EU to Splash Billions on Battery Factories

[Marina Schwarz + 1,576]

Finally, the EU has recognized a shortage in battery production capacity. Finally, they are putting their money where their mouths are. Not sure it will be enough but let's see how it goes. I can't wait for them to realize the grid will need adjustments, too.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

1 hour ago, Marina Schwarz said:

I can't wait for them to realize the grid will need adjustments, too.

Going to be a heckuva cost adder there...

[Marina Schwarz + 1,576]

Even more if they sleep through it until it becomes a pressing matter.

[DA? + 301]

7 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Going to be a heckuva cost adder there...

Check out a recent feedin tariff auction in Tucson, solar with battery for the evening slot. Solar and even batteries are getting dam cheap, things are moving fast, even prices six months ago are old news in renewables. It's funny seeing how those involved in the fossil fuel world seem to be in total denial about whats going on. Sometimes it's hard to know if they believe what they are saying or it's all spin to try and keep things together for as long as possible.

 

[jaycee + 348]

9 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said:

Finally, the EU has recognized a shortage in battery production capacity. Finally, they are putting their money where their mouths are. Not sure it will be enough but let's see how it goes. I can't wait for them to realize the grid will need adjustments, too.

They are on it. They are learning fast after problems in Germany which turned off its nukes too soon.

https://www.powerengineeringint.com/articles/2018/09/eon-unveils-german-smart-grid-prosumer-project.html

Avacon said that its Smart Grid Hub is able to control grid-connected systems such as PV installations or battery storage remotely. Smart meters in around 200 homes in Lower Saxony transmit their data to the Smart Grid Hub.

The hub is part of the European Union initiative InterFlex, which through 20 partner companies in five countries, aims to apply smart grid technology on an industrial scale to increase the marketability of renewable energy. With a focus on the consumer and their use of renewables, it launched in 2017 and will run for three years.

[Marina Schwarz + 1,576]

16 hours ago, DA? said:

Check out a recent feedin tariff auction in Tucson, solar with battery for the evening slot. Solar and even batteries are getting dam cheap, things are moving fast, even prices six months ago are old news in renewables. It's funny seeing how those involved in the fossil fuel world seem to be in total denial about whats going on. Sometimes it's hard to know if they believe what they are saying or it's all spin to try and keep things together for as long as possible.

 

Far from cheap enough yet, batteries, and as regards solar and wind costs, things will very soon start slowing down if they are not already. There's only so much you can do with costs without dramatically compromising quality, after all, it's a finite game of innovation.

[DA? + 301]

7 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said:

Far from cheap enough yet, batteries, and as regards solar and wind costs, things will very soon start slowing down if they are not already. There's only so much you can do with costs without dramatically compromising quality, after all, it's a finite game of innovation.

Then why is battery based storage starting to cut in the fossil fuelled generators market? and make tons of money (Hornsdale for example). Why would solar, wind and battery fall in cost's suddenly change?, solar and battery have actually accelerated recently. There is a finite game of innovation, but if you look at the history of technology you will see the "S" curve. Thing in this S-curve is it really starts to move when the major money comes to town and that is happening now.

Don't think silicon and lithium are the only players, although they do have more development to be made. Fossil fuel world types of money are now been invested in these and other related tech's.

It's not surprising people involved in the fossil fuel based world don't see whats going on when they get their "facts" from sites like this. Just read an article here that was about Musk/Tesla/SpaceX, describing it as misleading would be being overly nice. I know it was written for those that come normally to this site so has to be this way, but hiding from the truth doesn't help you. Go out seek the real facts and data, don't cherry pick to save your snow flake ego's that have been invested into the fossil fuelled story. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

12 hours ago, DA? said:

It's not surprising people involved in the fossil fuel based world don't see whats going on when they get their "facts" from sites like this. Just read an article here that was about Musk/Tesla/SpaceX, describing it as misleading would be being overly nice. I know it was written for those that come normally to this site so has to be this way, but hiding from the truth doesn't help you. Go out seek the real facts and data, don't cherry pick to save your snow flake ego's that have been invested into the fossil fuelled story. 

The name of this forum is Oil Price.

If you hate fossil fuels so much, what exactly are you doing here, besides insulting other members who are pro fossil fuels?

Perhaps you care to explain about the environmental havoc created by minining the minerals needed for all of these EV batteries, which will only last a few years before needing to be replaced?

The vast majority of the people I have worked with over the years in oil & gas care very much for the environment. 

The industrial revolution was made possible by oil & gas.

The plastic in the computer you wrote your comment on was most likely made from petrochemical, which are hydrocarbons.

I don't mind dissent.  Heck, I encourage dissent and alternate views.

Just don't be a jerk about it, and don't try to shove your ideas down other member's throats.

 

[DA? + 301]

3 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

The name of this forum is Oil Price.

If you hate fossil fuels so much, what exactly are you doing here, besides insulting other members who are pro fossil fuels?

