ronwagn

Europeans and Americans are beginning to see the results of depending on renewables.

Recommended Posts

On 9/22/2021 at 9:21 PM, Boat said:

I experienced the Texas storm. When you mix Republicans and nat gas, people die. If Texas followed the rule of its own laws they would jail those who hire illegals. This population drop of illegals going home because of lack of jobs would ease nat gas demand and allow renewables with batteries to expand market share.

It would also cost the republicans two congressional seats that Texas gained from the  census and an other  two seats as the districts go back to 2018.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

45 minutes ago, nsdp said:

It would also cost the republicans two congressional seats that Texas gained from the  census and an other  two seats as the districts go back to 2018.

I do believe you are experiencing a Geographical location moment....Below would be the @risk crowd.

 

Pow wow.jpg

Edited by Eyes Wide Open

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 10/9/2021 at 1:48 PM, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Clearly not as the coal from AZ/UT is not in  there. 

Der Grosseer Scheisskopf

Utah coal goes 100% to Pacific Lighting when LADWP optied out of the Internountian Project expansion as of Jan 1, 2011. AZ(and NM) coal goes to Tri-State Generating (AZ, CO NE NM and WY)  ,APS, Tuscon and Salt River , and PNM.  Doesn't look like there is any coal from AZ or UT and NM) going to CA. LADWP was the last to exit Navajo in 2015. Anyway that is what the FERC Form 3 says.

Edited by nsdp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

I do believe you are experiencing a Geographical location moment....Below would be the @risk crowd.

 

Pow wow.jpg

You pull the illegals out and send their employers to FBP you lose 1,6 million residents and another 800.000 voters. That  eliminates the two new districts. Plus Tony Gonzales District 23 is gone because his new makeup population comes from El Paso way too many to comply with Bakerr vs Carr  and drops Kendal, Kerr, Bandera counties entirely and NW San Antonio. Or Mike McCaul  District 10 gets to pick his poison; he either  Republican (80% R) north west Austin (80 or NW Harris County(Houston).  I don't know how losing 2, 5 million in voting  population is going to help Republicans  Here in District 23 where I live I think I know how losing roughly 100,000 in the Anglo side of the district while adding voters who are 82% Hispanic..  What  you have done would be like me redistricting California while living in Texas, stupid arrogance.

NONE OF THOSE PICTURED ABOVE REPRESENTS TEXAS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/15/2021 at 9:34 AM, Michael Sanches said:

The sad part is governments and radicals cause so much pain.

I have no doubt that our energy needs will all be met by renewables by 2200. Likewise, most cars will be EV's. We should let the market get us from here to there; it is the most efficient. I look forward to that day (for my descendants.)

It is sad that we have all these people who think they are gods who demand this route or that route.

The so called rush to renewables comes in large part from the huge price swings from FF. Natural disasters and geopolitical conflicts swing demand and production levels. Business and trade do best in a stable environment. Next comes the cost of healthcare and quality of life issues as pollution takes its toll. Then there are legacy issues in millions of uncapped wells that keeps growing. Unfortunately gas blows up, pipelines rupture and tankers wreck. Let’s not forget all these very obvious problems that send engineers and investors looking for solutions. But hey, we’re getting there slow but sure because these FF problems can’t be solved. The speed of change is driven by cost and applying new tech. As responsible choices become more efficient you will see the speed of change dramatically increase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2021 at 12:08 AM, Boat said:

The so called rush to renewables comes in large part from the huge price swings from FF. Natural disasters and geopolitical conflicts swing demand and production levels. Business and trade do best in a stable environment. Next comes the cost of healthcare and quality of life issues as pollution takes its toll. Then there are legacy issues in millions of uncapped wells that keeps growing. Unfortunately gas blows up, pipelines rupture and tankers wreck. Let’s not forget all these very obvious problems that send engineers and investors looking for solutions. But hey, we’re getting there slow but sure because these FF problems can’t be solved. The speed of change is driven by cost and applying new tech. As responsible choices become more efficient you will see the speed of change dramatically increase.

As the price of fossil fuels continues to skyrocket, more production will eventually come online.

That's what happens when the price goes up.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

As the price of fossil fuels continues to skyrocket, more production will eventually come online.

That's what happens when the price goes up.

When the price goes up people also substitute with less expensive alternatives.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

When the price goes up people also substitute with less expensive alternatives.

