cwalton505 t1_ja48vnw wrote
Reply to comment by largeb789 in New England grid operator says small-scale solar is driving down electricity demand on some days by TurretLauncher
Oil fired plants are basically non existent. Gas turbines with a HRSG sure, but not oil plants.
realbusabusa t1_ja4bujc wrote
Essentially the same thing though
cwalton505 t1_ja4hwgb wrote
Kind of. But not really. The differentiation is important when making statements
largeb789 t1_ja7r7es wrote
https://www.iso-ne.com/about/key-stats/resource-mix/ lists oil at 2%, and coal at .3%
Selfless- t1_ja4fa78 wrote
New England generated as much as 24% of its electricity in our fuel oil plants last year.
cwalton505 t1_ja4hqc8 wrote
Love to see that source.
Seabrook nuke plant at 1250 MWhr is by FAR the largest producer in Northern New England. I know of 0 generators running off oil in Maine or NH. I don't think you understand the inefficiency of oil fired plants. I went to school for power engineering and have 15 years experience in the field.
And here's mass, our biggest ISONE supplying state
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Massachusetts
note the 0.4% petroleum
SkiingAway t1_ja4ye6j wrote
(Not the previous poster.)
When we are short on Natural Gas we switch over to oil-fired generation. New England does not have the pipeline capacity to meet demand in major cold snaps.
Traditionally, this has been partially met with LNG imports into Boston (and to a lesser extent, New Brunswick). These are less available and while never cheap, are drastically more expensive now.
Last winter and this winter we have had brief periods where the grid is running on 25-40% oil.
This is not the same as saying that total yearly generation is that much oil, we're talking hours or days, so it's a small % of overall generation....although a slightly larger share of costs, since it's a very expensive power source.
realbusabusa t1_ja53o80 wrote
And significantly more carbon, all for lack of pipeline capacity. It is absurd.
cwalton505 t1_ja58ooh wrote
Yeah and take a look at the previous posters % claim. And I'd still be surprised if we had GTEs powering 25% oil at any single instance
SkiingAway t1_ja657uz wrote
I mean, that's very easy to prove correct, since it's happened recently.
We hit 40% oil-fired generation on Christmas Eve this year, and prices spiked to over $2,000/MWh around that time.
Bloomberg article (archive link since paywall): https://archive.is/LnFvP
You could also just go straight to the source: https://www.iso-ne.com/isoexpress/. "Resource Mix Graph" and then pick 12/24/22 and look at it. At peak, we were generating 6.5GW from oil that day.
realbusabusa t1_ja4l68q wrote
It was 2% last year. After 2018 near disaster of a winter, ISO got serious about fuel reserves. Now we have multiple dual fuel plants that can switch from natgas to fuel oil during extreme cold when natgas gets priority to heating demand.
It really should be 0% oil and 0% coal at this point but multiple reasons why we're not there yet.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments