But on the other hand consider this: state interventions crafted to both provide a strong nudge to use tech over dumb wires where it makes sense, and then pick up some of the most essential capex you can’t do without.

Are you concerned that turning to state funding can’t be done in a way that also promotes good incentives to open up planning practices to pick the right technology for the need? If state funding truly means locking in old, expensive ways then yeah, I share that concern.

What do you make of his main point in that blog post: moving some grid costs to taxpayer funding and out of electricity rates to encourage electrification?

What do you need to see from states that have good geothermal potential and want to see deployment happen?

Thanks for your work supporting this. Big things ahead indeed for the Western US grid.

I can’t stop seeing that 2000-2005 bump in the chart in my head each time I read something about AI data center electricity demand and gas generation.

Subsea power cables from Diablo Canyon might be a better option than extended onshore underground lines.

Subsea cables from Diablo Canyon down to the LA basin could be another option.

From a US PNW perspective: the big transmission studies do seem to be slowly changing as solar overtakes wind as the primary new capacity addition. More N-S lines. I’d love to see more work on integrating with Canada across the entire border. Canada buying more cheap US solar a win-win here?

But to run with your suggestion, if policymakers were to entertain such a big pivot, do you think the vexing technology choice they would face could dissuade even the bravest politico? Commit to AP1000 with hefty state support now, or push a decision into the future on an SMR tech.

Using the same logic I’ve heard several times on here and the other place: should they abandon the endeavor after the first few units come in at high cost and various contracting challenges, or carry on and go after learning and efficiency with continued scale-up?

If Intel splits, the manufacturing business may need hefty subsidies and support to stay afloat and maintain leading edge tech while it courts big name customers — in the rosy scenario. Oregon’s role is minuscule given the global geopolitical nature of this, but is it zero?

Waivers and rulings about specific tasks foreign flag ships can perform are nice, but offshore wind needs much more than that. Subsidies for new Jones act vessels that could have dual use national security applications is where I was going.

Renewable energy connection with this kind of vessel: that ship was previously an O&G service vessel, very similar to the new ships that will needed to build and operate floating offshore wind farms. They’ll be multi role capable — if they ever get built for U.S. projects.

Kills all the fun of hunting for waste heat streams