GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

Ohio bill to reform electric rates aims to preserve coal plant subsidies under attack in wake of corruption probe.

The Ohio coal subsidy corruption nightmare continues...

https://energynews.us/2021/06/21/ohio-bill-to-reform-electric-rates-aims-to-preserve-coal-plant-subsidies-under-attack-in-wake-of-corruption-probe/

Edited June 26, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

..

 

Edited June 26, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

13 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Allowing the oil industry to improperly dispose of their hazardous waste is a huge gov't subsidy that needs to end.

The "waste" of the oil and gas industry is not a waste...CO2 contributes to the greening of the planet and improved agricultural productivity. That produces food which you and I can put into our mouths. Yummy.

Toxic chemicals should be regulated, and it is a fault of government regulatory authorities if those regulations are not implemented.

Edited June 26, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

3 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

The "waste" is not a waste...CO2 contributes to the greening of the planet and improved agricultural productivity. That produces food which you and I can put into our mouths. Yummy.

Toxic chemicals should be regulated, and it is a fault of government regulatory authorities if those regulations are not implemented.

I'm glad you agree. Because the toxic waste in question this time is produced water. You should read the articles you post links to.

Edited June 26, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

3 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I'm glad you agree. Because the toxic waste in question this time is produced water. You should read the articles you post links to.

I was referring to the industry, not to your unrelated article.

Edited June 26, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

Just now, Ecocharger said:

I was referring to the industry, not your unrelated article.

You posted the article. It was about produced water and I replied. Good grief.

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

14 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Allowing the oil industry to improperly dispose of their hazardous waste is a huge gov't subsidy that needs to end.

Okay, the water issue,

"(A) Determine whether drilling fluids, produced waters, and other wastes associated with the exploration, development, or production of crude oil, natural gas, or geothermal energy meet the criteria promulgated under this section for the identification or listing of hazardous waste;“(B) identify or list as hazardous waste any drilling fluids, produced waters, or other wastes associated with the exploration, development, or production of crude oil, natural gas, or geothermal energy that the Administrator determines, pursuant to subparagraph (A), meet the criteria promulgated under this section for the identification or listing of hazardous waste; and“(C) promulgate regulations under sections 3002, 3003, and 3004 for wastes identified or listed as hazardous waste pursuant to subparagraph (B), except that the Administrator is authorized to modify the requirements of such sections to take into account the special characteristics of such wastes so long as such modified requirements protect human health and the environment.”

So the proposed bill authorizes the Administrator to subjectively classify waste water as "hazardous" according to some unspecified criteria. Depends on who the Administrator is.

If all such water is deemed to be "hazardous" then water must be collected into super-wells, which could cause seismic events. 

Wonderful, we trade dirty water for earthquakes...brilliant Democrat logic.

Edited June 26, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

5 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Okay, the water issue,

"(A) Determine whether drilling fluids, produced waters, and other wastes associated with the exploration, development, or production of crude oil, natural gas, or geothermal energy meet the criteria promulgated under this section for the identification or listing of hazardous waste;“(B) identify or list as hazardous waste any drilling fluids, produced waters, or other wastes associated with the exploration, development, or production of crude oil, natural gas, or geothermal energy that the Administrator determines, pursuant to subparagraph (A), meet the criteria promulgated under this section for the identification or listing of hazardous waste; and“(C) promulgate regulations under sections 3002, 3003, and 3004 for wastes identified or listed as hazardous waste pursuant to subparagraph (B), except that the Administrator is authorized to modify the requirements of such sections to take into account the special characteristics of such wastes so long as such modified requirements protect human health and the environment.”

So the proposed bill authorizes the Administrator to subjectively classify waste water as "hazardous" according to some unspecified criteria. Depends on who the Administrator is.

If all such water is deemed to be "hazardous" then water must be collected into super-wells, which could cause seismic events. 

Wonderful, we trade dirty water for earthquakes...brilliant Democrat logic.

Haha, another of your reading comprehension failures. The seismic events have already been occurring because the water has been disposed of in thousands of  class 2 wells over a wide region. 

"Just two weeks ago, Rystad Energy reported that the number of earthquakes of above 2.0 on the Richter scale in four oil-producing states had risen from 242 in 2017 to 938 in 2020. The increase was attributed to wastewater wells."

 

[-trance + 114]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

The "waste" of the oil and gas industry is not a waste...CO2 contributes to the greening of the planet and improved agricultural productivity. That produces food which you and I can put into our mouths. Yummy.

Toxic chemicals should be regulated, and it is a fault of government regulatory authorities if those regulations are not implemented.

I assure you the oil industry pollutes far more than just CO2.

There are regulations, and they are enforced sometimes.  Do you think posted speed limits actually prevent all speeding? 

