Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [hreg] Re: Response

Expand Messages
  • Steven Shepard
    One of the most dirty electric power generation plants in the USA is near Pleasanton, Texas and is owned by Karnes Electric. The plant was built right next to
    Message 1 of 4 , Oct 15, 2002
      One of the most dirty electric power generation plants in the USA is near
      Pleasanton, Texas and is owned by Karnes Electric. The plant was built
      right next to a lignite coal mine that has been in operation for over fifty
      years. This plant literally spews waste out a 300 foot tall stack. The
      rural landscape around this plant is littered with the refuse from this
      stack. This plant is allowed to continue to operate because they were
      allowed to grandfather their operation, because they are the only utility in
      the region at this time and because of regional political influence.

      Karnes Electric is a rural co-op utility operating in ten counties supplying
      power to several small cities and numerous rural residents. While each user
      is supposed to be an owner of this co-op in fact rigid control is maintained
      over this co-op by local politicians and land owners in and around Karnes
      County.

      We fought for four years to force Karnes Electric to allow one of our
      customers to intertie his wind power system. That battle continues today
      with Karnes Electric forcing our customer to pay for the insurance to
      connect his system as a commercial electric provider when in fact it is
      entirely residential.

      SBT Designs
      25840 IH-10 West #1
      Boerne, Texas 78006
      210-698-7109
      FAX: 210-698-7147
      www.sbtdesigns.com

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Robert Bruce Warburton" <warbur2@...>
      To: <hreg@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 7:07 PM
      Subject: [hreg] Re: Response


