GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[specinho + 470]

1 hour ago, notsonice said:

 

Oil demand will continue to increase going forward??? ha ha ha WTF are you suffering from dementia????

Old man did you miss the post several  weeks ago  on Oilprice that 2025 will the peak of all fossil fuels...and its is downhill forever (meaning that NAT gas peaks in 2025 and coal and oil already have peaked)

or are you really that senile that you are unable to recall all the facts they posted in the article.......

Futures market today says it all .....Backwardation all the way through till 2025

 

 

the FED is in charge.....not big oil.......The FED is not going to be happy until they crush Oil....

$65 Brent on the horizon???? end of the second quarter....and yet no buyers snapping up future contracts going forward to support your BS on increasing demand

the future oil demand was based on $ 5 nat gas....and the assumption nat gas to oil conversions would take place to generate electricity.....IEA blew it and anyone that tries to make a living on their forecast will be eating dirt

 

Gas to Oil conversion not happening at $2.50 nat gas...it is the other way around

Jan and Feb were busts in oil demand and the price to today reflects lack of demand/oversupply

Enjoy the reality that your assumptions are based on a market that no longer exists.....

IEA forecasts are based on $5 nat gas........ha ha ha 

Anyone beleiving nat gas is going back to $5 any time soon ???? ha ha ha

And all at the same time as renewables keeps expanding meeting all the new demand for electricity 

With a world in slowdown mode

Oil will never peak over 2019

Enjoy the transition to renewables, I am 

You must be in urgent need of cash selling oil and gas product and/or solar panel......? 

You, your relatives, friends of all network infiltrated, accomplices, appear to have been insisting on gaining at the expense of others, particularly the powerless.........?

Would like to suggest a meaningful task to you and relevant those..... 

Historically, wars created demand for male babies to be born. And this hamster probably shows you how things were done back then to have a large expendable contingent of  soldiers for war..... And farms.

With advancement of  technologies, farms, wars, etc that used to need a lot of family related man power might have many different types of machine, weapon to do the job. E.g. acres of land can be taken care off by one machine in a few days vs farmers' hands of small area in months of work; nuclear clearance of population by 70% in Hiroshima during world war II vs hand to hand combat and one to tens killing during ancient time.

Hamster breeding technique, might no longer be so useful but creating problems like increasing pressure on food demand, need on massive land clearance for housing and development, shortages of those, environmental and social issues etc. 

Your task is to change this to reverse climate change. How soon do you think you can get this done?  😏

[notsonice + 1,255]

2 hours ago, specinho said:

You must be in urgent need of cash selling oil and gas product and/or solar panel......? 

You, your relatives, friends of all network infiltrated, accomplices, appear to have been insisting on gaining at the expense of others, particularly the powerless.........?

Would like to suggest a meaningful task to you and relevant those..... 

Historically, wars created demand for male babies to be born. And this hamster probably shows you how things were done back then to have a large expendable contingent of  soldiers for war..... And farms.

With advancement of  technologies, farms, wars, etc that used to need a lot of family related man power might have many different types of machine, weapon to do the job. E.g. acres of land can be taken care off by one machine in a few days vs farmers' hands of small area in months of work; nuclear clearance of population by 70% in Hiroshima during world war II vs hand to hand combat and one to tens killing during ancient time.

Hamster breeding technique, might no longer be so useful but creating problems like increasing pressure on food demand, need on massive land clearance for housing and development, shortages of those, environmental and social issues etc. 

Your task is to change this to reverse climate change. How soon do you think you can get this done?  😏

Oh boy, you are the king of BS

[notsonice + 1,255]

 

Enjoy the transistion, I am

 

https://renews.biz/84414/low-carbon-sources-meet-most-uk-winter-power-demand/

Low carbon sources meet most UK winter power demand

Onshore and offshore wind provided 60% of total electricity generation in the period, says RenewableUK

 14 March 2023  Onshore Wind

 

RenewableUK has published statistics which show that over the entire winter period, low carbon power sources (renewables and nuclear) generated over 60% of Britain’s total electricity generation.

 

The figures are being released at the end of RenewableUK’s fortnightly Winter Power Update, which has been providing regular updates of generation statistics covering 1 November 2022 to 28 February 2023, when demand is usually at its highest.