[turbguy + 1,543]

And more storage coming for Florida!

https://www.power-eng.com/energy-storage/fpls-900-mwh-energy-storage-projects-receives-first-battery-unit-installations/

[turbguy + 1,543]

And more coal-fired units bite the dust....

https://www.power-eng.com/coal/cms-utility-consumers-energy-accelerating-campbell-coal-fired-karn-dual-fuel-closures/

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

6 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Haha, another of your reading comprehension failures. The seismic events have already been occurring because the water has been disposed of in thousands of  class 2 wells over a wide region. 

"Just two weeks ago, Rystad Energy reported that the number of earthquakes of above 2.0 on the Richter scale in four oil-producing states had risen from 242 in 2017 to 938 in 2020. The increase was attributed to wastewater wells."

 

For that stat to be meaningful, it needs to be correlated with the number of wells, and include more than just four selected states. Otherwise, it fails the science test.

That is a good article referenced above, for example here is one stat,

"In 2019, the high-water mark year for gas, wind, and solar alike, gas still supplied nearly nine times as much energy as wind and solar. The enduring disparity should give pause to any policymaker contemplating measures that would rapidly curtail domestic gas supplies on the assumption that renewables could quickly and seamlessly fill the void."

https://www.bakerinstitute.org/media/files/files/2e0b551a/bi-report-061121-ces-cleanprodwater.pdf

Edited June 27, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

33 minutes ago, turbguy said:

And more coal-fired units bite the dust....

https://www.power-eng.com/coal/cms-utility-consumers-energy-accelerating-campbell-coal-fired-karn-dual-fuel-closures/

You need more context to your point.

"In 2019, the high-water mark year for gas, wind, and solar alike, gas still supplied nearly nine times as much energy as wind and solar. The enduring disparity should give pause to any policymaker contemplating measures that would rapidly curtail domestic gas supplies on the assumption that renewables could quickly and seamlessly fill the void."

Sure, the old coal-fired plants are not up to the new coal-fired technology, which eliminates nearly all the toxic emissions and provides greater productivity.

 

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

46 minutes ago, turbguy said:

And more coal-fired units bite the dust....

https://www.power-eng.com/coal/cms-utility-consumers-energy-accelerating-campbell-coal-fired-karn-dual-fuel-closures/

Here is a more balanced assessment of the coal industry and its heroic production during the Texas turmoil this year, which probably saved the state from total disaster. Listen and learn, this is from the same source you gave us above.

"Coal-fired power’s positive early 2021 upswing, however temporary, has been sustained enough to negatively impact its on-site supply. Higher gas prices, winter plant outages and other factors have led to a rise in coal-fired power generation, according to reports. The U.S. Energy Information Administration noted that the nation increased coal-fired generation jumped 16 percent in the final months of 2020 and rose again early this year. “Rising natural gas prices in late 2020 and early 2021 made coal-fired electricity generation more competitive,” the EIA release read. This rapid increase in coal-fired electricity consumption has impacted stockpiles at U.S. power plants, according to the EIA this week. The drawdown totaled nearly 16 million tons in February, the largest monthly coal inventory decrease in about 10 years (July 2011). An earlier report indicated that coal-fired accounted for nearly 170 MWh of net generation in January and February, or basically 25 percent of the U.S. utility-scale total. It was also close to 30 percent higher than the same period in 2020. The U.S., like many developed nations, is retiring coal-fired power plants at a rapid pace, due to the lower emissions and economic competitiveness of gas and renewables. The newest coal power plant to come online was AEP’s Turk station in 2012 (pictured). Dozens of power plants suffered outages in the southern U.S. due to a massive and lingering winter storm in February. In Texas, Louisiana and elsewhere in the southwest, below-zero temperatures shut down numerous plants including wind turbines and natural gas wells and pipelines feeding gas-fired plants. Coal-fired and nuclear, both of which have on-site fuel supply, also suffered some outages but also stepped up to provide a greater than normal share of the generation during that frigid weather, according to reports. ERCOT reported that some 52 GW of power plant capacity was offline during the worst of Winter Storm Uri in February. Much of those outages included gas-fired power and wind turbine capacity. In the Southwest Power Pool which covers much of the midwest and plains states, coal-fired power stepped to deliver the most capacity during the worst load shedding periods. In fact, SPP records show that coal delivered 41 percent of the generation mix during the SPP’s load shedding events."

https://www.power-eng.com/coal/eia-increase-in-coal-fired-power-draws-down-power-plant-stockpiles/

Edited June 27, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

15 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

You need more context to your point.

"In 2019, the high-water mark year for gas, wind, and solar alike, gas still supplied nearly nine times as much energy as wind and solar. The enduring disparity should give pause to any policymaker contemplating measures that would rapidly curtail domestic gas supplies on the assumption that renewables could quickly and seamlessly fill the void."

