learn" that there ARE NO plans in place to make this happen. If you know of any then CITE THEM.

Of course you can "learn" this. You can't understand the plans that do exist, and it would be a complete waste of time to provide links to site that you couldn't comprehend, and would write off for some bogus reason or other.

> > Why bother? You wouldn't be able to make sense of them if I did.
> >
> > > > There's no claim that it "will all just somehow work out". There is a claim that if we spend quite a lot of money on the right hardware, it will actually work out, but Flyguy is much too dim to have any clue about how much money or what kind of hardware.
> > >
> > > Sorry, Sloman, but I cited a reference above (unlike you) that makes this very clear.
> >
> > Gnatguy can always read any document as supporting his preferred point of view. He can't understand what they actually say, but he can always misunderstand them in a way that he finds comforting.
> >

> More of Sloman's demented ramblings that make no sense whatsoever.

None so blind as those that do not wish to see. Not that Gnatguy can comprehend much at the best of times.

> > > > He also thinks that a transition to electric vehicles will overload the electricity generating system, even though he couldn't look up the predictions of how much it would load the generating system, nor notice that the extra load for the US would be about ten years worth of the annual growth from 1950 to 2000, while electric cars are gong to take more than ten years to entirely take over the car market.
> > >
> > > Hey Sloman, I already did that calculation (again, unlike you).
> >
> > So why were you asking us to do it for you?
>
> To get you to commit to an actual calculation, which you DID NOT DO! If you did do it, you would see the extent of the problem facing us. And you can't hardly deny your OWN NUMBERS, and you don't find ANY fault with mine!!

Since the result of that calculation has been posted here years ago, and are widely available on the web, what you were actually doing was just reminding us that you are the same pig-ignorant idiot that you have always been.

> > > And our system is ALREADY overloaded without ANY new loads:
> > > "Ahead of summer 2022, federal officials have released several warnings about anticipated reliability risks and higher electricity prices compared to 2021."
> > > https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11943
> > >
> > > "Midcontinent ISO (MISO) faces a capacity shortfall in its North and Central areas, resulting
> > > in high risk of energy emergencies during peak summer conditions"
> > > "Extreme drought across much of Texas can produce weather conditions that are
> > > favorable to prolonged, wide-area heat events and extreme peak electricity
> > > demand."
> > > https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_SRA_2022.pdf
> >
> > And nobody wants to spend extra money on installing a bit more generating capacity than they won't be able to keep on exploiting 100% of the time.
>
> Which is what you HAVE to do with renewables due to their unreliability. People WILL NOT tolerate an unreliable power supply, even YOU!

Solar power is quite a lot cheaper than the power generation schemes that you are used to. It's perfectly reliable - the sun keeps on coming up every day - but you do have to have grid scale batteries, pumped storage and long distance links to let you average out from day to night and between cloudy days here and there.

Turning a less than perfectly reliable generation system into a reliable grid supply is something that we have been doing for more than a century now. It takes more engineering to cope day-to-night fluctuations than it did to cope with coal-fired generators that broke down, but it's just engineering, not miracle working.

> > > And the USA and Europe aren't the only ones:
> > > https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/australians-urged-save-electricity-ease-power-crunch-2022-06-16/
> >
> > That was aging and unreliable coal-fired generating plants all being unreliable at once. Nothing to do with renewables - though if the previous Australian administration had subsdised renewable generation with the same enthusiasm as they'd insisted that the ageing coal-fired plants weren't retired there might have been enough extra generating capacity spread around the country to carry the load.
>

> Hey Sloman, it is ALL OF THE ABOVE! The Woke crowd wants to replace these aging plants with an even MORE unreliable source: renewables.

They aren't unreliable in the same way, and they resume generating a lot more reliably and predictably than wonky old coal-fired plants

> And there IS NO PLAN to do even that.

https://www.snowyhydro.com.au/snowy-20/about/

The various Australian electricity generating companies are all investing in more wind turbine farms and solar farms. Presumably there's some kind of plan involved, but it would be commercial in confidence, and you wouldn't be able to understand it if I could find a link to one of them.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[whit3rd]

Huh? Our ancestors were hunter-gatherers, omnivores, who relied on... dozens of unreliable food
sources. A statistical near-certainty of sufficency is all we humans will ever get, so learn to
live with it. Everyone does.

[Flyguy]

Our government is ALREADY warning of wide-spread blackouts because of this issue, but dullards such as yourself are ignoring them - until YOU are impacted.

>
> And there will be clowns like you telling us that it couldn't possible happen, while your pension fund will be investing in making it happenm
> > > > > > The Woke crowd simply can't listen to reason. Like Sloman they think that it will all just, somehow, work out.
> > > > >
> > > > > As if Flyguy could produce or comprehend a reasoned argument. He quotes an alarmist forecast from last November, and thinks that that reflects what actually happened.
> > > >
> > > > Well, Sloman, I am STILL waiting for you to make one.
> > >
> > > Which is to say you imagine that you could process it or even recognise it as reasonable if you ran into it.
> >
> > Lame excuse for not presenting one. The truth is that you DON'T have a plan.
> Of course I don't. I invest in companies that do - they do exist. Your pension fund will too, even if you haven't got a clue about it.
> > > > You have exactly the same plan for expanding electric generation and transmission as Lyin' Biden does - NONE AT ALL!
> > >
> > > Since your capacity to understand any such plan is absolutely zero, it's no surprise that you can't recognise the plans that do exist.
> >
> > So WHY don't you present one? You can't is the answer.
> If I had billions to invest, I would. As it is, I invest in companies that do. You want to a prospectus? Search the web yourself.
> > > > > Nobody is saying that it isn't going to take work to move the generation system to the point where it can rely on mainly renewable sources, and they've got to be capable of supplying a a higher peak current, and storing a lot of it for a day or two, in a way the current system can't manage.
> > > >
> > > > As I pointed out, there is a huge shortfall in the investment required to make this happen. Plus, the Woke crowd is throwing all sorts of permitting roadblocks in the way.
> > >
> > > You didn't. You posted a link to a report from an industry group that makes money out of this kind of investment and would like to see even more of it.
> >
> > False equivalency. By this logic, ANY professional group's opinion will be rejected by you.
> They weren't actually talking a bout any "huge shortfall" - they'd just like to see more inverstment. As usual you were misrepresenting what they said to fit with you bizarre delusions.
> > > > > It helps that renewable electricity is quite a bit cheaper than power from any other sources - though Flyguy doesn't seem to have noticed this, even if the Australian generating industry won't invest in any other generating capacity because its too expensive - but it is going to take time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Flyguy can't learn anything new and doesn't think than anybody else can do any better. He's clearly not "woke" and doesn't seem to have been awake for years now.
> > > >
> > > > I can "learn" that there ARE NO plans in place to make this happen. If you know of any then CITE THEM.
> Of course you can "learn" this. You can't understand the plans that do exist, and it would be a complete waste of time to provide links to site that you couldn't comprehend, and would write off for some bogus reason or other.

No, you don't provide them because you DON'T HAVE THEM!

> > > Why bother? You wouldn't be able to make sense of them if I did.
> > >
> > > > > There's no claim that it "will all just somehow work out". There is a claim that if we spend quite a lot of money on the right hardware, it will actually work out, but Flyguy is much too dim to have any clue about how much money or what kind of hardware.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, Sloman, but I cited a reference above (unlike you) that makes this very clear.
> > >
> > > Gnatguy can always read any document as supporting his preferred point of view. He can't understand what they actually say, but he can always misunderstand them in a way that he finds comforting.
> > >
> > More of Sloman's demented ramblings that make no sense whatsoever.
>
> None so blind as those that do not wish to see. Not that Gnatguy can comprehend much at the best of times.

Yet more demented ramblings filled with invective and name calling by SNIPPERMAN. So sad...

> > > > > He also thinks that a transition to electric vehicles will overload the electricity generating system, even though he couldn't look up the predictions of how much it would load the generating system, nor notice that the extra load for the US would be about ten years worth of the annual growth from 1950 to 2000, while electric cars are gong to take more than ten years to entirely take over the car market.
> > > >
> > > > Hey Sloman, I already did that calculation (again, unlike you).
> > >
> > > So why were you asking us to do it for you?
> >
> > To get you to commit to an actual calculation, which you DID NOT DO! If you did do it, you would see the extent of the problem facing us. And you can't hardly deny your OWN NUMBERS, and you don't find ANY fault with mine!!
> Since the result of that calculation has been posted here years ago, and are widely available on the web, what you were actually doing was just reminding us that you are the same pig-ignorant idiot that you have always been.
> > > > And our system is ALREADY overloaded without ANY new loads:
> > > > "Ahead of summer 2022, federal officials have released several warnings about anticipated reliability risks and higher electricity prices compared to 2021."
> > > > https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11943
> > > >
> > > > "Midcontinent ISO (MISO) faces a capacity shortfall in its North and Central areas, resulting
> > > > in high risk of energy emergencies during peak summer conditions"
> > > > "Extreme drought across much of Texas can produce weather conditions that are
> > > > favorable to prolonged, wide-area heat events and extreme peak electricity
> > > > demand."
> > > > https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_SRA_2022.pdf
> > >
> > > And nobody wants to spend extra money on installing a bit more generating capacity than they won't be able to keep on exploiting 100% of the time.
> >
> > Which is what you HAVE to do with renewables due to their unreliability. People WILL NOT tolerate an unreliable power supply, even YOU!
> Solar power is quite a lot cheaper than the power generation schemes that you are used to. It's perfectly reliable - the sun keeps on coming up every day - but you do have to have grid scale batteries, pumped storage and long distance links to let you average out from day to night and between cloudy days here and there.

LOL! So do the CLOUDS!!

>
> Turning a less than perfectly reliable generation system into a reliable grid supply is something that we have been doing for more than a century now. It takes more engineering to cope day-to-night fluctuations than it did to cope with coal-fired generators that broke down, but it's just engineering, not miracle working.
> > > > And the USA and Europe aren't the only ones:
> > > > https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/australians-urged-save-electricity-ease-power-crunch-2022-06-16/
> > >
> > > That was aging and unreliable coal-fired generating plants all being unreliable at once. Nothing to do with renewables - though if the previous Australian administration had subsdised renewable generation with the same enthusiasm as they'd insisted that the ageing coal-fired plants weren't retired there might have been enough extra generating capacity spread around the country to carry the load.
> >
> > Hey Sloman, it is ALL OF THE ABOVE! The Woke crowd wants to replace these aging plants with an even MORE unreliable source: renewables.
>
> They aren't unreliable in the same way, and they resume generating a lot more reliably and predictably than wonky old coal-fired plants
> > And there IS NO PLAN to do even that.
> https://www.snowyhydro.com.au/snowy-20/about/

Pumped storage has been around for decades, SNIPPERMAN, and is in use today in the US. But it is a very limited solution because of the huge landmass required to implement it. This project will work because it doesn't involve flooding any new land.

>
> The various Australian electricity generating companies are all investing in more wind turbine farms and solar farms. Presumably there's some kind of plan involved, but it would be commercial in confidence, and you wouldn't be able to understand it if I could find a link to one of them.

As they are here, but there is a big problem (https://www.wsj.com/articles/electricity-shortage-warnings-grow-across-u-s-11652002380):

"The risk of outages resulting from supply constraints comes amid other challenges straining the reliability of the grid. Large, sustained outages have occurred with greater frequency over the past two decades, in part because the grid has become more vulnerable to failure with age and an uptick in severe weather events exacerbated by climate change. A push to electrify home heating and cooking, and the expected growth of electric vehicles, may increase power demand in coming years, putting further pressure on the system."

This is the crux of the problem I was referring to at the outset of this thread. Europe almost had a catastrophic blackout on Jan 8, 2021 (https://stopthesethings.com/2021/02/02/european-emergency-chaotic-wind-solar-collapses-threaten-entire-europe-wide-blackout/):

"On 8 January 2021, the European electricity grid only just missed a large-scale collapse. Around 13:04 p.m. there was a sharp drop in frequency that could have paralysed Europe.

The cause was apparently a power failure in Romania. According to the Austrian blackout expert Herbert Saurugg, it was the second most serious major incident in the European network to date. According to the ENTSO-E classification, the third of four warning levels was achieved (Emergency – Deteriorated situation, including a network split at a large scale. Higher risk for neighboring systems. Security principles are not fulfilled. Global security is endangered)."

Businesses and many homeowners are WELL AWARE of this situation and are pro-actively installing backup power generation at considerable expense (https://www.wsj.com/articles/amid-power-outages-americans-buying-generators-solar-plus-battery-microgrids-11645207261?mod=article_inline):

"As the American electric grid becomes less dependable, a growing number of businesses and homeowners are buying their own power systems to protect themselves from being left in the dark.

Twenty years ago, only 0.57% of U.S. homes worth $150,000 or more had installed backup generators, mainly along hurricane-prone coastlines, according to backup-power provider Generac Holdings Inc. GNRC -5.52%▼ Now the number is 5.75%, a 10-fold increase.

Many entrepreneurs now consider secondary power systems to be a necessary cost of doing business. Steve Peterson, who owns Hungry Howie’s Pizza franchises in Michigan, learned their value in 2003, when a massive blackout knocked out power to much of the Midwest and Northeast. Mr. Peterson had invested in backup generation—and said he had lines of people who wanted a hot meal stretching 200 to 300 feet out the door."

This, however, is an option only for the wealthiest. Generac has opened sales offices in California, a state where they had no operation before because of how power reliability there has deteriorated (https://www.ocregister.com/2019/11/26/rich-californians-shelling-out-30000-to-ease-blackout-pain/):

"The trend isn’t unique to California. With climate change colliding with an aging grid, residents of areas from snowy New England to the hurricane-threatened South face more disruptions to power. But with costs for whole-house generators or solar and battery packages running tens of thousands of dollars, the demand for backup systems underscores a stark reality: Wealthy people will be able to endure outages while the poor are left in the dark."

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 3:55:30 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 7:23:17 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 2, 2022 at 4:28:48 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 10:02:02 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 12:41:11 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 1:12:38 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 3:00:31 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 7:14:47 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 11:02:16 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 12:51:23 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 3:38:16 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:

<snip>

> > > Which is what you HAVE to do with renewables due to their unreliability. People WILL NOT tolerate an unreliable power supply, even YOU!
> >
> > Solar power is quite a lot cheaper than the power generation schemes that you are used to. It's perfectly reliable - the sun keeps on coming up every day - but you do have to have grid scale batteries, pumped storage and long distance links to let you average out from day to night and between cloudy days here and there.
>
> LOL! So do the CLOUDS!!

