Thread by @PMoutis

This comes from TX gov's letter to the local PUC in light of a stressed electrical #grid & it is so scientifically uninformed! A 🧵on #reliability in the #electricity sector... -1/n

https://twitter.com/CaitlinSmithATX/status/1412569375819931651

Reliability is the behavior of an asset according to what is built to do w/o "breaking". Wind turbines & photovoltaics (WT+PV) are reliable when they generate according to blowing wind & shining sun. They are unreliable when a WT blade breaks or PV get hot-spots. -2/n

In other words WT+PV #volatility has nothing to do w/ reliability. Pushing the "volatility=reliability" narrative is unscientific, if not plain bad use of the language we all agree upon to communicate w/. -3/n

Let's play along w/ poor science, though. What if natural gas fails TX again by - 60% as during #TexasFreeze? What are the reliability costs then & where are they allocated? How do you price the unreliability of a source that is deemed by TX gov as de facto reliable? -4/n

Some may worryingly claim that other natural gas units can be paid the 9k/MWh cap plus ancillary payments... If WT+PV will not fail TX as in the #TexasFreeze they'll have paid for the reliability they're accused they're not offering. -5/n

We must not structure a market product on a misconception or on wrongly defined (if not pseudo-scientific) terminology. We must not even discuss on such terms. WT+PV are NOT unreliable resources. As simple as that! #smartgridnerd -n/n