GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

TailingsPond · July 18

3 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Nothing wrong with coal unless you are a sick perverted lying sack of crap.

*cough*

Edited July 18 by TailingsPond

Rob Plant · July 18

6 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Nothing wrong with coal unless you are a sick perverted lying sack of crap.

Possibly the most ill informed comment ever on this site whilst also inferring people who don't agree with his BS statement are "sick perverted lying sacks of crap"

Wow the arrogance (and stupidity) of the man is staggering!

Old-Ruffneck · July 18

4 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

I asked you if you think the cheapest way out is best. So?

Coal elimination really is independent of the "green" energy transition. It is poison. Switch to natural gas, still all the CO2, just less poison.

Don't call it "green" energy, call it "cleaner" energy. Coal is filth.

Argue with facts.

Define cheapest. Coal is inexpensive in the onset, quickly produce electricity. But Nuclear in the long term over its production capabilities with todays technology, much cleaner and cheaper in the long term until rods are spent and now you have disposal of extremely toxic materials to dispose of.

All the solar panels being made today are polluting in a different way. In the onset, Much aluminum and resins, highly toxic fumes, but once produced little pollution accept to the eyes. The cheap crap they are selling here in the Midwest has a longevity of 15 tp 17 years. But the contracts are 20-25 years. Some folks are going to be out of serious money when that lease expires and panels produce nadda.

Wildfires Return and Threaten Canada’s Oil Sands Once Again | OilPrice.com and your worried about coal?

Edited July 18 by Old-Ruffneck
add

TailingsPond · July 19

On 7/18/2024 at 4:55 AM, Old-Ruffneck said:

Define cheapest. Coal is inexpensive in the onset, quickly produce electricity. But Nuclear in the long term over its production capabilities with todays technology, much cleaner and cheaper in the long term until rods are spent and now you have disposal of extremely toxic materials to dispose of.

All the solar panels being made today are polluting in a different way. In the onset, Much aluminum and resins, highly toxic fumes, but once produced little pollution accept to the eyes. The cheap crap they are selling here in the Midwest has a longevity of 15 tp 17 years. But the contracts are 20-25 years. Some folks are going to be out of serious money when that lease expires and panels produce nadda.

Wildfires Return and Threaten Canada’s Oil Sands Once Again | OilPrice.com and your worried about coal?

I am not using the cheapest argument, they are. I say less polluting forms of energy may be more expensive and we should use them anyways. Remember, I am not talking CO2 or climate change here, just the toxic air emissions. Simply the replacement of one fossil fuel with another will go a long way.

The air pollution produced by the manufacture of solar panels is tiny compared to coal which pollutes continuously, not just during manufacture and decommissioning. Coal plants, have to be built and decommissioned too and with a lot more site remediation. So building one also produces pollution before and after operation just like with panels. How much does a coal plant cost and how quickly can you build a coal power plant? To build a large plant they have to a remediation plan and fund in place before construction can start. Is that still cheap? Way too many companies build stuff then abandon the projects when they go broke, leaving the government to pay for the cleanup, so now they have more rules before permits will be issued. A remediation plan and fund for a solar panel array is pretty simple and cheap...

FYI wildfires cannot be controlled as much a coal usage, lightning, drought, and stuff ya know? We can choose to not use coal, and have. Coal for electricity has been completely phased out in Alberta (nat gas retrofits, this is still oil and gas country).

Ecocharger · July 19

I guess someone should inform the Senate budget committee that oil markets and gasoline markets are international and highly competitive...they seem to be going off on a weird track here.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/FTC-Probes-Oil-Executives-Texts-for-OPEC-Collusion.html

"The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is intensifying its scrutiny of the oil and gas sector, focusing on communications between executives at major firms such as Hess Corp., Occidental Petroleum Corp., and Diamondback Energy Inc. The FTC's investigation seeks to determine if these executives improperly coordinated with OPEC officials, potentially violating U.S. antitrust laws."

"This investigation coincides with a U.S. Senate budget committee probe into alleged collusion between nearly 20 large oil and gas producers and OPEC. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, echoing the FTC's allegations against Sheffield, has claimed that industry executives have been working with OPEC to constrain production and drive up prices. The Senate has demanded that these companies, including BP, Shell, and ConocoPhillips, provide communications with OPEC officials dating back to January 2020."

Edited July 19 by Ecocharger

Ecocharger · July 19

On 7/18/2024 at 6:14 AM, Rob Plant said:

Possibly the most ill informed comment ever on this site whilst also inferring people who don't agree with his BS statement are "sick perverted lying sacks of crap"

Wow the arrogance (and stupidity) of the man is staggering!

Save your venom for China, which is rapidly turning to fossil fuels for electricity generation and fossil fuel vehicles for the future mass transportation needs.

You might as well get used to it.

Edited July 19 by Ecocharger

Ecocharger · July 19

It now looks like the days of EVs are fading into the rear view mirror, the new trend is to expand the production of fossil fuel vehicles.

Ford has now scrapped its plans for an EV expansion project and replaced it with plans to expand fossil fuel vehicles.

The EV revolution is over before it ever really took off.

This is not a surprise, given the foolish ideas which fueled the nonsense in the first place.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/18/ford-canada-large-truck-production.html

"Ford Motor will expand production of its large Super Duty trucks to a Canadian plant that was previously set to be converted into an all-electric vehicle hub.

The new plans include investing about $3 billion to expand Super Duty production, including $2.3 billion at Ford’s Oakville Assembly Complex in Ontario, Canada, Ford said Thursday.

Ford said the Canadian plant, which is expected to come online in 2026, will add annual capacity of roughly 100,000 units of the highly profitable pickups."

"Ford Motor will expand production of its large Super Duty trucks to a Canadian plant that was previously set to be converted into an all-electric vehicle hub.

The new plans include investing about $3 billion to expand Super Duty production, including $2.3 billion at Ford’s Oakville Assembly Complex in Ontario, Canada, Ford said Thursday. The remaining investment will be used to increase production at supporting facilities in the U.S. and Canada, the company said.

Ford currently produces Super Duty trucks – the larger siblings of the F-150 full-size pickup used largely by commercial and business customers – at plants in Ohio and Kentucky.

Ford said the Canadian plant, which is expected to come online in 2026, will add capacity of roughly 100,000 units annually.

“Super Duty is a vital tool for businesses and people around the world and, even with our Kentucky Truck Plant and Ohio Assembly Plant running flat out, we can’t meet the demand,” Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a release. “This move benefits our customers and supercharges our Ford Pro commercial business.”

Investors responded favorably to the news, sending Ford stock to a new 52-week high before shares leveled off later in the day amid a broader market decline."

TailingsPond · July 19

36 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Save your venom for China, which is rapidly turning to fossil fuels for electricity generation and fossil fuel vehicles for the future mass transportation needs.

You might as well get used to it.

Why do you want to emulate China? Shouldn't we try to do better?

Also try to remember, natural gas replacement of coal is still a fossil fuel, just a lot less poisonous.

I might "get used to" atrocities in other nations around the world, but not in my backyard, thanks.

We strive for better, and as a result do better, have better lives. Get used to it!

Edited July 19 by TailingsPond

TailingsPond · July 19

35 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

It now looks like the days of EVs are fading into the rear view mirror, the new trend is to expand the production of fossil fuel vehicles.

Any day now!

They didn't say the new plant would not make any EV's. It just won't be 100% EV.

Backing out of the 100% EV plans will have repercussions as the government footed the bill for some of the expansion based on it being a EV project.

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

"The plant is planned to produce electric vehicles and assemble batteries, starting from 2025, after a major retooling from 2024. Government of Canada and the province of Ontario are responsible to contribute a total of C$500 million."

Edited July 19 by TailingsPond

TailingsPond · July 19

48 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

"The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is intensifying its scrutiny of the oil and gas sector, focusing on communications between executives at major firms such as Hess Corp., Occidental Petroleum Corp., and Diamondback Energy Inc. The FTC's investigation seeks to determine if these executives improperly coordinated with OPEC officials, potentially violating U.S. antitrust laws.

Haha. Told you occidental was going to go down, just watch. B.H. has discount share options they can exercise any time the stock rises at all. Now they in crap on top of it.

When you have big money you can manipulate markets and there are laws against it.

Edited July 19 by TailingsPond

Ecocharger · July 19

20 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

Why do you want to emulate China? Shouldn't we try to do better?

Also try to remember, natural gas replacement of coal is still a fossil fuel, just a lot less poisonous.

I might "get used to" atrocities in other nations around the world, but not in my backyard, thanks.

We strive for better, and as a result do better, have better lives. Get used to it!

Ha ha! China is big on coal, which is now increasing in production.

Here is the reality,

https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/the-carbon-brief-profile-china/

"Coal has been the single largest source of energy in China throughout the modern era. While the share of coal in the energy mix decreased from 77% at its peak four decades ago to today’s 56%, coal consumption in China grew by 650% over the same period.

For decades, Chinese experts have been justifying the country’s heavy reliance on coal by reference to its resource endowment, which is “rich in coal, lacking oil and natural gas”.

These endowments have informed China’s approach to energy security, including its continued focus on coal, as well as the drive to develop domestic low-carbon energy supplies and supply chains for electric vehicles that cut the need for gas and oil imports.

(In fact, while its oil reserves are small in global terms, its gas reserves have recently grown rapidly, such that they now are only one-third lower than those of the US.)

China is the world’s largest coal producer, mining 4.56bn tonnes of coal in 2022. It is also the world’s biggest coal importer. It imported 293m tonnes in 2022 – mainly for thermal power generation – from countries including Indonesia, Australia and Russia.

China’s coal use doubled in the 10th five-year plan period (2001-2005). The expansion was stalled by the financial crisis in 2008, but quickly bounced back in 2009-2011.

In 2014, premier Li Keqiang declared a “war on pollution”, following the release of a five-year action plan on air-pollution prevention and control in 2013.

This led to major efforts including to shift homes from coal to gas heating and to close small coal-fired power plants near urban areas in favour of larger, more efficient units further away.

Around this time, China’s coal demand slowed to a temporary “peak” in 2013. This was followed by a period of decline – and coal use only returned to 2013 levels in 2019.

At the UN leaders summit on climate in April 2021, Xi said that China would “strictly limit the increase in coal consumption over the 14th five-year plan period” and “phase it down in the 15th five-year plan period”. This has been interpreted by some international observers as an announcement that China will “peak coal use in 2025”.

While the latest IEA outlook suggests this peak may come as early as 2024, China’s coal use has meanwhile continued to rise. Demand for the fuel surged as the global economy – and demand for Chinese manufactured goods – rebounded from the Covid-19 pandemic.

This rebound was compounded by drought that limited hydropower and by an inefficient electricity market, leading to power shortages in 2021. Severe droughts followed again in 2022 and 2023, along with heatwaves that pushed up demand for air conditioning.

At the same time, the global energy crisis was pushing up gas prices and ratcheting geopolitical tensions. These factors have driven a renewed push for coal in China.

Following Xi’s remarks on “strictly limit[ing]” coal, approvals for new coal-fired power plants declined by nearly 80% in the first half of 2021, compared to the same period in 2020, according to Greenpeace International.

Yet the recent push for energy security and surges in peak power demand have seen a new wave of coal plant approvals in 2022 and early 2023. This wave of approvals amounts to a “u-turn” on Xi’s coal pledge, despite conditions stating that new projects should only play “supporting” roles in the electricity system to complement variable renewables.

The power sector is the largest contributor to China’s coal demand and around 61% of its electricity was generated from the fuel in 2022, according to data from thinktank Ember.

China has made it clear that it will establish a “new power system centred on new [low-carbon] energy” in the 14th five-year plan period.

However, as Russia’s invasion in Ukraine squeezed global energy supplies, the government reiterated in 2022 that coal will remain the “ballast stone” of China’s power system.

The 14th five‐year plan for a “modern energy system”, released in March 2022, underlines the importance of energy security, even as it calls for efforts to low‐carbon transitions.

As such, China has not yet announced a clear timeline for coal phase down, let alone coal phaseout. The most recent five-year plan for the energy sector emphasises the “clean and efficient” use of coal and seeks coal plant retrofits to increase their flexibility, enabling the integration of more renewable power to the grid.

‘DUAL CARBON’ GOALS:

“Dual carbon” goals refer to China’s two climate goals announced by president Xi Jinping at the 75th session of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2020. President Xi announced that China would reach its carbon emissions peak before 2030 and become “carbon neutral” before 2060. However, it remains unclear if the latter goal refers to the neutrality of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions or all greenhouse gas emissions. More broadly speaking, “dual carbon” goals also include China’s further climate commitments for 2030 announced by Xi at the Climate Ambition Summit in December 2020. The additional targets include a 65% drop in CO2 emissions per unit of GDP compared to the 2005 level.

Han – who leads China’s leaders group on the efforts to achieve the carbon peaking and neutrality goals, said that “clean and efficient” use of coal was “an important means” to achieve the “dual-carbon” goals during a government conference in March 2022.

More recently, in November 2023, the NDRC announced that coal power plants will receive payments from 1 January 2024 under a new coal “capacity mechanism”. (The UK and several other European countries are among those that have capacity mechanisms.)

The scheme could distort market signals that would otherwise force expensive units out of the market, analysts said, but should also increase grid flexibility and allow more wind and solar into the generation mix “without compromising grid stability or energy security”.

Another issue for China is that its fleet of coal-fired power stations is very young, averaging 12 years, and only 1.1% of its units have operated for more than three decades, which weakens the economic motive for their fast retirement.

However, if China continues to add coal capacity, it risks creating more “stranded assets”, with declining profitability and the potential to delay China’s achievement of carbon neutrality.

To date, China has not released a cap on coal capacity, coal generation or coal emissions during the 14th five-year plan or later periods."

TailingsPond · July 19

3 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Ha ha! China is big on coal, which is now increasing in production.

China is also big on communism and human rights violations.

Why do you want to emulate China again? What they are doing is not an example of good behaviour.

What is next? Is war good because Russia is doing it?

Edited July 19 by TailingsPond

Ecocharger · July 19

20 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

Any day now!

They didn't say the new plant would not make any EV's. It just won't be 100% EV.

Backing out of the 100% EV plans will have repercussions as the government footed the bill for some of the expansion based on it being a EV project.

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

"The plant is planned to produce electric vehicles and assemble batteries, starting from 2025, after a major retooling from 2024. Government of Canada and the province of Ontario are responsible to contribute a total of C$500 million."

Wow, you really are slow today.

Those plans for EVs have now been scrapped and replaced with plans for new fossil fuel vehicles.

Of, course, the federal government, which is now crippled with super-low public polls, will have to squirm through this, but will alienate voters if they bail out. close to an election.

Try reading the story before you post out-of-date material as a response.