Severe Drought in the West Will Greatly Reduce Electrical Production from Hydroelectric Turbines.

[specinho + 467]

On 7/20/2021 at 1:26 AM, turbguy said:

If a state can place a severance tax on petroleum resources, why not on water resources?

eerrrrr......... once upon a time.......... civilization started near water resources. Everyone has been having access to water as free resource ever since. Government does not own it but helps to manage it e.g. makes it cleaner for drinking, distributes it properly etc.

Petroleum, on the other hand, might have been found by chance, by individual effort. The individual then sold the find to someone else. They made money. Government was appointed to make sure problems needed to be solved were in order. Officers were paid to work. Later, officers turned something else by believing the merchants should share more with the government. Officers turned generosity of merchants into a law called regular tax.......

p/s: not sure if all of us have heard of sky juice? My friend ordered one ages ago. Got me curious. It turned out......... a cup of plain water..........   Kindly do not deprive renewable sky juice as free entity please.........

On 7/20/2021 at 2:12 AM, -trance said:

True, but we are talking about a much smaller environmental buffer and a more closed loop.

"Direct potable water reuse"

Connect the sewage treatment plant effluent pipe to the drinking water treatment plant inlet pipe.

Less drastically, have the effluent line a bit upstream of the intake pipe so there is a mixing zone. Currently cities take their water from upstream and put their waste downstream (if they have a river).

May I ask a question....... wondering if you realize by now that "sewage" could not be understood as "waste water from the sea" like it sounds?

I have been horrified since the idea of turning waste water, including effluent of defecation, into drinking water, was shared and implemented in some countries.... The worse scenario happened when smarter brains insisted not to copy the full process, worrying about infringing property right or something like that, but merely partially...... The outcomes......... really not pleasant.......

[turbguy + 1,543]

5 minutes ago, specinho said:

eerrrrr......... once upon a time.......... civilization started near water resources. Everyone has been having access to water as free resource ever since. Government does not own it but helps to manage it e.g. makes it cleaner for drinking, distributes it properly etc.

Petroleum, on the other hand, might have been found by chance, by individual effort. The individual then sold the find to someone else. They made money. Government was appointed to make sure problems needed to be solved were in order. Officers were paid to work. Later, officers turned something else by believing the merchants should share more with the government. Officers turned generosity of merchants into a law called regular tax.......

p/s: not sure if all of us have heard of sky juice? My friend ordered one ages ago. Got me curious. It turned out......... a cup of plain water..........   Kindly do not deprive renewable sky juice as free entity please.........

 

 

May I ask a question....... wondering if you realize by now that "sewage" could not be understood as "waste water from the sea" like it sounds?

I have been horrified since the idea of turning waste water, including effluent of defecation, into drinking water, was shared and implemented in some countries.... The worse scenario happened when smarter brains insisted not to copy the full process, worrying about infringing property right or something like that, but merely partially...... The outcomes......... really not pleasant.......

 

At several areas out west in the USA, you are not permitted to capture rainwater from your roof and use it (e.g., for landscaping).  That runoff is "owned/claimed" by downstream water-rights.

Edited July 26, 2021 by turbguy

[specinho + 467]

3 minutes ago, turbguy said:

At several areas out west in the USA, you are not permitted to capture rainwater from your roof and use it (e.g., for landscaping).  That runoff is "owned/claimed" by downstream water-rights.

mmm........ wondering if those precious droplets would dissipate directly whenever it does rain?

[Eric Gagen + 713]

3 hours ago, specinho said:

eerrrrr......... once upon a time.......... civilization started near water resources. Everyone has been having access to water as free resource ever since. Government does not own it but helps to manage it e.g. makes it cleaner for drinking, distributes it properly etc.

Petroleum, on the other hand, might have been found by chance, by individual effort. The individual then sold the find to someone else. They made money. Government was appointed to make sure problems needed to be solved were in order. Officers were paid to work. Later, officers turned something else by believing the merchants should share more with the government. Officers turned generosity of merchants into a law called regular tax.......

p/s: not sure if all of us have heard of sky juice? My friend ordered one ages ago. Got me curious. It turned out......... a cup of plain water..........   Kindly do not deprive renewable sky juice as free entity please.........

 

 

May I ask a question....... wondering if you realize by now that "sewage" could not be understood as "waste water from the sea" like it sounds?

