Energy Bills Send Shivers in New England

[dmcowen674]

Questionable article. Rates didn't go up 110% in Salem, nh over a one month period.

Edit: googled it. Wow yeah that is nasty, some customers are getting hit with a huge increase but it is not the entire bill--only the supply. Salem electricity bills did not increase 110%, though. Less if you do the math but the article didn't bother.

Well they should all go off grid and run gasoline generators.

It is a cost savings with current gas prices.

It would cost about $100 for a month of gasoline to run a home.

 

[Jaskalas]

Yeah, let's convert all power plants back to coal.

I said that? Nope. What I oppose is the forced / hurried closing of existing coal energy production. EPA mandates you have less energy, prices go up, lights go out.

Natural gas is already replacing coal, but that isn't good enough for government officials who insist on pushing it off the cliff, along with our energy gird.

 

[Ken g6]

Well they should all go off grid and run gasoline generators.

It is a cost savings with current gas prices.

It would cost about $100 for a month of gasoline to run a home.

Close. They should all go off grid with solar power and batteries.

 

[K1052]

I said that? Nope. What I oppose is the forced / hurried closing of existing coal energy production. EPA mandates you have less energy, prices go up, lights go out.

Natural gas is already replacing coal, but that isn't good enough for government officials who insist on pushing it off the cliff, along with our energy gird.

Nobody has presented a compelling reason to allow obsolete coal power plants that lack emissions controls to continue to operate. The Clean Air Act was passed in 1970 and the last decade has seen ever increasing pressure on the utilities (from multiple levels of government) to either modernize or replace these facilities so this whole thing isn't exactly out of the blue.

 

[Jaskalas]

Nobody has presented a compelling reason to allow obsolete coal power plants that lack emissions controls to continue to operate.

That's where we disagree. I find the OP has provided a compelling reason.

Energy Bills Send Shivers in New England

It's winter, and we could use the cheap energy supply.

 

[K1052]

That's where we disagree. I find the OP has provided a compelling reason.

It's winter, and we could use the cheap energy supply.

I was unaware that the EPA set generation mix requirements for each state, has the power to overrule the legislature or local governments when they reject a pipeline/transmission project, or dictate specific local energy policies.

 

[DrPizza]

Well they should all go off grid and run gasoline generators.

It is a cost savings with current gas prices.

It would cost about $100 for a month of gasoline to run a home.

Uhhhh, how about no. They're using the electricity to heat the home. At $3/gallon, that's 33 gallons of gasoline. 33 gallons of gasoline has less heat content than 33 gallons of fuel oil. Oil burners can be 80% efficient - and a home would go through far more than 33 gallons in a month in the Northeast. A generator isn't even 50% efficient - so you have a lower efficiency, with a source of energy that has less energy per unit of volume, and using FAR less volume than what people actually use for heating.

To further shoot down your numbers, here's a typical gasoline generator: http://www.homedepot.com/p/Champion...table-Generator-with-RV-Ready-46533/202340001 At half capacity (2000 watts), its 4 gallon tank will last 12 hours. That's 8 gallons per 24 hour period, or 240 gallons of gasoline a month ($700+ in gasoline for a month). So, unless you're claiming that you actually meant $one-sixth of a dollar for gasoline this year, rather than $6 per gallon, you're not even in the ballpark. (This is to just cover regular electric use - it doesn't include the heating.)

 

[Jaskalas]

Nobody has presented a compelling reason to allow obsolete coal power plants that lack emissions controls to continue to operate. The Clean Air Act was passed in 1970 and the last decade has seen ever increasing pressure on the utilities (from multiple levels of government) to either modernize or replace these facilities so this whole thing isn't exactly out of the blue.

We agree it's not out of the blue.

"So if somebody wants to build a coal-fired plant they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them…" – Barack Obama

President Obama has kept his promise: “Electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket”

 

[Slew Foot]

liberals who voted for expensive energy complain that energy is expensve, news at 11.

 

[K1052]

We agree it's not out of the blue.

"So if somebody wants to build a coal-fired plant they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them…" – Barack Obama

President Obama has kept his promise: “Electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket”

I could give a shit what Obama or any politician said/says about it. Coal is only "cheap" power because it externalizes enormous costs like health and environmental damage (which are not at all unsubstantial), utilities have been allowed to pollute freely for far too long.

 

[OverVolt]

I could give a shit what Obama or any politician said/says about it. Coal is only "cheap" power because it externalizes enormous costs like health and environmental damage (which are not at all unsubstantial), utilities have been allowed to pollute freely for far too long.

I suppose it also helps that the USA is the Saudi Arabia of coal, we live on top of piles of the stuff, and its relatively easy to extract. It'd be like Saudi complaining they are in a desert and have to use all their water for drilling oil. Which they do. If you want energy you're just going to have to deal with it. If only we lived in a giant oasis of oil and water with a convenient place to put the waste, happens no where on the whole planet ever.

 

[wetech]

Questionable article. Rates didn't go up 110% in Salem, nh over a one month period.

Edit: googled it. Wow yeah that is nasty, some customers are getting hit with a huge increase but it is not the entire bill--only the supply. Salem electricity bills did not increase 110%, though. Less if you do the math but the article didn't bother.

