|
brugroffil posted:This happened in Texas ten years ago and FERC told them to fix it back then but lacked regulatory authority. That would have meant less profits, so it wasn't done. Now, there's billions in damage and dozens of dead people. Very bwm for society, gwm for those at the top Yes but no. 10 years ago there was a cold snap leading to grid instability from poor winterization and FERC (Federal Electrical Reliability Council) wrote the post mortem and the recommendations which were to further winterize the plants and also placed an estimated timeline of a freeze causing grid instability at a roughly once a decade occurrence which holds very well historically. After that, ERCOT and the PUC (Public Utility Commission which is an appointed board and can control ERCOT) commissioned NERC (North American Electrical Reliability Council) to draft a set of winterization standards for the grid. Those standards have been in committee hell for about 10 years and were supposed to go into effect next year after ratification this upcoming November. Texas already implements a series of standards, and in fact several gas well were cited in the past few years for insufficient winterization (this is administered by the RRC or Railroad commission). Unfortunately, the Texas winterization standards are not sufficient for such a long period below freezing, but the NERC standards are even less stringent than the ones Texas already implements. There are no applicable federal standards because they are written for the US as a whole and winterization practices are very region specific. There are 2 requirements that Texas used to impose on power generators that would have adverted most of the issue but were removed as part of deregulation. Previously plants were required to store several days of fuel on site. This was done away with to support more "dynamic" grid resources such as solar, wind, and natural gas but also to enable Lean Just in Time supply chains re: save money. The second was that natural gas plants were required to be able to run on a secondary type of fuel when required. This was typically kerosene but didn't have to be. This was removed to make natural gas plants cheaper and more efficient. In addition to this, wind generation went down due to icing. If it had been either colder, or warmer, this wouldn't have happened we just happened to have the perfect weather condition for icing. It also grounded pretty much all aircraft for a while too. Once the icing conditions stopped, they flew in de-icing equipment on helicopters to clear the blades but the oil in the windmill cranks had cooled below operating temperature while not in operation and couldn't be restarted. In colder climate you would have an oil heater to prevent this. Texas' solar went under because the solar generators were not equipped with panel heaters to prevent snow from accumulating. This is done for cost because enough snow to stop solar in Texas only occurs roughly every 30 years. The grid interconnects also sat idle because this storm covered an enormous area. The grids servicing Oklahoma, Louisiana/Arkansas, and Mexico all went into EEA3 which is the point at which they cut off any outgoing power to prevent their own grid collapse. No power was available from the federal grid to send to Texas without just moving the problem a state over. There was a slight disruption to Texas nuclear power when a sensor got below operating temperature which briefly took down a reactor. Also Texas power demand was much higher than normal because anywhere that doesn't heat with natural gas in Texas uses heat pumps, typically ones rated to about 20f to heat houses. You can get heat pumps that go to lower temperatures but they are much more expensive. So, when the heat pumps hit their lower temperature threshold, their efficiency plummets and the power demand increases significantly. TLDR: Texas didn't ignore the FERC report from 2011, but they did half rear end it and then got hit by a literal perfect storm aimed at their weak spot. This does not go into the myriad political or local gently caress ups that also occurred.