I wonder what Gnatguy thought that he meant by that.

<snip>

> > The various Australian electricity generating companies are all investing in more wind turbine farms and solar farms. Presumably there's some kind of plan involved, but it would be commercial in confidence, and you wouldn't be able to understand it if I could find a link to one of them.
>
> As they are here, but there is a big problem (https://www.wsj.com/articles/electricity-shortage-warnings-grow-across-u-s-11652002380):
>
> "The risk of outages resulting from supply constraints comes amid other challenges straining the reliability of the grid. Large, sustained outages have occurred with greater frequency over the past two decades, in part because the grid has become more vulnerable to failure with age and an uptick in severe weather events exacerbated by climate change. A push to electrify home heating and cooking, and the expected growth of electric vehicles, may increase power demand in coming years, putting further pressure on the system."
>
> This is the crux of the problem I was referring to at the outset of this thread. Europe almost had a catastrophic blackout on Jan 8, 2021 (https://stopthesethings.com/2021/02/02/european-emergency-chaotic-wind-solar-collapses-threaten-entire-europe-wide-blackout/):

But didn't.

The people who sell the power into the retail market want to put pressure on the people who supply the power to invest in excess generating capacity. The people who sell the power don't have to find the capital to pay the excess capacity, or the money to keep it maintained when it isn't generating power that anybody can sell. Spare generating capacity is great when you need it, and expensive when you don't, which is most of the time.

You see a particular sort of propaganda and take it seriously, because you are too dim to understand what's going on.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Flyguy]

I will give SNIPPERMAN one last chance to put up or shut about Lyin' Biden's federal plan to modernize the electrical grid and create more generation capacity before I explain the simple reason he can't. Hint: he hasn't produced it because it DOESN'T EXIST!

[Anthony William Sloman]

> I will give Sloman one last chance to put up or shut about Joe Biden's federal plan to modernize the electrical grid and create more generation capacity

Were we talking about that?

> before I explain the simple reason he can't. Hint: he hasn't produced it because it DOESN'T EXIST!

Why should it? The US government got out of electricity generation a long time ago, and tried to privatise a natural monopoly. The ENRON scandal should remind people that it isn't a great idea, but Gnatguy doesn't know enough to have noticed.

https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize

seems perfectly sensible - more high-voltage transmission lines between place where power is easy to generate (like Death Valley) and places where people like to live and use electricity makes every kind of sense. There doesn't seem to be any mention of creating any more power generation capacity - presumably the idea is that if you provide a means to ship the power from where it is easy to generate to where it is easy to sell, private enterprise can be relied on to exploit the opportunity to make money out of it. Of course you have to be able to do joined up logic to see that, and Gnatguy isn't up to that.

--
Bill Slom,an, Sydney

[Flyguy]

HELLO! That is EXACTLY what we ARE talking about, Dick Tracy.

> > before I explain the simple reason he can't. Hint: he hasn't produced it because it DOESN'T EXIST!
> Why should it? The US government got out of electricity generation a long time ago, and tried to privatise a natural monopoly. The ENRON scandal should remind people that it isn't a great idea, but Gnatguy doesn't know enough to have noticed.
>
> https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize

The US government was NEVER in the electricity generation business, Dick Tracy. WHY? Because they have NO AUTHORITY in this area, which MUST be granted by Congress. The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is powerless in mandating any changes to the electrical grid. Electrical power generation responsibility is a mish-mash of local, state, and seven regional operators. Unfortunately, these operators are under-estimating the likelihood of extreme weather events, which guides their investments in new generation capacity and transmission lines.

>
> seems perfectly sensible - more high-voltage transmission lines between place where power is easy to generate (like Death Valley) and places where people like to live and use electricity makes every kind of sense. There doesn't seem to be any mention of creating any more power generation capacity - presumably the idea is that if you provide a means to ship the power from where it is easy to generate to where it is easy to sell, private enterprise can be relied on to exploit the opportunity to make money out of it. Of course you have to be able to do joined up logic to see that, and Gnatguy isn't up to that.

More transmission lines require a major INVESTMENT, SNIPPERMAN, and this IS NOT happening. Furthermore, it requires regulatory approval and permitting, and will no doubt face major court challenges by the Greenies, which will, at the very minimum, delay such large projects, if not stop them altogether. You somehow think that this will just happen w/o spending

All of this is well explained here:
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-renewables-electric-grid/
which does say that "the administration said in an April news release that it plans to offer $2.5 billion in grants for grid-modernization projects as part of Biden’s $1 trillion infrastructure package." This amount, however, is FAR BELOW what is necessary to accomplish this task, perhaps as much as a THOUSAND TIMES. These costs are further detailed here:
https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/the-cost-of-upgrading-electricity-transmission/
Here is a quote from that report:
"The construction of new transmission facilities would cost an estimated $314 to $504 billion in capital costs on top of the estimated $1.8 to $2.1 trillion in new generation costs necessary to attain the 2035 goal, leading to higher bills for consumers."
Simple arithmetic sets the total cost at $2.1 to $2.6 TRILLION!

The bottom line is that the electrical grid is completely unprepared for current requirements, let alone the future electrification of America promised by Lyin' Biden. And YOU are as unprepared as Lyin' Biden, if not more so.

[Anthony William Sloman]

Tennesse Valley Authority

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_Valley_Authority

Gnatguy really is ignorant, and too dumb to realise how ignorant he is.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Flyguy]

From your reference:

"TVA receives no taxpayer funding and operates similarly to a private for-profit company."

So, NO, the US government ISN'T in the electricity generation "business."

[Anthony William Sloman]

> From your reference:
>
> "TVA receives no taxpayer funding and operates similarly to a private for-profit company."

It doesn't now. "Never" is a claim that it never did.

> So, NO, the US government ISN'T in the electricity generation "business."

It isn't now. My claim was "The US government got out of electricity generation a long time ago, and tried to privatise a natural monopoly."

The UK started off with privately owned power generation, found - back in Victorian times - that it didn't work, and moved to municipal utilities before eventually moving on to a National Grid. Thatcher got around to privatising that in 1990. It was a mistake, but Gnatguy won't be able to work out why.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Grid_(Great_Britain)

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Flyguy]

Hey SNIPPERMAN, none of this matters because the US government has NO AUTHORITY in the area of electricity generation or transmission, and Lyin' Biden's token scraps thrown at the industry will have NO IMPACT on the system availability or reliability. Yet he proposes throwing whole new classes of loads onto an already OVERLOADED system.

[whit3rd]

On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 9:59:49 PM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
> On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 8:32:30 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

> > ... My claim was "The US government got out of electricity generation a long time ago, and tried to privatise a natural monopoly."

> >
> > The UK started off with privately owned power generation, found - back in Victorian times - that it didn't work, and moved to municipal utilities before eventually moving on to a National Grid. Thatcher got around to privatising that in 1990. It was a mistake, but Gnatguy won't be able to work out why.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Grid_(Great_Britain)
> >
> > --
> > Bill Sloman, Sydney

> Hey SNIPPERMAN, none of this matters because the US government has NO AUTHORITY in the area of electricity generation or transmission...

False, of course; interstate commerce is completely in US authority, as is some large amount
of land use in the various national lands (not just parks, lots of land is under federal jurisdiction).
Federal government operates a number of energy facilities.

