JM

GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

Recommended Posts

(edited)

Here is the reality, the world depends on fossil fuels now, and also going forward.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Which-US-States-Are-Most-Dependent-On-Fossil-Fuels.html

"Here are the states most dependent on fossil fuels.

State

Rank

Percentage of energy derived from fossil fuels

Percentage of energy derived from renewables

Total energy consumed from fossil fuels (trillion BTU)

Total energy consumed from renewables (trillion BTU)

Largest fossil fuel source

 

Delaware

    1

    96.4%

3.6%

213.1

8.0

Petroleum

Alaska

    2

    95.9%

4.1%

584.8

25.0

Natural Gas

West Virginia

    3

    95.4%

4.6%

1,103.3

53.7

Coal

Rhode Island

    4

    95.0%

5.0%

189.1

10.0

Natural Gas

Kentucky

    5

    94.1%

5.9%

1,616.5

102.1

Coal

Wyoming

    6

    93.5%

6.5%

793.2

54.9

Coal

Indiana

    7

    93.4%

6.6%

2,617.2

185.9

Coal

Utah

    8

    93.1%

6.9%

830.0

61.3

Petroleum

Louisiana

    9

    92.1%

3.7%

3,895.5

155.0

Petroleum

Texas

    10

    89.9%

7.1%

12,752.3

1,009.0

Petroleum

Ohio

    11

    89.7%

4.7%

3,040.2

158.6

Natural Gas

Hawaii

    12

    89.4%

10.6%

261.8

31.1

Petroleum

Colorado

    13

    88.8%

11.2%

1,305.1

164.6

Natural Gas

Mississippi

    14

    88.2%

6.1%

1,116.6

76.8

Natural Gas

Missouri

    15

    88.0%

5.9%

1,608.7

108.5

Coal

United States

    –

    80.5%

11.2%

81,238.0

11,281.6

Petroleum

Source: Global Trade"

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Here is the reality, the world depends on fossil fuels now, and also going forward.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Which-US-States-Are-Most-Dependent-On-Fossil-Fuels.html

"Here are the states most dependent on fossil fuels.

State

Rank

Percentage of energy derived from fossil fuels

Percentage of energy derived from renewables

Total energy consumed from fossil fuels (trillion BTU)

Total energy consumed from renewables (trillion BTU)

Largest fossil fuel source

 

Delaware

    1

    96.4%

3.6%

213.1

8.0

Petroleum

Alaska

    2

    95.9%

4.1%

584.8

25.0

Natural Gas

West Virginia

    3

    95.4%

4.6%

1,103.3

53.7

Coal

Rhode Island

    4

    95.0%

5.0%

189.1

10.0

Natural Gas

Kentucky

    5

    94.1%

5.9%

1,616.5

102.1

Coal

Wyoming

    6

    93.5%

6.5%

793.2

54.9

Coal

Indiana

    7

    93.4%

6.6%

2,617.2

185.9

Coal

Utah

    8

    93.1%

6.9%

830.0

61.3

Petroleum

Louisiana

    9

    92.1%

3.7%

3,895.5

155.0

Petroleum

Texas

    10

    89.9%

7.1%

12,752.3

1,009.0

Petroleum

Ohio

    11

    89.7%

4.7%

3,040.2

158.6

Natural Gas

Hawaii

    12

    89.4%

10.6%

261.8

31.1

Petroleum

Colorado

    13

    88.8%

11.2%

1,305.1

164.6

Natural Gas

Mississippi

    14

    88.2%

6.1%

1,116.6

76.8

Natural Gas

Missouri

    15

    88.0%

5.9%

1,608.7

108.5

Coal

United States

    –

    80.5%

11.2%

81,238.0

11,281.6

Petroleum

Source: Global Trade"

Good info!  Thanx!

Watch it change dramatically in the next two decades.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

1400ppm.... so every single semi closed building such as your basement, shopping center... most schools and any other modern house that is well sealed. 🙄

Homes are not sealed for the most part. Most have air brought in by the air conditioner system. In Texas this is the emergency approach along with blaming the left. Texas has many redneck unwoke supporters that not only allow pollution and co2 but warn you to go inside to breath less of it for a few hrs. Why bother with competent filtration systems in a world of airborne virus. It’s easier to ignore respiratory costs and promote healthcare technology systems instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Boat said:

Homes are not sealed for the most part. Most have air brought in by the air conditioner system. In Texas this is the emergency approach along with blaming the left. Texas has many redneck unwoke supporters that not only allow pollution and co2 but warn you to go inside to breath less of it for a few hrs. Why bother with competent filtration systems in a world of airborne virus. It’s easier to ignore respiratory costs and promote healthcare technology systems instead.