Quite. I wonder how  much permanent demand destruction arises from people shaken into action by rapidly rising prices. Time to insulate the loft, replace the lights with LED's, insulate the hot water tank etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 10/25/2021 at 3:11 AM, Jay McKinsey said:

When the price goes up people also substitute with less expensive alternatives.

Except the renewable alternatives are also getting more expensive. 

Solar is seeing input price inflation.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Major-Cost-Increase-Threatens-Solar-Power-In-2022.html

Edited by Ecocharger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2021 at 11:08 PM, Boat said:

The so called rush to renewables comes in large part from the huge price swings from FF. Natural disasters and geopolitical conflicts swing demand and production levels. Business and trade do best in a stable environment. Next comes the cost of healthcare and quality of life issues as pollution takes its toll. Then there are legacy issues in millions of uncapped wells that keeps growing. Unfortunately gas blows up, pipelines rupture and tankers wreck. Let’s not forget all these very obvious problems that send engineers and investors looking for solutions. But hey, we’re getting there slow but sure because these FF problems can’t be solved. The speed of change is driven by cost and applying new tech. As responsible choices become more efficient you will see the speed of change dramatically increase.

I agree that there are hidden costs associated with FF's. The problem is that when we have government agencies to monitor FF producers, instead of something sensible, like putting money into escrow for decommissioning wells, these agencies end up subsidizing the FF producers. The more government agencies we have, the more we screw ourselves. Laws are only for the middle class and poor to obey. The government ignores the elites. No restaurant eating unless you are Governor Newsome (or insert the elite of your choice (either party)).

We are on the downside of the greatness of our country. The people only vote for those who will give them the most money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

 

Quote

“Gas prices of course are based on a global oil market. That oil market is controlled by a cartel. That cartel is Opec,” said Jennifer Granholm, the US energy secretary. “So that cartel has more say about what is going on.”

Quote

Fact check: OPEC crude and NGL production was 34% of total supply in September 21, OPEC+ at 51% (IEA) OPEC reserves were at 70%, OPEC+ at 80% in 2020 (BP)

 

250541086_1128460337561695_2163053636603730204_n.jpg

Edited by Tomasz
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/17/2021 at 3:36 AM, Thefutureiselectric said:

Another answer to the problem of massive swings in the supply and price of oil is to greatly increase renewable energy which can be supplied at continuous low cost, with the necessary investment in battery technology. The sun and wind do not have to be purchased, nor transported, and as a source are completely free from OPEC, Russia, and the ups and downs of US policy. Current oil and gasoline prices are clearly due to sharp cutbacks in oil production and capital spending by oil companies in 2020, caused by huge over-supply and the drop in demand that caused $30 oil for awhile last year. The free market and OPEC’s production declines are to blame, and the increasing use of electric cars will only serve to keep gasoline prices lower by reducing demand. Want lower gasoline prices? Then support electric vehicles, or buy one and make the price of gasoline irrelevant to your budget. Want to minimize your electric bill from spiking natural gas and coal costs? Putting solar panels on your roof will do that. My monthly electric bill averaged $12 per month last year, because of my solar panels, so fossil fuel prices don’t affect me so much. “Drill baby drill” isn’t the solution… that’s how we got here in the first place.

You are correct, but you need to know that it will cost $7 trillion to upgrade the electricity grid over the next decade and $3 trillion for EV charging stations and $10 trillion for batteries. The price of electricity needs to quadruple to make it all possible. PS: I didn't pluck those figures out of thin air, they are realistic estimates based on nearly a decade of my own research as well as that of the IEA etc. According to the IEA, full electrification will cost the globe $70 trillion, and that means about $20 trillion for the USA. Given that the USA spends half a trill on oil each year, the energy transition is not quite cost effective yet. Economies of scale should help though. Trying to transition to 100% renewables without extra nuclear and natural gas will triple the cost again.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/25/2021 at 12:23 AM, Ecocharger said:

As the price of fossil fuels continues to skyrocket, more production will eventually come online.

That's what happens when the price goes up.