      > One reason that Texas might get coal from the states west of Texas is that
      > subbituminous coal is lower in sulfur and more common out west. Bituminous
      coal is
      > higher in heat than subbituminous, but higher in sulfur. Lignite is lower
      in heat
      > than subbituminous but higher in sulfur. According to the 1981 edition of
      National
      > Geographic that I read recently. For lignite coal to be competitive, a
      lignite coal
      > plant was built next to a lignite coal mine. This was in Texas, which has
      a lot of
      > lignite coal. The lignite coal in the U.S., is primarity south or west of
      Memphis
      > Tennessee. However, even with being next to a coal mine, the lignite coal
      plant was
      > not cost competitive and was shut down.
      >
      > "Charles L. Seaman" wrote:
      >
      > > Date kwh Cents/kwh
      > > 1/16/02 510 9.15
      > > 3/15/02 510 8.11
      > > 4/15/02 500 8.09
      > > 5/15/02 720 8.48
      > > 6/13/02 880 8.64
      > > 7/16/02 1330 8.89
      > > 8/13/02 1390 8.91
      > > Reliant Energy HL&P (Now Centerpoint)
      > >
      > > ----------
      > > >From: Ryan McMullan <mcmullan@...>
      > > >To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
      > > >Subject: Re: [hreg] Your questions - comments
      > > >Date: Sun, Oct 13, 2002, 11:15 AM
      > > >
      > >
      > > > We are coming up on a year since deregulation of energy
      production
      > > > in Texas, so probably the simplest, yet effective, comparison would be
      to
      > > > show the monthly price for all of the providers for "x" kWh per month
      and
      > > > the yearly price. In fact, a marketing angle Green Mountain could use
      > > > would be to show the cost per kWh for different companies, which jump
      > > > around each month, and theirs, which stays the same. Of course, the
      real
      > > > test is going to be what the prices do over the next five years as
      > > > companies can lower prices to initially get customers and present well
      on
      > > > the www.powertochoose.org website. Actually, looking closely at the
      > > > figures on the website, which vary widely (from $0.08/kWh to
      $0.95/kWh),
      > > > these are only estimates submitted by the companies for 1000kWh usage
      per
      > > > month. They are not actually a measurement of anything.
      > > > So lets get some real numbers together. My historical data
      from
      > > > Green Mountain since January is:
      > > > MonthkWhCostCents/kWh
      > > > Jan-02710$75.3410.6
      > > > Feb-02520$56.4710.9
      > > > Mar-02590$56.849.6
      > > > Apr-02600$57.729.6
      > > > May-021480$135.059.1
      > > > Jun-021320$120.999.2
      > > > Jul-021950$176.359.0
      > > > Aug-022240$201.839.0
      > > > Sep-022140$193.049.0
      > > >
      > > > How does this compare to others with Green Mountain or other
      providers?
      > > >
      > > > Ryan
      > > >
      > > > P.S.--Would it be handy to have one of the Green Mountain guys on this
      > > > list? Or the other companies for that matter? We could extend them a
      > > > conditional invitation, provided they don't send advertisements and
      the
      > > > like. We seem to be passing back and forth a lot of "I heard"
      information,
      > > > so it might be handy to get some info from the sources (through a
      biased
      > > > filter, of course, but we can adjust for that).
      > > >
      > > > At 08:24 AM 10/13/2002 -0400, you wrote:
      > > >>Mike, James, et al,
      > > >>
      > > >>It almost seems like they are trying to confuse us, and the more they
      > > >>"clarify" things the worse it gets. It's kind of like all the options
      you
      > > >>have for phone service. I am so confused about that I just stay with
      SW
      > > >>Bell - not even sure about that but I think that's who I'm with - and
      hell
      > > >>I'm an engineer so if I am confused I feel sure a lot of other people
      are
      > > >>too. It's just too hard and too confusing and too much trouble to try
      to
      > > >>do comparison shopping. I'm not even sure it can be done.
      > > >>
      > > >>It can't be that hard but I can't find any literature available from
      any
      > > >>of the service providers or any regulatory agency that makes it
      simple. If
      > > >>one Reliant something or other is different from the other Reliant
      > > >>something or other why are their names so similar? Was one a spin-off
      from
      > > >>the other? Why such similar names and then try to explain to us they
      are
      > > >>different? What is going on with that?
      > > >>
      > > >>And it's truly strange that between a third and a half of all the
      > > >>supplier's fuel (except GM) comes from coal. I think someone said
      Texas is
      > > >>a net importer of energy, and this is the reason. We don't export much
      > > >>(any?) but started bringing in huge amounts from Wyoming or somewhere
      up
      > > >>there back during the energy crunch when gas prices went through the
      roof.
      > > >>I think that had something to do with the bogus contracts Oscar Wyatt
      made
      > > >>with San Antonio, Corpus Christi, and other towns and finally had to
      > > >>wiggle out of. It helps to have good lawyers. Or does some of that
      come
      > > >>from Texas lignite, a very inferior, low BTU, high pollutant, but
      cheap
      > > >>form of coal?
      > > >>
      > > >>The 10% nuclear from everyone (except GM) I will not even comment on.
      > > >>
      > > >>And I saw in the Chronicle yesterday that natural gas futures (almost
      half
      > > >>of everyone's fuel) went up Friday by 31.8 cents to $4.146 with the
      > > >>explanation given that a cold front is forecast to sweep into the
      Midwest
      > > >>this weekend. I wonder how high it will get this winter, and how that
      will
      > > >>affect everyone's price on the famous fuel cost pass-through
      adjustment or
      > > >>whatever they call it? Everyone but GM, that is.
      > > >>
      > > >>I just feel sure in my gut that GM is the way to go for all kinds of
      > > >>reasons, probably even including price if they could make their case
      in a
      > > >>logical form but no one seems to be able to do that. I have complained
      to
      > > >>several GM people I have met that they may need a really good PR firm
      to
      > > >>get this across to all us doofuses out here who can't seem to do it on
      our
      > > >>own. Or maybe that's the problem - they need to fire their PR guys and
      get
      > > >>some new ones that can think down here on my level. Whatever. It's all
      > > >>pretty irritating.
      > > >>Charlie
      > > >>
      > > >>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > > >>ADVERTISEMENT
      > >
      >><http://rd.yahoo.com/M=212804.2460941.3878106.2225242/D=egroupweb/S=170506
      4177
      > > :HM/A=
      > > >
      810373/R=0/*http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info?.refer=blrecs>34ec395.jpg
      > >
      >><http://rd.yahoo.com/M=212804.2460941.3878106.2225242/D=egroupweb/S=170506
      4177
      > > :HM/A=
      > > >
      > >
      810373/R=1/*http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info?.refer=blrecs>34ec421.jpg<htt
      > > p://rd.ya
      > > >
      > >
      hoo.com/M=212804.2460941.3878106.2225242/D=egroupweb/S=1705064177:HM/A=81037
      > > 3/R=1/*ht
      > > > tp://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info?.refer=blrecs>
      > > >>
      > > >>34ec499.jpg
      > > >>
      > > >>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
      > > >><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
    • mark r. johnson
      ... which has a lot of ... west of Memphis ... coal plant was ... Robert, I wonder if you could provide the name of that lignite plant and its owner if
      Message 2 of 4 , Oct 17, 2002
        --- In hreg@y..., Robert Bruce Warburton <warbur2@e...> wrote:
        > ...a lignite coal
        > plant was built next to a lignite coal mine. This was in Texas,
        which has a lot of
        > lignite coal. The lignite coal in the U.S., is primarity south or
        west of Memphis
        > Tennessee. However, even with being next to a coal mine, the lignite
        coal plant was
        > not cost competitive and was shut down.