You have your air conditioning running 24/7, 365? 

I dont have my furnace running 24/7, 365. 

That said, CO2 from your mouth breathing is filling up your home with this "deadly pollutant". 🙄

Therefore, your breathless whining about the unworke is really just them telling you to breathe less because you're a waste of oxygen. 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Oil markets appear to be strong going forward, in line with the huge world energy dependence on fossil fuels and the increased importance of petrochemicals.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/Oil-Could-Be-Primed-For-Up-To-50-Rally-Strategist-Says.html

"The price of WTI crude oil could be headed for a jump of between 20 percent and 50 percent, judging from a bullish breakout pattern that suggests a major rally could be coming for an asset, and that has occurred just three times for crude this century, an equity strategist told CNBC this week. “Crude oil has seen what’s called a golden cross on its weekly chart,” Matt Maley, Equity Strategist at Miller Tabak, told CNBC’s “Trading Nation” program. The so-called golden cross appears on a chart when the short-term moving average of an asset crosses above its long-term moving average. The gold cross chart pattern points to a potential for a major rally.  “That’s only happened three times since the beginning of this century and each of those three times has been followed by a very strong further rally in crude oil, anywhere from 20%-50%,” Maley told CNBC."

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 hours ago, turbguy said:

Good info!  Thanx!

Watch it change dramatically in the next two decades.

You mean fossil fuel dependence in some states might drop from 95% to 94.7%? In a world of vastly increasing energy production? That would be okay for fossil fuels, they could live with that.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

3 hours ago, Boat said:

Homes are not sealed for the most part. Most have air brought in by the air conditioner system. In Texas this is the emergency approach along with blaming the left. Texas has many redneck unwoke supporters that not only allow pollution and co2 but warn you to go inside to breath less of it for a few hrs. Why bother with competent filtration systems in a world of airborne virus. It’s easier to ignore respiratory costs and promote healthcare technology systems instead.

Perhaps the woke will wake up. Equating energy and climate  issues with social activism is an example of intellectual confusion of the highest order.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Goldman Sachs is very positive on oil.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Goldman-OPEC-Unlikely-To-Open-The-Taps-Despite-US-Calls.html

"OPEC+ is unlikely to respond with increased production to the U.S. calls amid the surging Delta variant, which is set to dampen short-term oil demand, Goldman Sachs says. Earlier this week, the White House called on the OPEC+ group to increase oil production more than they had planned in order to tame rising gasoline prices that could derail the global economic recovery. U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said in a statement that “We are engaging with relevant OPEC+ members on the importance of competitive markets in setting prices.” Higher gasoline costs, if left unchecked, risk harming the ongoing global recovery,” the statement further reads. Commenting on the possibility that OPEC+ lift supply, Goldman Sachs analysts said in a Thursday note carried by Reuters: “We don’t see the recent White House statement as threatening the current market deficit nor the pace of the rebalancing in 2H21.” As a result, the investment bank kept its forecast for Brent Crude prices at $80 a barrel at the end of this year. Brent was trading at around $71 early on Friday."

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

The "blizzard" of coal's decline continues, against everything Wyoming legislators can do...

PacifiCorp intends to retire 14 of its 22 active coal units by 2030 and another five by 2040, with the remaining three shuttered shortly afterward. It would retain two coal units at Wyoming’s Jim Bridger power plant, converting them to natural gas peaking units in 2024.

All of PacifiCorp’s Wyoming coal plants would be offline by 2039, according to this year’s plan.

By the end of 2040, the company’s total coal-fueled generation capacity would be reduced by more than 4,000 megawatts and its gas capacity reduced by 1,500 megawatts.

https://trib.com/business/energy/wyomings-biggest-utility-is-closing-the-curtains-on-coal/article_58bcccee-1193-5f55-aa7e-a1207faa86de.html

I suspect some units will be converted to synchronous condenser duty if the grid requires voltage (VAR) and inertial support.

Edited by turbguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

13 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Perhaps the woke will wake up. Equating energy and climate  issues with social activism is an example of intellectual confusion of the highest order.