[Flyguy]

No, you're false. Show me statutes which grant the Feds authority in electricity generation and production. They have no more authority in this area than they do to produce cars and trucks. They can REGULATE it, but can't PARTICIPATE in it.

[whit3rd]

Don't be silly; anyone with a generator flashlight has the authority to generate electricity;
federal branches like bureau of mines do so (I've worked at facilities that got power from
those sources, as part of a federal grant...). What they don't participate in, is power
MARKETING, as a competitor to profit-making businesses.

Rights-of-way for interstate power lines often involve federal, not just state or local, legal protection.

[rbowman]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonneville_Power_Administration
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonneville_Dam
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Coulee_Dam
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dalles_Dam
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Day_Dam
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McNary_Dam

There are 8 other dams on the Snake operated by either the Corp of
Engineers or the Bureau of Reclamation.

[Anthony William Sloman]

> Hey Sloman, none of this matters because the US government has NO AUTHORITY in the area of electricity generation or transmission, and Joe Biden's token scraps thrown at the industry will have NO IMPACT on the system availability or reliability. Yet he proposes throwing whole new classes of loads onto an already OVERLOADED system.

Make up your mind. Either Biden's proposals will have an impact, or they won't. You can't have it both ways

Either way, you don't seem to have any idea what he might be proposing, or what effect it might have. And the US government can enact legislation which can give all the authority it needs. The damage Trump has done to the Supreme Court may mean that the right-wing lunatics currently infesting the institution might beg to differ, but it may be difficult to interpret a constitution written before electricity was used in industry to justify that kind of delusion.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

rbowman <bow...@montana.com> wrote in
news:jl92kq...@mid.individual.net:

Yes. And the BPA also operates the biggest HV DC interlink in the
US. 4MV. 3100 MegaWatts. 846 miles.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_DC_Intertie>

[Flyguy]

ALL of these projects were authorized by Congress decades ago, mostly as Depression-era economic stimulus activities. Any future projects would also have to be specifically AUTHORIZED by Congress; absent this authorization (law) no Administration, including Lyin' Biden's, can fund such activities. And, YES, the Feds are PROMOTING and MARKETING existing hydro generation:
"The Bonneville Power Administration is a nonprofit federal power MARKETING administration based in the Pacific Northwest."
The odds of getting a new hydro project authorized these days is, for all practical purposes, ZERO. AFAIK, current power generation projects are privately financed after BPA got its headed handed to it for financing WPPSS.

[rbowman]

On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:
> ALL of these projects were authorized by Congress decades ago, mostly as Depression-era economic stimulus activities. Any future projects would also have to be specifically AUTHORIZED by Congress; absent this authorization (law) no Administration, including Lyin' Biden's, can fund such activities. And, YES, the Feds are PROMOTING and MARKETING existing hydro generation:
> "The Bonneville Power Administration is a nonprofit federal power MARKETING administration based in the Pacific Northwest."
> The odds of getting a new hydro project authorized these days is, for all practical purposes, ZERO. AFAIK, current power generation projects are privately financed after BPA got its headed handed to it for financing WPPSS.

Nice save from 'So, NO, the US government ISN'T in the electricity
generation "business."'

The electricity powering this computer is contracted from the BPA from
the electric co-op of which I am a member. The co-op goes back to the
REA (Rural Electrification Administration) formed in 1935. Yeah, it's
all legacy but it lives on. fwiw the REA was created by an EO of Roosevelt.

It worked well when deregulation was all the rage. Montana Power
immediately sold its generation capacity to out of state firms and
reinvented itself as a telecommunications company just in time to go
bankrupt in the dotcom bust. Rates went up drastically driving out
several energy intensive businesses like aluminum smelters. Since the
co-op is linked to the BPA my rates stayed stable.



BTW, Hoover Dam is also run by the Bureau of Reclamation and Congress
directly authorizes the contracts.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid%3AUSC-1999-title43-chapter12A-subchapter3&edition=1999

The current contracts are extended to 2067. It's a good thing the
distribution is in percents. Reclamation saved the bacon in 2017 with
new wide head turbines but I don't know if they have any more rabbits in
the hat as Mead dries up.

[Flyguy]

BPA, TVA and the like are federal AGENCIES. They are entities that are authorized to operate by the US government to perform specific functions, but ARE NOT the government. Their charter is limited by law. For example, BPA can (and does) sell power to CA, but they can't issue bonds and build a new power plant in CA.

The ENTIRE POINT of this thread is that Lyin' Biden is using all means possible to outlaw carbon-fueled vehicles, but has NO PLAN (and certainly NO AUTHORITY) to expand and modernize the electrical grid to accommodate the EV vehicles that will replace them. If they did have the authority you can bet that they would have exercised it. This is putting people's lives and livelihoods in danger, but the libtards DON'T CARE!

[Anthony William Sloman]

> ALL of these projects were authorized by Congress decades ago, mostly as Depression-era economic stimulus activities. Any future projects would also have to be specifically AUTHORIZED by Congress; absent this authorization (law) no Administration, including Joe Biden's, can fund such activities. And, YES, the Feds are PROMOTING and MARKETING existing hydro generation:

> "The Bonneville Power Administration is a nonprofit federal power MARKETING administration based in the Pacific Northwest."
> The odds of getting a new hydro project authorized these days is, for all practical purposes, ZERO.

Gnatguy's appreciation of practical reality is zero. People have been looking for potential hydroelectric projects for at least a century now, and all the low hanging fruit has been plucked. There are other ways of generating power that are renewable - solar power is going to keep on working for the next billions years or so - but Gnatguy doesn't appreciate this.

> AFAIK, current power generation projects are privately financed after BPA got its headed handed to it for financing WPPSS.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/wpps-municipal-bond-default-whoops.asp

American firms don't have to be incompetent. Gnatguy isn't representative.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:

> > > ALL of these projects were authorized by Congress decades ago, mostly as Depression-era economic stimulus activities. Any future projects would also have to be specifically AUTHORIZED by Congress; absent this authorization (law) no Administration, including Joe Biden's, can fund such activities. And, YES, the Feds are PROMOTING and MARKETING existing hydro generation:

> > > "The Bonneville Power Administration is a nonprofit federal power MARKETING administration based in the Pacific Northwest."
> > > The odds of getting a new hydro project authorized these days is, for all practical purposes, ZERO. AFAIK, current power generation projects are privately financed after BPA got its headed handed to it for financing WPPSS.
> > Nice save from 'So, NO, the US government ISN'T in the electricity
> > generation "business."'
> >
> > The electricity powering this computer is contracted from the BPA from
> > the electric co-op of which I am a member. The co-op goes back to the
> > REA (Rural Electrification Administration) formed in 1935. Yeah, it's
> > all legacy but it lives on. fwiw the REA was created by an EO of Roosevelt.
> >
> > It worked well when deregulation was all the rage. Montana Power
> > immediately sold its generation capacity to out of state firms and
> > reinvented itself as a telecommunications company just in time to go
> > bankrupt in the dotcom bust. Rates went up drastically driving out
> > several energy intensive businesses like aluminum smelters. Since the
> > co-op is linked to the BPA my rates stayed stable.
> >
> > BTW, Hoover Dam is also run by the Bureau of Reclamation and Congress
> > directly authorizes the contracts.
> >
> > https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid%3AUSC-1999-title43-chapter12A-subchapter3&edition=1999
> >
> > The current contracts are extended to 2067. It's a good thing the
> > distribution is in percents. Reclamation saved the bacon in 2017 with
> > new wide head turbines but I don't know if they have any more rabbits in
> > the hat as Mead dries up.
>
> BPA, TVA and the like are federal AGENCIES. They are entities that are authorized to operate by the US government to perform specific functions, but ARE NOT the government. Their charter is limited by law. For example, BPA can (and does) sell power to CA, but they can't issue bonds and build a new power plant in CA.
>

> The ENTIRE POINT of this thread is that Joe Biden is using all means possible to outlaw carbon-fueled vehicles, but has NO PLAN (and certainly NO AUTHORITY) to expand and modernize the electrical grid to accommodate the EV vehicles that will replace them.

