by Dreamtwister » Sun 25 Mar 2007, 01:36:05
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Twilight', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dreamtwister', 'W')ill they shut off the grid to the lower class folks to keep the middle class driving, or keep the lights on for everyone and run the pumps dry?
Makes no difference, that's not where the problem is.
Ah, but it does matter. Refineries are
already experiencing power problems. Fortunately, the disruptions haven't been crippling so far, but they have affected pump prices. Looking at demand growth, we could see significant power disruptions as early as this summer. And when I say "disruptions", I mean full-on blackouts in major markets. Who are the electric companies going to cut off? That's the question here. Will they cut off the refineries? Not if they can help it. Refinery disruptions are extremely damaging to the economy (See fire at Nanticoke) and must be viewed as unacceptable by the hydro network. But that means they will have to cut off
someone. Is it going to be the "big business" to which you alluded? Unlikely.
It doesn't matter whether the "supply problems" are caused by insufficient capacity, or poor maintainance as you suggest. All that matters is there isn't enough to go around.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Twilight', 'I') do not know what arrangement US refineries have, but the cynical side of me suspects they went for the cheaper option.
I can see where you might draw that conclusion, and from a purely cynical perspective it makes sense, but I think you underestimate the level of corporate penetration in the US government, especially in the energy sector. follow the logic of my position for a moment:
I think we can all reasonably agree that the US government is
painfully aware of the critical importance of energy to the economy. I think we can also agree that the importance of the stability of the energy supply extends beyond whatever contractual agreements the refineries have entered into with the hydro producers. To that end, I think it's reasonable to assume that the (US) goverment would intervene on behalf of the refineries to ensure adequate power, despite the terms of any existing contracts, even at the expense of the hydro companies' other customers.
I would not be surprised to find out that the refineries both a) opted for the "first cutoff" option as you suspected
and b) intend to cite "national security" as a reason to violate those terms when the electricity shortages begin to threaten their revenue streams as early as this summer.
The whole of human history is a refutation by experiment of the concept of "moral world order". - Friedrich Nietzsche
by DantesPeak » Fri 27 Apr 2007, 20:56:06
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('roccman', 'h')ttp://www.koco.com/news/13211973/detail.html
For some reason, refineries seem to get far more than their share of lightning strikes. I suppose it's the high metal towers, but maybe some scientist reading this could explain if there is some other reason.
It's already over, now it's just a matter of adjusting.
-

DantesPeak
- Expert

-
- Posts: 6277
- Joined: Sat 23 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: New Jersey
-
by joewp » Sat 28 Apr 2007, 01:30:04
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('DantesPeak', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('roccman', 'h')ttp://www.koco.com/news/13211973/detail.html
For some reason, refineries seem to get far more than their share of lightning strikes. I suppose it's the high metal towers, but maybe some scientist reading this could explain if there is some other reason.
Murphy's Law.
Joe P.
joeparente.com"Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money." - Cree Indian Proverb