Well new mexico governor decided to make electricity unaffordable

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Oilpan4

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
1,839
The governor signed it into law.
It mandates 80% renewable power by 2030. And 100% by 2040.
But as far as I know there is no actual plan to achieve this. Just boundless optimism and other people's money.
It doesn't effect me that much but supposedly as many as 1 in 4 house holds in NM was behind on their power bill at some point in 2018 and 1 in 7 got a disconnect notice.
NM has the 5th lowest per capita income in the United States.

My highest power bill was a little over a year ago, nearly $300. Because of the cold winter and heat pump heating.
Last year I bought a wood stove and coal furnace. Even after adding the leaf my bills were all around or under $100 this winter.
The coal furnace and wood stove pretty much paid for them selves so far.
This year I'm buying tons of solar panels and doing grid tie solar and buying more coal. A lot more coal.
 
Oilpan4 said:
But as far as I know there is no actual plan to achieve this. Just boundless optimism and other people's money.
Wrong.
I'll give you a hint where to look: PNM charges less for renewable energy than dirty sources.
 
Do these renewables work throughout the night?
If not then it kind of doesn't matter if they are cheaper.

When I had excel in texas I had the option to "buy wind power" for an additional 1 cent per kwh. How is that cheaper?

Here is the problem.
Wind and sun only work really well for about 8 hours a day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_profile
That's great, except when you need power at night. 10 or 11 months a year all your peak power demands are during the day while wind and solar are hard at work.

Another tiny possibly inconvenient question or questions.
Was this existing clean energy owned by PNM heavily subsidized by the US government?
If so how much did it really cost?
If NM wants to charge ahead and go 80% renewable in 11 years what obligation does the Fed have to pay for it?
NM is about the 5th poorest state in the union, so we can't afford it.
If those entitled elitists in Santa fe want solar panels why don't they just do what I'm doing and spend their own money on them?

Maybe unaffordable electricity will drive some of the illegals out.
 
Oilpan4 said:
Do these renewables work throughout the night?

Batteries work at night.


Oilpan4 said:
If not then it kind of doesn't matter if they are cheaper.

Depends on the cost of storing power. If renewable power stored with batteries until needed is cheaper, why not?
 
I think I've said this before: the US, and the Western US especially, is going to have to deal with increasing flooding AND increasing drought, and the only way to do this is to store and transport water over longer distances and at larger volumes than usually done. That would in turn off a solution to the variability of renewables: pumped storage. It's already in use, and is the main way in which utilities store power. Integrate it into a larger system that moves excessive rainfall to dry regions, or stores it nearby in large reservoirs for the dry season, and you have another problem solved, without much extra investment, relatively speaking.
 
As a utility engineer with over 3 decades experience, I do agree with OP that all the hardware, technology, and maintenance for the complex grid equipment that will be required to achieve 100% renewables (including a boatload of storage batteries that will need to be replaced every several years) will make it a more expensive proposition than what we have now...
 
Coinneach said:
As opposed to the environmental cost of continuing to pump poisonous rock vapors into the air? :roll:

Most societies have been trained to both ignore environmental costs, and to pass them directly on to consumers, as adverse health affects and a deteriorated ecosystem. We lead the way in that regard.
 
Randy said:
As a utility engineer with over 3 decades experience, I do agree with OP that all the hardware, technology, and maintenance for the complex grid equipment that will be required to achieve 100% renewables (including a boatload of storage batteries that will need to be replaced every several years) will make it a more expensive proposition than what we have now...

80% renewable might be reasonable. 100% probably isn't reasonable. 80% needs a few hours of battery or other storage. 100% needs weeks of storage, or large amounts of hydro, or nuclear.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=15162
 
Randy said:
As a utility engineer with over 3 decades experience, I do agree with OP that all the hardware, technology, and maintenance for the complex grid equipment that will be required to achieve 100% renewables (including a boatload of storage batteries that will need to be replaced every several years) will make it a more expensive proposition than what we have now...

Please provide evidence for your statement that utility scale batteries need to be replaced every few years
 
Oilpan4 said:
Wind and sun only work really well for about 8 hours a day.
As usual, you do not have a clue.
Stop posting BS. Look up production data for solar and wind in NM

--
You ignore the subsidies given to nuclear and fossils, ignore the externalized costs of these choices, but take great offense at the wind production tax credit.

But you are not content to simply be ignorant, you post nonsense and FUD.
In short, you are FOS. Just another Trumper
 
WetEV said:
Oilpan4 said:
Do these renewables work throughout the night?

Batteries work at night.


Oilpan4 said:
If not then it kind of doesn't matter if they are cheaper.

Depends on the cost of storing power. If renewable power stored with batteries until needed is cheaper, why not?


I already posted that tesla can do it for $110,000 per mega watt hour.
Is that cheap enough?
Can enough battery material be obtained to make them?
I'm very sure the 5th poorest state in the union can't afford it.
 
SageBrush said:
Oilpan4 said:
Wind and sun only work really well for about 8 hours a day.
As usual, you do not have a clue.
Stop posting BS. Look up production data for solar and wind in NM

--
You ignore the subsidies given to nuclear and fossils, ignore the externalized costs of these choices, but take great offense at the wind production tax credit.

But you are not content to simply be ignorant, you post nonsense and FUD.
In short, you are FOS. Just another Trumper

Here is the solar and wind power profile for California.
NM has a little better wind utilization, but not drastically different. Our wind can last until 6 or 7pm most evenings.
Does this not clearly show wind and solar power coming on line about 8 or 9 am then dropping off around 5pm?
loadprofile.png

I already put out solar panels tracked their output and have had access to wind farm data trends in the past.
I went to wind power school for 2 years, been to multiple wind farms, climbed wind turbines, I'm well aware of wind power capabilities compared to someone who reads articles about them.
 
Here is a better one.
The wind power curve in CA is almost a mirror image of what NM experiences.
Otherwise thats about what it looks like.
Unlike solar, wind is less predictable, a lot of days it surges just like that CA graph.
Looks like some of that solar is on trackers or is slightly east or west facing.

kavousian-2.png
 
Oilpan4 said:
NM has a little better wind utilization, but not drastically different.
More BS.

Look up the data, and try to remember the question: how well does wind complement PV in NM.
Take seasons and load profile into account; take future demand management into account.
 
Nope, you just call everything you don't agree with bs even after you are proven completely wrong. You really should be working in politics.

I already said in NM the wind profile blows well into the evening most days and is kind a mirror image of that California wind load profile. Wind and solar will work together well in NM until about 9pm when both go 0.
 
Oilpan4 said:
Wind and solar will work together well in NM until about 9pm when both go 0.
More BS
This is not a question of what I like, it is a question of facts and data.
 
Another inconvenient fact.
I saw in the news paper this morning that NM is ranked 50th out of all 50 states for food security by the USDA.
I'm going to say I think our state government is focusing on the wrong stuff.
1 in 4 households can't afford to keep up with their electricity bill, USDA warns poorer residents of NM regularly struggle to buy enough food.
But the Democrats think it's a good idea to spend a large amount of money to make electricity more expensive, instead of make sure people stay fed and keep their lights on.
A lot of them won't last past next election.

If someone can't afford to feed their kids or keep up with the electricity bill who really think these people really are wanting to spend more to get electricity from solar panels?
 
Back
Top