Slashdot Mirror


After Rising For 100 Years, Electricity Demand is Flat (vox.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: The US electricity sector is in a period of unprecedented change and turmoil. Renewable energy prices are falling like crazy. Natural gas production continues its extraordinary surge. Coal, the golden child of the current administration, is headed down the tubes. In all that bedlam, it's easy to lose sight of an equally important (if less sexy) trend: Demand for electricity is stagnant. Thanks to a combination of greater energy efficiency, outsourcing of heavy industry, and customers generating their own power on site, demand for utility power has been flat for 10 years, and most forecasts expect it to stay that way. The die was cast around 1998, when GDP growth and electricity demand growth became "decoupled." This historic shift has wreaked havoc in the utility industry in ways large and small, visible and obscure. Some of that havoc is high-profile and headline-making, as in the recent requests from utilities (and attempts by the Trump administration) to bail out large coal and nuclear plants.

22 of 229 comments (clear)

  1. Demand is Still Rising... by sycodon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...but in developing countries.

    While TFA did point out, "US", it seems rather pointless because the demand, and thus the generation, and thus the pollution is occurring overseas.Just because it's not here doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

      It's like you cleaned up your back yard by throwing all the trash over the fence. Coming soon, we will be bitching at our neighbors about all the trash in their yard.

    So before the Enviro's celebrate, they should consider that they have successfully pushed the pollution into countries that are ill equipped to handle it from regulatory and societal standpoints, yet the US and other western countries are still benefiting from it.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:Demand is Still Rising... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Informative

      Peak coal in China? Not according to the Chinese government.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_in_China

      "electricity consumption is expected to grow by 3.6-4 percent over 2016 to 2020 according to (China's Official) Thirteenth (five-year) Plan (2016–2020).[4] According to the same five-year plan, coal power capacity will be expanded from 960 GW to under 1,100 GW by the end of 2020 to meet some of the continued growth in electricity demand.[4] Indeed, in the first two months of 2016, China had added 22 GW of capacity, 14 GW of which was coal, according to the China Electricity Council.[5] "

    2. Re:Demand is Still Rising... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yup, they've agreed to peak emissions 'around 2030'

      https://www.reuters.com/articl...

      BEIJING, Nov 14 (Reuters) - China's total volume of carbon emissions is set to rise by a third in the next 16 years, according to scholars from China's Tsinghua University, even as the world's biggest carbon polluter has pledged the climate-warming gas emissions will peak by 2030.

      China's president Xi Jinping announced this week that the country would strive to bring its spiralling carbon emissions to a peak by "around 2030" as part of a joint commitment with the United States to combat global warming.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    3. Re:Demand is Still Rising... by upl8n87447 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, the US is to blame for trade agreements without any consideration for environmental regulation of our trade partners. We are a major consumer of the goods whose production was shifted from the US to those foreign nations. The corporations that sourced their goods from China are fully capable of reviewing their manufacturing and energy generation practices to ensure they're meeting a high standard. We may not be physically throwing garbage over the fence, but it's in our closing our eyes, plugging our ears, and holding our mouths shut that we ensure the same result.

      As the consumer, we are just as responsible for ensuring that our goods are sourced from those using environmentally sound methods. Instead we decided price is the only thing that matters. Yet, ironically, it's the market forces that determine prices, not the price of production. Cheap labor, cheap manufacturing processes, and cheap energy generation do not lead to a proportional reduction in price.

      In effect, the consumers have gladly handed over their money for a small savings, watched it filter up to the wealthiest individuals and businesses and stagnating there, while the workers didn't get paid for the value they produced and we destroyed our environment in the process.

      Go us!

    4. Re:Demand is Still Rising... by guruevi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We are literally outsourcing power generation by outsourcing production. We have "bettered" the environment game not because we implemented "green" policies, but because we moved large swathes of power consumption out of this country.

      Steel production is a big user, we moved virtually all steel production to China hence moving the power generation issue. Same goes for most factories, moving it to South America and Asia moves the power generation and production issue.

