silence7@slrpnk.netM to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.netEnglish · 7 months ago
silence7@slrpnk.netM to Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.@slrpnk.netEnglish · 7 months ago
I really hope we can figure out how to fix that issue quickly, but I don’t really see that happening.
The Texas model seems pretty good, like I’m willing to pay more for renewables. I actually already have elected to do so; when my utility was looking to add another hydro generator, I paid for “extra blocks of power” which were $15/mth. I got 2 for 2 years, so my electric is cleaner now than otherwise, not cheaper but cleaner. It was opt-in, but I’d be happy to have it as just a standard cost of upgrading, as well.
We are all in this together, let’s act like it.
This problem is one about interconnection studies for new utility-scale wind and solar. Texas operates by letting them build, and then telling them they can’t sell electricity. That’s not great either.
Right move here is to do a planned build-out of transmission to support actual needs.
Right, what I mean is the Texas model of pre-surveying for places they would be a good fit with minor pushback, and then having the projects paid by everyone, rather than some investor who can just flake out.
Their grid is an absolute disaster, so I’m certainly not idolizing most of what they are doing, but the method they follow to get them at least done… that part is good.