Massive Pile Up In Fort Worth

Page 20 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

deadlyapp

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2004
6,622
720
126
The majority of leaks in commercial buildings we were called out on were the sprinkler lines in the above ceiling spaces. Uninsulated steel pipe in areas with no direct or adjacent heat for 2-3 days in single digit weather. We are also seeing a lot of water meter breaks. They are usually about 12" deep in a simple vault with no insulation. Just not built for this kind of weather.
I could not believe that we didn't lose the pipes in our commercial space. 2" line suspended overhead and pex to our bathrooms and the building owner didn't shut off the incoming line which was a PVC incoming line.
 

local

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2011
1,851
515
136
I could not believe that we didn't lose the pipes in our commercial space. 2" line suspended overhead and pex to our bathrooms and the building owner didn't shut off the incoming line which was a PVC incoming line.
One of the few good things about pex is that it can expand instead of breaking when there is a line freeze.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captante

deadlyapp

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2004
6,622
720
126
One of the few good things about pex is that it can expand instead of breaking when there is a line freeze.
I just wouldn't expect it to not leak at the fittings, but I suppose if it freezes and thaws mostly evenly, perhaps it wouldn't pull off.
 

Captante

Lifer
Oct 20, 2003
30,316
10,814
136
Here is a site with national average by States.



Interesting ... I rent currently and utilities are included so this doesn't affect me much but apparently much as we love to complain around here Connecticut rates are below national average at $8.39 to $8.90 per KWH for "fixed" plans.
 

Torn Mind

Lifer
Nov 25, 2012
11,878
2,712
136
Interesting ... I rent currently and utilities are included so this doesn't affect me much but apparently much as we love to complain around here Connecticut rates are below national average at $8.39 to $8.90 per KWH for "fixed" plans.
Wait. Dollars per KWH? Like what Texas charged during the emergency?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captante

Captante

Lifer
Oct 20, 2003
30,316
10,814
136
Wait. Dollars per KWH? Like what Texas charged during the emergency?

I stuck the dollar sign in without thinking about it ... it reads 8.49 to 8.89 cents per KWH on the page not sure if I'm getting it wrong.


(been awhile since I had an electric bill)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Torn Mind

Lifer
Nov 25, 2012
11,878
2,712
136
I stuck the dollar sign in without thinking about it ... it reads 8.49 to 8.89 cents per KWH on the page not sure if I'm getting it wrong.


(been awhile since I had an electric bill)
That number looks like it is just for "generation", which I think is deregulated everywhere now.

Generation here in MD is about 6 to 8 cents per KWH but tack on the regulated transmission and distribution charges and it comes out to the around the listed average on the website, which is 13-14 cents per KWH.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captante

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
9,429
12,971
146
It's Texas. Today Biden is visiting Texas and the governor is going to ask for even more federal money, to add to Texas being in the lead for most FEMA money received in the last few years. What a bunch of leeches.
What a bunch of hypocritical asshats for elected leaders...but that's nothing new.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
What a bunch of hypocritical asshats for elected leaders...but that's nothing new.
It's Texas. Today Biden is visiting Texas and the governor is going to ask for even more federal money, to add to Texas being in the lead for most FEMA money received in the last few years. What a bunch of leeches.



Can you 2 morons of dumb and dumber stick to your P&N bunghole?

The adults are talking here but you just have to make shit political, like other states are in complete and total order but Texas is just in utter chaos.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

Torn Mind

Lifer
Nov 25, 2012
11,878
2,712
136
The problem in Texas is 100% political in cause. The weather just exposed the problem.
Nah, just the usual humans not prepping for shocks and extreme outlier conditions. The state just happens to be red.

On the small scale level, storms become a boon for generator sellers on the used market wherever they hit because people are acclimated to the 99.5% of days where they don't need it and need that power right now. Likewise, Texas is simply too warm most of the time for them to prep for snow and cold.

Regulating utilities is a political non-issue except in extreme disasters and thus wherever you go, the government and the company are in a circle jerk most of the time. Then something like a derecho hit and after the autopsy, then you see changes in code. Took them long enough when I am. Things got taken out quite a few times over 2 decades before the derecho hit.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
You know, I think it's reasonable for customers to assume that whatever type of contract or rate they choose, they expect these businesses to build and support infrastructure that allows them to provide the fucking service that they are paying for, and when this business fails spectacularly to do that, to not then push those fucking egregious charges on to their customers when rebuilding their broken facilities....all the while still taking federal money to fix things, because it's suddenly "the right thing to do." Fuck them, and fuck them hard.

