JM

GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

"Nonsense" you say lol They were on about deaths per Twh NOT Greenhouse gas

here let me show you

"But energy production doesn’t just lead to carbon emissions, it can also cause accidents and air pollution that have a significant toll on human life."

"with coal responsible for 25 deaths per terawatt-hour."

Keep promoting coal and keep promoting polluting FF that actually kill people. I feel sorry for you if you want people to continue to die! Why would you want that?

You are joking, I assume.

People die from driving EVs, should we ban EVs? Don't you care about people? How insensitive.

How many people die from slave labor in African cobalt mines? I guess we should shut down the electric revolution, it makes people go nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

33 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

We were discussing SPECIFICALLY power generation by source NOT energy consumption!

Please try to keep up.

However from your own post, this

  • Record deployment of wind and solar in the power sector accounted for around 84% of net electricity growth.

I posted the actual numbers and FF powergen is 61% of total powergen globally bit this is reducing rapidly as you kindly pointed out in your article link.

 

Well, that does not seem to have any impact on energy sources, with fossil fuels usually attributed with about 84% of energy requirements, which is the big number of consequence.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

You are joking, I assume.

People die from driving EVs, should we ban EVs? Don't you care about people? How insensitive.

How many people die from slave labor in African cobalt mines? I guess we should shut down the electric revolution, it makes people go nuts.

WTF are you on about now?

Talk about deflection!

Now youre on about cobalt mining

Is there something wrong with you that you want people to die of respiratory conditions due to FF powergen? You gleefully promote coal use knowing full well it is killing people, what's wrong with you man?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Well, that does not seem to have any impact on energy sources, with fossil fuels usually attributed with about 84% of energy requirements, which is the big number of consequence.

Again "energy sources" we WERENT discussing energy sources FFS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

7 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

WTF are you on about now?

Talk about deflection!

Now youre on about cobalt mining

Is there something wrong with you that you want people to die of respiratory conditions due to FF powergen? You gleefully promote coal use knowing full well it is killing people, what's wrong with you man?

I am trying to get you to broaden your intellectual horizons. You were deflecting and blinkering.

The world is inter-related, you cannot just shut down everything that kills people, we would all sit at home and starve.

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Again "energy sources" we WERENT discussing energy sources FFS!

Yes, I was discussing sources of energy, which is what really counts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Ecocharger said:

I am trying to get you to broaden your intellectual horizons.

The world is inter-related, you cannot just shut down everything that kills people, we would all sit at home and starve.

Why promote coal as you do when there are alternatives to this horrifically pollutant form of powergen, renewables, nuclear, NG etc?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Yes, I was discussing sources of energy, which is what really counts.

NO you changed the topic to sources of energy when we were discussing SPECIFICALLY power generation!

Anyway hopefully youve learned that only 61% is FF powergen and that is rapidly reducing now.

Edited by Rob Plant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

31 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Why promote coal as you do when there are alternatives to this horrifically pollutant form of powergen, renewables, nuclear, NG etc?

 

When did I promote Coal? I merely pointed out that coal is a powerful industry with a strong future.

The promoters of coal are those governments which encourage the use of coal. They have their own reasons for using coal. Who am I to argue with them?

Do I think that using coal is more dangerous than going Green? I doubt that.

Eliminating fossil fuels would cause a serious destruction of living standards and decrease life expectancy.

The EV industry depends upon coal to provide electricity.

Edited by Ecocharger
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

NO you changed the topic to sources of energy when we were discussing SPECIFICALLY power generation!

Anyway hopefully youve learned that only 61% is FF powergen and that is rapidly reducing now.

The real number that counts is 84% of energy deriving from fossil fuels. That is reality.

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

The real number that counts is 84% of energy deriving from fossil fuels. That is reality.

you must be living on a different planet as it is now 2023

2019 was 84 percent

Fossil fuels

 
 
 
In 2019, around 84% of global primary energy came from coal, oil and gas. Over the coming decades, we must rapidly reduce this share by displacing them with low ...
 
in 2021

 

 
 
 
Jun 26, 2023Fossil fuels accounted for 82% of primary energy in 2021
 
in 2022   81 percent
 
2023......80 percent max
 
Try keeping up with the times Luddite
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

American oil production now leads the world as the U.S.  oil industry becomes a major exporter of oil.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Growing-US-Oil-Exports-Put-Lasting-Pressure-on-Prices.html

"Cargo-tracking data from Kpler and Vortexa has suggested U.S. crude oil exports hit a record of nearly 6 million barrels daily last week.