I have been horrified since the idea of turning waste water, including effluent of defecation, into drinking water, was shared and implemented in some countries.... The worse scenario happened when smarter brains insisted not to copy the full process, worrying about infringing property right or something like that, but merely partially...... The outcomes......... really not pleasant.......

Have you ever read the bible? studied ancient Egypt?  Looked at the civilizations of the American Indians of the Western Plains?  The Inca in Peru? The Eurasian Steppe? Anywhere that water was a potential constraint it was used as the critical controlling mechanism by tribes, chiefs and governments.  This ranged from war over water sources, governmental control of wells and oasis points, to mechanisms of forced corvee labor or taxation based on water supply volume.  Water has only been free in social or fiscal terms in places where it was present in such abundance that it was of no value.  Everywhere else, control of water supplies was the key to organizing a civilization and controlling people. 

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

23 minutes ago, Eric Gagen said:

Have you ever read the bible? studied ancient Egypt?  Looked at the civilizations of the American Indians of the Western Plains?  The Inca in Peru? The Eurasian Steppe? Anywhere that water was a potential constraint it was used as the critical controlling mechanism by tribes, chiefs and governments.  This ranged from war over water sources, governmental control of wells and oasis points, to mechanisms of forced corvee labor or taxation based on water supply volume.  Water has only been free in social or fiscal terms in places where it was present in such abundance that it was of no value.  Everywhere else, control of water supplies was the key to organizing a civilization and controlling people. 

 

I think he is from Vietnam, so one of those places where water is over abundant.

[nsdp + 449]

On 7/26/2021 at 5:39 PM, Jay McKinsey said:

I think he is from Vietnam, so one of those places where water is over abundant.

Your typical Vietnamese peasant  could walk and chew gum at the same time. That is beyond beyond specinho' s cerebral abilities.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

On 7/19/2021 at 4:32 PM, Dan Clemmensen said:

Offshore has some additional advantages. A seaside factory can build and ship turbine blades and other very large components by barge or ship, with no size constraints. It's like building oil platforms. You can therefore make them much larger, which works well for offshore wind.

Yep size matters unfortunately gents and you don't really want one of these on your doorstep

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/ge-haliade-x-wind-turbine/

https://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1699714/worlds-longest-wind-turbine-blade-gets-engineers-approval

And they're only going to get bigger!

Siemens Gamesa make these on the North East coast of England and ship directly to Dogger Bank in the North Sea (the worlds largest wind farm currently), no road transport needed.

One rotation of these powers a house for 2 days!

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

On 7/20/2021 at 3:18 AM, Eric Gagen said:

This limits the number of organizations that can potentially fund offshore wind energy programs, and in the meantime 'low payout' quick capital turnaround land based wind fills the gap.  

When the incumbent government makes claims to be zero carbon by 2050 they have to stump up a lot of cash to help finance these and they have to be seen to be doing it, certainly in Europe. Also Europe is very densely populated and has shallow water for the most part so offshore wind wins the day as everyone wants NIMBY

"Jérôme Pécresse, president and CEO of GE Renewable Energy said: “The renewables industry took more than 20 years to install the first 17GW of offshore wind. Today, the industry forecasts that it will install more than 90GW over the next 12 years. This is being driven by lower cost of electricity from scale and technology. The Haliade-X shows GE’s commitment to the offshore wind segment and will set a new benchmark for cost of electricity, thus driving more offshore growth.”

Everyone is falling over themselves to finance these projects and historical oil + gas companies are getting involved as thats where the money is!

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

34 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Yep size matters unfortunately gents and you don't really want one of these on your doorstep

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/ge-haliade-x-wind-turbine/

https://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1699714/worlds-longest-wind-turbine-blade-gets-engineers-approval

And they're only going to get bigger!

Siemens Gamesa make these on the North East coast of England and ship directly to Dogger Bank in the North Sea (the worlds largest wind farm currently), no road transport needed.

One rotation of these powers a house for 2 days!

No, I don't want one "on my doorstep". I want it away from the shore by at least 12 miles, just like an offshore oil platform.

