Natural gas generators make up the largest share of overall U.S. generation capacity

[thackney]

Natural gas generators make up the largest share of overall U.S. generation capacity
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34172
DECEMBER 18, 2017



In 2016, natural gas-fired generators accounted for 42% of the operating electricity generating capacity in the United States. Natural gas provided 34% of total electricity generation in 2016, surpassing coal to become the leading generation source. The increase in natural gas generation since 2005 is primarily a result of the continued cost-competitiveness of natural gas relative to coal.

Natural gas-fired combined-cycle units accounted for 53% of the 449 gigawatts (GW) of total U.S. natural gas-powered generator capacity in 2016. Combined-cycle generators have been a popular technology choice since the 1990s and made up a large share of the capacity added between 2000 and 2005. Under current natural gas and coal market conditions in many regions of the country, combined-cycle generating units are often used as baseload generation, which operate throughout the day.

Other types of natural gas-fired technology, such as combustion turbines (about 28% of total natural gas-powered generator capacity) and steam turbines (17%), generally only run during hours when electricity demand is high. The capacity-weighted average age of U.S. natural gas power plants is 22 years, which is less than hydro (64 years), coal (39), and nuclear (36).



Natural gas-fired capacity is widely distributed across the United States. Every state except Vermont has at least one natural gas plant. About 38% of U.S. natural gas-fired generation capacity is located in four states: Texas, California, Florida, and New York. Natural gas power plants account for more than half of the total electricity generating capacity in each of these four states and in seven other states. Texas has the most natural gas-fired capacity of any state, with 69 GW, or 15% of the national total. California and Florida each have about 40 GW of natural gas-fired capacity.



The operating profile of the nation’s natural gas-fired generation facilities varies, depending on the overall level of electricity demand, plant efficiency, and natural gas prices. The average capacity factor, a metric that measures the utilization of power plants, for natural gas combined-cycle units has increased from 43% in 2011 to 56% in 2016. The upward trends in both natural gas net generation and the natural gas-fired combined-cycle annual capacity factor (which is approaching 60%) highlight the growing contribution of natural gas-fired combined-cycle generators, which traditionally only served peaking and intermediate loads, but now have increasingly become more common to meet baseload demands.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

On this paragraph
 In 2016, natural gas-fired generators accounted for 42% of the operating electricity generating capacity in the United States. Natural gas provided 34% of total electricity generation in 2016, surpassing coal to become the leading generation source. The increase in natural gas generation since 2005 is primarily a result of the continued cost-competitiveness of natural gas relative to coal.

Is it correct to divide 34%/42% = 80% utilization rate?

Also, I wonder how much of this natural gas generation capacity is actually a backup for renewables to use only when needed?

[thackney]

On this paragraph
 In 2016, natural gas-fired generators accounted for 42% of the operating electricity generating capacity in the United States. Natural gas provided 34% of total electricity generation in 2016, surpassing coal to become the leading generation source. The increase in natural gas generation since 2005 is primarily a result of the continued cost-competitiveness of natural gas relative to coal.

Is it correct to divide 34%/42% = 80% utilization rate?

Also, I wonder how much of this natural gas generation capacity is actually a backup for renewables to use only when needed?

Keep in mind NatGas generators includes both baseload high-efficiency combined cycles and low-efficiency peakers that are only used to meet short-time peaks.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Keep in mind NatGas generators includes both baseload high-efficiency combined cycles and low-efficiency peakers that are only used to meet short-time peaks.

Yes, so that backup capacity must represent a portion of the downtime.

What I was trying to ascertain is how much improvement upwards from 80% would it be if the backup generation capacity were taken into account.

[thackney]

Yes, so that backup capacity must represent a portion of the downtime.

What I was trying to ascertain is how much improvement upwards from 80% would it be if the backup generation capacity were taken into account.

I don't understand what you refer to as backup.  I'm talking about peakers used to meet short term power swings like the daily peak loads.

[Joe Wooten]

I get so amused by the "greenies" who think we can just shift peak usage to off peak hours like we flip a wall switch. They have been pursuing this mantra for at least 30 years and still cannot convince folks to turn off their air conditioners until 10 PM so they can shut down those polluting power plants that will not be needed when this happens.

