Ecocharger + 1,485 DL April 6 (edited) 3 hours ago, TailingsPond said: ICE vehicles have upfront manufacturing emissions too, but with no mitigating factors. Read the total calculations before spouting more nonsense. The comparison just destroys EVs as a positive contribution to CO2 emissions. "Norway imports all domestic EVs. As we discussed, EV manufacturing is incredibly energy-intensive, mainly to build the battery. In Norway’s case, none of this additional energy is reflected in their domestic demand figures. China manufactures most lithium-ion batteries and 80% of all EVs. Coal accounts for 60% of their total energy supply. We estimate an average EV consumes 60 MWh to manufacture, of which the battery represents half. Therefore, manufacturing Norway’s 579,000 EVs (all the EVs on the road today in Norway) requires 35 twh, equivalent to 25% of the total annual Norwegian electricity demand. Given that China emits 600 grams of CO2 per kwh (China is where almost all of Noway’s EV batteries are manufactured), we calculate Norway’s EV fleet would emit 21 mm tonnes of CO2. Norway’s gasoline and diesel consumption fell by a meager 3,200 barrels per day or 50 mm gallons per year. Assuming 9 kg of CO2 per gallon of gasoline or diesel, Norway’s entire EV fleet mitigates a mere 450,000 tonnes of CO2 per year, compared with an upfront emission of 21 mm tonnes. In other words, it would take forty-five years of CO2 savings from reduced gasoline and diesel consumption to offset the initial emissions from the manufacturing of the vehicles. Since an EV battery has a useful life of only ten to fifteen years, it is clear that Norway's EV rollout has increased total lifecycle CO2 emissions dramatically. Incredibly, this is true despite Norway having the lowest carbon hydroelectricity in the world. Even if China were to reach its overly ambitious targets for wind, solar, and nuclear power by 2035, we calculate that the carbon “payback” would still exceed twenty years. Realistically, the only way for EVs to reduce lifecycle carbon emissions would be with a widespread move to carbon-free energy in EV manufacturing. " https://blog.gorozen.com/blog/the-norwegian-illusion Edited April 6 by Ecocharger Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,266 DM April 6 (edited) 3 hours ago, Ecocharger said: Read the total calculations before spouting more nonsense. The comparison just destroys EVs as a positive contribution to CO2 emissions. "Norway imports all domestic EVs. As we discussed, EV manufacturing is incredibly energy-intensive, mainly to build the battery. In Norway’s case, none of this additional energy is reflected in their domestic demand figures. China manufactures most lithium-ion batteries and 80% of all EVs. Coal accounts for 60% of their total energy supply. We estimate an average EV consumes 60 MWh to manufacture, of which the battery represents half. Therefore, manufacturing Norway’s 579,000 EVs (all the EVs on the road today in Norway) requires 35 twh, equivalent to 25% of the total annual Norwegian electricity demand. Given that China emits 600 grams of CO2 per kwh (China is where almost all of Noway’s EV batteries are manufactured), we calculate Norway’s EV fleet would emit 21 mm tonnes of CO2. Norway’s gasoline and diesel consumption fell by a meager 3,200 barrels per day or 50 mm gallons per year. Assuming 9 kg of CO2 per gallon of gasoline or diesel, Norway’s entire EV fleet mitigates a mere 450,000 tonnes of CO2 per year, compared with an upfront emission of 21 mm tonnes. In other words, it would take forty-five years of CO2 savings from reduced gasoline and diesel consumption to offset the initial emissions from the manufacturing of the vehicles. Since an EV battery has a useful life of only ten to fifteen years, it is clear that Norway's EV rollout has increased total lifecycle CO2 emissions dramatically. Incredibly, this is true despite Norway having the lowest carbon hydroelectricity in the world. Even if China were to reach its overly ambitious targets for wind, solar, and nuclear power by 2035, we calculate that the carbon “payback” would still exceed twenty years. Realistically, the only way for EVs to reduce lifecycle carbon emissions would be with a widespread move to carbon-free energy in EV manufacturing. " https://blog.gorozen.com/blog/the-norwegian-illusion what a load of BS, You are an idiot to take someones BS post as gospel...... first all of the EVs in Norway are not manufactured every year , over and over again so comparing the energy required to the annual Norwegian output is garbage 21 mm tonnes divided by 579,000 vehicles is 40 tonnes of CO2 per vehicle???? which is also BS as it is 5 tonnes per vehicle for the battery.... We estimate an average EV consumes 60 MWh to manufacture??? who is We ??? some idiot that spouts BS and Ecochump????? 2 idiots with IQs of 80, put in a room together, does not yield a person with an IQ of 160.....you just have two idiots in a room. so you are taking someones BS math as your gospel??? when you yourself are incapable of doing simple math..... Norway’s gasoline and diesel consumption fell by a meager 3,200 barrels per day???? so your idiot posting pal says 579,000 vehicles in Norway would only use 3200 barrels a day or 125,000 gallons a day if they were ICE vehicles...........0.23 gallons a day/for each EV????????? so the average EV is driven 5 miles a day???? assuming 20 MPG??? God you are an idiot. 50 mm gallons per year for 579000 vehicles or 85 gallons a year per vehicle...what does 85 gallons a year get you in an ICE vehicle????? 1700 miles a year per vehicle. So all Norwegians only drive to church on Sundays????? Your poster and yourself are not dealing with reality When you are posting some idiots rambling BS please make sure you are quoting real facts not someone who is incapable of spelling or doing simple math. Unless you want to be considered an Idiot, the same as the person you are quoting. Edited April 6 by notsonice 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,013 GE April 6 (edited) 7 hours ago, Ecocharger said: We estimate an average EV consumes 60 MWh to manufacture, of which the battery represents half. It's a biased blog using made up numbers. I know you love those made up numbers and pretending to do math. They admit themselves that they are biased and controversial and only want to exploit natural resources. https://www.gorozen.com/about "A fundamental research firm focused exclusively on contrarian natural resource investments with a team with over 49 years of combined resource experience." Try again. Edited April 6 by TailingsPond 1 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,013 GE April 6 LOL read some of their older commentaries. In 2020 they predicted low oil supply. The same year oil prices went negative due to oversupply. https://www.gorozen.com/commentaries/1q2020 They also predicted a collapse in non-OPEC oil production. How did that go? https://www.gorozen.com/commentaries/2q2018 1 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turbguy + 1,553 April 6 (edited) 11 hours ago, Ecocharger said: "We estimate an average EV consumes 60 MWh to manufacture, of which the battery represents half. Therefore, manufacturing Norway’s 579,000 EVs (all the EVs on the road today in Norway) requires 35 twh", . I don't have reason to doubt these estimates, but to compare the energy used to manufacture those half million plus EV's in Norway to a