Perhaps you care to explain about the environmental havoc created by minining the minerals needed for all of these EV batteries, which will only last a few years before needing to be replaced?

The vast majority of the people I have worked with over the years in oil & gas care very much for the environment. 

The industrial revolution was made possible by oil & gas.

The plastic in the computer you wrote your comment on was most likely made from petrochemical, which are hydrocarbons.

I don't mind dissent.  Heck, I encourage dissent and alternate views.

Just don't be a jerk about it, and don't try to shove your ideas down other member's throats.

 

Ok why I'm here. I have spare time due to some surgery. I find it interesting to see the other side of the coin, living in an echo chamber you often miss things. I don't think it's healthy for people in any industry to live an echo chamber, so even though I know I'll more than likely be written off as some green nutter that has no clue at least I'm pointing out this fact. Also so it's an interesting point in human history we are at the point that technology will bring on a massive and quick disruption to our society and economy. And seeing the view point from a dying industry I find interesting and stirring up the pot a bit exposes people's views even more.

I thought us liberal greenie types were the snowflakes that were insulted by different points of view.

As I have stated before all actions have an environmental impact, it's just looking for the least damaging one. Again this is why you need to look at different sources of information, your view on battery life. Batteries are rapidly improving in many ways, and useful life time is one. Tesla batteries for example are built to last many years and far above an average ICE vehicles life time. Then after they are no longer viable for the car they go into being used for fixed electric storage for many many years, after that recycled for their useful parts. And yes the mining industry does need higher standards of environmental protection. Although again in the not to distant future we will see off earth mining, sounds SF but billions are being spent to make this a reality, SpaceX and Blue Origin being two examples in this effort.

Those in the fossil fuelled world caring about the environment, this doesn't show up to much in the actions of the companies involved. In fact the opposite is normally true and when actions are taken for the environment it's often just green washing.

Yes fossil fuels were an important part of the rise of technology and wealth. But it's time has come, tech's available today can replace it and are been actively slowed by the industry in many ways. When the use of fossil fuels causes such great harm to the environment and human health this is just evil.

As you say the plastic in this computer are made from fossil fuels. As you say it's a hydrocarbon, two of the most common elements, we are finding many different ways of getting these and using them to make polymers without fossil fuels. The chemical feedstock industry will not save oil, take a look at some of the work been done.

Maybe I was just born a jerk but a thick skinned one that doesn't get upset from other views. If writing things that others don't believe is shoving it down peoples throats, I suggest they may well need to grow a backbone.    

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

@DA?  interesting.  

I am strongly pro oil & gas, and a moderator on a pro Oil & Gas forum.  

I will not apologize for being pro oil & gas.

And I don't see hydrocarbons going away any time soon.  I don't view oil & gas as a dying industry.  

Judging from your comment above, if your primary purpose on this forum is to #resist and disrupt and stir the pot on pro oil & gas discussions by people who make their livelihood in the the oil & gas industry, you will likely have an uphill battle on this forum. @CMOP

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 hour ago, mthebold said:

That's the short/intermediate term.  In the long term, there exists some possibility that renewables will become cheapest.  Many of us have our doubts, but it could happen.  Most importantly, no one is opposed to renewables.  Literally no average person is fighting against them.  When they're the best option, the world will welcome them with open arms.  Instead of "advocating" for them, activists should focus on improving them. 

As a final note, I've drifted in and out of social groups my entire life, and the liberal ones have a common characteristic: fear.  They're driven by a fearful anxiety that transforms every issue into a life-or-death struggle.  Frankly, it's exhausting.  I don't recommend it. 

You found the words.  Excellent!

[DA? + 301]

9 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

@DA?  interesting.  

I am strongly pro oil & gas, and a moderator on a pro Oil & Gas forum.  

I will not apologize for being pro oil & gas.

And I don't see hydrocarbons going away any time soon.  I don't view oil & gas as a dying industry.  

Judging from your comment above, if your primary purpose on this forum is to #resist and disrupt and stir the pot on pro oil & gas discussions by people who make their livelihood in the the oil & gas industry, you will likely have an uphill battle on this forum. @CMOP

 

As I said I know I'll make no difference, but it's interesting the mental hoops even very intelligent people jump through to stick with something they have invested personally in even when the evidence points to a very different reality. 

[jaycee + 348]

For me the problem with the renewables narrative is that it is driven by those that wish to profit from it and get people who want to believe in them to champion their cause, I include politicians in this whose only desire is to gain votes and to hell with the long term consequences. You have a lot of radical people out their with no engineering sense who think everything is possible and they have caused many problems where their views have been accepted. The Labour government in the UK in the 90s decided to appease them and abandon nuclear power in favour of renewables. They provided subsidies and encouraged the sector fast forward to today and the UK is having to build very rapidly expensive French nukes, the UK ran down its nuclear design sector, to meet an electricity supply gap that is looming as the renewable sector failed to fill the gap even with all the help they were given, I could point out too the Greens in Germany caused the shutdown of nukes there and the supply gap is being filled by coal power. There is a place for renewables and as time goes on it will become bigger but people advocating changing the world overnight are delusional and the people feeding them their lines are opportunists with no cares about green issues only profit.

