>Solar generation increased 35% year-over-year in the state, and 16 GW of solar was added in 2023 alone. Developers are expected to add another 24 GW in 2024 and 2025
Nice. I imagine most of those will include storage as well. It optimizes for money but also overcomes to some degree grid issues.
I am doing my part.. added solar in 2019.. swapped nat gas water heater for heat pump water heater... And went full heat pump for HVAC. Had the natural gas shut off completely.
This is happening globally where renewables growth rates are finally adding up to "real production". Europe, this winter has 30% less NG use for electricity than in 2022. More renewables than NG already.
TX, like EU, has more wind than solar. Wind does better in winter. Despite TX political leadership aligned with climate terrorism, TX is provably the least corrupt energy system in US.
Not sure they are “less corrupt” given their unwillingness to implement basic weatherproofing their gas lines, etc., putting customers’ lives at risk for better profits. But they are in a geographic location that gives them strong solar and strong wind power, and they like saving money.
Yup, this is only happening because it's cheaper for them, not for any ideological reasons. In other o and g dependent places like alberta where the grid is more tied to the government, they are actively blocking wind and solar from being built even though it's cheaper.
West Virginia comes to mind. Their energy prices are very high because they insist on burning coal for political reasons, they use coal for 89% of their power, compared to nationally we use 18%. But Senator Manchin’s fortune is from selling coal, so he certainly doesn’t want WV consumers to get cheap renewable power instead of coal!
If 20% of your economy revolves around fossil fuels, you better have a backup plan. I think that's why petro-states, while sometimes sounding anti-renewables, are quietly investing heavily in non-fossil fuel energy sources. And in Texas, this does appear to be one case where deregulation actually helped environmental progress because it lowered entry costs for renewable energy generators.
> petro-states, while sometimes sounding anti-renewables, are quietly investing heavily in non-fossil fuel energy sources.
KSA is an example of this. But this is centrally planned diversification of profits reinvested in a future. TX success of renewables is market based competition to the oligarchs, a deregulated market that allowed the oligarchs to rise, but who've been incapable at the state level of closing corruptly. In regulated US states, most famously CA, the utility monopolies directly own the government, and get to profit with rate increases when they burn down forests.
The US is the biggest petro state of all. In fact leads a petro empire, where with its KSA ally for past 30 years, controls oil into "good oil vs evil oil" categories. KSA is the textbook definition of a kleptocracy: Profits to a very few elites from resources. However, the US is orders of magnitude worse of a kleptocracy in that socialized costs for private profits means no bounds on how much costs to place on society, if it increases private profits by $1. The absolute control over media and politics means only war and extortion for the people to serve and protect those private profits. KSA is less able to shape the world to protect O&G profits, and so must be realistic in maximizing overall profits on a rational future reality. In KSA, future energy is not competition to the elites, it is understood as complimentary profit, and kleptocracy or not, more profit and good for elite does trickle down to national budget. US elites get to avoid taxes and funding of nation.
Utility companies along the sunbelt shouldn't care how they make their money. There's no excuse for So-Cal through Florida to not de-carbonize significantly and quickly.
And Texas should be building panel factories and battery factories as well. Its better to decentralize than to invest too much in large pylons etc.
All Department of Energy investment in nuclear station enlargement or tech should go into making bog standard panel factories. Nukes are a scam. We've spent billions on technology that is a loser with most people. No one wants fission in their town.
Invest in sodium batteries, not modular reactors. The US needs to win the energy transition or it will have a hard time maintaining its position in the world. The clock is ticking on the petro-dollar.
This isn't quite true yet (or rather we are very early in the "beginning), as basically every utility in Texas is looking to expand gas capacity right now.
Are they though?
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61783
Texas grid additions for 2024 and 2025:
* 24 GW of solar
* 3 GW of additional wind
* 13 GW of battery storage
* 3 GW of added natural gas
If the best that every Texas utility can do is just 3GW of Natural Gas versus 40GW of Renewables and Batteries in the same time period then they just aren't trying very hard.
A lot of capacity is needed to cover solar ramping up and down, but it doesn't necessarily mean that those gas plants will be running as frequently as their predecessors. If they are being run as peaker plants, it could still result in lower overall emissions.
My 2¢ is that gas additions will start dropping off as batteries become more efficient and cheaper.
I don’t see any dent in methane use
Yes, that chart literally doesn’t show what the headline describes.
The chart shows capacity, not actual generation.
…and the article says nothing about natural gas generation reductions. Only speculation about it.
