Author Topic: Energy Politics & Science  (Read 608444 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1150 on: November 15, 2022, 10:05:34 AM »
Better perhaps than Drill Baby Drill, would be to pitch natural gas as why we are outperfoming the rest of the world in reducing emissions (this is correct, yes?) and the new nuclear technology, while presenting the alternative as a Maoist Green Leap Forward with similar consequences while facilitating Chinese power and creating massive toxicity from the minerals involved in batteries.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1151 on: November 16, 2022, 12:25:44 PM »
We know what happens when we close nuclear power plants.  We closed one in NY in 2019.  Coal and natural gas usage goes up.



Must scroll right to see.  Or click on the image link.  Wish I knew how to re-size these.
The nuclear line shifts down and coal and gas go up.  After all the subsidies, wind is small and up and down.  Solar is insignificant.

One nuclear reactor at one facility generated more energy than all wind and solar all across the state combined:



Again, scroll right.

https://files.americanexperiment.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Indian-point-nuclear-before-and-after-1024x555.jpg

https://files.americanexperiment.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Indian-Point-vs-wind-and-solar-1024x632.png

https://www.americanexperiment.org/new-york-nuclear-plant-shutdown-proves-liberals-are-unscientific-and-unserious/
« Last Edit: November 16, 2022, 12:34:33 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Wind and solar require natural gas to fill the enormous gaps
« Reply #1152 on: November 16, 2022, 12:45:36 PM »
Stated before but proven here.  For every megawatt, gigawatt or terawatt hour capacity of wind or solar you install, you need an equal sized fossil fuel plant to supplement it.  That is because the wind goes up and down and so does the sun and they don't offset each other.  Demand also goes up and down throughout the hours of the day, the seasons and the temperatures outside and not in any sequence with the above.

Think of a natural gas power plant as a gas stove burner with a knob.  A carbon free nuclear plant doesn't scale up and down with demand.  It can only provide steady base power.  Coal can somewhat but natural gas can do it almost perfectly, except for the carbon dioxide released.

Another scroll right chart to see it all.  When wind and solar are down, gas usage is up.  It's unavoidable.



https://files.americanexperiment.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/wind-generation-vs-gas-generation-in-MISO-feb-1-through-feb-28-2021-1-1024x596.png

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1153 on: November 16, 2022, 01:09:59 PM »
From the previous: 
"When wind and solar are down, gas usage is up.  It's unavoidable."

But the Lefties tell us batteries will make up the difference!

Was it the "infrastructure" bill or the "Inflation reduction Act" where they "invest" a zillion in batteries?

But all the batteries in the world projected to be manufactured by 2030 ...

... will power the world at present rates for 17 minutes.  10 minutes at best if you project demand forward.

Battery backup for a brief outage is different than battery backup for every time the sun or wind goes down which is pretty much every day - for half the day.  And my Lithium batteries for with low usage are lasting 3 years.

Soooo...  you're going to run all the cars and the trucks in the world on electricity, using batteries, and charge those vehicles on a grid, using batteries, with at least a 6% transmission and distribution loss.  How much Lithium is that, and what could possibly go wrong?

My point is, they are lying to you folks.  If you buy the whole program, you will be staying home, and in our climate it will be cold at home with the power off.  Don't have to dream of a white Thanksgiving this year:
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2022/11/14/photos-twin-cities-sees-first-sticky-snowfall

My numbers are extrapolated from Isaac Orr, Energy Analyst at Center for the American Experiment, Minneapolis.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2022, 01:18:34 PM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
Reality bitch slaps Biden into approving oil terminal
« Reply #1154 on: November 24, 2022, 11:51:49 AM »

Biden Admin Quietly Greenlights Plan to Build Huge Gulf Oil Terminal
By Katabella Roberts November 24, 2022 Updated: November 24, 2022biggersmaller Print



The Biden administration has quietly approved plans to build a new crude oil terminal in the Gulf of Mexico off Texas, seemingly in contradiction to the president’s climate agenda.

The Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration approved the application (pdf) for Enterprise’s Sea Port Oil Terminal, one of four proposed offshore oil export terminals, on Monday.

According to the application, the port will be located offshore of Freeport, Texas. It will have 4.8 million barrels of storage capacity and add 2 million barrels per day to the U.S. oil export capacity.

In its 94-page decision (pdf), the Maritime Administration said that it had approved the application because the construction and operation of the port is “in the national interest and consistent with other policy goals and objectives.”

“The construction and operation of the Port is in the national interest because the Project will benefit employment, economic growth, and U.S. energy infrastructure resilience and security,” the administration wrote. “The Port will provide a reliable source of crude oil to U.S. allies in the event of market disruption and have a minimal impact on the availability and cost of crude oil in the U.S. domestic market.”

Protests Over Planned Oil Terminal
The decision states that the project will expand on an existing Enterprise Crude Houston operated terminal located in Houston and will generate 62 permanent jobs over 30 years. Additionally, 1,400 temporary construction jobs will be created, with the majority of the workforce being hired from existing labor pools in Texas and Louisiana, according to the application.

The Environmental Protection Agency quietly issued its approval (pdf) of the project in October but stressed that “more emphasis is needed to ensure that environmental justice and climate change considerations are included in the project for the protection of overburdened communities.”

Protests broke out shortly after on the Gulf Coast, The Texas Tribune reported, with climate activists condemning the move, and pointing to the fact that President Joe Biden has prioritized issues such as climate change and clean energy incentives during his time in office. Biden has vowed to cut carbon emissions by 50 percent by 2030.

Ahead of the U.N. climate conference in Egypt this month, the White House said that Biden was set to “announce new initiatives to strengthen U.S. leadership tackling the climate crisis and galvanize global action and commitments,” and that the United States is “acting to lead a clean energy future that leverages market forces, technological innovation, and investments to tackle the climate crisis.”


‘Peak Hypocrisy for President Biden’
Greenpeace promptly took aim at the Biden administration’s decision regarding the new oil terminal, stating that the new terminal would “emit over 300 million tons of carbon dioxide every year polluting the air and water of Brazoria and Harris counties in Texas while creating serious health threats for everyone living there.”

“It is peak hypocrisy for President Biden and Secretary [of Transportation] Pete Buttigieg to shorten the fuse on the world’s largest carbon bomb by greenlighting additional oil export terminals right after lecturing the world about increasing climate ambitions at COP27,”  the independent global campaigning network added.

The approval of the Sea Port Oil Terminal would facilitate the safe and efficient long-term loading of large crude carriers while simultaneously slashing oil transportation costs and reducing ship collision risks among other issues, according to officials.

In a separate statement, Kelsey Crane, senior policy advocate at Earthworks, a national organization aimed at ending oil and gas mining pollution, said, “President Biden cannot lead on combating climate change, protecting public health or advocating for environmental justice while simultaneously allowing fossil fuel companies to lock-in decades of fossil fuel extraction.”

The Epoch Times has contacted the Department of Transportation for comment.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
WSJ: How fusion works and why it's a breakthrough
« Reply #1155 on: December 15, 2022, 08:33:29 AM »
How Fusion Works and Why It’s a Breakthrough
American science scores a triumph, though it’ll be decades before it yields a viable energy source.
By Steven E. Koonin and Robert L. Powell
Dec. 14, 2022 5:34 pm ET



The Energy Department has announced the first gain in energy from fusion in a laboratory—the first time fusion reactions produced more energy than it took to induce them. Last week 192 laser beams at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory’s National Ignition Facility heated and compressed a capsule of hydrogen to previously unattainable temperatures and pressures, igniting fusion reactions that produced 50% more energy than the laser beams had delivered.