 

The figures show that overall, during the winter period, onshore and offshore wind provided 60% of the UK’s low carbon power (31.4TWh), followed by nuclear which generated 26% (14.34 TWh).

This increased Britain’s energy security over the winter by reducing the demand for imported gas by over 9.7 billion cubic metres (or over 66% of total Liquified Natural Gas imports) – saving British consumers over £15,700,000,000.

 

RenewableUK’s Executive Director of Policy Ana Musat said: “These latest figures show that low carbon power sources, led by wind, played a central role in keeping the lights on this winter by providing the lion’s share of Britain’s electricity.

 

“Reliable homegrown clean energy is boosting our energy security and saving hard-pressed British consumers billions of pounds in expensive gas imports, as well as moving us closer towards net zero.

 

“Now we need to ramp up the roll-out of new clean energy projects as fast as possible to maximise  the benefits of renewables to billpayers and businesses in the years ahead.”

[Polyphia + 83]

9 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Suggest a mirror

I am many things, but I am neither a bully nor a liar. I stand up to bullies such as yourself, but I don't draw first blood. Time to end this conversation--I know these types of threads are annoying for others to have to sift through. Your (unintentionally) comedic posts do make me chuckle, though.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

13 hours ago, notsonice said:

 

Enjoy the transistion, I am

 

https://renews.biz/84414/low-carbon-sources-meet-most-uk-winter-power-demand/

Low carbon sources meet most UK winter power demand

Onshore and offshore wind provided 60% of total electricity generation in the period, says RenewableUK

 14 March 2023  Onshore Wind

 

RenewableUK has published statistics which show that over the entire winter period, low carbon power sources (renewables and nuclear) generated over 60% of Britain’s total electricity generation.

 

The figures are being released at the end of RenewableUK’s fortnightly Winter Power Update, which has been providing regular updates of generation statistics covering 1 November 2022 to 28 February 2023, when demand is usually at its highest.

 

The figures show that overall, during the winter period, onshore and offshore wind provided 60% of the UK’s low carbon power (31.4TWh), followed by nuclear which generated 26% (14.34 TWh).

This increased Britain’s energy security over the winter by reducing the demand for imported gas by over 9.7 billion cubic metres (or over 66% of total Liquified Natural Gas imports) – saving British consumers over £15,700,000,000.

 

RenewableUK’s Executive Director of Policy Ana Musat said: “These latest figures show that low carbon power sources, led by wind, played a central role in keeping the lights on this winter by providing the lion’s share of Britain’s electricity.

 

“Reliable homegrown clean energy is boosting our energy security and saving hard-pressed British consumers billions of pounds in expensive gas imports, as well as moving us closer towards net zero.

 

“Now we need to ramp up the roll-out of new clean energy projects as fast as possible to maximise  the benefits of renewables to billpayers and businesses in the years ahead.”

This tells us nothing about the overall energy picture....no surprise.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

18 hours ago, notsonice said:

Jan and Feb are real results ...oil demand sucked

Price in a tailspin right now.....oil demand today sucks

Enjoy the real numbers

oil dominance???? dude are you on the payroll of Aramco????

 

Of course if the economy tanks, energy will decrease...that is a surprise tp you? You really did skip Econ 101.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

18 hours ago, notsonice said:

here is a repost for the braindead oil and coal lovers

 

love the highlight of the article

data shows a peak of 39 Gtpa in 2025, but that timeline could move up to as early as next year if the short-term macroeconomic outlook accelerates the energy transition.

 

and today the macroeconimic outlook is accelerating the transition.

Enjoy the transition. I am 

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Fossil-Fuel-Emissions-Projected-To-Peak-In-2025.html

Fossil Fuel Emissions Projected To Peak In 2025

By Rystad Energy - Feb 27, 2023, 11:00 AM CST

• Direct CO2 emissions from power and heat generation will peak this year.
• Fossil CO2 emissions reached an all-time high of about 38.3 Gtpa last year.
• The power and heating sector is expected to drive the upcoming fossil CO2 decline from mid-decade onwards.
• While Europe, the US and China make progress, India’s emissions grow.n Our Community

 

 

 

The inflection point for fossil fuel carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions is nigh, with emissions on track to peak by 2025, according to Rystad Energy research and analysis. On the current global pathway of announced policies, projects, industry trends and expected technological advancements, global CO2 emissions are poised to hit about 39 gigatonnes per year (Gtpa) in 2025 before settling into a steady annual decline as industries clean up their carbon footprint.

