Terlalu Sering Makan Bakso dan Mie Instan, Lihat yang Terjadi pada Wanita Ini

Spending on electricity distribution systems by major U.S. electric utilities—representing about 70% of total U.S. electric load—has risen 54% over the past two decades, from $31 billion to $51 billion annually. This increase has been largely driven by increases in capital investment. From 1996 to 2017, annual capital investment by these utilities for electric distribution systems nearly doubled, which was similar to increases in transmission investment over the same time period. Annual spending on customer expenses and operations and maintenance by these utilities also increased slightly. This information is based on reports to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) from major utilities. The electricity distribution system works to decrease voltage from high-power transmission lines and to deliver electricity to homes and businesses. Electric distribution spending is affected by the number of customers served, the amount of electricity sold, the number of miles of electric distribution wire installed (line miles), and the maximum amount of load on the lines at one time (peak load). Electric distribution system costs have been increasing faster than the growth of any of the other variables. Capital investment accounts for the largest share of distribution costs as utilities work to upgrade aging equipment. According to a 2015 U.S. Department of Energy report, 70% of power transformers are 25 years of age or older, 60% of circuit breakers are 30 years or older, and 70% of transmission lines are 25 years or older. Poles, wires, and substation transformers are being upgraded with advanced materials and new technology to better withstand extreme weather events, to allow easier frequency and voltage control during system emergencies, and to accommodate greater use of variable renewable generation (customer-sited wind and solar). Over the past decade, investment in overhead poles, wires, devices, and fixtures such as sensors, relays, and circuits has risen by 69%, and spending on substation transformers and other station equipment has increased by 35%. Investment in customer meters has more than doubled over the past decade as utilities have upgraded customer meters to smart meters that can be accessed remotely, communicate directly to utilities, and support smart consumption and pricing applications using real-time or near real-time electricity data. Customer-related expenses include advertising, reading meters, billing, and communicating with customers. Although expenses related to customer accounts and sales have decreased, spending on customer services and information systems has more than doubled over the past decade in an effort to better inform customers about outage locations and durations and to develop better customer outreach tools. Operations and maintenance (O&M) expenses have increased as electric distribution systems experience stress from several factors, including more customers, variable generation, and the effects of storms, wildfires, and flooding. Managing a grid with increasing amounts of customer-sited variable generation increases wear and tear on the distribution equipment required to maintain voltage and frequency within acceptable limits and to manage excessive heating of transformers during reverse power flow. According to FERC, the largest spending increases have occurred in the older, more populated systems, which include the Northeast Power Coordinating Council (New York City and Boston), Reliability First (Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, Baltimore-Washington, DC), and the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (Los Angeles, San Francisco).

Trends in the sales shares of new light-duty vehicles by vehicle type have continued as the crossover utility vehicle (CUV) share of light-duty vehicles has increased, largely at the expense of cars, despite increases in gasoline prices over the previous two years. In each month since September 2017, sales of CUVs have exceeded those of cars, a class that includes sedans, hatchbacks, and sports cars. CUVs, which typically have ride height and interior space similar to truck-based sport utility vehicles (SUVs), are built on more fuel-efficient, car-based platforms and often have fuel economies that are only slightly lower than comparable cars. Vehicle sales shares for pickups, SUVs, and other vehicle types—which typically have much lower fuel economy than sedans and many CUVs—have remained relatively constant in recent years, with pickup shares showing comparatively modest gains. Although CUVs and cars are built on similar platforms, CUVs often have slightly lower fuel economy than their comparable sedan counterparts (for example, the Toyota RAV4 CUV versus the Toyota Camry sedan), even when they are equipped with the same engine and transmission. However, the change in vehicle shares from cars to CUVs had less effect on fuel consumption compared with other historical shifts in sales, such as the shift from cars to SUVs in the 1990s and early 2000s. The relatively small variability in annual fuel costs has not been enough to change purchasing trends in the same way that consumers exchanged low fuel economy SUVs for cars and CUVs in the peak of the recession in 2009. At that time, replacing a 20 mile-per-gallon (mpg) vehicle with a 30-mpg vehicle would save an annual 250 gallons when driven 15,000 miles, at a cost savings ranging from $500 ($2/gallon) to $1,000 ($4/gallon). CUVs often have fuel economy ratings that are more comparable to cars than to the fuel economy ratings of SUVs or pickups. Also, as fuel economy increases, cost savings from fuel consumption reductions decrease. For example, a consumer who drives 15,000 miles per year using a 35-mpg sedan consumes about 429 gallons of gasoline annually, while a 30-mpg CUV traveling the same distance would consume 500 gallons, a difference of 71 gallons. That difference in gasoline consumption would cost $143 to $285 annually with gasoline prices in the range of $2/gallon to $4/gallon.

The natural gas spot price spread between the Permian Basin, as priced at the Waha Hub in western Texas, and the U.S. national benchmark Henry Hub in Louisiana has grown considerably in the past year. Natural gas prices at Waha are nearly a dollar per million British thermal units (MMBtu) lower than Henry Hub prices. This spread widened as the ability to transport the increased natural gas production in the Permian Basin in western Texas and southeastern New Mexico was constrained by existing pipeline capacity. Based on estimates in EIA’s most recent Drilling Productivity Report, production of natural gas in the Permian Basin averaged 10.4 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) in June 2018, which was 2.1 Bcf/d more than in June 2017. Much of this increase in production is associated natural gas, or natural gas produced as a byproduct of the increase in oil production from oil-directed rigs. As a result, the increase in natural gas production closely correlated with the increase in crude oil production in the Permian Basin, which averaged 3.3 million barrels per day (b/d) in June 2018, up 0.9 million b/d from the June 2017 level. As Permian Basin oil production grows, producers must find outlets for the associated natural gas. Once pipeline capacity is fully used, choices are limited. The widening price differential between Waha and Henry Hub indicates pipeline capacity is already somewhat constrained. Producers may flare or vent the natural gas, although these disposal methods are regulated in Texas and New Mexico. Both states allow flaring from wells during drilling and immediately after completion. However, after a certain amount of time, producers can only flare natural gas after receiving exemptions from a state agency. If natural gas production continues to grow, and natural gas prices continue to fall, some producers in the area may cease oil production to avoid producing associated natural gas. Two pipelines—Comanche Trail and Trans-Pecos—were completed in 2017 to export Permian natural gas to Mexico. Although these pipelines have a combined takeaway capacity of 2.6 Bcf/d, they are not expected to see significant flows until late 2018 or early 2019 when downstream pipeline infrastructure in Mexico enters service. The only other project expected to come online in 2018 is the combined expansion of the North Texas Pipeline and resumption of service on the Old Ocean Pipeline, which collectively will increase pipeline capacity out of the Permian by 0.15 Bcf/d. Several new pipelines are currently in development to carry natural gas from the Permian Basin to the Gulf Coast: the Gulf Coast Express Pipeline (2.0 Bcf/d capacity), the Permian to Katy Pipeline (1.7 to 2.3 Bcf/d capacity), and the Pecos Trail Pipeline (1.9 Bcf/d capacity). Of these three projects, only the Gulf Coast Express is under construction, with an expected in-service date of October 2019. The proposed pipelines from the Permian Basin are intended to meet Gulf Coast demand for natural gas, which includes new liquefied natural gas export facilities and regional industrial use.

U.S. exports of methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), a motor gasoline additive, totaled 38,000 barrels per day (b/d) in 2017, primarily to Mexico, Chile, and Venezuela. MTBE was once commonly used in the United States but was phased out in the late 2000s as a result of water contamination concerns. Since then, fuel ethanol has replaced MTBE as a gasoline additive. MTBE is a fuel oxygenate that boosts octane ratings and helps achieve more complete combustion in gasoline engines. Since 2005, most U.S. exports of MTBE have gone to Mexico and Venezuela, with increasing exports to Chile. In 2017, Mexico accounted for two-thirds (66%) of U.S. MTBE exports. Economic instability in Venezuela may have contributed to the decrease in U.S. exports of MTBE to that country in recent years. Overall, MTBE accounts for a small portion of total U.S. petroleum product exports, averaging 0.7% of the total in 2017. MTBE is used as an oxygenate instead of fuel ethanol in those countries, in part, because it has lower evaporative emissions, can be shipped in pipelines alongside finished petroleum products, and does not require the kinds of infrastructure investments specific to ethanol. Virtually all U.S. MTBE exports originate from the Gulf Coast, where production is concentrated. MTBE can be blended with motor gasoline blendstock in the United States to produce a finished product that is subsequently transported to destinations in Mexico. MTBE was once a common fuel additive in the United States. U.S. blending of MTBE into motor gasoline peaked in 1999 at 260,000 b/d. In that year, the volume of fuel ethanol added to motor gasoline totaled 38,000 b/d. However, between 2000 and 2007, 23 states instituted a partial or complete ban on MTBE blended into motor gasoline because of groundwater contamination concerns. The result was an eventual phase out as a fuel oxygenate in the United States and a decline in domestic MTBE consumption that was replaced with ethanol. In contrast to MTBE, the use of fuel ethanol has been supported by tax subsidies such as the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit and by the Renewable Fuel Standard, which mandates the use of biofuels in the nation’s transportation supply. As a result, almost all motor gasoline in the United States contains 10% fuel ethanol blends.