year's worth of the country's total electric demand is disturbing, or at least worthy of some review. Not all of Norway's EV's were manufactured in the same year! I don't know the average age of Norway's EV's, but I suspect the average is young compared to the average Norway ICE vehicle, on the order of 3-5 years. Let's say the average EV age is 3 years. That means that only 1/3 of the "equivalent to 25% of the total annual Norwegian electricity demand", or more properly, about 8% of Norway's yearly total demand, has been consumed (somewhere) instead of 1/4 of Norway's demand. How many MWh does the manufacture of a ICE vehicle consume? Some research suggests the "embodied energy" (including manufacturing) of a mid-size ICE sedan can range from 35 to 85 MWh, which I also have no reason to doubt. Let's say it is 20 MWh. If we are going to criticize an EV's "embodied energy", it is the DIFFERENCE between the "embodied energy" between an EV and an ICE that needs to be considered, not the absolute. If there is a "energy penalty" that is to be pinned on EV's (which I have no reason to believe does indeed exist), then it is that "penalty" that should be considered. I just don't believe it is such a large penalty as portrayed by the statement quoted. YMMV. Edited April 6 by turbguy 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marcin2 + 726 MK April 6 On 3/15/2024 at 10:11 AM, Rob Plant said: No they are the factual numbers for 2023 from the European Automobile Manufacturers Association as Ive already told you. I dont take a 1 month snapshot like you do to try and justify my position on this. If in 2024 nobody buys an EV then come and spout off, FACT is they grew by the numbers I posted and actually significantly outperformed ICE by % increase For city cars EV's are competitive, some of my friends think about buiyng a chep Chinese EV car for shopping, and daily commutes within Warsaw. It is ok, it can be this market. But when I go for vacation, say it Croatia 1800 km, or even Czech Republic for 800 km, electric cars are nobrainer for us. Electric cars are a good second cars in the family. But not the first one's. Also for trucks it is no brainer, you just need to understand current demands of European supply chains. Diesel truck makes 800 km (500 miles) a day and does not need to thin k about recharging. I work in transport/logistic industry and electrci vehicles just do not fit yet - when they will have 800-900 km mileage on batteries it would change, but now it is a toy for very rich and not effcient companies. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turbguy + 1,553 April 6 (edited) Here's one "analysis" that's worth considering (and criticizing) by those here: https://www.zerocarbonguildford.org/post/should-i-buy-an-electric-car Edited April 6 by turbguy 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,485 DL April 7 (edited) 9 hours ago, turbguy said: Here's one "analysis" that's worth considering (and criticizing) by those here: https://www.zerocarbonguildford.org/post/should-i-buy-an-electric-car Well, of course that is nonsense. You need to consider the initial need for manufacturing emissions of CO2. And, no, those numbers given for the Norway comparison do not assume that all EVs were manufactured in one year. Not sure how you figured that. Here is where the Norway calculations begin. EVs are not manufactured in Norway, so the CO2 emissions need to be factored in the country of manufacture. "Norway imports all domestic EVs." "As we discussed, EV manufacturing is incredibly energy-intensive, mainly to build the battery. In Norway’s case, none of this additional energy is reflected in their domestic demand figures. China manufactures most lithium-ion batteries and 80% of all EVs. Coal accounts for 60% of their total energy supply." That is where the numbers come from, comparing the entire fleets on the road today. The "years" calculation is for how many years are needed to reach equivalence with the huge initial outlay of CO2 emissions to manufacture the EVs. "Norway’s gasoline and diesel consumption fell by a meager 3,200 barrels per day or 50 mm gallons per year. Assuming 9 kg of CO2 per gallon of gasoline or diesel, Norway’s entire EV fleet mitigates a mere 450,000 tonnes of CO2 per year, compared with an upfront emission of 21 mm tonnes. In other words, it would take forty-five years of CO2 savings from reduced gasoline and diesel consumption to offset the initial emissions from the manufacturing of the vehicles. Since an EV battery has a useful life of only ten to fifteen years, it is clear that Norway's EV rollout has increased total lifecycle CO2 emissions dramatically. " This is not rocket science, Einstein not needed to see this. Edited April 7 by Ecocharger Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,485 DL April 7 (edited) 9 hours ago, turbguy said: Here's one "analysis" that's worth considering (and criticizing) by those here: https://www.zerocarbonguildford.org/post/should-i-buy-an-electric-car The relevant measure is not one mile of travel, but lifecycle emissions for EVs compared to fossil fuel vehicles. And the comparison is for mitigation of fossil fuel CO2 emissions from a start-up position for EVs. Reliance on Chinese coal-fired electricity for the manufacture of EVs compared to the cleaner energy used to manufacture fossil fuel vehicles, the CO2 gap between EVs and fossil fuel vehicles works strongly in favor of fossil fuel vehicles. Edited April 7 by Ecocharger Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron Wagner + 714 April 7 https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/amid-explosive-demand-america-running-152219813.html Amid explosive demand, America is running out of power Evan Halper Fri, April 5, 2024 at 10:22 AM CDT·13 min read 8.8k 1 / 2 Amid explosive demand, America is running out of power - - - Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly said the revised forecast for power needs in Georgia showed power use in the state increasing 17 times. New demand, not total demand, is projected to increase 17 times. The article also misspelled the name of the agency that advocates for Maryland ratepayers. It is the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel. The article has been corrected. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. - - - Vast swaths of the United States are at risk of running short of power as electricity-hungry data centers and clean-technology factories proliferate around the country, leaving utilities and regulators grasping for credible plans to expand the nation’s creaking power grid. In Georgia, demand for industrial power is surging to record highs, with the projection of new electricity use for the next decade now 17 times what it was only recently. Arizona Public Service, the largest utility in that state, is also struggling to keep up, projecting it will be out of transmission capacity before the end of the decade absent major upgrades. Northern Virginia needs the equivalent of several large nuclear power plants to serve all the new data centers planned and under construction. Texas, where electricity shortages are already routine on hot summer days, faces the same dilemma. The soaring demand is touching off a scramble to try to squeeze more juice out of an aging power grid while pushing commercial customers to go to extraordinary lengths to lock down energy sources, such as building their own power plants. “When