[Eric Gagen + 713]

2 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

When the incumbent government makes claims to be zero carbon by 2050 they have to stump up a lot of cash to help finance these and they have to be seen to be doing it, certainly in Europe. Also Europe is very densely populated and has shallow water for the most part so offshore wind wins the day as everyone wants NIMBY

"Jérôme Pécresse, president and CEO of GE Renewable Energy said: “The renewables industry took more than 20 years to install the first 17GW of offshore wind. Today, the industry forecasts that it will install more than 90GW over the next 12 years. This is being driven by lower cost of electricity from scale and technology. The Haliade-X shows GE’s commitment to the offshore wind segment and will set a new benchmark for cost of electricity, thus driving more offshore growth.”

Everyone is falling over themselves to finance these projects and historical oil + gas companies are getting involved as thats where the money is!

Sure but my comment was in the context of the North American market.  In that situation there are large windy areas on land with little or no population which are ‘low hanging fruit’ and which are the incumbent method of wind generation.  Europe is a different place with different population densities and sea conditions.  Europe also mostly lacks good quality land based wind resources making the financial calculus quite different even in the absence of shared land use issues. 
 

with respect to capital,  it’s not just about getting access to it, but being able to use it efficiently.  I could dump a billion dollar/euro grant for wind energy on you tomorrow and you would have to start from scratch figuring out how to use it.  Pre existing large organizations can efficiently use the money immediately without excess delays caused by constructing an organization and facilities to utilize the funds. 

Edited July 28, 2021 by Eric Gagen

[specinho + 467]

On 7/27/2021 at 6:15 AM, Eric Gagen said:

Have you ever read the bible? studied ancient Egypt?  Looked at the civilizations of the American Indians of the Western Plains?  The Inca in Peru? The Eurasian Steppe? Anywhere that water was a potential constraint it was used as the critical controlling mechanism by tribes, chiefs and governments.  This ranged from war over water sources, governmental control of wells and oasis points, to mechanisms of forced corvee labor or taxation based on water supply volume.  Water has only been free in social or fiscal terms in places where it was present in such abundance that it was of no value.  Everywhere else, control of water supplies was the key to organizing a civilization and controlling people. 

 

May I ask which story in the bible were you referring to?

For all the questions, not at all. But a quick check on the net shows.......

Ancient Egypt was founded closed to the river. In fact, all four ancient civilizations were founded near water resources as mentioned (a note of concern : some people edited the info online to include another one, to make it five, without being noticed. How desperate has this ethnic been to change history and mislead the youngs and old whom might not have learnt before... Annoyed 🤢........). I could not recall they have to pay to wash clothes by the river, to use water in other daily chores etc in movies or books.

American indigenous of the western plains might live as nomad? Steppe, grassland? The horses drank water wherever available and they would move on, no? They did not pay for sure?

Inca Peru, quote:" The Inca Empire functioned largely without money and without markets." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_Empire We might be able to deduct that they did not pay for water?

Hopefully I decipher your intention correctly that you are backing up the statement "water has been a free resource since ancient time".

The epic phrase that you might mean " control water, you control everything", is depicted from movie Rango based in Mohave Desert?

There might have been a latest technology that could make rain at one arid place and cause severe flood every where else, including the arid area.........  Very economic and efficient, don't you think?

Everywhere else, there might be another more appropriate epic phrase i.e "control money, you control everything"......?

 

 

 

Edited July 28, 2021 by specinho

[Eric Gagen + 713]

1 hour ago, specinho said:

May I ask which story in the bible were you referring to?

For all the questions, not at all. But a quick check on the net shows.......

Ancient Egypt was founded closed to the river. In fact, all four ancient civilizations were founded near water resources as mentioned (a note of concern : some people edited the info online to include another one, to make it five, without being noticed. How desperate has this ethnic been to change history and mislead the youngs and old whom might not have learnt before... Annoyed 🤢........). I could not recall they have to pay to wash clothes by the river, to use water in other daily chores etc in movies or books.

American indigenous of the western plains might live as nomad? Steppe, grassland? The horses drank water wherever available and they would move on, no? They did not pay for sure?

Inca Peru, quote:" The Inca Empire functioned largely without money and without markets." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_Empire We might be able to deduct that they did not pay for water?

Hopefully I decipher your intention correctly that you are backing up the statement "water has been a free resource since ancient time".

The epic phrase that you might mean " control water, you control everything", is depicted from movie Rango based in Mohave Desert?

