A plea from my Electric Company to Conserve Power

[UncleDave]

I think not!
I will not revert my standard of living back to another time in the past because of poor planning by corporations and government. That is their problem, let them suffer the consequences once the public starts to get vocal. We have had decades to properly plan new clean zero emission power plants (nuclear) and have done nothing.

Oh well, not my problem. Thermostat at 73 degree's, I'll use my washers, dryers, dishwashers whenever I want. I will not change my lifestyle for anyone making a profit off me and for electric utility poor planning. So they dont have to thank me for my patience as I am not changing anything that I do nor do I care how unstable the system may get.

What I will do, is save more power that anyone with a EV, I drive a gas powered vehicle, so I can live in comfort at home anyway I choose. It's time for EV owners to step up to the plate and cut their household use drastically.
(just wait until 25% of the population owns an EV instead of less than the current 1%)
Dont take my post as angry, I am just pointing out, you can not promote electricity sucking EVs in the USA without having the infrastructure to support them. Yet ask ordinary people to give up living their lifestyle, makes no sense at all.

Due to the extremely cold weather, we are all relying more on our appliances around the house. To protect the stability of the electric system and to continue providing you the safe, reliable service you expect, we're asking customers to conserve energy as much as possible for the next few days.

Here are some ways you can reduce your energy use:​ Set thermostats to 68 degrees or lower. Turn off non-essential appliances and outdoor lights. Unplug appliances and devices that are not in use. Limit the use of higher power consuming appliances like dishwashers, washers, and dryers. Ensure your HVAC vents are open and not blocked by furniture, etc.

“We are feeling the effects of historically cold temperatures as our customers are running their heating units extra hard trying to keep warm,” said Dominion Energy South Carolina President Keller Kissam. “Our top priority is keeping every one of our customers safe and warm while our team works hard to manage this situation. We are asking customers to voluntarily reduce energy use to help ensure the continued reliable supply of electricity. We thank you in advance for your patience as you enjoy your time with loved ones during this special holiday season.”

Hopefully your power stayed on.

In times of crisis people often are unwilling to alter behavior citing that they wont let "them do this to me."
In reality if you aren't in control of your own situation you are completely at the mercy of the power companies.

The liquid infrastructure in place today isnt robust either and just a year ago the Carolinas experienced fuel shortages, and we had diesel shortages just this year. A lone pipeline hacking brought the southeast to its knees for much longer than day or two.
In most places no power= no fuel if there is even fuel available. If there is no liquid fuel - well then you are just SOL period.

I can make my own power, heat, and pump my own water. If I had an electric car I can make its "fuel" independent of the grid and system.

I refuse to be at the mercy of others goodwill or willingness to share resources because as you've demonstrated in your first sentence when the call to conserve goes out- many show no goodwill toward fellow man in time of emergency or scarcity.

 

[k1xv]

There were a few people on the Titanic who found the life jackets uncomfortable, took them off, and sat down with their peers to play cards until the end.

No iceberg was going to spoil their ocean voyage.

 

[4WD]

Hopefully your power stayed on.

In times of crisis people often are unwilling to alter behavior citing that they wont let "them do this to me."
In reality if you aren't in control of your own situation you are completely at the mercy of the power companies.

The liquid infrastructure in place today isnt robust either and just a year ago the Carolinas experienced fuel shortages, and we had diesel shortages just this year. A lone pipeline hacking brought the southeast to its knees for much longer than day or two.
In most place no power= no fuel if there is even fuel available. If there is no liquid fuel - well then you are just SOL period.

I can make my own power, heat, and pump my own water. If I had an electric car I can make its "fuel" independent of the grid and system.

I refuse to be at the mercy of others goodwill or willingness to share resources because as you've demonstrated in your first sentence when the call to conserve goes out- many show no goodwill toward fellow man in time of emergency or scarcity.

I resemble that …

 

[4WD]

There were a few people on the Titanic who found the life jackets uncomfortable, took them off, and sat down with their peers to play cards until the end.

No iceberg was going to spoil their ocean voyage.

Yeah - there’s that crowd still … I have an 87 year old widow next door - I want her to have 70° inside - so I do 60°

 

[Rand]

Your cost per therm must still be pretty high...my house is 2400 sqft plus I heat my 650 sqft garage in a much more extreme climate and I've never had a bill top $150 or so. Connection fee is $22/month.

I think you misread my $$$ or I wasnt clear.
the connection fee for the year is around 500
my total gas bill besides the connection fee for the year is 180-250 ... For the year.

It is sold by 1000 Cu Ft(mcf) and I pay $3.31 but there is some distro related component...
So I condenced my yearly gas bill into "connection fees" ie what I would pay with 0 consumption($500) and everything else.($180-$250)

To add even more than you probably wanted to know
sample bills
for this past november which was relatively high for a
november was: 5.8MCF and 64$ total so around ~~41 in connection fees and 23$ in gas charges

Nov bill (october usage) was 1.7MCF and $47

We also get an aprox. 2$ bill credit for previous overcharging from a lawsuit settlement. if the numbers dont match up exactly.

1 MCF = 10.37 therm
So the gas related component including distro charges is just under 40cents/therm

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

And I’m tired of people making up their own “truth.” Do you really believe what you wrote?

Yes, I do believe what I wrote; I’ll trust 1,500+ independent scientists each with verifiable life experience long before I’ll believe a study written by government employees of an agency that can produce a net benefit for the elected officials they work for.

Conflict of interest by “interpreting” data that will give one’s government agency more illicit power over the lives of citizens is an automatic disqualifier in my book.

 

[andrew_j]

Surge demand happens due to excess heat or cold or other events. Not worth overbuilding a system IMHO when it works fine vast majority of time. Personally I think they create surge demand incentives to and charges based on average consumption.

 

[PWMDMD]

Yes, I do believe what I wrote; I’ll trust 1,500+ independent scientists each with verifiable life experience long before I’ll believe a study written by government employees of an agency that can produce a net benefit for the elected officials they work for.

Conflict of interest by “interpreting” data that will give one’s government agency more illicit power over the lives of citizens is an automatic disqualifier in my book.

Then you are hopelessly lost as the other 97% of climate scientists disagree with your 1,500 climate scientists (please provide that reference). There is consensus from EIGHTEEN scientific organizations and a bunch of well-done peer reviewed literature looking specifically at the scientific consensus which it is 97% vs your 3%. The capacity for humans to believe what they want to believe to fit whatever narrative they want to be true regardless of the 97 to 3 evidence is truly amazing. You are amazing. These articles below were written by “independent” scientists, mostly from universities, from four different countries, and from varied funding sources. Please pass on that reference for the 1500 independent scientists who believe climate change is not anthropogenic.

Scientific Consensus

It’s important to remember that scientists always focus on the evidence, not on opinions. Scientific evidence continues to show that human activities (primarily the human burning of fossil fuels) have warmed Earth’s surface and its ocean basins, which in turn have continued to impact Earth’s...

climate.nasa.gov

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2774/meta

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024

https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1003187107

 

[4WD]

 

[HemiBenny]

Sounds pretty warm. We don’t even turn the heat on in the living room unless it gets around 50

58 sounds warm? No heat until it gets to around 50 in your house? You can’t be serious.

 

[Warstud]

(Reuters) -Thousands of residents were without power near Tacoma, Washington, after three electrical substations were vandalized, local authorities said on Sunday, adding that it was not yet clear if the Christmas Day incidents were linked.

The Pierce County Sheriff's Department said robberies were reported at two substations belonging to Tacoma Public Utilities and another belonging to Puget Sound Energy. Deputies cited forced entry into the fenced-in area, with equipment vandalized but nothing taken from the sites, it said. More than 14,000 customers were affected.

 

[Trav]

And I’m tired of people making up their own “truth.” Do you really believe what you wrote?

https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/666002/21b43e1b155051227ef2981acd52c254/19-16-292-C-Corbyn-data.pdf

 

[Trav]

Then you are hopelessly lost as the other 97% of climate scientists disagree with your 1,500 climate scientists (please provide that reference). There is consensus from EIGHTEEN scientific organizations and a bunch of well-done peer reviewed literature looking specifically at the scientific consensus which it is 97% vs your 3%. The capacity for humans to believe what they want to believe to fit whatever narrative they want to be true regardless of the 97 to 3 evidence is truly amazing. You are amazing. These articles below were written by “independent” scientists, mostly from universities, from four different countries, and from varied funding sources. Please pass on that reference for the 1500 independent scientists who believe climate change is not anthropogenic.

Scientific Consensus

It’s important to remember that scientists always focus on the evidence, not on opinions. Scientific evidence continues to show that human activities (primarily the human burning of fossil fuels) have warmed Earth’s surface and its ocean basins, which in turn have continued to impact Earth’s...

climate.nasa.gov

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2774/meta

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024

https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1003187107

Stop perpetrating you own truths and facts and those of nut jobs please. 97% my foot.

 

[PWMDMD]

https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/666002/21b43e1b155051227ef2981acd52c254/19-16-292-C-Corbyn-data.pdf

Are you ****ing kidding me? Next you’ll post a Wordpress article. That is not peer-reviewed and the equivalent of Ted Kaczynski manifesto…lol.

If you think that’s “evidence” anywhere close to what I’ve posted you’re lost too.

 

[PWMDMD]

Stop perpetrating you own truths and facts and those of nut jobs please. 97% my foot.