Nuclear reactions can release the energy that binds together protons and neutrons in an atom’s nucleus. Nuclear power plants use fission, not fusion. Fission releases energy when a large uranium nucleus splits into two radioactive fragments, which carry the energy as they fly apart.

Fusion, by contrast, relies on the universe’s smallest atom, hydrogen. Energy is released when two hydrogen nuclei combine to produce a helium nucleus and a neutron. Unlike fission, fusion produces no radioactive fragments. Fusion is much harder to induce than fission, since the hydrogen nuclei must be heated to nearly 100 million degrees Celsius to overcome the electrical repulsion that hinders their reaction. Stars run on fusion energy, but on Earth it has previously been released only in thermonuclear explosions. This stunning new result in laboratory fusion opens doors for unprecedented studies in basic and applied science.

The concept of laser fusion had been pursued without success since the 1960s and it became a central part of a 1990s program to ensure continued confidence in the nuclear-weapons stockpile without underground testing. Although scientists knew that high-powered laser beams could probe the properties of matter relevant to the early stages of detonating a nuclear weapon, the goal of laser fusion would allow for studies in the later stages. It would also challenge and demonstrate the ability to understand and predict the dynamics of hot, dense matter more generally.


Construction of the ignition facility at the Livermore lab began in 1997, and experiments attempting ignition began soon after construction was completed in 2009. The design and construction of the world’s most powerful laser was an engineering triumph, but three years of failed attempts to achieve fusion ignition brought the program close to cancellation in 2012. But the program continued with a more deliberate approach that included outside peer review.

The decade of research from 2012 to 2022 illustrated the ability of the Energy Department’s national laboratories to marshal an interdisciplinary team of scientific and engineering talent from the government, universities and private sector in long-term pursuit of an audacious goal. Researchers in lasers, nuclear and plasma physics, precision-target fabrication, instrumentation and high-fidelity computer modeling helped design and undertake a series of experiments that gradually approached ignition conditions. The payoff came last week.

As recent world events make apparent, the U.S. nuclear deterrent is effective only if there’s confidence that the weapons remain effective. Laser ignition demonstrates to the world a deep understanding of weapons science and will be important in sustaining confidence in the coming decades.

The U.S. hasn’t been alone in recognizing the importance of laser fusion. France and China are building comparable facilities. But as the new American results show, the years of learning were necessary to form a potent intellectual and innovation ecosystem at the National Ignition Facility. The U.S. now leads every other country by a decade because of its foresight, perseverance and research enterprise. Continued investment in laser fusion will ensure that this leadership endures.

These days one can’t mention fusion without thinking about energy. The ignition milestone demonstrates fusion gain, a necessary condition for practical energy production. But that is only the first step. Several decades of engineering would be required to make fusion a practical, emissions-free source of electricity. And even then, it would have to be cost-competitive with alternatives. Like the initial decision to pursue the ignition goal, this is not at all guaranteed. But it’s well worth considering.

Mr. Koonin is a professor at New York University, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and author of “Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters.” Mr. Powell is a professor at the University of California, Davis. Both are governors of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
GPF: Turkmenistan Nat Gas to Europe via Turkey?
« Reply #1156 on: December 16, 2022, 04:42:55 PM »
I claim considerable prescience here  :-D :-D :-D

=============
December 16, 2022
View On Website
Open as PDF

    
Turkmenistan Targets the European Gas Market
New pipeline infrastructure must be built first.
By: Geopolitical Futures
Turkmenistan Gas Market
(click to enlarge)

Since Russia invaded Ukraine, Europe has announced its intent to diversify its gas supplies away from Russia. Sensing an opportunity, Turkey is angling to become a natural gas hub and alternative supply route to the European Union from resource-rich countries in the Caucasus and Central Asia. During a trilateral summit on Dec. 14 involving Azerbaijan, Turkey and Turkmenistan, Ankara announced its intention to carry Turkmen gas west through the Caspian Sea.

Since gaining independence, Turkmenistan has strived for neutrality, relying on its huge natural gas reserves. It has sought new export markets for years, and the drop in Russian supplies to Europe is a clear opening. However, new infrastructure must be built first, meaning a solution is far off. Additionally, the Kremlin does not take kindly to competition in the post-Soviet space and, as an important trading partner for Turkmenistan, Moscow has some leverage.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
Russia and Turkey convo
« Reply #1158 on: January 05, 2023, 02:12:53 PM »
GPF

Erdogan and Putin. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan spoke by phone about the situation in Ukraine and the Syrian crisis. They also discussed a plan, proposed by Russia in October, to establish Turkey as a natural gas hub using Russian supplies. Ankara is interested in the proposal as part of its broader efforts to stabilize its economy ahead of presidential elections in June.



German energy. Germany’s grid regulator and its economy minister agreed that Berlin should construct 17-21 gigawatts' worth of additional gas power plants by 2030. According to Germany’s energy strategy document, the government wants the country to run on 80 percent renewable electricity and fully phase out coal. To ensure that enough gas is available, the government is committed to LNG development, and the document adds that import capacities will increase. Investment in new LNG capacities will also increase.

===========================================

RANE

The third geopolitical event that altered the balance of power in the European Union was Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, which led to a spike in inflation across Europe amid tighter and more expensive energy supplies. The economic fallout from the war and the subsequent disruptions to Russian energy exports saw European governments (again) introduce large stimulus packages, as well as desperately look for alternative supplies of natural gas to avoid gas rationing and blackouts. Energy-intensive industries across the continent in sectors ranging from cement to fertilizers were also forced to reduce or halt their operations. The war presented both a risk and an opportunity for Central and Eastern European countries, which for decades had warned about Russia's threat to peace in the continent, and had demanded a greater presence of NATO troops in the region and a more hawkish EU position toward Moscow. Under pressure from Poland and the Baltic states, the European Union imposed economic and political sanctions on Russia while increasing financial, humanitarian and military aid for Ukraine. Notably, the war also forced Germany to break with its decades-old policy that sought to keep political tensions between Russia and the West separated from Germany's massive imports of Russian natural gas. Berlin's decision in February 2022 not to use the controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline connecting Germany to Russia (which previous German governments had fervently defended) was highly illustrative of this policy change.

Perhaps more crucially, the war also gave NATO a renewed sense of purpose that was in line with Central and Eastern Europe's views, less than three years after French President Emmanuel Macron had declared the military alliance ''brain dead'' and promoted European alternatives to NATO cooperation. The fact that Sweden and Finland broke their historical neutrality to join the Western security alliance realized Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia's aspiration of completely surrounding Russia in the Baltic region and opened the door to deeper Baltic-Nordic security cooperation.

Finally, the war also increased the strategic importance of Southern European countries, which overnight became key players in the European Union's push to diversify its natural gas supplies away from Russia. Spain and Italy's multiple LNG terminals and their pipeline connections with Northern Africa contrast with Germany's high dependence on pipelines coming from Russia, and put Madrid and Rome at the center of ongoing plans to multiply and diversify the European Union's energy suppliers. In addition, Southern Europe's significant investments in renewable energy (including solar power, which has a huge potential in sun-blessed Mediterranean countries) will only further expand its role in the bloc's energy mix in the coming years —- especially if Northern Europe is willing to pay for the necessary infrastructure to distribute the energy across the continent. Ironically, Europe's energy crunch also resulted in Brussels tolerating countries using more coal, which was a short-term victory for heavy coal users like Poland and other countries in the region.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2023, 03:53:10 PM by Crafty_Dog »




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1162 on: January 10, 2023, 11:10:04 AM »
Far out.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science, solar
« Reply #1163 on: January 11, 2023, 08:59:26 AM »
John Hinderaker reports:
"It doesn't pay to clear the snow off the solar panels because they produce so little electricity in the winter anyway."

