Energy Armageddon

[C.B. Saunders + 14]

You're using the grossly and unnecessarily inflated costs of a Gen2 nuke plant in Europe. Part of building out 80% of a grid using hydro and nuclear power is getting rid of the prissy regs Europe is utterly entangled in.

Roll out SMRs that can be factory built - perfect way to use German & Dutch mfg/engineering workforces. Design them to cost targets NOT TO THE IMPOSSIBLE TO SATISFY SAFETY STANDARDS SET BY SJWs 

As an example of the madness of woke regulators. - CA has set standards for remediating a site where some aerospace companies used toxic chems. The remediation standard requires backfilling with earth that is "cleaner" than ANY dirt that can be found in CA. For environmentalists - the process IS the punishment.

Sensible rules required.

Regs and Laws are ALL changeable.

The costs you're citing are based on current insane rules, regs, technology and risk tolerance. All need to change if Europe is to have a future as a developed economy.

[markslawson + 1,057]

On 10/6/2022 at 1:43 PM, Boat said:

Mark, just for fun pretend the sun is of little use in the winter.

Boat - you're contribution is difficult to understand but you seem to be advocating two generating systems.. one gas and one renewable. If you build enough gas generators in additional to the renewable generators of course that would work, but it would be horrifically expensive. You could then simply forget about the renewables and then have the gas generators.. but whatever. 

[Jeroen Goudswaard + 61]

13 hours ago, C.B. Saunders said:

You're using the grossly and unnecessarily inflated costs of a Gen2 nuke plant in Europe. Part of building out 80% of a grid using hydro and nuclear power is getting rid of the prissy regs Europe is utterly entangled in.

Roll out SMRs that can be factory built - perfect way to use German & Dutch mfg/engineering workforces. Design them to cost targets NOT TO THE IMPOSSIBLE TO SATISFY SAFETY STANDARDS SET BY SJWs 

As an example of the madness of woke regulators. - CA has set standards for remediating a site where some aerospace companies used toxic chems. The remediation standard requires backfilling with earth that is "cleaner" than ANY dirt that can be found in CA. For environmentalists - the process IS the punishment.

Sensible rules required.

Regs and Laws are ALL changeable.

The costs you're citing are based on current insane rules, regs, technology and risk tolerance. All need to change if Europe is to have a future as a developed economy.

Barakah in Abu Dhabi was built by the A-D government: standards are definitely lower in the Emirates vs. Europe and USA. Money was borrowed at interest levels not available to commercial companies. All risks are carried by the government. No reservations are needed for decommisioning and no insurance is paid for by the plant. No land lease is paid either. Still, this plant costs $600 mln to build (per TWh production/year). This is about similar to offshore wind on commercial terms. On government terms, offshore wind would be about 40% cheaper than government nuclear.

Edited October 7, 2022 by Jeroen Goudswaard

[Ron Wagner + 706]

On 9/18/2022 at 3:04 PM, specinho said:

there was a comment on a discussion board somewhere about cost of health care for a country. Highlight the essence here...........

Imagine the prospects of health care service..... People who need it might usually be

a) infants and mothers/ pediatric < 3 years old,

b) aged generations/ geriatric > 60 yrs old,

c) some unusual cases of genetics, occasional cases etc.

Those ages in between might rarely need it because they are usually healthy and vibrant with activities, especially people from not so well off group. If, a + b + c comprise 10% of a population and out of this 10%, only 0.1 to 1% requires regular medical service, and if a population is 300 m, then it would be 300,000 people. Divide that into 50 states............ we get 6000 people per state? Divided that to 4 months to 6 months regular interval, one month would be 1500 people or 50 people per day? And divided that into how many districts equipped with clinics, yes?

Question:

1. after so much they have contributed to the economic growth of a country, is it really that hard to provide free care for them?

2. insurance started off as good intention and generosity of some well off pioneers to protect their workers who might be doing injury prone or high risk work.

Later, it grows to become making money on customers' expenses. All insurances purchased are like paying money for things you might or might not used once or twice for a life time, with no guaranteed return. Not even an investment linked saving insurance could guarantee your basic seed saving is protected............

Why insist to do it on high prices and why  impose?

Hence, we can probably deduce that high costs incurred might be due to mismanagement of fund or allocation e.g. wastage on purchases, excessive staff, overpriced purchases etc...........

If spending so much on hiring so many to treat so few, why can't we demand good quality of free service?

Wondering if there is a crash course teaching government officers the basic? 'n'

I grew up in Los Angeles at the era of worst pollution. On the worst days, activity would lead to slight pain in the lungs. Today my lungs are in great shape. I am 77 years old and doing fairly well. Older than the latest average lifespan for a man today. 

Electric cars are mainly fueled by clean natural gas at a reasonable price below what is actually paid by other forms of energy. Just check California's price for electricity. Let the consumer be free to decide what they will drive and what fuel they use. I would suggest clean natural gas or propane. Add some hydrogen if you wish. Yes, natural gas can run your car with small modifications. Any mechanic can learn how to do that. We have very poor leadership in that area. 

[Ron Wagner + 706]

11 hours ago, markslawson said:

Boat - you're contribution is difficult to understand but you seem to be advocating two generating systems.. one gas and one renewable. If you build enough gas generators in additional to the renewable generators of course that would work, but it would be horrifically expensive. You could then simply forget about the renewables and then have the gas generators.. but whatever. 

Natural gas prices will be going down in the next few years, Only politics is keeping them high. That must be fixed. Our next election may help. 

[TailingsPond + 1,006]

On 10/3/2022 at 5:49 PM, markslawson said:

 To properly assess the contribution of renewables you have to subtract the contribution of biomass and hydro, which count as renewables but which don't have anything like the problems of wind farms and solar plants.

So only look at data that fits your preconceived notions?

That's not how analysis works...

[TailingsPond + 1,006]

1 hour ago, Ron Wagner said:

Natural gas prices will be going down in the next few years, Only politics is keeping them high. That must be fixed. Our next election may help. 

Renewable sources are also constantly getting cheaper.

You rave about nat gas because it is cheap, when it is not cheap. 

Your political predictions have also been wrong.  Also your election doesn't change global market factors.

Occasionally look at reality not just your theory...

Edited October 7, 2022 by TailingsPond

[markslawson + 1,057]

5 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

So only look at data that fits your preconceived notions?

That's not how analysis works...

Nope. As you know wind and solar are only of limited use. If you can construct power systems that only uses hydro and biomass then there is no problem. We can happily agree on the outcome. There are hydro-only systems, such as Norway. New Zealand has more than 50 per cent hydro and a lot of hydrothermal (another renewable with which there is no problem). The real problem comes when the grid has to rely heavily on wind and solar - basically it simply isn't possible, and no amount of flinging silly accusations at me will make it work. Leave it with you.

[RichieRich216 + 454]

Great read, However, some of the EU Countries brought their energy problems on themselves!

OPEC + Cutting by two million BPD is there a way to cash in on this problem? Though I can not blame them as a U.S. Citizen and remembering the 70’s oil embargo, I'm a little pissed off that we have put the Saudis under U.S. Military protection and were again being fucked over.

Now before you all pile on, I acknowledge that the fucking brain-dead President and the Democrats are the main reason we are in this situation! These greenies in the U.S. Want something that in the immediate short time is not possible to have, Fossil Fuels are going to be required for the foreseeable future and this administration has made any long-term investment not worth the risk so the fucking ignorant Democrats and Hedge Funds fuck over the United States as much as the Saudis.

However, we have given the Saudis Billions in U.S. Protection, When Iraq took Kuwait the only and I mean the only reason Iraq didn't run the board and take it all was half a million United States soldiers and equipment, weapons systems stopped Iraq.

They say hindsight is 20/20 but I think when Iran goes to take the Saudis, fuck them, let Iran take them.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,554]

On 9/27/2022 at 6:21 PM, notsonice said:

3 strikes and your out???

2 impeachments and now Marlago. You thought processes were correct.  "YOUR OUT".

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

Today, well yesterday in ABSURD: from Oilprice.com( I have  read it elsewhere)...

Danish Company To Build World’s Tallest Onshore Wind Turbine

By Felicity Bradstock - Oct 07, 2022, 5:00 PM CDT

• Vestas, a Danish wind energy firm, announced in September that it would be establishing an onshore wind turbine tower with a hub height measuring 199 meters.
• The giant structure is expected to help Vestas access stronger and more constant wind power, to increase the turbine’s electricity production.
• While Vestas is out ahead at the moment, it may not be long until other energy companies catch up.

Join Our Community

_________________________________________________

 

Guess how many 200m  tall structures there are in this world....  1731 or thereabouts.

 

This "wind turbine" @200m will produce at best, uh hem, AT BEST, 15MW-->17MW  roughly speaking 50% of the time and in a VERY good wind position @200m might hit 60% in a good year... for 15MW...  15!!!  A mere 15MW!!!. 

 

Great, the UK, with the best wind in the world, or close enough to it, needs roughly speaking 1TWH per day before, the UK has electrified transportation or industry.  This will double that, so call it 2TWh per day.  Due to wind power storage requirements(assume storage exists), lets use the 50% capacity factor instead of 60% and it is easier to calc.  2TWh/day /50% = 4TWh/15MW/24hours then the UK by itself needs ~11,000 200m "skyscrapers".  Do remember only 1700 exist in the world today...

 

Are these genius's going to open 1000 more iron mines to build all  these MEGATALL skyscrappers?

Are these genius's going to open/process 1000 more cement plants to build all these MEGATALL skyscrappers?

NO, they are going to pretend this is somehow a solution while at the same time DENYING anyone the ability to actually produce the material to build them other than to INDEBT themselves to the CHINESE  who are at least willing to produce the material for the stupid's building them and proposing to build them. 

 

Unbelievable...

 

Oh yea, grid spacing for a 125m swept volume 200m tall is 10blade diameters by 15 blade diameters, but it increases for ever larger turbines so roughly ~10km^2 per turbine and might be as high as 20sq. km per turbine is required.  In short 110,000km^2-->200,000sq. km of land area  is required.  UK has ~250,000sqkm land area...  How many birds will be left???  For the UK/Ireland who have the best wind in the world.    Everyone else needs multiple of this as their wind is SLOWER and less consistent. 

 

[TailingsPond + 1,006]

23 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

2 impeachments and now Marlago. You thought processes were correct.  "YOUR OUT".

"You're"

Nobody uses words like me. I use the best words.  Bigly.

 

PS

You missed tax evasion / fraud and how the Proud boys are pleading guilty of seditious conspiracy. 

Only you will ignore admitted guilt.

Edited October 10, 2022 by TailingsPond

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,554]

37 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

"You're"

Nobody uses words like me. I use the best words.  Bigly.

 

PS

You missed tax evasion / fraud and how the Proud boys are pleading guilty of seditious conspiracy. 

Only you will ignore admitted guilt.

Political commentary? Keep on topic.

[TailingsPond + 1,006]

42 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Political commentary? Keep on topic.

"2 impeachments and now Marlago. You thought processes were correct.  "YOUR OUT"

??

I was literally quoting your political commentary.

Edited October 10, 2022 by TailingsPond

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

15 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

"You're"

Nobody uses words like me. I use the best words.  Bigly.

 

PS

You missed tax evasion / fraud and how the Proud boys are pleading guilty of seditious conspiracy. 

Only you will ignore admitted guilt.

Do you geeeeeeet your "info" from your rectum?  No one is pleading guilty to trumped up charges by corrupt garbage Prosecutors.  All charges have been thrown out other than disorderly conduct. 

[TailingsPond + 1,006]

5 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Do you geeeeeeet your "info" from your rectum?  No one is pleading guilty to trumped up charges by corrupt garbage Prosecutors.  All charges have been thrown out other than disorderly conduct. 

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-leader-proud-boys-pleads-guilty-seditious-conspiracy-efforts-stop-transfer-power

"Jeremy Bertino, 43, pleaded guilty in the District of Columbia to seditious conspiracy in connection with the Capitol breach."

[]

"Charles Donohoe, 34, of Kernersville, North Carolina, pleaded guilty on April 8, 2022, to conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers."

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/leader-north-carolina-chapter-proud-boys-pleads-guilty-conspiracy-and-assault-charges-jan-6

 

"Anyone with tips can call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) or visit tips.fbi.gov." *Hint, hint* OilPrice.com / @Selva / host of terrorists.  Ward and 0R0 content should/will be reported to authorities.  It looks better if you report it yourself rather than get implicated as an active host to criminal communications. Do not delete this as that would be an attempt to cover up... aka guilt.  Screenshot taken.  Notification provided.

Edited October 11, 2022 by TailingsPond

[TailingsPond + 1,006]

58 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Do you geeeeeeet your "info" from your rectum?  No one is pleading guilty to trumped up charges by corrupt garbage Prosecutors.  All charges have been thrown out other than disorderly conduct. 

See above; admit your error

Edited October 10, 2022 by TailingsPond

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

10 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

See above; admit your error

See above previous post.  You literally can't make this shit up. 

EDIT: IT will be interesting if you can connect the dots....  I won't hold my breath

Edited October 11, 2022 by footeab@yahoo.com

[TailingsPond + 1,006]

6 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

See above previous post.  You literally can't make this shit up. 

EDIT: IT will be interesting if you can connect the dots....  I won't hold my breath

You probably own a MAGA hat and still think trump won the election.

I live in reality where your scum is going to jail.

[Jeroen Goudswaard + 61]

On 9/5/2022 at 10:13 AM, Rob Plant said:

Seriously?

There was sod all investment in oil & gas exploration by the oil majors way before Covid was released on the planet, I'd say 2015 onwards, just as renewable investments took off.

Cmon man get a grip and think up a new conspiracy theory.

Oil and gas will be around for a long time, longer than you will be for sure!

Just how will "ALL FF be under the Wests control in 20 years"? Sounds like lots of shooty shooty bang bang to me if that prediction were to come true., which it wont.

2018: $600 bn, 2019: $650bn, 2020: $400bn and 2021 $500bn. That's not sod-all investment. That's more than invested in renewables.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

23 minutes ago, Jeroen Goudswaard said:

2018: $600 bn, 2019: $650bn, 2020: $400bn and 2021 $500bn. That's not sod-all investment. That's more than invested in renewables.

Where is your source for these numbers and are they for opex and capex or just opex?

They are bugger all numbers compared to 10 years ago.

Edited October 11, 2022 by Rob Plant

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

26 minutes ago, Jeroen Goudswaard said:

2018: $600 bn, 2019: $650bn, 2020: $400bn and 2021 $500bn. That's not sod-all investment. That's more than invested in renewables.

https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/energy-transition/120721-need-for-investment-is-critical-for-oil-gas-industry-world-petroleum-congress-panelists

"Capex cuts by international oil companies and national oil companies in 2020 was about 35%," he said. "We're now showing another 23% reduction in capex levels" from pre-pandemic levels this year.

In 2019, E&P companies spent $525 billion, an amount which plummeted to $341 billion in 2021, he added.

"We have to get back to $525 billion over several years until 2030 to restore market balance," McMonigle said. "I'm afraid what we're seeing with the energy crisis is on our doorstep

[Jeroen Goudswaard + 61]

On 10/9/2022 at 2:20 PM, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Today, well yesterday in ABSURD: from Oilprice.com( I have  read it elsewhere)...

Danish Company To Build World’s Tallest Onshore Wind Turbine

By Felicity Bradstock - Oct 07, 2022, 5:00 PM CDT

• Vestas, a Danish wind energy firm, announced in September that it would be establishing an onshore wind turbine tower with a hub height measuring 199 meters.
• The giant structure is expected to help Vestas access stronger and more constant wind power, to increase the turbine’s electricity production.
• While Vestas is out ahead at the moment, it may not be long until other energy companies catch up.

Join Our Community

_________________________________________________

 

Guess how many 200m  tall structures there are in this world....  1731 or thereabouts.

 

This "wind turbine" @200m will produce at best, uh hem, AT BEST, 15MW-->17MW  roughly speaking 50% of the time and in a VERY good wind position @200m might hit 60% in a good year... for 15MW...  15!!!  A mere 15MW!!!. 

 

Great, the UK, with the best wind in the world, or close enough to it, needs roughly speaking 1TWH per day before, the UK has electrified transportation or industry.  This will double that, so call it 2TWh per day.  Due to wind power storage requirements(assume storage exists), lets use the 50% capacity factor instead of 60% and it is easier to calc.  2TWh/day /50% = 4TWh/15MW/24hours then the UK by itself needs ~11,000 200m "skyscrapers".  Do remember only 1700 exist in the world today...

 

Are these genius's going to open 1000 more iron mines to build all  these MEGATALL skyscrappers?

Are these genius's going to open/process 1000 more cement plants to build all these MEGATALL skyscrappers?

NO, they are going to pretend this is somehow a solution while at the same time DENYING anyone the ability to actually produce the material to build them other than to INDEBT themselves to the CHINESE  who are at least willing to produce the material for the stupid's building them and proposing to build them. 

 

Unbelievable...

 

Oh yea, grid spacing for a 125m swept volume 200m tall is 10blade diameters by 15 blade diameters, but it increases for ever larger turbines so roughly ~10km^2 per turbine and might be as high as 20sq. km per turbine is required.  In short 110,000km^2-->200,000sq. km of land area  is required.  UK has ~250,000sqkm land area...  How many birds will be left???  For the UK/Ireland who have the best wind in the world.    Everyone else needs multiple of this as their wind is SLOWER and less consistent. 

 

The number of incorrect statements above are staggering.

 A large 15 MW turbine generates, at standard offshore 50% efficiency, 180 MWh a day. To compare that with a natural gas plant of 500MW, with a utilisation between 50-80%, this is between 6000-9500 MWh/day. So for every natural gas turbine you need 30-50 wind turbines. 

Anyway, we would then need 2 TWh / 180 MWh = 22,000 turbines to feed all of the UK. So how much area would that need?

The Gemini wind-park in the Netherlands has very good statistics. It generates 2.4 TWh per year and covers 68 km2. These are only 4MW turbines and are less efficient. But let's keep the number of 2400/68= 35GWh/km2/year. Hence, for 2 TWh per day, or 700 TWh per year, we would need 68 * 700 / 2.4 = 20,000 km2 offshore area. This can be distributed over the full offshore area of the UK, which is a whopping 700,000 km2. That's 2.8% of the offshore will be needed for all electrical energy for the UK (and that's excessive, as there is also nuclear, PV and hydro). The birds will hardly notice.

The amount of steel in a large wind turbine is 3000 tonnes (Haliade X). For 22,000 turbines that is 66 mln tonnes of steel. That's about 3% of the world annual steel production (1.95 Bn tonnes). Not a problem. Similarly, it is only 6 months of European steel production. 

The foundation weighs a similar amount as the wind turbine. The world uses 30 Bn tonnes of concrete a year. Again, this is 0.2% of world concrete. Nothing at all. Europe makes much more concrete than that a month.

Then we are building and buying wind turbines from either GE (USA company and made in France) or Siemens (made in Germany). Where does China come in?

Then the rare earth metals. Only 50% of mined rare earth metals come from China. So although they are a big player, there is no monopoly at al.

What is the problem then? Well, the real problem is that we do not have enough gas, oil and uranium to feed Europe. But we have more than enough wind and solar. 

[Jeroen Goudswaard + 61]

15 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Where is your source for these numbers and are they for opex and capex or just opex?

They are bugger all numbers compared to 10 years ago.

IEA

Edited October 12, 2022 by Jeroen Goudswaard

[Jeroen Goudswaard + 61]

On 10/8/2022 at 2:37 AM, markslawson said:

Nope. As you know wind and solar are only of limited use. If you can construct power systems that only uses hydro and biomass then there is no problem. We can happily agree on the outcome. There are hydro-only systems, such as Norway. New Zealand has more than 50 per cent hydro and a lot of hydrothermal (another renewable with which there is no problem). The real problem comes when the grid has to rely heavily on wind and solar - basically it simply isn't possible, and no amount of flinging silly accusations at me will make it work. Leave it with you.

More and more solutions are being built to stabilize the grid with high percentage of wind/solar. Scotland is case in point. Both battery as well as flywheel solutions are implemented. E.g., the Scottish Green Battery Complex will take out the need for a full gas-fired power plant. TheThe Keith Greener Grid Park does the same with flywheels.