Lights Out: Your Electric Grid is Going Down

I'm no Jerome a Paris. Electricity is a mystery to me. You plug in; things happen. Or don't, thanks to deregulation. Where's the juice? Not many places it seems according to a new report by the North American Electric Reliability Council.
:

The impact will be felt unevenly but will be widespread, the report said. In the next two to three years, surplus capacity needed to keep the lights on in Texas, New England, the mid-Atlantic, the Midwest and the Rocky Mountain regions will drop to levels that make brownouts and blackouts more likely.

And with power demand seen rising 19 percent by 2015, and generation capacity expected to rise just 6 percent, "the adequacy of North America's electricity system will decline unless changes are made soon," the council's president, Rick Sergel said in the report.

Make the jump.

Effect of Deregulation

Buoyed by the '80s-era deregulation success stories of the natural gas, telecom, airline and trucking industries, the electric power industry, with the help of Congress, embarked on a similar path. The hope was that by breaking up the ownership of power generation and transmission, competition would spur new, investor-funded capacity, drive the development and deployment of new technology and -- over the long run -- drive down prices for consumers.

But it hasn't worked out that way. After decades of change that included the near-collapse of California's power industry and the power trading scandal at Enron, the industry is stuck halfway between a market-driven future and a state-regulated past.

Oh, Enron. Wasn't there some connection to the republican administration here???

So what's a typical local effect?

The move toward market pricing -- which was supposed to lower rates over the long term --would mean rate increases over the short term, according to the companies. Starting in January, Illinois consumers face an average increase of between 22 and 55 percent compared with what they've been paying for the past decade. But ComEd has said it expects lose $1.4 billion if those increases are blocked. The company also faces cuts in its debt ratings if the freeze is extended.

Now be advised. I have a dog in this hunt. It's a power line that cuts a swath through some of the most pristine country in New York State. A power line that destroys an area that has been termed  "A Wild and Scenic River" corridor as designated by the National Parks Service.

You also might want to check out the stakeholders in the NAERC report to see whose interests are being represented.

So thanks to the repugs, we have smaller government and bigger business: all unregulated and driven by profits.

A new power line could be coming to a neighborhood, like mine, near you. Soon. Tell your neighbors if they don't know how to vote.

The party for new energy (of all types) is democratic. Unless , of course, you don't believe in global warming and want to double your energy bills.

•  Make Lemonaid

  We have a unique opportunity to build a new energy infrastructure cleaner than the one we have in place now.  The only time you get to mess with the basic mix of power production is at times like these.  Let's seized the opportunity.

  by ohwilleke on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 08:49:01 PM PDT

  •  Damn straight.

    These issues are ours for the taking. Let's take them.

    by MrSandman on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 08:58:19 PM PDT

  •  Sadly, instead we're building more coal plants.

    by Arken on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 09:15:17 PM PDT

    •  And, sadly, will continue to do so.

      I work for an electric utility.  We are deep in the process of building a new plant.  Permitting and engineering a new plant takes most of a decade.  Actual construction most of another.  The project has been in the works for several years, and will not be on line for several more.  It will be coal fired.  Given the current economic and regulatory climate, that is a given.  

      On economics alone, coal beats out just about every realistic alternative.  In the sixties we build gas fired plants because they were economic at that time.  Since then the cost of gas fired generation has more than tripled while the cost of coal fired generation has remained almost constant.  Nuclear power might be an economic contender, but the current regulatory environment makes it almost impossible.

      We have added some wind generation to our mix, but wind cannot serve as base load capacity for obvious reasons.  Solar will eventually be a meaningful part of the energy mix, but I think that will come more at the retail and individual level.  I don't see great utility scale solar arrays in our future.  Residential and commercial building rooftops yes.

      Don't get me wrong -- I'm not trying to defend coal.  I am not at all happy that my company is in the process of building another coal burner.  There are a whole host of reasons why building more coal fired generation is a really, really bad idea.  But the current economic and regulatory climate makes it almost inevitable for almost any utility currently seeking additional base load capacity.  Until there is some kind of consensus at the national level that takes into account the true environmental costs of fossil fuel based generation in general, and coal fired generation in particular, that is the reality we face.

      by ignorant bystander on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 08:20:33 AM PDT

  •  We can conserve

    Conservation same as building new plants.

    See:

    http://www.rmi.org

    A leader in the field.

    by AllisonInSeattle on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 10:28:25 PM PDT

    •  We indeed can conserve

      with more efficient appliances and less energy hungry light bulbs (compact flourescents and LEDs come to mind).  Air conditioning can be greatly curtailed with better insultation.

      But, as long as population grows rapidly, and in some parts of the country it is growing very rapidly, even significant reduction in demand per person don't eliminate the need for more juice.

      I'd personally like to see a good share of the growing demand supplied by nuclear power, and think that the barriers to that approach in place now do serious net harm to the environment.

      by ohwilleke on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 02:02:32 PM PDT

      •  Nukes not a good choice

        Nor have they been for decades. For many reasons.
        http//www.rmi.org used to have tons of reasons posted.