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/01/solar-energy-is-useless.php
« Last Edit: January 11, 2023, 02:18:08 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Energy Politics & Science, The report behind banning gas stoves
« Reply #1164 on: January 12, 2023, 02:19:02 AM »
https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/01/real-science-behind-reversal-of-gas-stove-ban/

From the study:
We don’t want people to go out and completely ditch a perfectly good gas stove,” lead author Eric Lebel said.
----------
Who knew?

Quick question, what fuel do electric stoves burn?
"In 2021, coal-fired electric power plants accounted for 91% of West Virginia's total electricity net generation"

Ban natural gas.  Replace it with coal.  Or would this region not be part of a national ban?
https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=WV

Broken record alert:. Build nuclear first. Then discuss the future of the declining need for fossil fuels.  But no...

This isn't new.They banned incandescent bulbs before LED was ready so we installed tens of billions of mercury based cfl's, now in our landfills.  All in the name of saving the environment.

How stupid can they be?
« Last Edit: January 12, 2023, 02:37:49 AM by DougMacG »



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1167 on: January 14, 2023, 10:45:35 AM »
Good info.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Isaac Orr, The High Cost of Solar
« Reply #1168 on: January 24, 2023, 05:55:31 AM »
https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2023/01/24/sunshine_might_be_free_but_solar_power_is_not_cheap_877463.html

No question he reads the forum.

Actual data from a southern state, solar panels are producing 22% of the time.

From the article:
"families and businesses are forced to pay for two electric systems: one that works when the sun is out, and one that works when it isn’t."

In their actual data, natural gas is only slightly cheaper than nuclear, and coal and solar are more expensive.

If you figure in any value for being carbon-free, there is no excuse for not building more nuclear.

Build more solar and you will have to use fossil fuels for the other 78% of the time. That is not carbon-free!

All that subsidies do is transfer and distort costs causing utilities to make the wrong choices. Choices that produce more carbon, not less.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2023, 06:04:30 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
RANE: Italy positioning as energy hub
« Reply #1169 on: February 08, 2023, 03:43:22 PM »
With Energy Deals in Africa, Italy Positions Itself as Europe's Next Gas Hub

The Italian government's new energy-driven approach to Africa will help the country bolster its own energy security and position itself as Europe's next natural gas hub. But infrastructural challenges at home and above-ground risks in North Africa will remain obstacles. The Italian government has made a series of high-level, energy-centric visits to the wider Mediterranean region since Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni took office at the end of 2022. For example, Meloni visited Libya's capital Tripoli on Jan. 27-28 to discuss increased energy and migration cooperation with Abdul Hamid Dbeibah, the prime minister of Libya's internationally recognized Government of National Unity. While there, she oversaw the signing of an $8 billion natural gas deal between Italian oil and gas giant Eni and Libya's National Oil Corporation (NOC), and other deals for carbon capture and solar energy projects. Previously, Meloni visited Algeria's capital Algiers on Jan. 22-23 to meet with President Abdelmadjid Tebboune and Prime Minister Aymen Benabderrahmane, and she oversaw the signing of a new set of deals aimed at further strengthening bilateral economic and energy ties. During the visit, Eni and Algeria's state-owned Sonatrach signed a new set of deals aimed at further increasing Algeria's gas exports to Italy, reducing carbon emissions, and building a second pipeline connecting the two countries.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18157
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1171 on: February 12, 2023, 09:27:29 AM »
obviously (have on saracasm)

SA needs more windmills and solar panels:

then all will be beautiful!  :wink:

while Bill Gates John Kerry buzz around the world in their luxurious jets
eating cavier and dom perignon
they sadly cannot stop over on Epstein island before the get to Europe to screw the rest of us over.