There might have been a latest technology that could make rain at one arid place and cause severe flood every where else, including the arid area.........  Very economic and efficient, don't you think?

Everywhere else, there might be another more appropriate epic phrase i.e "control money, you control everything"......?

 

 

 

Any portion of the old testament dealing with water is a good example. If you aren't familiar with biblical sources, feel free to look at different ones - I merely included it because I thought you would already have them near in mind.  Here is a partial list of how water plays a pivotal historical role in the region, as taken from the bible.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_in_the_Bible

Washing clothes?  sure, free use - but that's an incidental use of water.  The main use of water then and now is in agriculture - to secure a food supply.  That was, is and has been strictly a state controlled affair. 

American western plains - no cash exchanges took place (since they didn't have it) but tribes could and did fight over water rights.  Especially on the southern plains and in the southwest, access to good quality water sources was the key to success.  The Comanche guaranteed this by killing anyone who used 'their' water without permission, and the pueblo indians settled at any useful sources and 'blocked out' competitors by preventing them from getting physical access. 

Without money or markets does not mean 'without control or accountability' The Inca constructed a series of terraced farmlands in order to capture rain and snow melt from higher elevations for agricultural purposes.  These were constructed with corvee labor, where taxes are paid for in labor to the state rather than cash.  the resulting farmland was then apportioned out to citzens for use, and the produce collected by the state/temples.  The food supply was controlled by the water supply, and the state controlled both ends of the system.

I have never heard of the movie you mentioned.  

The hypothetical techniques to create or suppress rain aren't really relevant, since they have not proven very effective either in terms of volume of water produced, or return on levels of effort employed. 

Control of water has been a method of organizing and controlling people since long before money was invented - money is merely a method of accounting for and measuring value, but in places without large volumes of rainfall, water IS one of the sources of value, so the intermediary of money was not required for it to be useful.  It has the additional benefits of being easily measurable and easy to account for in volumes which matter (i.e. volumes large enough to produce usable volumes of food with) 

Edited July 28, 2021 by Eric Gagen

[turbguy + 1,543]

3 hours ago, specinho said:

Everywhere else, there might be another more appropriate epic phrase i.e "control money, you control everything"......?

Control water, and you easily control money.

Which would you rather consume?

Edited July 28, 2021 by turbguy

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

14 hours ago, Eric Gagen said:

with respect to capital,  it’s not just about getting access to it, but being able to use it efficiently.  I could dump a billion dollar/euro grant for wind energy on you tomorrow and you would have to start from scratch figuring out how to use it.  Pre existing large organizations can efficiently use the money immediately without excess delays caused by constructing an organization and facilities to utilize the funds. 

Yes of course that's the same in any industry!

large scale utilities like RWE ,SSE etc along with historic oil + gas companies such as Equinor are all involved and its those who are developing these offshore wind farms

[NickW + 2,714]

On 7/17/2021 at 8:24 PM, ronwagn said:

Desal for water, using hydroponics or at least drip irrigation with plastic covering could be quite efficient and affordable. If the Pacific Coast treated all of its grey water and reused it plus stopped wasting effluent its real water problems would be solved.

This is interesting and already being developed in several locations including Australia, Abu Dhabi, and Oman. 

Seawater Greenhouse

[Eric Gagen + 713]

3 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Yes of course that's the same in any industry!

large scale utilities like RWE ,SSE etc along with historic oil + gas companies such as Equinor are all involved and its those who are developing these offshore wind farms

Well my point there was that in the US there is a pre-existing large wind energy industry focused on land based installations.  They don’t need grants or ‘seed money’ they are commercial profitable organizations pulling in steady profits who are listed on major stock exchanges.  They site, plan and execute major wind projects on land on a routine basis. 
 

even if offshore wind is theoretically more capital efficient, at least in the US any organization which wanted to get into it would have to build up that knowledge and competency which the land based organizations already have.  Until they do their improved capital efficiency is in theory only because they will not in fact be more capital efficient.  It’s liable to take them 3-5 years or so of steady investment with sub par returns on capital to close the organizational gaps required to be efficient offshore wind energy organizations.  This is why only the largest of companies can do it - they need to have large and stable sources of cash flow to effectively subsidize their offshore wind segment until it is capital competitive on its own.  