Like drinking water from lead pipes, killing weeds with roundup, smoking that Marlboro atop a horse and insulating with asbestos took a little social wokeness. 
Humans crude mental awareness crawls toward being woke at a snails pace. But given enough generations and education, celebrating ignorance like a Trump will no longer be a social norm.

Edited by Boat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wyoming's biggest utility is closing the curtains on coal

Dave Johnston

Unlike Wyoming, PacifiCorp is turning away from fossil fuels.

The parent company to Rocky Mountain Power, the state’s biggest electric utility, announced Friday that its biennial Integrated Resource Plan is expected to include substantial investment in renewables — and no new investment in coal or natural gas. The 2021 plan will be finalized next week.

PacifiCorp intends to retire 14 of its 22 active coal units by 2030 and another five by 2040, with the remaining three shuttered shortly afterward. It would retain two coal units at Wyoming’s Jim Bridger power plant, converting them to natural gas peaking units in 2024.

All of PacifiCorp’s Wyoming coal plants would be offline by 2039, according to this year’s plan.

 
 

By the end of 2040, the company’s total coal-fueled generation capacity would be reduced by more than 4,000 megawatts and its gas capacity reduced by 1,500 megawatts.

“This IRP definitely reflects the fact that PacifiCorp recognizes it needs to move away from fossil fuel assets,” said Rob Godby, an associate professor of economics at the University of Wyoming. “So there is a real move here, a really significant move.”

https://trib.com/business/energy/wyomings-biggest-utility-is-closing-the-curtains-on-coal/article_58bcccee-1193-5f55-aa7e-a1207faa86de.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Wyoming's biggest utility is closing the curtains on coal

Dave Johnston

Unlike Wyoming, PacifiCorp is turning away from fossil fuels.

The parent company to Rocky Mountain Power, the state’s biggest electric utility, announced Friday that its biennial Integrated Resource Plan is expected to include substantial investment in renewables — and no new investment in coal or natural gas. The 2021 plan will be finalized next week.

PacifiCorp intends to retire 14 of its 22 active coal units by 2030 and another five by 2040, with the remaining three shuttered shortly afterward. It would retain two coal units at Wyoming’s Jim Bridger power plant, converting them to natural gas peaking units in 2024.

All of PacifiCorp’s Wyoming coal plants would be offline by 2039, according to this year’s plan.

 
 

By the end of 2040, the company’s total coal-fueled generation capacity would be reduced by more than 4,000 megawatts and its gas capacity reduced by 1,500 megawatts.

“This IRP definitely reflects the fact that PacifiCorp recognizes it needs to move away from fossil fuel assets,” said Rob Godby, an associate professor of economics at the University of Wyoming. “So there is a real move here, a really significant move.”

https://trib.com/business/energy/wyomings-biggest-utility-is-closing-the-curtains-on-coal/article_58bcccee-1193-5f55-aa7e-a1207faa86de.html

California to Build Temporary Gas Plants to Avoid Blackouts

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-19/california-to-build-temporary-gas-plants-to-avoid-blackouts

 

 

 

 

 

How temporary is temporary ? LOL

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, ceo_energemsier said:

California to Build Temporary Gas Plants to Avoid Blackouts

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-19/california-to-build-temporary-gas-plants-to-avoid-blackouts

 

 

 

 

 

How temporary is temporary ? LOL

 

Five 30MW back up generators for a whopping 150MW  that will be online in a couple weeks. Half of what we lost a couple months ago when 300MW of CCGT blew up sending shrapnel across Hayward. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Five 30MW back up generators for a whopping 150MW  that will be online in a couple weeks. Half of what we lost a couple months ago when 300MW of CCGT blew up sending shrapnel across Hayward. 

Yawn!!!!!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ceo_energemsier said:

Yawn!!!!!

I agree, those back up generators are a complete nothing burger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Here is the excitement:

image.png.e4ab5b5d49c61ca68240092cfff2e8b7.png

The batteries are charged for this evening:

image.thumb.png.8637122be6a7112cae382c2f98ca32ee.png

Edited by Jay McKinsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

24 minutes ago, QuarterCenturyVet said:

Hilarious how you guys think it is a problem that we import electricity but are all for us importing fossil fuels to generate electricity in state. 

Perhaps you can explain why importing electricity is bad but importing fuel to generate the electricity in state is good?

