 |
|
Next year in California, state regulators are likely to have the emergency power to control individual thermostats, sending temperatures up or down through a radio-controlled device that will be required in new or substantially modified houses and buildings to manage electricity shortages. The proposed rules are contained in a document circulated by the California Energy Commission, which for more than three decades has set state energy efficiency standards for home appliances, like water heaters, air conditioners and refrigerators.
The changes would allow utilities to adjust customers’ preset temperatures when the price of electricity is soaring. Customers could override the utilities’ suggested temperatures. But in emergencies, the utilities could override customers’ wishes. Final approval is expected next month. Reducing individual customers’ electrical use – if necessary, involuntarily – could avoid that, Rosenfeld said. “If you can control rotating outages by letting everyone in the state share the pain,” he said, “there’s a lot less pain to go around.” “This is an outrage,” one Californian said in an e-mail message to Rosenfeld. “We need to build new facilities to handle the growth in this state, not become Big Brother to the citizens of California.”
Another example of Big Brother intrusion into our daily lives? You decide. Of course this will only apply to new construction and remodels, not the mansions in Beverly Hills, the hot tubs in Malibu, or Ahnolds and Marias digs in Sacramento. Right, share the pain.
Uh oh, I guess I need to put an aluminum foil hat on the thermostat too. Someone needs to cock punch big brother.
Unbelievable. That actually might be a good idea, #1.
How about building some more power plants. California is crying about power problems, yet are the utilities planing on building more plants or are they using this as an excuse to raise rates and to pull this shit. Maybe the legislature should REQUIRE them to build more plants to adequately serve the peoples of California.
Coming soon, people who relocate their thermostat sensors into a thermos full of water that can be heated or cooled as desired to beat the system… using additional electricity of course.
Interesting… Here in Ontario, Canada the same program is being rolled out, but it is voluntary. Many people seem happy to sign up to have these devices installed.
#3: More peaking plants (intended to handle peak power demands) are needed in California now, as well as maintenance on the existing plants. This got California in trouble in 2001 (before 9/11) when a number of existing peaking (and maybe regular) plants broke down from deferred maintenance. New regular plants are also needed.
#5 I bet your farts don’t smell in Canada either.
They are trying that out here in my part of Colorado too. It is voluntary though. They install the fancy thermostat for free and you get a check for about $200 if memory serves.
Arkansas Power & Light (now Entergy) did this back during the fuel crisis in the ’70s. It was an optional program and a lot of folks did it for the automatic 5% discount they got on their electicity bill. I seem to remember a few people got suffered heat strokes when the system shut off A/C for what was supposed to be 20-30 minutes during pick use and then the system didn’t turn the A/C back on.
Most of us live under building codes that dictate how our water systems don’t contaminate the city water supply, how our electrical systems don’t burn down our neighborhood. I can’t buy a bathroom fixture that does not have some federal code dictating flow.
The real question is the required nature of this proposal.
Having lived for the last few years with regulated thermostats from Kansas City Power and Light, I can say I never noticed the degradation of my comfort, and I do believe it has helped keep the requirements for another power plant at a minimum.
Peace to you all in the new year!
Choices given a limited supply of energy:
a) Cycle back a little to reduce load and keep the power on.
b) Cycle back all the way when the power goes out because of system overload.
Sufficient power to avoid (b) is ideal, but having the option of (a) is completely reasonable.
#12 That may help, but does not solve the energy supply problems. That can only be solved with additional generation plants. Unfortunately, many power companies prefer the role of energy broker to that of energy creator. Its easier to buy and sell power and they make a bigger profit then if they actually had to build and maintain a power plant of their own.
Well they already regulate how you go to the bathroom, and how you drive, and what type of light bulbs you use, so this isn’t that much of a change.
Above these [citizens] an immense tutelary power is elevated, which alone takes charge of assuring their enjoyments and watching over their fate. It is absolute, detailed, far-seeing, and mild. It would resemble paternal power if, like that, it had for its object to prepare men for manhood; but on the contrary, it seeks only to keep them fixed irrevocably in childhood; it likes citizens to enjoy themselves provided that they think only of enjoying themselves. It willingly works for their happiness; but it wants to be the unique agent and sole arbiter of that; it provides for their security, foresees and secures their needs, facilitates their pleasures, conducts their principal affairs, directs their industry, regulates their estates, divides their inheritances; can it not take away from them entirely the trouble of thinking and the pain of living?
Tocqueville, Democracy in America
#13 – People want more power, for less money, with no environmental consequences,and a ‘not in my back yard’ attitude. You can’t blame the power companies… they don’t like power outages any more than you do. During power outages they sell zero electricity.
Power management is the solution. And the only power management tool that people pay ANY attention to is cost.
Some things that we need NATIONWIDE as part of a comprehensive energy independence policy:
a) More costly energy at peak hours regardless of load. Install smart meters that have clocks and record usage variably according to the time of day and rates for that time of day during the year.
b) Much more costly energy at peak demand. If things get really bad, it gets much more expensive to use electricity. You voluntarily reset your thermostat a few degrees just because you know that it will hurt you in the wallet.
c) Ranking devices by ‘essential need’. Your clothes washer is a low need item during power emergencies. Make it really expensive to operate… extra expensive during peak hours.
We waste energy like crazy due to it’s relatively low cost. We have all walked into a store that is so cold that you put on a sweater to go shopping, while it is 92 degrees outside. We could probably get rid of many power plants and still have excess power if there was some kind of reasonable incentive for power consumption management.
What’s the Big Deal?
Here in Minnesota, I requested to have this installed the same year I put in Central Air. It’s a little device that can shut off my air conditioning for up to 15 minutes out of each hour during peak demand times.
For this, I get a discount on ALL my electricity all summer long. Well worth it!
Presumably, they have used this at various times over the years — but I can’t tell, I’ve never noticed the difference. Except when paying my electric bill!
We could probably get rid of many power plants and still have excess power if there was some kind of reasonable incentive for power consumption management.
Not even close with this comment. Get a clue please.
People want more power, for less money, with no environmental consequences,and a ‘not in my back yard’ attitude. You can’t blame the power companies
Yeah you can. NIMBY is part of it, but energy suppliers have found it to be more profitable for their CEOs if they just let existing plants deteriorate and just buy and sell power to meet their needs. As a result, there are only a handful of companies that actually generate their own power. When it costs more to buy power they simply pass the cost on to us. You can conserve all you want, but the entire infrastructure is falling apart and energy companies simple don’t want to spend their profits to fix it.
When is that lame ass state going to fall ino the ocean ? Not soon enough. Hope big bro can’t swim.
How about public floggings for those who want to be warm! Who cares if you are sick! who cares if you have a newborn at home! How about a sensor that will shut off your engine like a rev limiter if you exceed the speed limit or use too much gas accelerating onto the freeway? And what about thos freeways? They aren’t free… pay your tool or stay off my road! I’m going to like the new America!
If you don’t like it move to Venezuela!
#18, gq,
If everyone reduced their energy use by 10%, we could remove several older, highly polluting coal generators from the grid. There would still be more than enough capacity to service everyone. We have gotten too used to unlimited energy and will need to change our attitudes to what is available.
Is your back yard available for a major nuclear generating plant?
Is your back yard available for a major nuclear generating plant?
Yes, Yes, Yes
A local nuclear power station means, lower or sometimes no local property tax. Considering the safety record of American built reactors, it sounds like a good deal to me.
We have gotten too used to unlimited energy and will need to change our attitudes to what is available.
No we shouldn’t. Its 2008 and in this day and age there is no reason for power shortages. Its only due to the reluctance of power companies to re-invest in the infrastructure that this country is in such a power mess.
I know all you greenies would love to return to the good old days of farming and the horse and buggy, but progress moves on. You can stay behind if you want. You might want to move to Amish country.
#16, Awake
[sic]
OK, come pay my electric bill, it’s so frickin’ cheap.
Reducing consumption is not the answer for me. I’m not cutting back any more just because another 1,000,000 people are predicted to move here within the next 8 years. I’ve already cut back all I can. New energy efficient A/C + heat (big bucks for that). All light bulbs replaced with fluorescents. No “drains”, like chargers etc. Insulation coming out the attic. Multi-pane doors & windows. I’m not moving underground. I’ll keep my house at 72 in the summer and 68 in the winter. Tough.
Build more power plants, utilizing some of the new techs. Nuclear would be the deal if the darned public wasn’t so freaked (and the NRC isn’t helping). The waste disposal techniques are catching up.
