 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Sandman
|
 |
Sinister Penguin
Aug 2001 time: 05:31
|
|
quote: I suppose its hard to figure out what the demand the total demand would be if theyve never actually fulfilled more than a fraction of it. Presumably that includes stuff that people dont bother turning on, cause the power has always been so intermittent. |
So don't you think that it's also misleading to estimate total output when the power is constantly being turned off and on, and the transmission system is a mess?
quote: I presume they were including that in the pre-war total, which just says total power produced, and doesnt specify the power grid only. Still, even if you exclude that, its a pretty good number. |
It also reeks of contrivance. Why not wait until the Iraqi power output has risen to 4500MW, rather than tack on a probably unrelated energy supply in order to beat the previous 'record'? Probably because it takes years to build new power stations.
quote: Yup, now it couldn't be possible that the impact of looting, sabotage and bombing was just a tad exagerated in some of our favorite news outlets, could it? |
It couldn't be possible that the electricity output before the war was played down and the output after the war played up, could it?
quote: (LOTM reminds himself not to say anything snarky about auntie Beeb, auntie Beeb is nice, only evil American right wingers suggest that auntie Beeb had an axe to grind) |
This story is based on a press conference given by a Coalition spin doctor. I reckon he wants this little 'fact' to be on everyone's lips come election time, even though he has to cook the books in order to make it happen.
quote: Presumably, since IIUC Baghdad relies on electricity imports from north and south - Kirkuk needs only natural gas pipelines from nearby field to be secure, while Baghdad requires that plus the power lines from Kirkuk, which run through the most hostile territory in Iraq. |
I don't see how this is relevant to my point.
quote: In any case, if the whole country is at 100% of prewar levels, and Baghdad is still significantly below prewar levels, then its mathematically necessary that the rest of the country as a whole be above prewar levels. (or is Iraq actually Lake Woebegone in reverse - a place where everything is below average?) |
No. Inferior transmission systems will result in less power getting around (and the transmission system was badly hit by both bombs and looters). And the US military presence undoubtably consumes lots of power.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000 time: 00:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Strangely apropo. |
First we got the bomb, and that was good,
'Cause we love peace and motherhood.
Then Russia got the bomb, but that's okay,
'Cause the balance of power's maintained that way.
Who's next?
France got the bomb, but don't you grieve,
'Cause they're on our side (I believe).
China got the bomb, but have no fears,
They can't wipe us out for at least five years.
Who's next?
Then Indonesia claimed that they
Were gonna get one any day.
South Africa wants two, that's right:
One for the black and one for the white.
Who's next?
Egypt's gonna get one too,
Just to use on you know who.
So Israel's getting tense.
Wants one in self defense.
"The Lord's our shepherd," says the psalm,
But just in case, we better get a bomb.
Who's next?
Luxembourg is next to go,
And (who knows?) maybe Monaco.
We'll try to stay serene and calm
When Alabama gets the bomb.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000 time: 00:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Sandman
So don't you think that it's also misleading to estimate total output when the power is constantly being turned off and on, and the transmission system is a mess?
|
Is power constantly being turned off and on - i dont think so - rather its being shifted around to different cities - i would expect PRODUCTION to be steady. As for transmission, IIUC it has to be able to accomodate what theyre producing, or transformers blow. Thats why its so hard to bring power back after a storm, you dont want to overload a system.
quote:
It also reeks of contrivance. Why not wait until the Iraqi power output has risen to 4500MW, rather than tack on a probably unrelated energy supply in order to beat the previous 'record'? Probably because it takes years to build new power stations.
|
As long as its apples and apples, makes sense to me.
quote:
It couldn't be possible that the electricity output before the war was played down and the output after the war played up, could it?
|
Possible, yup. I await a source. Given that I saw lots of stuff (but not in the media outlets that were trying to prove quagmire) in the weeks after the war indicating that in much of the country power did NOT go down like in Baghdad, im inclined to think its true.
quote:
This story is based on a press conference given by a Coalition spin doctor. I reckon he wants this little 'fact' to be on everyone's lips come election time, even though he has to cook the books in order to make it happen.
