NYRI, again

[dan]

www.uticaod.com/news/x415867527/Recommendation-NYRI-power-line-should-follow-Marcy-South-route

......and we finally get to what DeMio, Picentie and the rest have been hoping for. Get it out of Oneida County so they can declare victory and go home. Trust me, Herkimer County will be hung out to dry and the line will now be suddenly and quickly approved.
I am against this line for practical and principal issues both. Practically the power should be generated where it's used. It's more efficient and keeps the infrastructure "at home". Principally I feel we are being walked on by downstate concerns and a multi-national corporation that doesn't give two craps about the area. In reality I understand that I am pushing the same NIMBY pablum I have complained about, but I do feel this is a piss-poor way to appease the NYC interests that will vote down new power generation in thier own backyards. Our bills go up while thiers go down.

[strikeslip]

The Marcy-South route could have been predicted . . . but Herkimer County does not help itself very much when it pushes for windfarms. The more power generation capacity that is placed upstate, the greater the "congestion" [differences between regions regarding supply and demand] that the federal government will cite as justifying the need for a power line.

The problem is, power is too expensive upstate and too cheap downstate relative to the local economic conditions in each place.

The "cheap" hydropower that turned upstate's mills, gave upstate an economic advantage, and fueled upstate growth a century ago, has been turned into electricity and transmitted downstate. We should have seen this coming when Marcy-South was put up. That really was a big nail in our upstate coffin, because it encouraged rates to rise further upstate, pushing us past the "tipping point" where we could no longer compete with other manufacturing based economies.

If electric rates downstate were allowed to be significantly higher to reflect the lack of generating capacity there, then more capacity would be built there, eliminating the need for NYRI and making upstate's power more plentiful (and cheaper).

[dan]

Good points Strike, and a couple of things I didn't consider. If we're willing to put up the power generation facilities I guess we have to be willing to be the distribution for that power. The laugh is that wind isn't the answer to the power defecit the downstate area has. I'm currently in school, going for my degree in renewable energy sources and wind is coming up as a poor fourth place for ability to consistantly generate electricity, so what happens 20 years from now when the wind farms locally start to age and need major maintenance? Do the owners abandon them on the farmland they have been erected on and jump to the next, great idea-du-jour? And the farmers that have been subsidized for years will be cut off from a sizable source of income when that happens. We need a plan for energy, not a knee-jerk reaction to a situation.

[dgriffin]

From what I've read, I believe the feds are behind the placement of power sources and lines. I don't think differential pricing inter or intra state are affecting the plans. (By the way, Strike, downstate New York's Con Edison has one of the highest rates in the state.) Other than politics ... not a small matter, of course ... security is a large factor in the placement of plants. Not YOUR security of course.

The difference between states is quite high:
www.neo.ne.gov/statshtml/115.htm
and
www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table5_6_a.html

You can compare the relative rates within and across the NY State at this website:
www.saveonenergy.com/
By the looks of the numbers, they must be source rates without distribution costs.

For the past almost 20 years, at each billing period, I've divided my electric bill's total of power cost, fees, taxes, etc., by the number KWH used. I've noted a 48 % increase since January '08. My last bill was about 17 cents per KWH. I'm in Ulster County, 100 miles north of NY CIty and about 45 south of Albany.

Regarding wind versus oil, etc., I posted the comparative costs of various energy sources on this forum a few months ago. I don't remember the numbers, but the clear winner was coal. I think it was 5 cents per kwh versus 21 for either wind or solar, I don't remember which.

NYRI appears to be one of the more clownish of the power players currently on the scene. They'll say anything that goes over well at public meetings and to the news outlets. When they were asked to run lines underground in nearby Greene County so as to not distrub some of the prettiest views in the Catskills, they said such an idea was not affordable. And they were right ... burying high power lines is expensive ... it's like building another aqueduct. When pushed on the issue, they said, "OK, we think we could figure out how to affordably do it." Few took them seriously.

[strikeslip]

Very interesting charts, Dave. If Upstate's rates were more like Ohio's, we would not be at a competitive disadvantage to them . . . And why are Upstate's rates higher than Ohio's? We have hydropower resources that they do not have.

While in absolute terms electricity may be more expensive downstate than here, you have to consider (1) the higher incomes there and (2) the difference in economy. Downstate is not as sensitive to high rates as we are, because our economy was built on very cheap (water) power.

[snickers]

It's interesting that whenever you speak of the high incomes in NYC, it's justified as being because of the higher cost of living. And, when the subject of things being so damned expensive in NYC, the answer is that it's okay because incomes are so high.

One of those chicken-and-egg riddles, I guess.

[dgriffin]

We may be having two different discussions here, and I'm not expert in either of them. Strike, you pose a great question about why Ohio's power is cheaper. I don't know. I sort of doubt hydro power changes the picture much. Many years ago, I participated in a study at Niagra Mohawk's hq in Syracuse, and one thing I remember being told about hydro was that it didn't affect the power generating picture much. The percentage of hydro generation as part of the whole was quite small and would never be larger. The old hydro plants on various rivers were tremendously inefficient, I was told, and the power companies would not invest in any new hydro technology ... assuming it were to come along, when they could spending that money on nuclear.
I wonder if anything has changed in that view.