No plan that Gnatguy can understand. He certainly seems to have a plan to boost the distribution grid.If he needs the authority he can ask cogress to pass the appropriate legislation.

> If they did have the authority you can bet that they would have exercised it.

Why? It's a capital-intensive exercise, and they don't happen overnight.

> This is putting people's lives and livelihoods in danger, but the libtards DON'T CARE!

How is proposing to beef up the distribution grid putting people's lives in danger? Gnatguy doesn't understand what's gong on, and - as he always does - he's decided that what's he imagines is actually going on is something he can get hysterical about.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Flyguy]

Hey SNIPPERMAN, we all know that there is NO PLAN, including your addled brain. If you could find one - which you CAN'T - you would be parading it around like your new outfit at a gay pride parade.

[Anthony William Sloman]

> > No plan that Gnatguy can understand. He certainly seems to have a plan to boost the distribution grid.If he needs the authority he can ask congress to pass the appropriate legislation.
>
> Hey Sloman, we all know that there is NO PLAN, including your addled brain.

Gnatguy generalises his own confusion to everybody else. If there's nothing there that he can understand, he's fatuously confident that there's nothing there than anybody could understand.

>If you could find one - which you CAN'T - you would be parading it around like your new outfit at a gay pride parade.

Why would I bother? I did actually post this link, which isn't talking about a plan, but rather the consultation that you'd go through when putting one together

https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize

Biden is being sensible about this, but he's not being sensible in a way that you can understand - you can't understand much as the best of times, and you aren't going to exert your remarkably feeble intellect to try to understand anything that the Democrats might put forward , even if there was remote chance you could.

You actually headed this thread with a reference to Biden and electrification, but what you asked for was an estimate of the extra generating capacity required to support electric cars when they replace gasoline-powered cars, which I already knew, and could dig a supporting link out of google in thirty seconds.

Going around bleating that other people don't know what they are talking about after that pathetic pratfall would be chutzpa, if you were bright enough to understand how stupid you had been. As it is it's just Gnatguy reminding us - again - that he's a total moron.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

GnatTurd <maggotl...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:c9fbd165-ffcb-4657...@googlegroups.com:

> ALL of these projects were authorized by Congress decades ago,
> mostly as Depression-era economic stimulus activities.

You are a goddamned idiot. The DC intertie was NOT a "Depression-
era" project. You are only off by three decades minimum. It was
"authorized" by the congress in place during the Kennedy
administration. Damn you are stupid, boy.

You are even more stupid than 'John Doe' aka 'Jack Webb' aka Jake
Isks.

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

GnatTurd <maggo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:712b9bfd-8fab-4f14...@googlegroups.com:

> No, you're false. Show me statutes which grant the Feds authority
> in electricity generation and production. They have no more
> authority in this area than they do to produce cars and trucks.
> They can REGULATE it, but can't PARTICIPATE in it.
>

They operate nuclear power facilities. They do not own them. They
GOVERN ALL ASPECTS of their operation, however.

GnatTurd is an abject idiot. But we all already knew that from all
the TrumpShitSmear stench in the air from you having your head a mile
up his fat skanky ass for over 7 years. You stink, boy.

[Flyguy]

You, sir, are the "abject idiot" - they DO NOT "GOVERN ALL ASPECTS," they REGULATE the operation of the facilities. The first implies direct control of the operation. This IS NOT the case - they review the operation for compliance with regulations. And they, sure as HELL, DON'T OPERATE THEM, fool.

[Flyguy]

Again, SNIPPERMAN, we ALL KNOW that you are BLOWING SMOKE and can't find any such plan. If you had you would have posted it instead of making those PATHETIC, LAME EXCUSES!

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:36:51 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 11:37:12 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 3:18:35 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 6:52:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > > > > > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:

> > > > > The ENTIRE POINT of this thread is that Joe Biden is using all means possible to outlaw carbon-fueled vehicles, but has NO PLAN (and certainly NO AUTHORITY) to expand and modernize the electrical grid to accommodate the EV vehicles that will replace them.

It wasn't the point when Gnatguy started it - he was fussed about the extra load on the grid when electric cars took over from gasoline-powered cars, and was much too dumb to know that people have been working that out - and publishing their conclusions - for ages.

I suspect that "Hot, Flat and Crowded"

https://www.thomaslfriedman.com/hot-flat-and-crowded-2-0/

originally published in 2008, went into that. I can't check my copy - it's still in the Netherlands.

> > > > No plan that Gnatguy can understand. Biden certainly seems to have a plan to boost the distribution grid.If he needs the authority he can ask congress to pass the appropriate legislation.

> > >
> > > Hey Sloman, we all know that there is NO PLAN, including your addled brain.
> >
> > Gnatguy generalises his own confusion to everybody else. If there's nothing there that he can understand, he's fatuously confident that there's nothing there than anybody could understand.
> > >If you could find one - which you CAN'T - you would be parading it around like your new outfit at a gay pride parade.
> >

> > Why would I bother? I did actually post this link, which isn't talking about a plan, but rather the consultation that you'd go through when putting one together.
> >
> > https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize
>
> Again, Sloman, we ALL KNOW that you are BLOWING SMOKE and can't find any such plan.

Gnatguy is confident that he knows what other people are doing. In practice he does seem to assume that they are as stupid as he is, which is very rarely true.

> If you had you would have posted it instead of making those PATHETIC, LAME EXCUSES!

So pathetic and lame that you snipped the rest of what I posted, rather than subjecting it to your laser-like analytical scrutiny.

In this particular case Gnatguy is complaining about Biden not having a plan, when Biden has enough sense to be working on setting up the consultations which would assemble the kind of expert opinions you'd need to allow you to set up a sensible plan. Gnatguy doesn't see the necessity for that because he doesn't actually understand that the task is tolerably complicated - how could he?

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Flyguy]

Hey, Idiot, I said "MOST" you FOOL!

