JM

GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Eric Gagen said:

I was too - solar, hydro and wind constructed and deployed in China for domestic consumption in China.  They use all of it - it's just not enough because demand is growing so fast.  As a percentage of electricity generated in China it's not that big,  but compared to the amount of renewables deployed anywhere else it's staggering, and growing fast.  They just can't build it fast enough to keep up with demand.  This is the first time (and probably the last) we have seen a country of 1.4 billion transition from famine and starvation to 1st world status in the space of 40 years, and it's mind numbing how fast it's going.  

They are going to have problems with the price of inputs, and that will limit market penetration.

"Solar panel prices had surged by more than 50 percent in the past 12 months alone. The price of wind turbines is up 13 percent and battery prices are rising for the first time ever"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, notsonice said:

Peak Oil???? did it already happen???? if no one is producing ICE vehicles in 2030 the oil business will shrivel up and disappear sooner than expected....

 

GM to spend nearly $7B on EV, battery plants in Michigan

By DAVID EGGERT and TOM KRISHERan hour ago
 

LANSING, Mich. (AP) — General Motors is making the largest investment in company history in its home state of Michigan, announcing plans to spend nearly $7 billion to convert a factory to make electric pickup trucks and to build a new battery cell plant.

The moves, announced Tuesday in the state capital of Lansing, will create up to 4,000 jobs and keep another 1,000 already employed at an underutilized assembly plant north of Detroit.

The automaker plans to spend up to $4 billion converting and expanding its Orion Township assembly factory to make electric pickups and $1.5 billion to $2.5 billion building a third U.S. battery cell plant with a joint-venture partner in Lansing.

GM CEO Mary Barra said the investment would make Michigan “the epicenter of the electric vehicle industry.”

The state’s economic development board on Tuesday approved $824 million in incentives and assistance for Detroit-based GM. The package was unveiled and authorized by the Michigan Strategic Fund Board. It includes a $600 million grant to GM and Ultium Cells, the venture between the carmaker and LG Energy Solution, and a $158 million tax break for Ultium. The board also approved $66.1 million to help a local electric utility and township upgrade infrastructure at the battery factory site.

Both factories are scheduled to start producing in about two years, as GM rolls the dice on whether Americans will be willing to convert from internal combustion engines to battery power.

The Orion plant will join GM’s “Factory Zero” facility in Detroit in building new electric Chevrolet Silverados and GMC Sierra pickups. When both plants are making trucks on three shifts, GM will have the ability to build 600,000 electric pickup trucks per year, Barra said.

Already the company is getting great interest in the trucks from consumers, she said, without giving any numbers of reservations.

The announcement is a critical win for Michigan, which lost out on Ford Motor Co.’s $11 billion investment in three battery plants and a new vehicle assembly plant that went to Kentucky and Tennessee.

GM President Mark Reuss said it made sense for GM to locate the battery factory near its large manufacturing footprint in Michigan. The company’s ability to quickly convert existing factories such as Orion to build solely electric vehicles is a competitive advantage over companies that need to costly build brand-new plants, he said.

“We’re going to take advantage of that from an assembly plant standpoint, and then we’re going to put the new cell plants in the proximity to supply that footprint,” Reuss said.

GM says it will build four battery cell factories in North America. The Lansing announcement is its third, but Reuss said more may be needed as the transition to electric vehicles continues. The location of the fourth plant has not been announced.

“We’ve said four for now, but the adoption rate is rapid,” Reuss said. The other battery plants are being built in Lordstown, Ohio, and Spring Hill, Tennessee.

In Michigan, officials realized the critical nature of winning the GM investment after losing out on Ford’s announcement last year.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, said the GM announcement shows what can happen when elected officials from both sides of the aisle work together. “We showed everyone that we can compete with transformational projects,” she said.

The announcements, which include another $510 million investment to maintain production at two other Lansing-area GM plants, will generate more than $35 billion in personal income during the next 20 years, Whitmer said.

“The economic well-being of our state isn’t a partisan matter. High quality jobs don’t have party affiliations,” Republican Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey said.