This is meaningless...what does "steady" mean?  What percentage of energy requirements will be met by fossil fuels? That is the bottom line.

[bloodman33 + 22]

Ecocharger said 'For someone who insists on driving a fossil fuel car, you should apologize for the nonsense you spout about climate change. If you really believed what you are advocating, you would drive an EV.'

I have pointed out before on this thread EV's are not the solution.  The electric grid cannot handle them and never will be able to handle them..  They are a pipe dream.  The only thing that will save the planet is mass transit and getting rid of 70% of the cars on the road, and oil and coal powered plants, and tractors and trucks.  That said, I am perfectly fine being called a hypocrite, but Ecocharger you need to call me a rich hypocrite contributing to AOC. 

I don't need money from the oil industry to be their shill, unlike you.  That or your just (fill in the blank). LOL  Maybe your just a genius and 99.99% of the scientists have got it wrong. I am sure that is it.  How old are you anyway.  Am I talking to a high school kid?

I drive a wind powered cadillac with a huge sail. It is a prototype paid for by Total. They are going green don't ya know.  When there is no wind I pay a bunch of midgets to breath at the sail to make it move.  You want a job Ecocharger?

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

7 hours ago, bloodman33 said:

Ecocharger said 'For someone who insists on driving a fossil fuel car, you should apologize for the nonsense you spout about climate change. If you really believed what you are advocating, you would drive an EV.'

I have pointed out before on this thread EV's are not the solution.  The electric grid cannot handle them and never will be able to handle them..  They are a pipe dream.  The only thing that will save the planet is mass transit and getting rid of 70% of the cars on the road, and oil and coal powered plants, and tractors and trucks.  That said, I am perfectly fine being called a hypocrite, but Ecocharger you need to call me a rich hypocrite contributing to AOC. 

I don't need money from the oil industry to be their shill, unlike you.  That or your just (fill in the blank). LOL  Maybe your just a genius and 99.99% of the scientists have got it wrong. I am sure that is it.  How old are you anyway.  Am I talking to a high school kid?

I drive a wind powered cadillac with a huge sail. It is a prototype paid for by Total. They are going green don't ya know.  When there is no wind I pay a bunch of midgets to breath at the sail to make it move.  You want a job Ecocharger?

You have a very limited understanding of science, old boy. The best scientific brains have not accepted the CO2 theory of earth temperature, which is nothing more than a political con job. I recommend that you follow the links given above to read the real story about climate change, and then you are welcome to join the conversation. As of now, you are outside the discussion.

Edited March 17, 2023 by Ecocharger

[bloodman33 + 22]

Hmmm.  Little understanding of science.

Physical Chemistry, Organic Chemistry, PHD statistics and I work analyzing weather station data in the US.  LOL.  What are your credentials other than oil company shill?

[bloodman33 + 22]

Ecocharger.  Let me guess you are in high school and daddy works for the oil industry?

[bloodman33 + 22]

I will hire you to run my wind powered car!

[notsonice + 1,255]

22 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

This is meaningless...what does "steady" mean?  What percentage of energy requirements will be met by fossil fuels? That is the bottom line.

what does "steady" mean?

 

you do not understand the word steady?????

young boy...stay in school.....you will some day pass the 6th grade.

What percentage of energy requirements will be met by fossil fuels?

 

simple less and less every day........Fossil fuels, as a percentage, has been on a decline for the past 10 years. The decline is 1 percent a year in the past and this is accelerating to 2 percent a year now. Just take a look at BPs annual energy reports......which data has been posted here before...

the bigger question is how much renewables are you using everyday.......more and more and more is the answer...Now this makes you a Green Revolutionist...enjoy the thought. Your use of green electricity???? 30 ....40 percent maybe more.........and increasing every day.

 

Now enjoy the fossil fuel clunker ride to the bottom

And Enjoy the transition to renewables....I am

 

PS Brent crude at $72 and change.....are you still singing Brent Crude at $130???? Boy the demand must really suck today .........Brent crude $65 coming to you soon...Enjoy

 

Edited March 17, 2023 by notsonice

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

3 hours ago, bloodman33 said:

Hmmm.  Little understanding of science.

