Simple question: What is the expected impact in electricity Demand when EV deployment exceeds 10%

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

17 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Yes, you are clearly disturbed. It is very evident in how you make claims about a technology that you have zero understanding of.

I am disturbed by the self-contradictory behavior of yourself and other climate activists.

That is enough to disturb anyone. Especially if the Prez has climbed on board your train.

Edited April 20, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

@Ecocharger, There really are two major problems with Cobalt that are even larger than the simple problem of supply quantity.. Everyone mentions the supply constraint in the DRC (Democratic Republic of the Congo). However, nobody mentions that the Cobalt companies in the Congo are majority-owned by the Chinese. Furthermore, semi-refined cobalt is not usable, and more than 80% of the final cobalt refining capacity is in China. Until the world finds more Cobalt ore, and more importantly builds independent refining capacity, NCM batteries are at the mercy of the Chinese. The alternative is to use batteries that do not use Cobalt.

The Chinese also own a bunch of Lithium mining operations in the world, but the situation is not nearly as dire on the mining side and the world can fairly easily find new sources. However, the refining problem of lithium is just as bad. Today, a very large percentage of the world's lithium refining capacity is in China.  For example, Tesla's new battery plant in Texas will use Australian Lithium, but it will be refined in China.

The US and the rest of the world are in fierce trade competition with China, and we need to fix this by adding independent metals refining capacity among may other things. China became dominant by using very low-cost labor and high levels of automation to drive the price down. To address the projected lithium shortage spike in 2030,  EV manufacturers (or somebody) will need to invest in new mines, but even more importantly they will need to invest in non-Chinese lithium refining.

We learned to our dismay with crude oil that state operators can create cartels and raise prices far beyond costs, either for political or economic reasons. Saudi Arabia ("OPEC") forced the price of crude to above $100/bbl when the marginal lifting cost was below $10/bbl.  The Arab League also used an oil boycott directly or political reasons in 1973, causing very large worldwide disruption:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis

There is very little to stop China from doing the same thing unless we start now. It took us from 1973 to about 2015 finally use the shale revolution to provide the necessary "screw you" to OPEC.

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

3 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

@Ecocharger, There really are two major problems with Cobalt that are even larger than the simple problem of supply quantity.. Everyone mentions the supply constraint in the DRC (Democratic Republic of the Congo). However, nobody mentions that the Cobalt companies in the Congo are majority-owned by the Chinese. Furthermore, semi-refined cobalt is not usable, and more than 80% of the final cobalt refining capacity is in China. Until the world finds more Cobalt ore, and more importantly builds independent refining capacity, NCM batteries are at the mercy of the Chinese. The alternative is to use batteries that do not use Cobalt.

The Chinese also own a bunch of Lithium mining operations in the world, but the situation is not nearly as dire on the mining side and the world can fairly easily find new sources. However, the refining problem of lithium is just as bad. Today, a very large percentage of the world's lithium refining capacity is in China.  For example, Tesla's new battery plant in Texas will use Australian Lithium, but it will be refined in China.

The US and the rest of the world are in fierce trade competition with China, and we need to fix this by adding independent metals refining capacity among may other things. China became dominant by using very low-cost labor and high levels of automation to drive the price down. To address the projected lithium shortage spike in 2030,  EV manufacturers (or somebody) will need to invest in new mines, but even more importantly they will need to invest in non-Chinese lithium refining.

We learned to our dismay with crude oil that state operators can create cartels and raise prices far beyond costs, either for political or economic reasons. Saudi Arabia ("OPEC") forced the price of crude to above $100/bbl when the marginal lifting cost was below $10/bbl.  The Arab League also used an oil boycott directly or political reasons in 1973, causing very large worldwide disruption:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis

There is very little to stop China from doing the same thing unless we start now. It took us from 1973 to about 2015 finally use the shale revolution to provide the necessary "screw you" to OPEC.

And now the shale sector has been intimidated by the OPEC response, and the inherent concern over OPEC retaliation should the shale sector again ramp up. It doesn't look like shale will rebound in a big way going forward. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

10 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

I am disturbed by the self-contradictory behavior of yourself and other climate activists.

That is enough to disturb anyone. Especially if the Prez has climbed on board your train.