        Robert, I wonder if you could provide the name of that lignite plant
        and its owner if possible. I'm kind of a utility nerd and love to
        collect info such as this. Was this plant shut down prior to the
        National Geographic article in 1981? I thought utilities always used
        to successfully bury their mistakes.

        I understand Texas Utilities owns several lignite plants and still
        operates them. The old Houston Light and Power (now Centerpoint) built
        *one* lignite plant, I think it was in Limestone County halfway to
        Dallas. Hearsay was that was built on a mediocre vein of lignite,
        after 30 years of operation there would be none left. I have made
        myself a mental note to watch *that* one for closure, it hasn't
        happened yet.

        Can't think of anything good to say about coal and lignite, except
        cheapness. They are Nature's soup of odd materials, and inherently far
        more polluting than natural gas. Coal kills people more than other
        traditional fuels, that is not a theory but a fact. I think one of the
        best things to do for the environment would be to find a way to close
        down all coal plants as soon as practical to do so, I would rather see
        nuclear plants supply electricity rather than coal, based on
        environmental and safety reasons.

        Best wishes -- Mark J.
      • Robert Bruce Warburton
        Actually, I believe the coal plant was in East Texas and it was in the last few years not before 1981 that it was shutdown. Over 90 percent of our new power
        Message 3 of 4 , Oct 17, 2002
          Actually, I believe the coal plant was in East Texas and it was in the last
          few years not before 1981 that it was shutdown. Over 90 percent of our new
          power plants, from what I read, are natural gas fired. Since there has not
          been a new nuclear reactor ordered in this country since 1978, which was
          before Three Mile Island, I assume that the bulk of the non-gas fired power
          plants are coal fired. One thing I wonder about is has anyone every thought
          of using the warm water that comes from nuclear and fossil fuel power plants
          and using solar power to convert the warm water back into steam. Additional
          electricity could be produced.

          "mark r. johnson" wrote:

          > --- In hreg@y..., Robert Bruce Warburton <warbur2@e...> wrote:
          > > ...a lignite coal
          > > plant was built next to a lignite coal mine. This was in Texas,
          > which has a lot of
          > > lignite coal. The lignite coal in the U.S., is primarity south or
          > west of Memphis
          > > Tennessee. However, even with being next to a coal mine, the lignite
          > coal plant was
          > > not cost competitive and was shut down.
          >
          > Robert, I wonder if you could provide the name of that lignite plant
          > and its owner if possible. I'm kind of a utility nerd and love to
          > collect info such as this. Was this plant shut down prior to the
          > National Geographic article in 1981? I thought utilities always used
          > to successfully bury their mistakes.
          >
          > I understand Texas Utilities owns several lignite plants and still
          > operates them. The old Houston Light and Power (now Centerpoint) built
          > *one* lignite plant, I think it was in Limestone County halfway to
          > Dallas. Hearsay was that was built on a mediocre vein of lignite,
          > after 30 years of operation there would be none left. I have made
          > myself a mental note to watch *that* one for closure, it hasn't
          > happened yet.
          >
          > Can't think of anything good to say about coal and lignite, except
          > cheapness. They are Nature's soup of odd materials, and inherently far
          > more polluting than natural gas. Coal kills people more than other
          > traditional fuels, that is not a theory but a fact. I think one of the
          > best things to do for the environment would be to find a way to close
          > down all coal plants as soon as practical to do so, I would rather see
          > nuclear plants supply electricity rather than coal, based on
          > environmental and safety reasons.
          >
          > Best wishes -- Mark J.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.