I should add on other issue electric car promoters don't mention and that is if somehow you can produce all that EXTRA electricity that is required to power an entire nation of electric cars the existing power network will not be able to handle it so the hidden costs of rapid adoption of electric cars is massive. I admit I am an engineer and I think about things practically so have difficulty understanding the narrative that someone will sort that problem when we get there as the history of renewables so far has proven that viewpoint to be incorrect.

Edited October 19, 2018 by jaycee
extra point added

[DA? + 301]

5 hours ago, mthebold said:

Yes, renewable & storage costs are falling.  This matters less than you think it should because, even after decades of subsidy-driven R&D, the costs are still quite high.  E.g. the cost of wind turbines can't be taken in isolation as renewable advocates are wont to do.  We must consider the total cost of turbines, storage, transmission, peaking plants, and decommissioning necessary for wind.  The same is true of solar.

Yes, renewables have taken off in recent years.  This has been driven by several factors, only one of them real and durable:

1)  Subsidies: if the government pays for 30% of the cost, it's much easier to make a financial case.
2)  Regulation: if the government tells a utility they must use 10% renewables or else, you'll get 10% renewables.
3)  Artificially inflated market prices: In Australia, providers have managed to drive retail costs far above equilibrium levels.  They're making a killing for now, but if renewables + storage threatens them, providers will drop those prices once again - thus stunting the renewables boom. 
4)  Grids can absorb a small percentage of renewables w/o significant upgrades.  Above about 10% wind/solar, the cost of renewables increases.
5)  Niche applications.  This is the only real demand for renewables.  E.g. Saudi Arabia has excess barren land, peak demand coinciding with maximum sunlight, and no coal.  Likewise, it makes perfect sense to install renewables on remote islands that currently burn diesel, and there are places in the American Southwest and rural Australia where renewables are cheapest.

So renewables have boomed due to five factors, and only one of those factors is natural.  When subsidy, regulation, and artificially inflated prices end, the renewable industry could hit a brick wall.  Maybe it happens at 5% of global energy electricity production; maybe it happens at 10%.  Whatever the specifics, it will happen.  Installation volumes may even plummet for a time.  This is the irony of advocating for renewables: activists were so adamant about advancing renewables, they set the industry - and all its employees - up for a fall.  It would have been better for renewables - and cheaper for the country as a whole - to let free markets operate. 

That's the short/intermediate term.  In the long term, there exists some possibility that renewables will become cheapest.  Many of us have our doubts, but it could happen.  Most importantly, no one is opposed to renewables.  Literally no average person is fighting against them.  When they're the best option, the world will welcome them with open arms.  Instead of "advocating" for them, activists should focus on improving them. 

As a final note, I've drifted in and out of social groups my entire life, and the liberal ones have a common characteristic: fear.  They're driven by a fearful anxiety that transforms every issue into a life-or-death struggle.  Frankly, it's exhausting.  I don't recommend it. 

Renewables aren't just getting less expensive, they are getting cheap. The price of solar has dropped off a cliff. Yes new technologies need help getting into the markets often with subsidies, this is healthy capitalism as without it things stagnate and somewhere else that's more progressive takeover. Not sure what you are comparing renewables with as they are kicking the arse of fossils in many markets. Of course you have to look at the complete system from generator to not just the customer but the product using the energy. No serious advocate takes anything in isolation. Umm decommissioning, it's a dam load easier to decommission renewables (maybe not some hydro schemes) than fossil fuels, take a look at the mess the UK's off shore oil/gas industry is in, the taxpayer is going to have to subsidies this at an industry estimated cost of around £80 billion.

1)Subsidies- as stated before to stop stagnation of an economy it's often required. On-shore wind and solar and making large gains into markets even when subsidy free. It's only a subsidy when it applies to renewables, take a look at all the costs that are ignored when it comes to fossil fuels, human health, taxbreaks, infrastructure, environment, wars and so on.

2)Regulation-as before for stagnation. Markets are often hostile to renewables, for example NE USA renewables could not bid under a certain amount which was far higher than fossil fuel. Even without regulation renewables are taking market share.

3)Inflated prices- yes stagnation in the market. The Hornsdale battery didn't bring down the cost of competitors for grid stabilisation it killed the competitors. Fossil fuelled generators are already in most markets operating in a competitive market, gas generators in the USA aren't competitive with solar and really can't bring their costs down much at all. Again look at the amazing reduction of cost in the renewable sector, it's massive, solar and battery prices having been dropping this decade at around 20% per year. The boom continues and even accelerates.

4)Grids- 10% that figure got blown out of the water ages ago, catch up please. I see 10 states in the USA have been producing at least 20% of their electricity from renewables and this is on a terrible grid system, whats Ireland these day 40%? Grids are being up graded and for most not a great deal of work needs to be done to bring it up to 80%. The technology has come on fast as well for distribution of electricity especially now we have DC grid lines, along with smart systems and storage (it's not just batteries) the grid can handle renewables. 

