Should the US government be on the hook for $15 billion?

[ronwagn + 6,290]

5 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The number one reason empires and leaders fall is because they keep doing what they did yesterday and don't adapt to tomorrow. Technology is moving forward at a rapacious rate. Anyone who ignores it will be responsible for our demise.

With your strategy Ron we will forever be the leader of yesterday. 

You don't know what my strategy is but it is far better than yours. It involves using common sense, not destroying the economy, not raising the prices of fossil fuels, welcoming all green options that do make sense including all natural gas usage possible. It is not against electric vehicles, just expensive ones that are subsidized by the taxpayers. You have a one track mind that does not consider all options and that is not helpful for this country or any other. 

 

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 7/10/2021 at 6:06 AM, Eric Gagen said:

Hubbert was a geologist presenting a mathematical theory that he thought would predict the recoverable oil available from a group of geologic provinces.  He didn’t care at all about the economic or other implications of his work.  He didn’t make any assumptions about the end uses of oil at all.  In fact one of his assumptions was that the price and demand for oil never changed and was an irrelevant factor.  
 

Other people who didn’t understand how limited his model was ignored his explicit and implicit assumptions and filled the blanks in their own minds with their own assumptions, many of which were very different.  It’s really a classic example of the press and general public totally missing the point of an obscure, limited and esoteric scientific paper. 

That is news to me. I am so used to people using propaganda to advance their goals and hide their true intentions. 

[Eric Gagen + 713]

4 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

That is news to me. I am so used to people using propaganda to advance their goals and hide their true intentions. 

His famous curve is propaganda now but that’s not what he intended or expected.

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 minute ago, ronwagn said:

 

Sorry Ron, natural gas is another of yesterday's high pollution, high cost energy sources that is only cheap because it is a by product of oil and it is not being taxed for its pollution. Once EVs take over, the cost of natural gas is going through the roof because gas will no longer be subsidized by oil production. 

We are heading into an economic golden age of renewable leadership. Unless of course you fossils derail us into the gutter.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,537]

8 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Sorry Ron, natural gas is another of yesterday's high pollution, high cost energy sources that is only cheap because it is a by product of oil and it is not being taxed for its pollution. Once EVs take over, the cost of natural gas is going through the roof because gas will no longer be subsidized by oil production. 

We are heading into an economic golden age of renewable leadership. Unless of course you fossils derail us into the gutter.

All hail to the New Green Leader....well it is the thought that counts is it not?

 

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

Just now, Jay McKinsey said:

Sorry Ron, natural gas is another of yesterday's high pollution, high cost energy sources that is only cheap because it is a by product of oil and it is not being taxed for its pollution. Once EVs take over, the cost of natural gas is going through the roof because gas will no longer be subsidized by oil production. 

We are heading into an economic golden age of renewable leadership. Unless of course you fossils derail us into the gutter.

I will enjoy showing how wrong you are about the pace of electrical vehicles percentage of the market. Even more so about the growth of natural gas use throughout the world. There are incredible resources of natural gas on land around the planet and far more in the oceans. Natural gas will be providing most of the electricity that EV's use. Natural gas will also be handling more of the ships, trucks and buses around the world. Public resistance to wind turbines and solar farms will increase as they proliferate and they realize they are paying higher power bills to look at them. Then they will realize they need to be replaced regularly and buried somewhere. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

4 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

I will enjoy showing how wrong you are about the pace of electrical vehicles percentage of the market. Even more so about the growth of natural gas use throughout the world. There are incredible resources of natural gas on land around the planet and far more in the oceans. Natural gas will be providing most of the electricity that EV's use. Natural gas will also be handling more of the ships, trucks and buses around the world. Public resistance to wind turbines and solar farms will increase as they proliferate and they realize they are paying higher power bills to look at them. Then they will realize they need to be replaced regularly and buried somewhere. 

Go right ahead, let's see some numbers.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

5 hours ago, -trance said:

That is ethanol for fuel / Energy.  The amount needed for the plastic industry is much smaller. 

My gasoline is 10% ethanol. 

The vast majority of petrochemicals are burnt for energy, not chemical feed stocks.  Only 11% is not directly burnt.

People here do question if you can get chemicals without oil. At least you agree "plastic" is not dependent on oil.  It is dependent on the energy we currently get from oil.

 

Can you MATH bro?  --> No

5% of 40% is what again? --> 2%

IS aviation going anywhere?  No.  There is an additional +5% of current total.

Is Asphalt going anywhere?  No. Another ~1%

Is Construction/Farming diesel usage going anywhere?  No.  There is an additional +5% all by itself

Is fertilizer/Pesticides which consume a huge chunk of the NGL's going anywhere?  No, there is another +5% and closer to 10%

Is shipping bunker fuel going anywhere?  No.  There is +5% additional all by itself.

So, 20% of current + Plastics is going NOWHERE

So, your 11%, is hopelessly impossible assuming current content from Corn/Sugar and when you add in REALITY of cracking efficiencies to get Diesel etc long chain Hydrocarbons from bio source it is FAR worse, it is beyond hopelessly absurd from farm based products. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 minute ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Go right ahead, let's see some numbers.

You know the numbers of EV's are proportionately very small. You know that the cost benefit ratio is what will sell them. I hope that they are ready for my next minivan purchase. I have said that previously but doubt it will meet my cost/benefit ratio. The charging system required is still far off IMO. The novelty factor may fade for awhile until that is sped up. The large vehicles becoming EV's is far off if they materialize at all. Technology may all do it but it is up in the air as far as I am concerned. 

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Just now, ronwagn said:

You know the numbers of EV's are proportionately very small. You know that the cost benefit ratio is what will sell them. I hope that they are ready for my next minivan purchase. I have said that previously but doubt it will meet my cost/benefit ratio. The charging system required is still far off IMO. The novelty factor may fade for awhile until that is sped up. The large vehicles becoming EV's is far off if they materialize at all. Technology may all do it but it is up in the air as far as I am concerned. 

 

HaHa, so you looked at the numbers and realized that renewables and EVs are kicking methane butt for growth ratios. So much for your claim that "I will enjoy showing how wrong you are about the pace of electrical vehicles percentage of the market. Even more so about the growth of natural gas use throughout the world."

[ronwagn + 6,290]

2 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

HaHa, so you looked at the numbers and realized that renewables and EVs are kicking methane butt for growth ratios. So much for your claim that "I will enjoy showing how wrong you are about the pace of electrical vehicles percentage of the market. Even more so about the growth of natural gas use throughout the world."

You obviously need to study natural gas use around the world. I am not only talking about small vehicles of which EV's are a tiny percentage everywhere and there are twice as many natural gas vehicles which are also far larger. 

I have given you all the information about natural gas before and am not going to take the time to do it again right now. Almost everyone on this site knows it already. You should. 

[-trance + 114]

14 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Can you MATH bro?  --> No

5% of 40% is what again? --> 2%

IS aviation going anywhere?  No.  There is an additional +5% of current total.

Is Asphalt going anywhere?  No. Another ~1%

Is Construction/Farming diesel usage going anywhere?  No.  There is an additional +5% all by itself

Is fertilizer/Pesticides which consume a huge chunk of the NGL's going anywhere?  No, there is another +5% and closer to 10%

Is shipping bunker fuel going anywhere?  No.  There is +5% additional all by itself.

So, 20% of current + Plastics is going NOWHERE

So, your 11%, is hopelessly impossible assuming current content from Corn/Sugar and when you add in REALITY of cracking efficiencies to get Diesel etc long chain Hydrocarbons from bio source it is FAR worse, it is beyond hopelessly absurd from farm based products. 

You can't stay on topic.

If you remove energy from the discussion all the listed materials are easily obtained without oil.  You agreed on this point.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-products/images/petroleum_spaghetti_2020.pdf

Only 11% is not burnt and that includes asphalt. 

"Fertilizers" from oil is just energy to make ammonia etc. It's not like mining potash.

 

Edited July 11, 2021 by -trance

[-trance + 114]

[-trance + 114]

"Other" is 11%. 

89% is burnt for energy.  This is why oil is often called energy.

 

 

Edited July 11, 2021 by -trance

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

44 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

You obviously need to study natural gas use around the world. I am not only talking about small vehicles of which EV's are a tiny percentage everywhere and there are twice as many natural gas vehicles which are also far larger. 

I have given you all the information about natural gas before and am not going to take the time to do it again right now. Almost everyone on this site knows it already. You should. 

So first you say "I will enjoy showing how wrong you are" then you say you can't be bothered. Got it.

EV light vehicle sales have obliterated meth light vehicle sales and they are rapidly taking market share from the larger vehicles.

More GW of renewable electric production are being added every year than GW of meth electric production.

 

Edited July 11, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

So first you say "I will enjoy showing how wrong you are" then you say you can't be bothered. Got it.

EV light vehicle sales have obliterated meth light vehicle sales and they are rapidly taking market share from the larger vehicles.

