As Texas Power Demand Surges, Solar, Wind and Storage Carry the Load (electrek.co)
- Reference: 0179866362
- News link: https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/25/10/25/0110225/as-texas-power-demand-surges-solar-wind-and-storage-carry-the-load
- Source link: https://electrek.co/2025/10/24/texas-power-demand-surges-solar-wind-and-storage-carry-the-load/
> ERCOT, which supplies power to about 90% of the state, saw demand jump 5% year-over-year to 372 terawatt hours (TWh) -- a 23% increase since 2021. No other major US grid has grown faster over the past year. [...] The biggest growth story in Texas power generation is solar. Utility-scale solar plants produced 45 TWh from January through September, up 50% from 2024 and nearly four times what they generated in 2021 (11 TWh). Wind power also continued to climb, producing 87 TWh through September -- a 4% increase from last year and 36% more than in 2021.
>
> Together, wind and solar supplied 36% of ERCOT's total electricity over those nine months. Solar, in particular, has transformed Texas's daytime energy mix. From June to September, ERCOT solar farms generated an average of 24 gigawatts (GW) between noon and 1 pm -- double the midday output from 2023. That growth has pushed down natural gas use at midday from 50% of the mix in 2023 to 37% this year.
The report notes that while natural gas is still Texas's dominant power source, it isn't growing like it used to. "Gas comprised 43% of ERCOT's generation mix during the first nine months of 2025, down from 47% in the first nine months of 2023 and 2024," reports Electrek.
[1] https://electrek.co/2025/10/24/texas-power-demand-surges-solar-wind-and-storage-carry-the-load/
Home Oil Wells (Score:2)
Doesn't everyone in Texas (outside of Austin) have a personal backyard oil well and refinery?
Re: Home Oil Wells (Score:2)
Can I order my own from Amazon or do they sell them at their local hardware store?
Re: (Score:2)
It is a war of facts vs stupid, and facts are winning.
It's a win win (Score:2)
So either it's Texas's pro free market low tax environment which means renewables are the market choice (which is true) or if it's say Texas subsidies tipping the scale which means renewables are an effective and economic way to add capacity because why else would the Texas legislature and governor do this?
Re: (Score:2)
Why be a sucker and burn fossil fuels yourself, when you can sell them to other suckers? There may be a more serious explanation, it was a vision of [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]. He thought of nat gas as bridge energy source to renewables, and was an influential Texas Billionaire.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T._Boone_Pickens
Horseshit (Score:3)
[1]It looks as if Texas ERCOT is at at 397 g CO2 per kWh [electricitymaps.com]. So don't act like solar, wind and storage have some how cleaned up Texas. Just for reference France is 19 g CO2 per kWh.
[1] https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/US-TEX-ERCO/12mo/monthly
Re: (Score:1)
"So don't act like solar, wind and storage have some how cleaned up Texas."
Who's acting like that? It's a Red state, CO2 emissions are mandatory.
Re: (Score:3)
As coal and nat gas is reduced, that 397 will drop quite a bit.
Re: (Score:2)
Without nuclear it won't drop enough. Thankfully Texas is preparing to build new nuclear. Now if only Germany could admit their mistake.
Re: (Score:2)
I do believe in an "all of the above" approach to energy, but I think all costs should be considered. Nuclear has some problems in the costs area. I think Texas is doing just fine, the trends are going in the right direction, and is reaping the benefits of wind, solar, and batteries as it is being built out more, and more.
Re: (Score:2)
Texas is slowly moving in the right direction. Imagine how much farther it could have moved if conservatives didn't have a jihad against reality.
Re: (Score:2)
> I do believe in an "all of the above" approach to energy, but
To paraphrase Ned Stark anything before the word "but" is horseshit!
Re: (Score:2)
> As coal and nat gas is reduced, that 397 will drop quite a bit.
Wind, solar, and batteries isn't likely to get an electrical grid as close to zero carbon as France sees with heavy use of nuclear fission. It's a good thing then that Texas has plans for more nuclear power plants.
[1]https://texasinsider.org/artic... [texasinsider.org]
If the claims on solar+storage being lower cost than nuclear then I guess the anti-nuclear solar power advocates have nothing to worry about, nobody will build a nuclear power plant if they can get solar at lower cost. Why is it always solar+storage vs. nuclear f
[1] https://texasinsider.org/articles/governor-abbott-delivers-remarks-at-2025-texas-nuclear-summit
Same as lots of US states (Score:2)
Texas is about the same or lower emissions than 40 other US states.
Re: (Score:2)
> Just for reference France is 19 g CO2 per kWh.
Go away, troll. Because France's electricity is not only highly subsidized, [1]they can't even produce enough electricity to meet their own needs at least 2 months out of every year! [rte-france.com]
Nuclear, because it cannot load-follow cost effectively, needs either fossil fuels or grid storage, just like renewables.
[1] https://analysesetdonnees.rte-france.com/en/electricity-review-keyfindings
Re: (Score:2)
Germany's electricity is full of subsidies. Why are solar/wind subsidies which fail acceptable but nuclear subsidies which succeeded wrong? Second France is the largest net exporter in Europe. So STFU!