Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[Jed Rothwell]

bobcook39...@hotmail.com  wrote:


> The utilities love that combination of lower cost and higher profit
> margins,  with no competition.
>

The utilities do have a valid point regarding electricity from rooftop PV
installations. It costs them money to accept this electricity and to
integrate it safely into their grid. For example, the incoming power from a
rooftop PV installation has to be metered, and during a power failure, the
power a PV installation would be dangerous, so it has be cut off. This
means the power company meter and other equipment has to be more
complicated. The power company gets very little electricity from a rooftop
installation, and I doubt they make a significant profit from it. It is
probably not worth it to them.

This is not like asking Amazon to sell 10 copies a year of an e-book.
Amazon can do that profitably because that business scales down and it is
profitable even at a few dollars per year. It does not require Amazon to
install something like a hardware meter at your house.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Harry-

Most electricity prices are set by state commissions.  These commissions ignore 
the lower costs associated with reduced  production and the resulting increased 
profit margin of the utilities they regulate.

The utilities love that combination of lower cost and higher profit margins,  
with no competition.

Bob Cook


From: H LV 
Sent: Saturday, March 3, 2018 8:48:01 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the 
USA

Bob, do you think the ultility companies are keeping demand depressed by 
keeping prices high in their favour?

Harry

On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 8:13 PM, 
bobcook39...@hotmail.com 
> wrote:


My local utility currently charges me about $100 per year to feed electricity 
to them which they sell at their regular rate.  The politicians for some reason 
allow such an unfair practice.

RE: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Jones—

You noted: “The grid suppliers on average are receiving about the same income 
today despite higher prices due to lower demand. It is that simple.”


I would think considering supply and demand economics that a lower demand would 
reduce prices of electricity as occurs with reduced demand for most 
commodities.  IMHO it’s the Utility Industry/Government Complex that has kept 
electricity prices high via the actions of state commissions that set local 
electricity rates and hand out greater profit margins to the utilities.

YOU NEED TO FOLLOW THE “BUCK” RIGHT THRU THE UTILITY COMMISSION POLITICAL 
APPOINTEES AND THEIR APPOINTERS POCKETS.

The cheap wholesale cost of electricity from TVA and other publicly owned 
energy sources like here in the Northwest do not seem to occasion grid charges 
from utilities  for use of their local grids,  contrasting with the charge I 
get for giving them electricity.

Bob Cook


From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com
Sent: Saturday, March 3, 2018 5:13 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the 
USA

I though that the document Jed provided to indicated that co-generation by 
businesses displaced grid electricity because it was cheaper.This is 
especially true in Japan where co-generation of electricity using waste heat 
from industrial facilities has lead the world in this area of electricity 
production.

Rossi’s  product to produce heat  should fit well with industries that already 
do co- generation.  Its too bad for the utilities’s expensive and vulnerable 
grid.

My local utility currently charges me about $100 per year to feed electricity 
to them which they sell at their regular rate.  The politicians for some reason 
allow such an unfair practice.

Bob Cook



From: H LV 
Sent: Saturday, March 3, 2018 2:24:08 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the 
USA

I wonder what the relationship between age and energy demand ​is like. Given 
that the average age is increasing this might have something to do with the 
drop in demand.

Harry

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 2:48 PM, JonesBeene 
> wrote:
Those of us who are completely focused on LENR or new sources for alternative 
energy may have missed the big picture story. We have not been “following the 
buck” so to speak.

That is, when you look at the changes in the supply/demand of conventional 
energy since the beginning of the Industrial age, well… there was a steady 
increase for 100 years. This steady increased came to a peak in 2007.

Since that time over a decade ago  – the demand for Grid Power in the USA  has 
been going DOWN - steadily but slowly  DOWN, despite the economic boom and the 
significant increase in population (including undocumented).

Not to mention the electric car. Tesla alone “should have” increased the demand 
for electrical power. This has not happened.