Despite the substantial discrepancy between export estimates, the fact remains that the U.S. is now a major exporter.

Bloomberg: Producers are looking to get rid of as many barrels as they can as the end of the year and tax season approaches. "

 

Edited by Ecocharger
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

17 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

American oil production now leads the world as the U.S.  oil industry becomes a major exporter of oil.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Growing-US-Oil-Exports-Put-Lasting-Pressure-on-Prices.html

 

WTI at 69.52

Producing oil nobody really wants as evident by the price.  There is none of your predicted demand bud, time to eat crow.

From the link you posted:

"Everything seems to point downwards for oil right now as traders focus on demand rather than supply, reducing the effect of OPEC+ cuts and Middle East escalation on the benchmarks.

Edited by TailingsPond

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2023 at 3:58 PM, Eyes Wide Open said:

I stand here in shock and awe..for once you are correct..Econ 101.

UK offshore wind auction receives zero bids, puts industry at risk

 

https://www.worldoil.com/news/2023/9/11/uk-offshore-wind-auction-receives-zero-bids-puts-industry-at-risk/#:~:text=(Bloomberg) – The UK's offshore,received zero bids from developers.

So, the UK with the BEST offshore wind parameters in the world bar none, can't do it...

Gee, as if the rest of the world can.  Wind "power" what a farcical joke.  I too used to be a wind fool 20 odd years ago.  I got out and wised up.  Solar... has potential, wind?  Not a chance in Hell.  No one can make a  HAWT that last long enough nor can be repaired in situ without complete replacement.  Until then, wind is an absurd joke.  Now I Have several ideas on how to make the above work, but said HAWT would look NOTHING like they currently do. 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

I am trying to get you to broaden your intellectual horizons. You were deflecting and blinkering.

The world is inter-related, you cannot just shut down everything that kills people, we would all sit at home and starve.

Uh, Ecoblather, he admitted upthread he is a MARKETING weenie.  That is his job.  By deninition every marketing guy is a zealot.  You will NEVER get a marketing guy to change off their BULL SHIT.  In order to sell, you have to convince yourself with unwavering faith that your bumbling Bull Shit, given to you by other peddling bumbling bull shitters is the truth when selling to others. 

Zealots do not look at math my friend. 

Peace

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Uh, Ecoblather, he admitted upthread he is a MARKETING weenie.  That is his job.  By deninition every marketing guy is a zealot.  You will NEVER get a marketing guy to change off their BULL SHIT.  In order to sell, you have to convince yourself with unwavering faith that your bumbling Bull Shit, given to you by other peddling bumbling bull shitters is the truth when selling to others. 

Zealots do not look at math my friend. 

Peace

If youre referring to me, I was a sales director for 23 years not a MARKETING weenie. The 2 jobs are totally different, but you wouldnt know that of course. I've actually changed roles to Purchasing Director over the last month so I do see both sides of the game. You know nothing about me, and your petty jibes and insults dont bother me in the slightest as I have zero respect for your opinions on almost everything you post.

I choose to call you out when you continue to post blatant lies.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

coal is toast ....pay attention to the price of solar cells used in making solar panels....

Battery prices are falling fast also

Solar Plus Batteries wipes out coal on every level

PV MAGAZINE

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2023/12/05/m10-solar-cell-prices-dive-to-new-record-low/

 

M10 solar cell prices dive to new record low

In a new weekly update for pv magazine, OPIS, a Dow Jones company, provides a quick look at the main price trends in the global PV industry.

DECEMBER 5, 2023 OPIS
 
Price-Graph2.v1-1200x578.jpg

ESN_New.png

https://www.energy-storage.news/lfp-cell-average-falls-below-us100-kwh-as-battery-pack-prices-drop-to-record-low-in-2023/

LFP cell average falls below US$100/kWh as battery pack prices drop to record low in 2023

November 27, 2023
LinkedIn
Twitter
Reddit
Facebook
Email
China_s_Largest_Stand_alone_Energy_Stora A 200MW/400MWh LFP BESS project in China, where lower battery prices continue to be found. Image: Hithium Energy Storage.