Between 2010 and 2016, the capacity-weighted average cost (real 2016$) of U.S. wind installations declined by one-third, from $2,361 per kilowatt (kW) to $1,587/kW, based on analysis in the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy’s (DOE/EERE) Wind Technology Market Report. The reasons for this decline include improving technology and manufacturing capability and an increasing concentration of builds in the regions of the United States with the lowest installation costs. After many years of declining real project costs, wind reached a low in 2004 at $1,342/kW. Through the remainder of that decade, costs gradually increased, reaching a peak in 2009 and 2010 of about $2,360/kW. Contributing factors to the increasing costs through 2010 included increasing labor costs, an increase in the cost of key manufacturing and construction commodities, and international currency exchange fluctuations affecting imports of key equipment. After 2010, installed costs began to decline as some of those pressures lifted. The global recession of 2008 reduced the cost of key construction and manufacturing commodities. Domestic manufacturing capacity for wind turbine components increased, and the increasing pace of installations helped to reduce both turbine manufacturing and installation costs through learning-by-doing effects, even as higher-performing equipment continued to enter the wind turbine market. Regional variations in wind turbine installation costs also have an effect on reported U.S. average costs. In 2010, the Interior region of the United States had an average installation cost of $2,069/kW, compared with $2,247/kW for the rest of the country. By 2016, the costs in the Interior had dropped 25% from 2010 levels to $1,531/kW, and costs in the rest of the United States had dropped 10% to $2,025/kW. EIA began collecting capital cost data for new generators in 2013, and this data closely tracks the estimates from DOE/EERE. Also in 2010, the share of wind capacity installations was almost evenly split between the Interior and the rest of the United States, with only 46% of capacity entering service that year in the Interior. By 2016, almost 90% of incremental capacity was installed in the lower-cost Interior region. This capacity takes advantage of not only the more favorable wind resources of the region, but also the easily developed expanses of flat land (allowing for larger project sizes) and transportation access to the developing concentration of turbine component manufacturing in this region. The increasing concentration of U.S. wind builds in the low-cost Interior region of the country has reinforced the overall decline in the average cost of wind construction. Because of the recent increase in the overall capacity mix in this region, the national rate of decline in wind costs closely tracks the cost declines for the Interior. Although other factors have affected overall costs, 2016 average installed costs for wind in the United States would have been more than 10% higher if total wind installations had remained at their 2010 geographic market shares.

he share of electricity generation supplied by natural gas-fired power plants has increased over the past decade, while the share supplied by coal has fallen, primarily as a result of sustained low natural gas prices, increases in natural gas-fired capacity, and retirements of coal-fired generating capacity. Over the three-year period from 2015 to 2017, the cost of natural gas delivered to electric generators averaged $3.16 per million Btu (MMBtu), compared with $7.69/MMBtu between 2006 and 2008. The combination of relatively low natural gas prices, environmental regulations, and supportive renewable energy policies has led the industry to build new natural gas-fired and renewable capacity and to retire coal-fired power plants. As reported on EIA’s Preliminary Monthly Electric Generator Inventory, power plant operators added 5.4 gigawatts (GW) of new natural gas-fired generating capacity during the first four months of 2018 with an additional 15 GW scheduled to come online through the end of the year. This addition would be the largest increase in natural gas capacity since 2004. The electric industry also added 2.6 GW of new utility-scale solar and wind generating capacity during the first four months of the year, with an additional 9.6 GW scheduled to come online by the end of 2018. More than 10 GW of coal-fired capacity was retired over the 12-month period ending April 2018. EIA forecasts the delivered cost of natural gas will average $3.16/MMBtu this summer, 2% lower than the average cost during the summer of 2017. In contrast, the cost of coal delivered to electric generators is forecast to rise slightly this summer. The continued low cost of natural gas, along with the recent additions of natural gas-fired capacity and retirements of coal power plants, drive EIA’s expectation that natural gas will contribute a growing share of electricity generation this summer, while coal's share will fall. The largest changes in generation shares occur in the Midwest census region. During the summer of 2018, EIA expects natural gas will supply 20% of electricity in the Midwest, up from 15% last summer. The forecast share of generation from coal in the Midwest falls from 53% last summer to 49% this summer. Unlike the rest of the country, natural gas generation in the West census region is forecast to decline this summer as renewable energy generating capacity increases. Nearly 2 GW of utility-scale solar generating capacity came online in the West census region during the 12 months ending in April. EIA forecasts the share of generation in the West from renewable sources other than hydropower will increase to 16% in summer 2018, up from 14% last summer. Between 2010 and 2016, the capacity-weighted average cost (real 2016$) of U.S. wind installations declined by one-third, from $2,361 per kilowatt (kW) to $1,587/kW, based on analysis in the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy’s (DOE/EERE) Wind Technology Market Report. The reasons for this decline include improving technology and manufacturing capability and an increasing concentration of builds in the regions of the United States with the lowest installation costs. After many years of declining real project costs, wind reached a low in 2004 at $1,342/kW. Through the remainder of that decade, costs gradually increased, reaching a peak in 2009 and 2010 of about $2,360/kW. Contributing factors to the increasing costs through 2010 included increasing labor costs, an increase in the cost of key manufacturing and construction commodities, and international currency exchange fluctuations affecting imports of key equipment. After 2010, installed costs began to decline as some of those pressures lifted. The global recession of 2008 reduced the cost of key construction and manufacturing commodities. Domestic manufacturing capacity for wind turbine components increased, and the increasing pace of installations helped to reduce both turbine manufacturing and installation costs through learning-by-doing effects, even as higher-performing equipment continued to enter the wind turbine market. Regional variations in wind turbine installation costs also have an effect on reported U.S. average costs. In 2010, the Interior region of the United States had an average installation cost of $2,069/kW, compared with $2,247/kW for the rest of the country. By 2016, the costs in the Interior had dropped 25% from 2010 levels to $1,531/kW, and costs in the rest of the United States had dropped 10% to $2,025/kW. EIA began collecting capital cost data for new generators in 2013, and this data closely tracks the estimates from DOE/EERE. Also in 2010, the share of wind capacity installations was almost evenly split between the Interior and the rest of the United States, with only 46% of capacity entering service that year in the Interior. By 2016, almost 90% of incremental capacity was installed in the lower-cost Interior region. This capacity takes advantage of not only the more favorable wind resources of the region, but also the easily developed expanses of flat land (allowing for larger project sizes) and transportation access to the developing concentration of turbine component manufacturing in this region. The increasing concentration of U.S. wind builds in the low-cost Interior region of the country has reinforced the overall decline in the average cost of wind construction. Because of the recent increase in the overall capacity mix in this region, the national rate of decline in wind costs closely tracks the cost declines for the Interior. Although other factors have affected overall costs, 2016 average installed costs for wind in the United States would have been more than 10% higher if total wind installations had remained at their 2010 geographic market shares.

EIA’s July 2018 Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO) expects natural gas-fired power plants to supply 37% of U.S. electricity generation this summer (June, July, and August), near the record-high natural gas-fired generation share in summer 2016. EIA forecasts the share of generation from coal-fired power plants will drop slightly to 30% in summer 2018, continuing a multi-year trend of lower coal-fired electricity generation. The share of electricity generation supplied by natural gas-fired power plants has increased over the past decade, while the share supplied by coal has fallen, primarily as a result of sustained low natural gas prices, increases in natural gas-fired capacity, and retirements of coal-fired generating capacity. Over the three-year period from 2015 to 2017, the cost of natural gas delivered to electric generators averaged $3.16 per million Btu (MMBtu), compared with $7.69/MMBtu between 2006 and 2008. The combination of relatively low natural gas prices, environmental regulations, and supportive renewable energy policies has led the industry to build new natural gas-fired and renewable capacity and to retire coal-fired power plants. As reported on EIA’s Preliminary Monthly Electric Generator Inventory, power plant operators added 5.4 gigawatts (GW) of new natural gas-fired generating capacity during the first four months of 2018 with an additional 15 GW scheduled to come online through the end of the year. This addition would be the largest increase in natural gas capacity since 2004. The electric industry also added 2.6 GW of new utility-scale solar and wind generating capacity during the first four months of the year, with an additional 9.6 GW scheduled to come online by the end of 2018. More than 10 GW of coal-fired capacity was retired over the 12-month period ending April 2018. EIA forecasts the delivered cost of natural gas will average $3.16/MMBtu this summer, 2% lower than the average cost during the summer of 2017. In contrast, the cost of coal delivered to electric generators is forecast to rise slightly this summer. The continued low cost of natural gas, along with the recent additions of natural gas-fired capacity and retirements of coal power plants, drive EIA’s expectation that natural gas will contribute a growing share of electricity generation this summer, while coal's share will fall. The largest changes in generation shares occur in the Midwest census region. During the summer of 2018, EIA expects natural gas will supply 20% of electricity in the Midwest, up from 15% last summer. The forecast share of generation from coal in the Midwest falls from 53% last summer to 49% this summer. Unlike the rest of the country, natural gas generation in the West census region is forecast to decline this summer as renewable energy generating capacity increases. Nearly 2 GW of utility-scale solar generating capacity came online in the West census region during the 12 months ending in April. EIA forecasts the share of generation in the West from renewable sources other than hydropower will increase to 16% in summer 2018, up from 14% last summer.