Here is the story and a graph with an article focused on one supplier - which 
shows that net  energy demand this year will be less than 11 years ago (in 
dollars) -  despite the fact that grid energy prices have gone up. Prices for 
solar and wind have gone down but not the price paid per KWH by consumers. The 
grid suppliers on average are receiving about the same income today despite 
higher prices due to lower demand. It is that simple.

Even the biggest electric suppliers have been caught off-guard since they have 
badly overestimate demand – which never materialized.

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/2/27/17052488/electricity-demand-utilities

This is freaking amazing when you think about the implications of the big 
picture - and if this trend (flat to slightly negative demand) were to continue 
- then the need for LENR would be minimal. Of course, no one thinks the trend 
will continue, but… the same experts did not think demand per person would ever 
have dropped like it has over the past decade+.

Of course, some of this flattening of the demand curve (or actual lowering when 
considered as the more meaningful metric of GWH/GDP*) - can be explained by one 
simple observation(or two). Millions of consumers have been making their own 
power from solar. This does not show up on the books since the grid itself does 
not participate in the transaction (or participates minimally). In fact, it has 
been said that until recently, demand statistics did try to  account for the 
total amount of off-grid power being made since it is not reported as such. 
Another big factor is electric lighting. The LED and the CFL have made an 
enormous contribution to lower energy use since lighting is the biggest 
component of electric power usage. The CFL has more than offset the arrival of 
the Tesla.

*GigaWatt-hrs per dollar of Gross National Product is a meaningful ratio. Using 
this 

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[H LV]

Bob, do you think the ultility companies are keeping demand depressed by
keeping prices high in their favour?

Harry

On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 8:13 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> My local utility currently charges me about $100 per year to feed
> electricity to them which they sell at their regular rate.  The politicians
> for some reason allow such an unfair practice.
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

I though that the document Jed provided a link to indicated that co-generation 
by businesses displaced grid electricity because it was cheaper.This is 
especially true in Japan where co-generation of electricity using waste heat 
from industrial facilities has lead the world in this area of electricity 
production.

Rossi’s  product to produce heat  should fit well with industries that already 
do co- generation.  Its too bad for the utilities’s expensive and vulnerable 
grid.

My local utility currently charges me about $100 per year to feed electricity 
to them which they sell at their regular rate.  The politicians for some reason 
allow such an unfair practice.

Bob Cook



From: H LV 
Sent: Saturday, March 3, 2018 2:24:08 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the 
USA

I wonder what the relationship between age and energy demand ​is like. Given 
that the average age is increasing this might have something to do with the 
drop in demand.

Harry

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 2:48 PM, JonesBeene 
> wrote:
Those of us who are completely focused on LENR or new sources for alternative 
energy may have missed the big picture story. We have not been “following the 
buck” so to speak.

That is, when you look at the changes in the supply/demand of conventional 
energy since the beginning of the Industrial age, well… there was a steady 
increase for 100 years. This steady increased came to a peak in 2007.

Since that time over a decade ago  – the demand for Grid Power in the USA  has 
been going DOWN - steadily but slowly  DOWN, despite the economic boom and the 
significant increase in population (including undocumented).

Not to mention the electric car. Tesla alone “should have” increased the demand 
for electrical power. This has not happened.

Here is the story and a graph with an article focused on one supplier - which 
shows that net  energy demand this year will be less than 11 years ago (in 
dollars) -  despite the fact that grid energy prices have gone up. Prices for 
solar and wind have gone down but not the price paid per KWH by consumers. The 
grid suppliers on average are receiving about the same income today despite 
higher prices due to lower demand. It is that simple.

Even the biggest electric suppliers have been caught off-guard since they have 
badly overestimate demand – which never materialized.

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/2/27/17052488/electricity-demand-utilities

This is freaking amazing when you think about the implications of the big 
picture - and if this trend (flat to slightly negative demand) were to continue 
- then the need for LENR would be minimal. Of course, no one thinks the trend 
will continue, but… the same experts did not think demand per person would ever 
have dropped like it has over the past decade+.

Of course, some of this flattening of the demand curve (or actual lowering when 
considered as the more meaningful metric of GWH/GDP*) - can be explained by one 
simple observation(or two). Millions of consumers have been making their own 
power from solar. This does not show up on the books since the grid itself does 
not participate in the transaction (or participates minimally). In fact, it has 
been said that until recently, demand statistics did try to  account for the 
total amount of off-grid power being made since it is not reported as such. 
Another big factor is electric lighting. The LED and the CFL have made an 
enormous contribution to lower energy use since lighting is the biggest 
component of electric power usage. The CFL has more than offset the arrival of 
the Tesla.

*GigaWatt-hrs per dollar of Gross National Product is a meaningful ratio. Using 
this metric, energy demand is way off in 2018 compared to 10 years before…

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[H LV]

I wonder what the relationship between age and energy demand ​is like.
Given that the average age is increasing this might have something to do
with the drop in demand.

Harry

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 2:48 PM, JonesBeene  wrote:

> Those of us who are completely focused on LENR or new sources for
> alternative energy may have missed the big picture story. We have not been
> “following the buck” so to speak.
>
>
>
> That is, when you look at the changes in the supply/demand of conventional
> energy since the beginning of the Industrial age, well… there was a steady
> increase for 100 years. This steady increased came to a peak in 2007.
>
>
>
> Since that time over a decade ago  – the demand for Grid Power in the USA
>  has been going DOWN - steadily but slowly  DOWN, despite the economic boom
> and the significant increase in population (including undocumented).
>
>
>
> Not to mention the electric car. Tesla alone “should have” increased the
> demand for electrical power. This has not happened.
>
>
>
> Here is the story and a graph with an article focused on one supplier -
> which shows that net  energy demand this year will be less than 11 years
> ago (in dollars) -  despite the fact that grid energy prices have gone up.
> Prices for solar and wind have gone down but not the price paid per KWH by
> consumers. The grid suppliers on average are receiving about the same
> income today despite higher prices due to lower demand. It is that simple.
>
>
>
> Even the biggest electric suppliers have been caught off-guard since they
> have badly overestimate demand – which never materialized.
>
>
>
> https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/2/27/
> 17052488/electricity-demand-utilities
>
>
>
> This is freaking amazing when you think about the implications of the big
> picture - and if this trend (flat to slightly negative demand) were to
> continue - then the need for LENR would be minimal. Of course, no one
> thinks the trend will continue, but… the same experts did not think demand
> per person would ever have dropped like it has over the past decade+.
>
>
>
> Of course, some of this flattening of the demand curve (or actual lowering
> when considered as the more meaningful metric of GWH/GDP*) - can be
> explained by one simple observation(or two). Millions of consumers have
> been making their own power from solar. This does not show up on the books
> since the grid itself does not participate in the transaction (or
> participates minimally). In fact, it has been said that until recently,
> demand statistics did try to  account for the total amount of off-grid
> power being made since it is not reported as such. Another big factor is
> electric lighting. The LED and the CFL have made an enormous contribution
> to lower energy use since lighting is the biggest component of electric
> power usage. The CFL has more than offset the arrival of the Tesla.
>
>
>
> *GigaWatt-hrs per dollar of Gross National Product is a meaningful ratio.
> Using this metric, energy demand is way off in 2018 compared to 10 years
> before…
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[Terry Blanton]

Also consider the increase in efficiencies in the homes here. Incentives to
improve leakage and appliance consumption through tax incentives have been
implemented by this author. My home energy consumption is half what it was
a decade ago.

