
Californians are paying billions for power they don't need - blondie9x
http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-electricity-capacity/#nt=notification
======
refurb
_Critics agree that some excess capacity is needed. And, in fact, state
regulations require a 15% cushion. California surpasses that mark and is on
pace to exceed it by 6 percentage points in the next three years_

Hmmm... as soon as I hit this point in the article I really lost a lot of
enthusiasm to keep reading.

The article throws out all these shocking stats about too many power plants,
show a scary graph where the supply keeps going up even though demand if flat.
Frightening!!

The they readily admit that a 15% surplus in generation capability is a good
thing! In fact it's a requirement by law. Suddenly a 21% excess doesn't seem
all that scary.

~~~
toast0
I think the real question (not addressed by the article) is how much projected
surplus there is as older plants reach their scheduled closure dates.
Especially given the experience at San Onofre where the plant was closed early
due to unexpected problems, it's reasonable to consider capacity if the 2.2 GW
at Diablo Canyon goes offline before the current schedule of 2025.

~~~
cladari
I'm sure you mean MW. Diablo Canyon supplies about 8.5% of the states energy.

~~~
masklinn
> I'm sure you mean MW.

Unlikely, 2.2MW is pretty much nothing, it's the nameplate capacity of a
single relatively large wind turbine (but not a huge one, the current record-
setter is the 8MW Vestas V164). Even in SMR few commercial design go that low,
there's only ABV (3~10MWe) and the quite odd ELENA effort (68kWe), but most
designs are 2~3 digits electrical.

Diablo Canyon has a nameplate capacity of 2240MWe over two reactors, which is
about 2.2GW.

------
jedberg
In 1999, I worked in IT, and one of the graphs we had on our "big board" was a
feed from the CA power grid, showing utilization vs peak generation capacity.
We had to keep an eye on it because if usage got to close to capacity, the
state would start rolling blackouts, which might shut down the server room in
our office, so we had to be ready and shut down any non-critical machines so
that the rest could shut down after switching to the UPS.

It was not a good time. It's also important to remember that these things take
a long time to build, so they were still being approved when solar was
expensive and server rooms were still expanding.

I think it's a good thing that they are over provisioned and anticipating
future growth. I would assume that generation will get closer to the demand
curve over time as it levels out.

~~~
tyre
If you're referring to the CA electricity crises of 2000/2001, these were
caused by Enron manipulating energy supply.[1]

Smartest Men in the Room is a great book about Enron's history.

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis)

~~~
jack9
But not the subsequent ones?

"the ISO has imposed short rotating outages in 2004, 2005, 2010 and 2015,
mostly related to unexpected transmission line or power plant outages during
periods of unusually high demand." \- Rueters

~~~
jmanderley
That sounds like an issue of transmission capacity and redundancy, not energy
production.

------
dmritard96
I am tangentially in this space in that we build tech that allows for demand
response capabilities, specifically for mini-split and other air conditioning
systems ([https://flair.co](https://flair.co), shameless plug).

This article seems to be missing some important details that are rather
relevant in statements of 'capacity' and 'demand'. Specifically, demand is
dynamic with energy 'rush hours' at certain times of the day and lows at
others. One reason that this is relevant is that often times these companies
build 'peaker' plants to handle the rush hour loads that may be present
significantly less than 1% of the time. Its not that you neceisarily need to
speak to this phenomena but treating demand as a static number leaves a bunch
of things unclear. For instance, what is the average over capacity and what is
the excess capacity at peak demands.

Another thing that was missing to me - electric cars and gas systems. At the
moment a decent amount of space heating, water heating and cooking systems
require gas but arguably as we begin cleaning our power sources, it will make
less sense to use gas and having more electric capacity will make making this
sort of decision or switch much easier. Not to mention safer given the massive
gas issues in southern california recently...