I provided FIVE peer-reviewed articles…you provided rubbish. Read the articles before spouting off stupidity. Stop ignoring the inconvenient mountain of evidence against your thesis. Saying it convincingly doesn’t make it true.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Then you are hopelessly lost as the other 97% of climate scientists disagree with your 1,500 climate scientists (please provide that reference). There is consensus from EIGHTEEN scientific organizations and a bunch of well-done peer reviewed literature looking specifically at the scientific consensus which it is 97% vs your 3%. The capacity for humans to believe what they want to believe to fit whatever narrative they want to be true regardless of the 97 to 3 evidence is truly amazing. You are amazing. These articles below were written by “independent” scientists, mostly from universities, from four different countries, and from varied funding sources. Please pass on that reference for the 1500 independent scientists who believe climate change is not anthropogenic.

Scientific Consensus

It’s important to remember that scientists always focus on the evidence, not on opinions. Scientific evidence continues to show that human activities (primarily the human burning of fossil fuels) have warmed Earth’s surface and its ocean basins, which in turn have continued to impact Earth’s...

climate.nasa.gov

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2774/meta

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024

https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1003187107

How many of those individuals & organizations receive funding, grants, or direct payments to “study” climate change? I’m betting 75% or more.

Solar activity has orders of magnitude more effect on temps on Earth than anything we’re doing. Look up pics of Ellis Island around 1900, and then look at ones today. The shoreline is in the exact same place; no rising oceans like they’ve been lying about for decades…

 

[Trav]

I provided FIVE peer-reviewed articles…you provided rubbish. Read the articles before spouting off stupidity. Stop ignoring the inconvenient mountain of evidence against your thesis. Saying it convincingly doesn’t make it true.

Peer reviewed? You must be kidding, all being funded and confirming what the other fruit cakes claimed. CO2 is not a proven green house gas.
If someone with enough balls to tell the truth the whole agenda goes down the tubes.
I can remember 40 years ago when the nut jobs were preaching global cooling and the next ice age. IBTL

 

[PWMDMD]

How many of those individuals & organizations receive funding, grants, or direct payments to “study” climate change? I’m betting 75% or more.

Solar activity has orders of magnitude more effect on temps on Earth than anything we’re doing. Look up pics of Ellis Island around 1900, and then look at ones today. The shoreline is in the exact same place; no rising oceans like they’ve been lying about for decades…

You tell me! You are attempting to discredit peer-reviewed literature published by researchers from major universities with nothing more than a biased hunch that they are somehow compromised. You provide NO evidence other than it “could” be possible. If science could be legitimately discredited with your rationale then nothing could ever be trusted. Yet science makes the world go around as you inevitably type away on a device that is 100% the product of the system you attempt to challenge. You have provided no contrary evidence, just the possibility that these scientists MAY be part of some global multinational conspiracy. Your position is a joke believed by people too unsophisticated and unknowledgeable to know when they are out of their depths and when they should ****. But you have an opinion, and you found other idiots online with the same misguide opinion and so there must be something to it. The articles I posted show you are in a very small minority of those who know about climate science but it won’t matter because you don’t want to believe that them. That’s the differences between us - all I know about climate science is what the vast majority of climate scientists state. I know I don’t understand it in depth but when the vast majority of scientists come to a consensus it’s the best bet. You on the other hand believe you are capable of understanding and agreeing with a small tiny minority of scientists. I call ********…YOUR opinion isn’t worth the cost of the electrons you used to post your responses, not unless you have a PhD in climate science. Your opinion is a meaningless, as is mine, so I defer to the MAJORITY of experts.

 

[PWMDMD]

Peer reviewed? You must be kidding, all being funded and confirming what the other fruit cakes claimed. CO2 is not a proven green house gas.
If someone with enough balls to tell the truth the whole agenda goes down the tubes.
I can remember 40 years ago when the nut jobs were preaching global cooling and the next ice age. IBTL

Please provide EVIDENCE for these claims! You question funding? Please tell me where’d they get their funding? Did you write that response without even determining their funding? Did you read ANY of the articles? I know the answer is no because it’d take a few hours to read and properly vet those articles. So that means I provide peer-reviewed literature, you made no attempt to read or understand it, and instead ignores it so you could push on with your agenda. YOU ARE FULL OF ****! You are not interested in truth. You just want to believe what you want to believe. Change my mind! PLEASE! Change my mind with some sort of well designed well written peer reviewed article. I love learning new things. I even love being a contrarian but the evidence is what it is.

Yes, being wrong FORTY YEARS AGO means it’s impossible to be correct today?! The vast majority of climate scientists publishing 40 years ago are now dead. Please get a grip…

 

[gman2304]

Sounds pretty warm. We don’t even turn the heat on in the living room unless it gets around 50

You must have gathered ALL of the wool and have a polar bear as a spouse!