On Mar 2, 2018 8:44 PM, "Jed Rothwell"  wrote:

> I wrote:
>
> U.S. manufacturing is at record highs. Manufacturing employment is down,
>> and the U.S. fraction of world manufacturing is down, but in absolute terms
>> it is higher than it has ever been. It is even higher when you include
>> things like mining and agriculture. Manufacturing energy use is down, along
>> with all other sectors such as residential. This is because of improved
>> efficiency. See:
>>
>> https://www.eia.gov/consumption/manufacturing/
>>
>
> As I said, this version of the graph does not slide off the screen:
>
> https://www.eia.gov/consumption/manufacturing/
> reports/2014/enduse_intensity/?src=%E2%80%B9%20Consumption%20%20%20%20%20%
> 20Manufacturing%20Energy%20Consumption%20Survey%20(MECS)-b1
>
> The EIA web site is the Cat's Pajamas for energy geeks.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[Jed Rothwell]

I wrote:

U.S. manufacturing is at record highs. Manufacturing employment is down,
> and the U.S. fraction of world manufacturing is down, but in absolute terms
> it is higher than it has ever been. It is even higher when you include
> things like mining and agriculture. Manufacturing energy use is down, along
> with all other sectors such as residential. This is because of improved
> efficiency. See:
>
> https://www.eia.gov/consumption/manufacturing/
>

As I said, this version of the graph does not slide off the screen:

https://www.eia.gov/consumption/manufacturing/reports/2014/enduse_intensity/?src=%E2%80%B9%20Consumption%20%20%20%20%20%20Manufacturing%20Energy%20Consumption%20Survey%20(MECS)-b1

The EIA web site is the Cat's Pajamas for energy geeks.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[Jed Rothwell]

 wrote:

I think another important factor was the stock market in 2008, which caused
> many
> people to become more conservative in their spending. They actually
> started to
> make an effort to save energy.
>

People have been making intense efforts to save energy since the 1970s, in
the U.S. and everywhere else, especially China. Japan has made the least
progress in the 21st century, I think, because they were already far more
efficient than other industrialized nations, and because they have not
invested much in efficiency. They invested practically nothing in
alternative energy. They put all their eggs in the nuclear power basket.
They regret that now.

U.S. manufacturing is back to the peak it reached before the 2008 crash.
See the graph I referenced before, only this version does not slide off the
screen:

"Energy Use and Energy Intensity of U.S. Manufacturing—Data from the 2014
Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS)"

https://www.eia.gov/consumption/manufacturing/reports/2014/enduse_intensity/
?src=%E2%80%B9%20Consumption%20%20%20%20%20%20Manufacturing%20Energy%
20Consumption%20Survey%20(MECS)-b1


As I said, there has been a relative decline in manufacturing compared to
other countries, especially China, but in absolute terms there has been no
decline. There was after 2008, but it recovered.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[mixent]

In reply to  mix...@bigpond.com's message of Sat, 03 Mar 2018 12:29:28 +1100:
Hi,
[snip]
>I think another important factor was the stock market in 2008, which caused 
>many
>people to become more conservative in their spending. They actually started to
>make an effort to save energy.

...read "stock market crash".

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[Jed Rothwell]

Bob Higgins  wrote:

It seems to me that another factor in the decline has been the decline in
> manufacturing in the USA.
>

U.S. manufacturing is at record highs. Manufacturing employment is down,
and the U.S. fraction of world manufacturing is down, but in absolute terms
it is higher than it has ever been. It is even higher when you include
things like mining and agriculture. Manufacturing energy use is down, along
with all other sectors such as residential. This is because of improved
efficiency. See:

https://www.eia.gov/consumption/manufacturing/

Residential:

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=6570

Natural gas is by far the most used fuel in manufacturing. See Fig. 2
(click to enlarge it):

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=us_energy_industry#tab2

Electricity and net electricity (including co-gen) have not changed as a
percent of the total, but like all sources they have fallen.



> . . . but in the USA the manufacturing has been slowly and consistently
> trickling to the far east for many years, gradually reducing the electrical
> demand.
>

No, it has not trickled anywhere. As I said, and as these graphs show, it
is at record highs. It would be higher still if some of it had not gone to
China. None has gone to Japan in recent decades. That is to say, no more
than was there in 1980. On the contrary, more Japanese companies now
manufacture in the U.S.