After a difficult couple of years which saw the trend of falling lithium battery prices temporarily reverse, a 14% drop in lithium-ion (Li-ion) battery pack cost from 2022-2023 has been recorded by BloombergNEF.

The market research and analysis group has published the new edition of its annual survey of battery pricing, finding that prices have been falling again this year after “unprecedented price increases” in 2022.

Meanwhile, demand for batteries across the electric vehicle (EV) and battery energy storage system (BESS) markets will likely total 950GWh globally in 2023, according to BloombergNEF.

On average, pack prices fell 14% from 2022 levels to a record low of US$139/kWh this year. This reduction was driven by the dynamics of falling raw material and component prices, and increases in production capacity.

However, despite the good news, BloombergNEF (BNEF) no longer expects to find average pack prices fall below US$100/kWh by 2024 (as it predicted in 2020), nor by 2026 (as it predicted last year). It will however be likely to happen before the end of this decade, with BNEF forecasting that the average pack will cost about US$113/kWh in 2025, and decline in cost sharply to around US$80/kWh by 2030.

Edited by notsonice
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

China unveils molten salt reactor containership design

A concept design for a giant nuclear-powered containership using a molten salt reactor (MSR) has been unveiled at the Marintec China exhibition in Shanghai.The design for a 24,000 TEU containership was developed by Jiangnan Shipbuilding, a division of the Chinese state-owned China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC), and has received an Approval in Principle (AiP) certificate from DNV, according to a report in the South China Morning Post.CSSC, in a statement posted to Weibo, highlighted the high safety of this type of reactor, which operates at high temperatures and low pressure, avoiding the principle of the core melting, and that in the event of an accident, the core solidifies at ambient temperature. CSSC indicated that their design is based on using thorium, as opposed to uranium, in the MSR. The South China Morning Post says China got the first thorium-based MSR up and running earlier this year during a test in the Gobi Desert, adding that the scientists involved in the project have said that such reactors are suitable for many different applications, including ships.If built, it could be one of the world's largest containerships and the first to be powered using MSR technology, which is different from the conventional pressurised water reactor (PWR) technology used on ships to date. Nuclear-powered ships in operation today are mainly military vessels, and Russia is operating a nuclear-powered icebreaker fleet in its territorial waters.

China unveils molten salt reactor containership design | CORE POWER

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/china-landspaces-methane-powered-rocket-004501934.html

Reuters

China LandSpace's methane-powered rocket sends satellites into orbit -state media

 
 
Reuters
Fri, December 8, 2023 at 6:45 PM CST·2 min read
 
 
 

BEIJING (Reuters) - A rocket developed by LandSpace Technology on Saturday launched three satellites into orbit, state media said, a milestone in the Chinese private rocket startup's mission to test whether its vehicle using methane and liquid oxygen is ready for commercial liftoffs.

LandSpace's Zhuque-2 Y-3 blasted off at 7:39 a.m. Dec. 9(11:39 p.m. Dec.8 GMT) from Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center in China's Inner Mongolia region, state television CCTV said, without providing details on the types and overall weight of the satellites it lifted.

The success could boost investors' confidence in methane as a potential rocket fuel, which is deemed able to help slash costs and support reusable rockets in a cleaner and more efficient way.

20231201144442576.png

Zhuque-2 Y-3 was the third of LandSpace's test rockets for Zhuque-2, and the first that succeeded in lifting satellites.

A second attempt, without real satellites, in July made LandSpace the world's first company to launch methane-liquid oxygen rocket, ahead of U.S. rivals including Elon Musk's SpaceX and Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin.

LandSpace had said the first launch last December failed, without specifying whether the test rocket, Zhuque-2 Y-1, carried any satellite payloads.

The eight-year-old startup said earlier it plans to provide clients with about three launches in 2024 and double that number in 2025.

Several private Chinese rocket startups have lined up test or commercial launches, aiming to preparing their products for the increasing demand in China's expanding commercial space industry, amid growing competition to form a constellation of satellites as an alternative to Musk's Starlink.

OrienSpace said it has scheduled the debut launch of its solid-fuel rocket, Gravity-1, in December. Deep Blue Aerospace, which is developing a reusable kerosene-fuelled rocket, aims to complete next year its first test of launching the Nebula-1 rocket to orbit and recovering it.

