HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » California Passes Huge Gr... » Reply #22

Response to oldhippie (Reply #21)

Thu Oct 31, 2013, 03:33 AM

22. Or you could just be civil...

I suppose, then, that it's back to the beginning again. I strongly urge anyone still reading to review the thread.

After reading the wrong document (post 8) you clearly stated that the CPUC was making the "same mistake" that the uninformed "technical" journalist had made (post 15). You tried to backtrack with a qualifier, but you are clearly stating that the CPUC document is wrong and, by implication, that the people who wrote it are less informed than you.

Perhaps you should worry less about tossing snark at other DUers and more about simply reading with comprehension and accuracy, for the CPUC docs are actually very clear when they define that in this document, "MW represents the peak power capacity of the storage resource in terms of the maximum discharge rate". (pg 1, APPENDIX A)

Appendix A, btw, is the document actually being adopted.

The CPUC is issuing a policy that "prescribes" the purchase of a certain amount of storage. For their purposes it isn't necessary to define that storage in terms of amount delivered over time. I explained why in post 10, but you chose to call that "techno-garfel" rather than consider that you were off-target.

I then gave examples to demonstrate why the time element of the storage to be purchased isn't predictable enough for a prescriptive approach to be used at this stage. One important goal of the policy is "cost effectiveness". There would be severe negative impacts to that if they tried to determine in advance the hours of storage involved in all of the different applications.

I see from your continued nervous snark that you understand specifying the time dimension would be a ridiculous approach to pursue but that is what your criticism is about - they chose to use the faceplate peak power capacity of the resources being purchased rather than get into the depth of delivery that might suit each of those resources best.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 29 replies Author Time Post
madokie Oct 2013 OP
NYC_SKP Oct 2013 #1
madokie Oct 2013 #2
NYC_SKP Oct 2013 #3
madokie Oct 2013 #4
NYC_SKP Oct 2013 #5
madokie Oct 2013 #6
phantom power Oct 2013 #7
oldhippie Oct 2013 #8
kristopher Oct 2013 #11
oldhippie Oct 2013 #12
kristopher Oct 2013 #14
oldhippie Oct 2013 #15
kristopher Oct 2013 #17
hunter Oct 2013 #20
One_Life_To_Give Oct 2013 #9
hunter Oct 2013 #26
One_Life_To_Give Oct 2013 #28
kristopher Oct 2013 #10
oldhippie Oct 2013 #13
kristopher Oct 2013 #16
oldhippie Oct 2013 #18
kristopher Oct 2013 #19
oldhippie Oct 2013 #21
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineNew Reply Or you could just be civil...
kristopher Oct 2013 #22
phantom power Oct 2013 #23
kristopher Oct 2013 #24
oldhippie Oct 2013 #25
kristopher Oct 2013 #27
kristopher Nov 2013 #29
Please login to view edit histories.