you look at the numbers, it is staggering,” said Jason Shaw, chairman of the Georgia Public Service Commission, which regulates electricity. “It makes you scratch your head and wonder how we ended up in this situation. How were the projections that far off? This has created a challenge like we have never seen before.” A major factor behind the skyrocketing demand is the rapid innovation in artificial intelligence, which is driving the construction of large warehouses of computing infrastructure that require exponentially more power than traditional data centers. AI is also part of a huge scale-up of cloud computing. Tech firms like Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta and Microsoft are scouring the nation for sites for new data centers, and many lesser-known firms are also on the hunt. The proliferation of crypto-mining, in which currencies like bitcoin are transacted and minted, is also driving data center growth. It is all putting new pressures on an overtaxed grid - the network of transmission lines and power stations that move electricity around the country. Bottlenecks are mounting, leaving both new generators of energy, particularly clean energy, and large consumers facing growing wait times for hookups. The situation is sparking battles across the nation over who will pay for new power supplies, with regulators worrying that residential ratepayers could be stuck with the bill for costly upgrades. It also threatens to stifle the transition to cleaner energy, as utility executives lobby to delay the retirement of fossil fuel plants and bring more online. The power crunch imperils their ability to supply the energy that will be needed to charge the millions of electric cars and household appliances required to meet state and federal climate goals. The nation’s 2,700 data centers sapped more than 4 percent of the country’s total electricity in 2022, according to the International Energy Agency. Its projections show that by 2026, they will consume 6 percent. Industry forecasts show the centers eating up a larger share of U.S. electricity in the years that follow, as demand from residential and smaller commercial facilities stays relatively flat thanks to steadily increasing efficiencies in appliances and heating and cooling systems. Data center operators are clamoring to hook up to regional electricity grids at the same time the Biden administration’s industrial policy is luring companies to build factories in the United States at a pace not seen in decades. That includes manufacturers of “clean tech,” such as solar panels and electric car batteries, which are being enticed by lucrative federal incentives. Companies announced plans to build or expand more than 155 factories in this country during the first half of the Biden administration, according to the Electric Power Research Institute, a research and development organization. Not since the early 1990s has factory-building accounted for such a large share of U.S. construction spending, according to the group. Utility projections for the amount of power they will need over the next five years have nearly doubled and are expected to grow, according to a review of regulatory filings by the research firm Grid Strategies. - - - Chasing power In the past, companies tried to site their data centers in areas with major internet infrastructure, a large pool of tech talent, and attractive government incentives. But these locations are getting tapped out. Communities that had little connection to the computing industry now find themselves in the middle of a land rush, with data center developers flooding their markets with requests for grid hookups. Officials in Columbus, Ohio; Altoona, Iowa; and Fort Wayne, Ind. are being aggressively courted by data center developers. But power supply in some of these second-choice markets is already running low, pushing developers ever farther out, in some cases into cornfields, according to JLL, a commercial real estate firm that serves the tech industry. Grid Strategies warns in its report that “there are real risks some regions may miss out on economic development opportunities because the grid can’t keep up.” “Across the board, we are seeing power companies say, ‘We don’t know if we can handle this; we have to audit our system; we’ve never dealt with this kind of influx before,’” said Andy Cvengros, managing director of data center markets at JLL. “Everyone is now chasing power. They are willing to look everywhere for it.” “We saw a quadrupling of land values in some parts of Columbus, and a tripling in areas of Chicago,” he said. “It’s not about the land. It is about access to power.” Some developers, he said, have had to sell the property they bought at inflated prices at a loss, after utilities became overwhelmed by the rush for grid hookups. - - - Rethinking incentives It is all happening at the same time the energy transition is steering large numbers of Americans to rely on the power grid to fuel vehicles, heat pumps, induction stoves and all manner of other household appliances that previously ran on fossil fuels. A huge amount of clean energy is also needed to create the green hydrogen championed by the White House, as developers rush to build plants that can produce the powerful zero-emissions fuel, lured by generous federal subsidies. Planners are increasingly concerned that the grid won’t be green enough or powerful enough to meet these demands. Already, soaring power consumption is delaying coal plant closures in Kansas, Nebraska, Wisconsin and South Carolina. In Georgia, the state’s major power company, Georgia Power, stunned regulators when it revealed recently how wildly off its projections were, pointing to data centers as the main culprit. The demand has Georgia officials rethinking the state’s policy of offering incentives to lure computing operations, which generate few jobs but can boost community budgets through the hefty property taxes they pay. The top leaders of Georgia’s House and Senate, both Republicans, are championing a pause in data center incentives. Georgia regulators, meanwhile, are exploring how to protect ratepayers while ensuring there is enough power to meet the needs of the state’s most-prized new tenants: clean-technology companies. Factories supplying the electric vehicle and green-energy markets have been rushing to locate in Georgia in large part on promises of cheap, reliable electricity. When the data center industry began looking for new hubs, “Atlanta was like, ‘Bring it on,’” said Pat Lynch, who leads the Data Center Solutions team at real estate giant CBRE. “Now Georgia Power is warning of limitations. ... Utility shortages in the face of these data center demands are happening in almost every market.” A similar dynamic is playing out in a very different region: the Pacific Northwest. In Oregon, Portland General Electric recently doubled its forecast for new electricity demand over the next five years, citing data centers and “rapid industrial growth” as the drivers. That power crunch threw a wrench into the plans of Michael Halaburda and Arman Khalili, longtime data center developers whose latest project involves converting a mothballed tile factory in the Portland area. The two were under the impression only a couple of months ago that they would have no problem getting the electricity they needed to run the place. Then the power company alerted them that it would need to do a “line and load study” to assess whether it could supply the facility with 60 megawatts of electricity - roughly the amount needed to power 45,000 homes. - - - Going off the grid The Portland project Halaburda and Khalili are developing will now be powered in large part by off-the-grid, high-tech fuel cells that convert natural gas into low-emissions electricity. The technology will be supplemented by whatever power can be secured from the grid. The partners decided that on their next project, in South Texas, they’re not going to take their chances with the grid at all. Instead, they will drill thousands of feet into the ground to draw geothermal energy. Halaburda sees the growth as good for the country and the economy. “But no one took into consideration where this is all going,” he said. “In the next couple of years, unless there is a real focus on expanding the grid and making it more robust, we are going to see opportunities fall by the wayside because we can’t get power to where it is needed.” Companies are increasingly turning to such off-the-grid experiments as their frustration with the logjam in the nation’s traditional electricity network mounts. Microsoft and Google are among the firms hoping that energy-intensive industrial operations can ultimately be powered by small nuclear plants on-site, with Microsoft even putting AI to work trying to streamline the burdensome process of getting plants approved. Microsoft has also inked a deal to buy power from a company trying to develop zero-emissions fusion power. But going off the grid brings its own big regulatory and land acquisition challenges. The type of nuclear plants envisioned, for example, are not yet even operational in the United States. Fusion power does not yet exist. The big tech companies are also exploring ways AI can help make the grid operate more efficiently. And they are developing platforms that during times of peak power demand “can shift compute tasks and their associated energy consumption to the times and places where carbon-free energy is available on the grid,” according to Google. But meeting both their zero-emissions pledges and their AI innovation ambitions is becoming increasingly complicated as the energy needs of their data centers grow. “These problems are not going to go away,” said Michael Ortiz, CEO of Layer 9 Data Centers, a U.S. company that is looking to avoid the logjam here by building in Mexico. “Data centers are going to have to become more efficient, and we need to be using more clean sources of efficient energy, like nuclear.” Officials at Equinix, one of the world’s largest data center companies, said they have been experimenting with fuel cells as backup power, but they remain hopeful they can keep the power grid as their main source of electricity for new projects. The logjam is already pushing officials overseeing the clean-energy transition at some of the nation’s largest airports to look beyond the grid. The amount of energy they will need to charge fleets of electric rental vehicles and ground maintenance trucks alone is immense. An analysis shows electricity demand doubling by 2030 at both the Denver and Minneapolis airports. By 2040, they will need more than triple the electricity they are using now, according to the study, commissioned by car rental giant Enterprise, Xcel Energy and Jacobs, a consulting firm. “Utilities are not going to be able to move quickly enough to provide all this capacity,” said Christine Weydig, vice president of transportation at AlphaStruxure, which designs and operates clean-energy projects. “The infrastructure is not there. Different solutions will be needed.” Airports, she said, are looking into dramatically expanding the use of clean-power “microgrids” they can build on-site. The Biden administration has made easing the grid bottleneck a priority, but it is a politically fraught process, and federal powers are limited. Building the transmission lines and transfer stations needed involves huge land acquisitions, exhaustive environmental reviews and negotiations to determine who should pay what costs. The process runs through state regulatory agencies, and fights between states over who gets stuck with the bill and where power lines should go routinely sink and delay proposed projects. The amount of new transmission line installed in the United States has dropped sharply since 2013, when 4,000 miles were added. Now, the nation struggles to bring online even 1,000 new miles a year. The slowdown has real consequences not just for companies but for the climate. A group of scientists led by Princeton University professor Jesse Jenkins warned in a report that by 2030 the United States risks losing out on 80 percent of the potential emission reductions from President Biden’s signature climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act, if the pace of transmission construction does not pick up dramatically now. While the proliferation of data centers puts more pressure on states to approve new transmission lines, it also complicates the task. Officials in Maryland, for example, are protesting a plan for $5.2 billion in infrastructure that would transmit power to huge data centers in Loudoun County, Va. The Maryland Office of People’s Counsel, a government agency that advocates for ratepayers, called grid operator PJM’s plan “fundamentally unfair,” arguing it could leave Maryland utility customers paying for power transmission to data centers that Virginia aggressively courted and is leveraging for a windfall in tax revenue. Tensions over who gets power from the grid and how it gets to them are only going to intensify as the supply becomes scarcer. In Texas, a dramatic increase in data centers for crypto mining is touching off a debate over whether they are a costly drain on an overtaxed grid. An analysis by the consulting firm Wood Mackenzie found that the energy needed by crypto operations aiming to link to the grid would equal a quarter of the electricity used in the state at peak demand. Unlike data centers operated by big tech companies such as Google and Meta, crypto miners generally don’t build renewable-energy projects with the aim of supplying enough zero-emissions energy to the grid to cover their operations. The result, said Ben Hertz-Shargel, who authored the Wood Mackenzie analysis, is that crypto’s drain on the grid threatens to inhibit the ability of Texas to power other energy-hungry operations that could drive innovation and economic growth, such as factories that produce zero-emissions green hydrogen fuel or industrial charging depots that enable electrification of truck and bus fleets. But after decades in which power was readily available, regulators and utility executives across the country generally are not empowered to prioritize which projects get connected. It is first come, first served. And the line is growing longer. To answer the call, some states have passed laws to protect crypto mining’s access to huge amounts of power. “Lawmakers need to think about this,” Hertz-Shargel said of allocating an increasingly limited supply of power. “There is a risk that strategic industries they want in their states are going to have a challenging time setting up in those places. - - - Graphics: https://washingtonpost.com/documents/2ac97e07-243d-4a1a-9d52-f66469ea65c1.pdf https://washingtonpost.com/documents/c55e319a-da69-475f-88b9-dcd4408fec99.pdf https://washingtonpost.com/documents/c7d03a95-032e-41bf-9a86-c22f37c24630.pdf https://washingtonpost.com/documents/26bfcb07-baba-47d2-b9ab-503da39b0678.pdf Related Content As obesity rises, Big Food and dietitians push ‘anti-diet’ advice Wes Moore envisioned economic revival. Then the Key Bridge collapsed. The problem with your sneakers? They’re built to last too long. View comments (8.8k) Trending What the New Jersey earthquake tells us about the fault system beneath the Northeast Yahoo News·3 min read The day New York shook: How the Big Apple reacted to Friday's 4.8 magnitude earthquake Yahoo News·3 min read People are reporting vertigo, dizziness and nausea after Friday's 4.8 magnitude East Coast earthquake. Here's why. Yahoo Life·4 min read After years on the run, GirlsDoPorn boss faces 'beginning of the end' in San Diego LA Times·6 min read More from Washington Post Texas man is preparing to watch his 13th solar eclipse. He’s 105. 4 min read As the internet gets scarier, more parents keep their kids’ photos offline 6 min read Meta expands AI labeling policies as 2024 presidential race nears 2 min read Scientists urge FDA to rescind approval of test for opioid addiction risk 4 min read Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,013 GE April 7 13 minutes ago, Ecocharger said: The relevant measure is not one mile of travel, but lifecycle emissions for EVs compared to fossil fuel vehicles. And the comparison is for mitigation of fossil fuel CO2 emissions from a start-up position for EVs. Reliance on Chinese coal-fired electricity for the manufacture of EVs compared to the cleaner energy used to manufacture fossil fuel vehicles, the CO2 gap between EVs and fossil fuel vehicles works strongly in favor of fossil fuel vehicles. Great because you think CO2 is plant food and not a problem. Score one more for EV's with bad logic. 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,485 DL April 7 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Ron Wagner said: https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/amid-explosive-demand-america-running-152219813.html Amid explosive demand, America is running out of power Evan Halper Fri, April 5, 2024 at 10:22 AM CDT·13 min read 8.8k 1 / 2 Amid explosive demand, America is running out of power - - - Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly said the revised forecast for power needs in Georgia showed power use in the state increasing 17 times. New demand, not total demand, is projected to increase 17 times. The article also misspelled the name of the agency that advocates for Maryland ratepayers. It is the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel. The article has been corrected. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. - - - Vast swaths of the United States are at risk of running short of power as electricity-hungry data centers and clean-technology factories proliferate around the country, leaving utilities and regulators grasping for credible plans to expand the nation’s creaking power grid. In Georgia, demand for industrial power is surging to record highs, with the projection of new electricity use for the next decade now 17 times what it was only recently. Arizona Public Service, the largest utility in that state, is also struggling to keep up, projecting it will be out of transmission capacity before the end of the decade absent major upgrades. Northern Virginia needs the equivalent of several large nuclear power plants to serve all the new data centers planned and under construction. Texas, where electricity shortages are already routine on hot summer days, faces the same dilemma. The soaring demand is touching off a scramble to try to squeeze more juice out of an aging power grid while pushing commercial customers to go to extraordinary lengths to lock down energy sources, such as building their own power plants. “When you look at the numbers, it is staggering,” said Jason Shaw, chairman of the Georgia Public Service Commission, which regulates electricity. “It makes you scratch your head and wonder how we ended up in this situation. How were the projections that far off? This has created a challenge like we have never seen before.” A major factor behind the skyrocketing demand is the rapid innovation in artificial intelligence, which is driving the construction of large warehouses of computing infrastructure that require exponentially more power than traditional data centers. AI is also part of a huge scale-up of cloud computing. Tech firms like Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta and Microsoft are scouring the nation for sites for new data centers, and many lesser-known firms are also on the hunt. The proliferation of crypto-mining, in which currencies like bitcoin are transacted and minted, is also driving data center growth. It is all putting new pressures on an overtaxed grid - the network of transmission lines and power stations that move electricity around the country. Bottlenecks are mounting, leaving both new generators of energy, particularly clean energy, and large consumers facing growing wait times for hookups. The situation is sparking battles across the nation over who will pay for new power supplies, with regulators worrying that residential ratepayers could be stuck with the bill for costly upgrades. It also threatens to stifle the transition to cleaner energy, as utility executives lobby to delay the retirement of fossil fuel plants and bring more online. The power crunch imperils their ability to supply the energy that will be needed to charge the millions of electric cars and household appliances required to meet state and federal climate goals. The nation’s 2,700 data centers sapped more than 4 percent of the country’s total electricity in 2022, according to the International Energy Agency. Its projections show that by 2026, they will consume 6 percent. Industry forecasts show the centers eating up a larger share of U.S. electricity in the years that follow, as demand from residential and smaller commercial facilities stays relatively flat thanks to steadily increasing efficiencies in appliances and heating and cooling systems. Data center operators are clamoring to hook up to regional electricity grids at the same time the Biden administration’s industrial policy is luring companies to build factories in the United States at a pace not seen in decades. That includes manufacturers of “clean tech,” such as solar panels and electric car batteries, which are being enticed by lucrative federal incentives. Companies announced plans to build or expand more than 155 factories in this country during the first half of the Biden administration, according to the Electric Power Research Institute, a research and development organization. Not since the early 1990s has factory-building accounted for such a large share of U.S. construction spending, according to the group. Utility projections for the amount of power they will need over the next five years have nearly doubled and are expected to grow, according to a review of regulatory filings by the research firm Grid Strategies. - - - Chasing power In the past, companies tried to site their data centers in areas with major internet infrastructure, a large pool of tech talent, and attractive government incentives. But these locations are getting tapped out. Communities that had little connection to the computing industry now find themselves in the middle of a land rush, with data center developers flooding their markets with requests for grid hookups. Officials in Columbus, Ohio; Altoona, Iowa; and Fort Wayne, Ind. are being aggressively courted by data center developers. But power supply in some of these second-choice markets is already running low, pushing developers ever farther out, in some cases into cornfields, according to JLL, a commercial real estate firm that serves the tech industry. Grid Strategies warns in its report that “there are real risks some regions may miss out on economic development opportunities because the grid can’t keep up.” “Across the board, we are seeing power companies say, ‘We don’t know if we can handle this; we have to audit our system; we’ve never dealt with this kind of influx before,’” said Andy Cvengros, managing director of data center markets at JLL. “Everyone is now chasing power. They are willing to look everywhere for it.” “We saw a quadrupling of land values in some parts of Columbus, and a tripling in areas of Chicago,” he said. “It’s not about the land. It is about access to power.” Some developers, he said, have had to sell the property they bought at inflated prices at a loss, after utilities became overwhelmed by the rush for grid hookups. - - - Rethinking incentives It is all happening at the same time the energy transition is steering large numbers of Americans to rely on the power grid to fuel vehicles, heat pumps, induction stoves and all manner of other household appliances that previously ran on fossil fuels. A huge amount of clean energy is also needed to create the green hydrogen championed by the White House, as developers rush to build plants that can produce the powerful zero-emissions fuel, lured by generous federal subsidies. Planners are increasingly concerned that the grid won’t be green enough or powerful enough to meet these demands. Already, soaring power consumption is delaying coal plant closures in Kansas, Nebraska, Wisconsin and South Carolina. In Georgia, the state’s major power company, Georgia Power, stunned regulators when it revealed recently how wildly off its projections were, pointing to data centers as the main culprit. The demand has Georgia officials rethinking the state’s policy of offering incentives to lure computing operations, which generate few jobs but can boost community budgets through the hefty property taxes they pay. The top leaders of Georgia’s House and Senate, both Republicans, are championing a pause in data center incentives. Georgia regulators, meanwhile, are exploring how to protect ratepayers while ensuring there is enough power to meet the needs of the state’s most-prized new tenants: clean-technology companies. Factories supplying the electric vehicle and green-energy markets have been rushing to locate in Georgia in large part on promises of cheap, reliable electricity. When the data center industry began looking for new hubs, “Atlanta was like, ‘Bring it on,’” said Pat Lynch, who leads the Data Center Solutions team at real estate giant CBRE. “Now Georgia Power is warning of limitations. ... Utility shortages in the face of these data center demands are happening in almost every market.” A similar dynamic is playing out in a very different region: the Pacific Northwest. In Oregon, Portland General Electric recently doubled its forecast for new electricity demand over the next five years, citing data centers and “rapid industrial growth” as the drivers. That power crunch threw a wrench into the plans of Michael Halaburda and Arman Khalili, longtime data center developers whose latest project involves converting a mothballed tile factory in the Portland area. The two were under the impression only a couple of months ago that they would have no problem getting the electricity they needed to run the place. Then the power company alerted them that it would need to do a “line and load study” to assess whether it could supply the facility with 60 megawatts of electricity - roughly the amount needed to power 45,000 homes. - - - Going off the grid The Portland project Halaburda and Khalili are developing will now be powered in large part by off-the-grid, high-tech fuel cells that convert natural gas into low-emissions electricity. The technology will be supplemented by whatever power can be secured from the grid. The partners decided that on their next project, in South Texas, they’re not going to take their chances with the grid at all. Instead, they will drill thousands of feet into the ground to draw geothermal energy. Halaburda sees the growth as good for the country and the economy. “But no one took into consideration where this is all going,” he said. “In the next couple of years, unless there is a real focus on expanding the grid and making it more robust, we are going to see opportunities fall by the wayside because we can’t get power to where it is needed.” Companies are increasingly turning to such off-the-grid experiments as their frustration with the logjam in the nation’s traditional electricity network mounts. Microsoft and Google are among the firms hoping that energy-intensive industrial operations can ultimately be powered by small nuclear plants on-site, with Microsoft even putting AI to work trying to streamline the burdensome process of getting plants approved. Microsoft has also inked a deal to buy power from a company trying to develop zero-emissions fusion power. But going off the grid brings its own big regulatory and land acquisition challenges. The type of nuclear plants envisioned, for example, are not yet even operational in the United States. Fusion power does not yet exist. The big tech companies are also exploring ways AI can help make the grid operate more efficiently. And they are developing platforms that during times of peak power demand “can shift compute tasks and their associated energy consumption to the times and places where carbon-free energy is available on the grid,” according to Google. But meeting both their zero-emissions pledges and their AI innovation ambitions is becoming increasingly complicated as the energy needs of their data centers grow. “These problems are not going to go away,” said Michael Ortiz, CEO of Layer 9 Data Centers, a U.S. company that is looking to avoid the logjam here by building in Mexico. “Data centers are going to have to become more efficient, and we need to be using more clean sources of efficient energy, like nuclear.” Officials at Equinix, one of the world’s largest data center companies, said they have been experimenting with fuel cells as backup power, but they remain hopeful they can keep the power grid as their main source of electricity for new projects. The logjam is already pushing officials overseeing the clean-energy transition at some of the nation’s largest airports to look beyond the grid. The amount of energy they will need to charge fleets of electric rental vehicles and ground maintenance trucks alone is immense. An analysis shows electricity demand doubling by 2030 at both the Denver and Minneapolis airports. By 2040, they will need more than triple the electricity they are using now, according to the study, commissioned by car rental giant Enterprise, Xcel Energy and Jacobs, a consulting firm. “Utilities are not going to be able to move quickly enough to provide all this capacity,” said Christine Weydig, vice president of transportation at AlphaStruxure, which designs and operates clean-energy projects. “The infrastructure is not there. Different solutions will be needed.” Airports, she said, are looking into dramatically expanding the use of clean-power “microgrids” they can build on-site. The Biden administration has made easing the grid bottleneck a priority, but it is a politically fraught process, and federal powers are limited. Building the transmission lines and transfer stations needed involves huge land acquisitions, exhaustive environmental reviews and negotiations to determine who should pay what costs. The process runs through state regulatory agencies, and fights between states over who gets stuck with the bill and where power lines should go routinely sink and delay proposed projects. The amount of new transmission line installed in the United States has dropped sharply since 2013, when 4,000 miles were added. Now, the nation struggles to bring online even 1,000 new miles a year. The slowdown has real consequences not just for companies but for the climate. A group of scientists led by Princeton University professor Jesse Jenkins warned in a report that by 2030 the United States risks losing out on 80 percent of the potential emission reductions from President Biden’s signature climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act, if the pace of transmission construction does not pick up dramatically now. While the proliferation of data centers puts more pressure on states to approve new transmission lines, it also complicates the task. Officials in Maryland, for example, are protesting a plan for $5.2 billion in infrastructure that would transmit power to huge data centers in Loudoun County, Va. The Maryland Office of People’s Counsel, a government agency that advocates for ratepayers, called grid operator PJM’s plan “fundamentally unfair,” arguing it could leave Maryland utility customers paying for power transmission to data centers that Virginia aggressively courted and is leveraging for a windfall in tax revenue. Tensions over who gets power from the grid and how it gets to them are only going to intensify as the supply becomes scarcer. In Texas, a dramatic increase in data centers for crypto mining is touching off a debate over whether they are a costly drain on an overtaxed grid. An analysis by the consulting firm Wood Mackenzie found that the energy needed by crypto operations aiming to link to the grid would equal a quarter of the electricity used in the state at peak demand. Unlike data centers operated by big tech companies such as Google and Meta, crypto miners generally don’t build renewable-energy projects with the aim of supplying enough zero-emissions energy to the grid to cover their operations. The result, said Ben Hertz-Shargel, who authored the Wood Mackenzie analysis, is that crypto’s drain on the grid threatens to inhibit the ability of Texas to power other energy-hungry operations that could drive innovation and economic growth, such as factories that produce zero-emissions green hydrogen fuel or industrial charging depots that enable electrification of truck and bus fleets. But after decades in which power was readily available, regulators and utility executives across the country generally are not empowered to prioritize which projects get connected. It is first come, first served. And the line is growing longer. To answer the call, some states have passed laws to protect crypto mining’s access to huge amounts of power. “Lawmakers need to think about this,” Hertz-Shargel said of allocating an increasingly limited supply of power. “There is a risk that strategic industries they want in their states are going to have a challenging time setting up in those places. - - - Graphics: https://washingtonpost.com/documents/2ac97e07-243d-4a1a-9d52-f66469ea65c1.pdf https://washingtonpost.com/documents/c55e319a-da69-475f-88b9-dcd4408fec99.pdf https://washingtonpost.com/documents/c7d03a95-032e-41bf-9a86-c22f37c24630.pdf https://washingtonpost.com/documents/26bfcb07-baba-47d2-b9ab-503da39b0678.pdf Related Content As obesity rises, Big Food and dietitians push ‘anti-diet’ advice Wes Moore envisioned economic revival. Then the Key Bridge collapsed. The problem with your sneakers? They’re built to last too long. View comments (8.8k) Trending What the New Jersey earthquake tells us about the fault system beneath the Northeast Yahoo News·3 min read The day New York shook: How the Big Apple reacted to Friday's 4.8 magnitude earthquake Yahoo News·3 min read People are reporting vertigo, dizziness and nausea after Friday's 4.8 magnitude East Coast earthquake. Here's why. Yahoo Life·4 min read After years on the run, GirlsDoPorn boss faces 'beginning of the end' in San Diego LA Times·6 min read More from Washington Post Texas man is preparing to watch his 13th solar eclipse. He’s 105. 4 min read As the internet gets scarier, more parents keep their kids’ photos offline 6 min read Meta expands AI labeling policies as 2024 presidential race nears 2 min read Scientists urge FDA to rescind approval of test for opioid addiction risk 4 min read It looks like someone forgot to advise the President that there are problems with the electrical grid which make it impossible to Go Green in a hurry. Could Biden even process that news with his internal information system? Edited April 7 by Ecocharger 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,485 DL April 7 (edited) 2 minutes ago, TailingsPond said: Great because you think CO2 is plant food and not a problem. Score one more for EV's with bad logic. Nice to see that you are a fan of CO2, we will advise President Biden that he should be prepared for a rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 due to EV manufacture. But not to worry, the vegetation will thank him. Edited April 7 by Ecocharger 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,013 GE April 7 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Ecocharger said: It looks like someone forgot to advise the President that there are problems with the electrical grid which make it impossible to Go Green in a hurry. Could Biden even process that information with his internal information system? Yeah explosive demand for power means EV's are being adopted. You don't have grid strain without more grid usage. Every time you mention grid stress you essentially admit that EV's and renewables are taking over. In this case the energy hog is AI data centers. Just like Bitcoin mine garbage. It had nothing to do with going green! LOL Edited April 7 by TailingsPond 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron Wagner + 714 April 7 56 minutes ago, Ecocharger said: It looks like someone forgot to advise the President that there are problems with the electrical grid which make it impossible to Go Green in a hurry. Could Biden even process that news with his internal information system? Almost all liberals and socialists seem to have the same problem! 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron Wagner + 714 April 7 On 4/2/2024 at 3:21 AM, Rob Plant said: Nope it wasnt, you said this "The Spanish explorers first commented about the smoke in what became Los Angeles. " I said that the etymology was a conjunction of smoke and fog. That is the truth. The other statement was also true! Just stick with your own statements. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,013 GE April 7 (edited) 9 hours ago, Ron Wagner said: Almost all liberals and socialists seem to have the same problem! That article had nothing about going green, it was just about wasting a bunch of electricity. You two should try reading. Edited April 7 by TailingsPond 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,013 GE April 7 10 hours ago, Ecocharger said: Nice to see that you are a fan of CO2, we will advise President Biden that he should be prepared for a rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 due to EV manufacture. But not to worry, the vegetation will thank him. I wrote "you think." Pick a side man. You can't say "CO2 is not a problem, and is good for plants" AND complain that EV's make CO2 during manufacturing. If CO2 is fine for the fossil industry it is fine for everybody. Try again. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ecocharger + 1,485 DL April 7 (edited) 8 hours ago, TailingsPond said: I wrote "you think." Pick a side man. You can't say "CO2 is not a problem, and is good for plants" AND complain that EV's make CO2 during manufacturing. If CO2 is fine for the fossil industry it is fine for everybody. Try again. We are examining your side, exemplified by the White House campaign to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. The point is that the current Biden policies, as exposed above, will actually increase atmospheric CO2. That is not what the Prez is trying to do, he would have been truer to his cause if he had left things alone. See the point? Edited April 7 by Ecocharger 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,013 GE April 8 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ecocharger said: We are examining your side, exemplified by the White House campaign to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. No, "my side" is not exemplified by anything the white house does. Can you even imagine the emissions from a single aircraft carrier? CO2, toxic waste, regular garbage, sewage. I have stated numerous times I care more about toxic emissions than greenhouse emissions. Cut all branches of the military in half and your personal dirty truck would be much less of a concern. Some older warships are so contaminated they can't even be sold for scrap - and they contain a lot of scrap metal... Brazil ended up just sinking one. https://shipbreakingplatform.org/toxic-aircraft-carrier-returns-to-brazil/ https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/brazil-sinks-rusting-old-aircraft-carrier-atlantic-2023-02-04/ Edited April 8 by TailingsPond 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
footeab@yahoo.com + 2,194 April 8 Clearly you do not care: Its about your religion, not your "concerns". If you did care, then Tire wear would be your #1 concern, not tailpipe emissions. Suppressing fires would be your #2 concern, and suppressing tillage would more than likely be your #1 concern if you could do math if it was not about tires from vehicles... Just admit it, there is no such thing as "safe" other than ZERO human beings in your self hate filled mind. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,266 DM April 8 and reality in Norway...... EVs are decimating fuel usage Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob Plant + 2,756 RP April 8 On 4/6/2024 at 7:30 AM, Ecocharger said: Rob, your material is way out of date. I already showed you that long ago. No, the use of hydro electricity in Norway des not overcome the problem. EVs are not manufactured in Norway,in case you did not know. Read carefully. "Norway imports all domestic EVs. As we discussed, EV manufacturing is incredibly energy-intensive, mainly to build the battery. In Norway’s case, none of this additional energy is reflected in their domestic demand figures. China manufactures most lithium-ion batteries and 80% of all EVs. Coal accounts for 60% of their total energy supply. We estimate an average EV consumes 60 MWh to manufacture, of which the battery represents half. Therefore, manufacturing Norway’s 579,000 EVs (all the EVs on the road today in Norway) requires 35 twh, equivalent to 25% of the total annual Norwegian electricity demand. Given that China emits 600 grams of CO2 per kwh (China is where almost all of Noway’s EV batteries are manufactured), we calculate Norway’s EV fleet would emit 21 mm tonnes of CO2. Norway’s gasoline and diesel consumption fell by a meager 3,200 barrels per day or 50 mm gallons per year. Assuming 9 kg of CO2 per gallon of gasoline or diesel, Norway’s entire EV fleet mitigates a mere 450,000 tonnes of CO2 per year, compared with an upfront emission of 21 mm tonnes. In other words, it would take forty-five years of CO2 savings from reduced gasoline and diesel consumption to offset the initial emissions from the manufacturing of the vehicles. Since an EV battery has a useful life of only ten to fifteen years, it is clear that Norway’s EV rollout has increased total lifecycle CO2 emissions dramatically. Incredibly, this is true despite Norway having the lowest carbon hydroelectricity in the world. Even if China were to reach its overly ambitious targets for wind, solar, and nuclear power by 2035, we calculate that the carbon “payback” would still exceed twenty years. Realistically, the only way for EVs to reduce lifecycle carbon emissions would be with a widespread move to carbon-free energy in EV manufacturing. " Yes China makes the batteries I was showing how long it takes for the payback of those CO2 emissions. Your 45 years is utterly ridiculous, you surely dont believe that?? Just typing it sounds blatantly stupid, get with reality and do some math! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob Plant + 2,756 RP April 8 On 4/6/2024 at 7:32 AM, Ecocharger said: You ignored my criticism of your reference. YOU HAVE NO NUMBERS, so that is useless material. Are you allergic to numbers? If not, give us some. Simply repeating meaningless propaganda without actual numbers doesn't cut it. The "new" research you keep repeating is over six years old, and apparently nothing has emerged from that research. That is also worthless. You clearly cant read here is what I put We have reduced our SF6 emissions by more than 80% since the year 2000. I think you'll find there are some numbers there! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob Plant + 2,756 RP April 8 On 4/6/2024 at 6:40 PM, Marcin2 said: For city cars EV's are competitive, some of my friends think about buiyng a chep Chinese EV car for shopping, and daily commutes within Warsaw. It is ok, it can be this market. But when I go for vacation, say it Croatia 1800 km, or even Czech Republic for 800 km, electric cars are nobrainer for us. Electric cars are a good second cars in the family. But not the first one's. Also for trucks it is no brainer, you just need to understand current demands of European supply chains. Diesel truck makes 800 km (500 miles) a day and does not need to thin k about recharging. I work in transport/logistic industry and electrci vehicles just do not fit yet - when they will have 800-900 km mileage on batteries it would change, but now it is a toy for very rich and not effcient companies. How many times a year do you drive 1800KM or even 800KM? Surely your second car would be the ICE or hybrid and youd take that on these journeys. Your day to day commute is cheaper in your EV as the cost of electricity compared to petrol is way cheaper. The other way round means youre wasting money! Agree that electric trucks currently make no sense 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Most Active Members
Recently Online
Popular Members