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 05:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
The junk collector posted:TLDR: Texas didn't ignore the FERC report from 2011, but they did half rear end it and then got hit by a literal perfect storm aimed at their weak spot. This does not go into the myriad political or local gently caress ups that also occurred. OK but here's a real question: had the Texas grid adhered to federal regulations, would that have prevented (or at least severely mitigated) all this? Are the federal regulations more strict, or are there climate- or region-based exceptions to the winterizing rules that would have allowed them to avoid having to take the necessary precautions? Ultimately that's the only question that really matters. Would following the federal rules have avoided this, or would this have happened regardless?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 13:05
|
|
|
Putting a roof on those nuclear power plant turbines might have helped
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 14:03
|
|
|
Did they try raking the snow
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 14:15
|
|
|
DaveSauce posted:OK but here's a real question: had the Texas grid adhered to federal regulations, would that have prevented (or at least severely mitigated) all this? Are the federal regulations more strict, or are there climate- or region-based exceptions to the winterizing rules that would have allowed them to avoid having to take the necessary precautions? Isn't El Paso on the federal grid? They still had blackouts despite following those rules. People lost power for almost 15 minutes!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 14:29
|
|
|
I think the argument is more that they cut themselves off from the larger interconnects to evade federal regulations, so then when their internal grid started collapsing, they had nowhere else to turn. Things being stuck in committee hell at NERC for a decade sounds about right, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 15:16
|
|
|
DaveSauce posted:OK but here's a real question: had the Texas grid adhered to federal regulations, would that have prevented (or at least severely mitigated) all this? Are the federal regulations more strict, or are there climate- or region-based exceptions to the winterizing rules that would have allowed them to avoid having to take the necessary precautions? NERC posted:While the incorporation of these practices is strictly voluntary, developing a winter weather readiness program using these practices in keeping with local conditions is highly encouraged brugroffil posted:I think the argument is more that they cut themselves off from the larger interconnects to evade federal regulations, so then when their internal grid started collapsing, they had nowhere else to turn.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 15:47
|
|
|
mllaneza posted:Always remember, when it comes to bankers and their ilk, it's not "what would Jesus do?" but rather "what did Jesus do?" While it can be applied in a general sense to some financial services, the issue was that money changers were giving people bad exchange rates, skimming what the temple would have received. Actually in this case, above market management fees probably fall into that category.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 16:47
|
|
|
crazypeltast52 posted:While it can be applied in a general sense to some financial services, the issue was that money changers were giving people bad exchange rates, skimming what the temple would have received. So Jesus would have used Vanguard?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 16:58
|
|
|
The junk collector posted:So Jesus would have used Vanguard? Is there any doubt about it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 18:57
|
|
|
24. Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who invested his capital in low cost passively managed index funds. 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that capital, but it did not fall, because it had been invested in low cost passively managed index funds. 26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who invested in meme stocks. 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that capital, and it fell, and great was the fall of it. Nofeed fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Feb 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 19:27
|
|
|
I've heard of prosperity gospel but this is ridiculous
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 19:48
|
|
|
crazypeltast52 posted:While it can be applied in a general sense to some financial services, the issue was that money changers were giving people bad exchange rates, skimming what the temple would have received. This. They were changing the sacred into the profane. He also put effort into trying to convince tax farmers to not be lovely and extortionate. Tax collection in the Roman era involved various people bidding on collecting taxes for a region, with whoever offered the most revenue to the state getting the job. They then went and squeezed as much as they could from the people to the point of extortion. He effectively said that they should take what they actually need and not more. Basically, The junk collector posted:So Jesus would have used Vanguard? This.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
What in the sweet ever-loving poo poo is Earth2.io? I've seen this come up as an ad in my Facebook feed. It looked like a game, since it seems to use Outerra engine from the looks of it, for whatever the gently caress it does, but it's about "investing" into virtual estate, which goes up in price the more of it sells in a country, then ..., and profit?! I plugged it into Google and checked whatever is being posted about it on reddit. Sure seems a lot of bots posting referral codes, but also plenty of old proper accounts. They have a heatmap on their page, and it's pretty lit up. Are people really that loving stupid? Is this for real?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2021 01:33
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:The flip side of this is me constantly  It warms my heart to read these replies, tbh. I see loads of posts saying “more than $5/day in food is ruining your budget!!” I’m a 6’6” dude who plays sports and works out. My food budget is $20-$30 daily 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2021 02:09
|
|
ing at people who act like $150/mo for one person's food is some sort of insane frugality(which was a semi-frequent derail in /r/personalfinance back when I bothered reading it regularly), unti I remember that I'm 5'3" and a lazy goon(who doesn't eat much meat, and most of what I do eat is chicken & occassionally pork) & people who are 6+ feet tall and/or excercise a lot need to eat more.