In terms of electric cars - I haven't seen the growth numbers or how much
anticipated load there is but it seems like electric cars over the next 10
years may add a nonnegligable load to the grid. This is also complicated as
the solar generation capacity and localized storage (power walls and other
similar at home batteries) markets are just starting to get interesting. I
would love to see a more comprehensive story with numerical predictions about
where additional loads and suppliers are headed instead of bickering between
industry veterans. It seems like depending upon how those shake out, this
excess capacity could prove even more foolish than some are arguing or it may
seem forward looking. Interesting article but missing some of the more dynamic
and relevant questions so making a more conclusive judgement is limited at
best imho.

~~~
CaliforniaKarl
Completely anecdotal, but among apartment-dwellers, I doubt electric cars will
take off as much as one might expect.

I live near the Palo Alto-Los Altos-Mountain View border, and I've lived in
two apartment buildings, one of which was just built (I was the first to move
into my apartment, 12 months ago). My first place had no electric vehicle
charging at all, and the second has a total of four spots, which aren't
shared.

I already have my own electric meter for my apartment, and I'd be perfectly
happy to pay for a second meter at my carport, but I don't see that happening
soon, and so that makes me wary to buy an electric car.

~~~
toomuchtodo
"For residential leases signed, renewed or extend on or after July 1, 2015,
landlords are required to approve a tenant’s written request to install an
electric vehicle charging station at the tenant’s parking space if the tenant
enters into a written agreement which includes requirements regarding the
installation, use, maintenance and removal of the charging station, requires
the tenant pay for all modifications, and requires the tenant to maintain a
$1,000,000 general liability insurance policy. The charging station and
modifications must comply with all applicable laws and covenants, conditions
and restrictions. The tenant is required to pay the cost associated with the
electric usage of the charging station. The landlord is not required to
provide the tenant with an additional parking space in order to comply with
this law. This law does not apply: (1) when parking is not included as part of
the rental contract; (2) to properties with fewer than five parking spaces;
(3) to properties subject to rent control; (4) when 10% or more of existing
spaces already have electric vehicle charging stations."

[http://www.kts-law.com/electric-vehicle-charging-stations-
fo...](http://www.kts-law.com/electric-vehicle-charging-stations-for-
california-landlords/)

It doesn't cover all cases, but its progress.

------
Animats
I wonder about this article. Natural gas plants are mostly fuel cost over
their lifetime. It's common to run natural gas plants only during peak
periods, and startup and shutdown are straightforward. There's nothing wrong
with 47% utilization of a natural gas plant.

I'm happy having lots of redundancy in electric power. California has
earthquakes, wildfires, and droughts. Keeping the power on through those is
worth a little extra cost.

Also, think of it as being electric car ready.

~~~
stdbrouw
The article doesn't address this, but the interactive graphic does: 831 out of
1170 California power plants (71%) are operating at less than 1/3 of capacity.

~~~
Animats
That's about normal. The peaking plants shut down off-peak. Last night's
California power demand was about 20GW at minimum. Peak today is about 30GW.
The historical peak (Jul 24, 2006, hottest day recorded in California, with 38
heat-related deaths[1]), was 50GW. Generating capacity has to be sized for
that peak.

[1]
[http://www.caiso.com/outlook/outlook.html](http://www.caiso.com/outlook/outlook.html)
[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North_American_heat_wave](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North_American_heat_wave)

~~~
stdbrouw
Initially you mentioned that 47% is fine, now <33% utilization is also fine,
okay, but what kind of utilization isn't?

~~~
Animats
Generating capacity is needed based on the peak, not the average. On the peak
hour of the peak day, you'd like to have 15% more nameplate capacity than
you're using. Some stations will be out of service for maintenance, and
something may fail.

PJM training on this: [1]

[1]
[http://www.screencast.com/t/9qPkoGacrnm](http://www.screencast.com/t/9qPkoGacrnm)

------
matt_wulfeck
Excess power is kind of like garage space. If there's any available, we'll
usually find some to take.

The amount of potential energy from rooftop solar is insane. It's so powerful
and cheap that in my home buying selection I'm avoiding homes with obstructed
south-facing rooftops.

Rather than building plants we should be expanding the "dumb" residential grid
to handle many, many more kW of residential solar and fairly subsidize the
owners who feed it.

~~~
tdb7893
Rooftop solar is already oversubsidized by net metering in many places. I
would be much more for it if rooftop solar could guarantee capacity (and
therefore actually reduce infrastructure costs on the grid) and was paid the
wholesale instead of retail costs for electricity but as it is the utility
companies are losing money for all the power that goes on the grid and that
money is only going to people rich enough to buy dollar panels. I haven't
talked to someone recently but last time I checked residential solar was often
inefficient compared to commercial solar and a subsidy for the rich

~~~
matt_wulfeck
The issue as you say in the beginning is capacity. Part of the solution is
certainly energy storage (and here's tons of innovation happening here, ala
tesla batteries etc). The other part is smartening the grid to utilize the
most power when it's the most available.