Anyone that supports this craven behavior is a fucking asshole.

Every time I hear an ignorant conservative bray about "Responsibility!" when it comes to contracts, it is absolutely never in defense of consumers, and only ever in defense of their corporate overlords that exist only to fucking steal wealth for everyone.

Texas deserves the absolute worst in leadership, because it seems that the people that live there, on average, must be the absolute worst of people. Sorry, but there is little observable evidence to argue against that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

deadlyapp

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2004
6,622
720
126
You know, I think it's reasonable for customers to assume that whatever type of contract or rate they choose, they expect these businesses to build and support infrastructure that allows them to provide the fucking service that they are paying for, and when this business fails spectacularly to do that, to not then push those fucking egregious charges on to their customers when rebuilding their broken facilities....all the while still taking federal money to fix things, because it's suddenly "the right thing to do." Fuck them, and fuck them hard.

Anyone that supports this craven behavior is a fucking asshole.

Every time I hear an ignorant conservative bray about "Responsibility!" when it comes to contracts, it is absolutely never in defense of consumers, and only ever in defense of their corporate overlords that exist only to fucking steal wealth for everyone.

Texas deserves the absolute worst in leadership, because it seems that the people that live there, on average, must be the absolute worst of people. Sorry, but there is little observable evidence to argue against that.
This isn't it at all. I certainly agree with you on the face of it, if you have a contract for terms, you can reasonably expect the company to adhere to that contract and not break that contract.

The problem is the stupid motherfuckers who DONT HAVE A CONTRACT because they are so easily tricked into thinking they are smarter than energy brokers, so they play the risks of high cost of energy, with the trade off of generally lower costs of energy. Now I'm not going to say companies like Griddy aren't deceptive, but when a company literally warns you that the cost of energy is going to skyrocket, and tells you to CHANGE COMPANIES, I can't see how that is deceptive.

I have zero sympathy for the people who use a service like Griddy and got stiffed with a high bill and are now trying to get out of it. A one billion dollar lawsuit is going to get laughed out of court, but I wouldn't be surprised if Griddy goes under just from pure bad press. At the end of the day, everyone else smart enough to have a fixed price contract is going to end up paying to cover these people also.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
23,003
21,127
136
This isn't it at all. I certainly agree with you on the face of it, if you have a contract for terms, you can reasonably expect the company to adhere to that contract and not break that contract.

The problem is the stupid motherfuckers who DONT HAVE A CONTRACT because they are so easily tricked into thinking they are smarter than energy brokers, so they play the risks of high cost of energy, with the trade off of generally lower costs of energy. Now I'm not going to say companies like Griddy aren't deceptive, but when a company literally warns you that the cost of energy is going to skyrocket, and tells you to CHANGE COMPANIES, I can't see how that is deceptive.

I have zero sympathy for the people who use a service like Griddy and got stiffed with a high bill and are now trying to get out of it. A one billion dollar lawsuit is going to get laughed out of court, but I wouldn't be surprised if Griddy goes under just from pure bad press. At the end of the day, everyone else smart enough to have a fixed price contract is going to end up paying to cover these people also.

The argument should be that on some level you expect a basic level of competency in providing service, normal fluctuations in price due to demand going up and down, as this crisis was easily avoidable.
 

deadlyapp

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2004
6,622
720
126
The argument should be that on some level you expect a basic level of competency in providing service, normal fluctuations in price due to demand going up and down, as this crisis was easily avoidable.
Easily avoidable sounds like something someone who has no idea how a power plant works would say.

The way the electricity system works here in TX is that the consumer purchases their energy from a broker. The broker purchases the electricity through a supplier - of which there are many - from the wholesale market. There is also the grid or transmission system, which is also maintained by another party based on where you live. ERCOT looks over all of this to balance demand and the reliability of the system.

The brokers (who the consumer purchases from) can decide how they structure their contracts with any given suppliers, and they then roll that all together for a price for a customer, including the local transmission charges, which generally wouldn't fluctuate. For the vast majority of brokers, they likely hedge their costs, so that sometimes they pay a much lower price than the consumer pays, and they make money, and sometimes they lose money (such as last week).