Total primary energy consumption is down.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=30652

Coal has fallen off a cliff. Other sources are down except renewables and
natural gas. The Trump administration is working overtime to reverse these
trends, mainly by curtailing efficiency, especially in transportation, and
by trying to subsidize coal. That plan fell through, for now. See:

http://www.newsweek.com/trumps-own-picks-block-his-subsidies-coal-power-plants-775460

After President Donald Trump promised to bring back “beautiful” coal power
plants, a group of his appointees ruled against the idea Monday on the
grounds that subsidies that would favor struggling plants would interfere
in energy markets.

Trump appointed four of the five officials that sit on the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission who rejected the plan Secretary of Energy Rick Perry
submitted in September, arguing it would discriminate against producers of
other sources of energy. . . .


Wind and natural gas employ far more people than the coal industry, so I
cannot understand why the administration is so anxious to promote coal at
the expense of these other sources, but it is. It is "at the expense" of
other sources because net energy use will continue to decline inexorably,
despite Trumps efforts to gut efficiency standards and stop efficiency R
If the U.S. does not make more efficient cars and refrigerators, others
countries will.

The administration's plan to gut the Energy Star program has run into
problems. A thousand manufacturing corporations protested.

"Trump's plan for Energy Star sparks industry uproar"

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/374940-trumps-plan-for-energy-star-sparks-industry-uproar

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[mixent]

In reply to  Bob Higgins's message of Fri, 2 Mar 2018 18:06:50 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>It seems to me that another factor in the decline has been the decline in
>manufacturing in the USA.  I know that when the Fukushima disaster struck,
>the net reduction in available power in Japan caused significant problems
>in manufacturing - hinting that manufacturing was a large consumer of the
>grid power.  It was easier to see that effect when Fukishima was suddenly
>shut down, but in the USA the manufacturing has been slowly and
>consistently trickling to the far east for many years, gradually reducing
>the electrical demand.
[snip]
I think another important factor was the stock market in 2008, which caused many
people to become more conservative in their spending. They actually started to
make an effort to save energy.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[Bob Higgins]

It seems to me that another factor in the decline has been the decline in
manufacturing in the USA.  I know that when the Fukushima disaster struck,
the net reduction in available power in Japan caused significant problems
in manufacturing - hinting that manufacturing was a large consumer of the
grid power.  It was easier to see that effect when Fukishima was suddenly
shut down, but in the USA the manufacturing has been slowly and
consistently trickling to the far east for many years, gradually reducing
the electrical demand.

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 6:01 PM, Andrew Meulenberg 
wrote:

> Has anyone looked at the impact of fracking on the data? Heating is a
> major energy sink and the difference in gas vs electric heating costs (even
> with heat pumps) could be a major driver in new builds.
>
> Andrew
> _ _ _ _ _
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 6:31 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
>> JonesBeene  wrote:
>>
>> Not to mention the electric car. Tesla alone “should have” increased the
>>> demand for electrical power. This has not happened.
>>>
>>
>> I have not looked at the numbers, but I kind of doubt that Tesla alone
>> could have a measurable effect. Perhaps Tesla + Leaf + plug-in hybrids
>> could. Tesla has sold 250,000 cars I think. That sounds like a lot but
>> electric cars do not consume much electricity. About as much as a large air
>> conditioner, I think. 250,000 air conditioners more or less would not have
>> a measurable impact on U.S. consumption.
>>
>> From what I have seen, the major factors in reduced consumption are, from
>> big to small:
>>
>> Increased efficiency, especially in things like lighting (illumination),
>> HVAC equipment, refrigerators, and Energy Star compliant equipment. (The
>> Energy Star program is completely voluntary -- it just gives manufacturers
>> bragging rights with a sticker they put on equipment. But it is highly
>> popular with the public and it has had a large impact, which I suppose is
>> why the Trump administration want to kill it.)
>>
>> Large scale private cogeneration with natural gas, especially in large
>> buildings, campuses factories and so no. This is more common in Japan, I
>> think, but it is catching on in the U.S.
>>
>> "Distributed" solar, a.k.a. small scale solar photovoltaic. That is,
>> small scale PV solar, on roofs, for example. Large scale solar is done by
>> power companies so it does not reduce grid power consumption. It resembles
>> wind turbine power generated by power companies. Small scale solar is
>> having a big impact in Hawaii. The power companies are in bad shape because
>> of it. But it is not having an impact elsewhere as far as I know. The Trump
>> administration and the power companies are determined to keep it from
>> having an impact, for example, by charging customers who have their own
>> solar exorbitant amounts for getting any grid power at all to supplement it.
>>
>> I may have that wrong. That was the situation a few years ago. The EIA is
>> the place to go to get information on things like this. See:
>>
>> https://www.eia.gov/
>>
>> Distributed solar began to show up in the stats, just above the noise
>> level, in 2015:
>>
>> https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=23972
>>
>> Here is net generation of electricity from all sources, distributed and
>> grid:
>>
>> https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/
>>
>> You can play around with this graph in many ways to see what is
>> happening. Change it to years to smooth out seasonal fluctuations. You can
>> see solar (bottom teal line) *just beginning* to leave the noise level
>> in 2014. In 2017 4Q small scale solar photovoltaic it is 1,476 thousand
>> megawatt hours. Total generation was 345,939, so that's 0.4%.
>>
>> In the right-hand box, select "Net generation by energy source: electric
>> utilities." You do not see a dramatic reduction. Seasonal variation makes
>> it hard to spot. Try the Annual version, "Index to start as value." That
>> does show a distinct decline:
>>
>> https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=
>> 2,0,1=vvg=g=8=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.A~
>> ELEC.GEN.COW-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-1.A~
>> ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-1.A=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.
>> A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-
>> 1.A~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-1.A=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.A=A&
>> chartindexed=2=linechart=pin=s=0=0=
>>
>> ("United States: all fuels (utility-scale)" blue line goes below -250,000)
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[Andrew Meulenberg]

Has anyone looked at the impact of fracking on the data? Heating is a major
energy sink and the difference in gas vs electric heating costs (even with
heat pumps) could be a major driver in new builds.

Andrew
_ _ _ _ _

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 6:31 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> JonesBeene  wrote:
>
> Not to mention the electric car. Tesla alone “should have” increased the
>> demand for electrical power. This has not happened.
>>
>
> I have not looked at the numbers, but I kind of doubt that Tesla alone
> could have a measurable effect. Perhaps Tesla + Leaf + plug-in hybrids
> could. Tesla has sold 250,000 cars I think. That sounds like a lot but
> electric cars do not consume much electricity. About as much as a large air
> conditioner, I think. 250,000 air conditioners more or less would not have
> a measurable impact on U.S. consumption.
>
> From what I have seen, the major factors in reduced consumption are, from
> big to small:
>
> Increased efficiency, especially in things like lighting (illumination),
> HVAC equipment, refrigerators, and Energy Star compliant equipment. (The
> Energy Star program is completely voluntary -- it just gives manufacturers
> bragging rights with a sticker they put on equipment. But it is highly
> popular with the public and it has had a large impact, which I suppose is
> why the Trump administration want to kill it.)
>
> Large scale private cogeneration with natural gas, especially in large
> buildings, campuses factories and so no. This is more common in Japan, I
> think, but it is catching on in the U.S.
>
> "Distributed" solar, a.k.a. small scale solar photovoltaic. That is,
> small scale PV solar, on roofs, for example. Large scale solar is done by
> power companies so it does not reduce grid power consumption. It resembles
> wind turbine power generated by power companies. Small scale solar is
> having a big impact in Hawaii. The power companies are in bad shape because
> of it. But it is not having an impact elsewhere as far as I know. The Trump
> administration and the power companies are determined to keep it from
> having an impact, for example, by charging customers who have their own
> solar exorbitant amounts for getting any grid power at all to supplement it.
>
> I may have that wrong. That was the situation a few years ago. The EIA is
> the place to go to get information on things like this. See:
>
> https://www.eia.gov/
>
> Distributed solar began to show up in the stats, just above the noise
> level, in 2015:
>
> https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=23972
>
> Here is net generation of electricity from all sources, distributed and
> grid:
>
> https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/
>
> You can play around with this graph in many ways to see what is happening.
> Change it to years to smooth out seasonal fluctuations. You can see solar
> (bottom teal line) *just beginning* to leave the noise level in 2014. In
> 2017 4Q small scale solar photovoltaic it is 1,476 thousand megawatt hours.
> Total generation was 345,939, so that's 0.4%.
>
> In the right-hand box, select "Net generation by energy source: electric
> utilities." You do not see a dramatic reduction. Seasonal variation makes
> it hard to spot. Try the Annual version, "Index to start as value." That
> does show a distinct decline:
>
> https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=2,0,1=vvg;
> geo=g=8=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-
> US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.
> HYC-US-1.A=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-
> US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.
> HYC-US-1.A=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.A=A=2&
> ctype=linechart=pin=s=0=0=
>
> ("United States: all fuels (utility-scale)" blue line goes below -250,000)
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

