MERB Banner
Montreal Escorts

Cold snap in Texas causes massive power hike

IamNY

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2005
3,436
2,066
113
NYC
Optics for this look pretty bad. Curious though, do senators typically remain in their states when there’s an emergency? Governors definitely stay home, mayors, local politicians, etc. but I don’t ever remember seeing my senators during hurricane Sandy. Or is all of this because Cruz is a well known outspoken republican?
 

sene5hos

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2019
8,505
16,941
113
No way Teddy's ass was going to freeze off when the warm beaches of Cancun was a flight away. When the going gets tough, Cruz gets out:
Frost particles on the testicles are for the plebes, not Teddy

Sen. Ted Cruz flew to Cancun, Mexico, with his family this week as Texas dealt with a winter storm that as of Thursday still has left 500,000 without power, Fox News has confirmed.

Photographs of Cruz (R-Texas) at an airport began circulating on social media late Wednesday, with people alleging that the senator had left the state for Cancun amid a major crisis. A Republican source told Fox News that the allegations that Cruz was traveling to the Mexican city are true.

Chances are he’s going to say it wasn’t him.

Ted Cruz doesn't give a damn Texans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purplem

EagerBeaver

Veteran of Misadventures
Jul 11, 2003
20,474
3,346
113
U.S.A.
Visit site
Optics for this look pretty bad. Curious though, do senators typically remain in their states when there’s an emergency? Governors definitely stay home, mayors, local politicians, etc. but I don’t ever remember seeing my senators during hurricane Sandy. Or is all of this because Cruz is a well known outspoken republican?
Regarding your question on what Senators should do during emergencies in their States, apart from the bad optics (which you noted) of being on a warm beach in Cancun while the constituents who elected him suffer frostbites in their nipples and testicles back in Texas, my thinking on this is, Senators get elected in the first place based on how much federal money they bring back into their State, and ditto with members of the HOR. Perhaps the greatest example of pork barrel spending of federal money being brought into one's State in United States history is Ted Stevens' proposed infamous "Bridge To Nowhere" in Alaska. While widely ridiculed outside of Alaska, Stevens almost got that bill passed and possibly might have had he not gotten criminally charged in an unrelated scandal, which derailed his 2008 re-election bid. Up until then, he was continuously reelected for 38 years to the Senate. This was because he brought all kinds of federal money and jobs back to Alaskans. He was viewed as a stud by Alaskans due to the disproportionate federal money he got spent in Alaska, which created lots of jobs for Alaskans. This is the ultimate hypocrisy for most Senate Republicans like Stevens, who campaign on policies of reducing federal spending, yet if there is not big federal spending in their State, their ass is not getting re-elected. It's the ultimate political tightrope, but Stevens was an all time political stud at getting federal money spent in his State.

In Texas the jobs are in the energy industry and Cruz picked the worst possible time and situation to not to be around for a disaster. Texans want him lobbying for federal relief, and maybe a disaster declaration, and not sipping a margarita poolside in Cancun while he gets a back rub.
 
Last edited:

Womaniser

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2017
1,733
3,207
113
Here is some opinion from the Wall Street Journal about the complete failure of the Texas power grid to keep up with demand during the recent cold snap. As usual with WSJ editorials, the opinion is backed up with solid facts and clear explanations. As the editorial makes clear, a system that relies too much on wind and solar simply cannot keep up with power demand under weather conditions that are unusual but not at all unprecedented.

Texas Spins Into the Wind: An electricity grid that relies on renewables also needs nuclear or coal power.​

By The Editorial Board
Updated Feb. 17, 2021

While millions of Texans remain without power for a third day, the wind industry and its advocates are spinning a fable that gas, coal and nuclear plants—not their frozen turbines—are to blame. PolitiFact proclaims “Natural gas, not wind turbines, main driver of Texas power shortage.” Climate-change conformity is hard for the media to resist, but we don’t mind. So here are the facts to cut through the spin.

Texas energy regulators were already warning of rolling blackouts late last week as temperatures in western Texas plunged into the 20s, causing wind turbines to freeze. Natural gas and coal-fired plants ramped up to cover the wind power shortfall as demand for electricity increased with falling temperatures.

Some readers have questioned our reporting Wednesday ("The Political Making of a Texas Power Outage") that wind’s share of electricity generation in Texas plunged to 8% from 42%. How can that be, they wonder, when the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (Ercot) has reported that it counts on wind to meet only 10% of its winter capacity.

Ercot’s disclosure is slippery. Start with the term “capacity,” which means potential maximum output. This is different than actual power generation. Texas has a total winter capacity of about 83,000 megawatts (MW) including all power sources. Total power demand and generation, however, at their peak are usually only around 57,000 MW. Regulators build slack into the system.

Texas has about 30,000 MW of wind capacity, but winds aren’t constant or predictable. Winds this past month have generated between about 600 and 22,500 MW. Regulators don’t count on wind to provide much more than 10% or so of the grid’s total capacity since they can’t command turbines to increase power like they can coal and gas plants.

Wind turbines at times this month have generated more than half of the Texas power generation, though this is only about a quarter of the system’s power capacity. Last week wind generation plunged as demand surged. Fossil-fuel generation increased and covered the supply gap. Thus between the mornings of Feb. 7 and Feb. 11, wind as a share of the state’s electricity fell to 8% from 42%, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Gas-fired plants produced 43,800 MW of power Sunday night and coal plants chipped in 10,800 MW—about two to three times what they usually generate at their peak on any given winter day—after wind power had largely vanished. In other words, gas and coal plants held up in the frosty conditions far better than wind turbines did.

It wasn’t until temperatures plunged into the single digits early Monday morning that some conventional power plants including nuclear started to have problems, which was the same time that demand surged for heating. Gas plants also ran low on fuel as pipelines froze and more was diverted for heating.

“It appears that a lot of the generation that has gone offline today has been primarily due to issues on the natural gas system,” Electric Reliability Council of Texas senior director Dan Woodfin said Tuesday. The wind industry and its friends are citing this statement as exoneration. But note he used the word “today.” Most wind power had already dropped offline last week.

Gas generation fell by about one-third between late Sunday night and Tuesday, but even then was running two to three times higher than usual before the Arctic blast. Gas power nearly made up for the shortfall in wind, though it wasn’t enough to cover surging demand.

View attachment 10043

Between 12 a.m. on Feb. 8 and Feb. 16, wind power plunged 93% while coal increased 47% and gas 450%, according to the EIA. Yet the renewable industry and its media mouthpieces are tarring gas, coal and nuclear because they didn’t operate at 100% of their expected potential during the Arctic blast even though wind turbines failed nearly 100%.

The policy point here is that an electricity grid that depends increasingly on subsidized but unreliable wind and solar needs baseload power to weather surges in demand. Natural gas is crucial but it also isn’t as reliable as nuclear and coal power.

Politicians and regulators don’t want to admit this because they have been taking nuclear and coal plants offline to please the lords of climate change. But the public pays the price when blackouts occur because climate obeisance has made the grid too fragile. We’ve warned about this for years, and here we are.




You are totally right on not relying too much on windmills and solar energy to produce electricity.
Wind and sun are not predictable.
I read on Forbes that the the windmills installed in Texas are not equipped for cold temperatures which is comprehensible.
The natural gas installations neither.
The gas pipelines frozed.
In 2011 on february 2, a sample of what happened this time took place.
Evidently the lesson hasn't been learned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sene5hos

Valcazar

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2013
859
256
83
As usual with WSJ editorials, the opinion is backed up with solid facts and clear explanations.

Wait. Have you never read the Wall Street Journal and its opinion page?
 

EagerBeaver

Veteran of Misadventures
Jul 11, 2003
20,474
3,346
113
U.S.A.
Visit site
At least Cruz manned up and admitted his mistake. Not sure Grandpa Munster would have done the same:
 

EagerBeaver

Veteran of Misadventures
Jul 11, 2003
20,474
3,346
113
U.S.A.
Visit site
At the same time Cruz is being hammered for going after other politicians who went on vacations during emergencies at home:
 

sene5hos

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2019
8,505
16,941
113

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz faced widespread condemnation on Thursday for taking a tropical vacation with his family in Mexico while his home state was paralyzed by a deadly winter storm that left many without power or safe drinking water.

As criticism of the trip mounted, Cruz returned to Texas and said it was “obviously a mistake.” (it's not only obviously a mistake).

Cruz is already one of the most villainized Republicans in Congress, having created adversaries across the political spectrum in a career defined by far-right policies and fights with the establishment. More recently, he emerged as a leader in former President Donald Trump’s push to overturn the results of the November election.

Another who only thinks about his well-being. Who are the Texans? Ah yes human beings living in Texas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purplem

EagerBeaver

Veteran of Misadventures
Jul 11, 2003
20,474
3,346
113
U.S.A.
Visit site
Cruz's Wife's Private Texts On Trip Shared With NY Times:
I wonder who revealed these deeply private texts? You think Teddy will be having a talking to sit down with wifey poo about her discretion in sending texts to a person who then shared them withe the NY Times? I wonder how the blade of the knife felt going into her back?

What naive people they are.
 

sene5hos

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2019
8,505
16,941
113

Ted, Ted, Ted... you really screwed up this time! You were already insanely unpopular (thanks to inciting the Capitol riot, all that grandstanding and Trump-kissin', etc.)
Then you left on vacation as your home state of Texas battled its worst natural disaster... basically ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purplem

Valcazar

Well-Known Member
Mar 6, 2013
859
256
83
Cruz is already one of the most villainized Republicans in Congress, having created adversaries across the political spectrum in a career defined by far-right policies and fights with the establishment.

No one likes him.

I think it was John Bohener who called him "Lucifer in the flesh."
Al Franken famously wrote, ""I like Ted Cruz more than most of my other colleagues like Ted Cruz. And I hate Ted Cruz.""
Lindsey Graham had a similar take. “If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you."

People really do not like that man.
All of those are before he was involved in the Capitol insurrection on 1/6.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts