• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Texas in Crisis

fromderinside

Mazzie Daius
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
15,610
Location
Local group: Solar system: Earth: NA: US: contiguo
Basic Beliefs
optimist
Perhaps this is a between the lines thing but when the radioactive melt through floor consequence lead to a partly enclosed area where some pressure might build. That pressure is nowhere near what for which a containment vessel is designed. So, yes there will be a thermal event with pressure overtones. Since pressure is behind the destroying of a pressure container that event will be very significantly greater than any follow on explosive pressure thermal event in an opportunistically created enclosed container.

May I suggest that talking about picking one's nose is more to point than is picking secondary explosions.

An analogy might be a volcanic explosion of the Yellowstone caldera followed by witnessing the activity of mud pots or geysers remaining there today.

Proper response to geysers is "Ho hum." There isn't call for "OH MY GOD!!!"
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
36,413
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
I saw the forecast for Phoenix with the excessive 110+, but the 109 is just sunny and hot.
 

Elixir

Made in America
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
20,468
Location
Mountains
Basic Beliefs
English is complicated
113? God damn, hats off to you Loren.

I reckon in that kind of weather, you might want to keep your hat on.

Definitely. My hair has thinned enough that I must wear a hat when hiking or the top of my head will sunburn. There's enough hair to make it basically impossible to apply sunscreen, though.

114 now, today, tomorrow and Saturday.

I guess this is still about thermonuclear radiation …

My hair is now thin enough to let my scalp burn but too thick for lotion. The best solution I’ve found is WalMart spray sunscreen SPF 50. Very low viscosity lets it penetrate, and it blocks sun real well. I hate WalMart for various reasons but do appreciate that particular product.
 

Swammerdami

Squadron Leader
Staff member
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
2,667
Location
Land of Smiles
Basic Beliefs
pseudo-deism
:rofl: I think you genuinely believe that. Which is a sad indictment of the TV industry, and an excellent reason why you shouldn't try to use TV shows to learn facts.
(2) WHAT did the series get very wrong? Don't say that Whatsername was a conflation of several people: the series itself points that out in concluding remarks.
Where to start?

Let's take your example: There was never any risk of a second steam explosion doing any further damage; Any such event would have been minuscule in comparison to the major steam explosion that destroyed the reactor, and would have just tossed rubble around. No containment still existed that could have allowed sufficient over pressure for a steam explosion.

That's far from the only major factual error, but it is more than enough on its own to eliminate any claims of being a documentary.
(3) Same to you, buddy! :) I confirmed the relevant facts with Wikipedia and/or the sources it cites.

Clearly you didn't.

That's see if I got this straight.

In reality, the authorities led by a top nuclear scientist were worried about another steam explosion and therefore sent men on a dangerous mission.
In the dramatization, the authorities led by a top nuclear scientist were worried about another steam explosion and therefore sent men on a dangerous mission.
And you use this as evidence of the sad state of TV. Is that about right?

I don't know whether we should accept Professor Bilby's verdict on the possible explosion as better than that of the Chernobyl authorities or Wikipedia editors, but this seems irrelevant to the sub-debate.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,274
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Definitely. My hair has thinned enough that I must wear a hat when hiking or the top of my head will sunburn. There's enough hair to make it basically impossible to apply sunscreen, though.

114 now, today, tomorrow and Saturday.

Hot damn. Literally. Then, I wear a hat to protect my scalp and neck from the sun regardless of how much of a long haired hippy I am. Try not to die in that mess. I do enjoy bickering with you as much as it appears bilby and Swammerdami enjoy doing so.

I normally put sunscreen on my neck, but the top of my head can only be protected by objects. I've been experimenting with a sun umbrella for hiking--nice but I haven't figured out a good way to secure it to my pack to provide good shade which means it's not an option when I need my poles. It's easy to stick it in the pack to provide shade, but it's really too far back that way.

And the forecast has been updated--now it's also 114 for Sunday. So far the high temp record has been broken for 3 days in a row. And don't worry--I'm not hiking even on the mountain (20-30F cooler) in this heat!

And don't even think of Death Valley. They clocked 129F, approaching the world record.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,274
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Perhaps this is a between the lines thing but when the radioactive melt through floor consequence lead to a partly enclosed area where some pressure might build. That pressure is nowhere near what for which a containment vessel is designed. So, yes there will be a thermal event with pressure overtones. Since pressure is behind the destroying of a pressure container that event will be very significantly greater than any follow on explosive pressure thermal event in an opportunistically created enclosed container.

May I suggest that talking about picking one's nose is more to point than is picking secondary explosions.

An analogy might be a volcanic explosion of the Yellowstone caldera followed by witnessing the activity of mud pots or geysers remaining there today.

Proper response to geysers is "Ho hum." There isn't call for "OH MY GOD!!!"

If the core melted it's way into someplace it left behind a hole in doing so. No meaningful containment.

Besides, the problem in the first place wasn't containment, but a power excursion. Whether it went prompt critical or simply very close to it there's no question it produced a huge amount of heat very fast and that's what blew up.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,918
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Definitely. My hair has thinned enough that I must wear a hat when hiking or the top of my head will sunburn. There's enough hair to make it basically impossible to apply sunscreen, though.

114 now, today, tomorrow and Saturday.

Hot damn. Literally. Then, I wear a hat to protect my scalp and neck from the sun regardless of how much of a long haired hippy I am. Try not to die in that mess. I do enjoy bickering with you as much as it appears bilby and Swammerdami enjoy doing so.

I normally put sunscreen on my neck, but the top of my head can only be protected by objects. I've been experimenting with a sun umbrella for hiking--nice but I haven't figured out a good way to secure it to my pack to provide good shade which means it's not an option when I need my poles. It's easy to stick it in the pack to provide shade, but it's really too far back that way.

And the forecast has been updated--now it's also 114 for Sunday. So far the high temp record has been broken for 3 days in a row. And don't worry--I'm not hiking even on the mountain (20-30F cooler) in this heat!

And don't even think of Death Valley. They clocked 129F, approaching the world record.

I'm a big fan of stetsons. They cover the head and shade the neck and ears. Put a drape on the back for the neck if you prefer shorter hair. Aren't you the Westerner here? Shouldn't you be telling ME a out the joys of quality hats?
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,918
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
27,373
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
(1) Ad hominem.

(2)


(3) I win. (See #1 and #2.)

I never suggested that people didn't fear it, only that it couldn't have actually happened.

Reality doesn't give two shits about who wins or loses debates. Winning a debate doesn't alter facts, nor change the laws of physics.

So in your mind, the dramatization would be more accurate if the characters talked only about the things we know now, as opposed to re-enacting the conversations they actually had at the time? :confused:

It did neither, so your guesses about what's going on in my mind are irrelevant.

Dramatisations are not documentaries. The latter show what happened, the former show what could perhaps have happened if the people involved had been trying to entertain an audience.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
27,373
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
:rofl: I think you genuinely believe that. Which is a sad indictment of the TV industry, and an excellent reason why you shouldn't try to use TV shows to learn facts.

Where to start?

Let's take your example: There was never any risk of a second steam explosion doing any further damage; Any such event would have been minuscule in comparison to the major steam explosion that destroyed the reactor, and would have just tossed rubble around. No containment still existed that could have allowed sufficient over pressure for a steam explosion.

That's far from the only major factual error, but it is more than enough on its own to eliminate any claims of being a documentary.


Clearly you didn't.

That's see if I got this straight.

In reality, the authorities led by a top nuclear scientist were worried about another steam explosion and therefore sent men on a dangerous mission.
In the dramatization, the authorities led by a top nuclear scientist were worried about another steam explosion and therefore sent men on a dangerous mission.
And you use this as evidence of the sad state of TV. Is that about right?

I don't know whether we should accept Professor Bilby's verdict on the possible explosion as better than that of the Chernobyl authorities or Wikipedia editors, but this seems irrelevant to the sub-debate.

There are two separate questions here. "Was there fear of a further steam explosion?" (quite possibly, though it wasn't justified fear). And "would such an explosion have made the disaster worse?", which was the question under consideration before we went off pointlessly chasing the other question.

Even if we accept ad argumentum that a second steam explosion was a certainty had no action been taken to prevent it, how would that have made things worse?

The brave people who fought the fires and undertook the deadly work of trying to deal with the disaster largely failed. By the time the fire was contained and the remains of the reactor were sealed away in the 'sarcophagus', most of the radioactive material from the reactor had been spread widely across the environment. Adding a bit more would have made little or no difference to the people affected.

My original point remains unchallenged (despite the goalpost shifting ITT); There's no way that the Chernobyl disaster could have been significantly worse than it was. 31 people died in the immediate term, and another 19 died due to medium to long term effects unequivocally linked to the disaster. Had the authorities simply evacuated a large area and waited until the whole thing burned itself out, the total number of fatalities would likely have been significantly lower. Certainly there's no way they could have been an order of magnitude higher.

Of course, such a strategy would have been unthinkable, for the harm it would have done to the already badly battered image of the USSR.

But the big lesson of Chernobyl is that a worst case, zero containment, explosive destruction of a nuclear reactor at the point in its fuel cycle where radioactive fission products are at their highest level, and those are then spread by an intense fire across a wide area, kills about fifty people and makes perhaps another five hundred sufficiently unwell as to require medical treatment. An area up to about a 100km radius becomes sufficently contaminated as to be unwise to live in for about three decades, although people living there don't suffer measurable health impacts. After that time, radiation levels are below the highest natural background radiation levels at which people habitually live, and only a small number of hotspots require to be isolated or cleaned up.

In short, nuclear accidents of the worst possible kind are medium sized industrial accidents, of the scale that we have tolerated on a once or twice a decade basis since the 1850s; And their main point of difference from other industrial accidents is that they are both less common, and (at worst) less damaging.

Before Chernobyl, nobody knew what the worst case would look like, and imaginations ran wild. Anti-nuclear campaigners said things like "sure, there might only be one accident in ten thousand reactor years of operation, but that accident could render half the planet uninhabitable for thousands of years, and could kill millions!" But we now know that fatal accidents occur once in more than 20,000 reactor years, and render a small area unusable for a few decades, having killed fewer than 100 people.

That's a lower risk level than any other way of making electricity; And lower than any other industrial activity.

If nuclear power is too dangerous to use, then electricity is too dangerous to use, and industry is too dangerous to engage in.

Just in the 1980s, the Bhopal disaster in 1984 killed seventy five times as many people as Chernobyl, and contaminated a wider area. The Piper Alpha disaster in 1988 was at the time the most expensive industrial disaster in history. Chernobyl wasn't particularly worthy of more attention than either (then or now), and only gets more attention because nuclear disasters are so abnormal (in much the same way that airliner crashes get more attention than car crashes).
 

TV and credit cards

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
4,430
Location
muh-dahy-nuh
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
I normally put sunscreen on my neck, but the top of my head can only be protected by objects. I've been experimenting with a sun umbrella for hiking--nice but I haven't figured out a good way to secure it to my pack to provide good shade which means it's not an option when I need my poles. It's easy to stick it in the pack to provide shade, but it's really too far back that way.

And the forecast has been updated--now it's also 114 for Sunday. So far the high temp record has been broken for 3 days in a row. And don't worry--I'm not hiking even on the mountain (20-30F cooler) in this heat!

And don't even think of Death Valley. They clocked 129F, approaching the world record.

I'm a big fan of stetsons. They cover the head and shade the neck and ears. Put a drape on the back for the neck if you prefer shorter hair. Aren't you the Westerner here? Shouldn't you be telling ME a out the joys of quality hats?

Tilley makes a good hat for hiking.
 

fromderinside

Mazzie Daius
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
15,610
Location
Local group: Solar system: Earth: NA: US: contiguo
Basic Beliefs
optimist
113? God damn, hats off to you Loren.

Going for a record-breaking 116 today. However, it's a very dry heat, 5% humidity.

So, in Kennewick WN back in the late '50s, from late July through mid August, temperatures normally rose to the high 100-high teens.

Now Vegas, almost 800 miles south is now getting high 100-teens, it's proof positive evidence of global warming?

Idonthinso.

The fright suiters look just as silly today as they did back in the day. Sure we're going to hell in a handbasket, but be reasonable guys it's summer in a couple days. Things aren't really getting out of hand in the states like they have been in the middle-east now for nearly 50 years.


I Don't deny warming. Just think we should be more proportional about it. We've got about another 200 feet of ocean rising in the near future. The give me the good life wannabes aren't moving out of Florida, they're building concrete barriers. To little to late.

Humans. Can't live with 'em can't live without 'em. When and where will the hair-on-fire 'ems finally get in line with the fungole 'ems.

It is the best of times It is the worst of times ...
 

Elixir

Made in America
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
20,468
Location
Mountains
Basic Beliefs
English is complicated
I Don't deny warming. Just think we should be more proportional about it. We've got about another 200 feet of ocean rising in the near future. The give me the good life wannabes aren't moving out of Florida, they're building concrete barriers.

If I were younger I'd be looking a topo maps right about now, and speculating. Sea levels will certainly rise. Some existing shorelines won't move, but many will.

‘Woke up sweating’: Texas power companies remotely raise temperatures on people using their smart thermostats

Yeah, the above probably speaks more to Texas' incompetent goobermint than to climate change.
I wonder what will happen with the next big gamma ray burst. Steam engines should still work...
 

Rhea

Cyborg with a Tiara
Staff member
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
13,232
Location
Recluse
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
And don't even think of Death Valley. They clocked 129F, approaching the world record.

We visited death valley on a day that it was 128°F. I drank a gallon of water.
And noticed the most useless item in the world - air hand dryers in the bathrooms at Furnace Creek.

Funny story, we camped in Death Valley that night. We asked the ranger in Furnace creek how high (elevation) we’d need to get to be comfortable. They had campgrounds at -280ft (not viable), and 2000 feet (still too hot) and 4000 feet and 8000 feet. Ranger said we’d probably be comfortable at 4000 feet, the temps might get down into the 90s for the night. We asked, “if we drive all the way up there (25 miles away), will we be able to get a spot, do you think?. She looked at us levelly - and very slowly nodded her head (like, “oh, yeah, no question in my mind”). LOL.

We got there and we were the ONLY people in the campground. It was a fabulous night, the sky was AMAZING - able to see the milky way perfectly like all those professional photos, and it got down to 85° and we lay on the picnic tables watching the stars for hours before the wild burros came up the road in a big herd and then we slept in the utter quiet.

The next day, our heater hose broke about 50 miles outside the park. Luckily we had lots of water to drink while we fixed it (bypassed heater which of course we did not need at that time).
 

Swammerdami

Squadron Leader
Staff member
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
2,667
Location
Land of Smiles
Basic Beliefs
pseudo-deism
Let me express apologies to all, especially to Mr. Bilby. (I intend to open another thread to discuss Swammi's personality disorders.)

:rofl: I think you genuinely believe that.
This sounded slightly condescending. I'd let it pass if I were a manlier man, or even a properly matured adult but instead I am over-sensitive, many orders of magnitude worse than typical complainants. After this, the "sub-thread" had no meaning for me except the stupid idea that bilby should retract this remark.

There's only one Farang I see often -- a Brexit fan; we visit the same mini-mart. Recently we stood in that parking lot, with his mention of Biden flaws. I raised my voice. He then likened me to Trump! I was struck speechless! He was right. Yes, I do lose control and rant just like Trump does. :(

I herewith apologize for my personality disorders and, again, apologize personally to Mr. Bilby.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
36,413
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
113? God damn, hats off to you Loren.

Going for a record-breaking 116 today. However, it's a very dry heat, 5% humidity.

So, in Kennewick WN back in the late '50s, from late July through mid August, temperatures normally rose to the high 100-high teens.

Now Vegas, almost 800 miles south is now getting high 100-teens, it's proof positive evidence of global warming?

Idonthinso.

The fright suiters look just as silly today as they did back in the day. Sure we're going to hell in a handbasket, but be reasonable guys it's summer in a couple days. Things aren't really getting out of hand in the states like they have been in the middle-east now for nearly 50 years.


I Don't deny warming. Just think we should be more proportional about it. We've got about another 200 feet of ocean rising in the near future. The give me the good life wannabes aren't moving out of Florida, they're building concrete barriers. To little to late.

Humans. Can't live with 'em can't live without 'em. When and where will the hair-on-fire 'ems finally get in line with the fungole 'ems.

It is the best of times It is the worst of times ...

It isn’t because AZ is hot. The heat dome is toasting a much larger area than usual, and much earlier than typical. And this heat wave is actually setting all-time high records in some places.

I know around my parts, we have set month long stretch records for highs and low and precipitation.

This heat wave is to disappear for a few days and then come back. That isn’t normal.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,274
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,274
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
My original point remains unchallenged (despite the goalpost shifting ITT); There's no way that the Chernobyl disaster could have been significantly worse than it was. 31 people died in the immediate term, and another 19 died due to medium to long term effects unequivocally linked to the disaster. Had the authorities simply evacuated a large area and waited until the whole thing burned itself out, the total number of fatalities would likely have been significantly lower. Certainly there's no way they could have been an order of magnitude higher.

Letting it burn would probably have spread a lot more crap around.

But the big lesson of Chernobyl is that a worst case, zero containment, explosive destruction of a nuclear reactor at the point in its fuel cycle where radioactive fission products are at their highest level, and those are then spread by an intense fire across a wide area, kills about fifty people and makes perhaps another five hundred sufficiently unwell as to require medical treatment. An area up to about a 100km radius becomes sufficently contaminated as to be unwise to live in for about three decades, although people living there don't suffer measurable health impacts. After that time, radiation levels are below the highest natural background radiation levels at which people habitually live, and only a small number of hotspots require to be isolated or cleaned up.

Other than the city evacuation I agree with you. I haven't seen good data on the risk of being in Pripyat, but Fukushima certainly shouldn't have been evacuated.

Before Chernobyl, nobody knew what the worst case would look like, and imaginations ran wild. Anti-nuclear campaigners said things like "sure, there might only be one accident in ten thousand reactor years of operation, but that accident could render half the planet uninhabitable for thousands of years, and could kill millions!" But we now know that fatal accidents occur once in more than 20,000 reactor years, and render a small area unusable for a few decades, having killed fewer than 100 people.

And there was the continual worry about China Syndrome accidents. I never understood it at first--why would the mass stay together?? (Look what happened to Chernobyl--it spread out, the reaction stopped.) I have since come to realize it couldn't happen in the first place--the margin between subcritical (stops burning a hole) and prompt critical (goes boom rather than burning a hole) is simply too narrow, no uncontrolled mass can navigate that knife's edge for long.

That's a lower risk level than any other way of making electricity; And lower than any other industrial activity.

Actually, it looks like utility-scale solar might be a hair safer than nuke--but neither measures the secondary deaths from things like manufacturing the equipment so who knows?
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,274
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
And don't even think of Death Valley. They clocked 129F, approaching the world record.

We visited death valley on a day that it was 128°F. I drank a gallon of water.
And noticed the most useless item in the world - air hand dryers in the bathrooms at Furnace Creek.

Useless at that temperature, not so useless in the winter.

Funny story, we camped in Death Valley that night. We asked the ranger in Furnace creek how high (elevation) we’d need to get to be comfortable. They had campgrounds at -280ft (not viable), and 2000 feet (still too hot) and 4000 feet and 8000 feet. Ranger said we’d probably be comfortable at 4000 feet, the temps might get down into the 90s for the night. We asked, “if we drive all the way up there (25 miles away), will we be able to get a spot, do you think?. She looked at us levelly - and very slowly nodded her head (like, “oh, yeah, no question in my mind”). LOL.

90 isn't comfortable. I would have gone for the 8,000' one but the only place I can think of where you can drive that high is 4x4 only.

We got there and we were the ONLY people in the campground. It was a fabulous night, the sky was AMAZING - able to see the milky way perfectly like all those professional photos, and it got down to 85° and we lay on the picnic tables watching the stars for hours before the wild burros came up the road in a big herd and then we slept in the utter quiet.

I've never spent the night out there but I have hiked under a reasonably full moon--the stars are impressive.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
36,413
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
So Texas stripped its energy grid from the national grids in order to have more freedom.

You might see where this is going.
article said:
Texas power companies heated up some customers' homes last week by remotely controlling their smart thermostats, KHOU 11 reported Thursday.

One resident in the state, which is facing a heat wave that is straining its power grid, told KHOU 11 his family had awoken from a nap sweating and shocked their home had gotten as hot as 78 degrees Fahrenheit.

It turns out they had enrolled their thermostats in an energy-conservation promotion called Smart Savers Texas, run by a company called EnergyHub, in partnership with power companies. The program gives EnergyHub permission to adjust participants' smart thermostats remotely during times of peak energy demand, in exchange for entry into a sweepstakes.

"During a demand-response event, Smart Savers Texas increases the temperature on participating thermostats by up to 4 degrees to reduce energy consumption and relieve stress on the grid," Erika Diamond, EnergyHub's vice president of customer solutions, told Insider, adding that "the ability to reduce energy consumption is critical to managing the grid, in Texas and nationwide."
So, the companies are forcing people to raise their thermostats. The irony of going from rule of the Government to rule of the Corporation.

Deregulation has saved you on rates and because we can no longer provide you with the comfort you'd like, you are also saving some cash there too. You're welcome.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,274
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
So Texas stripped its energy grid from the national grids in order to have more freedom.

You might see where this is going.
article said:
Texas power companies heated up some customers' homes last week by remotely controlling their smart thermostats, KHOU 11 reported Thursday.

One resident in the state, which is facing a heat wave that is straining its power grid, told KHOU 11 his family had awoken from a nap sweating and shocked their home had gotten as hot as 78 degrees Fahrenheit.

It turns out they had enrolled their thermostats in an energy-conservation promotion called Smart Savers Texas, run by a company called EnergyHub, in partnership with power companies. The program gives EnergyHub permission to adjust participants' smart thermostats remotely during times of peak energy demand, in exchange for entry into a sweepstakes.

"During a demand-response event, Smart Savers Texas increases the temperature on participating thermostats by up to 4 degrees to reduce energy consumption and relieve stress on the grid," Erika Diamond, EnergyHub's vice president of customer solutions, told Insider, adding that "the ability to reduce energy consumption is critical to managing the grid, in Texas and nationwide."
So, the companies are forcing people to raise their thermostats. The irony of going from rule of the Government to rule of the Corporation.

Deregulation has saved you on rates and because we can no longer provide you with the comfort you'd like, you are also saving some cash there too. You're welcome.

Huh? This sounds like they knowingly signed up for it and forgot about it.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
36,413
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
So Texas stripped its energy grid from the national grids in order to have more freedom.

You might see where this is going.
article said:
Texas power companies heated up some customers' homes last week by remotely controlling their smart thermostats, KHOU 11 reported Thursday.

One resident in the state, which is facing a heat wave that is straining its power grid, told KHOU 11 his family had awoken from a nap sweating and shocked their home had gotten as hot as 78 degrees Fahrenheit.

It turns out they had enrolled their thermostats in an energy-conservation promotion called Smart Savers Texas, run by a company called EnergyHub, in partnership with power companies. The program gives EnergyHub permission to adjust participants' smart thermostats remotely during times of peak energy demand, in exchange for entry into a sweepstakes.

"During a demand-response event, Smart Savers Texas increases the temperature on participating thermostats by up to 4 degrees to reduce energy consumption and relieve stress on the grid," Erika Diamond, EnergyHub's vice president of customer solutions, told Insider, adding that "the ability to reduce energy consumption is critical to managing the grid, in Texas and nationwide."
So, the companies are forcing people to raise their thermostats. The irony of going from rule of the Government to rule of the Corporation.

Deregulation has saved you on rates and because we can no longer provide you with the comfort you'd like, you are also saving some cash there too. You're welcome.

Huh? This sounds like they knowingly signed up for it and forgot about it.
Yeah, for a chance at a sweepstake, they sold out on rights. To save a few bucks, they also sold out on almost certain access to power. Some choices shouldn't be left to people to make. ERCOT and the Pandemic have proven it.
 

TomC

Celestial Highness
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
4,329
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
One resident in the state, which is facing a heat wave that is straining its power grid, told KHOU 11 his family had awoken from a nap sweating and shocked their home had gotten as hot as 78 degrees Fahrenheit.

OMFG!

Expected to survive 78F temperatures in Texas in the summer?!?!

Oh the inhumanity!
Oh the problems first World people must face!

Tom
 

Elixir

Made in America
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
20,468
Location
Mountains
Basic Beliefs
English is complicated
One resident in the state, which is facing a heat wave that is straining its power grid, told KHOU 11 his family had awoken from a nap sweating and shocked their home had gotten as hot as 78 degrees Fahrenheit.

OMFG!

Expected to survive 78F temperatures in Texas in the summer?!?!

Oh the inhumanity!
Oh the problems first World people must face!

Tom

Snowflakes! I remember enduring 95 degree heat without a whimper.
Must have something to do with THE TEXAS GOOBERMINT deciding how hot they should be.
Time to break out those AR-15s and fight the oppression!
 

T.G.G. Moogly

Traditional Atheist
Joined
Mar 19, 2001
Messages
8,908
Location
PA USA
Basic Beliefs
egalitarian
One resident in the state, which is facing a heat wave that is straining its power grid, told KHOU 11 his family had awoken from a nap sweating and shocked their home had gotten as hot as 78 degrees Fahrenheit.

OMFG!

Expected to survive 78F temperatures in Texas in the summer?!?!

Oh the inhumanity!
Oh the problems first World people must face!

Tom
That's what I was thinking.

Thanks for the reality check.

I'm hopeful no one succumbed to the utterly oppressive 78 degree heat.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,274
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Huh? This sounds like they knowingly signed up for it and forgot about it.
Yeah, for a chance at a sweepstake, they sold out on rights. To save a few bucks, they also sold out on almost certain access to power. Some choices shouldn't be left to people to make. ERCOT and the Pandemic have proven it.

Pay more attention to the situation!

I don't know how the program works in Texas, but around here if they trigger it the thermostats go up 4 degrees. It is not an insane choice, there's no reason it shouldn't be left to the people. This is no catastrophe, this is simply idiots. Setting your thermostat to 78 is horrible?? Our house is set higher than that, simply dress lightly and it's fine.
 
Top Bottom