Also the turnaround time on capital for  offshore projects tends to be longer than on land.  Until the project is up and running and cash flow positive the capital is tied up and unavailable for redeployment.  Only large companies with lots of capital/borrowing capability can afford to do projects of this nature. 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

6 minutes ago, Eric Gagen said:

Well my point there was that in the US there is a pre-existing large wind energy industry focused on land based installations.  They don’t need grants or ‘seed money’ they are commercial profitable organizations pulling in steady profits who are listed on major stock exchanges.  They site, plan and execute major wind projects on land on a routine basis. 
 

even if offshore wind is theoretically more capital efficient, at least in the US any organization which wanted to get into it would have to build up that knowledge and competency which the land based organizations already have.  Until they do their improved capital efficiency is in theory only because they will not in fact be more capital efficient.  It’s liable to take them 3-5 years or so of steady investment with sub par returns on capital to close the organizational gaps required to be efficient offshore wind energy organizations.  This is why only the largest of companies can do it - they need to have large and stable sources of cash flow to effectively subsidize their offshore wind segment until it is capital competitive on its own.  

Also the turnaround time on capital for  offshore projects tends to be longer than on land.  Until the project is up and running and cash flow positive the capital is tied up and unavailable for redeployment.  Only large companies with lots of capital/borrowing capability can afford to do projects of this nature. 

yes agreed that is why I stated the likes of Equinor and RWE. 

The US does have a lot of land this is true but you're never going to building wind turbines on the scale of the offshore ones being built elsewhere, as who wants a 860ft tall wind turbine farm near them??? That nearly 3X the height of The Statue Of Liberty and dozens of them.

Offshore does allow this.

Floating offshore maybe the answer but this isnt economic at present IMHO.

That being said you can of course build smaller scale onshore.

[Eric Gagen + 713]

7 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

yes agreed that is why I stated the likes of Equinor and RWE. 

The US does have a lot of land this is true but you're never going to building wind turbines on the scale of the offshore ones being built elsewhere, as who wants a 860ft tall wind turbine farm near them??? That nearly 3X the height of The Statue Of Liberty and dozens of them.

Offshore does allow this.

Floating offshore maybe the answer but this isnt economic at present IMHO.

That being said you can of course build smaller scale onshore.

This may surprise you if you haven’t been, to the US but you can build wind turbine farms on land here (not dozens but hundreds of them) and the entire project be sited out of sight of the nearest human habitation. There are dozens of projects with over 50 windmills per project like that on land here.  
Not 860 ft tall though - there may be a feet/meters translation issue here - most of them are ~ 250-300 feet tall, so 70-85 meters.  Any offshore project looking at an overall height of 860 ft is either theoretical plans for the future or is measuring total height from the sea floor, and not height over the water surface.  There are serious materials science issues with building windmills 250 meters tall and they haven’t all been solved yet. 

Edited July 29, 2021 by Eric Gagen

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

23 minutes ago, Eric Gagen said:

This may surprise you if you haven’t been, to the US but you can build wind turbine farms on land here (not dozens but hundreds of them) and the entire project be sited out of sight of the nearest human habitation. There are dozens of projects with over 50 windmills per project like that on land here.  
Not 860 ft tall though - there may be a feet/meters translation issue here - most of them are ~ 250-300 feet tall, so 70-85 meters.  Any offshore project looking at an overall height of 860 ft is either theoretical plans for the future or is measuring total height from the sea floor, and not height over the water surface.  There are serious materials science issues with building windmills 250 meters tall and they haven’t all been solved yet. 

As I said in my previous post the US has a lot of land but even so you wouldnt be making these for anywhere land based.

You obviously havent seen these yet then and arent up to date on the latest offshore wind turbines, I did post it on Oilprice previously. 260 metres (850ft+) ABOVE sea level. Each blade is 107metres (350ft) long!

No feet/metres translation issue here.

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/ge-haliade-x-wind-turbine/

This post was 2018 they are now built and in situ in the North Sea

This link shows a time lapse of the installation if you scroll down

https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/offshore-wind/haliade-x-offshore-turbine

Enjoy!

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

36 minutes ago, Eric Gagen said:

There are serious materials science issues with building windmills 250 meters tall and they haven’t all been solved yet. 

yep they have

https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/offshore-wind/haliade-x-offshore-turbine

[Eric Gagen + 713]

18 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

As I said in my previous post the US has a lot of land but even so you wouldnt be making these for anywhere land based.