Galactic Energy on Tuesday launched its solid-propellant rocket Ceres-1 with two satellites into orbit, after a failure in September and a series of successful launches earlier.

(Reporting by Ella Cao, Roxanne Liu and Bernard Orr; Editing by Josie Kao and Grant McCool)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fossil Fuel Use is Rising Worldwide

 

Yes, fossil fuel use is growing worldwide. 
Fossil fuels
 
 
 
images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQnUhENVySsCsCyAsXX7ad
 
 
 
 meet more than 90% of the world's energy demand. In 2022, fossil fuels made up 82% of the global energy mix. 
 
image.png.4cac81a308870a1f395af59e050d8761.png
image.png.adcf5b02ac0b495bbb1b39238d2ebe31.png
Inside Climate News
Fossil fuel consumption has increased eight-fold since 1950 and roughly doubled since 1980. 
 
 In 2022, global oil consumption rose almost 3 million b/d to 97.3 million b/d. 
 
 The world has proven oil reserves equivalent to 46.6 times its annual consumption levels. This means it has about 47 years of oil left. 
 
The types of fuel we rely on have also shifted from solely coal towards a combination with oil and gas. Today, coal consumption is falling in many parts of the world. 
 
The U.S. Energy Information Administration predicted that "world energy consumption will increase approximately 50% over the next 30 years". This increase is primarily due to non-OECD countries using twice as much energy as OECD nations. 
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2023 at 6:12 PM, Rob Plant said:

Wow you really just dont get it do you!

NG has pushed the cost of energy up its renewables that are the cheap powergen sources!

Clue for you EWO wind and sun are free, FF not so much!

🤔......

Wind, sun, fossil fuel might be all free?? 😟

They are there in the environment, naturally, for all... ( That's why oil and gas are still cheap around 0.45 - 0.65 cents in their local currencies, in some socialist countries?). 

What put a price is the process of generating energy from them. In other words, how much it costs per turbine, per panel, per pump of barrel etc.....

I'm an outsider. But saw in an old movie how oil was first discovered in the early 1900s near a chapel in the United States. Dispute was stirred by a young pastor in his teenage age, if the black stuff was evil and must not be allowed.

Machinery used was really simple. Just a roughly 3 - 5 m height * 0.5 - 1 m width grill with a pump. Oil spilled out forming a pool. More details structure like pipes, storage tanks have been introduced much later to increase efficiency or such.

Generally, one well could probably last for decades or  more than a century? 😯

How many turbines, panels, batteries, grid etc, how large a space do you need for wind and solar farms? How long would they last before in need of replacement? Do you still think it is free? 

 

On 12/7/2023 at 7:05 PM, Rob Plant said:

 

The World’s Safest and Deadliest Sources of Energy | OilPrice.com

  • Fossil fuels, including coal, oil, and natural gas, contribute to over 60% of the world's energy production and are the top greenhouse gas emitters.
  • Air pollution and accidents from fossil fuel-based energy sources lead to significant human casualties, with coal responsible for 25 deaths per terawatt-hour.
  • Wind, solar, and nuclear energy emerge as the safest options, with fewer than 0.1 annual deaths per terawatt-hour, challenging common perceptions about the safety of nuclear energy.

Generally, over here, the key contributor for respiratory killer haze, or poor quality of air with low visibility, is open burning. For examples, large scale wild forest fire, burning of rice fields after harvesting etc. The source of air containing a lot of ash, seen as snow in the tropics, could be from within the country itself or from neighbouring countries with such activities.

Not burning of fossil fuel?

CO and CO2 produced from burning ff could cause dizziness in minutes or headache after hours of exposure, in some people and  lead, before phased out, could affect brain development of young children,  etc, but probably not enough to kill. 

 

Wind and solar farms could have affected overlooked

a) population of wild lives,

b) smooth flow of wind turned turbulence,

c) increase localized heat accummulation and temperature etc. 

