Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Myotherside t1_ixuoicp wrote

Reply to comment by ctrealestateatty in What will it take to rein in electricity prices in CT? by eddie964

I think you’re just rambling. I actually have a science degree and I’m telling you that whatever base load you offset by generation at the point of production, especially if it can be generated for a lower overall amortized cost at economies of scale (very feasible), is always going to be more efficient than centralized generation and long-distance transmission/distribution. Just look at your electric bill and see how cost-inefficient centralized generation and distribution is.

0

brewski t1_ixw24ju wrote

This is a pretty bold statement and one I haven't heard before. We lose maybe 10% of the energy in transmission and distribution. Modern combined cycle NG power plants run at 50-60% efficiency. Overall grid efficiency in the US is about 35%, which includes lots of old inefficient plants.

You'd be lucky to get 25% with a home NG generator. Probably more like 15-20. And then you're exhausting pollution right at your house, without the benefits of scrubbers or modern emission control systems. We'd be better off building new efficient centralized plants. At least until more efficient distributed generation options or residential CHP are more cost effective.

2

ctrealestateatty t1_ixw5mkx wrote

Yeah 7% loss is usually what I see. Even at 10 his statement makes no sense. And that’s without getting into environmental factors.

1

Myotherside t1_iy3jhqt wrote

It’s because you can’t read, LOL. And I don’t think you have any intention of trying based on the effort made so far.

I’m talking about cost inefficiency not line inefficiency. I could hang superconductors all over and it would have very low line losses while being massively cost inefficient. But you’re an attorney you should be at least smart enough to figure that out right?

We have a convenient metric showing the real COST of delivery associated with centralized generation and it’s RIGHT ON YOUR POWER BILL. How is this so hard to figure out.

0

Myotherside t1_iy3jggk wrote

Read my comment again I did not say generator. I said to heat a home. Direct combustion vs delivered power at market rates.

Then go back and read again and realize I’m using that example because it’s familiar to someone who is allergic to solar, and solar is actually less cost per kWh than market rates for delivered power.

And we haven’t even brought up externalized costs that aren’t represented by market pricing.

1

brewski t1_iy41vtd wrote

You said "generation". Twice.

"...whatever base load you offset by generation at the point of production, especially if it can be generated for a lower overall amortized cost at economies of scale (very feasible), is always going to be more efficient than centralized generation and long-distance transmission/distribution"

I recognize that it's often hard to be clear on this platform sometimes. If you're not talking about electric generation, then maybe you need to clarify.

Edit: Are you saying that burning fuel at home is more efficient that electric heating? I agree, that is a no brainer. But this is why very few people heat with electricity in the Northeast.

1

Myotherside t1_iy58kbs wrote

I was referring to solar, not on site nat gas.

Scroll ALL THE WAY UP for context

1

ctrealestateatty t1_ixw5jbi wrote

My electric bill doesn’t tell me anything you just said. It only has one of the variables you’d need - that of how much centralized generation and distribution are costing.

Edit: and home generation would be buying NG on the same market, without the bulk buying power.

1

Myotherside t1_iy3j1s8 wrote

It’s literally half your bill, I hope you’re not an actual attorney.

0