[Jed Rothwell]

JonesBeene  wrote:

Not to mention the electric car. Tesla alone “should have” increased the
> demand for electrical power. This has not happened.
>

I have not looked at the numbers, but I kind of doubt that Tesla alone
could have a measurable effect. Perhaps Tesla + Leaf + plug-in hybrids
could. Tesla has sold 250,000 cars I think. That sounds like a lot but
electric cars do not consume much electricity. About as much as a large air
conditioner, I think. 250,000 air conditioners more or less would not have
a measurable impact on U.S. consumption.

>From what I have seen, the major factors in reduced consumption are, from
big to small:

Increased efficiency, especially in things like lighting (illumination),
HVAC equipment, refrigerators, and Energy Star compliant equipment. (The
Energy Star program is completely voluntary -- it just gives manufacturers
bragging rights with a sticker they put on equipment. But it is highly
popular with the public and it has had a large impact, which I suppose is
why the Trump administration want to kill it.)

Large scale private cogeneration with natural gas, especially in large
buildings, campuses factories and so no. This is more common in Japan, I
think, but it is catching on in the U.S.

"Distributed" solar, a.k.a. small scale solar photovoltaic. That is, small
scale PV solar, on roofs, for example. Large scale solar is done by power
companies so it does not reduce grid power consumption. It resembles wind
turbine power generated by power companies. Small scale solar is having a
big impact in Hawaii. The power companies are in bad shape because of it.
But it is not having an impact elsewhere as far as I know. The Trump
administration and the power companies are determined to keep it from
having an impact, for example, by charging customers who have their own
solar exorbitant amounts for getting any grid power at all to supplement it.

I may have that wrong. That was the situation a few years ago. The EIA is
the place to go to get information on things like this. See:

https://www.eia.gov/

Distributed solar began to show up in the stats, just above the noise
level, in 2015:

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=23972

Here is net generation of electricity from all sources, distributed and
grid:

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/

You can play around with this graph in many ways to see what is happening.
Change it to years to smooth out seasonal fluctuations. You can see solar
(bottom teal line) *just beginning* to leave the noise level in 2014. In
2017 4Q small scale solar photovoltaic it is 1,476 thousand megawatt hours.
Total generation was 345,939, so that's 0.4%.

In the right-hand box, select "Net generation by energy source: electric
utilities." You do not see a dramatic reduction. Seasonal variation makes
it hard to spot. Try the Annual version, "Index to start as value." That
does show a distinct decline:

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=2,0,1=vvg=g=8=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-1.A=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-1.A=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.A=A=2=linechart=pin=s=0=0=

("United States: all fuels (utility-scale)" blue line goes below -250,000)

- Jed