I can imagine a desalination plant that cranks during the hottest part of the
day when electricity is cheapest, and slumbers during the night.

Of course most of these problems are usually issues of economics. When it
becomes cheaper to do it then it will happen.

~~~
tdb7893
The problem right now is that if you look at it economically rooftop solar
doesn't make a lot of sense and is mainly being driven by subsidies (which are
being paid for by everyone else). My guess is that large scale commercial
solar will end up generally more economical than rooftop solar.

------
maxerickson
$1 billion is about $30 per California person.

So Californians can spend a billion without it being much of an emergency.

Doesn't mean they should be happy with waste/poor regulation, just that
billion isn't all that impressive a benchmark given the population of the
state.

~~~
will_pseudonym
And it isn't exactly self evident that it is "power that they "don't need."
Increasing power production would reduce costs for everyone, which would be
great for consumers, especially the poor.

~~~
maxerickson
The way generation is regulated, excess capacity doesn't necessarily reduce
rates (the utility gets approval to increase rates to cover the capital cost
of generation).

------
kissickas
Excess power in California? Sounds like a good time to build a desalination
plant.

------
nickjarboe
Maybe electricity rates in California should be dropped to increase demand.
The state has one of the highest electricity rates in the country [1].

[1]
[http://www.neo.ne.gov/statshtml/204.htm](http://www.neo.ne.gov/statshtml/204.htm)

------
stevenmays
I fully recommend The Grid by Gretchen Bakke. It goes over this subject in
great detail.

Link: [https://smile.amazon.com/Grid-Fraying-Between-Americans-
Ener...](https://smile.amazon.com/Grid-Fraying-Between-Americans-
Energy/dp/1608196100/)

------
CaliforniaKarl
I wonder, if there were more data center capacity in the state, would that
help?

For example, take Tracy, or some of the land around SR 46 west of Lost Hills:
If a cloud provider built facilities there, that would add a fairly constant
draw on the state's power supply, with some small flexibility[1]. I wonder if
that would be enough to reduce CA electricity prices (as weird as that might
sound).

[1]: In the case of AWS, imagine if there were a power shortage, they could
respond by massively increasing spot prices, causing load shedding, and
allowing hardware to shut down.

------
stdbrouw
Not saying the article is perfect, but I'm seeing the same one or two
counterarguments presented over and over again in almost identical fashion. Am
I paranoid or are we being astroturfed?

------
pfarnsworth
My dream is solar shingles, like what they advertised late last year, and a
Tesla house battery, but my electricity costs are $50/month, maybe $60 if I
decided to get lazy and use my heater downstairs in the morning. And this is
for a reasonably-sized home in the SF Bay Area. Even if I got AC (I currently
don't have it), it still might not be enough to justify solar panels. I think
I would have to convert all my gas appliances to electricity, and then it
would push me into territory that would justify them.

~~~
dx034
Solar panels can still make sense, you can sell the excess energy you don't
use. The amount you currently spend doesn't really affect how profitable solar
panels can be. It's rather a concern if you want to be independent of the
grid.

------
Shivetya
So basically a regulated public utility used its position to build plants to
push independents out of the market all the while knowing the capacity wasn't
needed. It was a power play supported by the regulating committee that should
have said no.

The first step in fixing such issues is to block those companies protected by
status of being public utilities from contributing to political campaigns.

The issue not covered by the article from what I can see is, how much of this
is baseload power and no peak power or variable (renewable)

------
tristanj
I'm not sure how the author managed to write this article without mentioning
that California imports over 33% of its electricity every year. Up from only
25% net imports 6 years ago.

------
ChuckMcM
I would be happy if we could just turn off coal[1] rather than these plants.

[1]
[http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/tracking_progress/docume...](http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/tracking_progress/documents/current_expected_energy_from_coal.pdf)

------
tn13
Californians are paying a lot of money for things they don't need. A high
speed train, subsidies for dairy and what not.

------
moo
Early 2000s Californians were having rolling blackouts. Was it really bad
planning or due to Texas energy crooks Enron?

------
davidf18
Higher energy prices lead to less electricity use which leads to less
greenhouse gas emissions.

------
moreoutput
So Tim Burton's second Batman movie?