Clean coal is here, with almost total CO2 scrubbing and recovery. Natural gas is clean with the same tech.
Where’s fusion power? Once that’s here, all this argument will disappear. Maybe when the oil/coal/gas cos. don’t lobby the govt., the funding will be spent where it will do the most good.
Yeah, right!
Illinois is starting to have the same problems as California. When a peeker plant was proposed to be built outside of Chicago, since the Zion nuclear plant was closed because it was old and from environmentalist pressure, it was voted down after a very vocal complaint of “stop the stacks” compleat with pictures of smoke stacks billowing smoke. Of course this plant would use natural gas and produce less emissions then a handful of homes.
They say the peeker plant would output as much emissions as 4 homes, but even if it was more, it would not compare to the growth that has happened in the past 10 years. The area around Chicago has grown so much, but it’s electircal grid has shrank. We are dependent on other states to supply power, but when they begin to have the same problems then what do we do? The environmental rent-a-mob moves from town to town stopping progress, but then leave so the people who live there have to suffer with these idiots opinions.
>Make it really expensive to operate… extra expensive during peak hours.
A sensible post. I hope you keep this thinking in mind the next time someone throws out accusations of ‘price gouging’
>> >Make it really expensive to operate… extra expensive during peak hours.
>> A sensible post. I hope you keep this thinking in mind the next time someone throws out accusations of ‘price gouging’
Mike, Mike, Mike…
Please sit down while I explain this to you… I will speak slowly so maybe you can follow it…
If I have a choice between products, and I choose to use the more expensive product, there is no price gouging, it is my choice.
Same thing for power usage during peak hours. If I choose to do a laundry load at the most expensive time of the day, and my rate is high, well that is my choice. I am not being gouged, I am making my own choice to pay a higher rate.
Compare this with the situation with gasoline. We do not have a choice in prices of gasoline, outside of a narrow range between gas stations. One of the big justifications for gas prices is lack of refining capacity, but the fact is that we would have plenty of capacity were it not for people that don’t care and drive gas guzzlers. I can drive an economy car and save money, but that does not reduce the price of gasoline because the majority swallow the high price, complain and continue to drive a gas guzzler. You want the price of gasoline to come down? Force a reduction by providing an extra incentive to use less, aside from the actual cost… charge a penalty for gas guzzling cars, such an extra tax by vehicle model and mileage rating… watch the population start to shift to high fuel economy vehicles and the price of gasoline could start to come down due to increased availability without building new refineries.
Right. The oil companies have so much incentive to rebuild production capacity and refineries after Katrina, now that gas is $3.00 / gallon and the traffic will allow it.
Show us where the new refineries are being built. Three years after Katrina and no new refineries are online. It’s not consumption that’s gone up so much, the supply has gone down since Katrina (no new refineries have been built in the US in 30 years).
Demand is the same or a little more since Katrina, and people are willing to gripe about it and yet still pay the price.
It just couldn’t get any better for big oil than this. Well, maybe some tornadoes in W TX.
You know, its beyond simple minded to simply bitch about something without offering an alternative? So, I was quite happy to see #5’s post (and subsequent confirmation) supply the answer that should make everyone happy? (except those who want nookclearer power no matter what–Bubba?)
Some folks just dont deal well with consequences and the real choices consequences require to be made.
Now Bubba (post #23)–“The waste disposal techniques are catching up.” Please confirm==are nuclear waste disposal techniques catching up or is there in fact NO DISPOSAL TECHNIQUE
AT ALL FOR NUKE WASTE?
You tend to post the possible or the hoped for as fait accompli at least as a subject to worry about? Not very good science in my book.
((Eds–seems like a common typo causes the draft to get posted?))
You mean like most of Europe? Seems like the US is behind the curve on this one.
I don’t see the problem. Where I live, there are a couple of days a year where the demand for electricity doubles so of course the infrastructure has to be built and maintained to cope for just a handful of days a year. I then get to pay for that infrastructure through my bill, even though the component of my bill that covers actual consumption is quite low. There is a system here that allows the supplier to turn off just the refrigeration yet allow the fan to keep running and if it’s off for a couple of minutes you don’t even notice. Much better than a rolling blackout.