|
Combat Pretzel posted:What in the sweet ever-loving poo poo is Earth2.io? As far as I can tell, it's an MLM except for virtual video game land, since there's referrals and downline recruitment to get a cut of everything everyone below you buys, except anyone trying to withdraw their earnings is probably not going to be able to sell their in-game tokens for their nominal real-world value
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2021 03:20
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:What in the sweet ever-loving poo poo is Earth2.io? It's exactly what it sounds like. Land only goes up in value because they're not making any more of it, but what if we could?* * land is not actually physically tangible, and provides no benefits beyond entertainment
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2021 09:15
|
|
|
land values go up the stairs and down out the window. some plots in damascus went down like 90% in some places in the last decade! uh, theres a reason some plots in damascus went down like 90% the last decade
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2021 11:52
|
|
|
A friend asked me about buying a house. Initially it sounded like his mom was gifting him a bunch of money but as I talked to him she actually wants to do this as an investment? Basically they co-sign on a mortgage and somehow divvy everything up. That part had no details. I told him to get a lawyer. Oh and they live on opposite sides of the country. How dumb is this about to be?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2021 14:38
|
|
|
honda whisperer posted:A friend asked me about buying a house. Initially it sounded like his mom was gifting him a bunch of money but as I talked to him she actually wants to do this as an investment? It could be very, very dumb, or it could be actually GWM. I've known a few friends whose parents set them up with a mortgage by co-signing, only to refinance to remove them as co-signers after a few years. It's helpful for people who could afford a mortgage but don't have much of a credit history - the parents having a more established credit history will help them get a better interest rate to start out with, or may even be required to get a loan in the first place. Likewise one of the main ways the upper middle class and above give their children a leg up is via a gift of either down payment or property itself. A "fun" game to play when the Wall Street Journal publishes their bimonthly "millenial Bootstraps themselves, what's wrong with all the other millenials" articles is finding the part where they were given this kind of leg up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2021 14:56
|
|
|
"Anyone can retire at age 28! All it requires is having your parents pay for your six-figure college, network your way through your parents' contacts into a finance job, cutting out Starbucks lattes, and you're set!!!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2021 14:57
|
|
|
I don't think this is just help. I think this is a rental property but all muddled because family. Instead of a lease it's co-signing a mortgage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
How GWM are the parents? Owning a rental property more than 30 minutes away from you is an absolutely terrible idea unless you also happen to own a big multi-state property management corporation but if it's right by his parents and the parents know what they are getting into and are taking care of everything, then it's just a leg up for him to be the co-owner. If the parents aren't familiar with renting out property, are generally bwm, or have ever been dishonest with him, he should run screaming into the hills and change his last name. Depending on what state he lives in vs where the house is located in can make things worse as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2021 16:12
|
|
|
Maybe I’m dating myself, but do people actually “aspire” to buying a Tesla car? I saw that recently in a discussion of Aston Martin, where someone said that was old and people these days are “aspiring for a Tesla”. When I was a kid, you aspired for a Porsche 911 or a Lamborghini or a Ferrari, any one of those iconic, insanely expensive super cars you’d hang up on a wall. Are kids these days hanging up posters of a model S or a 3 and saying “when I get my first mediocre salary job, I’m going right down to the Tesla store and buying the off the shelf car that a ton of other people have”? Aside from dubious build quality, what even differentiates a future Tesla from a future EV made by anyone else?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
Despite the atrocious build quality no ones built an EV that competes with it? Also when I was a youth I transitioned from unobtainable(lambo) towards lusting after semi-obtainable(lotus), as I got older. Might be somewhat of a similar effect, particularly because of stuff like ludicrous mode giving folks access to super car like experiences.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 15:59
|
|
|
A fast BMW would be the better old aspirational version of the Tesla. Everyone loves a Lambo but who is ever going to be able to buy that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
Cacafuego posted:Maybe I’m dating myself, but do people actually “aspire” to buying a Tesla car? I saw that recently in a discussion of Aston Martin, where someone said that was old and people these days are “aspiring for a Tesla”. I'd much rather have a Model S than those latter two, because you can actually drive it on a daily basis and it is a bottomless well of torque. And it's actually *less* likely to spontaneously combust than a Lambo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 16:40
|
|
|