Without the GM investment, Michigan risked losing a big chunk of its manufacturing base as the nation and world are expected to shift away from the vehicles it now makes that are largely powered by internal combustion engines. The consulting firm LMC Automotive expects U.S. EV sales to grow from just over 400,000 last year to 2.2 million in 2025. Even then, they still will be only about 13% of total U.S. new vehicle sales.

Reuss said that as the transition to electric vehicles starts, some buyers will substitute EVs for internal combustion trucks, but that number is difficult to estimate. GM, he said, doesn’t see the transition moving as fast in heavy duty work trucks. But the company is ready for whatever consumers want to buy, with factories building both versions. “That’s the way we’re approaching it, very agile, very much a foot in both camps as we do this transition,” he said.

Members of the United Auto Workers union are worried that jobs making gas engines, transmissions and other internal combustion vehicle parts eventually could be lost, since electric vehicles have fewer moving parts and are easier to assemble.

GM, which has set a goal of building only electric passenger vehicles by 2035, said that together with Ultium it considered multiple states for the new battery factory. The company has pledged to have 30 electric vehicle models for sale globally by 2025.

___

Krisher reported from Detroit.

2030 is fast approaching. I think that hybrid vehicles will be the first choice in the future for Americans. I think that 2040 to 2050 will be more realistic for small and midsize vehicles in use. By then the charging system will have a chance to catch up. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ronwagn said:

2030 is fast approaching. I think that hybrid vehicles will be the first choice in the future for Americans. I think that 2040 to 2050 will be more realistic for small and midsize vehicles in use. By then the charging system will have a chance to catch up. 

It will also have a chance to reconfigure in light of rapid cost increases to batteries. We are already seeing the beginnings of battery price increases due to supply constraints.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Eric Gagen said:

If any place in the world purposely has any excess power plants lying around 'just in case' it would literally be the first time in history that has ever happened.  No grid ever created or operated has had more than the minimum amount of excess generating capacity required to prevent current and voltage instabilities.  It's too expensive and wasteful to operate otherwise.  

I do not think it is wasteful. I think that not having any redundancy is very dangerous to our way of life which is totally dependent on electricity to meet the most basic of needs. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

25 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Output of coal is already increasing at a substantial rate. You have to keep watching, if you turn your head the Chinese rate of coal output increases again, and you cannot simply assume that this trend will change and go down. There are new mines planned to open.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-oct-coal-output-rises-highest-since-march-2015-2021-11-15/

"The world's biggest producer and consumer of the dirty fossil fuel churned out 357.09 million tonnes of coal last month, up from 334.1 million tonnes in September, data from the National Bureau of Statistics showed on Monday.

Output over the first 10 months of 2021 was 3.3 billion tonnes, up 4% year-on-year.

Since July, China has approved expansions at more than 153 coal mines, which could add 55 million tonnes of coal output in the fourth quarter, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) said last month.

The central government, striving to put an end to power shortages, has also forbidden local governments to shut coal mines without authorisation and urged a restart at closed mines as soon as they have rectified any problems. 

The increase comes as India, backed by China and other coal-dependent developing nations, brokered a last minute amendment at the COP26 climate talks in Glasgow at the weekend to change the final wording of the agreement to "phase down" rather than "phase out" the use of coal. "

In other words, no "phase-out", that idea is DONE, and GONE.

Okay, Eric, here is the reference that you asked for. Now, do not lose it, I don't want to have to go looking for it again.

If you click on the link, you will see the chart and graph showing a consistent gain  in coal production since 2015, a seven year trend....yes, it goes UP.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

We are already seeing the beginnings of battery price increases due to supply constraints.

Prices rise because supply can't easily meet demand.

You say that green energy will fail because of increasing prices yet do not realize the prices only increase when there is rapid adoption and high demand. So any time you post about increasing prices of batteries, solar panels, and turbines due to demand you are presenting evidence that the transition is almost succeeding too fast, not failing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Ecocharger said:

Okay, Eric, here is the reference that you asked for. Now, do not lose it, I don't want to have to go looking for it again.