|
If he wants it on everyones lips
come election time, why would he put it out 13 months BEFORE the US presidential election. Surely youre not seriously suggesting the CPA is trying to influence the gubernatorial recall, are you. If you think the voters in California are going to decide between Schwarzeneger and Davis based on electricity in Iraq, you've got alot to learn about american politics. (and note, this story has not yet been picked up by Fox - if this was an admin plant to influence the election it would have been headlined by them) No, more like a routine Iraq reconstruction story.
quote:
No. Inferior transmission systems will result in less power getting around (and the transmission system was badly hit by both bombs and looters). And the US military presence undoubtably consumes lots of power. |
See above on transmission. Not sure what the US military is consuming. OTOH the iraqi military, secret police, fedayeen, saddam palaces, etc surely consumed some power as well.
Last edited by lord of the mark on 04-10-2003 at 01:04
|
|
|  |
 |
|
yavoon
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Q Cubed
quote: One more time: Bush said we cant ALLOW Iraq to BECOME an imminent threat. |
let's not get into this argument again. especially when there were so many other imminent threats that most other people wondered why we should attack an almost imminent threat. |
not totally fair. I imagine bush would attack a lot of these. the result isnt a mirror of his views because they've been passed through the lens of the politically practicable.
I think bush would invade a ton of imminent threats. but iraq happened to be good for a couple of reasons.
1)we had a cease fire w/ them they were breaking everyday.
2)they had oil so we could rebuild easier
3)they were relatively more secular thanother ppl in the middle east.
4)we had a UN resolution we could go on.
among other things for varrying ppl. iraq fit the bill of places bush would like to invade that he could have pulled off.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
yavoon
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Q Cubed
i had no idea i had defined liberal here, except as in continuing yavoon's postulate.
what's that definition? |
just for sanity's sake I meant liberal=democrat. conservative =republican. blah blah. this isnt exactly the place to whine about idealogies.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sandman
|
 |
Sinister Penguin
Aug 2001 time: 05:31
|
|
quote: Is power constantly being turned off and on - i dont think so - rather its being shifted around to different cities - i would expect PRODUCTION to be steady. As for transmission, IIUC it has to be able to accomodate what theyre producing, or transformers blow. Thats why its so hard to bring power back after a storm, you dont want to overload a system. |
I would not expect production to be steady. Seasonal water changes make the hydroelectric system unstable, and the power stations can break down at any moment due to neglect and damage. Not mention the need to get sufficient fuel for the oil-fired power stations. A poor transmission system will result in increased resistance, wasting more electricity.
quote: As long as its apples and apples, makes sense to me. |
Would you also include military vehicles and journalist's cameras in the figure then? Including power stations that are part of the oil infrastructure is misleading at best.
quote: Possible, yup. I await a source. Given that I saw lots of stuff (but not in the media outlets that were trying to prove quagmire) in the weeks after the war indicating that in much of the country power did NOT go down like in Baghdad, im inclined to think its true. |
Source
"The acts of sabotage have shown just how fragile the system is. When saboteurs brought down several power lines and transmission towers, the nation's output dropped to 700 megawatts per day, when demand stands at around 6000 MW per day."
quote: If he wants it on everyones lips come election time, why would he put it out 13 months BEFORE the US presidential election. |
To make sure it's on everyone's lips. In time, this story will become a handy factoid. Another reason to release this story now is in case the situation in Iraq deteriorates, or a major power plant dies, or the CPA embark on a series inevitably botched privatisations.
quote: See above on transmission. Not sure what the US military is consuming. OTOH the iraqi military, secret police, fedayeen, saddam palaces, etc surely consumed some power as well. |
The US military is considerably higher tech than those organisations, and almost certainly uses more electricity. And they are still using Saddam's palaces.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lord Merciless
|
|
There are people in Iraq who don't want the power to be delivered to Bagdhad and the Sunni Triangle. New York Times showed a picture with several toppled transmission towers. Apparently many sabotages to the transmission system (not the generation) were carried out by power company workers themsevles.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31. Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|