[Flyguy]

On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 8:28:18 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:36:51 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 11:37:12 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 3:18:35 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 6:52:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > > > > > > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:
>
> > > > > > The ENTIRE POINT of this thread is that Joe Biden is using all means possible to outlaw carbon-fueled vehicles, but has NO PLAN (and certainly NO AUTHORITY) to expand and modernize the electrical grid to accommodate the EV vehicles that will replace them.
> It wasn't the point when Gnatguy started it - he was fussed about the extra load on the grid when electric cars took over from gasoline-powered cars, and was much too dumb to know that people have been working that out - and publishing their conclusions - for ages.
>
> I suspect that "Hot, Flat and Crowded"
>
> https://www.thomaslfriedman.com/hot-flat-and-crowded-2-0/
>
> originally published in 2008, went into that. I can't check my copy - it's still in the Netherlands.
>
> > > > > No plan that Gnatguy can understand. Biden certainly seems to have a plan to boost the distribution grid.If he needs the authority he can ask congress to pass the appropriate legislation.
> > > >
> > > > Hey Sloman, we all know that there is NO PLAN, including your addled brain.
> > >
> > > Gnatguy generalises his own confusion to everybody else. If there's nothing there that he can understand, he's fatuously confident that there's nothing there than anybody could understand.
> > > >If you could find one - which you CAN'T - you would be parading it around like your new outfit at a gay pride parade.
> > >
> > > Why would I bother? I did actually post this link, which isn't talking about a plan, but rather the consultation that you'd go through when putting one together.
> > >
> > > https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize
> >
> > Again, Sloman, we ALL KNOW that you are BLOWING SMOKE and can't find any such plan.
>
> Gnatguy is confident that he knows what other people are doing. In practice he does seem to assume that they are as stupid as he is, which is very rarely true.

Hey SNIPPERMAN, until you produce the goods we all know you are just BLOVIATING!

> > If you had you would have posted it instead of making those PATHETIC, LAME EXCUSES!
> So pathetic and lame that you snipped the rest of what I posted, rather than subjecting it to your laser-like analytical scrutiny.
>
> In this particular case Gnatguy is complaining about Biden not having a plan, when Biden has enough sense to be working on setting up the consultations which would assemble the kind of expert opinions you'd need to allow you to set up a sensible plan. Gnatguy doesn't see the necessity for that because he doesn't actually understand that the task is tolerably complicated - how could he?

LOL! So, SNIPPERMAN, so your phony story now is that Lyin' Biden is WORKING on putting together a team that will work on putting a plan together!! That's RICH!!!

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 4:42:34 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 8:28:18 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:36:51 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 11:37:12 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 3:18:35 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 6:52:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:

<snip>

> > > > >If you could find one - which you CAN'T - you would be parading it around like your new outfit at a gay pride parade.
> > > >
> > > > Why would I bother? I did actually post this link, which isn't talking about a plan, but rather the consultation that you'd go through when putting one together.
> > > >
> > > > https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize
> > >
> > > Again, Sloman, we ALL KNOW that you are BLOWING SMOKE and can't find any such plan.
> >
> > Gnatguy is confident that he knows what other people are doing. In practice he does seem to assume that they are as stupid as he is, which is very rarely true.
>

> Hey Slomnan, until you produce the goods we all know you are just BLOVIATING!

Gnatguy bloviating again.

> > > If you had you would have posted it instead of making those PATHETIC, LAME EXCUSES!
> >
> > So pathetic and lame that you snipped the rest of what I posted, rather than subjecting it to your laser-like analytical scrutiny.
> >
> > In this particular case Gnatguy is complaining about Biden not having a plan, when Biden has enough sense to be working on setting up the consultations which would assemble the kind of expert opinions you'd need to allow you to set up a sensible plan. Gnatguy doesn't see the necessity for that because he doesn't actually understand that the task is tolerably complicated - how could he?
>

> LOL! So, Sloman, so your phony story now is that Joe Biden is WORKING on putting together a team that will work on putting a plan together!!

That's what the link to the US Department of Energy web site says that they are doing. If you think that that website is phony, do tell us why.

>That's RICH!!!

Gnatguy can't see the point, and thinks that everybody else is equally brain-dead.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Flyguy]

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:53:51 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 4:42:34 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 8:28:18 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:36:51 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 11:37:12 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 3:18:35 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 6:52:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:
> <snip>
> > > > > >If you could find one - which you CAN'T - you would be parading it around like your new outfit at a gay pride parade.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why would I bother? I did actually post this link, which isn't talking about a plan, but rather the consultation that you'd go through when putting one together.
> > > > >
> > > > > https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize
> > > >
> > > > Again, Sloman, we ALL KNOW that you are BLOWING SMOKE and can't find any such plan.
> > >
> > > Gnatguy is confident that he knows what other people are doing. In practice he does seem to assume that they are as stupid as he is, which is very rarely true.
> >
> > Hey Slomnan, until you produce the goods we all know you are just BLOVIATING!
>
> Gnatguy bloviating again.

SNIPPERMAN is at such a loss of words that he MUST USE MINE!!!!

> > > > If you had you would have posted it instead of making those PATHETIC, LAME EXCUSES!
> > >
> > > So pathetic and lame that you snipped the rest of what I posted, rather than subjecting it to your laser-like analytical scrutiny.
> > >
> > > In this particular case Gnatguy is complaining about Biden not having a plan, when Biden has enough sense to be working on setting up the consultations which would assemble the kind of expert opinions you'd need to allow you to set up a sensible plan. Gnatguy doesn't see the necessity for that because he doesn't actually understand that the task is tolerably complicated - how could he?
> >
> > LOL! So, Sloman, so your phony story now is that Joe Biden is WORKING on putting together a team that will work on putting a plan together!!
>
> That's what the link to the US Department of Energy web site says that they are doing. If you think that that website is phony, do tell us why.

Hey SNIPPERMAN, this IS NOT a "plan" - it is just a wish list. So, YES, as a PLAN it is PHONY!

>
> >That's RICH!!!
>
> Gnatguy can't see the point, and thinks that everybody else is equally brain-dead.

No, just YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:49:26 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:53:51 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 4:42:34 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 8:28:18 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:36:51 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 11:37:12 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 3:18:35 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 6:52:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > > > > >If you could find one - which you CAN'T - you would be parading it around like your new outfit at a gay pride parade.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why would I bother? I did actually post this link, which isn't talking about a plan, but rather the consultation that you'd go through when putting one together.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize
> > > > >
> > > > > Again, Sloman, we ALL KNOW that you are BLOWING SMOKE and can't find any such plan.
> > > >
> > > > Gnatguy is confident that he knows what other people are doing. In practice he does seem to assume that they are as stupid as he is, which is very rarely true.
> > >

> > > Hey Sloman, until you produce the goods we all know you are just BLOVIATING!
> >
> > Gnatguy bloviating again.
>
> Sloman is at such a loss of words that he MUST USE MINE!!!!

Gnatguy doesn't own the word "bloviating". He may have squatters rights.

> > > > > If you had you would have posted it instead of making those PATHETIC, LAME EXCUSES!
> > > >
> > > > So pathetic and lame that you snipped the rest of what I posted, rather than subjecting it to your laser-like analytical scrutiny.
> > > >
> > > > In this particular case Gnatguy is complaining about Biden not having a plan, when Biden has enough sense to be working on setting up the consultations which would assemble the kind of expert opinions you'd need to allow you to set up a sensible plan. Gnatguy doesn't see the necessity for that because he doesn't actually understand that the task is tolerably complicated - how could he?
> > >
> > > LOL! So, Sloman, so your phony story now is that Joe Biden is WORKING on putting together a team that will work on putting a plan together!!
> >
> > That's what the link to the US Department of Energy web site says that they are doing. If you think that that website is phony, do tell us why.
>

> Hey Sloman, this IS NOT a "plan" - it is just a wish list. So, YES, as a PLAN it is PHONY!

Gnatguy wants there to be a plan, and hasn't noticed that you need to have a well-defined problem before you can set up a plan to solve it.