        Purposefully adding more radiation to our environment is not a good thing for long-term survival of humanity.

        Just the sun falling on the desert areas of our country would supply the electricity for the... whole country. There is a TON of wind energy potential -- possibly enough to supply ALL of our usage now.

        In Central Washington, in Kittitas County, there are something like 14 windmills at the ends of one valley. The valley includes one of the biggest University towns in Eastern WA. ONE of those windmills supplies enough electricity for the whole valley. University, town, farms, etc.

        Most of our homes now are the equivilent of a boat with a hole in it, re energy. We can do better!

        Americans are trained to think that bigger is better (bigger tv's = toss the old, and use more electricity, as example). That more is better. But being caught in an endless cycle of consumption is not necessarily quality of life.

        We can have enjoyable lives living with less.

        We can supply SO much  

        by AllisonInSeattle on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 09:44:37 PM PDT

•  It's not just gas anymore. Tips, please???

  This issue cuts across America. All you have to ask is "Who profits?? Who offers solutions??"

  by MrSandman on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 08:56:43 PM PDT

•  Kind of Off Topic

  I'm in Buffalo, and as you may know we got socked by a storm last week. I had no electricity from Thursday evening until late Saturday night, and many people still don't have power.

  I'm here to urge you all to have an emergency kit ready in case power goes out for extended periods. That means the standard candles, matches, flashlights, and batteries, as well as blankets (you might not have heat) cash (if the grid is down your credit cards are useless) first aid kit, food and bottled water (the generators at our water pumping station were running at 30% capacity at one point, and water was in short supply). Get a spare battery for your cell phone or be more vigilant about keeping your phone charged. Don't let your gas tank get too low. Get a portable radio (the crank kind that doesn't need batteries are great). Have a plan in place for your family.

  I know these are common-sense things, but it's too easy to say "oh, I'll do that some day" and just not get to it. Then when you need it you're unprepared.

  by The Why Not Guy on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 09:41:20 PM PDT

  •  Have a hand-crank cell phone charger

    No kidding. Cute as a bug, keep in car.

    Which might come in handy, as I just smashed the car charger in the door. Sigh.

    Have hand-crank radio, with solar cells on top. Have been keepign it going exclusively with cranking or solar charging. It's... kinda cool! Amazign how long it will run with short cranking session.

    (Have hand-crank flashlights, too, they're getting more common.)

    by AllisonInSeattle on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 10:31:02 PM PDT

•  If only I could have cashed in my Enron stock

  a little earlier,... I'd still have nothing.

  We need real investment in energy reform in this country.

  by punditpong on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 09:56:29 PM PDT

•  Installed solar hot water heater

  a couple weeks ago.

  Next: Biodiesel home furnace. I'm not kidding.

  Next: Tulikivi wood stove -- burns tiny amounts of wood to create radiant heat... can cook in it... set for emergencies, and trees in my back yard keep falling down. (In Europe, some people "copice" trees to create their own wood supply.)

  Next: Deal with insulation, fix some leaky spaces, replace some windows.

  All bulbs are fluro except about one.

  Low-flow water-saver shower head.

  You conserving? If not, how about starting?

  by AllisonInSeattle on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 10:27:16 PM PDT

  •  What's your carbon footprint?

    Got An Inconvenient Truth layibg about? Great fun -- and reality check -- to see where you are on the energy consumption food chain.

    I'm lucky. Too poor to afford big in NYC, I'm without a car or a McMansion.

    But I'm retrofitting this little eco-cottage in the country on the Upper Delaware River. I know to the gallon how much water is consumed, how much energy.

    It's amazing how little you need if you care to conserve.

    by MrSandman on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 10:42:41 PM PDT

    •  Righto! Just conserve. It matters.

      by AllisonInSeattle on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 12:28:21 AM PDT

•  It's bullshit ..

  designed to stampede the public into pulling down  Bush's 'nucular power pants' and his unClear Skies Dirty Coal initiative. It's sick I tell ya ..

  
  Short of finding willing vigiliante groups of citizens to make arrests of these plutocrats en masse, and use torture techniques authorized for use against enemies of the State {ref: Patriot Act} we'll never find the truth. Hmmm .. who says citizens can't be the 'decider'? We can lock them in their limousines and make them eat the fruit from the wet bar until it's gone. Shut off their A/C until they sweat. Make them watch Paris Hilton's cable show {bah, they'd probably like that, or at least the low light version of it, those perverts.}

  by shpilk on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 11:54:19 PM PDT

  •  seriously, plenty of experts have said

    improvements in efficiency as well as even modest conservation will easily offset the need for more power plants.

    This is just a bunch of greedy corporatists trying scare people.

    Same as it ever was.

    by shpilk on Mon Oct 16, 2006 at 11:56:32 PM PDT

    •  When you look at the stakeholders in NAERC

      you see only traditional energy interests. So I did think the report could be a teeny, tiny bit warped to the view that we need more fossil-fuel based energy production and we need it now.

      Under Bush, our energy policies are as good as our foreign policies. At least this administration is consistent in manufacturing a crisis to make a profit.

      by MrSandman on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 09:21:46 AM PDT