Physical Chemistry, Organic Chemistry, PHD statistics and I work analyzing weather station data in the US.  LOL.  What are your credentials other than oil company shill?

Then why do you have trouble reading climate science articles? I have been waiting for you to demonstrate your exalted knowledge but to no avail.

Edited March 17, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Ron Wagner + 710]

https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2023/03/17/experts-tell-congress-green-wind-turbines-in-atlantic-may-impair-ship-radar-threatening-national-security/

 

Experts Tell Congress ‘Green’ Wind Turbines in Atlantic May Impair Ship Radar, Threatening National Security

446 Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

FRANCES MARTEL

17 Mar 2023271

9:23

A panel of experts testifying to members of Congress at an in-district hearing in Wildwood, New Jersey, on Thursday warned that offshore wind projects actively promoted and subsidized by state and national Democrats could greatly interfere with radar and navigation in the Atlantic Ocean, creating a national security threat.

The panel included environmentalists, fishing industry experts, and advocates with working experience at the Department of Energy. Several noted concerns with maritime territory designated for wind farms apparently getting in the way of Pentagon and NASA operations. Another noted that the farms’ potential interference with ship radar could damage U.S. Coast Guard activities, including rescue missions. Another concern raised was the possibility of cargo ships, particularly those carrying oil or chemicals, being unable to navigate the seas and colliding, causing an environmental catastrophe.

“NASA has said that these areas interfere with all their missions out of Wallops Island; the Navy has said there is not an area in that whole lease block that does not interfere with DOD [Department of Defense] missions, but BOEM [the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management] is continuing ahead,” Meghan Lapp, the fisheries liaison for the Rhode Island commercial fishing company Seafreeze, told the panel of lawmakers.

“When I’ve asked them on webinars, like – the Navy said that this is a problem how can you still be leasing it?” she noted, “‘Well, we’re just going to be continuing the discussions.'”

Lapp recounted that she attempted to discuss the issue of potential radar interference with the U.S. Coast Guard in 2018 and found officials there “completely unaware of the issue.”

“Coast Guard personnel told us, ‘we don’t know what to tell you, this is literally the first we heard of this.'”

The hearing was chaired by Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ), who represents the district the hearing occurred in, and attended by fellow Jersey Shore lawmaker Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), and Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA). Rep. Smith has introduced legislation in Congress to demand further scientific research into the impact on ocean ecosystems that offshore wind farms may have.

In his opening remarks, Rep. Smith, condemning the wind farm project approval process as “shoddy at best,” highlighted studies that suggest wind farms could significantly impair the use of radar to navigate the ocean.

“Vessel navigation including U.S. Navy ships, merchant ships, and search and rescue operations … their radars will be compromised,” he noted, citing a study published last year by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

“The report concludes wind turbine generators have significant electromagnetic reflectivity, and therefore can interfere with radar systems operating nearby,” the Academies explained in a press release on the results of the investigation into offshore wind farms last year. “The rotating blades can also create reflections in Doppler radar systems. In particular, these forms of interference could obfuscate smaller vessels and stationary objects such as buoys on radar, complicating navigation decisions and increasing the risk of collision with larger vessels.”

Rep. Smith highlighted that the study found “that wind turbine generators obfuscate the marine vessel radar for both magnetron-based and solid-state radar.”

Robert Stern, a former director of the Office of Environmental Compliance at U.S. Department of Energy who now runs the local shore advocacy group Save LBI, told the lawmakers that, in his attempts to study the proposed wind farms, he discovered that some overlap with a Department of Defense exclusion zone. LBI is short for “Long Beach Island,” an 18-mile-long barrier island that has served as a family summer retreat to the region for decades.

“The first half of the side [of one of the wind farm leases] off LBI from about nine to 14 miles out is labeled by the Navy as a DOD exclusion zone,” Stern noted. “We tried to contact DOD to find out what that means; we could not get any information, maybe it’s classified, I don’t know.”

“But right now, you have a lease area out there, half of which is classified as a DOD exclusion zone and, as Meghan [Lapp] indicates, all you get from BOEM is ‘we’re working out with DOD’ … I’d rather hear something from DOD.”

