←back to thread

71 points seanobannon | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
hannob ◴[] No.43462913[source]
As a counterpoint, I recommend this article: https://ketanjoshi.co/2024/08/12/texas-builds-clean-power-bu...

It looks into the numbers for the Texas renewable buildout, and there's a very important caveat: the amount of renewables you build is not the relevant metric. Emission reduction is. And Texas does not succeed there.

replies(4): >>43462951 #>>43463006 #>>43463170 #>>43463219 #
jandrese ◴[] No.43462951[source]
> Emission reduction is. And Texas does not succeed there.

Are you saying they would have released less CO2 had they installed natural gas power plants instead?

replies(2): >>43463004 #>>43463010 #
ZeroGravitas ◴[] No.43463004[source]
Maybe they are saying that if they'd followed California's policies they'd have a higher percentage of their power from renewables and they wouldn't be so wasteful with the energy they do generate.

Because that's the point of this article isn't it? To follow Texas policies, not California's, by pointing to absolute numbers of renewables.

If they looked at absolute numbers on coal and gas they'd look worse.

replies(1): >>43463031 #
epistasis ◴[] No.43463031[source]
California is not plummeting in total emissions either, which is the point of the plots in there.

The only thing that could move this along faster is to shut down fully running and functional fossil fuel facilities, which means that the huge capital assets are stranded and a big loss to the people who paid for them.

There, Texas's approach of private investors bearing the cost of that poor investment will fare much better than California's approach of letting the utility bill customers for their poor decisions. (I say this as a Californian absolutely INFURIATED at our toothless public utility commission allowing six whole rate increases in the past year, making electricity for a heat pumpfar more expensive than burning gas for heating, and making charging an EV about the same cost as fueling gas car, instead of much cheaper.)

replies(2): >>43463102 #>>43463177 #
Spivak ◴[] No.43463102[source]
> and making EVs about the same cost as a gas car

At first I was like, isn't that great EVs are the more expensive car but then I realized you meant that the electricity costs as much as the equivalent gas. Oof. Yikes. That's really bad.

replies(2): >>43463247 #>>43464418 #
epistasis ◴[] No.43463247[source]
Thanks for pointing out that ambiguity, I hopefully edited for better clarity!

The other problem in California is that most heating is done via natural gas, and though heating needs are fairly low if houses had any sort of insulation, there's basically zero insulation in all homes. Which means that every winter, people experience massive natural gas bills that should be close to zero, making it very problematic to switch some of the utility cost burdens from the electricity side to natural gas side. Meanwhile, PG&E profits are at the very top of the utility stock list for its profit margins...

replies(2): >>43463268 #>>43463486 #
baggy_trough ◴[] No.43463268[source]
> there's basically zero insulation in all homes.

This is completely false.

replies(3): >>43463327 #>>43463457 #>>43466068 #
triceratops ◴[] No.43463457[source]
I read "zero insulation" as "shit-tier insulation" and that is approximately accurate for a lot of Bay Area housing.
replies(1): >>43463493 #
baggy_trough ◴[] No.43463493{3}[source]
That's closer to the truth, but to say that all homes have basically zero insulation is just wrong.
replies(1): >>43463528 #
triceratops ◴[] No.43463528{4}[source]
Well sure drywall is technically an insulator, since it's not a thermal or electrical conductor. So is the single pane of glass found on most windows.

Maybe there's some stuff between the drywall and stucco? I never checked because the lead paint on the walls (any of the walls I've lived among; the Bay Area has a lot of old, shit housing) made me wary of drilling holes.

replies(1): >>43463629 #
1. baggy_trough ◴[] No.43463629{5}[source]
I have lived in multiple homes in the bay area of differing vintages, and they all had at least some attic insulation. I'm not sure what was in the walls. Newer homes have better insulation, of course.