freeasinbeer posted:Despite the atrocious build quality no ones built an EV that competes with it? This seems to be pretty much the answer. The teslas have a lot of faults, but the user facing tech is lightyears ahead of other EVs. That being said, it kinda looks like this new Ford Mach-E might be the tesla killer. A lot of the same tech without Elon Musk's ego and much more unlikely to fall apart after 2,000 miles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 16:46
|
|
|
Actually last week one of my coworkers commented about his teenaged son going on about how much Teslas cost, like they were all over $100k. He didn't believe his dad that they had cheaper models until his dad showed him on the Tesla website. So yeah it's probably become a status symbol among the youth, and Instagram influencers with a Model 3 are happy to let their young followers think all Teslas are super expensive. Maybe GWM.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 16:48
|
|
|
freeasinbeer posted:Despite the atrocious build quality no ones built an EV that competes with it? quote:Also when I was a youth I transitioned from unobtainable(lambo) towards lusting after semi-obtainable(lotus), as I got older. I think we all probably did that as we grew up. I know there are probably some elementary age school kids primed for a career in the exciting world of accounting that may aspire to own a bog standard electric vehicle, but what differentiates their EV product that makes someone aspire to it? Is it that it’s an EV? Pretty much any car now has apple/Android car play. smackfu posted:Everyone loves a Lambo but who is ever going to be able to buy that?  Maybe what I should be asking is “what makes a car aspirational” to other people, because for me, it’s the unattainability and insane performance. Maybe the sound of the engine, or the impracticality of a supercar. I know it’s not “wanting to buy the same car in one of 3 colors that my neighbors have that requires special charging and you have to search out places to ‘refuel’ if you want to go anywhere very far”.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 16:51
|
|
|
Tesla's whole thing from day one has basically been a prestige brand. Can maybe give them some credit for making electric vehicles mainstream and cool rather than weird hippie crap, but they've always been all about marketing and novelty.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 16:54
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:And it's actually *less* likely to spontaneously combust than a Lambo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 16:58
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Tesla's whole thing from day one has basically been a prestige brand. Can maybe give them some credit for making electric vehicles mainstream and cool rather than weird hippie crap, but they've always been all about marketing and novelty. Oh, no doubt that EVs are the future and I’m not disputing that Tesla has definitely made them mainstream, but i think that’s the point I’m not explaining very well. Who aspires to want to buy something that’s mainstream? Don’t people want to aspire to own something non-mainstream? I guess I’m the weirdo that doesn’t see them as a prestige brand, but as something that the all the prius owners moved to so they can be more mainstream, or tech bros that love Elon wanting to buy into his dream.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 17:01
|
|
|
There’s a Tesla haters thread somewhere on this forum that you might like?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 17:05
|
|
|
angryrobots posted:So yeah it's probably become a status symbol among the youth, and Instagram influencers with a Model 3 are happy to let their young followers think all Teslas are super expensive. Maybe GWM.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 17:06
|
|
|
smackfu posted:There’s a Tesla haters thread somewhere on this forum that you might like? Yeah, I’ll shut up about it now, sorry for the derail!
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 17:09
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Tesla's whole thing from day one has basically been a prestige brand. Can maybe give them some credit for making electric vehicles mainstream and cool rather than weird hippie crap, but they've always been all about marketing and novelty. Yes, a "prestige" brand for people who don't know anything about cars. The build quality is atrocious and the interiors are garbage. Anyone who has actually been in a $60+K luxury car (including a base model Cadillac) is going to be turned off by how absolutely lovely the interior is. They literally can't compete at their own price point(s), but this doesn't matter, because they aren't being bought by car buyers. Cacafuego posted:Oh, no doubt that EVs are the future and I’m not disputing that Tesla has definitely made them mainstream, but i think that’s the point I’m not explaining very well. Who aspires to want to buy something that’s mainstream? Don’t people want to aspire to own something non-mainstream? I know exactly what you're talking about, but I see more and more "I finally bought my dREaM cAR!" and it's like, a Tesla or a 996 or a BMW. Like, sure, those are fun cars - attainable even. But llike....dream better. I want my Koenigsegg CCXR, dammit!
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 17:19
|
|
|
Motronic posted:I know exactly what you're talking about, but I see more and more "I finally bought my dREaM cAR!" and it's like, a Tesla or a 996 or a BMW. Like, sure, those are fun cars - attainable even. But llike....dream better. I want my Koenigsegg CCXR, dammit!
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 17:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
It's the hope that kills you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2021 17:33
|
|