First you work out exactly what you need to achieve, and then you can plan how you can do that. Gnatguy wants to skip the stages that he can't understand and get straight to the stage that he can understand - buying transformers and stringing up wires. Working out where you would need to put them is beyond him.

> > >That's RICH!!!
> >
> > Gnatguy can't see the point, and thinks that everybody else is equally brain-dead.
>
> No, just YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gnatguy is brain-dead enough to think that this his opinion is worth posting. This isn't really worth posting but Gnatguy will probably read it and enteratain us with an even more transparently stupid response.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:30:55 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:49:26 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:53:51 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 4:42:34 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 8:28:18 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:36:51 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 11:37:12 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 3:18:35 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 6:52:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > > > > >If you could find one - which you CAN'T - you would be parading it around like your new outfit at a gay pride parade.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Why would I bother? I did actually post this link, which isn't talking about a plan, but rather the consultation that you'd go through when putting one together.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Again, Sloman, we ALL KNOW that you are BLOWING SMOKE and can't find any such plan.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gnatguy is confident that he knows what other people are doing. In practice he does seem to assume that they are as stupid as he is, which is very rarely true.
> > > >
> > > > Hey Sloman, until you produce the goods we all know you are just BLOVIATING!
> > >
> > > Gnatguy bloviating again.
> >
> > Sloman is at such a loss of words that he MUST USE MINE!!!!
>
> Gnatguy doesn't own the word "bloviating". He may have squatters rights.

...and out of tens of thousands you can't even think of one of your own!

> > > > > > If you had you would have posted it instead of making those PATHETIC, LAME EXCUSES!
> > > > >
> > > > > So pathetic and lame that you snipped the rest of what I posted, rather than subjecting it to your laser-like analytical scrutiny.
> > > > >
> > > > > In this particular case Gnatguy is complaining about Biden not having a plan, when Biden has enough sense to be working on setting up the consultations which would assemble the kind of expert opinions you'd need to allow you to set up a sensible plan. Gnatguy doesn't see the necessity for that because he doesn't actually understand that the task is tolerably complicated - how could he?
> > > >
> > > > LOL! So, Sloman, so your phony story now is that Joe Biden is WORKING on putting together a team that will work on putting a plan together!!
> > >
> > > That's what the link to the US Department of Energy web site says that they are doing. If you think that that website is phony, do tell us why.
> >
> > Hey Sloman, this IS NOT a "plan" - it is just a wish list. So, YES, as a PLAN it is PHONY!
>
> Gnatguy wants there to be a plan, and hasn't noticed that you need to have a well-defined problem before you can set up a plan to solve it.

Bozo Bill STILL can't find a plan from Lyin' Biden and feels compelled to make excuses for the senile pervert.

>
> First you work out exactly what you need to achieve, and then you can plan how you can do that. Gnatguy wants to skip the stages that he can't understand and get straight to the stage that he can understand - buying transformers and stringing up wires. Working out where you would need to put them is beyond him.

That's ALREADY been done, Bozo Bill. Go back and READ the references I provided.

> > > >That's RICH!!!
> > >
> > > Gnatguy can't see the point, and thinks that everybody else is equally brain-dead.
> >
> > No, just YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Gnatguy is brain-dead enough to think that this his opinion is worth posting. This isn't really worth posting but Gnatguy will probably read it and enteratain us with an even more transparently stupid response.

Hey Bozo Bill, YOU keep replying to MY posts. And you should READ your own posts - and fix the SPELLING ERRORS (virtually EVER ONE you post has at least one spelling error, not to speak of the irrational reasoning errors).

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 1:17:37 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:30:55 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:49:26 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:53:51 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 4:42:34 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 8:28:18 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:36:51 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 11:37:12 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 3:18:35 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 6:52:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:

<snip>

> > Gnatguy is brain-dead enough to think that this his opinion is worth posting. This isn't really worth posting but Gnatguy will probably read it and entertain us with an even more transparently stupid response.

>
> Hey Bozo Bill, YOU keep replying to MY posts.

Jeering at you is shooting a fish in a barrel, but if I didn't do it somebody might take you seriously.

> And you should READ your own posts - and fix the SPELLING ERRORS (virtually EVER ONE you post has at least one spelling error, not to speak of the irrational reasoning errors).

But you don't take the risk of pointing out the typos - maybe you don't trust your own judgement well enough. And your grasp of what might be irrational is even less reliable. You have been known to express admiration for Donald Trump and to espouse his more bizarre items of election propaganda.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

GnatTurd <stink...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:e46dc1e0-7333-4576-937b-
f5c661...@googlegroups.com:

> virtually EVER ONE you post has at least one spelling error,

"EVER ONE"? Really?

Bwuahahahahahahaahah!

[Flyguy]

On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 12:20:16 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 1:17:37 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:30:55 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:49:26 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:53:51 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 4:42:34 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 8:28:18 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:36:51 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 11:37:12 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 3:18:35 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 6:52:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > > Gnatguy is brain-dead enough to think that this his opinion is worth posting. This isn't really worth posting but Gnatguy will probably read it and entertain us with an even more transparently stupid response.
> >
> > Hey Bozo Bill, YOU keep replying to MY posts.
> Jeering at you is shooting a fish in a barrel, but if I didn't do it somebody might take you seriously.

NEWS FLASH: NO ONE takes Bozo Bill seriously!

> > And you should READ your own posts - and fix the SPELLING ERRORS (virtually EVER ONE you post has at least one spelling error, not to speak of the irrational reasoning errors).
> But you don't take the risk of pointing out the typos - maybe you don't trust your own judgement well enough. And your grasp of what might be irrational is even less reliable. You have been known to express admiration for Donald Trump and to espouse his more bizarre items of election propaganda.

Oh, YES I HAVE! Like when you misspell YOUR OWN NAME!! And don't talk about being irrational - you promote FIREBOMBING and NUKING YOUR OWN COUNTRY!!!

At least this time you have dropped your FALSE CLAIM that Lyin' Biden has a plan to solve the energy crisis.

>
> --
> Bill the Bozo Sloman, Sydney

[Flyguy]

Right - his last one was "enteratain"

[Anthony William Sloman]

> Right - his last one was "enteratain".

Both are typo's. Gnatguy doesn't seem to know that everybody makes typo's and gets excited when he finds one in somebody else's output, and doesn't check carefully enough to completely avoid posting them in his responses - but neither does anybody else.

He wasn't brave enough to single it out when he complained about it. He's not very bright, so he doesn't realise that he should have.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 10:49:30 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 12:20:16 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 1:17:37 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:30:55 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:49:26 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:53:51 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 4:42:34 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 8:28:18 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:36:51 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 11:37:12 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 3:18:35 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 6:52:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> > > > Gnatguy is brain-dead enough to think that this his opinion is worth posting. This isn't really worth posting but Gnatguy will probably read it and entertain us with an even more transparently stupid response.
> > >
> > > Hey Bozo Bill, YOU keep replying to MY posts.
> > Jeering at you is shooting a fish in a barrel, but if I didn't do it somebody might take you seriously.
>
> NEWS FLASH: NO ONE takes Bozo Bill seriously!

You take me seriously enough to respond to my posts. This isn't flattering, and I would rate you as a nobody, but presumably you wouldn't.