Cindy Zipf, the executive director of the environmental group Clean Ocean Action, suggested another national security concern regarding navigation: the potential for a ship carrying hazardous materials, its radar impaired, could crash.

“We have the number one port on the East Coast where we are moving a lot of cargo, but included in that cargo are oil tankers and chemical tankers,” Zipf noted, “and if one of those ships were to have a collision with a ship or with a monopole or with the transition facilities, it would be catastrophic to our coast.”

The development of offshore wind energy has become one of the most heated political topics in New Jersey, a state heavily dependent economically on fishing and beach tourism. Radical progressive Governor Phil Murphy, a Massachusetts native who served as President Barack Obama’s ambassador to Germany, has prompted widespread condemnation in the state’s shore region for aggressively greenlighting offshore wind projects with, locals say, little input from those who will live near the wind farms. Murphy has the full backing of the administration of President Joe Biden on the issue, which prioritizes climate change as a threat to America. Rep. Smith noted in the hearing that last year’s Inflation Reduction Act “includes a 30 percent tax credit for offshore wind projects” that begin construction before January 1, 2026.

The largest projects attracting the most local outrage are the Ocean Wind I and II planned farms, developed and owned by the Danish company Ørsted.

Ørsted was notably not represented at Thursday’s hearing, despite Rep. Van Drew inviting the company to attend.

Rep. Van Drew accused the company of lying to the public, stating he had asked Ørsted officials to ” speak at least to these fishermen and to some of these other people in our community that have issues.”

“They lied and we caught them in the lie because we had them come to a meeting that we had … I asked all the fishermen and other people that were there,” Rep. Van Drew recalled, “‘Raise your hand if Ørsted has spoken to you and if they’ve helped in any way.’ About 150 people there – three people raised their hand [and] all three worked for Ørsted.”

Maddy Urbish, head of government affairs for the Ørsted Ocean Wind projects, issued a statement on Thursday defending the company’s due diligence.

“Since 2019, our Ocean Wind 1 project has been undergoing a complete and thorough federal review process as outlined by the National Environmental Policy Act and governed by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management,” the statement read, “including a required environmental impact assessment that invited public comment during the summer of 2022.”

The statement did not clarify why the company did not send a representative to the hearing.

The wind farm development attracted so much attention that Thursday’s hearing filled the Wildwoods Convention Center to capacity – about 400 people – and the venue was forced to turn back hundreds of people interested in attending to adhere to fire safety regulations. At one point, local reports noted, crowds outside the center chanted, “Let us in!” though the hearing was also broadcast live online and could be heard on the loudspeaker system outside.

While locals have opposed such projects for years out of fear that building massive wind turbines in the ocean will devastate the maritime ecosystem, eliminate the fishing industry, and pollute the shore, enthusiasm against the projects has been renewed by the bizarre phenomenon of an alarming increase in dead whales washing ashore on New Jersey beaches in the past year.

New Jersey authorities have documented nine dead whales washing ashore in the past three months; on an average year, the shore will see about seven dead whales a year. As of this week, the entire East Coast has documented 29 dead whales since December.

Environmental groups who support offshore wind projects and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) insist that no evidence ties offshore wind development to whale deaths. The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities approved a third solicitation of offshore wind projects last week. A dead dolphin washed up on Leonardo Beach, on the northern Jersey Shore, on Wednesday.

“It’s sad to see yet another marine animal wash up on our beaches here in Middletown—just a few weeks ago, several dolphins were stranded on Sandy Hook,” Middletown Mayor Tony Perry told the local outlet Save Jersey on Wednesday. “Last week, the Middletown Township Committee demanded a halt to the construction of the wind farms along the New Jersey coastline after we have witnessed an unprecedented amount of whales and dolphins die along the Jersey Shore.”

Follow Frances Martel on Facebook and Twitter.

 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

Like all other obstacles in navigation of an ocean, it is called a MAP... you just do not send giant ships through that area.  End of Story.  Just like navigation channels.  Ships have long since had zero problems using autopilot and computer maps with multiple forms of navigation for where they are and where objects to NOT be run over are...