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18157
    • View Profile
tax credits for Chinese batteries
« Reply #1174 on: February 15, 2023, 06:39:08 AM »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18157
    • View Profile
ConocoPhilips Alaska project
« Reply #1177 on: March 19, 2023, 02:06:35 PM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18157
    • View Profile
Where to dump solar panels
« Reply #1178 on: June 04, 2023, 09:22:04 AM »
where to dump old solar panels if not recycled:

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-65602519

I suggest Brussels and Luxembourg and Palm Springs and Martha's Vineyard.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2023, 04:49:39 PM by Crafty_Dog »


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Biden's enemy Saudi is cutting oil production to drive up the price
« Reply #1180 on: July 20, 2023, 06:53:11 AM »
https://discern.tv/oil-supply-is-on-the-brink-of-collapse-as-saudi-arabia-slashes-production/

I remember when a higher gas price was a bad thing for consumers.  Now it's a national strategy and the world is joining in.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
WSJ
« Reply #1181 on: July 21, 2023, 04:53:05 PM »
America’s Rise as an Energy Export Powerhouse Hinges on One Town
Pipelines to Corpus Christi, Texas, are near capacity as U.S. oil production approaches records
About 2 million barrels of daily crude exports passed through Corpus Christi, Texas, in the first half of 2023, in addition to refined fuels.
About 2 million barrels of daily crude exports passed through Corpus Christi, Texas, in the first half of 2023, in addition to refined fuels.
By David UbertiFollow
 and Benoît MorenneFollow
 | Photographs by Verónica G. Cárdenas for The Wall Street Journal
July 21, 2023 5:30 am ET

SAVE

SHARE

TEXT
353 RESPONSES

Explore Audio Center
The U.S. has transformed global markets by boosting crude-oil exports more than 30-fold over the past decade. Much of the boom hinges on Corpus Christi Bay.

In the first four months of 2023, about half of the country’s 4.1 million barrels of daily shipments abroad was loaded onto skyscraper-size tankers from this stretch of Texas coastline, destined to become fuel for overseas travelers or factories.

Corpus Christi Bay
Other
2016
'20
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
million barrels per day
That gusher of supply has helped blunt the increase in prices from recent production cuts by Saudi Arabia and Russia. In Europe, oil and natural gas shipped from the Gulf Coast have backstopped the continent as it weaned itself off Russian energy after the outbreak of the war on Ukraine.

Corpus Christi has become the dominant U.S. hub, siphoning crude from elsewhere thanks to unique terminals that make it cheaper than competitors. Now, ballooning trade from the port has put the U.S. on pace to pump out record oil exports this year, according to federal record-keepers.

But with pipelines nearing capacity and U.S. output set to reach new heights, competition is heating up among companies and investors over how to connect the American oil patch to a fuel-hungry world.

“The market is totally focused on taking shale production from the U.S. into international markets,” said Rusty Braziel, chief executive of consulting firm RBN Energy.

ADVERTISEMENT

Corpus Christi is the closest deep-draft port to the Permian Basin in West Texas and New Mexico, America’s hottest oil field. Crude extracted from shale rock there, prized by overseas refineries for its light, sweet quality, trades at a premium to many other grades.



A very large crude carrier seen from a boat in Ingleside, Texas, site of a former Naval base. Markings on the carrier help indicate how much of the vessel's hull is submerged.
That oil was confined stateside as the shale boom unleashed unprecedented U.S. production growth. But after Washington nixed decades-old export restrictions in 2015, companies scrambled to build out pipelines to Corpus Christi, a South Texas city of about 320,000.

Various companies have since constructed storage tanks in Corpus Christi to hold tens of millions more barrels of oil near the water. Cheniere Energy is expanding a plant that can liquefy natural gas for export. Since 2020, dredgers have been at work deepening the port’s ship channel and inner harbor to 54 feet from 47 feet currently, a more than $680 million operation that will allow many tankers to fill up close to capacity.