Sure, the old coal-fired plants are not up to the new coal-fired technology, which eliminates nearly all the toxic emissions and provides greater productivity.

 

I'll get back to the earthquakes in a bit but I can't let such blatant misinformation as this move forward. 

In 2019 gas supplied 4x as much as all solar+wind.

In 2020 gas produced 3.5x as much as all solar+wind.

In Q1 2021 gas produced 2.7x as much as all solar+wind.

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.Q~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.TSN-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.Q~&columnchart=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.Q&map=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.Q&freq=Q&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&pin=&rse=0&maptype=0

Edited June 27, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

20 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I'll get back to the earthquakes in a bit but I can't let such blatant misinformation as this move forward. 

In 2019 gas supplied 4x as much as all solar+wind.

In 2020 gas produced 3.5x as much as all solar+wind.

In Q1 2021 gas produced 2.7x as much as all solar+wind.

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.Q~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.TSN-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.Q~&columnchart=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-99.Q~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.Q&map=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.Q&freq=Q&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&pin=&rse=0&maptype=0

This guy used the same source, Jay.  The guy who wrote this article used official EIA data.

"U.S. share calculated using Energy Information Administration data for primary energy consumption by source,

https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/browser/?tbl=T01.03#/?f=A&start=1949&end=2020&charted=1-2-3-5-12

Edited June 27, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

26 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Here is a more balanced assessment of the coal industry and its heroic production during the Texas turmoil this year, which probably saved the state from total disaster. Listen and learn, this is from the same source you gave us above.

"Coal-fired power’s positive early 2021 upswing, however temporary, has been sustained enough to negatively impact its on-site supply. Higher gas prices, winter plant outages and other factors have led to a rise in coal-fired power generation, according to reports. The U.S. Energy Information Administration noted that the nation increased coal-fired generation jumped 16 percent in the final months of 2020 and rose again early this year. “Rising natural gas prices in late 2020 and early 2021 made coal-fired electricity generation more competitive,” the EIA release read. This rapid increase in coal-fired electricity consumption has impacted stockpiles at U.S. power plants, according to the EIA this week. The drawdown totaled nearly 16 million tons in February, the largest monthly coal inventory decrease in about 10 years (July 2011). An earlier report indicated that coal-fired accounted for nearly 170 MWh of net generation in January and February, or basically 25 percent of the U.S. utility-scale total. It was also close to 30 percent higher than the same period in 2020. The U.S., like many developed nations, is retiring coal-fired power plants at a rapid pace, due to the lower emissions and economic competitiveness of gas and renewables. The newest coal power plant to come online was AEP’s Turk station in 2012 (pictured). Dozens of power plants suffered outages in the southern U.S. due to a massive and lingering winter storm in February. In Texas, Louisiana and elsewhere in the southwest, below-zero temperatures shut down numerous plants including wind turbines and natural gas wells and pipelines feeding gas-fired plants. Coal-fired and nuclear, both of which have on-site fuel supply, also suffered some outages but also stepped up to provide a greater than normal share of the generation during that frigid weather, according to reports. ERCOT reported that some 52 GW of power plant capacity was offline during the worst of Winter Storm Uri in February. Much of those outages included gas-fired power and wind turbine capacity. In the Southwest Power Pool which covers much of the midwest and plains states, coal-fired power stepped to deliver the most capacity during the worst load shedding periods. In fact, SPP records show that coal delivered 41 percent of the generation mix during the SPP’s load shedding events."

https://www.power-eng.com/coal/eia-increase-in-coal-fired-power-draws-down-power-plant-stockpiles/

Context is important. Such as the fact that Texas is not a part of SPP. 

Here is what the rest of the SPP report says:

"Coal provided a bigger overall percentage of the generation mix during the worst periods, but actually delivered a lower percent of its capacity than wind.

Overall, SPP records show that coal delivered 41 percent, gas 27.7 percent, wind 10.5 percent, nuclear 5 percent and hydro 4.7 percent during the controlled service interruptions (load shedding events) on Feb. 16.

Normally, that SPP accredited capacity mix is 45 percent gas-fired, 38.5 percent coal, 5.6 percent wind, 3 percent nuclear and 4.4 percent hydro.

In other words, wind nearly doubled its position in generation mix during the worst period, while coal and nuclear performed above their usual positions compared with gas-fired power—and that’s only because so much gas supply and generation capacity was out."

https://www.power-eng.com/om/spp-no-fault-zone-gas-coal-and-wind-plants-all-suffered-outages-in-winter-storm/

Edited June 27, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[turbguy + 1,543]

42 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

You need more context to your point.