Since any given power generation company can charge whatever they want on the wholesale market, as generation failed last week, the wholesale price of electricity increased dramatically. This is how the de-regulated market works and whether or not it is right or wrong is going to be the discussion for another day. Perhaps everyone will be up in arms and will want to go back to a regulated market, but they should also expect the possibility for their rates to increase to hedge for things like this. Voters can stand behind whatever candidates they feel like to try to change this, or get in touch with their state reps to force the issue.
 

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
68,413
12,593
126
www.anyf.ca
Sounds more like a political issue than a technical one. If for any reason it really costed that much to provide power to the few that still had it due to power supplier issues, then they should have simply shut off all the reclosers. I'm sure anyone would agree they'd rather get a power outage than a multi thousand dollar bill.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captante

deadlyapp

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2004
6,622
720
126
Sounds more like a political issue than a technical one. If for any reason it really costed that much to provide power to the few that still had it due to power supplier issues, then they should have simply shut off all the reclosers. I'm sure anyone would agree they'd rather get a power outage than a multi thousand dollar bill.
You can't make a choice for a person when you simply think it's in their best interest. Yes, these people should have gone out to their breaker box and shut off all their breakers, but no doubt they felt they were impervious to the possible effects. It would have been smart for the provider to give an idea of what the cost of energy could be, but I don't know if we've ever seen costs as high as we saw last week.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
You can't make a choice for a person when you simply think it's in their best interest. Yes, these people should have gone out to their breaker box and shut off all their breakers, but no doubt they felt they were impervious to the possible effects. It would have been smart for the provider to give an idea of what the cost of energy could be, but I don't know if we've ever seen costs as high as we saw last week.

Yup. Like I said, my neighbor across the street was the one who actually introduced me to Griddy and he definitely made it sound appealing. At the end though I was happy with my current 5 year contract of not having to worry about shit.

Had I gone with Griddy - theres zero question I would turn off the breaker and left town for a week for a surprise vacation.

He's definitely hurting, though I don't have the heart to ask him what bill he received.
 

ondma

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2018
2,999
1,520
136
The argument should be that on some level you expect a basic level of competency in providing service, normal fluctuations in price due to demand going up and down, as this crisis was easily avoidable.
There should be some limit (set by the government) to how high the cost can climb in times of shortage, even if that means somewhat higher base rates in times of low usage. But we know Texans dont want the gumint interfering with their "rights".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captante

ondma

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2018
2,999
1,520
136
Easily avoidable sounds like something someone who has no idea how a power plant works would say.

The way the electricity system works here in TX is that the consumer purchases their energy from a broker. The broker purchases the electricity through a supplier - of which there are many - from the wholesale market. There is also the grid or transmission system, which is also maintained by another party based on where you live. ERCOT looks over all of this to balance demand and the reliability of the system.

The brokers (who the consumer purchases from) can decide how they structure their contracts with any given suppliers, and they then roll that all together for a price for a customer, including the local transmission charges, which generally wouldn't fluctuate. For the vast majority of brokers, they likely hedge their costs, so that sometimes they pay a much lower price than the consumer pays, and they make money, and sometimes they lose money (such as last week).

Since any given power generation company can charge whatever they want on the wholesale market, as generation failed last week, the wholesale price of electricity increased dramatically. This is how the de-regulated market works and whether or not it is right or wrong is going to be the discussion for another day. Perhaps everyone will be up in arms and will want to go back to a regulated market, but they should also expect the possibility for their rates to increase to hedge for things like this. Voters can stand behind whatever candidates they feel like to try to change this, or get in touch with their state reps to force the issue.
Seems to me "today" should be the operative term.
 

Captante

Lifer
Oct 20, 2003
30,316
10,814
136
The problem in Texas is 100% political in cause. The weather just exposed the problem.


Exactly.

However in order to understand this you have to fully understand what happened over the years which led up to this debacle and that takes some reading/research.

Texans of voting age need to find a mirror and have to look at the one to blame.
 

Red Squirrel

No Lifer
May 24, 2003
68,413
12,593
126
www.anyf.ca
You can't make a choice for a person when you simply think it's in their best interest. Yes, these people should have gone out to their breaker box and shut off all their breakers, but no doubt they felt they were impervious to the possible effects. It would have been smart for the provider to give an idea of what the cost of energy could be, but I don't know if we've ever seen costs as high as we saw last week.

With that same logic, the FD should not bust down your front door to go put out a fire in your house if they get a call from the alarm company.

Some decisions just make sense to do to save people from hardship. Clearly it was not in the company's interest to save anyone though, this was just an opportunity at gouging people out of their life savings or possibly even causing them to have to go bankrupt.