“You can’t just build those facilities overnight,” said Kent Britton, the Port of Corpus Christi’s interim chief executive.

'05
'10
'15
'20
1993
'95
2000
0
2.5
5.0
7.5
10.0
12.5
15.0
17.5
20.0
22.5
25.0
million barrels a day
U.S.
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Ensuing growth in crude shipments has outpaced other launch points in Texas and Louisiana largely because of the economics of shipping. Exporters that operate from Houston-Galveston and the main Port of Corpus Christi funnel shipments to smaller classes of tankers, which either carry cargoes abroad or ferry them to 1,100-foot supertankers anchored offshore in a dayslong process.

But across Corpus Christi Bay, in the small town of Ingleside, Texas, oil terminals at a former Naval base are big enough that those massive ships can fill up about half of their 2 million barrels of capacity from shore. 

“You can pretty much load your million barrels in 24 hours,” said Lois Zabrocky, chief executive of International Seaways, which operates 13 so-called very large crude carriers.

ADVERTISEMENT

Five tugboats then guide half-full VLCCs several miles out to sea, where smaller tankers top them off for delivery to refineries in Europe, Asia or elsewhere. 

That streamlined loading process can pare the price of shipments compared with elsewhere on the Gulf Coast. Analysts said such differences became particularly crucial last year after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine whipsawed energy markets and sent shipping costs skyrocketing.

Calgary, Alberta-based Gibson Energy bought one of the Ingleside terminals in June for $1.1 billion, an investment that Chief Executive Steven Spaulding said will pay off regardless of whether Permian production growth continues. His rationale: Ingleside’s efficiency will entice traders, even if it means drawing oil away from across Corpus Christi Bay.

“It doesn’t matter to our terminal,” Spaulding said.

Pipelines from the Permian to Corpus Christi are running at about 90% capacity, according to East Daley Analytics, a level at which traders might begin sending more crude toward Houston for refining or shipment abroad.

The midstream energy company Enbridge has responded by announcing an expansion of its pipeline to Corpus Christi by 200,000 barrels a day. Other companies have proposed environmentally contentious plans for multibillion-dollar deepwater terminals that would allow VLCCs to load up fully in the Gulf of Mexico.


A liquid terminal in Ingleside, Texas, a port with capacity to accommodate supertankers.
For all their customers’ focus on oil-and-gas exports, Corpus officials are preparing for a future when the U.S. exports nonfossil-fuel commodities such as hydrogen and ammonia. The port authority applied to receive some of the $8 billion that Washington pledged in its 2021 infrastructure package to develop regional hubs aimed at accelerating the use of hydrogen for energy.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS
What are the implications of Texas’ growing prominence in the global energy trade? Join the conversation below.

Enbridge has said it would partner with the Norwegian fertilizer company Yara International to develop a plant to produce up to 1.4 million tons of ammonia a year at its Ingleside terminal. The companies plan to capture carbon dioxide produced during the process and store it underground—activity that could qualify for credits under President Biden’s climate law.

Corpus Christi “is hopefully the gift that’s going to keep on giving,” said Phil Anderson, senior vice president, business development, at Enbridge.

Write to David Uberti at david.uberti@wsj.com and Benoît Morenne at benoit.morenne@wsj.com


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science, gas prices
« Reply #1182 on: July 31, 2023, 04:16:29 AM »
$4 ($5?) gas for an election year and everyone knows whose fault it is.

The price of gasoline is starting to surge everywhere, an inflationary omen for central banks and governments the world over. Futures just soared to a nine-month high in New York, sending shock waves through to the pump, while prices have also been rising in Asia. Markets for the motor fuel have tightened worldwide due to a combination of unexpected refinery outages plus lower-than-normal stockpiles in key storage hubs such as the US Gulf Coast and Singapore for this time of the year. In global energy markets, it’s telling that while crude oil futures are little changed year-to-date, US gasoline contracts have rallied by more than 20%.
Bloomberg.com

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Biden Administration cancels Strategic Petroleum Reserve replenishment
« Reply #1183 on: August 04, 2023, 03:51:54 PM »
Are strategic reserves sit at a 40-year low because jackass had to remove millions of gallons to win the midterms. Now the price is too high again. Who knew this would happen?

