To: pater tenebrarum who wrote (57331 ) 1/11/2001 9:49:52 PM From: yard_man Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 436258 so far distributed generation only makes sense to the extent that it can defer very large investments in T&D in some very specific instances ... economics still favor large central generating stations in 99.9% of applications. Fuel cells are nothing more than energy conversion devices -- currently using NG -- cost/kw is many times what the power provided by a combustion turbine provides ... There are areas which are remote -- photvoltaics have a niche in these locations -- places where natural gas is available, but where it might be expensive to extend a transmission line to serve a small load -- fuel cells or microturbines might be an option ...there are also backup needs that people have for power quality -- certain process needs, etc which warrant some redundancy But these are simply niche applications. Simply unrelated and unlikely to be changed by what is happening in CA -- granted an individual might like to be "free from the grid" given what has happened in CA, but think about this suppose someone does invest serveral thousand dollars to buy a fuel cell for their home -- they are no longer dependent on the grid, but now they are dependent on NG -- which also might be where they get their heat ... such an individual will not have "freed" themselves at all -- in fact they've become more dependent on one energy resource -- NG I only see a couple of plays for what is going on in CA -- already been mentioned -- short the banks holding the debt -- but that isn't a sure thing -- they may be bailed out and quickly. Perhaps you could buy the suppliers making the great profits during the tight times -- but that has the risk that the price gets fixed by regulators ... Keep in mind that this specific problem is just that -- specific to CA. There has been a ton of building of generation going on in the US in the last 3 - 4 years. There is likely to be an oversupply of peaking capacity in soem regions within 1 - 2 years Power generation is not like high tech -- improvements are gradual -- consumption continues to increase. The problems in Ca are not everywhere in the states and they are not technological problems. The technology, whether it be more NG fired gen, or coal gen, or additional transmission lines, are all available and can be applied ... Decentralized power may be in the future, but there is no trend toward it at present. New discoveries will have to happen before there can be any such trend -- economics simply don't favor such decentralization except in very specific a narrow circumstances. There are many good reasons why I expect this to remain for quite some time. think about this -- suppose there were a technology that allowed u to generate all your needs -- there has to be a fuel, unless you depend entirely on solar -- then you would need close to "lossless" storage, but suppose you need a fuel. How are you going to get that fuel? Is there a cost to distribute it? Is it cheaper to distribute the electricity or the fuel? Also think about the capital investment required to generate the electricity: one big plant to serve thousands or thousands of plants serving individual needs ... That's why I say there would have to be a very fundamental change before there were any trend toward decentraliztion. Frankly, I'd like to be unplugged from the grid. I am considering investing in a gas fired generator just to have in case of an ice storm knocking out my lines and keeping them out for days ... CA gets all the attention, but those folks down in Arkansas had no real picnic ...