Yes - that's the same one we used before - and my data also showed that 'highest since 2015' (what the Reuters article discusses) is also still lower than it was in 2012 and 13.  It's also behind a paywall.  The new mines with 55 million tpy capacity are good, but what they don't mention (and never can) is how many older played out mines close or are curtailed over the same period.  That's not a fault of 'bad reporting' or 'trying to hide the decline' it's just a fact, that nobody really knows when the economic limit of a mine with a lot of depletion is.  If borrowing is easy (sort of right now), prices for coal are high (definately), and labor is cheap (it's not at least by Chinese standards right now) that economic limit gets extended.  By contrast production can also end unexpectedly early due to water intrusion, a fire, collapse or other major incident (which would require costly repairs and re construction to recover from) or unexpectedly bad stocks of coal (sometimes it just isn't in the ground where you thought it was)  This is why responsible governments (and amazingly China IS in this group at least in this regard) try to keep detailed statistics of mines opened, mines closed, pay extracted, problems encountered in various mining regions, etc. so that they can try to predict some of these hard to predict things.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Eric Gagen said:

Yes - that's the same one we used before - and my data also showed that 'highest since 2015' (what the Reuters article discusses) is also still lower than it was in 2012 and 13.  It's also behind a paywall.  The new mines with 55 million tpy capacity are good, but what they don't mention (and never can) is how many older played out mines close or are curtailed over the same period.  That's not a fault of 'bad reporting' or 'trying to hide the decline' it's just a fact, that nobody really knows when the economic limit of a mine with a lot of depletion is.  If borrowing is easy (sort of right now), prices for coal are high (definately), and labor is cheap (it's not at least by Chinese standards right now) that economic limit gets extended.  By contrast production can also end unexpectedly early due to water intrusion, a fire, collapse or other major incident (which would require costly repairs and re construction to recover from) or unexpectedly bad stocks of coal (sometimes it just isn't in the ground where you thought it was)  This is why responsible governments (and amazingly China IS in this group at least in this regard) try to keep detailed statistics of mines opened, mines closed, pay extracted, problems encountered in various mining regions, etc. so that they can try to predict some of these hard to predict things.  

If you read the article, it shows that the Chinese government has ordered the reopening of closed mines. We are witnessing a rapid buildup of coal production, both from new mines (that 55 million tonnes) and from reopening old mines. 

Hang on to your hat, this is going to be a wild ride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

I do not think it is wasteful. I think that not having any redundancy is very dangerous to our way of life which is totally dependent on electricity to meet the most basic of needs. 

Personally I don't think it is either,  and I would be happy to pay a 'surcharge' say an extra 10% on my electric bill each month for grid hardening, redunant power plants, fuel stocks, etc.  

Sadlly the average member of the public disagrees, literally violently (as witnessed with protests and riots in Europe over high utility bills) with you and I, and the people who run utility companies will do the absolute minimum to meet legal requirements of this sort, because they are regulated, and don't get to charge extra for improvements beyond the letter of the law.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

Prices rise because supply can't easily meet demand.

You say that green energy will fail because of increasing prices yet do not realize the prices only increase when there is rapid adoption and high demand. So any time you post about increasing prices of batteries, solar panels, and turbines due to demand you are presenting evidence that the transition is almost succeeding too fast, not failing.

 

Environmentalist activists are stopping the supply chain from providing inputs into batteries...this trend will continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

If you read the article, it shows that the Chinese government has ordered the reopening of closed mines. We are witnessing a rapid buildup of coal production, both from new mines (that 55 million tonnes) and from reopening old mines. 

Hang on to your hat, this is going to be a wild ride.

I can't read the article - it's behind a paywall.  I agree though, it will be a wild ride.  Another wildcard on the wild ride is that for skilled industrial labor and capital (of the sort you need to run coal mines effectively) China doesn't have serious excess capacity - wages are going to go up, and production and imports of capital equipment will rise.  I foresee Caterpillar and Komatsu selling a lot of mining gear to China in the next little while.  

 

Edit:  got past the paywall by using a different computer.  You reported the gist of it effectively though.  They are definately pulling out all the stops.  When central planners say pull out the stops, cost be damned, interesting things happen.  Although with prices 'down to 810 yuan' compared to the long run average of ~ 400 yuan most producers will make money if they are already online.  The ones that get screwed will be the ones that borrow money to put marginal mines on,  then don't have any production come on line until after prices fall back down.  

Edited by Eric Gagen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

The weather is not cooperating with the Green Agenda, all that hot air about global warming is turning into frigid air. It's getting cold!

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-Gas/US-Natural-Gas-Prices-Jump-On-High-Demand.html

"Natural gas prices reflected expected high to very high demand for space heating and electricity in the United States in the coming days. According to estimates from NatGasWeather.com for the week January 26 to February 2, national natural gas demand is expected to be strong through the weekend as a series of frigid blasts sweep across the Midwest, Plains, and East with snow showers and frosty lows of -20s to 20s. Lows between teens and the 30s in Texas and the South, along with rain and snow showers, will also lift demand for natural gas. The colder Mountain West will see highs in 10s to 40s with lows of -0s to 30s. Overall, NatGasWeather predicts high to very high national demand through the weekend. Moreover, higher American LNG exports with more cargoes going to energy-starved Europe is also tightening domestic U.S. supply, which has been relatively flat recently."

Edited by Ecocharger
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Eric Gagen said:

Personally I don't think it is either,  and I would be happy to pay a 'surcharge' say an extra 10% on my electric bill each month for grid hardening, redunant power plants, fuel stocks, etc.  

Sadlly the average member of the public disagrees, literally violently (as witnessed with protests and riots in Europe over high utility bills) with you and I, and the people who run utility companies will do the absolute minimum to meet legal requirements of this sort, because they are regulated, and don't get to charge extra for improvements beyond the letter of the law.  

Then I think that the public needs to be educated as do many politicians or the whole world could be thrown into a deathly chaos. The Third Word might be better prepared for survival than the the First or Second. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

7 minutes ago, Eric Gagen said:

I can't read the article - it's behind a paywall.  I agree though, it will be a wild ride.  Another wildcard on the wild ride is that for skilled industrial labor and capital (of the sort you need to run coal mines effectively) China doesn't have serious excess capacity - wages are going to go up, and production and imports of capital equipment will rise.  I foresee Caterpillar and Komatsu selling a lot of mining gear to China in the next little while.  

I gave you the contents above, so how can you not read it? The chart may not show up for you, but take my word, coal production has been consistently rising in China for the past SEVEN YEARS, this is no temporary trend.

Eric, mark this page so that in future when this idea is discussed, we do not lose these contents.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

It will also have a chance to reconfigure in light of rapid cost increases to batteries. We are already seeing the beginnings of battery price increases due to supply constraints.

Yes, and I have already given up on getting a Ford Maverick Hybrid this year. The supply chain is still screwed up and prices will increase. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ronwagn said:

Then I think that the public needs to be educated as do many politicians or the whole world could be thrown into a deathly chaos. The Third Word might be better prepared for survival than the the First or Second. 

For a lot of folks it's not a matter of education - they simply don't have the same values as you or I.  They may be more price sensitive.  For many others it's a matter of principal - they don't want 'big companies' to get any more of their money than necessary.  For the vast majority though, they simply have too many other things to do, and worry about them - they just pick the cheapest option for stuff like electricity which they don't care about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

I gave you the contents above, so how can you not read it? The chart may not show up for you, but take my word, coal production has been consistently rising in China for the past SEVEN YEARS, this is no temporary trend.

I got into the article.  My point is it's rising slowly (and unevenly - it has NOT been a steady rise for 7 years) but still below the high (from 10 years ago) and that's with this massive effort and incredibly high prices.  If they do in fact beat their previous high, then I'll happily concede, but I really don't think they can.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Eric Gagen said:

For a lot of folks it's not a matter of education - they simply don't have the same values as you or I.  They may be more price sensitive.  For many others it's a matter of principal - they don't want 'big companies' to get any more of their money than necessary.  For the vast majority though, they simply have too many other things to do, and worry about them - they just pick the cheapest option for stuff like electricity which they don't care about. 

I think that leadership is needed. That is the only way that people come to accept something that is really good for them. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

The weather is not cooperating with the Green Agenda, all that hot air about global warming is turning into frigid air. It's getting cold!

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-Gas/US-Natural-Gas-Prices-Jump-On-High-Demand.html

"Natural gas prices reflected expected high to very high demand for space heating and electricity in the United States in the coming days. According to estimates from NatGasWeather.com for the week January 26 to February 2, national natural gas demand is expected to be strong through the weekend as a series of frigid blasts sweep across the Midwest, Plains, and East with snow showers and frosty lows of -20s to 20s. Lows between teens and the 30s in Texas and the South, along with rain and snow showers, will also lift demand for natural gas. The colder Mountain West will see highs in 10s to 40s with lows of -0s to 30s. Overall, NatGasWeather predicts high to very high national demand through the weekend. Moreover, higher American LNG exports with more cargoes going to energy-starved Europe is also tightening domestic U.S. supply, which has been relatively flat recently."

natgasweather.com sounds like a great site.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/18/2022 at 3:24 PM, Eyes Wide Open said:

A bit of history, Ecoboost was developed on the Ford/Cosgsworth engine design meaning extremely well balanced and very tight tolerances.

Fast forward to say 94? The Ford coyote v8 was finally ready for release. Both Ecoboost and the v8 were released at the same time. The coyote team was enraged, that little v6 just handed them their lunch.

What they didn't realize Ecoboost tech could be implemented on the v8 design, think 700hp and 800 ft lbs of tourqe in a 5.0.

All made possible by variable cam timing and direct injection....By the way it also put a end to Ford's hybrid/EV tech...Another shit storm.

Please flesh out your last paragraph. I do not understand it. The hybrids are coming as soon as Ford can make them. I had to reconsider waiting for one. The next Maverick will be a 2023. The hybrid and the Ecoboost are both in high demand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ronwagn said:

I do not think it is wasteful. I think that not having any redundancy is very dangerous to our way of life which is totally dependent on electricity to meet the most basic of needs. 

I think it’s called reserve margin. Texas typically runs a 13%-15% reserve margin on their grid. So yea, very expensive. Then with a big storm you need a robust, high quality system where you can shut off electricity to non essential customers and only use electricity for critical customers. That’s partly where Texas failed. Some states run a reserve margin closer to 30% which is very expensive but much safer. I’ll drop the politics for today but this is where the conversation should be. How much storage should we have vrs idle nat gas plants sitting around waiting on a ten year storm. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can Google grid reserve margin by state.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Boat said:

I think it’s called reserve margin. Texas typically runs a 13%-15% reserve margin on their grid. So yea, very expensive. Then with a big storm you need a robust, high quality system where you can shut off electricity to non essential customers and only use electricity for critical customers. That’s partly where Texas failed. Some states run a reserve margin closer to 30% which is very expensive but much safer. I’ll drop the politics for today but this is where the conversation should be. How much storage should we have vrs idle nat gas plants sitting around waiting on a ten year storm. 

Where does battery storage fit into the equation in the future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/investor-clash-gas-nuclear-muddies-eu-green-finance-drive-2022-01-26/ Greenies trying to stop expansion of natural gas and nuclear plants in Europe. 

I told you not to call me a greenie, lol. National security trumps pollution and climate change. That’s where I draw the line. Nuke in GA yet another Republican disaster filled with promises and government money with incomplete results and 10 years late and counting. 
I am not against the idea of nuclear. But the problems of waste and cost need to be solved. Solve that and that’s a great base-load if you have the long term water to spare. 

  • Upvote 1

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.