I want to see those morons go first. Turn off your lights and A/C first Al, then maybe I'll consider doing it

NOT!

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I don't understand what you refer to as backup.  I'm talking about peakers used to meet short term power swings like the daily peak loads.

Ok, a natural gas generator runs a certain % of the time.  If it is not used fulltime, but is  say a backup for a renewable plant or is a 'peaker', then its utilization efficiency (usage/capacity) will not be as high as fulltime generators.

Natural gas generators are efficient, certainly more than 80% run time of rated capacity. I was interested in finding out how efficient, and if one takes out deliberate shutdowns due to usage of backup and peak generation, one would know.

[thackney]

a backup for a renewable plant

Who do you claim has built such a plant?  Where are they?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Who do you claim has built such a plant?  Where are they?

American wind energy association
https://www.awea.org/Issues/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=5454

[thackney]

American wind energy association
https://www.awea.org/Issues/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=5454

From your link:

The “backup power” myth

Sometimes wind opponents claim that because wind energy output varies with the wind speed, wind plants require an equivalent amount of “backup power” provided by fossil fuel plants, negating the environmental and fuel savings benefits of wind energy. Understanding why this myth is false requires some explanation of how the electric utility system operates.

Perhaps Spinning Reserve and 10 minute Non-Spinning Reserve requirements have changed.  Do you have any information they have?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

From your link:

The “backup power” myth

Sometimes wind opponents claim that because wind energy output varies with the wind speed, wind plants require an equivalent amount of “backup power” provided by fossil fuel plants, negating the environmental and fuel savings benefits of wind energy. Understanding why this myth is false requires some explanation of how the electric utility system operates.

Perhaps Spinning Reserve and 10 minute Non-Spinning Reserve requirements have changed.  Do you have any information they have?

This is the part I refer to.  Since they say natural gas plants do not run much here, then they must have a lot less than 80% efficiency

Non-spinning reserves are inactive power plants that can start up within a short period of time (typically 10-30 minutes) if needed. Hydroelectric plants are frequently the top choice for this type of reserve as well because of their speedy response capabilities, followed by natural gas plants. The vast majority of the time non-spinning reserves that are made available are not actually used, as they only operate if there is a large and unexpected change in electricity supply or demand. As a result, the emissions and fuel use of non-spinning reserves are very low, given that they only rarely run, the fact that hydroelectric plants (which have zero emissions and fuel use) often serve as non-spinning reserves, and the very modest efficiency penalty that applies when reserve natural gas plants actually operate.

I call these backup capacity but they call it 'non-spinning' or 'reserve' capacity

[thackney]

I call these backup capacity but they call it 'non-spinning' or 'reserve' capacity

These have been in use for decades to meet the time day peak.  They are not turning on and off baseline units to meet the peak lasting a few hours. 

[IsailedawayfromFR]

These have been in use for decades to meet the time day peak.  They are not turning on and off baseline units to meet the peak lasting a few hours.

I know all that.  What I have been asking, apparently poorly, is whether their capacity is within the original 80% capacity in your article.  If it is, then natural gas efficiency is not nearly as bad as painted.

[thackney]

I know all that.  What I have been asking, apparently poorly, is whether their capacity is within the original 80% capacity in your article.  If it is, then natural gas efficiency is not nearly as bad as painted.

I think it is a pointless comparison of comparing running time of units designed for different functions.

The utility industry needs both baseline units that run efficiently 24/7 and peaker units that economically come on and shut off as needed.

Natural Gas fired units fill both these requirements but are lumped in one category for this article.

[Idiot]

Natural gas generators make up the largest share of overall U.S. generation capacity
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34172
DECEMBER 18, 2017



In 2016, natural gas-fired generators accounted for 42% of the operating electricity generating capacity in the United States. Natural gas provided 34% of total electricity generation in 2016, surpassing coal to become the leading generation source. The increase in natural gas generation since 2005 is primarily a result of the continued cost-competitiveness of natural gas relative to coal.

Natural gas-fired combined-cycle units accounted for 53% of the 449 gigawatts (GW) of total U.S. natural gas-powered generator capacity in 2016. Combined-cycle generators have been a popular technology choice since the 1990s and made up a large share of the capacity added between 2000 and 2005. Under current natural gas and coal market conditions in many regions of the country, combined-cycle generating units are often used as baseload generation, which operate throughout the day.

Other types of natural gas-fired technology, such as combustion turbines (about 28% of total natural gas-powered generator capacity) and steam turbines (17%), generally only run during hours when electricity demand is high. The capacity-weighted average age of U.S. natural gas power plants is 22 years, which is less than hydro (64 years), coal (39), and nuclear (36).



Natural gas-fired capacity is widely distributed across the United States. Every state except Vermont has at least one natural gas plant. About 38% of U.S. natural gas-fired generation capacity is located in four states: Texas, California, Florida, and New York. Natural gas power plants account for more than half of the total electricity generating capacity in each of these four states and in seven other states. Texas has the most natural gas-fired capacity of any state, with 69 GW, or 15% of the national total. California and Florida each have about 40 GW of natural gas-fired capacity.



The operating profile of the nation’s natural gas-fired generation facilities varies, depending on the overall level of electricity demand, plant efficiency, and natural gas prices. The average capacity factor, a metric that measures the utilization of power plants, for natural gas combined-cycle units has increased from 43% in 2011 to 56% in 2016. The upward trends in both natural gas net generation and the natural gas-fired combined-cycle annual capacity factor (which is approaching 60%) highlight the growing contribution of natural gas-fired combined-cycle generators, which traditionally only served peaking and intermediate loads, but now have increasingly become more common to meet baseload demands.

What really sticks out from the graph you posted is....  coal is just about gone, as is nuclear.  Wind seems to really be increasing, as is solar....gas is staying about the same.

I wonder what the lifespan of a windmill is?  We had them installed locally a few years ago, and most had 30 year leases on the property they are located.  I notice several times a year, one of them will spontaneously combust...lol.  Also, they are starting to look awful...all stained with oil, etc.  They were kind of unique to look at when they first arrived.  Now I can't stand them.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I think it is a pointless comparison of comparing running time of units designed for different functions.

The utility industry needs both baseline units that run efficiently 24/7 and peaker units that economically come on and shut off as needed.

Natural Gas fired units fill both these requirements but are lumped in one category for this article.

The whole point I have been trying to make is the comparison of natural gas plant efficiencies vs efficiencies of renewable plants.

From the article, natural gas plant efficiency appears to be 80%.  It is not as those plants are more efficient than that as they are purposely not run at times if used as peak shavers.

Renewable power plants do not have this type of efficiency level as the sun don't always shine and the wind don't always blow.

No one should be ever comparing the efficiency of a renewable plant with the efficiency of a natural gas plant which has far more than 80% efficiency.  But I see renewable groups doing just that.

[thackney]

What really sticks out from the graph you posted is....  coal is just about gone, as is nuclear.  Wind seems to really be increasing, as is solar....gas is staying about the same.

I wonder what the lifespan of a windmill is?  We had them installed locally a few years ago, and most had 30 year leases on the property they are located.  I notice several times a year, one of them will spontaneously combust...lol.  Also, they are starting to look awful...all stained with oil, etc.  They were kind of unique to look at when they first arrived.  Now I can't stand them.

Coal is far from gone, but it isn't being built for the new units.  Cost combined with the increases in the efficiencies have helped Natural Gas.

[thackney]

The whole point I have been trying to make is the comparison of natural gas plant efficiencies vs efficiencies of renewable plants.

From the article, natural gas plant efficiency appears to be 80%.  It is not as those plants are more efficient than that as they are purposely not run at times if used as peak shavers.

Renewable power plants do not have this type of efficiency level as the sun don't always shine and the wind don't always blow.

No one should be ever comparing the efficiency of a renewable plant with the efficiency of a natural gas plant which has far more than 80% efficiency.  But I see renewable groups doing just that.

Comparing run time is not comparing efficiencies.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Comparing run time is not comparing efficiencies.

then call it utilization rate.

[Joe Wooten]

then call it utilization rate.

It's actually called "capacity factor"
nameplate capability (mw) X8720/actual MW-hrs generated.