Even tiny cruising sailboats have navionics now.  You can get it on your ipad or cell phone not to mention all your standard navigation chart plotting products made by everyone in the world. 

One truly has to be brain dead to believe this shit regarding wind turbines and navigation impediments on a gargantuan ocean.

[Ron Wagner + 710]

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/natgas.php#:~:text=U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG,an additional 5% in 2024.

 

SHORT-TERM ENERGY OUTLOOK

Release Date: Mar. 7, 2023  |  Forecast Completed: Mar. 2, 2023  |  Next Release Date: Apr. 11, 2023  |  Full Report    |   Text Only   |   All Tables   |   All Figures

GLOSSARY › FAQS ›

• FORECASTS
• DATA
• SUPPLEMENTS

Natural gas

Natural gas consumption
In January and February, below-average U.S. natural gas consumption in the residential and commercial sectors was driven by mild winter weather across large parts of the country, particularly in the Northeast and the Midwest. Based on preliminary data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for January and February, the first two months of 2023 combined were among the three warmest on record for that period going back to 1895. In March, we expect natural gas consumption in the residential and commercial sectors to average almost 32 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d), which is close to the five-year average, because we expect more normal temperatures in March with a close to average number of heating degree days.

As a result of the mild winter and low natural gas consumption in the residential and commercial sectors, we expect 2.4% (2 Bcf/d) less U.S. natural gas consumption in 2023 than in 2022. Reduced natural gas consumption in January and February slowed withdrawals from natural gas inventories to less than the five-year average and reduced natural gas prices. The spot price of natural gas at the U.S. benchmark Henry Hub averaged $2.38 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) in February, the lowest monthly average since September 2020. Although we reduced our Henry Hub price forecast from last month’s STEO, we still expect natural gas prices to increase in the coming months. Price increases in the forecast result from rising demand from Freeport LNG reopening, which shut down last June due to a fire, and seasonal increases in natural gas demand in the electric power sector. In addition, we expect natural gas production will be relatively flat for the rest of 2023 as producers reduce drilling in response to lower prices.

Liquefied natural gas exports
U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports in our forecast average about 12 Bcf/d in 2023, up 14% from last year. We expect LNG exports to increase by an additional 5% in 2024. The Freeport LNG export terminal’s return to service and LNG export projects under construction that will come online by the end of 2024 contribute to rising exports.

The Freeport LNG terminal can produce more than 2.1 Bcf/d of LNG for export on a peak day, and exports from Freeport averaged 1.9 Bcf/d from January 2021 through May 2022, prior to the full shutdown of the facility in June 2022, according to our Natural Gas Monthly. Because of the Freeport shutdown, U.S. LNG exports averaged 10.0 Bcf/d from June 2022 through December 2022, after peaking at 11.7 Bcf/d in March. The new Calcasieu Pass LNG export facility partially offset the decline in exports from Freeport LNG, with exports from Calcasieu Pass averaging 1.2 Bcf/d since June 2022.

This year, once all three trains at Freeport LNG return to service, we forecast U.S. LNG exports to exceed 12 Bcf/d in most months for the rest of the forecast period. We forecast that U.S. LNG exports will increase to 14 Bcf/d by December 2024 because new LNG export capacity from three major projects under construction are scheduled to come online.

Natural Gas
	2021	2022	2023	2024
Natural gas price at Henry Hub (dollars per million Btu)	3.91	6.42	3.02	3.89
U.S. dry natural gas production (billion cubic feet per day)	94.57	98.09	100.67	101.69
U.S. natural gas consumption (billion cubic feet per day)	83.90	88.54	86.40	86.06
U.S. LNG exports (billion cubic feet per day)	9.76	10.59	12.07	12.73
Natural gas share of electricity generation (percentage)	37	39	39	37

Interactive Data Viewers

Provides custom data views of historical and forecast data

STEO Data browser ›
Real Prices Viewer ›

Related Tables
Table WF01. Average Consumer Prices and Expenditures for Heating Fuels During the Winter	PDF
Table 1. U.S. Energy Markets Summary	PDF
Table 2. Energy Prices	PDF
Table 5a. U.S. Natural Gas Supply, Consumption, and Inventories	PDF
Table 5b. U.S. Regional Natural Gas Prices	PDF
Table 8a. U.S. Renewable Energy Consumption	PDF
Table 8b. U.S. Renewable Electricity Generation and Capacity (Discontinued - generation data available on Table 7d and capacity data available on Table 7e)	PDF
Table 9a. U.S. Macroeconomic Indicators and CO2 Emissions	PDF
Table 9b. U.S. Regional Macroeconomic Data	PDF
Table 9c. U.S. Regional Weather Data	PDF

Related Figures
Henry Hub natural gas price	XLSX	PNG
U.S. natural gas prices	XLSX	PNG
U.S. natural gas balance	XLSX	PNG
U.S. marketed natural gas production	XLSX	PNG
U.S. natural gas consumption	XLSX	PNG
U.S. working natural gas in storage	XLSX	PNG
U.S. natural gas trade	XLSX	PNG

Other Resources

Energy Price Volatility and Forecast Uncertainty documentation
(Adobe PDF file)

Henry Hub natural gas price and NYMEX 95% confidence intervals
January 2021 - Current Month
(Adobe PDF file)
January 2019 - December 2020
(Adobe PDF file)
January 2017 - December 2018
(Adobe PDF file)
January 2015 - December 2016
(Adobe PDF file)
January 2013 - December 2014
(Adobe PDF file)
January 2011 - December 2012
(Adobe PDF file)
January 2009 - December 2010
(Adobe PDF file)
January 2007 - December 2008
(Adobe PDF file)

 

[Ron Wagner + 710]

https://www.gecf.org/_resources/files/pages/gecf-global-gas-outlook-2050/gecf-gas-outlook-2022.pdf

 

[bloodman33 + 22]

EIA: 'No significant change' in US oil use to 2040

We are doomed! 

Oh well. 

[specinho + 470]

On 3/16/2023 at 3:27 PM, notsonice said:

Oh boy, you are the king of BS

In the old days, when a pioneer raised the alarm over the potential issue related to drastic increment in population, it was regarded as racist. The organization he owns is nearly crushed. The aim was probably to show everyone is equal and deserve the right to life.

Today, the same alarm is raised. But Randys, human duplicates of the hamster, could be found in middle to upper class. A 70% of them. My dad used to mention " men with a little extra money in their pockets generally have loose dicks that act in random, at all chances."

To clear Randys, those with  despicable, ruthless, shameless characteristics, + no basic capability nor sense of responsibility to do basic things right in contribution must be cleared first. If it involves families and friends, all related must be cleared.

Besides, Would like to show a case on all human are not the same. Below are workmanship of Indonesians workers claimed to have 30 years of experience. Paid neighbour, their friend, cannot handle their bad working attitude and ethics. Basic work can not get done properly.

They are moderately rich with 200k in the bank, menacing lives with threats of rape, slit, break entry to steal etc while they worked, and shout to deny request to get basic replacement done. They are either backed to stirr up problems or they grow arrogant because the hiring person is multilacking and regarded weaker than they are.

If we must take side, may we have the wisdom to discard chunks or strings of people like these, but choose those with proven contribution and tested characteristics under all conditions....

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by specinho

[specinho + 470]

On 3/16/2023 at 3:29 PM, notsonice said:

 

Enjoy the transistion, I am

 

https://renews.biz/84414/low-carbon-sources-meet-most-uk-winter-power-demand/

Low carbon sources meet most UK winter power demand

Onshore and offshore wind provided 60% of total electricity generation in the period, says RenewableUK

 14 March 2023  Onshore Wind

 

RenewableUK has published statistics which show that over the entire winter period, low carbon power sources (renewables and nuclear) generated over 60% of Britain’s total electricity generation.

 

The figures are being released at the end of RenewableUK’s fortnightly Winter Power Update, which has been providing regular updates of generation statistics covering 1 November 2022 to 28 February 2023, when demand is usually at its highest.

 

The figures show that overall, during the winter period, onshore and offshore wind provided 60% of the UK’s low carbon power (31.4TWh), followed by nuclear which generated 26% (14.34 TWh).

This increased Britain’s energy security over the winter by reducing the demand for imported gas by over 9.7 billion cubic metres (or over 66% of total Liquified Natural Gas imports) – saving British consumers over £15,700,000,000.