5)Niche applications- This can be said for the fossil fuels. Most of Earths population lives in the sunshine belt countries, great for solar, wind often fills in other areas along with other renewables, then of course storage and large dc grids. Australia it actually makes sense to cut the grid connection for people with houses and go with solar/storage. It's not just one part of Australia. Even in Germany not a sunny place in anyones standard a nonsubsidised solar won a feed in tariff auction. What has happened is renewables and storage have been filling in niche markets, getting bigger, price dropping, moving into other markets and repeat. Now it's getting difficult to term these as niche markets as they are becoming main stream.

I agree let free markets operate, once a new technology has been given help to compete let it. As my Grandfather said (a mover in the last agricultural revolution) subsidies were needed after the WW2 to get Britains farmers up to date and competitive. The problem was they never stopped the subsidies and farmers kept going no matter how good or bad they are. So in many markets now renewables can compete and out do fossil fuels, but it's not a free market at all. Fossil fuels are helped in so many ways, normally by government workers, take a look at Australia. Although I see it's likely that the coal industry in the USA will be allowed to fail even after Trumps promises as it's such a basket case. Also all external costs need to be factored in to create a free market that reflects reality.

No one is against renewables, really? Why all the lobbying and massive amounts of money been put in to try and stop them in all sorts of ways. Governments regularly try to prop up the fossil fuel world. A person that I know well is involved with one of the largest fossil fuel companies with a renewable project, that he calls a green wash attempt by the company to try to discredit renewables. I've worked in the energy market and there was open hostility to me as I would put across the opinion that renewables would become competitive. Luckily many people that believe in renewables have gone into the industry to change things and that they are. 

Your last paragraph shows how the fossil fuel world distances itself from it's actions.  As the "Nuremberg psychologist," Gustave Gilbert showed the same ways of justification are used in the business world as Nazi's used to justify their actions. The fossil fuel world does kill many people every year and countless people have major health issues because of the pollution. Belittling people who find this unacceptable, is that an act of a person that puts profit or people first? Luckily an environmentally better way of producing our energy is here and profitable.

[DA? + 301]

20 minutes ago, jaycee said:

For me the problem with the renewables narrative is that it is driven by those that wish to profit from it and get people who want to believe in them to champion their cause, I include politicians in this whose only desire is to gain votes and to hell with the long term consequences. You have a lot of radical people out their with no engineering sense who think everything is possible and they have caused many problems where their views have been accepted. The Labour government in the UK in the 90s decided to appease them and abandon nuclear power in favour of renewables. They provided subsidies and encouraged the sector fast forward to today and the UK is having to build very rapidly expensive French nukes, the UK ran down its nuclear design sector, to meet an electricity supply gap that is looming as the renewable sector failed to fill the gap even with all the help they were given, I could point out too the Greens in Germany caused the shutdown of nukes there and the supply gap is being filled by coal power. There is a place for renewables and as time goes on it will become bigger but people advocating changing the world overnight are delusional and the people feeding them their lines are opportunists with no cares about green issues only profit.

I should add on other issue electric car promoters don't mention and that is if somehow you can produce all that EXTRA electricity that is required to power an entire nation of electric cars the existing power network will not be able to handle it so the hidden costs of rapid adoption of electric cars is massive. I admit I am an engineer and I think about things practically so have difficulty understanding the narrative that someone will sort that problem when we get there as the history of renewables so far has proven that viewpoint to be incorrect.

Happens to be I used to be a Nuclear Operative. I have no problem with nuclear power as long as a few issues are sorted. Security for one, not that I can go that deep on this subject here. Waste is another, it's not an engineering problem but a political/social one, producing more waste until this is sorted is madness. We are storing nuclear material in highly dangerous ways. The last real issue is economics, they are expensive, no matter who designs them. In the short/medium term nuclear power can not compete. Yes the Germans did close down safe plants which was madness. I don't see any major player in the renewables field advocating change over night. It will be quick but will take a couple of decades to complete. Thing is for the fossil fuel world as soon as this recognised by investors the shares collapse as in coal. Peak demand and prices crash. The fossil fuel world has to spin right up to the end.

Don't think you've kept up with the latest research by scientists and the engineers that are experts in this field. EV's will not crash our grids. Yes over all demand will expand considerably but this isn't the major hurdle that it's made out to be. in fact EV's can help,they are being built with large battery packs that can drain up electricity when other demand is low. Smart girds with smart appliances are been developed and so on. Cost yes there will be some, although in reality this will be great for the electricity companies, more demand more profit to be made. Also great for renewables EV's can charge when the wind blows or the sun shines.

That's why I love science and engineering coming up with answers to problems.

