For example about half of California’s electricity is imported from coal fired plants in surrounding states,
Uh, no. This is
both junk science
and misleading, and I'm pretty sure I know where it came from: An article from October 22nd, 2015 by the "Institute for Energy Research," a 501(c)(3) that serves as a front group for the fossil fuel industry.
From Wikipedia:
"IER is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization and is funded by tax deductible contributions from individuals, foundations and corporations.[1][10] IER has received funding from the Brown Foundation(started by founders of a construction and energy company), the Searle Freedom Trust and the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation.[11][12] They have also previously received funding from ExxonMobil,[13] the American Petroleum Institute,[3] the Center to Protect Patient Rights,[3] and Peabody Energy.[2] IER says that it has not sought for or accepted financial support from the government.[1]
IER has been described as a front group for the fossil fuel industry, since it has accepted financial donations from firms in that sector.[2][3][4]"
I'm not going to link to the article, but it's a real classic for cherry picking.
They think you are stupid, VoltMan. Don't let them get away with it. Think for yourself.
Here's what you'll find if you dig a little deeper: The stats for this article come from a piece by Molly Christian on 10/12/15 in some publication called SNL. (This is probably SNL Energy, a company that provides data from commodities trading.) Here's how they came up with that number:
"But at times, as much as 50% of Southern California's electricity still comes from coal-fired plants, Steve Homer, director of project management for the Southern California Public Power Authority, or SCPPA, told SNL Energy. The three main out-of-state coal plants serving California — the Intermountain Power Project in Utah, the San Juan plant in New Mexico and the Navajo plant in Arizona — together received 10.1 million tons of coal in the first seven months of 2015, according to U.S. Energy Information Administration data." (Italics mine)
Um, excuse me... they cherry-picked
seven months from
one year, and that was
seven years ago, to make the claim that 'about half' of California's electricity is imported? Nice try, assholes.
Let's look at the primary source (the EIA) and see what they have to say about that for a more recent year-- and for
the entire year. (Note that the EIA provided the raw data that Christian cherry-picked for her 2015 article.) In 2019, electricity imports (of
any kind) represented less than 30% of California's total electricity supply, and that most of that was from renewable resources in surrounding states.
"About 10% of California's total electricity imports are from coal-fired power plants, but coal's total contribution to the state's electricity supply from imports and in-state generation in 2019 was less than 3%.
37 Electricity supplied from out-of-state coal-fired power plants decreased following the enactment of a state law in 2006 that requires California utilities to limit new long-term financial investments in baseload generation to power plants that meet California emissions performance standards. Essentially all of California's imports of coal-fired generation are projected to end by 2026."
Source:
https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=CA
But this isn't the worst of it-- this claim is considering only
electricity consumption, which is only a fraction of the far more important metric:
energy consumption. It doesn't make a lot of sense to leave other forms of energy usage out the equation, right? Greenhouse gasses come from many other sources besides electricity usage, yes?
If we consider the more important and inclusive metric of
energy consumption rather than
electricity? Electricity imports
are a negligible fraction of total energy consumption. Coal producers better crank up the Sex Pistols, because there is
no future, no future, no future for you...
To be fair, this lists "Net Electricity Imports" as a function of total energy used, which is measured in BTUs. A little confusing, I don't want to do the apples and oranges thing, and I did want to find out how much of our electricity was imported in 2019 as a function of total
electricity used just for giggles.
Here's the answer:
"California Energy Commission (CEC)
data for 2019 showed in-state generation of 200 TWh and net imports of 77 TWh to give a total of 277 TWh. In-state: 16 TWh was nuclear, 86 TWh natural gas, 33 TWh large hydro, 29 TWh solar, 14 TWh wind, 11 TWh geothermal, 6 TWh biomass, 5 TWh small hydro and 0.25 TWh coal. The imports were 24 TWh from Pacific Northwest and 53 TWh from Southwest, the latter including 17 TWh from coal and gas."
Source: (California Energy Comission as listed, hit the link, it will take you right to the page.)
Read it and weep: We generated 200 TWh of electricity, and imported a total of 77 TWh, with only a fraction of that being from coal.
Nowhere near 50%. What a crock! A lie within a lie.