How does your state make electricity? ( For US residents )

[southernhybrid]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/24/climate/how-electricity-generation-changed-in-your-state.html?&action=click&module=MoreInSection&pgtype=Article&region=Footer&contentCollection=Climate%20and%20Environment

I thought some might be interested in how the sources that each state gets its energy from has changed since the year 2001. Generally speaking, gas is the primary source of energy that most states use these days. Coal is decreasing to a large extent but just a few states are using a lot more wind, hydroelectric or geothermal since 2001. Click on the article and you can see graphs of how each state derives their primary source of energy.

While gas is much better than coal. Gas still puts out a lot of carbon and will eventually need to be replaced if we are ever going to make any progress in regards to climate change etc. I'm not trying to start another argument, I just thought this was some interesting information. About five states use nuclear but only 17 remain on coal, which is a big improvement from 2001, when 32 states relied on coal. Scroll down the article to see how each individual state has changed since 2001.

 

[untermensche]

Florida has 2 nuclear power stations.

Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station & St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant

Florida also has stations using solar power.

DeSoto Next Generation Solar Energy Center & Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center

Most of the energy is generated by a fossil fuel of some kind, coal, gas, oil or natural gas.

A little hydroelectric.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Florida

 

[Derec]

This is Georgia.

Solid nuclear due to Vogtle and Hatch power plants. But coal was largely reduced due to increase in natural gas. That's what all those fracking haters do not get. Gas is better both when it comes to carbon dioxide emissions and toxic emissions, as it burns far cleaner than coal (which contains sulfur, mercury and uranium and actually releases more radioactivity into the atmosphere than comparable nuke plant).

 

[Politesse]

California has led exploration of all manner of alternative energy; it's interesting to note that nuclear power has become steadily less important over the last twenty years. The newcomer is solar, which now accounts for nearly 20% of our output (and are they counting individual businesses on that? I see a lot of solar panels on warehouse roofs lately...)

But natural gas still dominates. Not surprising, considering we have huge stores of the stuff under the ground in the South San Joaquin Valley and out on the Mojave Desert. I note that the production of those resources has been an ecological and economic disaster for the people who live in them. There is no such thing as free energy; there is always a human cost.

There are some inherent lies in our graph, considering how much of our power (about 20%) is purchased from out of state rather than internally produced. So we consume, for instance, a lot more coal than our graph suggests, in the form of electricity purchased from Utah and Arizona. This practice might have numbered days, though, if the state legislature is to be believed.

 

[southernhybrid]

California has led exploration of all manner of alternative energy; it's interesting to note that nuclear power has become steadily less important over the last twenty years. The newcomer is solar, which now accounts for nearly 20% of our output (and are they counting individual businesses on that? I see a lot of solar panels on warehouse roofs lately...)

But natural gas still dominates. Not surprising, considering we have huge stores of the stuff under the ground in the South San Joaquin Valley and out on the Mojave Desert. I note that the production of those resources has been an ecological and economic disaster for the people who live in them. There is no such thing as free energy; there is always a human cost.

There are some inherent lies in our graph, considering how much of our power (about 20%) is purchased from out of state rather than internally produced. So we consume, for instance, a lot more coal than our graph suggests, in the form of electricity purchased from Utah and Arizona. This practice might have numbered days, though, if the state legislature is to be believed.

The article mentions those things. It's right under the graph. It also says that California is planning to transition to renewable sources of energy by 2045. Is that realistic, in your opinion?

 

[Politesse]

California has led exploration of all manner of alternative energy; it's interesting to note that nuclear power has become steadily less important over the last twenty years. The newcomer is solar, which now accounts for nearly 20% of our output (and are they counting individual businesses on that? I see a lot of solar panels on warehouse roofs lately...)

But natural gas still dominates. Not surprising, considering we have huge stores of the stuff under the ground in the South San Joaquin Valley and out on the Mojave Desert. I note that the production of those resources has been an ecological and economic disaster for the people who live in them. There is no such thing as free energy; there is always a human cost.

There are some inherent lies in our graph, considering how much of our power (about 20%) is purchased from out of state rather than internally produced. So we consume, for instance, a lot more coal than our graph suggests, in the form of electricity purchased from Utah and Arizona. This practice might have numbered days, though, if the state legislature is to be believed.

The article mentions those things. It's right under the graph. It also says that California is planning to transition to renewable sources of energy by 2045. Is that realistic, in your opinion?

Not in any real position to guess. I know the progress we've made thus far exceeded by quite a margin most predictions made when I wad a kid (ie the 90s) and we're good at pulling technological rabbits out of hats. The rising price of UT and AZ power also adds economic incentive.