"In 2019, the high-water mark year for gas, wind, and solar alike, gas still supplied nearly nine times as much energy as wind and solar. The enduring disparity should give pause to any policymaker contemplating measures that would rapidly curtail domestic gas supplies on the assumption that renewables could quickly and seamlessly fill the void."

Sure, the old coal-fired plants are not up to the new coal-fired technology, which eliminates nearly all the toxic emissions and provides greater productivity.

 

What do you need as more context?

Another relatively modern coal plant is going to be GONE!

Who is gonna build a more modern one to replace it, that STILL requires fuel mining, processing, and transport, ash disposal, water treatment, flue gas treatment, make-up water, and STILL rejects about 50% of the energy released in combustion?

Edited June 27, 2021 by turbguy

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

21 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Context is important. Such as the fact that Texas is not a part of SPP. 

Here is what the rest of the SPP report says:

"Coal provided a bigger overall percentage of the generation mix during the worst periods, but actually delivered a lower percent of its capacity than wind.

Overall, SPP records show that coal delivered 41 percent, gas 27.7 percent, wind 10.5 percent, nuclear 5 percent and hydro 4.7 percent during the controlled service interruptions (load shedding events) on Feb. 16.

Normally, that SPP accredited capacity mix is 45 percent gas-fired, 38.5 percent coal, 5.6 percent wind, 3 percent nuclear and 4.4 percent hydro.

In other words, wind nearly doubled its position in generation mix during the worst period, while coal and nuclear performed above their usual positions compared with gas-fired power—and that’s only because so much gas supply and generation capacity was out."

https://www.power-eng.com/om/spp-no-fault-zone-gas-coal-and-wind-plants-all-suffered-outages-in-winter-storm/

Some joke Jay.....so coal-fired provided 41% during the crisis, and normally delivered 38.5, so it was less impacted than the others. Fine, coal was a stalwart of the mix and still is. Wind increased as a percentage only because the others were knocked down further, but at those low percentages for wind, such small absolute changes make a disproportionate percentage change. No big deal at that low volume of supply.

I gave you the link for the data which you challenged...still angry?

You stated "I can't let such blatant misinformation as this go forward", but then you just called up the same source for the data which you challenged. What gives, Jay?

Edited June 27, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

3 minutes ago, turbguy said:

What do you need as more context?

Another relatively modern coal plant is going to be GONE!

Who is gonna build a more modern one to replace it, that STILL requires fuel mining, processing, and transport, ash disposal, water treatment, flue gas treatment, make-up water, and STILL rejects about 50% of the energy released in combustion?

The new plants are superior in terms of emissions. The point I made was that coal is still a main stalwart of the energy mix.

Michigan is an unusual place for energy policy.

[turbguy + 1,543]

2 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

The new plants are superior in terms of emissions. The point I made was that coal is still a main stalwart of the energy mix.

Michigan is an unusual place for energy policy.

I would agree that new plants are superior to old, for just about EVERYTHING.

Coal is still important.  It ain't going away any time soon.  It's death will be slow, and it WILL die.

Point me to ONE new coal-fired plant planned in the USA.

What so "unusual" about Michigan?  Perhaps I can learn something.

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

1 minute ago, turbguy said:

I would agree that new plants are superior to old, for just about EVERYTHING.

Coal is still important.  It ain't going away any time soon.  It's death will be slow, and it WILL die.

Point me to ONE new coal-fired plant planned in the USA.

What so "unusual" about Michigan?  Perhaps I can learn something.

They seem to think that they can over-ride the system about shutting down pipelines, which are  needed by just about every resident in the state to supply oil and gasoline to drive their vehicles. That is pretty unusual, don't you think?

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

1 minute ago, Ecocharger said:

Some joke Jay.....so coal-fired provided 41% during the crisis, and normally delivered 38.5, so it was less impacted than the others. Fine, coal was a stalwart of the mix and still is. Wind increased as a percentage only because the others were knocked down further, but at those low percentages for wind, such small absolute changes make a disproportionate percentage change. No big deal at that low volume of supply.

I gave you the link for the data which you challenged...still angry?

Those numbers are all on the same scale and all were equally affected by the loss of other generation. Wind increased by 4.9 points and coal increased by 2.5 points.  

I'll grant you that your report was looking at primary energy mix and I was looking at electric. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

24 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

They seem to think that they can over-ride the system about shutting down pipelines, which are  needed by just about every resident in the state to supply oil and gasoline to drive their vehicles. That is pretty unusual, don't you think?

Are they trying to shutdown some pipeline other than Enbridge 5?

 

Edited June 27, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[turbguy + 1,543]

30 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

They seem to think that they can over-ride the system about shutting down pipelines, which are  needed by just about every resident in the state to supply oil and gasoline to drive their vehicles. That is pretty unusual, don't you think?

Are they trying to shutdown some pipeline other than Enbridge 5?