You obviously havent seen these yet then and arent up to date on the latest offshore wind turbines, I did post it on Oilprice previously. 260 metres (850ft+) ABOVE sea level. Each blade is 107metres (350ft) long!

No feet/metres translation issue here.

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/ge-haliade-x-wind-turbine/

This post was 2018 they are now built and in situ in the North Sea

This link shows a time lapse of the installation if you scroll down

https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/offshore-wind/haliade-x-offshore-turbine

Enjoy!

Nope - I hadn't seen them - the largest ones I had seen are the big land based ones in the 300-450 ft tall range.  As I noted, there isn't really any offshore wind development in the US yet, so this sort of equipment isn't here.  I was fully aware that the sea based stuff tends to be larger, but hadn't really been keeping up with it,  since it seems unlikely that there will be any significant volume of sea based wind power in the US any time soon.

You probably couldn't install them efficiently on land, as the sea based installation technique is (very loosely) based on partially sinking the column the turbine is based on, then bringing it back to operating height, and/or the use of massive floating cranes which exceed the size of those which can be moved around on land.  

Based on my experience with offshore facility work from the oil and gas industry, it would be wonderful for me personally if these were to take off in the US it just isn't happening on a large scale soon, although there may be some off the northeast coast before long. 

Edited July 29, 2021 by Eric Gagen

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

45 minutes ago, Eric Gagen said:

Nope - I hadn't seen them - the largest ones I had seen are the big land based ones in the 300-450 ft tall range.  As I noted, there isn't really any offshore wind development in the US yet, so this sort of equipment isn't here.  I was fully aware that the sea based stuff tends to be larger, but hadn't really been keeping up with it,  since it seems unlikely that there will be any significant volume of sea based wind power in the US any time soon.

You probably couldn't install them efficiently on land, as the sea based installation technique is (very loosely) based on partially sinking the column the turbine is based on, then bringing it back to operating height, and/or the use of massive floating cranes which exceed the size of those which can be moved around on land.  

Based on my experience with offshore facility work from the oil and gas industry, it would be wonderful for me personally if these were to take off in the US it just isn't happening on a large scale soon, although there may be some off the northeast coast before long. 

I do think there's scope for offshore wind on the US east coast

It may well be that floating offshore wind becomes a lot more economic as it is a very new industry.

I'm not an engineer so I'd be interested from any of you guys that are engineers what the viability is of building floating offshore wind turbines on the scale of the Haliade X and what engineering challenges there are in trying to do so. I'd expect the mooring systems to be nearly as large as the topside.

Edited July 29, 2021 by Rob Plant

[Eric Gagen + 713]

8 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

I do think there's scope for offshore wind on the US east coast

It may well be that floating offshore wind becomes a lot more economic as it is a very new industry.

I'm not an engineer so I'd be interested from any of you guys that are engineers what the viability is of building floating offshore wind turbines on the scale of the Haliade X and what engineering challenges there are in trying to do so. I'd expect the mooring systems to be nearly as large as the topside.

No mooring required for the types of operations being considered in the US east coast - in general these are expected to be in relatively shallow waters, where a variety of structures fixed to the seafloor can be used. This is similar to those in Europe now.   

There are a variety of deepwater installation options being considered, but it's not yet clear which ones will be the best types, and there will probably be different optimal ones in areas with different sea state potentials and different undersea soil/rock conditions.  These are all 'solved' problems from the deepwater oil and gas industry which easily port over to wind turbines.  Even the construction techniques are interchangeable, since the undersea support systems are consistently constructed seperately from the 'topsides' and then mated up later.  This means they are fully modular and can be set up plug and play as needed.  

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

12 hours ago, Eric Gagen said:

No mooring required for the types of operations being considered in the US east coast - in general these are expected to be in relatively shallow waters, where a variety of structures fixed to the seafloor can be used. This is similar to those in Europe now.   

There are a variety of deepwater installation options being considered, but it's not yet clear which ones will be the best types, and there will probably be different optimal ones in areas with different sea state potentials and different undersea soil/rock conditions.  These are all 'solved' problems from the deepwater oil and gas industry which easily port over to wind turbines.  Even the construction techniques are interchangeable, since the undersea support systems are consistently constructed seperately from the 'topsides' and then mated up later.  This means they are fully modular and can be set up plug and play as needed.  