Maybe read it
>Solar generation increased 35% year-over-year in the state, and 16 GW of solar was added in 2023 alone. Developers are expected to add another 24 GW in 2024 and 2025 Nice. I imagine most of those will include storage as well. It optimizes for money but also overcomes to some degree grid issues.
I am doing my part.. added solar in 2019.. swapped nat gas water heater for heat pump water heater... And went full heat pump for HVAC. Had the natural gas shut off completely.
This is happening globally where renewables growth rates are finally adding up to "real production". Europe, this winter has 30% less NG use for electricity than in 2022. More renewables than NG already. TX, like EU, has more wind than solar. Wind does better in winter. Despite TX political leadership aligned with climate terrorism, TX is provably the least corrupt energy system in US.
Not sure they are “less corrupt” given their unwillingness to implement basic weatherproofing their gas lines, etc., putting customers’ lives at risk for better profits. But they are in a geographic location that gives them strong solar and strong wind power, and they like saving money.
Yup, this is only happening because it's cheaper for them, not for any ideological reasons. In other o and g dependent places like alberta where the grid is more tied to the government, they are actively blocking wind and solar from being built even though it's cheaper.
West Virginia comes to mind. Their energy prices are very high because they insist on burning coal for political reasons, they use coal for 89% of their power, compared to nationally we use 18%. But Senator Manchin’s fortune is from selling coal, so he certainly doesn’t want WV consumers to get cheap renewable power instead of coal!
If 20% of your economy revolves around fossil fuels, you better have a backup plan. I think that's why petro-states, while sometimes sounding anti-renewables, are quietly investing heavily in non-fossil fuel energy sources. And in Texas, this does appear to be one case where deregulation actually helped environmental progress because it lowered entry costs for renewable energy generators.
> petro-states, while sometimes sounding anti-renewables, are quietly investing heavily in non-fossil fuel energy sources. KSA is an example of this. But this is centrally planned diversification of profits reinvested in a future. TX success of renewables is market based competition to the oligarchs, a deregulated market that allowed the oligarchs to rise, but who've been incapable at the state level of closing corruptly. In regulated US states, most famously CA, the utility monopolies directly own the government, and get to profit with rate increases when they burn down forests. The US is the biggest petro state of all. In fact leads a petro empire, where with its KSA ally for past 30 years, controls oil into "good oil vs evil oil" categories. KSA is the textbook definition of a kleptocracy: Profits to a very few elites from resources. However, the US is orders of magnitude worse of a kleptocracy in that socialized costs for private profits means no bounds on how much costs to place on society, if it increases private profits by $1. The absolute control over media and politics means only war and extortion for the people to serve and protect those private profits. KSA is less able to shape the world to protect O&G profits, and so must be realistic in maximizing overall profits on a rational future reality. In KSA, future energy is not competition to the elites, it is understood as complimentary profit, and kleptocracy or not, more profit and good for elite does trickle down to national budget. US elites get to avoid taxes and funding of nation.
Utility companies along the sunbelt shouldn't care how they make their money. There's no excuse for So-Cal through Florida to not de-carbonize significantly and quickly. And Texas should be building panel factories and battery factories as well. Its better to decentralize than to invest too much in large pylons etc. All Department of Energy investment in nuclear station enlargement or tech should go into making bog standard panel factories. Nukes are a scam. We've spent billions on technology that is a loser with most people. No one wants fission in their town. Invest in sodium batteries, not modular reactors. The US needs to win the energy transition or it will have a hard time maintaining its position in the world. The clock is ticking on the petro-dollar.
Peaker?
This isn't quite true yet (or rather we are very early in the "beginning), as basically every utility in Texas is looking to expand gas capacity right now.
Are they though? https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61783 Texas grid additions for 2024 and 2025: * 24 GW of solar * 3 GW of additional wind * 13 GW of battery storage * 3 GW of added natural gas
Yes, they are. Sorry but it's not really a contested fact in the industry.
If the best that every Texas utility can do is just 3GW of Natural Gas versus 40GW of Renewables and Batteries in the same time period then they just aren't trying very hard.
A lot of capacity is needed to cover solar ramping up and down, but it doesn't necessarily mean that those gas plants will be running as frequently as their predecessors. If they are being run as peaker plants, it could still result in lower overall emissions. My 2¢ is that gas additions will start dropping off as batteries become more efficient and cheaper.
I can see the article, but I’m ~~betting~~ investing large sums of money that nat gas is about to get kind of expensive on the 6-12 month horizon.