[Eugene Coyle wondered whether plans for new power plant capacity will come
to fruition. Mark]
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 28 June 2001 21:35
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [energyresources] That incredible 180,000 MW new capacity:
Update
Karl, Murray, and others who were wondering:
My incredulousness got the better of me and I delved into the
breakdown of this new US electrical capacity projected to be online
by this time (June) 2003. Here is what I learned:
(1) Of the total 180,000 MW, 135,000 MW will use natural gas as its
primary fuel. (Backup fuel is #2 fuel oil.)
(2) Of the 135,000 MW fueled by NG, 55,000 MW represents peaking
units.
(3) The remaining 80,000 MW attributes to gas-fired base load units.
(4) These new combustion turbines have a "heat rate" of 6500 BTU/WKH.
(I calculated this number back to an implied efficiency of 50%.)
Assuming that a recession obviates fueling the peaking units, I
calculate the projected increase in required NG production to be:
80,000 MW x 1000 KW/MW x 6500 BTU/KWH x 24 H/D x 365 D/Y / 1000
BTU/cu-ft = 4.56 trillion cu-ft per year
Compare this to current usage of 20 TCF/Y.
Some of this new capacity will be used to retire old units,
especially in California, that have been activated by the current
crisis despite having heat rates as poor as 12000 BTU/KWH.
The 135,000 MW represents over 1100 units. They are in various stages
of planning, design, and construction. Hundreds have come online in
the past fortnight. Why do I begin to see them as 21st century Moai?
Regards,
Dick in Florida
~~~~~~~ EnergyResources Moderator Comment ~~~~~~~~
Whats a Moai?
~~~~~ EnergyResources Moderator Tom Robertson ~~~~~~
Your message didn't show up on the list? Complaints or compliments?
Drop me (Tom Robertson) a note at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