Completely fail article actually. They want you to beleive that the increase was due to hiked rates when actually, it was colder in November. How much colder you may ask?

http://www.degreedays.net

Description: Fahrenheit-based heating degree days for a base temperature of 65F
Source: www.degreedays.net (using temperature data from www.wunderground.com)
Accuracy: No problems detected
Station: Salem, NH, US (71.21W,42.80N)
Station : KNHSALEM3

Month starting HDD
10/1/2014 371
11/1/2014 781

(781 / 371) -1 = 110%

Expected energy usage for November was actually 110% higher than October in Salem.

For those of you who don't know, a heating degree day (HDD) is a measure of how much colder and for how long the temperature outside is relative to a baseline indoor temperature (typically 65 deg). You can use this to estimate heating cost. As an example, my house uses 1 gallon of oil for every 8 HDD. If you ever plan on doing effeciency upgrades to your house, you can get a baseline and then do the calcs after the work is done to see the real world improvements.

 

[Jaskalas]

I could give a shit what Obama or any politician said/says about it. Coal is only "cheap" power because it externalizes enormous costs like health and environmental damage (which are not at all unsubstantial), utilities have been allowed to pollute freely for far too long.

Industry is shifting towards natural gas. Coal is sliding down a cliff.

Our government, however, intends to shove it off quickly - consequences of higher prices and potential blackouts be damned. I want it to happen slowly, and naturally - not forced by the strong arm of regulation. Not risking Americans in the cold of winter.

 

[K1052]

Industry is shifting towards natural gas. Coal is sliding down a cliff.

Our government, however, intends to shove it off quickly - consequences of higher prices and potential blackouts be damned. I want it to happen slowly, and naturally - not forced by the strong arm of regulation. Not risking Americans in the cold of winter.

Coal heavy utilities have had years to plan contingencies and many of the more stringent rules aren't even going into effect for several more years. Some plants will be converted and the ones that were already marginal will be closed and replaced. This has been long overdue.

 

[1prophet]

Yeah, let's convert all power plants back to coal. Because the only valid consideration is the direct cost of energy, and coal is cheap. Just ask the Chinese; they know.

Come to think of it, we could drastically reduce the cost of automobiles if we got rid of all those pesky safety standards. And what about those OSHA standards and child-labor laws? We could make things MUCH cheaper if only we allowed American companies to follow the third-world-country model.

Yep, cheaper should always be the determining factor in any decision.

Or we could require products to be made following OSHA and child labor laws no matter the country of origin or ban/tariff them if they want to sell in the USA.

We tax Americans overseas, we prosecute Americans for overseas sex crimes in accordance with US laws, don't see why we can't hold US companies to US labor, EPA, and OSHA laws if they want to sell their foreign made products services in the US.

 

[Wreckem]

I said that? Nope. What I oppose is the forced / hurried closing of existing coal energy production. EPA mandates you have less energy, prices go up, lights go out.

Natural gas is already replacing coal, but that isn't good enough for government officials who insist on pushing it off the cliff, along with our energy gird.

You bought the industry's line hook line and sinker. The reality is the EPA regs were 2 decades in the making. The industry knew eventually they would be implemented. They just choose to not do anything and say we don't have time. When they in fact have had plenty of time to respond.

 

[werepossum]

We agree it's not out of the blue.

"So if somebody wants to build a coal-fired plant they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them…" – Barack Obama

President Obama has kept his promise: “Electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket”

Yep. Needed to happen though, coal is environmentally very nasty.

Completely fail article actually. They want you to beleive that the increase was due to hiked rates when actually, it was colder in November. How much colder you may ask?

http://www.degreedays.net

Description: Fahrenheit-based heating degree days for a base temperature of 65F
Source: www.degreedays.net (using temperature data from www.wunderground.com)
Accuracy: No problems detected
Station: Salem, NH, US (71.21W,42.80N)
Station : KNHSALEM3

Month starting HDD
10/1/2014 371
11/1/2014 781

(781 / 371) -1 = 110%

Expected energy usage for November was actually 110% higher than October in Salem.

For those of you who don't know, a heating degree day (HDD) is a measure of how much colder and for how long the temperature outside is relative to a baseline indoor temperature (typically 65 deg). You can use this to estimate heating cost. As an example, my house uses 1 gallon of oil for every 8 HDD. If you ever plan on doing effeciency upgrades to your house, you can get a baseline and then do the calcs after the work is done to see the real world improvements.

I wondered about that too. Unless your business is electrocuting people or welding for walk-ins, weather is going to be a lot more determinant of energy use, and November was especially nasty.

Industry is shifting towards natural gas. Coal is sliding down a cliff.

Our government, however, intends to shove it off quickly - consequences of higher prices and potential blackouts be damned. I want it to happen slowly, and naturally - not forced by the strong arm of regulation. Not risking Americans in the cold of winter.

Actually it has been happening slowly. The plants being closed are the much older ones whose efficiency just didn't make them financially worth upgrading to modern emission standards. Obama has accelerated the process, to be sure, but the new plants and pipelines should have been started well before Obama took office to come on line now. Just getting the permits takes years, and construction of a brand new power plant typically takes three to four years from breaking ground to commissioning.

Coal is a dying fuel. Power Engineering showed just a handful of new coal power plant projects in America when Obama took office, and all but one or two have either been canceled or lost funding. Today most of their New Coal Projects page stories are about installing new emission controls or dealing with fly ash, and the remainder mostly are about projects in other countries.