The Unreported Story Of Grid Scale Battery Fires

/
The Unreported Story Of Grid Scale Battery Fires

  • The geniuses who are planning New York’s energy future think that they can make intermittent wind and solar generators work to power the electrical grid by the simple device of providing some battery storage.

  • The idea is that when there is abundant wind and sun, they can store up the power for use during those calm and dark periods in the winter. How much battery storage will that take? It’s a simple arithmetic calculation, but none of our supposed experts have taken the trouble to crunch the numbers.

  • Nevertheless, without any kind of feasibility study of whether this will work, they soldier forth building large grid-scale battery storage facilities. The battery building program is under way, at least to some degree, and a few such facilities are actually complete and operating out in the rural parts of the state. Meanwhile, there are plans for some much larger such facilities in New York City, including right in some of its most densely-populated sections.

  • Is there any problem with this that we ought to know about?

Read More

Doubling Down On The Worst Possible Public Policy ("Affordable Housing" In Manhattan)

/
Doubling Down On The Worst Possible Public Policy ("Affordable Housing" In Manhattan)

  • I often write about the folly of attempting, through a myriad of government mandates and subsidies, to compel the replacement of our electricity system with one powered by the wind and sun. You may think it would be impossible to come up with any public policy that is worse than that one of a forced energy system transformation.

  • And yet, the Manhattan Contrarian designee for “worst possible public policy” has gone to something else. That something else is the building of what they call “affordable housing” on some of the world’s most expensive real estate here in Manhattan.

  • The term “affordable housing” as used by housing advocates is a euphemistic term of art that means something different from what you would think. What it really means is subsidized and income restricted.

  • The policies of forced energy transition and of building “affordable housing” in Manhattan share some notable characteristics. One is that a few simple observations are sufficient to demonstrate that the policy wastes vasts amounts of taxpayer resources while accomplishing essentially nothing and indeed being destructive. Another is that there is near total consensus among the Manhattan cognoscenti that the policy is a not only good idea but indeed a moral imperative.

Read More

Our Final Objection To Our Local Utility's Rate Increase

/

  • If you have been following this blog closely, you know that I have been participating, along with two excellent colleagues, in the rate proceeding of our local utility, Con Edison.

  • A rate proceeding is the mechanism by which a utility goes before a regulatory body, in our case the New York Public Service Commission, seeking to increase the rates charged to consumers. Our purpose in the proceeding has been to object to and disrupt having the ratepayers charged for the building of infrastructure in pursuit of the futile and infeasible “climate” goals of our deluded politicians.

  • One of the rules of these things is that anybody with a genuine interest in the outcome can “intervene” if they want, and participate as a party in the proceedings. That’s how we got ourselves in on the action.

  • And by the same mechanism, multiple parties advocating for the utopian future of “renewable” and “zero emissions” energy also joined up. Among the green energy advocates in the mix were the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Alliance for a Green Economy. And then there was the New York City government, which wants to present itself as an advocate for low consumer rates, but at the same time has enacted its own mandate for electric building heat that can only be implemented with the support of some expensive new infrastructure to be built by Con Edison.

Read More

The Electric Vehicle Collapse: Wow, That Was Quick!

/

  • It was less than three years ago — early 2023 — that I was writing about the then-universal government and industry line that electric vehicles (EVs) would soon be taking over the American car market.

  • In April 2022 the Biden Administration had adopted aggressive vehicle mileage standards intended to be achievable only through rapid transition to EVs. Our “climate leader” states, California and New York, had then adopted regulations in August and September 2022, respectively, mandating a phase-out of sales of combustion vehicles, to culminate in 2035, after which only EVs would be allowed.

  • In a post in January 2023, I linked to the websites of Ford and GM, where they both touted their grand plans for rapid conversion of their companies to the manufacture of mostly or entirely EVs. At that time, Ford was claiming that it would “lead America’s shift to EVs,” and would achieve 50% of its sales in that category by 2030. GM bragged about its “path to an all-electric future” by 2035.

  • In a post on February 23, 2023, I expressed skepticism.

Read More

Even "Progressives" Are Now Allowed To Notice That New York's Climate Plans Are Crumbling

/

  • Today I spent the day with my excellent collaborator Richard Ellenbogen cross-examining witnesses at the New York Public Service Commission’s hearing on whether the pending rate increase request of our utility Con Edison should be approved. We had a lot of fun. Although the hearing was theoretically open to the public, they had no live video feed, and you had to register in advance to attend in person. It looked like everybody there was an interested party.

  • At the close of the hearing, we were invited (along with everybody else) to file a post-hearing brief by next Friday, December 12. The hearing provided us with lots of good material, and we will be putting together a good scathing screed as our contribution. You can look forward to a post on the subject next Friday or Saturday.

  • But meanwhile, there has been other news on the New York Climate Act front. On November 25 a Washington think tank called the Progressive Policy Institute put out a Report with the title “NEW YORK'S CLIMATE CROSSROADS: ASSURING AFFORDABLE ENERGY.”‍ ‍The Report takes serious note that New York’s “climate” regime is in big trouble.

Read More

Some Other Parties Weigh In On The Con Edison Rate Case

/

  • In my last post I linked to, and quoted portions of, the objection submitted by myself and two colleagues to the pending settlement of the rate increase request of our local utility, Con Edison. The gist of our objection is that the ratepayers should not be forced to pay to build infrastructure for delivery of “renewable” electricity that does not exist.

  • Our objection was filed on the day before Thanksgiving, November 26. That day had been set as the due date for all statements either in support or opposed to the pending settlement, which is referred to as the Joint Proposal of “JP.” And thus, on the same date, numerous other parties to the proceeding also filed statements, either in favor or opposed to the JP. The large majority were in favor — which is not surprising, given that to reach a settlement that might stick they needed the support of a large majority of the parties.

  • Most of the parties who had joined the case had sought from the outset to characterize their position as standing up for the ratepayers by opposing excessive revenue demands from Con Edison. And yet here at the settlement phase we find nearly all of these parties signing on to large amounts of spending by Con Edison that are completely wasteful, in that they provide for delivery of non-existent electricity and support for impossible Climate Act goals that are not happening.

Read More