> > > And you should READ your own posts - and fix the SPELLING ERRORS (virtually EVER ONE you post has at least one spelling error, not to speak of the irrational reasoning errors).
> >
> > But you don't take the risk of pointing out the typos - maybe you don't trust your own judgement well enough. And your grasp of what might be irrational is even less reliable. You have been known to express admiration for Donald Trump and to espouse his more bizarre items of election propaganda.
>
> Oh, YES I HAVE! Like when you misspell YOUR OWN NAME!! And don't talk about being irrational - you promote FIREBOMBING and NUKING YOUR OWN COUNTRY!!!

Actually I never promoted fire-bombing any country - you just failed to understand what I was proposing. And doing a Project Plowshare exercise in earth-moving isn't "nuking your own country" and the proposal was aimed at denying an invader useful access to bits that they were about to take over, which weren't going to remain part of my own country. The irrationality involved is all in your defective comprehension.

> At least this time you have dropped your FALSE CLAIM that Joe Biden has a plan to solve the energy crisis.

It's not my claim

https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize

seems to come from the US Department of Energy. There's no obvious energy crisis. We can get as much energy as we need from solar cells and wind turbines, and both seem to be cheaper than any other source. We need more of both, and we need a certain amount of extra investment in the grid to shift the power from where and when it is going to be generated to where and when it is going to be used - both spatial and temporal transfers.

It's a complicated job, and the plan that exists at the moment seems to be more to work out a detailed project plan than to immediately hire contractors for specific jobs which haven't yet been specified . This is pretty much what you'd expect after four years of a Trump administration. His promised wall never got built.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

Flyguy <soar2...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:2bcab769-7565-46b1...@googlegroups.com:

The "ever one" error was your error, idiot.

Goddamned spelling error crybaby?

God damn boy, grow the fuck up.

[Flyguy]

LOL! Yes YOU DID, Bozo! And, YES, setting off nuclear bombs to deny access IS nuking your own country!!

>
> > At least this time you have dropped your FALSE CLAIM that Joe Biden has a plan to solve the energy crisis.
>
> It's not my claim

Well, YOU kept on making it, so it IS your claim.

>
> https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize
>
> seems to come from the US Department of Energy. There's no obvious energy crisis. We can get as much energy as we need from solar cells and wind turbines, and both seem to be cheaper than any other source. We need more of both, and we need a certain amount of extra investment in the grid to shift the power from where and when it is going to be generated to where and when it is going to be used - both spatial and temporal transfers.

Yes, there IS a crisis: CA has ALREADY had numerous blackouts and other states are border-line depending upon temperatures. This is only going to GET WORSE as more coal plants get closed. And, NO, unreliable renewables ARE NOT going to fix it, even if enough money is spent, which isn't happening.

>
> It's a complicated job, and the plan that exists at the moment seems to be more to work out a detailed project plan than to immediately hire contractors for specific jobs which haven't yet been specified . This is pretty much what you'd expect after four years of a Trump administration. His promised wall never got built.

A plan to come up with a plan IS NOT A PLAN, Bozo!!!!

[Ricky]

You claim the typo was someone else's error, but here it is, clearly YOUR error. "EVER ONE" just above. See it? Your error.

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Flyguy]

LOL! Bozo Bill can't even SPELL HIS OWN NAME!!

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 6:47:55 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 7:22:44 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 10:49:30 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 12:20:16 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 1:17:37 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:30:55 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:49:26 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:53:51 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 4:42:34 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 8:28:18 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:36:51 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 11:37:12 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 3:18:35 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 6:52:22 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, August 8, 2022 at 11:03:46 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 3:14:35 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 08/07/2022 03:25 PM, Flyguy wrote:
> > > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > > > > Gnatguy is brain-dead enough to think that this his opinion is worth posting. This isn't really worth posting but Gnatguy will probably read it and entertain us with an even more transparently stupid response.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey Bozo Bill, YOU keep replying to MY posts.
> > > >
> > > > Jeering at you is shooting a fish in a barrel, but if I didn't do it somebody might take you seriously.
> > >
> > > NEWS FLASH: NO ONE takes Bozo Bill seriously!
> >
> > You take me seriously enough to respond to my posts. This isn't flattering, and I would rate you as a nobody, but presumably you wouldn't.

<snipped the usual drivel>

> > > And don't talk about being irrational - you promote FIREBOMBING and NUKING YOUR OWN COUNTRY!!!
> >
> > Actually I never promoted fire-bombing any country - you just failed to understand what I was proposing. And doing a Project Plowshare exercise in earth-moving isn't "nuking your own country" and the proposal was aimed at denying an invader useful access to bits that they were about to take over, which weren't going to remain part of my own country. The irrationality involved is all in your defective comprehension.
>
> LOL! Yes YOU DID, Bozo! And, YES, setting off nuclear bombs to deny access IS nuking your own country!!

Gnatguy fails reading comprehension again. Or rather succeeds in misunderstanding the original text in a way that suits him.

> > > At least this time you have dropped your FALSE CLAIM that Joe Biden has a plan to solve the energy crisis.
> >

> > It's not my claim.

>
> Well, YOU kept on making it, so it IS your claim.

Not exactly. It's actually your claim, and I had to dig out the Department of Energy link to work out what you were carrying on about.

> > https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/doe-launches-new-initiative-president-bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-modernize
> >
> > seems to come from the US Department of Energy. There's no obvious energy crisis. We can get as much energy as we need from solar cells and wind turbines, and both seem to be cheaper than any other source. We need more of both, and we need a certain amount of extra investment in the grid to shift the power from where and when it is going to be generated to where and when it is going to be used - both spatial and temporal transfers.
>
> Yes, there IS a crisis: CA has ALREADY had numerous blackouts and other states are border-line depending upon temperatures. This is only going to GET WORSE as more coal plants get closed. And, NO, unreliable renewables ARE NOT going to fix it, even if enough money is spent, which isn't happening.

That may be a crisis, but it's one driven by climate change putting extra demands on the grid, not the choices being made about how the extra electricity is going to be generated. Lunatic like you imagining that more inflexible coal -fired plants being built would help are part of the problem. Fast-start gas-fired plants could be helpful in the short term, but grid storage is a better long term solution, but getting you to wrap your head around that is probably impossible.

> > It's a complicated job, and the plan that exists at the moment seems to be more to work out a detailed project plan than to immediately hire contractors for specific jobs which haven't yet been specified . This is pretty much what you'd expect after four years of a Trump administration. His promised wall never got built.
>
> A plan to come up with a plan IS NOT A PLAN, Bozo!!!!

It clearly is a plan. It's not the "plan" that you claim doesn't exist. You want Biden to have come up with some kind of different plan that you can be rude about. but you can't post any kind of link to it, so you are forced to invent your own non-plan and try to foist that on him.

You really are transparently idiotic.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Flyguy]

Hey Bozo Bill, did you actually READ this piece of shit? There IS NO PLAN, there isn't even a hint of a plan. They talk about "catalyzing" the discussion - this is bureaucratic bullshit for PASSING THE BUCK! There is absolutely NOTHING about funding, and there CAN'T BE because Congress has to AUTHORIZE that! This is nothing more than a SMOKE SCREEN to hide the fact that Lyin' Biden and his lackies are doing NOTHING about the issue.

So, I repeat: Lyin' Biden HAS NO PLAN for expanding and modernizing the electrical grid and this is evidence of that.