By the way, I'm now extremely doubtful in any discussions I hear about the economics of energy generation. Having watched gasoline at my local gas station double and then halve itself, while the oil companies and the sheiks still make lots of money, I'm convinced that energy must be way overpriced.

[Clipper]

I resent that fact that we have to suffer the environmental impact of the power lines, while NY City continues to WASTE energy. One only has to walk down the streets of NY City and see all the unnecessary lighting and glitzy crap. Worse than the Las Vegas strip. It bugs me that we conserve upstate so that they can be stupid downstate.

It is the same thing with water. WE have to meter and pay for water, and have conservation measures in place during dry spells, while they pay nothing to upstate for drawing on our resources for water in NY City and leave fire hydrants open for kids to run through the spray. You often see hydrants that have leaked for so long that there is algae growing on the sidewalk where the leak trickles into the gutter. The catskills watershed and most of the lakes there are part of the NYC water supply and tightly controlled as such. Not like our lakes in the Adirnondacks. Hell, they even make you pay for extra fishing licenses and permits to fish in those lakes.

I guess if he feds are going to designate "corridors" for the power transmission lines, they may as well keep them all in one corridor, such as following the Marcy South lines. To run the NYRI lines through the city and along the railroad lines, and continue down through the Sauquoit valley and a whole new corridor through the Catskillswould be a travesty and a whole new assault on the scenic tranquility of the upstate area.

[dgriffin]

Clipper, I'm not sure how we measure waste. It has occurred to me that if the standard were so many kilowatt hours per individual located at any instant within a given measurement of geography (for heat, communications, economic generation, etc.), Times Square might be considered more efficient than Stittville.

Here in the Catskills, New York City's water rights and usage are controversial. They do issue permits for use of reservoir property. They do NOT charge for them. For myself, I'm quite happy with NYC's DEP agency running of the reservoir lands. Unlike the Adirondacks, there are few natural lakes in our mountains, so the creation of them as reservoirs has been welcome. Limiting their use to fishermen and hunters also matches my interests. No need to worry about hoards of tourists on jet skis, etc. No motors are allowed and row boats must be registered and on the reservoir. NYC also pays a tremendous amount of 'in leiu of" tax money to local towns and counties.
Most of the arguments in regard to NYC reservoirs involve restrictions on properties surrounding the reservoirs in order to preseve the purity of the waters. This disturbs some rugged individualists who don't want to pay for a septic system. So, a few years ago, NYC went around and checked septics and paid for the construction of new ones at homes where test results were bad. The city does all of this to avoid having to build filtration plants in the city, that would be very cost prohibitive.

[Clipper]

I guess I was misinformed about the fees to fish. I SURE was not looking that the environmental advantages of having the areas controlled and monitored. Sorry. I guess being that close to the city and Jersey, there would be mayhem on the lakes with jet skis on weekends, if motors and boat traffic were not controlled.

I guess I am just prejudiced and resentful of downstate interests, mainly the city and Westchester County, after paying the taxes that we do, and having much of the money funneled downstate by politicians and special interest groups.

I have heard all the "NY City is the economic engine that drives the state" and all of that. I personally think that NY City is a pimple on the ass of upstate, and the engine that drives waste, fraud and high taxes.

[snickers]

New York City doesn't have filtration plants??? Get out!

[Clipper]

NO filteration? Hmmm. I guess you might get sediment and a dead fish at some point without it. They MUST have some sort of filteration upstream.

I know one thing. When I used to be in the city often, years ago, I could not drink the water in restaurants. It had enough chlorine in it to bleach your underwear.

It might explain the algae growth where water puddles form from leaks though.

[dgriffin]

Dec 8, 2008 10:56:21 GMT -5 snickers said:

New York City doesn't have filtration plants??? Get out!

Six BILLION is a lot of dollars. Here's a good summary:
www.rand.org/scitech/stpi/ourfuture/NaturesServices/sec1_watershed.html

[dgriffin]

Well, we're a hundred miles from the city, and often a thousand from their recreational interests, thankfully, except for skiing. Also, one has to admit that more than half of New York State's residents live down in that area, so I guess they deserve something back for their state taxes. They probably pay the majority of state taxes, too. My memory from when I worked there for a couple of years long ago is that there are more high paying jobs there, but the SAME job pays no more in NY City than in Utica or elsewhere. But their expenses are a lot higher, of course.

[dgriffin]

Has the Thruway been mentioned? There was talk at one time about running power down the middle of it. Even an idea to run a Magnetic Levitation Train up the center between lanes! The shock wave of a MagLev train passing by you at 200 mph 30 feet away on the Thruway would certainly be memorable.
Of course, I've always thought that for all we know, the Thruway's "right of way" could be ten miles wide.