Good news is that you are really going to enjoy driving your new EV in a decade or so (when there are no new ICE cars to buy). I know I'll be enjoying mine sooner than that.

Edited April 21, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

4 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

And now the shale sector has been intimidated by the OPEC response, and the inherent concern over OPEC retaliation should the shale sector again ramp up. It doesn't look like shale will rebound in a big way going forward. 

A great reason to get an EV. Shale oil is at OPECs mercy. There are great reasons to get an EV that have nothing to do with climate change.

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

29 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Good news is that you are really going to enjoy driving your new EV in a decade or so (when there are no new ICE cars to buy). I know I'll be enjoying mine sooner than that.

If you were going to enjoy it then, you would be enjoying it now.....nope, ain't happening.

Edited April 21, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

2 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

A great reason to get an EV. Shale oil is at OPECs mercy. There are great reasons to get an EV that have nothing to do with climate change.

There are great reasons to put out some more CO2 into the atmosphere, apart from keeping the affordable, secure ICE autos in motion. CO2 is necessary to grow our crops and to keep America green. Reducing atmospheric CO2 risks reducing agricultural productivity, mass starvations. But if that is what the climate alarmists want, depopulation (which they already claim they want), than one way to depopulate is to reduce food production by reducing atmospheric CO2. The Prez should be aware of what that course of action will lead to.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

5 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

If you were going to enjoy it then, you would enjoy it now.....nope, ain't happening.

I would not put to much effort into the discussion of EV's making it to mainstream, this thread deals to what could be and now what is...18 months from now EV's will repeat history..a dead issue, for now the mfg's are placating the current crowd...A little pablum goes along way with the EV crowd.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

15 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

There are great reasons to put out some more CO2 into the atmosphere, apart from keeping the affordable, secure ICE autos in motion. CO2 is necessary to grow our crops and to keep America green. Reducing atmospheric CO2 risks reducing agricultural productivity, mass starvations. But if that is what the climate alarmists want, depopulation (which they already claim they want), than one way to depopulate is to reduce food production by reducing atmospheric CO2. The Prez should be aware of what that course of action will lead to.

It might seem there’s an upside to the rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Plants are growing faster.

However, in many species of plants, quantity is not quality. Most plants are growing faster, but they have on average more starch, less protein and fewer key vitamins in them,

“The loss of nutrients, particularly protein, is serious,” Metzger said. “That does not help in the effort for people to eat more balanced diets and increase their nutrition.”

Animal meat and dairy products are a significant source of protein for humans. So, if animals aren’t getting sufficient protein from plants, that will affect what they can produce as food.

https://cfaes.osu.edu/news/articles/higher-carbon-dioxide-levels-prompt-more-plant-growth-fewer-nutrients

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

13 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

I would not put to much effort into the discussion of EV's making it to mainstream, this thread deals to what could be and now what is...18 months from now EV's will repeat history..a dead issue, for now the mfg's are placating the current crowd...A little pablum goes along way with the EV crowd.

In 18 months EV's will be as mainstream in Texas as they are now in California. Just waiting for Tesla Texas to start production. And keep an eye out for those Amazon EV deliver vans. They will be delivering to your front door by then.

[QuarterCenturyVet + 312]

55 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Good news is that you are really going to enjoy driving your new EV in a decade or so (when there are no new ICE cars to buy). I know I'll be enjoying mine sooner than that.

Yeah. Maybe you'll be enjoying the afterlife before that. 

"Doctor named as one of victims in fatal Tesla crash in Texas"

https://ca.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/doctor-named-as-one-of-victims-in-fatal-tesla-crash-in-texas-2415372

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

2 minutes ago, QuarterCenturyVet said:

Yeah. Maybe you'll be enjoying the afterlife before that. 

"Doctor named as one of victims in fatal Tesla crash in Texas"

https://ca.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/doctor-named-as-one-of-victims-in-fatal-tesla-crash-in-texas-2415372

And how many people died on Texas roads driving ICE cars that day? Not to mention that the idiot was apparently not sitting in the driver's seat like the instructions say. We call that user error, not vehicle error.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

4 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

In 18 months EV's will be as mainstream in Texas as they are now in California. Just waiting for Tesla Texas to start production. And keep an eye out for those Amazon EV deliver vans. They will be delivering to your front door by then.

Good to see you back posting again, it must be said your energy levels are quite deep. However the Green New Deal time has come and gone, Texas is the epicenter of many things. Now with that being said the smart money has bailed and its off to new horizons....blocking the Sun itself. I would suggest it will be a by far simpler approach.

Bill Gates Backs Geoengineering to Block Sunlight From Reaching the Earth's Surface

https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/30341/20210327/bill-gates-backs-research-blocking-sunlight-reaching-earths-surface.htm

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

8 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Good to see you back posting again, it must be said your energy levels are quite deep. However the Green New Deal time has come and gone, Texas is the epicenter of many things. Now with that being said the smart money has bailed and its off to new horizons....blocking the Sun itself. I would suggest it will be a by far simpler approach.

Bill Gates Backs Geoengineering to Block Sunlight From Reaching the Earth's Surface

https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/30341/20210327/bill-gates-backs-research-blocking-sunlight-reaching-earths-surface.htm

Well thanks. But I wouldn't get too excited about Bill Gate's plan. First of all blocking sunlight will have a dramatic affect on plant and crop growth, a huge negative. And if they do build it they won't just reflect the sun light away. They will convert it to electricity and beam it to earth to power EV's and replace fossil energy generation. That is how they will profit from it.

He is just planning to put a big solar panel in space.

Edited April 21, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

It might seem there’s an upside to the rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Plants are growing faster.

However, in many species of plants, quantity is not quality. Most plants are growing faster, but they have on average more starch, less protein and fewer key vitamins in them,

“The loss of nutrients, particularly protein, is serious,” Metzger said. “That does not help in the effort for people to eat more balanced diets and increase their nutrition.”

Animal meat and dairy products are a significant source of protein for humans. So, if animals aren’t getting sufficient protein from plants, that will affect what they can produce as food.

https://cfaes.osu.edu/news/articles/higher-carbon-dioxide-levels-prompt-more-plant-growth-fewer-nutrients

We are only now beginning to understand the nature of increased atmospheric CO2 on climate. Two new studies have shown a negative correlation between CO2 levels and temperature change, contrary to common misunderstanding, and now there is evidence that increased CO2 levels actually act through changes in green vegetation to provide a mitigating and stabilizing factor in earth temperature change.

In other words, it appears that solar variables create the earth temperature changes, and that increased/decreased CO2 has the potential to stabilize the resulting temperature changes.

So the way to fight global warming is actually to INCREASE the atmospheric levels of CO2, which then increases global greening, and this acts as a mitigating factor in earth temperature changes.

This research was conducted by an international team of scientists, and the results were published on November 20 2020....just a little bit too late to enter into public discussion surrounding the 2020 federal elections. Unfortunate.

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/47/eabb1981

Edited April 21, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

20 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

We are only now beginning to understand the nature of increased atmospheric CO2 on climate. Two new studies have shown a negative correlation between CO2 levels and temperature change, contrary to common misunderstanding, and now there is evidence that increased CO2 levels actually act through changes in green vegetation to provide a mitigating and stabilizing factor in earth temperature change.

In other words, it appears that solar variables create the earth temperature changes, and that increased/decreased CO2 has the potential to stabilize the resulting temperature changes.

So the way to fight global warming is actually to INCREASE the atmospheric levels of CO2, which then increases global greening, and this acts as a mitigating factor in earth temperature changes.

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/47/eabb1981

That paper was anything but conclusive. It sounds just as likely that covering the N. Atlantic with giant turbines would do an even better job of increasing turbulent airflow and thus cause more cooling.

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

36 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

That paper was anything but conclusive. It sounds just as likely that covering the N. Atlantic with giant turbines would do an even better job of increasing turbulent airflow and thus cause more cooling.

You didn't read it carefully, Jay,

It clearly states, " Changes in these biophysical factors can strongly affect the radiometric land surface temperature (LST)."

That is STRONGLY, as in STRONGLY.

It provides an elucidation of the organic structure which underlies the negative correlation between atmospheric CO2 and earth temperature.

The picture is now complete.

Edited April 21, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

16 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

It provides an elucidation of the organic structure which underlies the negative correlation between atmospheric CO2 and earth temperature.

The picture is now complete.

Picture of what? The paper concludes with 

"Whether these effects will be detectable by observations and whether the Earth greening can affect other climatic processes (e.g., extreme events) remain to be investigated."

They aren't even sure if the effect will be significant enough to be observed.

And much of the greening is not attributed to higher CO2:

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/ames/human-activity-in-china-and-india-dominates-the-greening-of-earth-nasa-study-shows

Edited April 21, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

2 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Good to see you back posting again, it must be said your energy levels are quite deep. However the Green New Deal time has come and gone, Texas is the epicenter of many things. Now with that being said the smart money has bailed and its off to new horizons....blocking the Sun itself. I would suggest it will be a by far simpler approach.

Bill Gates Backs Geoengineering to Block Sunlight From Reaching the Earth's Surface

https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/30341/20210327/bill-gates-backs-research-blocking-sunlight-reaching-earths-surface.htm

A year ago, talk in the Texas energy hub was mostly about defending oil and gas and denouncing renewables, Arnold, 47, said Monday on his Twitter account. Now, much of the discussion has shifted to clean-energy topics including wind, solar and batteries.

“Even those who are not ideological believers are taking the cues from the financial markets, which have no interest in oil production growth anymore,” said Arnold, the former head of natural-gas derivatives at Enron Corp.

He also said capital available to oil and gas has dried up while “every” private equity firm in Houston is raising money for clean energy. “The markets are rewarding those in a growth industry (zero carbon energy) vs one in secular decline.”

https://gcaptain.com/legendary-natural-gas-trader-sees-seismic-shift-in-houstons-oil-patch/

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

25 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

A year ago, talk in the Texas energy hub was mostly about defending oil and gas and denouncing renewables, Arnold, 47, said Monday on his Twitter account. Now, much of the discussion has shifted to clean-energy topics including wind, solar and batteries.

“Even those who are not ideological believers are taking the cues from the financial markets, which have no interest in oil production growth anymore,” said Arnold, the former head of natural-gas derivatives at Enron Corp.

He also said capital available to oil and gas has dried up while “every” private equity firm in Houston is raising money for clean energy. “The markets are rewarding those in a growth industry (zero carbon energy) vs one in secular decline.”

https://gcaptain.com/legendary-natural-gas-trader-sees-seismic-shift-in-houstons-oil-patch/

The real 300 lb gorilla, have a Google on there effects on the realestate markets across the US for the past 5 yrs. 

Now there gaze is fixed on energy. Bill&Boys are out...Well maybe..

BlackRock puts climate at center of $7 trillion strategy

https://www.investmentnews.com/blackrock-puts-climate-at-center-of-7-trillion-strategy-176383

Edited April 21, 2021 by Eyes Wide Open

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

1 minute ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

The real 300 lb gorilla, have a Google on there effects on the realestate markets across the US for the past 5 yrs. 

Now there gaze is fixed on energy.

BlackRock puts climate at center of $7 trillion strategy

https://www.investmentnews.com/blackrock-puts-climate-at-center-of-7-trillion-strategy-176383

The Green New Deal is going into high gear. The shift is seismic. 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

30 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The Green New Deal is going into high gear. The shift is seismic. 

If I were a betting man a wager would be in order. It will never even see the floor of Congress..Just to messy, to many unneeded tail's..opinions or strings.

A bit like when the airline industry discovered they could refine their own fuel...who needs a middle man.

Edited April 21, 2021 by Eyes Wide Open

[turbguy + 1,553]

33 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The Green New Deal is going into high gear. The shift is seismic. 

"Nothing is more powerful that an idea whose time has come".

Follow the money.

The green new deal does not need Congress, but Congress needs the money.

Edited April 21, 2021 by turbguy

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

8 minutes ago, turbguy said:

"Nothing is more powerful that an idea whose time has come".

Follow the money.

The green new deal does not need Congress, but Congress needs the money.

You got that right! The money has already moved and Congress is going to follow it.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

15 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

If I were a betting man a wager would be in order. It will never even see the floor of Congress..Just to messy, to many unneeded tail's..opinions or strings.

A bit like when the airline industry discovered they could refine their own fuel...who needs a middle man.

The Green New Deal think tank proposed legislation I think you are referring to is just a starting place. What will be passed are different parts of it that follow the money. A lot of it will be on the order of permits to build off shore wind turbines, invest in charging stations, etc.

Edited April 21, 2021 by Jay McKinsey