More GW of renewable electric production are being added every year than GW of meth electric production.

 

Now California is going to sell ICE vehicles until 2035. All those ICE vehicles can be retrofitted to natural gas vehicles, including 18 wheelers, buses, and smaller trucks. California is the leader in the electric vehicle states and will be an example as I have said previously. 

Either you will show me how wrong I am or vice versa. I am for real progress not wasteful plans to rush into new and unproven technologies that have not proven their cost benefit ratio. This will be playing out for the next two decades. We both win if wisdom is used in the future and both lose otherwise unless you are investing in one or the other. Natural gas is the cleanest solution to pollution IMO, when you look at all factors over the long term.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Californias-Electric-Vehicle-Dream-Has-A-Major-Problem.html

 

Edited July 12, 2021 by ronwagn

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

HaHa, so you looked at the numbers and realized that renewables and EVs are kicking methane butt for growth ratios. So much for your claim that "I will enjoy showing how wrong you are about the pace of electrical vehicles percentage of the market. Even more so about the growth of natural gas use throughout the world."

You are living in a future that has not happened yet. You are not happy that I have said I would consider an EV if it met my cost benefit ratio. Maybe you will be right, lets just agree to pursue it as time goes on. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

10 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Now California is going to sell ICE vehicles until 2035. All those ICE vehicles can be retrofitted to natural gas vehicles, including 18 wheelers, buses, and smaller trucks. California is the leader in the electric vehicle states and will be an example as I have said previously. 

Either you will show me how wrong I am or vice versa. I am for real progress not wasteful plans to rush into new and unproven technologies that have not proven their cost benefit ratio. This will be playing out for the next two decades. We both win if wisdom is used in the future and both lose otherwise unless you are investing in one or the other. Natural gas is the cleanest solution to pollution IMO, when you look at all factors over the long term.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Californias-Electric-Vehicle-Dream-Has-A-Major-Problem.html

 

Ron, we aren't retrofitting anything to natural gas. We are phasing out natural gas because it is a major polluter. 

As to your link, What does it take to get it through to you guys that California only runs low on grid capacity during peak hours in late summer which last from 4 to 9pm? The rest of the day is off peak, we have plenty of capacity and that is when we will charge the EVs 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Here is a good example of the dynamic in California. The San Diego Transit authority just announced that the final diesel bus had been replaced with natural gas. At the same time they announced the next addition to their electric bus fleet which will replace the natural gas buses by 2040.

At the same time as retiring the diesel fleet, MTS also added two GILLIG zero-emission battery electric buses, upping the agency’s total to eight. MTS began its zero-emission bus pilot program in 2017, and intends to complete a full transition to 100% zero emissions fixed-route vehicles by 2040.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

17 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

You are living in a future that has not happened yet. You are not happy that I have said I would consider an EV if it met my cost benefit ratio. Maybe you will be right, lets just agree to pursue it as time goes on. 

Of course I live in the future, I'm a Californian. I'm thrilled that you are considering an EV, I object to the fact that you want to power it with methane.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

6 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

They bought a bunch of pipe last year when steel prices were rock bottom. Their mitigation date is now, with steel prices at record highs. Would be very amusing if they make a profit on the pipe.

Who are they going to sell oil pipeline pipe to? The Russians? Xiden had no problem cashing the check, er, agreeing to allow Nord Stream to go thru. Guess they're in the no CO2 section of the swimming pool.  

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

2 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Who are they going to sell oil pipeline pipe to? The Russians? Xiden had no problem cashing the check, er, agreeing to allow Nord Stream to go thru. Guess they're in the no CO2 section of the swimming pool.  

Steel is easily recyclable. I would think even you would know that.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

meth light vehicle sales

they run on Meth? 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Just now, Ward Smith said:

they run on Meth? 

They do indeed.

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

4 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The number one reason empires and leaders fall is because they keep doing what they did yesterday and don't adapt to tomorrow. Technology is moving forward at a rapacious rate. Anyone who ignores it will be responsible for our demise.

With your strategy Ron we will forever be the leader of yesterday. 

 

Jay, I agree with your use of the word "rapacious". That is exactly what is going to happen to the overburdened American taxpayer who will get shafted with the bills for expensive Green energy. The average guy who voted Democrat last time out is getting repaid with a rapidly rising cost of living and reduced standard of living.

Part of that bill will be compensation to the Keystone folks who attempted to bring affordable energy to America and were denied permission which had already been given.

Edited July 12, 2021 by Ecocharger