[jaycee + 348]

15 minutes ago, DA? said:

Happens to be I used to be a Nuclear Operative. I have no problem with nuclear power as long as a few issues are sorted. Security for one, not that I can go that deep on this subject here. Waste is another, it's not an engineering problem but a political/social one, producing more waste until this is sorted is madness. We are storing nuclear material in highly dangerous ways. The last real issue is economics, they are expensive, no matter who designs them. In the short/medium term nuclear power can not compete. Yes the Germans did close down safe plants which was madness. I don't see any major player in the renewables field advocating change over night. It will be quick but will take a couple of decades to complete. Thing is for the fossil fuel world as soon as this recognised by investors the shares collapse as in coal. Peak demand and prices crash. The fossil fuel world has to spin right up to the end.

Don't think you've kept up with the latest research by scientists and the engineers that are experts in this field. EV's will not crash our grids. Yes over all demand will expand considerably but this isn't the major hurdle that it's made out to be. in fact EV's can help,they are being built with large battery packs that can drain up electricity when other demand is low. Smart girds with smart appliances are been developed and so on. Cost yes there will be some, although in reality this will be great for the electricity companies, more demand more profit to be made. Also great for renewables EV's can charge when the wind blows or the sun shines.

That's why I love science and engineering coming up with answers to problems.

I am glad you have no problems with nukes but I was pointing out many do and see them as evil and have driven governments away from a great source of base load which would actually compliment renewables in CO2 emissions. These people are those that are at the heart of driving for renewables as they are driving governments to make stupid decisions to get votes.
Regards the using of power when others aren't that is a hope not a fact until you have a country with a fleet of electric vehicles operating you have no proof of this, look again at the German example of going all in renewables and failing miserably as reality is different from projections made by biased sources hence my view it should be slowly introduced but it appears others are advocating massive change over night, by which I mean a few years which is over night in any country timescale. 
Glad you agree it will cost and I hope you realise why that is a major issue in the world just now as most countries are still cash strapped after the last financial crisis so what will happen, and is happening with the Indian example, is governments will make stupid promises to make change but the engineering logistics and costs will stop them but not before they cause more problems for their country eg Germany.

Edited October 19, 2018 by jaycee

[DA? + 301]

1 minute ago, jaycee said:

I am glad you have no problems with nukes but I was pointing out many do and see them as evil and have driven governments away from a great source of base load which would actually compliment renewablea in CO2 emissions. These people are those that are at the heart of driving for renewables as they are driving governments to make stupid decisions to get votes.
Regards the using of power when others aren't that is a hope not a fact until you have a country with a fleet of electric vehicles operating you have no proof of this, look again at the German example of going all in renewables and failing miserably as reality is different from projections made by biased sources hence my view it should be slowly introduced but it appears others are advocating massive change over night, by which I mean a few years which is over night in any country timescale. 
Glad you agree it will cost and I hope you realise why that is a major issue in the world just now as most countries are still cash strapped after the last financial crisis so what will happen, and is happening with the Indian example, is governments will make stupid promises to make change but the engineering logistics and costs will stop them but not before they cause more problems for their country eg Germany.

The heart of those driving for renewables are normally very logical educated people and some that just see which way the wind is blowing and want to be on the sunny side of the street and make money. Governments normally go with the fossil fuel lobby even Germany supporting it's coal industry as the biggest priority. Although Germany should be thanked by the renewable world they gave massive subsidies to domestic solar installations this brought about the massive cost falls that we still gain from. It's also shown what should be done in the future for others, lesson learnt by the renewable world.

Again it's economics for EV charging, nice free market, pay a higher price when demand is high, less when excess electricity depresses the price. There is never proof for the future but probabilities and trends and so on. The only reason to slow the growth of renewables and EV's is protectionism of established industries, not very free market. It's amazing how quickly things can change horses to cars, brick mobile to smart phone( although I hate that term it's a mobile super computer with access to the sum of all human knowledge). And the rate things change is increasingly fast, we are about to enter a time of massive disruption, those that fight it will be left behind.

As I said before a massive disruption is going to take place in many industries and society. Those that don't keep up will be economically harmed. It costs but the cost of business as normal is far higher. Governments never seem to get things right, no matter which one we are talking about. As I've repeatedly said since the late 80's it's despite governments the world will head for a more sustainable more environmentally friendly future, because of economics. It's going to be a hard short/medium term future for those that hate change but it's worth it to make the world a better place for my son.  

[jaycee + 348]

59 minutes ago, DA? said:

As I've repeatedly said since the late 80's it's despite governments the world will head for a more sustainable more environmentally friendly future, because of economics. It's going to be a hard short/medium term future for those that hate change but it's worth it to make the world a better place for my son.  

The first part of your post I wont reply to as I would only be repeating myself, we have different views lets see how it plays.

Regards the point above the future for all our kids is not bright the problem is growing world population. It is forcing many issues to the fore, energy production is just one of them solving that does not solve the water problem or the food one and does not solve the CO2 one either as in the end all humans are a massive carbon footprint and rising population is always going to produce more CO2.

Edited October 19, 2018 by jaycee
typos

[DA? + 301]

29 minutes ago, jaycee said:

The first part of your post I wont reply to as I would only be repeating myself, we have different views lets see how it plays.

Regards the point above the future for all our kids is not bright the problem is growing world population. It is forcing many issues to the fore, energy production is just one of them solving that does not solve the water problem or the food one and does not solve the CO2 one either as in the end all humans are a massive carbon footprint and rising population is always going to produce more CO2.

Yes round and round in circles we go.

This bit I think you are fundamentally wrong and energy is one of the major reasons why. Looks like population will top out around the 10 billion mark, even today if we didn't waste food we could feed that many. But anyway this is were the falling prices of renewables really come into play, they won't stop falling for sometime even just following the recent trends without any major break through, like the 50 mega watt turbine that's been worked on able to with stand cat 5 hurricanes, perovskite solar, iron air batteries and so on all are probably possible but lets ignore them for now. Looks like electricity gets very cheap, with cheap electricity many things become possible. Cheap electricity means cheap desalinisation of sea water, it's a technology that's really come on strong mainly thanks to Israel, but cheap enough to irrigate crops with. Although when you look at how the Dutch are changing agriculture using very little land, fertilisers and minimal water the food and clean water production becomes a solved issue. There are technologies been worked on to capture CO2 from the atmosphere most won't be economic. The one that is economic is capturing it in organic material in the soil. With irrigation many arid parts of the world become viable for agriculture, with good practices we are soon going to see in the next agricultural revolution soil organic matter will be raised significantly. Fossil fuel use will soon peak and fall reducing considerably the amount of CO2 released.

A few years ago I was pessimistic about the future, but with the increasing trend of development that sort of Malthusian outlook is one I no longer share. I know it's hard to over come that way of thinking, it's hard wired into us and in the past was a good survival tool, but things are very different now. The next decade and maybe in the one after will be difficult but even today we have the answers, it's just an engineering problem, but with continued development it gets easier all the time.

[jaycee + 348]

2 hours ago, DA? said:

Yes round and round in circles we go.

This bit I think you are fundamentally wrong and energy is one of the major reasons why. Looks like population will top out around the 10 billion mark, even today if we didn't waste food we could feed that many. But anyway this is were the falling prices of renewables really come into play, they won't stop falling for sometime even just following the recent trends without any major break through, like the 50 mega watt turbine that's been worked on able to with stand cat 5 hurricanes, perovskite solar, iron air batteries and so on all are probably possible but lets ignore them for now. Looks like electricity gets very cheap, with cheap electricity many things become possible. Cheap electricity means cheap desalinisation of sea water, it's a technology that's really come on strong mainly thanks to Israel, but cheap enough to irrigate crops with. Although when you look at how the Dutch are changing agriculture using very little land, fertilisers and minimal water the food and clean water production becomes a solved issue. There are technologies been worked on to capture CO2 from the atmosphere most won't be economic. The one that is economic is capturing it in organic material in the soil. With irrigation many arid parts of the world become viable for agriculture, with good practices we are soon going to see in the next agricultural revolution soil organic matter will be raised significantly. Fossil fuel use will soon peak and fall reducing considerably the amount of CO2 released.

A few years ago I was pessimistic about the future, but with the increasing trend of development that sort of Malthusian outlook is one I no longer share. I know it's hard to over come that way of thinking, it's hard wired into us and in the past was a good survival tool, but things are very different now. The next decade and maybe in the one after will be difficult but even today we have the answers, it's just an engineering problem, but with continued development it gets easier all the time.

Yes round and round we go this is a discussion I have many times before, not with you of course.
Falling price of renewables. Yes great free energy lets look at oil, drill a hole and up it comes free energy, forget all the associated costs its cheap energy. Really! Once the world becomes dependant on electricity I can also assure you there will be shortages just like oil. Stop listening to the BS and look at history.
Cheap desalination falls into the above category it is not free somebody has to pay and the poor can't so they don't get free water to irrigate their crops.
I'm sorry I am clearly older than you and have heard the BS too many times be positive but somebody has to be so carry on.

[DA? + 301]

1 hour ago, jaycee said:

Yes round and round we go this is a discussion I have many times before, not with you of course.
Falling price of renewables. Yes great free energy lets look at oil, drill a hole and up it comes free energy, forget all the associated costs its cheap energy. Really! Once the world becomes dependant on electricity I can also assure you there will be shortages just like oil. Stop listening to the BS and look at history.
Cheap desalination falls into the above category it is not free somebody has to pay and the poor can't so they don't get free water to irrigate their crops.
I'm sorry I am clearly older than you and have heard the BS too many times be positive but somebody has to be so carry on.

Nothing in life is ever free, although wind and especially solar are really it's just harnessing it that costs but they have far fewer cost associated with them than oil. The good thing about the sun and wind in reality they are quite dependable, we know what averages to expect. Wind/solar/tidal are very dependable with fixed costs making investment far easier than fossil fuels with their constant instabilities. Why should there be shortages especially after the system is completed? Stop listening to the FUD and look at the technology/science/engineering.

I must have not made myself clear about desalination it's getting quite cheap now and it's energy that's the biggest expense for it. Energy prices with renewables will drop even with todays trends expect feed in tariffs in many markets at 1 cent per KW/hr in the next ten years and in twenty years 0.5 cents. Compared to todays cheap gas generators at 6 cents. In fact desalination is a great companion to renewables, pump water up hill when excess is produced and use that pressure for the desalination, simple. No the poor will not get free water, but it'll be cheap enough for them to be able to irrigate crops and to make profit and no longer be so poor.

I'm quite long in the tooth myself and have seen masses of BS (especially living and working around DC) in a few different industries in a number of countries I've lived and worked in. This is why I prefer data/facts/science rather than propaganda that companies and governments dish out for their own personal agenda's. I would suggest looking at some of the science review sites such as sciencedaily.com and even cleantechnica.com, I too was pessimistic not so long ago but science and technology have made massive movement towards a better future recently. The trends are there to see today, around 2025 those trends will be obvious by 2035 the world has been disrupted.

[jaycee + 348]

33 minutes ago, DA? said:

Nothing in life is ever free, although wind and especially solar are really it's just harnessing it that costs but they have far fewer cost associated with them than oil. The good thing about the sun and wind in reality they are quite dependable, we know what averages to expect. Wind/solar/tidal are very dependable with fixed costs making investment far easier than fossil fuels with their constant instabilities. Why should there be shortages especially after the system is completed? Stop listening to the FUD and look at the technology/science/engineering.

I must have not made myself clear about desalination it's getting quite cheap now and it's energy that's the biggest expense for it. Energy prices with renewables will drop even with todays trends expect feed in tariffs in many markets at 1 cent per KW/hr in the next ten years and in twenty years 0.5 cents. Compared to todays cheap gas generators at 6 cents. In fact desalination is a great companion to renewables, pump water up hill when excess is produced and use that pressure for the desalination, simple. No the poor will not get free water, but it'll be cheap enough for them to be able to irrigate crops and to make profit and no longer be so poor.

I'm quite long in the tooth myself and have seen masses of BS (especially living and working around DC) in a few different industries in a number of countries I've lived and worked in. This is why I prefer data/facts/science rather than propaganda that companies and governments dish out for their own personal agenda's. I would suggest looking at some of the science review sites such as sciencedaily.com and even cleantechnica.com, I too was pessimistic not so long ago but science and technology have made massive movement towards a better future recently. The trends are there to see today, around 2025 those trends will be obvious by 2035 the world has been disrupted.

The biggest cost in the UK for petrol is the £2.19 per gallon ($2.68), added tax plus off course the government taxes the oil coming out of the North Sea. I filled up just now and the cost per US gallon was £4.91 ($6.40). Petrol varies a little throughout the EU however roughly the same. Where will that tax revenue come from when we drive electric cars? I give you one guess.

Nothing is free or cheap as I said I think I may have lived longer.

Edited October 19, 2018 by jaycee

[DA? + 301]

2 hours ago, jaycee said:

,The biggest cost in the UK for petrol is the £2.19 per gallon ($2.68), added tax plus off course the government taxes the oil coming out of the North Sea. I filled up just now and the cost per US gallon was £4.91 ($6.40). Petrol varies a little throughout the EU however roughly the same. Where will that tax revenue come from when we drive electric cars? I give you one guess.

Nothing is free or cheap as I said I think I may have lived longer.

The tax systems will have to be changed completely in the near future. The system we have at present is very broken, when countries hold far more debt than they can pay back, UK stands around $2 trillion, the USA $21 trillion federal (although complete debt and obligations for the USA is estimated at around $210 trillion). Bend something to far and it will snap, we've borrowed and inflicted massive debt on our children and grandchildren. Tax from fossil fuels is a drop in the ocean and the taxes taken are often given back, the UK's taxpayers will probably be out of pocket somewhere around £60-80 billion just to clean up the mess in the north sea, not to mention all the NHS costs due to pollution.

Theres going to be hell to pay when it's realised big business will have to be taxed hard, the days of obscene profits will be over.

If you've lived longer does that mean you are even more guilty than I am of putting the young into a debt they can never repay? That's nice I can off load some guilt on someone else, blame displacement you got to love it.

[jaycee + 348]

12 hours ago, DA? said:

The tax systems will have to be changed completely in the near future. The system we have at present is very broken, when countries hold far more debt than they can pay back, UK stands around $2 trillion, the USA $21 trillion federal (although complete debt and obligations for the USA is estimated at around $210 trillion). Bend something to far and it will snap, we've borrowed and inflicted massive debt on our children and grandchildren. Tax from fossil fuels is a drop in the ocean and the taxes taken are often given back, the UK's taxpayers will probably be out of pocket somewhere around £60-80 billion just to clean up the mess in the north sea, not to mention all the NHS costs due to pollution.

Theres going to be hell to pay when it's realised big business will have to be taxed hard, the days of obscene profits will be over.

If you've lived longer does that mean you are even more guilty than I am of putting the young into a debt they can never repay? That's nice I can off load some guilt on someone else, blame displacement you got to love it.

The taxes on fuels are not a 'drop in the ocean' I am afraid it is £28 billion per annum that's  I also forgot the loss in VAT so you can addin another 20% fo that. The UK budget deficit is at its lowest since the crash of 2008 and is currently £52 billion so the loss of fuel duty and VAT will add something like 60 to 70% to that. The numbers are not insignificant infact they are terrifying and will be replaced by taxation on road users either by charging for the electricity or road taxes either way EVs are not going to be cheaper to run.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/26/treasury-tax-electric-cars-vat-fuel-duty

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_deficit_analysis

The North Sea oil companies are responsible for the decommissioning their old rigs so there is no cost to the taxpayers.

Regards me being guilty for increasing the tax deficit no I have no guilt I did not do it was the crooks incharge of the UK and all the others I have paid tax in.. Lax laws and free spending to get re elected caused the problem.I have religiously voted for anyone but the main parties in the UK when I have been able to vote so I have actively tried to get the thieves out of power sadly to no avail..

Regards taxing big business you have to understand profit margins before you start claiming they have obscene profits. If you have a billion worth of assets or tunrnover and you make 5% profit that is 50 million profit. Many companies in the UK have billions of assets or turnover and make large profits because of that Tesco, a large grocery chain, make profits of about 4% on their turnover for example. SSE a power company one which left wingers want to nationalise due to its large profits has assets of 23 Billion and profit margin of 4% is that an obscene margin?  How about an evil oil company like BP with the obscene profit margin of 2.55%? Profit margins are what you need to look not £s is an other discussion I have had many times.  I do agree FANG companies need taxation but they are dodging taxes however they have nothing to do with oil.

Edited October 20, 2018 by jaycee
typo

[DA? + 301]

7 minutes ago, jaycee said:

The taxes on fuels are not a 'drop in the ocean' I am afraid it is £28 billion per annum that's  I also forgot the loss in VAT so you can addin another 20% fo that. The UK budget deficit is at its lowest since the crash of 2008 and is currently £52 billion so the loss of fuel duty and VAT will add something like 60 to 70% to that. The numbers are not insignificant infact they are terrifying and will be replaced by taxation on road users either by charging for the electricity or road taxes either way EVs are not going to be cheaper to run.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/26/treasury-tax-electric-cars-vat-fuel-duty

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_deficit_analysis

The North Sea has paid and still pays a levee towards decommissioning their old rigs so there is no extra cost to the taxpayers.

Regards me being guilty for increasing the tax deficit no I have no guilt I did not do it was the crooks incharge of the UK and all the others I have paid tax in.. Lax laws and free spending to get re elected caused the problem.I have religiously voted for anyone but the main parties in the UK when I have been able to vote so I have actively tried to get the thieves out of power sadly to no avail..

Regards taxing big business you have to understand profit margins before you start claiming they have obscene profits. If you have a billion worth of assets or tunrnover and you make 5% profit that is 50 million profit. Many companies in the UK have billions of assets or turnover and make large profits because of that Tesco, a large grocery chain, make profits of about 4% on their turnover for example. SSE a power company one which left wingers want to nationalise due to its large profits has assets of 23 Billion and profit margin of 4% is that an obscene margin?  How about an evil oil company like BP with the obscene profit margin of 2.55%? Profit margins are what you need to look not £s is an other discussion I have had many times.  I do agree FANG companies need taxation but they are dodging taxes however they have nothing to do with oil.

The tax on fossil fuels in the UK was pissed up the wall especially by the government in the 80's, made a few wealthy and that was it and we know wealth doesn't trickle down. Then add in all the external costs of fossil fuels deaths, illness, environmental damage and so on. That tax goes up in smoke. When renewables come in those external costs rapidly go down, saving far more than is gained in taxes at present. Although if we just look at taxes around roads, it all gets knocked out of whack in the not distant future with the autonomous vehicles. I tend to be far more general looking at the world rather than one narrow case and renewables becoming cheap does help a considerable percent of the worlds population.

The amount to clean up the North Sea that has been paid in by the industry has been far to little compared to the damage done.

We are all guilty there is more than voting that can be done. Again blame displacement is a great thing.

Well if we can't tax the more profitable organisations and general wealthy many countries are stuffed. And as I've said before expect massive disruption coming soon, the system is broken. As for the UK's debt and it's "austerity" measures they have hurt the country. My wife has taught in British schools and I have seen how many children grow up there and my mother was a child social worker. The country has acted in a terrible manner and has not invested in it's future. The damage done has been terrible just to make a few more wealthy, the debt will never be repaid.

So the short term is screwed, but looking out to the future for my son things get far better. Cheap energy (not free) changes everything, the two factors that put most cost on an item are energy and labour, both will become far less.