NativeMasshole t1_j1r8zq2 wrote
Reply to comment by Ilikereddit15 in Wind developers’ tightening financials call New England project into question by stewart0077
Seems more likely that they don't want to have to pay for any of the infrastructure to support transmission. We really should be investing heavily in the next generation power grid to support all the renewables, but that's kind of tough when they're all owned by some of the most hated private interests in the country. They don't want to invest on their own, we can't make them, and nobody trusts them with subsidies.
-Anarresti- t1_j1rjsjy wrote
It sounds like we need to stop relying on the private sector.
Ilikereddit15 t1_j1rps57 wrote
But who is gong to build the farms?
OneRingOfBenzene t1_j1rpiau wrote
Widely speaking, the utilities don't have to pay for the transmission infrastructure, at least not the transmission infrastructure that is required to support these wind projects. That infrastructure would also be paid for by the wind project.
New England utilities are not allowed to own generation, which means that they're also not competing with the wind project for revenue.
In my opinion- at the end of the day, the reason these larger projects are moving slowly is simple: They're hard, and they're expensive. And land rights- particularly in New England- make the required transmission infrastructure to support the generation doubly hard and doubly expensive.
Cobrawine66 t1_j1rq2qu wrote
Most if not all of the wind cocompanies are foreign companies that sometimes pair up with American companies for optics.
Ilikereddit15 t1_j1shfj5 wrote
Orsted 💪
Cobrawine66 t1_j1uhc84 wrote
Orsted is Danish.
Orsted US is just a subsidiary.
Ilikereddit15 t1_j1uqxpl wrote
I know — you said most are foreign…so I gave Orsted as an example
Cobrawine66 t1_j1v33t2 wrote
Ohhh, gotcha!
Ilikereddit15 t1_j1rcr72 wrote
Yeah it’s pretty funny when their websites espouse their goals of moving to renewables then this happens…we’ll see what comes of it in April
Cobrawine66 t1_j1rq74i wrote
It's all about the $$$ for them. Not about the environment.
femtoinfluencer t1_j1uz53z wrote
> Seems more likely that they don't want to have to pay for any of the infrastructure to support transmission.
This is an anecdote, but I've never lived anywhere in the USA with electric distribution infrastructure as seemingly shitty as Masschusetts. As soon as the weather gets even a touch spicy, it's a question whether the power will go out, and at least in my experience it's been that way since the 1990s (which was the first of several times I've lived in state or split my time between MA and somewhere else).
Like look. I know it's still within spec for a "developed country" - we don't have rolling blackouts, the power is on 99.9% of the time. But that being said I've never lived anywhere else where most of the houses in well-to-do neighborhoods have a generator on a concrete pad outside. I was staying with friends who are fairly well off and was walking around that neighborhood last year when the power went out and it was quite an experience suddenly hearing like 50 generators autostart, took me half a minute to figure out what the hell was happening. That level of not being able to trust the power company isn't typical for the entire USA, and that includes other places which get cold af in the winter.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments