GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Again with your 2nd grade reading comprehension. The information you quoted directly negates your claim of lack of energy supplies due to Green philosophy. The gasoline shortage is due to Brexit causing a lack of truck drivers. Live with it.

Jay, you still don't get it...this was about the sudden demand for energy and gasoline and the lack of preparation for the system to handle it...you still haven't got that one under your hat?

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

Here is the basic conundrum....Green panic creates conditions which are guaranteed to produce a drastic reduction in the standard of living for lower income levels of society, and the problems are now emerging with the current energy crisis.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Are-Carbon-Taxes-To-Blame-For-Europes-Energy-Crisis.html

"Carbon taxes, according to pretty much everyone, are the only way to make sure our species reduces its carbon footprint. The higher these are, the better, proponents say, because high carbon taxes would speed up the transition to low-carbon energy. What they don’t say, including all those asset managers making net-zero commitments and urging governments to act more aggressively on emissions, is that this transition to low-carbon energy also means a transition to a lower standard of life.

Politicians like to advertise the energy transition as clean, reliable, and cheap. Yet this, as anyone who has ever worked in manufacturing or services knows, is the equivalent of fast, cheap, and good. You can never have all three at once.

You could therefore have clean and reliable, but it wouldn’t be cheap. Or you can have clean and cheap but, as we can see, it’s unreliable. As for reliable and cheap - these would be the detested fossil fuels that some governments are trying so hard to get rid of that they are willing to shoot themselves in the leg with carbon taxes."

Edited September 27, 2021 by Ecocharger

[ronwagn + 6,290]

21 hours ago, Eric Gagen said:

??? Not sure I understand where you are coming from.  Nobody is enforcing a new energy mode, at least in Texas.  Wind and solar farms are going up for good old fashioned reasons:  the investors can make money.  The solar business in west Texas in particular is about to get really interesting.  It’s a very sunny and windy area and most of the current electric grid is powered by wind, and natural gas (in that order) it might be the first large scale section of a developed world grid to get the majority of its electricity from wind and solar within the next few years.

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

Texas Net Electricity Generation by Source, November 2020^[1]

  Petroleum - fired (0.01%)

  Natural gas - fired (44.8%)

  Coal - fired (19.0%)

  Nuclear (9.9%)

  Renewable - Hydroelectric (0.4%)

  Other renewable - solar, wind, etc. (25.9%)

 

 

Edited September 27, 2021 by ronwagn
reference

[nsdp + 449]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Jay, you still don't get it...this was about the sudden demand for energy and gasoline and the lack of preparation for the system to handle it...you still haven't got that one under your hat?

83% of the failure of electric supply in February in Texas was coal and natural gas. Guys like you were trying to blame the wind farms. How  does an 85% failure rate of coal,NG and Nuke  relate to  green energy and failure of supply by FF and nuclear. Wind and solar over performed making up for a small part of the FF failure to perform.

[turbguy + 1,544]

10 minutes ago, nsdp said:

83% of the failure of electric supply in February in Texas was coal and natural gas. Guys like you were trying to blame the wind farms. How  does an 85% failure rate of coal,NG and Nuke  relate to  green energy and failure of supply by FF and nuclear. Wind and solar over performed making up for a small part of the FF failure to perform.

...an it ain't fixed, yet!!

(well, I'm quite certain the nukes took actions).

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

16 minutes ago, nsdp said:

83% of the failure of electric supply in February in Texas was coal and natural gas. Guys like you were trying to blame the wind farms. How  does an 85% failure rate of coal,NG and Nuke  relate to  green energy and failure of supply by FF and nuclear. Wind and solar over performed making up for a small part of the FF failure to perform.

No, the natural gas system was a backup to the renewable energy sources, but the system was designed to fail, when the renewable sector failed, which it did in spectacular fashion, it dragged down the natural gas system with it...we showed this before, you guys are still trying to catch up with it.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

The energy crisis is now heating up into a veritable economic crisis, with deluded Green politicians helplessly trying to understand what went wrong with the Green agenda, it was all supposed to be so simple and easy, what happened?  Befuddlement in spades.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Natural-Gas-Prices-In-Europe-Hit-An-All-Time-High.html

"The surge in natural gas prices is also due to a massive supply shortage in Europe, a situation that is quickly spilling over into other countries and other markets—including the coal and oil markets as demand for power exceeds supply. The natural gas crisis is set to intensify as winter heating season approaches, with supplies insufficient to keep up with current demand, let alone build stockpiles for what will be increased demand in the cold season. Europe’s natural gas crisis has prompted European fertilizer producers to curb output, which could send food prices soaring along with the natural gas prices. It has also sparked warnings of blackouts and factory shutdowns. If the winter is colder than normal, natural gas supplies could run even shorter, leaving Europeans and possibly other countries, especially those that can barely afford current energy prices, in the cold."

Edited September 27, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

China relies on coal for more than half of its electrical power generation, and that dependency will keep China increasing its demand for coal going forward. Sorry folks, coal is a robust industry and will increase output going forward. 

The current energy crisis is forcing China to pay through the nose for essential coal to run the economy, and it hurts big-time,

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Coal/Chinese-Utility-Companies-Face-Bankruptcy-As-Coal-Prices-Skyrocket.html

"The severity of the shortage and the potential for prolonged economic fallout has many wondering how far Beijing will have to bend to keep a lid on the potential looming crash. It has been widely speculated that Xi Jinping will soon have to end his unofficial moratorium on coal imports from Australia in order to meet demand. It’s also highly questionable whether Beijing will be able to keep its climate commitments, which largely hinge on cutting down the nation’s dependence on coal, the dirtiest fossil fuel in terms of carbon emissions. While Xi Jinping has been making lofty promises to decarbonize by 2060, China and India have been dually responsible for increasing demand and raising global coal prices even as the global community makes a push toward a green energy transition."

Edited September 28, 2021 by Ecocharger

[nsdp + 449]

Just now, Ecocharger said:

No, the natural gas system was a backup to the renewable energy sources, but the system was designed to fail, when the renewable sector failed, which it did in spectacular fashion, it dragged down the natural gas system with it...we showed this before, you guys are still trying to catch up with it.

 

 

The great line once again. Wind was scheduled by ERCOT day ahead planning ws for a small part of the generation stack 10mwh.  Actual wind delivery was 11.5 mwh over producing 15. % until a FF fail perform obligations to deliever KVARS. Check the NERC report published Thursday.

[nsdp + 449]

9 minutes ago, nsdp said:

 

 

The great line once again. Wind was scheduled by ERCOT day ahead planning ws for a small part of the generation stack 10mwh.  Actual wind delivery was 11.5 mwh over producing 15. % until a FF fail perform obligations to deliever KVARS. Check the NERC report published Thursday.

https://ferc.gov/media/february-2021-cold-weather-grid-operations-preliminary-findings-and-recommendations-full

[Eric Gagen + 713]

9 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

The natural gas failure was caused by the renewable failure. we went over that here a few hundred times. The natural gas system depended on renewables to function, when the renewables failed, they dragged down the NG with them. Bottom line: overdependence on renewables leads to disaster.

Maybe with someone else, but no, it’s not true.  Nothing was winterized for the weather that happened.  Sensors for nuclear power plants froze over.  Water intakes for natural gas plants froze over because they were set shallow with no freeze protection.  
 

I don’t have a dog in the fight of ‘renewables are da bomb’ or ‘fossil fuels rox’ battle that seem people imagine MUST exist and must be something everyone picks a side on.  I live here and deal with energy production and distribution and looked at the facts.  Everything was unprepared, and suffered as a result.  The details about what failed in different types of plants varied dramatically but they all failed all by themselves.  They didn’t need help

[Eric Gagen + 713]

2 hours ago, ronwagn said:

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

Texas Net Electricity Generation by Source, November 2020^[1]

  Petroleum - fired (0.01%)

  Natural gas - fired (44.8%)

  Coal - fired (19.0%)

  Nuclear (9.9%)

  Renewable - Hydroelectric (0.4%)

  Other renewable - solar, wind, etc. (25.9%)

 

 

That’s for all of Texas.  The western part is heavily tilted towards wind, and has no nukes or coal. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

It also has very few people and very little water so not likely to have many in the future. It is a great place for getting oil, natural gas, wind turbines and solar panels, ranchers, etc. 

[Eric Gagen + 713]

3 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Obesity is the largest overall cause of early death in America IMHO. It contributes heavily to death by diabetes, cardiac problems, lung insufficiency, cancer, skeletal compression, etc. We use food as as if we worked like our ancestors did but few of us do. I am more guilty than most but have already lived almost the new average lifespan of an American male. I am 76 and the average male lifespan is only 76. It has gone down since COVID which kills many over age 65 and also to drug abuse which kills a lot of young people. Most of us can look back to our youth and remember that their were few fat kids and relatively few fat adults compared to now. We would live longer by cutting our eating by about 25 percent. Eating the right mix of foods would add even more years.

My dad passed at 64, and the need to reduce how much we eat (and what) really makes me wonder how long he would have made it under different circumstances.  Be proud that you care enough about your life, your kids and your grandkids to try hard and do the hard things.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 minute ago, Eric Gagen said:

My dad passed at 64, and the need to reduce how much we eat (and what) really makes me wonder how long he would have made it under different circumstances.  Be proud that you care enough about your life, your kids and your grandkids to try hard and do the hard things.

Thanks Eric, I am looking forward to a 50th wedding annivresary in ten years+, that plus knowing that half of our income dies with me!

[Eric Gagen + 713]

11 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

It also has very few people and very little water so not likely to have many in the future. It is a great place for getting oil, natural gas, wind turbines and solar panels, ranchers, etc. 

Yep.   It’s sort of a good ‘natural’ experimentation area for mashing together a bunch of renewables with natural gas.  I’m sure a lot of lessons will be learned, but I’m not sure what they will be.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

3 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

I still don't have a good read on your education, Jay....it remains a puzzle.

Jay  has a good education in how to hustle wind turbines and get government subsidies. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

5 hours ago, notsonice said:

 

The increases in global methane in the last 20 years are related to Cows and Oil and Gas/coal mining production not releases from the Earth. Manmade caused methane releases are 50 percent greater than natural methane releases from wetlands. Essentially if the release of methane from oil and gas production were eliminated or we could figure out how to reduce the cow methane releases the Global methane budget will balance and then we would see a decrease in Atmospheric Methane

 

The pandemic has tugged carbon emissions down, temporarily. But levels of the powerful heat-trapping gas methane continue to climb, dragging the world further away from a path that skirts the worst effects of global warming.

BY Josie Garthwaite

Stanford Earth Matters

Climate Change,

Energy,

Food and Agriculture

 

Global emissions of methane have reached the highest levels on record. Increases are being driven primarily by growth of emissions from coal mining, oil and natural gas production, cattle and sheep ranching, and landfills.

Between 2000 and 2017, levels of the potent greenhouse gas barreled up toward pathways that climate models suggest will lead to 3-4 degrees Celsius of warming before the end of this century. This is a dangerous temperature threshold at which scientists warn that natural disasters, including wildfires, droughts and floods, and social disruptions such as famines and mass migrations become almost commonplace. The findings are outlined in two papers published July 14 in Earth System Science Data and Environmental Research Letters by researchers with the Global Carbon Project, an initiative led by Stanford University scientist Rob Jackson.

In 2017, the last year when complete global methane data are available, Earth’s atmosphere absorbed nearly 600 million tons of the colorless, odorless gas that is 28 times more powerful than carbon dioxide at trapping heat over a 100-year span. More than half of all methane emissions now come from human activities. Annual methane emissions are up 9 percent, or 50 million tons per year, from the early 2000s, when methane concentrations in the atmosphere were relatively stable.

In terms of warming potential, adding this much extra methane to the atmosphere since 2000 is akin to putting 350 million more cars on the world’s roads or doubling the total emissions of Germany or France. “We still haven’t turned the corner on methane,” said Jackson, a professor of Earth system science in Stanford’s School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences (Stanford Earth).

Growing sources of methane

Globally, fossil fuel sources and cows are twin engines powering methane’s upward climb. “Emissions from cattle and other ruminants are almost as large as those from the fossil fuel industry for methane,” Jackson said. “People joke about burping cows without realizing how big the source really is.”

Throughout the study period, agriculture accounted for roughly two-thirds of all methane emissions related to human activities; fossil fuels contributed most of the remaining third. However, those two sources have contributed in roughly equal measure to the increases seen since the early 2000s.

Methane emissions from agriculture rose to 227 million tons of methane in 2017, up nearly 11 percent from the 2000–2006 average. Methane from fossil fuel production and use reached 108 million tons in 2017, up nearly 15 percent from the earlier period.

Amid the coronavirus pandemic, carbon emissions plummeted as manufacturing and transportation ground to a halt. “There’s no chance that methane emissions dropped as much as carbon dioxide emissions because of the virus,” Jackson said. “We’re still heating our homes and buildings, and agriculture keeps growing.”

Emissions around the globe

A visualization of the emission and transport of atmospheric methane around the globe between December 9, 2017 and December 1, 2018 shows pulses of methane from livestock, oil and gas operations, rice fields, wildfires, wetlands and other sources. (Image credit: NASA's Scientific Visualization Studio)

Methane emissions rose most sharply in Africa and the Middle East; China; and South Asia and Oceania, which includes Australia and many Pacific islands. Each of these three regions increased emissions by an estimated 10 to 15 million tons per year during the study period. The United States followed close behind, increasing methane emissions by 4.5 million tons, mostly due to more natural gas drilling, distribution and consumption.

“Natural gas use is rising quickly here in the U.S. and globally,” Jackson said. “It’s offsetting coal in the electricity sector and reducing carbon dioxide emissions, but increasing methane emissions in that sector.” The U.S. and Canada are also producing more natural gas. “As a result, we’re emitting more methane from oil and gas wells and leaky pipelines,” said Jackson, who is also a senior fellow at Stanford’s Woods Institute for the Environment and Precourt Institute for Energy.

Europe stands out as the only region where methane emissions have decreased over the last two decades, in part by tamping down emissions from chemical manufacturing and growing food more efficiently. “Policies and better management have reduced emissions from landfills, manure and other sources here in Europe. People are also eating less beef and more poultry and fish,” said Marielle Saunois of the Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin in France, lead author of the paper in Earth System Science Data.

 

Your beautiful graph does not include methane that emanates from the oceans which cover two thirds of the earth and contain more methane clathrates and other natural gas produced by dead vegetation and aquatic life than all of the land mass by far. The depth of the ocean living area is much greater than that of the land also. So basically it is just a totally graph regarding the earth as a whole IMHO.

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

Edited September 28, 2021 by ronwagn
error

[nsdp + 449]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

No, the natural gas system was a backup to the renewable energy sources, but the system was designed to fail, when the renewable sector failed, which it did in spectacular fashion, it dragged down the natural gas system with it...we showed this before, you guys are still trying to catch up with it.

NERC has a different view. "60% of natural gas-fired generating units affected by fuel supply issues had outages, derates, or failures to start by February 14, and 32% had fuel supply issues before and after February 14." That is before the first wind turbines iced on the 15th. . 

[Boat + 1,324]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

No, the natural gas system was a backup to the renewable energy sources, but the system was designed to fail, when the renewable sector failed, which it did in spectacular fashion, it dragged down the natural gas system with it...we showed this before, you guys are still trying to catch up with it.

Look at the chart you no chart reading fool. Wind plays some role in Texas electricity but little compared to nat gas. Also every fool knows not to trust the intermittency of renewables and to have contingency plans in the form of nat gas for back up. Since nat gas seems unreliable in Texas and people died, using batteries may be the future of backing up renewables on the grid. The speed of this transition will depend on improved battery tech and improved pricing. The even near future seems very bright except to no chart reading fools.

[nsdp + 449]

21 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Your beautiful graph does not include methane that emanates from the oceans which cover two thirds of the earth and contain more methane clathrates and other natural gas produced by dead vegetation and aquatic life than all of the land mass by far. The depth of the ocean living area is much greater than that of the land also. So basically it is just a totally distorted and worthless graph regarding the earth as a whole IMHO.

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

I suggest you take some time and read about the Permian extinction. Methyl  hydtrates were the third and final dagger to life forms that were exterminated. First was about a 5C CO2 related increase from the Siberian Traps volcanoes. Next was an increase in ocean temps. Last was Methyl hydrate released by. the heated oceans.

[Boat + 1,324]

9 minutes ago, nsdp said:

NERC has a different view. "60% of natural gas-fired generating units affected by fuel supply issues had outages, derates, or failures to start by February 14, and 32% had fuel supply issues before and after February 14." That is before the first wind turbines iced on the 15th. . 

I knew the real story of the Texas storm would emerge. Nat gas is not only puts out dangerous pollution, to much carbon but in the case of ERCOT an unreliable backup for the grid in extreme storms. Is it asking to much of electrical systems to provide heat from a winter storm? Not if death from a few dozen customers is ok. Anybody got demographics on the dead? In the future can Texas get police on horseback to round up citizens who could potentially freeze? You know, usher them to government safe zones. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

The majority oppose the 3.5 trillion spending bill which includes many wasteful provisions including the green new deal. 

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/september_2021/majority_oppose_3_5_trillion_spending_bill_against_raising_debt_ceiling

[ronwagn + 6,290]

48 minutes ago, nsdp said:

I suggest you take some time and read about the Permian extinction. Methyl  hydtrates were the third and final dagger to life forms that were exterminated. First was about a 5C CO2 related increase from the Siberian Traps volcanoes. Next was an increase in ocean temps. Last was Methyl hydrate released by. the heated oceans.

That does not have a direct correlation with our present situation. We have no volcanoes in Siberia. We have a problem with no forestry management in Siberia and dire mismanagement of our own forests, mainly due to green dreams of how things should be done. Our problem is coal burning in Asia and around the world. Renewables cannot be built without money. Where are the electrical vehicle sales without subsidies? Where does the money come from? Our economy is a much more important issue that we should focus on. America has led the world in reducing pollution due to natural gas replacing coal. 

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/september_2021/majority_oppose_3_5_trillion_spending_bill_against_raising_debt_ceiling

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

3 hours ago, nsdp said:

 

 

The great line once again. Wind was scheduled by ERCOT day ahead planning ws for a small part of the generation stack 10mwh.  Actual wind delivery was 11.5 mwh over producing 15. % until a FF fail perform obligations to deliever KVARS. Check the NERC report published Thursday.

We went over that already...the NG system failed because it was cut off from electrical supply by the failure of the renewables. That was established in the investigation.....nice try for a spin in the other direction.