GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Rob Plant + 2,600]

Biden Administration Pushes A Made-In-America EV Charging Network

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Biden-Administration-Pushes-A-Made-In-America-EV-Charging-Network.html

[notsonice + 1,062]

39 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Biden Administration Pushes A Made-In-America EV Charging Network

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Biden-Administration-Pushes-A-Made-In-America-EV-Charging-Network.html

good luck finding floor space for new manufacturing in the US......Unbeliveable building boom and vacancy rates are still at 3%. Rising interest rates are not slowing down the boom. Lease rates for industrial space are up over 25 percent in the last year. These higher rates are driving a boom for manufacturers to build out their own buildings/shop space and to get out of the leased facilities.  Made in America is happening and nearby Made in Mexico for US export is booming under USMCA. The made in America is being pushed, finally, on a governmental level...IE to qualify for any Federal credit related to EVs...made in America is required.

 

I hope the boom lasts for a long time and reverses the make it in China mentallity that was the norm for the past 20 years. Nothing wrong with a little protectionism to make sure a country has the capibilities to produce what it needs. IE Chip manufacturing...let the Boom in US chips manufacturing roll on

 

Edited February 16, 2023 by notsonice

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

7 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Biden Administration Pushes A Made-In-America EV Charging Network

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Biden-Administration-Pushes-A-Made-In-America-EV-Charging-Network.html

Another Demo waste of good money.

[turbguy + 1,391]

10 hours ago, specinho said:

If we imagine atmosphere is made up of air molecules separated in a far distance, particles of pollutants in different levels of severity, and cloud, it might be safe to assume,  major common obstructor would be the cloud, particularly thick ones?

Recalling childhood favourite shape of sun, it has intermittent long and short lines around the circle. Some photos from nature show the visibility of ray in these forms under different conditions. Morning, or days with clouds, longer-clearer range of ray; clear sky, thin cloud, shorter-less visible ray. This phenomenon might mean radiation comes in at all times, unobstructed. Visible or invisible by the eyes.

Magnetic field in an old experiment might have attracted and accelerated the passage of electrons. Although deflected in path onto the detector, it might have not repelled it. Therefore, magnetic field on earth might be an attracting force, and reason why they are coming in in such a speed?

Another note is how light is converted into electricity in the eyes by proteins. Protein is known to exist in the form of zwitterion, with two charged ends, under normal pH. Only charged particles would be able to activate it and generate electricity. Therefore, negatively charged ray e.g. beta, gamma, might be possible stimulants.

If these assumptions can be tested, there could be a breakthrough in panel design and addressing problem of low efficiency?

 

Gamma rays do not have a charge.  They are very high energy photons,

Gamma rays (and cosmic "rays") are penetrating enough to stimulate flashes in the visual field of astronauts when above the atmosphere.

Cosmic "rays" are not photons and can be composed of many different particles/combinations of particles  A few, rare, cosmic "rays" have been observed to pack a REAL punch!   Many millions of times greater than the energy of protons accelerated by the Large Hadron Collider.  Almost all cosmic "rays" cause showers of secondary particles when they strike the atmosphere, shattering atmospheric molecules. These secondary showers are the reason high altitude passenger air travel carries an exposure to damaging radiation.

That said, the energy flux from the particles you suggest is very low when compared to the visible light photon flux we receive below the atmosphere.  There is just insufficient flux to bother attempting to recover energy from them.

Now, a large eruption of mass from the sun (a solar storm) that happens to cross the earth can have issues to deal with, particularly with the electrical grid.  Large potential differences (very high voltages) can arise within that infrastructure, damaging insulation systems and/or tripping protective relaying.

Edited February 16, 2023 by turbguy

[TailingsPond + 460]

15 hours ago, specinho said:

If these assumptions can be tested, there could be a breakthrough in panel design and addressing problem of low efficiency?

 

There are fundamental limits at the quantum level.  Only a fairly narrow range of wavelengths are useful in practice.  Too low in energy they can't overcome the work function.  High energy photons can pass right through your panel (like a x-ray) or destroy the panel from the ionizing radiation produced (and they can give you cancer, hence why we wear sunscreen).

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

Edited February 17, 2023 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

Despite the economic slowdown expected soon, oil demand will remain robust.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Chinas-Crude-Oil-Imports-Expected-To-Hit-A-Record-High-In-2023.html

"Chinese crude oil imports could increase to an average as high as 11.8 million barrels per day.

Reuters: Chinese refineries are raising utilization rates due to lower-cost crude and a surge in demand after the reopening.

China will also see this year the start-up of two new refineries with a combined capacity to process 520,000 bpd of crude."

Edited February 17, 2023 by Ecocharger

[notsonice + 1,062]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Despite the economic slowdown expected soon, oil demand will remain robust.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Chinas-Crude-Oil-Imports-Expected-To-Hit-A-Record-High-In-2023.html

"Chinese crude oil imports could increase to an average as high as 11.8 million barrels per day.

Reuters: Chinese refineries are raising utilization rates due to lower-cost crude and a surge in demand after the reopening.

China will also see this year the start-up of two new refineries with a combined capacity to process 520,000 bpd of crude."

Despite the economic slowdown expected soon, oil demand will remain robust.????

that statement does not hold well when you go back to basic supply and demand correlations...economic slowdown = oil demand going down......

with Brent at $82 (and going nowhere) and crude inventories building...... that does not show any robust demand...

WTI at $75 and only holding at that level due to Sleepy Joes $72 WTI buy for the SPR

and you got a degree in economics????? ha ha ha

[specinho + 439]

On 2/17/2023 at 3:10 AM, turbguy said:

Gamma rays do not have a charge.  They are very high energy photons,

Gamma rays (and cosmic "rays") are penetrating enough to stimulate flashes in the visual field of astronauts when above the atmosphere.

Cosmic "rays" are not photons and can be composed of many different particles/combinations of particles  A few, rare, cosmic "rays" have been observed to pack a REAL punch!   Many millions of times greater than the energy of protons accelerated by the Large Hadron Collider.  Almost all cosmic "rays" cause showers of secondary particles when they strike the atmosphere, shattering atmospheric molecules. These secondary showers are the reason high altitude passenger air travel carries an exposure to damaging radiation.

That said, the energy flux from the particles you suggest is very low when compared to the visible light photon flux we receive below the atmosphere.  There is just insufficient flux to bother attempting to recover energy from them.

Now, a large eruption of mass from the sun (a solar storm) that happens to cross the earth can have issues to deal with, particularly with the electrical grid.  Large potential differences (very high voltages) can arise within that infrastructure, damaging insulation systems and/or tripping protective relaying.

Recalling an experiment where 

1. By having electricity through a copper wire, a circular magnetic field is generated.

2. By interrupting magnetic field of a magnet with copper wires, electricity is generated.

These two observation might have indicated that moving electrons possibly become magnet. And magnet produces moving electrons?

Therefore, if we regard gamma ray and photons as electromagnetic waves, is it safe to assume, they can be interfered to produce electricity? Or, collected as electrons?

The fundamental difference  between this concept and common concept of solar panel is:

Common concept calculates energy provided by photons hitting out electrons on silicone plate and produce electricity. (That's probably how UV is regarded as a novel source of energy?)...

The assumed concept regards photons and cosmic rays as readily available electrons or magnet. Upon channelled onto the right detector, electricity will be produced. 

By energy flux, could we safely assume it means converting to heat? I have a feeling those two concepts might not be suitable to be compared using the same flux method. I might be wrong but direct collection or interference might not involve flux of heat...

If solar storm brings in voltage surge, does it mean more electrons are coming in onto the earth and be conducted on grid somehow?

Edited February 18, 2023 by specinho

[specinho + 439]

On 2/17/2023 at 8:15 AM, TailingsPond said:

There are fundamental limits at the quantum level.  Only a fairly narrow range of wavelengths are useful in practice.  Too low in energy they can't overcome the work function.  High energy photons can pass right through your panel (like a x-ray) or destroy the panel from the ionizing radiation produced (and they can give you cancer, hence why we wear sunscreen).

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

Low efficiency might be a common result of less consistency in quantum energy expected and received due to variation in intensity of sun from hour to hour, day to day, month to month, season to season, year to year?

[specinho + 439]

14 hours ago, notsonice said:

Despite the economic slowdown expected soon, oil demand will remain robust.????

that statement does not hold well when you go back to basic supply and demand correlations...economic slowdown = oil demand going down......

with Brent at $82 (and going nowhere) and crude inventories building...... that does not show any robust demand...

WTI at $75 and only holding at that level due to Sleepy Joes $72 WTI buy for the SPR

and you got a degree in economics????? ha ha ha

Your interpretation might not be at the point. 

According to theory, economic slowdown, will cause demand of oil to go down.

In real life, economy might be made up of many sectors e.g. manufacturing or production, spending of consumers etc.

If slowing of economy is brought upon by lower total  production, lower consumer spending but consider these:

1. Consumers could be saving on groceries, luxuries but not essential like oil and gas for private and public vehicles, machines, cooking etc for day to day usages. 

2. Generators for electricity will remain in demand for fuel, particularly when the prices drop.

Theories in many books of economy can only be applied partially, circumstantially. There will always be discrepancies, noticeable or unnoticeable, when applied in real life. 

[notsonice + 1,062]

54 minutes ago, specinho said:

Your interpretation might not be at the point. 

According to theory, economic slowdown, will cause demand of oil to go down.

In real life, economy might be made up of many sectors e.g. manufacturing or production, spending of consumers etc.

If slowing of economy is brought upon by lower total  production, lower consumer spending but consider these:

1. Consumers could be saving on groceries, luxuries but not essential like oil and gas for private and public vehicles, machines, cooking etc for day to day usages. 

2. Generators for electricity will remain in demand for fuel, particularly when the prices drop.

Theories in many books of economy can only be applied partially, circumstantially. There will always be discrepancies, noticeable or unnoticeable, when applied in real life. 

the point is oil demand sucks right now......price reflects lack of robust demand right as production is stepping up

EV's are slowly making a dent in oil demand

more fuel effecient vehicles are slowly making a dent in oil demand

China is in a real bad real estate recession making a dent in oil demand

And the price shock last you for super high gasoline prices...caused drivers around the world to reduce consumption by reducing unnecassary driving that still is the rule today......

 

Oil demand is not going to be robust for at least another 4 to 6 months.....

Brent at 80 plus change is the rule ......WTI 75$ 

for the next 30 years EVs will keep replacing ICE vehicles to the point that oil demand is cratered

Peak Oil already happened

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

23 hours ago, notsonice said:

Despite the economic slowdown expected soon, oil demand will remain robust.????

that statement does not hold well when you go back to basic supply and demand correlations...economic slowdown = oil demand going down......

with Brent at $82 (and going nowhere) and crude inventories building...... that does not show any robust demand...

WTI at $75 and only holding at that level due to Sleepy Joes $72 WTI buy for the SPR

and you got a degree in economics????? ha ha ha

Even during a slowdown, demand for crude oil and gasoline should remain strong. During the Great Depression (before your time?) demand for automobiles and gasoline increased.

Not every sector gets hurt during a recession.

Don't hold your breath on peak oil, it won't happen in our lifetime.

Edited February 18, 2023 by Ecocharger

[turbguy + 1,391]

3 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

During the Great Depression (before your time?) demand for automobiles and gasoline increased.

Really?

 

[turbguy + 1,391]

13 hours ago, specinho said:

Low efficiency might be a common result of less consistency in quantum energy expected and received due to variation in intensity of sun from hour to hour, day to day, month to month, season to season, year to year?

Panel efficiency is measured and reported under standard conditions that does not include variations.  That is done to provide valid comparisons between panel designs and construction.

A simple discussion:

https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/most-efficient-solar-panels

Edited February 18, 2023 by turbguy

[specinho + 439]

22 hours ago, notsonice said:

the point is oil demand sucks right now......price reflects lack of robust demand right as production is stepping up

EV's are slowly making a dent in oil demand

more fuel effecient vehicles are slowly making a dent in oil demand

China is in a real bad real estate recession making a dent in oil demand

And the price shock last you for super high gasoline prices...caused drivers around the world to reduce consumption by reducing unnecassary driving that still is the rule today......

 

Oil demand is not going to be robust for at least another 4 to 6 months.....

Brent at 80 plus change is the rule ......WTI 75$ 

for the next 30 years EVs will keep replacing ICE vehicles to the point that oil demand is cratered

Peak Oil already happened

You might need a story.....

Car industry of a small country started off excellently. The initial function of the factory built was merely assembling parts imported from partnering country. Excellent quality, sustainable with lasting usages, privileged but competitive price. 20 years later, when top management was replaced, cars produced then on can be dented with a finger, and can not be driven beyond 5 years without repair (this is a time frame given with regular maintenance).

Natural resources in need to produce cars are limited.

Soft reminder, this is a small country. Regression happens in 20 years.

When you are forecasting about EV, the way they forecasted the demand for cars in that small country, don't you think history will repeat? The larger the volume you are eyeing, the faster the pace you intend it to be, the sooner you will see regression........

Always good to have different things in the market. Comparison often creates the right momentum for right changes and action, at the right time.

Progressive change at steady state usually is more impactful than instant change in hasty and unsteady state. New companies and businessmen might have much to learn from old companies and pioneer businessmen. Old generation creates good quality of things that last. Profits come naturally when all they wish might be to share the beneficial inventions with others. They are usually the first users. Waste recyclable produced is minimal over half a century.

Modern generation eyeing profit first. The rest is cliche..... Many never know or use their products before they sell them in scale.

There is a need to restore old business concept, ethic and attitude for a more sustainable time ahead.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[specinho + 439]

11 hours ago, turbguy said:

Panel efficiency is measured and reported under standard conditions that does not include variations.  That is done to provide valid comparisons between panel designs and construction.

A simple discussion:

https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/most-efficient-solar-panels

There was a post and discussion intended to highlight how efficiency of a solar panel has been increased by 5-10% or such (from less than 10%), including the calculation made. Not sure if I recall correctly where problems of this method raised the alarm:

1. The first assumption that could create problem might be amount of energy receivable from the sun. The assumed amount is a fixed term of Z x 10 the power of (more than 20)..... How they got this constant from calculation is highly dubious.

2. Conversion.

The second assumption that energy in photons could generate a certain amount of electrons from silicone at  constant rate might also be problematic.

This is where efficiency is calculated. We usually have a very different output/ input ratio compared to expected.

They might need to revise these if they were to continue using the assumptions..... Or the effort would very likely be proven in vain over a short time.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 19, 2023 by specinho

[turbguy + 1,391]

8 hours ago, specinho said:

There was a post and discussion intended to highlight how efficiency of a solar panel has been increased by 5-10% or such (from less than 10%), including the calculation made. Not sure if I recall correctly where problems of this method raised the alarm:

1. The first assumption that could create problem might be amount of energy receivable from the sun. The assumed amount is a fixed term of Z x 10 the power of (more than 20)..... How they got this constant from calculation is highly dubious.

2. Conversion.

The second assumption that energy in photons could generate a certain amount of electrons from silicone at  constant rate might also be problematic.

This is where efficiency is calculated. We usually have a very different output/ input ratio compared to expected.

They might need to revise these if they were to continue using the assumptions..... Or the effort would very likely be proven in vain over a short time.

The power flux from the sun, as measured above the atmosphere, is on the order of 1.7 KW/m².  

You do the math for how much power flux strikes the Earth's cross-section.

(Hint: far in excess of 200 petawatts).

Edited February 19, 2023 by turbguy

[turbguy + 1,391]

7 hours ago, specinho said:

There is a need to restore old business concept, ethic and attitude for a more sustainable time ahead.

Did I missing some history? When was THAT?

That type of "business concept, ethic, and attitude" might arise from Native Americans.

 

Edited February 19, 2023 by turbguy

[Ron Wagner + 642]

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/electric-shock-study-found-evs-150000536.html 

Electric shock: A new study found that EVs cost more to fuel than gas-powered cars at the end of 2022 — here are 3 simple ways to save no matter what you drive

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

On 2/18/2023 at 5:00 PM, turbguy said:

Really?

 

I guess you forgot your reading glasses again...the depths of the Depression were from 1931 to 1936, where you see the auto production numbers zooming upwards in defiance of the general manufacturing trends. Autos and radios were still increasing in sales throughout this massive downturn. There was another downturn in 1937/8 but that was overcome quickly the following year. 

Point sustained. Gasoline demand remained growing throughout the worst economic downturn in history.

Edited February 20, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Ron Wagner + 642]

http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm

 

Distance to the Horizon Calculator

Edited February 20, 2023 by Ron Wagner

[notsonice + 1,062]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

I guess you forgot your reading glasses again...the depths of the Depression were from 1931 to 1936, where you see the auto production numbers zooming upwards in defiance of the general manufacturing trends. Autos and radios were still increasing in sales throughout this massive downturn. There was another downturn in 1937/8 but that was overcome quickly the following year. 

Point sustained. Gasoline demand remained growing throughout the worst economic downturn in history.

 

um did you miss the facts again???

1930 to 1935  looks like a disaster compared to the 1920's...1932 especially ....... production numbers zooming??????

 

 

 

here is the US chart

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

10 hours ago, notsonice said:

 

um did you miss the facts again???

1930 to 1935  looks like a disaster compared to the 1920's...1932 especially ....... production numbers zooming??????

 

 

 

here is the US chart

Your chart ignores the jump from 1931 to 1936....you having more trouble with eyesight?

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

Oil demand remains robust,

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Global-Oil-Demand-Hit-Record-High-In-December.html

"In December, global crude oil demand jumped to 1.3 million barrels per day, the highest level on record.

While global demand soared in December, production fell to a five-month low due to lower supply from the U.S. and UK.

The growth in demand in December was mainly driven by higher consumption in Japan, Indonesia, and South Korea."

Edited February 22, 2023 by Ecocharger

[specinho + 439]

On 2/20/2023 at 1:14 AM, turbguy said:

The power flux from the sun, as measured above the atmosphere, is on the order of 1.7 KW/m².  

You do the math for how much power flux strikes the Earth's cross-section.

(Hint: far in excess of 200 petawatts).

Pardon me, i do not know how to count with formulas in physics. 'o' '-'  Started late, barely passed. >.<

But when you calculate flux of energy from the sun over a surface, something would probably be not at the point.

Wondering these:

a) E = hc/x ( x is lamda, wavelength of targeted light).

Why is this formula not used, for a direct energy calculation with known wavelength or average of them, and  proven constants?

b) energy required to remove electron from the outer shell of silicone. How much energy, for how much electron, for how long? How do they be recharged?

As an outsider, I do not know the working details on how a panel works. From collecting heat to convert it to electricity, if surface area is not a main factor involved,  could it be more environmentally friendly?