California off shore wind is a few years off but tremendous pressure is about to be put on expedited development. The hot spots to be are Eureka and Morro Bay.  

https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/environment/article253074188.html

Edited July 30, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[RichieRich216 + 454]

On another Ode to green technology….. Wait for it……

The founder of the much-hyped electric truck manufacturer Nikola Corp. NKLA, -15.22% has been charged with lying to investors about the supposed technological breakthroughs the company had achieved in order to drive up its stock price, federal prosecutors announced Thursday.

Trevor Milton, 39, is accused of claiming that his company had successfully manufactured working prototypes of electric trucks and pickup trucks that would turn the industry on its head, when he had, in fact, never built anything.

“At the bottom, this a very simple case: Milton told lies to generate popular demand for his stock,” said Audrey Strauss,, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.

Advertisement

At public events, the prototype vehicles were towed into position and were powered by plugs leading from hidden wall sockets, prosecutors said. 

Milton resigned from Nikola in September as it emerged that the justice department had opened a probe into the startup and its founder over possible false claims. Milton has previously tweeted that he intended to defend himself against “false allegations.”

Prosecutors said Milton was taken into custody Thursday in Manhattan and was later released on a $100 million bond. His attorney, Marc Mukasey, said in an email: “Trevor Milton is innocent. He’s been wrongfully accused after a faulty and incomplete investigation. He will be exonerated after trial.” 

In a statement, Nikola said that the indictment was against Milton and not the company, and noted that he had not been involved in the business since last year.

“Nikola has cooperated with the government throughout the course of its inquiry. We remain committed to our previously announced milestones and timelines and are focused on delivering Nikola Tre battery-electric trucks later this year from the company’s manufacturing facilities,” the statement read.

In the indictment, federal prosecutors said Milton had for years overinflated the technological developments the company had achieved, claiming it had built working prototypes of its Nikola One truck and Badger pickup truck out of parts the company had fully manufactured on its own. 

To make it appear the truck prototype was driving, it was towed to the top of a hill and then rolled down to the bottom, prosecutors said.

Prosecutors said that, in fact, the prototypes that had been unveiled didn’t function and were Frankenstein monsters cobbled together from parts from other vehicles. At public events, the vehicles were allegedly towed into position and were powered by plugs leading from hidden wall sockets. 

Advertisement

In one instance, in which the vehicle was filmed for a promotional film, tape was used to keep the doors of a truck prototype from opening, prosecutors said. To make it appear the truck was driving, it was towed to the top of a hill and then rolled down to the bottom, according to the indictment.

What the News Means for You and Your Money

Understand how today’s business practices, market dynamics, tax policies and more impact you with real-time news and analysis from MarketWatch. 

 

SUBSCRIBE NOW: $1 FOR 4 WEEKS

Milton allegedly repeatedly said publicly that the prototypes were fully operational and overstated the number of pre-orders the company had received.

Non-traditional IPO

In June 2020, the company went public via a blank-check company, or a SPAC, called VectoIQ Acquisiton. A spokesperson for VectoIQ declined to comment. 

Prosecutors said because the company didn’t go public through a traditional IPO, Milton wasn’t bound by the traditional “quiet period” rulings following the listing, and was able to make outlandish public claims on social media about the company’s success in order to drive up the stock price by attracting retail investors. 

“Among the retail investors who ultimately invested in Nikola were investors who had no prior experience in the stock market and had begun trading during the COVID-19 pandemic to replace or supplement lost income or to occupy their time while in lockdown,” the indictment read.

Prosecutors said in the initial period following Nikola starting to trade publicly, the value of Milton’s shares shot up by $7 billion. After it emerged the company was under investigation, shares tanked causing many retail investors to lose tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars, prosecutors said. In some cases, some investors lost substantial portions of their retirement savings, they said. 

The Securities and Exchange Commission is running a parallel civil complaint. “Having chosen to promote Nikola through social media, Milton was obligated under the securities laws to communicate completely, accurately and truthfully,” Gurbir Grewal, director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement, said in a statement Thursday. “That obligation exists for all public company officials, even those whose companies have only recently entered the public markets through SPAC transactions.”

The thing’s they will do for green… More like GREED, All part of the great green energy Ponzi Scam.