Meanwhile fossil fuels accounted for about one third of electricity imports last year. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2020-total-system-electric-generation

Edited by Jay McKinsey
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

What you fossils can't comprehend is that we have gone to great effort to build a regional renewable electricity market. 

How it works

The EIM allows participants to buy and sell power close to the time electricity is consumed, and gives system operators real-time visibility across neighboring grids. The result improves balancing supply and demand at a lower cost.

The EIM platform balances fluctuations in supply and demand by automatically finding lower-cost resources to meet real-time power needs. The EIM manages congestion on transmission lines to maintain grid reliability and supports integrating renewable resources. In addition, the market makes excess renewable energy available to participating utilities at low cost rather than turning the generating units off.

More specifically, regional coordination in generating and delivering energy produces significant benefits in three main areas:

  • Reduced costs for participants by lowering the amount of costly reserves utilities need to carry, and more efficient use of the regional transmission system.
  • Reduced carbon emission and more efficient use and integration of renewable energy. For instance, when one utility area has excess hydroelectric, solar or wind power, the ISO can deliver it to customers in California or to another participant. Likewise, when the ISO has excess solar energy, it can help meet demand outside of California that otherwise would be met by more expensive – and less clean – energy resources.
  • Enhanced reliability by increasing operational visibility across electricity grids, and improving the ability to manage transmission line congestion across the region’s high-voltage transmission system.

image.thumb.png.7c40c0db685e9c934b41e435d0829a28.png

Edited by Jay McKinsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

As usual, the renewable movement is riddled with hypocrisy,

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Oil-Rich-Nations-Face-Growing-Pressure-To-Go-Green.html

"The potential movement away from fossil fuels is of particular significance for Scotland as questions around independence following Brexit rise to the surface again, but with what financial backing? North Sea oil has fuelled the Scottish independence movement since the 1970s, but a movement away from fossil fuels could quash this opportunity.  

In addition, while much of the British public is calling for greater action on climate change, many Scots are questioning the U.K.'s preparedness for living without fossil fuel. At present, renewables only provide an average 30 percent of current electricity demand, meaning if the country was to switch to purely renewable power households would have to decrease their electricity usage by 70 percent. "

Edited by Ecocharger
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/28/2021 at 11:56 AM, Boat said:

Like drinking water from lead pipes, killing weeds with roundup, smoking that Marlboro atop a horse and insulating with asbestos took a little social wokeness. 
Humans crude mental awareness crawls toward being woke at a snails pace. But given enough generations and education, celebrating ignorance like a Trump will no longer be a social norm.

We are willing to provide a little public education on the new solar cycle science, which is a "wake-up" call for the "woked-up".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Here is the excitement:

image.png.e4ab5b5d49c61ca68240092cfff2e8b7.png

The batteries are charged for this evening:

image.thumb.png.8637122be6a7112cae382c2f98ca32ee.png

Jay, you forgot to identify the market...time to "woke up", buddy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

40 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Jay, you forgot to identify the market...time to "woke up", buddy.

If you could focus long enough to follow a conversation and context I think even you could figure out that it is California.

Edited by Jay McKinsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

As usual, the renewable movement is riddled with hypocrisy,

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Oil-Rich-Nations-Face-Growing-Pressure-To-Go-Green.html

"The potential movement away from fossil fuels is of particular significance for Scotland as questions around independence following Brexit rise to the surface again, but with what financial backing? North Sea oil has fuelled the Scottish independence movement since the 1970s, but a movement away from fossil fuels could quash this opportunity.  

In addition, while much of the British public is calling for greater action on climate change, many Scots are questioning the U.K.'s preparedness for living without fossil fuel. At present, renewables only provide an average 30 percent of current electricity demand, meaning if the country was to switch to purely renewable power households would have to decrease their electricity usage by 70 percent. "

HaHa, England is terrified that Scotland will leave and take all their offshore wind with them. By 2030 Scotland will be 100% renewable and  exporting copious amounts of renewable electricity. By 2040 they are going to be the very wealthy wind powerhouse of Europe:

The Scottish Government plans to increase offshore wind capacity to 11 gigawatts (GW) of energy installed by 2030 – which is, as the government has said, enough to power more than eight million homes.

Currently, Scotland, with a population of around 5.5 million people, has 5.6GW of consented offshore capacity, of which 1GW is operational.

https://www.oedigital.com/news/482966-scotland-sets-11gw-offshore-wind-target

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.