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/report-biden-admin-cancels-oil-order-drained-strategic-petroleum-reserve?utm_source=mux&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=tw

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1184 on: August 04, 2023, 04:27:16 PM »
 :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1186 on: August 05, 2023, 07:45:36 AM »
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/27/labour-cardiff-council-diesel-generators-electric-lorries/

"Labour council using diesel generators to charge electric bin lorries
Cardiff Council resorts to using portable diesel generators because of software problem causing new system to trip"
------------------
They want to force all of us into electric vehicles, but we don't all have enough diesel generator capacity to pull it off.

(Doug) I keep trying to convert to Leftism but stubborn facts keep getting in the way.
-------
Ronald Reagan:  The trouble with our Liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1187 on: August 05, 2023, 08:26:03 AM »
I showed a three bedroom apartment to three men this week. When we got to the kitchen, one of them asked about switching the electric stove for a gas stove, and went on about how much he loves to cook (and prefers the gas stove).

Explained that it's hard to switch the hookups, and took the opportunity to say "they're going to take away your gas stove", a statement of both prediction and perhaps slight overstatement.

One of the others said back to me, "that's a republican lie".

Awkward moment for all and I dropped the subject there.

Then of course I looked into it. Where did that story originate? Oops, it looks like it started with a Biden appointee to the consumer products safety commission, reported by Bloomberg News.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-09/us-safety-agency-to-consider-ban-on-gas-stoves-amid-health-fears

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/07/14/biden-nominates-trumka/

https://www.achrnews.com/articles/146993-gas-infrastructure-ban-takes-hold-in-berkeley

Sorry, but who is the Republican in this story?  I don't see one, and the word "lie" is a little strong for having a different view of what is coming.

In context, that was the day the permanent ban on the sale of incandescent light bulbs went into effect. Not exactly an implausible prediction that they would ban other things they find harmful.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
The Wheels on the Electric Bus go flat
« Reply #1189 on: August 09, 2023, 06:07:00 AM »
Electric bus maker files for bankruptcy two years after being praised by Biden

BY RAMSEY TOUCHBERRY THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The electric bus maker Proterra has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, a little more than two years after the California-based public company received praise from President Biden for being the future of the EV industry.

Proterra said in a statement Monday that its bankruptcy was made “in an effort to strengthen its financial position through a recapitalization or going-concern sale.”

The company said it intends to continue normal operations through the process by using “existing capital to fund operations, including paying employee salaries and benefits, and compensating vendors and suppliers on a goforward basis.” “We have faced various market and macroeconomic headwinds that have impacted our ability to efficiently scale all of our opportunities simultaneously,” Proterra CEO Gareth Joyce said.

Its bankruptcy comes amid the auto industry grappling with widespread cuts and on the heels of EV startup Lordstown Motors filing for bankruptcy protection in June. Proterra, valued at $1.6 billion in January 2021, listed assets and liabilities at $500 million to $1 billion but saw its market value plummet to $362 million as of Monday’s market close. The company has made most of its money from manufacturing electric buses, but also produces EV parts like chargers and batteries for heavy-duty vehicles.

The Biden administration had close ties to the company, prompting criticism from conservatives about government spending on clean energy and the president’s climate agenda.

During a virtual tour of Proterra’s South Carolina facility in April 2021, Mr. Biden lauded Proterra for “getting us in the game” of green EV transportation. He predicted that Proterra and other EV companies would “end up owning the future.”

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm served on Proterra’s board of directors, and after conflict of interest criticisms once assuming her government role, sold her $1.6 million worth of shares in May 2021.

In February, