The important thing to remember is the old wisdom of, “You don’t put all your eggs in one basket”.
Ten years ago when I replaced my furnace and A/C, fuel oil @ $1 gal (no LNG gas is available) was the “obvious choice” but right now with fuel oil @ $5 gal I’m considering replacing my fully functioning A/C with a heat pump, giving me the option of electric or gas heat.
If I had done it originally it would have added maybe $1,000 to the cost but doing it now it will cost at least $3,000 so now I’m kicking myself for being a cheapskate fool and only thinking short term.
My larger point is that we’re dependent on energy but none of us can accuratly predict the future costs so the only prudent course is a mix of oil, gas, hydro, solar, nuclear and renewables to hedge our bets.
And just like my home furnace, the investment will cost a little more now but give us more options to protect us against the unexpected, .
Heat pumps operate off of electricity, which nationally is predominantly fed by natural gas. I don’t think having an electric heat pump is going to necessarily insulate you from higher energy costs. I have a heat pump myself, as it just doesn’t get THAT cold here for that long, relatively speaking.
I would consider a cost analysis of some sort before choosing to pay to install solar panels on my house. I’d want to save money in the long run by installing them. I think it would be wise to look at it the same way on a national scale.
That’s conventional wisdom at it’s best. But unfortunately there seems to be an all or nothing attitude on both sides of the issue. We need more common sense solutions by our representatives. (Notice I didn’t say leaders).
Those difficult to quantify expenses are tough to wrangle with. Still, people can come up with ways of estimate if them. Several decades fired power plants were causing respiratory illnesses in the areas downwind of them. The solution? Put up really tall smokestacks. Didn’t work. The airborne contaminants just went farther afield, but still caused respiratory problems, just in the next state over. That’s partly how we ended up with more sophisticated pollution abatement equipment on power plants.
Full Life cost analysis is always an important investment consideration BUT when an application is a necessity it requires a different calculation.
Around here everyone depends on LPG generated electricity but many people have also invested in a LPG or gasoline generator in the event the electric goes out.
I’ve had mine for 10+ years now and haven’t needed it yet so by a straight cost analysis it’s been a total loss but if another storm disrupts the electric, it will be priceless.
On the National level we’re seeing crude oil supply disruptions, looming drought induced hydroelectric cutbacks, experienced recent oil product pipeline disruptions and seen the Texas snowstorm electrical debacle so this isn’t just a theoretical consideration.
And from the automotive perspective I’ll bet dollars to donuts that during the Colonial Pipeline shutdown that every EV, Hybrid and Prius driver was whizzing by the gas lines grinnin’ like a cat eating a bumble bee.
It’s cheaper and more “cost effective” to only plan for a 70 degree sunny day but since energy is a necessity it’s only prudent to invest in developing ALL our energy options.
Better to spend and not need it then to need it and not have it.
Disagree. Need to ensure all of the options are viable before blindly investing in them, in my opinion. Viability goes back to investment cost per unit of power generated.
I don’t have a generator. I’d rather risk being without power than purchasing something I don’t use, and possibly having it sit long enough that it doesn’t actually work when I do need it. So we think a little differently there.
How convenient to have social costs difficult to quantify. So you can pretty much make up anything to sell the case. In Minnesota very few city dwellers heat with electricity because it is just too expensive. In rural areas lp is the predominant fuel. It’s called normal people making normal economic decisions.
Back to the old chicken or egg issue, a new study from Greece I believe suggests co2 increases after the temp increases instead of the other way around. The hysterics begins.
Interesting. Seems Niagra Falls hydro-electric plant isn’t pushing down the cost of electricity very much for Buffalo residents.
Electric-rates here in San Jose, not a lot of hydro, about 25 cents. Portland Oregon on the other hand is near to a big hydro-electric facility, 6-7 cents.
I’ve got a little generator that would be used strictly for survival. Bil put a whole house and shop one in and said business is booming with long waits. $10-20,000. I’m not there yet. No guarantee the gas would be there to run it, and you can’t store gasoline in town and for long periods of time. So many of those generators may prove less than useful in a real crisis.
Actually surprising I think we actually agree almost all the time, especially on core issues but definately not on climate!
Both my kids decided on schools in the Deep.South and having experienced late August there, My Goodness How Do You Do It!
The folks are wonderful, the area beautiful, the bugs are tolerable, the heat is tough but the humidity is something else. I’d step outside and within a minute would be looking like I just climbed out of a pool but you guys would look like you’re sitting in a Spring breeze!
But more seriously, we all agree that money should be spent prudently and that there are regional variations in what that means but I hope that we also agree that in an interconnected national energy grid that an overall plan incorporating regional differences is very important.
In the Northwest and Southwest hydro is important, in the Gulf it’s oil, in the Midwest it’s agro gas and wind, in the Northeast it’s becoming natural gas, etc. but the point is that by investing in ALL energy sources we protect our energy supply for our Region but also all our other Regions.
The single source Colonial Pipeline shutdown proved the folly of relying on only one supplier and the Texas reliance on only Interstate suppliers proved the folly of only relying on Regional sources and single source energy.
A nationally interconnected and diversified source of gas, oil, hydro, solar, nuclear, renewables and even coal energy would protect us against spot shortages and international blackmail.
Yeah, it’s going to cost us in tax dollars to support possibly immediately uneconomic excess capacity and interconnections but wouldn’t that be cheaper and wiser than to stumble from one crisis to another?
i.e. If you assure me that that gasoline or electricity will be available at $X dollars I can make a rational decision and won’t have to spend beacoup bucks to buy a backup generator or vehicle…
Sure but the folly is that there is no way to store excess solar and wind capacity except with batteries. And those batteries need to be huge and with deep environmental costs associated with the creation and disposal of them. Can’t store from the other sources either but can be cranked up when needed regardless of weather.
I had similar experience when I visited Bangkok for 6 weeks. Nearly struck dead when first stepped off plane by an evil blast of heat and humidity. By the end of the 6 weeks in the climate I was putting on a jacket if the temperature went below 85 degrees … lol. … people are pretty adaptable.
True enough, no dispute, but isn’t there still the potential of a reduction in use of carbon sources at times when the non-carbon sources are available?
And that’s why I’d like to see the cost vs amount of power produced. I feel like it’s a bad time to be raising taxes too, unfortunately. Not that there is a “good” time to raise taxes (yay, higher taxes - said no one). Maybe they can take the money from…somewhere else. Has to be some fat in the budget…somewhere, I suppose.
The reality is that we’ve already solved the storage issue.
Although still in if it’s infancy, hydro storage, batteries, gravity storage, it’s already done but at a higher price.
And altenative energy sources are well underway including gas, efficient use of oil products, biogas, recycleablebles and even coal but the limiting factor is price.
The real question is whether we want true National Enegy Independence or whether we want to remain dependent on OPEC or a crazy nutter in Russia?
Yeah we can get it cheaper but at what price is it worth selling your soul?
My point is that we’re an incredibly huge and economically wealthy country and instead of “shucking on the hind teat” we need to invest in our own energy solutions.
Give me a reasonably assured price of gasoline, fuel oil or electricity and I can decide which is the best solution for me.
.