 

(b) and ( c ) are the latest concern raised by cult kid on this platform. They drive  availability of wind down the field, changing climate, pattern of rain and possibly induce formation of frequent cyclones in large scale farms. Investigation is needed to know or confirm how severe the neglected impact could have been .... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

China unveils molten salt reactor containership design

A concept design for a giant nuclear-powered containership using a molten salt reactor (MSR) has been unveiled at the Marintec China exhibition in Shanghai.The design for a 24,000 TEU containership was developed by Jiangnan Shipbuilding, a division of the Chinese state-owned China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC), and has received an Approval in Principle (AiP) certificate from DNV, according to a report in the South China Morning Post.CSSC, in a statement posted to Weibo, highlighted the high safety of this type of reactor, which operates at high temperatures and low pressure, avoiding the principle of the core melting, and that in the event of an accident, the core solidifies at ambient temperature. CSSC indicated that their design is based on using thorium, as opposed to uranium, in the MSR. The South China Morning Post says China got the first thorium-based MSR up and running earlier this year during a test in the Gobi Desert, adding that the scientists involved in the project have said that such reactors are suitable for many different applications, including ships.If built, it could be one of the world's largest containerships and the first to be powered using MSR technology, which is different from the conventional pressurised water reactor (PWR) technology used on ships to date. Nuclear-powered ships in operation today are mainly military vessels, and Russia is operating a nuclear-powered icebreaker fleet in its territorial waters.

China unveils molten salt reactor containership design | CORE POWER

 

Boom!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PV Magazine

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2023/12/08/solar-lcoe-now-29-lower-than-any-fuel-fossil-option-says-ey/

 

Solar LCOE now 29% lower than any fossil fuel option, says EY

A report from Ernst & Young (EY) shows that despite inflationary pressures, solar remains the cheapest source of new-build electricity. The global weighted average levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for PV is now 29% lower than the cheapest fossil fuel alternative.

DECEMBER 8, 2023 RYAN KENNEDY
antonio-garcia-ndz_u1_tFZo-unsplash-1200

Image: Antonio Garcia, Unsplash

EY said in its latest energy and resources report that 86%, or 187 GW, of newly commissioned renewable energy resources generated electricity at a cost lower than the average cost of fossil fuel generation in 2022.

Solar is the cheapest new-build electricity in many markets, even amid inflation and price rises, said EY, noting that the global weighted average LCOE for solar is now 29% lower than the cheapest fossil fuel alternative. Large-scale energy storage is also quickly becoming more cost-competitive and sophisticated, it said.

Solar has rapidly fallen in average LCOE globally, from more than $400/MWh in the early 2010s to about $49/MWh in 2022, down 88%. Wind power LCOE has fallen roughly 60% over the same period.

EY.pngImage: EY

EY forecasts that solar and wind will become the global baseload electricity source. By 2030 the two traditional renewables are expected to represent 38% of the energy mix, and by 2050 solar and wind may supply 62% of the energy mix. China, Europe and the United States will drive a 53% increase in solar and wind generation, producing over 57% of global solar and wind output by 2050, said EY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/8/2023 at 12:41 AM, Rob Plant said:

If youre referring to me, I was a sales director for 23 years not a MARKETING weenie. The 2 jobs are totally different, but you wouldnt know that of course. I've actually changed roles to Purchasing Director over the last month so I do see both sides of the game. You know nothing about me, and your petty jibes and insults dont bother me in the slightest as I have zero respect for your opinions on almost everything you post.

I choose to call you out when you continue to post blatant lies.

Marketing weenies become sales guys and vice versa.  Same side of the coin, but they both like to lie and say they aren't.  They do the grunt work that engineers are too expensive to use.  Yes, engineering school teaches you economics, marketing. 

Let the world know when you can do basic math(science) and analysis so you can actually figure out what the truth or a lie is. 

Until then let the Marketing/Salemen zealots unite with their snowjob Bull Shit!  Gold is free, after all a salesguy told me so, it must be true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2023 at 4:41 AM, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Marketing weenies become sales guys and vice versa.  Same side of the coin, but they both like to lie and say they aren't.  They do the grunt work that engineers are too expensive to use.  Yes, engineering school teaches you economics, marketing. 

Let the world know when you can do basic math(science) and analysis so you can actually figure out what the truth or a lie is. 

Until then let the Marketing/Salemen zealots unite with their snowjob Bull Shit!  Gold is free, after all a salesguy told me so, it must be true. 

You continue to demonstrate you know very little about anything, well done!

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.