      We are not 'forcing' them, they are bettering themselves and their population in the process, but that comes at an expense of energy. Luckily FOR ALL OF US China is bringing a decent amount of nuclear generators online

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  2. wrong title. Demand continues to increase by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What is NOT increasing, is the demand for UTILITIES electricity. That has been flat for some time depending on the state. If you are in a state that fights against Solar/Wind, then utility demand continues.

    However, what is missing is that this is about to change in a HUGE way. In particular, EVs will be coming on very strong esp with Commercial trucking. While cars will outsell the trucks, the trucks are ran 5-10x as much . As such, within 5 years, these will put a huge demand on electricity. Worse, it will not be a simple increase in electricity but will be heavy spikes in demand.
    It is for exactly this reason that we need base-load powers, such as nuclear.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:wrong title. Demand continues to increase by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is why I continue to fight against our subsidizing hybrid and low MPC crap. These will cost ALL OF US, while the high MPC EV will be charged at nighttime except when doing a long distance drive.

      Low MPC (I assume "miles per charge") driver here. I charge almost exclusively during low demand times: typically at night.

      Remember that most journeys are less than 15 miles (30 miles round trip), so that most use of any electric vehicle allows overnight charging.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    2. Re:wrong title. Demand continues to increase by ArhcAngel · · Score: 3, Informative

      I work in the energy sector and I can assure you some of your assertions are inaccurate. Utilities actually still loved nuclear from a cost per KW perspective. It was simply the PR and strong NIMBY component which kept it from proliferating. Had fracking not caused the influx of natural gas to destroy the price I assure you Nuclear would still be a darling.

      You're right about solar but utilities are figuring it out and making it work.

      Battery storage is now cost effective and IS being deployed in large scale nationwide. It isn't intended to provide the total power for any location but to provide stress relief for the grid during peak usage.

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  3. LEDs I think. by Major_Disorder · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The price on LED lighting has come down so much, that I have just finished converting my entire house to LED lighting. It has made a big difference in my electric bill. Also big power sucking CRT TVs are being replaced rapidly with LED backlit flat screens.
    I would expect the electric use to start a downward trend from this point.

    --
    First law of people: People are generally stupid.
    1. Re:LEDs I think. by Gilgaron · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah when I was finishing my basement I drew out what lighting fixtures I wanted and went to add them up to see if I could get them all on one breaker... the single fixture that came with 3 incandescent bulbs used more power than the rest of the basement put together, since the others were all LED. I intend to use the 3 bulbs that came with the fixture until they burn out and then replace them with decorative LEDs, but maybe I should just get rid of them and let the LEDs pay for themselves... we bough the house just long enough ago that I'd replaced the rest of the lighting with CFLs, which themselves had a noticeable affect on the electric bill, and look forward to replacing them with LEDs as they burn out, too.

    2. Re:LEDs I think. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      LED have a longer life, Can be dimmed, A wide verity of color hues, brighter bulbs can be put into lamps that normally would have cause a fire problems.

      There are a lot of Benefits from LEDs over Incandescent or CF. It isn't just greenies who use them. They are a practical light source. It just took the invention of the Bright Blue LED in 1995 (23 years ago) to help make it a reality. Otherwise we would be having Red-Yellow-Green lights with them, Which are not overly useful for normal lighting.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:LEDs I think. by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 3, Informative

      LED have a longer life

      I don't know about that.

      I do. I've been running LEDs since 2008; I have 75 of them in my house. Some of the earlier ones did die early, but the current versions just keep on going; a lot more long-lived than even the old CF bulbs.

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  4. Re:EVs will change that by AlanObject · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When you switch to more energy efficient products, this is a natural side effect. EVs will change that obviously.

    But with a corresponding drop in demand for fossil fuels at the point of consumption.

    Of course fossil fuels will still be used a lot for generation of electricity for EVs, but if renewables are actually dropping in price then that has to trend downward.

    Which, of course, will cause the price of gasoline to crash because of the resulting glut.

    The thing to watch for is if gasoline prices drop because of that then ICE cars become more cost-competitive against EVs than they were before. If that is true then EV cars need to become more cost-efficient than they currently are. And for that, Li-ION batteries have to both improve and drop in price.

    Maybe Elon is on to something.

  5. Very interesting development by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...but in developing countries.

    While TFA did point out, "US", it seems rather pointless because the demand, and thus the generation, and thus the pollution is occurring overseas.Just because it's not here doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

      It's like you cleaned up your back yard by throwing all the trash over the fence. Coming soon, we will be bitching at our neighbors about all the trash in their yard.

    So before the Enviro's celebrate, they should consider that they have successfully pushed the pollution into countries that are ill equipped to handle it from regulatory and societal standpoints, yet the US and other western countries are still benefiting from it.

    This is a *very* interesting development, for the following reason:

    All modern theories of economics ("schools of thought" as they are called) assume infinite demand, either by infinitely increasing population or infinitely increasing demands per person, or both.

    So for example, theory has it that you can double your sales income if you double your sales outlets - by opening stores in other states, for instance. Problem with this is that the world is finite and eventually you reach diminishing returns. Many companies found this out the hard way when they started selling through WalMart - once your jeans (or pickles) are sold at Walmart, you're done. You can no longer increase sales *at all*.

    We know that population begins to level off and decline when countries become modernized, and now it looks like demand itself has a fixed upper limit.

    If consumption is fixed, then lots of macro economic theory is simply incorrect. If efficiency per-worker reaches a level where half the available workers can fulfill the demands of the population, what do you do with the other half that can't find work?

    It's these sorts of observations and extrapolations that lead people to think of possible solutions like reduced-hours work week (for the same pay), or UBI.

    1. Re:Very interesting development by swb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On the other hand, I would love to have my own starship.

      Which implies another laptop, doesn't it? I mean, you can't run a starship with just one laptop..

  6. Re:EVs will change that by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The charging time problem is one of charging cable size.

    You can get around that by upping the voltage. Tesla Superchargers use 400 volts.

    Supercapacitors do shit for that issue.

    The biggest problem with super-caps is energy density, currently less than a tenth that of lithium batteries.

  7. Re:EVs will change that by rogoshen1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    that sounds like the lead-in to an Elon #meToo moment.

  8. Re:EVs will change that by crunchygranola · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Which, of course, will cause the price of gasoline to crash because of the resulting glut.

    What glut? EV's driving down petrol sales will be a gradual process, and vehicle fuel plants shift production on a monthly basis. Gasoline production will be adjusted (as is true now) so that there is a razor thin margin of excess supply.

    Liquid fossil fuels is a world-wide industry in every respect (production, refining, consumption) and prices are set at the global level and on a world-wide scale U.S. shifts to EVs will have a small effect. And any drop in primary resource prices suppresses high cost fuel production (fracking, tar sands) which compensates significantly.

    --
    Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
  9. Re: Obligitory Trump Bashing by peragrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only reason Trump won is because Democrats underestimated the raw hatred people have of Hillary. I am a liberal and I can't stand her. She stands for nothing but power for herself.

    Democratic leadership is just as corrupt and incompetent as Republican.

    --
    i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  10. Re:EVs will change that by nonBORG · · Score: 5, Informative

    supercapacitors at present are more sci-fi than fact if they are thought of as competing (in capacity) to batteries.
    The formula for a capacitor has in its formula A/d
    A is the area (of the plates)
    d is the distance (between the plates)

    so a small distance and big area is how to make super capacitors. The problem comes when you want to charge the capacitor because the d distance sets the limit of the voltage (due to the breakdown the the diametric, which is whatever material is between the plates) the charge stored on a capacitor is

    0.5 (CV^2) so the charge is proportional to the square of the voltage meaning you need lots of voltage to get a big charge (or amount of stored energy) so what makes the capacitor value large makes the amount of charge you can store small. This is the issue currently with super capacitors just because of the basic physics of capacitors. So unless an amazing dielectric is found that has super incredibly high breakdown voltage and is easy to form onto the plates we probably will have to keep looking to batteries.

    --
    You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
  11. Re: Obligitory Trump Bashing by morethanapapercert · · Score: 3, Informative

    can someone mod this comment up?

    --
    I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
  12. Re: Obligitory Trump Bashing by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    She stands for nothing but power for herself. So let's just let the other candidate roll in, who is even worse in that regard. Not only does he want power for himself, he only wants power for the sake of enriching himself. Yeah. Very clever of you to let the worser person win. That'll teach 'em.

    --
    Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.