The world is at the whim of the Saudi and Russia. But yea the frackers will have a short term heyday. For prices to stay up costs Russia/Saudi market share. It appears they are willing to do that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wombat One said:

You are correct, but you need to know that it will cost $7 trillion to upgrade the electricity grid over the next decade and $3 trillion for EV charging stations and $10 trillion for batteries. The price of electricity needs to quadruple to make it all possible. PS: I didn't pluck those figures out of thin air, they are realistic estimates based on nearly a decade of my own research as well as that of the IEA etc. According to the IEA, full electrification will cost the globe $70 trillion, and that means about $20 trillion for the USA. Given that the USA spends half a trill on oil each year, the energy transition is not quite cost effective yet. Economies of scale should help though. Trying to transition to 100% renewables without extra nuclear and natural gas will triple the cost again.

 

Musk is making early strides in grid storage and electric cars by building better desired products. He can do that with or without government help. FF politics will not give out that 20 trillion but the fact FF is price unreliable and expensive will drive alternative demand for other products. Biden can’t seem to get 1.5 billion and parts of that money went to healthcare and infrastructure. There is little massive green spending in the forecast. It fake news hype. Track the numbers. This is just the US of course. I don’t follow global energy close. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

3 hours ago, Wombat One said:

You are correct, but you need to know that it will cost $7 trillion to upgrade the electricity grid over the next decade and $3 trillion for EV charging stations and $10 trillion for batteries. The price of electricity needs to quadruple to make it all possible. PS: I didn't pluck those figures out of thin air, they are realistic estimates based on nearly a decade of my own research as well as that of the IEA etc. According to the IEA, full electrification will cost the globe $70 trillion, and that means about $20 trillion for the USA. Given that the USA spends half a trill on oil each year, the energy transition is not quite cost effective yet. Economies of scale should help though. Trying to transition to 100% renewables without extra nuclear and natural gas will triple the cost again.

 

Finally a thought process that deals directly with the core issue's. More conversation of this nature needs to come to the forefront. 

The current approach to Green Energy solutions seems to be well founded in some kind of teenage waste land fantasies. 

I am quite sure if PT Barnum was still breathing his commentary would be...Not bad guys..not bad at all.

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Finally a thought process that deals directly with the core issue's. More conversation of this nature needs to come to the forefront. 

The current approach to Green Energy solutions seems to be well founded in some kind of teenage waste land fantasies. 

I am quite sure if PT Barnum was still breathing his commentary would be...Not bad guys..not bad at all.

So your core issue thought process for green energy is grounded in fantasies. It’s telling your so honest about your fantasies. Try porn, you need a fantasy upgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boat said:

So your core issue thought process for green energy is grounded in fantasies. It’s telling your so honest about your fantasies. Try porn, you need a fantasy upgrade.

It is economically unarchivable. Every country in the world are in debt bubble and is heading to a stagnation, because of the deleveraging cycle.  With bigger debt, both in public, finance or manufacturing sectors around the world since 2008 and especially with covid19, any talk about innovation by subsidy or carbon credit is simply a political/stock propaganda or fantasy. We need wealth creation to pay back debt, not by make debt bigger which demands much more wealth to pay back. 

If you want really to go green, the best way is to grow more trees, which use solar to turn CO2 into O2 and make the sea less pollution, not by chopping trees or fields with panel or wind mills  and more mining which more chemical to the ocean. That is how the world have Oxygen.

Do you know where do we have fossil fuel in the first place? From Carbon capture and forming O2 using the solar energy. The best way is to reverse it, using free solar energy with  minimum maintenance and O2 is the by product. CO2 is my most favorite pollutions if comparing to the solid and liquid wastes the poor countries facing for the sake of green energy. 

Besides the non CO2 pollution from mining and less CO2 to O2 process, the feedback loop: more productions of "renewable" components:  to make clean energy, we need to make more batteries, solar panel, wind turbines, carbon capture.. -> more dirty energy --> more CO2 emission-->more productions of "renewable" components. This feedback loop in unsustainable itself , regardless of the debt level.

If CO2 emission is the standard of clean energy, then nuclear is the only clean energy that can be adapt to the current infrastructure. France now goes with nuclear energy. 

Read the history of the world and you can find how many times political wills messed up the economy. Generations looks back and think their predecessors are stupid but keep repeating it themselves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Boat said:

So your core issue thought process for green energy is grounded in fantasies. It’s telling your so honest about your fantasies. Try porn, you need a fantasy upgrade.

I sense we have a difference in opinions and porn is your first thought? Triggered seems to manifest itself in mysterious forms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.