GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

29 minutes ago, notsonice said:

the 2022 new vehicle sales of ev's  is  currently  estimated to be  1.2 million vehicles 

Do you want me to do the math for you on what percentage of the new vehicle market this is?????

I think you mean 12 million.

Last year was 6.6 million.

Sales of electric cars hit 6.6 million in 2021, more than tripling their market share from two years earlier

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/electric-cars-fend-off-supply-challenges-to-more-than-double-global-sales

Edited March 10, 2022 by Jay McKinsey

[notsonice + 1,068]

1 minute ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I think you mean 12 million.

Last year was 6.6 million.

Sales of electric cars hit 6.6 million in 2021, more than tripling their market share from two years earlier

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/electric-cars-fend-off-supply-challenges-to-more-than-double-global-sales

1.2 million in the US....I fixed my comments while you were writing 

Edited March 10, 2022 by notsonice

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Less than 1% of the vehicles market...no real change here, or going forward.

Who wants to drive this golf buggy?

Well 400K people bought this EV last year:

 

[Ron Wagner + 643]

3 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Because demand is greater than supply which drives up the cost. Why make 2 low margin EV when you can make one high margin EV? Teslas are expensive and there is no end in sight of increasing demand. 

Americans like big powerful vehicles, little econo boxes don't sell well here. The first low cost EVs in the West are in Europe:

The Dacia Spring Electric is probably the most environmentally-friendly and pocket-friendly electric car on the market in Europe right now.

It's an absolute entry-level, small, city car for up to four passengers, which appears to be a perfect solution for the basic transport needs, especially in big city centers, where space is constrained.

According to Fully Charged's review, Dacia (part of the Renault Group), offers the Spring Electric in France at €17,890 ($20,200), but with incentives, it can be as low as €12,500 or so ($14,100). https://insideevs.com/features/549565/europe-cheapest-ev-dacia-spring/

A very nice looking vehicle. I would have to check out the rear seating to see if there is enough room for three little people or children. It is underpowered and doesn't have enough range. My Mitsubishi Mirage beats it by far for $14,000 and no rebates. Gasoline is very high though and if it meets the needs locally it is a good deal. Europeans don't drive nearly as far as we do. They are used to much smaller cars historically and their prices are higher than ours for fuel. 

[Ron Wagner + 643]

4 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Well 400K people bought this EV last year:

 

So give us the link please. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

2 minutes ago, Ron Wagner said:

So give us the link please. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuling_Hongguang_Mini_EV

[notsonice + 1,068]

1 minute ago, Ron Wagner said:

A very nice looking vehicle. I would have to check out the rear seating to see if there is enough room for three little people or children. It is underpowered and doesn't have enough range. My Mitsubishi Mirage beats it by far for $14,000 and no rebates. Gasoline is very high though and if it meets the needs locally it is a good deal. Europeans don't drive nearly as far as we do. They are used to much smaller cars historically and their prices are higher than ours for fuel. 

Ron kudos on buying a fuel efficient vehicle.... I work on making as few as trips as possible as I believe it is a sin to waste resources...Including gas, coal, oil or anything that we mine or take from the earth......

Truly a car that gets 40 mpg is a winner 

[Ron Wagner + 643]

How hard is it to get import licensing and safety approval to the USA. Just sheer curiosity. A lot of people could use such cars. They like the uniqueness and the attention plus savings. 

[Ron Wagner + 643]

4 minutes ago, notsonice said:

Ron kudos on buying a fuel efficient vehicle.... I work on making as few as trips as possible as I believe it is a sin to waste resources...Including gas, coal, oil or anything that we mine or take from the earth......

Truly a car that gets 40 mpg is a winner 

We still have a 12 passenger van that we should sell to someone that would really use it. 15 mpg. but very safe. Large Leather seats and a nice V8. Also a minivan.

[Ron Wagner + 643]

44 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I think you mean 12 million.

Last year was 6.6 million.

Sales of electric cars hit 6.6 million in 2021, more than tripling their market share from two years earlier

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/electric-cars-fend-off-supply-challenges-to-more-than-double-global-sales

Doubling is really easy when you first start out. 

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

17 minutes ago, Ron Wagner said:

Doubling is really easy when you first start out. 

 

If it doubles this year EVs will be at 17% global new market share. I'd say that is a ways past starting out. 

Edited March 10, 2022 by Jay McKinsey

[Ron Wagner + 643]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

If it doubles this year EVs will be at 17% global new market share. I'd say that is a ways past starting out. 

Especially because of the Ukraine conflict and boycott of Russia. Russia's oil and gas may have mainly China and maybe India as its main customers. Russia will now be in trouble because of its greed. 

This will give EVs a big boost. It will take time to boost production to serve Europe. 

[kshithij Sharma + 78]

23 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

What would you argue with? Reality? Those investments are being made. Returns on solar compared to natural gas are going up.

Seems it is my turn to post this:

Report Release: Headwinds for US Gas Power

Six Trends Eroding the Business Case for New Gas Power Plants

December 16, 2021

By  Lauren Shwisberg,  Mark Dyson

This past year was tough for natural gas in the US electricity sector. Headline-grabbing events like Winter Storm Uri and the blackouts in Texas in February—caused in large part by the failure of gas delivery and power infrastructure in extreme weather conditions—illustrated how fuel insecurity and high prices can cost consumers billions of dollars.

Amid the ongoing volatility in natural gas prices, and the continued trend of falling prices for renewable energy and storage technologies, numerous gas power projects have been canceled before commencing construction. A few high-profile cases, like the cancellation of a long-proposed gas-fired plant in Minnesota in June, illustrate a broader shift: utilities and investors increasingly prioritize clean energy as a lower-cost, lower-risk option than continued investment in new gas plants.

And yet, there remains a long tail of gas plants still proposed for construction in the United States, even as their economic prospects dim. In fact, utilities and other investors plan to invest more than $50 billion in new gas power plants over the next decade. But a new RMI study released today details how at least 80 percent of these projects could be cost-effectively avoided by prioritizing investments in clean energy instead. And a set of economic and policy trends, ranging from volatile gas prices to policy priorities around public health and job creation, threaten the viability of nearly all new gas projects.

New Gas Plants Are Losing Steam

The trends have been shifting against new gas plants in the United States for several years. RMI analysis starting in 2018 documented how “clean energy portfolios”—combinations of wind, solar, energy efficiency, demand response, and battery energy storage that can provide the same reliability services as a gas-fired power plant—are increasingly economical compared with new gas plants. And since 2018, the capacity of new gas plants entering service has fallen every year, on track in 2021 to hit the lowest level since 2010.

Even more telling, over 50 percent of gas plants proposed to come online in the past two years have been canceled prior to construction as clean energy resources have become more and more competitive (Exhibit 1). This is true for restructured markets as well as for vertically integrated utilities.

Exhibit 1: Annual share of proposed gas capacity terminated before construction compared with CEP competitiveness

Currently, new gas plants make up less than 10 percent of new capacity in interconnection queues, while renewables and storage dominate planned construction. This is reflective of shifting economics—where utilities have run modern, all-source competitive procurement processes to select the least-cost, least-risk resources to maintain grid reliability, they have overwhelmingly chosen clean energy portfolios.

Stiffening Headwinds for New Gas Power Plants

In addition to raw economics leading to gas project cancellations, a growing set of economic and policy trends threaten the viability of any new gas-fired power project proposed for construction in the United States. RMI’s study quantifies six risk factors and their impacts on the viability of new gas power plants (Exhibit 2):

• Renewable energy prices: If renewables cost declines continue at their recent pace, 91 percent of new gas plants will be uneconomic relative to CEPs at their proposed construction date.
• Gas price volatility: If gas price trajectories return to 2021 highs, 88 percent of new gas plants will be uneconomic relative to CEPs.
• Costs of fuel security: If gas plants are required to bear the cost of securing reliable fuel supply to guard against the kind of outages on display in February 2021 in Texas, 95 percent of proposed gas plants would be uneconomic.
• Focus on job creation: If policymakers continue to prioritize job creation, 100 percent of proposed gas plants are threatened, as clean energy portfolios lead to higher net job creation than new gas plants.
• Focus on human health: If policymakers account for the cost of human health impacts of pollution from new gas-fired power plants, 94 percent of new gas plants would be uneconomic.
• Reducing community impacts: If policymakers prioritize minimizing impacts to marginalized communities due to new gas plant construction and operations, 88 percent of proposed gas plants are threatened.

https://rmi.org/report-release-headwinds-for-us-gas-power/

 

There is a difference between politically motivated investment at a lower ROI or even loss and true business based on sustainable and strong ROI figures. The renewable energy except hydro is not really a good business option without government support like subsidy, tax credits etc. Regardless of what the cost of gas or coal is, they provide stable and reliable power supply which solar and wind can never match. Solar and wind can be used on a part time basis to lower fossil fuel consumption in order to save/preserve the fossil fuel reserves from depleting but that comes under political motive of saving for the future rather than as a good business move.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

9 minutes ago, kshithij Sharma said:

There is a difference between politically motivated investment at a lower ROI or even loss and true business based on sustainable and strong ROI figures. The renewable energy except hydro is not really a good business option without government support like subsidy, tax credits etc. Regardless of what the cost of gas or coal is, they provide stable and reliable power supply which solar and wind can never match. Solar and wind can be used on a part time basis to lower fossil fuel consumption in order to save/preserve the fossil fuel reserves from depleting but that comes under political motive of saving for the future rather than as a good business move.

So there are these things called batteries. Soon the US will be installing more battery capacity than natural gas.

 

[Boat + 1,315]

24 minutes ago, kshithij Sharma said:

There is a difference between politically motivated investment at a lower ROI or even loss and true business based on sustainable and strong ROI figures. The renewable energy except hydro is not really a good business option without government support like subsidy, tax credits etc. Regardless of what the cost of gas or coal is, they provide stable and reliable power supply which solar and wind can never match. Solar and wind can be used on a part time basis to lower fossil fuel consumption in order to save/preserve the fossil fuel reserves from depleting but that comes under political motive of saving for the future rather than as a good business move.

I may agree with you in areas where storms can take out renewables for several days. A long enough period of time to outlast installed battery storage. Far enough south where there is there is no ice you can’t stop batteries and solar. To the extent Mother Nature can stop wind depends on the area. Humans are dumb so mistakes will be made not adding enough and adding to much wind. Most idiots will argue ideology instead of using commonsense. Commonsense says watch tech that is changing rapidly. These dozens of battery plants going up around the world will produce storage and somebody will install them, government or not. Will they overbuild or under build these battery factories? Who cares. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

2 minutes ago, Boat said:

I may agree with you in areas where storms can take out renewables for several days. A long enough period of time to outlast installed battery storage. Far enough south where there is there is no ice you can’t stop batteries and solar. To the extent Mother Nature can stop wind depends on the area. Humans are dumb so mistakes will be made not adding enough and adding to much wind. Most idiots will argue ideology instead of using commonsense. Commonsense says watch tech that is changing rapidly. These dozens of battery plants going up around the world will produce storage and somebody will install them, government or not. Will they overbuild or under build these battery factories? Who cares. 

Batteries will be supplemented with green hydrogen and other technologies for longer term storage.

[Boat + 1,315]

6 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Batteries will be supplemented with green hydrogen and other technologies for longer term storage.

Sounds good. Got numbers on the tech and the cost? I think batteries may become the cheapest solution in the short to median term. Battery storage for more than a day in a large metropolitan area around Dallas will get expensive. Now maybe in a few years hundreds of thousands of cars may cut that price. Battery tech will cut that price. My guess is that will take several years leaving the grid vulnerable. Nat gas has proved to be sketchy. I predict no expensive fix. Call it the Texas gamble. It’s only a few hundred billion and a few dozen lives if another storm hits. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

8 minutes ago, Boat said:

Sounds good. Got numbers on the tech and the cost? I think batteries may become the cheapest solution in the short to median term. Battery storage for more than a day in a large metropolitan area around Dallas will get expensive. Now maybe in a few years hundreds of thousands of cars may cut that price. Battery tech will cut that price. My guess is that will take several years leaving the grid vulnerable. Nat gas has proved to be sketchy. I predict no expensive fix. Call it the Texas gamble. It’s only a few hundred billion and a few dozen lives if another storm hits. 

Batteries are for daily operations and will cover 90% of demand. 

Green hydrogen won't become a player until 10 years from now. Like all renewables, costs reduce over time through research and scaling.

The first Energy Earthshot, launched June 7, 2021—Hydrogen Shot—seeks to reduce the cost of clean hydrogen by 80% to $1 per 1 kilogram in 1 decade ("1 1 1"). https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-shot#:~:text=The first Energy Earthshot%2C launched,"1 1 1").

Edited March 10, 2022 by Jay McKinsey

[Boat + 1,315]

No idea if this will happen but if you overbuilt solar and battery storage, the summers could basically pay for winter maintenance. Yea, that’s it. Call it ramp up the ac and everybody work to stockpile money. Let’s cut the refineries, aluminum, steel, concrete plants and other high energy demand during the winter. Call it a managed grid on a much bigger scale. Ask Musk to build it. Lol

[Boat + 1,315]

1 minute ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Batteries are for daily operations and will cover 90% of demand. 

Green hydrogen won't become a player until 10 years from now. Like all renewables, costs reduce over time through research and scaling.

The first Energy Earthshot, launched June 7, 2021—Hydrogen Shot—seeks to reduce the cost of clean hydrogen by 80% to $1 per 1 kilogram in 1 decade ("1 1 1"). https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-shot#:~:text=The first Energy Earthshot%2C launched,"1 1 1").

Darn Jay, you just killed Texans. I don’t think Texas will quit adding renewables. We defiantly won’t have enough batteries for a big storm. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

3 minutes ago, Boat said:

Darn Jay, you just killed Texans. I don’t think Texas will quit adding renewables. We defiantly won’t have enough batteries for a big storm. 

Well Texas will be a leader in green hydrogen with all those renewables. 

The world’s largest green hydrogen plant will be built in Texas

https://interestingengineering.com/largest-green-hydrogen-plant

[Boat + 1,315]

I haven’t followed Green Hydrogen. When the tech can kick out some metrics that give it a path to being competitive. I’ll jump on it. Kinda like the modular safe nuclear plants. We can hope. 

[Boat + 1,315]

One reason I like the idea of renewables is their approx 20-30 year life span. The replacement generation will be so advanced. I think batteries will be the same way and recycling will be a growing business. With really cheap electricity, landfills become resources. As AI replaces humans, humans can mine the trash. We’re probably smart enough to recycle trash if the power is cheap. 

[QuarterCenturyVet + 312]

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

So there are these things called batteries. Soon the US will be installing more battery capacity than natural gas.

 

It's great they're adding 61% of capacity as solar and wind, even though both generate about 30% of their installed capacity. To get a real 61% you'd have to install 3× the installed capacity. With or without batteries is irrelevant. You still need continuous generation for any of this to be effective. 

Nuclear, hydroelectric and geothermal, with end user solar and wind with batteries for backup. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 hour ago, QuarterCenturyVet said:

It's great they're adding 61% of capacity as solar and wind, even though both generate about 30% of their installed capacity. To get a real 61% you'd have to install 3× the installed capacity. With or without batteries is irrelevant. You still need continuous generation for any of this to be effective. 

Nuclear, hydroelectric and geothermal, with end user solar and wind with batteries for backup. 

I guess you don't understand how batteries work. They provide continuous generation until they run out of fuel, just like every other power plant. Interestingly the Sun shines every day and the wind blows most days. If there is a shortfall we will use green hydrogen as the backup.

Capacity factor of Combined Cycle Gas Turbine: 54%

Capacity factor of Gas Turbine peaker plant: 12%

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=epmt_6_07_a

Nuclear, hydroelectric and geothermal are fine to keep in the mix but they aren't growing. Geothermal is a rounding error, hydroelectric is half of solar + wind and nuclear will be overtaken in a couple years. Here are all of them, look at that wind and solar growth curve!

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=2,0,1&fuel=vtvv&geo=g&sec=g&linechart=ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.TSN-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.A~&columnchart=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.A&map=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.A&freq=A&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&pin=&rse=0&maptype=0

 

Edited March 10, 2022 by Jay McKinsey