NYC relies on aging, polluting "peaker plants" to meet electricity demand during peak usage. These plants, often located in disadvantaged communities, burn fossil fuels and contribute significantly to air pollution. While renewable energy sources are growing, they are not yet sufficient to handle peak loads, making these plants, despite their environmental impact, a necessary evil for grid stability in the near future. The city is working to transition away from these plants through initiatives like increasing battery storage and promoting energy efficiency, but a complete phase-out remains a complex challenge.
A new study published in Joule finds that relying on carbon capture and storage (CCS) to decarbonize the electric grid is significantly more expensive than transitioning to renewable energy sources like solar and wind power. Researchers modeled various decarbonization scenarios and discovered that even with optimistic assumptions about CCS cost reductions, renewables coupled with battery storage offer a cheaper pathway to a carbon-free grid. This cost difference stems from the inherent energy intensity of capturing, transporting, and storing carbon dioxide, adding extra operational expenses compared to simply generating clean electricity in the first place.
HN commenters are generally skeptical of carbon capture, viewing it as a distraction from the necessary transition to renewable energy. Many see it as a way for fossil fuel companies to maintain the status quo, pointing out its high cost and energy requirements. Some believe the focus should be on reducing emissions rather than trying to capture them after the fact. The practicality and scalability of carbon capture are also questioned, with commenters highlighting the immense infrastructure required and the lack of proven, effective technologies. A few suggest that carbon capture could play a niche role in hard-to-decarbonize industries, but not as a primary climate solution. There's also discussion about the misleading nature of "net-zero" targets that rely heavily on unproven carbon capture technologies.
UK electricity bills are high due to a confluence of factors. Wholesale gas prices, heavily influencing electricity generation costs, have surged globally. The UK's reliance on gas-fired power plants exacerbates this impact. Government policies, including carbon taxes and renewable energy subsidies, add further costs, although their contribution is often overstated. Network costs, covering infrastructure maintenance and upgrades, also play a significant role. While renewable energy sources like wind and solar have lower operating costs, the upfront investment and intermittency require system balancing with gas, limiting their immediate impact on overall prices.
HN commenters generally agree that UK electricity bills are high due to a confluence of factors. Several point to the increased reliance on natural gas, exacerbated by the war in Ukraine, as a primary driver. Others highlight the UK's "green levies" adding to the cost, though there's debate about their overall impact. Some argue that the privatization of the energy market has led to inefficiency and profiteering, while others criticize the government's handling of the energy crisis. The lack of sufficient investment in nuclear energy and other alternatives is also mentioned as a contributing factor to the high prices. A few commenters offer comparisons to other European countries, noting that while prices are high across Europe, the UK seems particularly affected. Finally, the inherent inefficiencies of relying on intermittent renewable energy sources are also brought up.
Summary of Comments ( 5 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43139946
Hacker News commenters discuss the complexities of NYC's reliance on peaker plants. Several highlight the trade-off between pollution and reliability, acknowledging the necessity of these plants during peak demand, even if undesirable. Some suggest exploring demand-side management and battery storage as alternatives, while others point to the slow pace of transmission upgrades as a hindering factor. The economic incentives for peaker plant operators are also discussed, with some arguing that the current system rewards pollution. A few commenters mention the environmental justice implications, emphasizing the disproportionate impact of these plants on marginalized communities. Finally, the possibility of microgrids and localized power generation is raised as a potential long-term solution.
The Hacker News post titled "Dirty 'Peaker Plants' Remain Essential to NYC's Power Grid" generated a moderate discussion with a number of commenters offering insightful perspectives on the complexities of transitioning to cleaner energy sources.
Several commenters highlighted the inherent difficulties in balancing the immediate need for reliable power with the long-term goal of reducing emissions. One commenter pointed out the crucial role peaker plants play in meeting peak demand, especially during heat waves, and emphasized that simply shutting them down without adequate replacement capacity would lead to blackouts. This commenter also noted the limitations of current battery technology in providing sufficient backup power for extended durations.
The economic challenges of transitioning to cleaner alternatives were also discussed. One commenter noted the substantial investment required to upgrade infrastructure and deploy new technologies, raising concerns about the potential impact on electricity costs for consumers. Another commenter suggested exploring demand-side management strategies, such as incentivizing energy conservation during peak hours, to reduce reliance on peaker plants.
The environmental impact of peaker plants was a recurring theme. Several commenters expressed concerns about the disproportionate pollution burden these plants place on low-income communities and communities of color, often located near these facilities. There were calls for prioritizing environmental justice considerations in the transition to cleaner energy sources.
Some commenters discussed the potential of alternative technologies, such as pumped hydro storage and improved battery technology, to eventually replace peaker plants. However, there was also acknowledgement of the technical and logistical hurdles involved in implementing these solutions at scale.
One commenter offered a nuanced perspective, suggesting that focusing solely on peaker plants might be a distraction from the larger issue of decarbonizing the entire power grid. They argued that investing in renewable energy sources and improving grid efficiency would be more effective in the long run.
Finally, a few commenters pointed out the regulatory and political challenges hindering the transition to cleaner energy, emphasizing the need for policy changes to incentivize investment in renewable energy and energy storage technologies.