 

RenewableUK’s Executive Director of Policy Ana Musat said: “These latest figures show that low carbon power sources, led by wind, played a central role in keeping the lights on this winter by providing the lion’s share of Britain’s electricity.

 

“Reliable homegrown clean energy is boosting our energy security and saving hard-pressed British consumers billions of pounds in expensive gas imports, as well as moving us closer towards net zero.

 

“Now we need to ramp up the roll-out of new clean energy projects as fast as possible to maximise  the benefits of renewables to billpayers and businesses in the years ahead.”

This photo is taken from <The Guinness Book of Amazing Nature>, page 121.

The site of the photo is countryside of England. 

"Despite being clean and environmentally friendly ways of producing electricity, wind turbines have always been at the centre of controversy........... Each wind  turbine requires a hole up to 300m deep to be dug. To produce 10% of the UK's electricity, 30,000 turbines would be required, covering an area of 3,000 km2."

Looking back, is there anything we would do differently right now to make things better?

[notsonice + 1,255]

18 hours ago, specinho said:

This photo is taken from <The Guinness Book of Amazing Nature>, page 121.

The site of the photo is countryside of England. 

"Despite being clean and environmentally friendly ways of producing electricity, wind turbines have always been at the centre of controversy........... Each wind  turbine requires a hole up to 300m deep to be dug. To produce 10% of the UK's electricity, 30,000 turbines would be required, covering an area of 3,000 km2."

Looking back, is there anything we would do differently right now to make things better?

Each wind  turbine requires a hole up to 300m deep to be dug.??????

um a 1000 foot hole for  a foundation????

please keep posting BS it really makes you look like a fool.....

1000 feet deep??????

I bet you never have had anything to do with large structure foundation...

1000 feet deep .....oh that is a monster line of BS

[notsonice + 1,255]

19 hours ago, specinho said:

In the old days, when a pioneer raised the alarm over the potential issue related to drastic increment in population, it was regarded as racist. The organization he owns is nearly crushed. The aim was probably to show everyone is equal and deserve the right to life.

Today, the same alarm is raised. But Randys, human duplicates of the hamster, could be found in middle to upper class. A 70% of them. My dad used to mention " men with a little extra money in their pockets generally have loose dicks that act in random, at all chances."

To clear Randys, those with  despicable, ruthless, shameless characteristics, + no basic capability nor sense of responsibility to do basic things right in contribution must be cleared first. If it involves families and friends, all related must be cleared.

Besides, Would like to show a case on all human are not the same. Below are workmanship of Indonesians workers claimed to have 30 years of experience. Paid neighbour, their friend, cannot handle their bad working attitude and ethics. Basic work can not get done properly.

They are moderately rich with 200k in the bank, menacing lives with threats of rape, slit, break entry to steal etc while they worked, and shout to deny request to get basic replacement done. They are either backed to stirr up problems or they grow arrogant because the hiring person is multilacking and regarded weaker than they are.

If we must take side, may we have the wisdom to discard chunks or strings of people like these, but choose those with proven contribution and tested characteristics under all conditions....

 

what are you babbling about now????

keep posting gibberish ....it makes you look like a bigger fool.....

[turbguy + 1,544]

22 hours ago, specinho said:

This photo is taken from <The Guinness Book of Amazing Nature>, page 121.

The site of the photo is countryside of England. 

"Despite being clean and environmentally friendly ways of producing electricity, wind turbines have always been at the centre of controversy........... Each wind  turbine requires a hole up to 300m deep to be dug. To produce 10% of the UK's electricity, 30,000 turbines would be required, covering an area of 3,000 km2."

Looking back, is there anything we would do differently right now to make things better?

A 1000 foot deep hole for each wind turbine?

I can see that in the case of a hydroelectric project's penstock.

Sorry, you're gonna have to prove that with other evidence

Otherwise, it's known as a lie.

Edited March 19, 2023 by turbguy

[specinho + 470]

4 hours ago, turbguy said:

A 1000 foot deep hole for each wind turbine?

I can see that in the case of a hydroelectric project's penstock.

Sorry, you're gonna have to prove that with other evidence

Otherwise, it's known as a lie.

I do not know the details. But my guess is, the author meant the average total vertical space used for one  turbine i.e. 150 m for pole, 65 m for blades, ~70 - 100 m for base.