Don Kelly wrote:
> ----------------------------
> "Mark Thorson"
sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:476F05A9.2B72B71@sonic.net...>> Don Kelly wrote:
>>> Actually not. The process of "economic dispatch" is intended to minimize
>>> total costs of generation at all loads. The cost of spinning reserve is
>>> simply the cost of having extra capability on line-but once a given unit
>>> is
>>> on line, the variation of its fuel cost with load is taken into account
>>> in
>>> determining its share of the load. Which units should be on line is a
>>> matter of "unit committment" which is another (related) problem
>> Thanks for the informative replies. I was trying to figure
>> out what the impact will be of time-of-use pricing, demand response
>> appliances, and vehicle-to-grid technology. It's my impression
>> that the first two of these trends are inevitable, and they'll
>> improve overall energy efficiency and peak demand.
> ---------------
> They will flatten peaks and reduce the need for high fuel cost peaking
> plant. Unfortunately de-regulation favours these (i.e. gas turbines) due to
> their lower capital costs.
As I recall, this is what drove the market a decade ago. Only the spot
price of natural gas. It had nothing to do with assessing the future
cost, just spot.
What is so bazaar to me is that even a cursory assessment of future
markets, from then, would have reviled how shallow the investment was.
But then, peakers were going in for less than 50 cents a watt, so who
really cared?
This is what most folks don't seem to get. Business only cares about
today. It doesn't plan for the 'real' tomorrow. If it did, the Great
Depression would have never happened.
Why is there such a void on usenet, (i.e. the general public), about
this kind of issue? (A rhetorical question considering Enron.)
>> Right now, the utilities buy power at variable rates and
>> sell it to consumers at fixed rates. This is a crazy pricing
>> system, and the only reason we have it is we didn't have smart
>> meter technology. But now we do, so we will have TOU pricing,
>> and this is the stick which will push consumers toward
>> DR-enabled white goods and V2G cars (though the latter will
>> only be practical when hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles are
>> introduced, which might be never).
> -----------------
> The fixed rate process has worked well in the past but if the intention is
> to reduce peak loads and even out loads, then the time of day pricing is a
> better choice.
But what is used to determine? Future fuel cost is still not an issue?
SCE has seemed to look for, even if an inflated 'base cost' for solar, a
look to the future of return on investment.
> Most may not be at or near peak efficiency. This will only be the case
> for a fairly flat efficiency-load curve. Economic dispatch doesn't imply
> that but rather the best use of the resources on line. That may mean some
> machines at minimum load, others at maximum load and most at some in between
> situation -so that the overall system fuel costs will be minimized. This
> could mean that any gas turbines on line would be at low loads.
> Peak efficiency concepts are leading you to conclusions which are invalid.
> Consider...
That it is all about cost of fuel from here....
Canada will cut us off from methane if they can sell their sand to Asia
for a better price. That is what markets are all about. But Asia better
demand it then. Means that they produce for them selves rather than the
Western market, as they have so far.
What a can of worms......
Does anybody get this?
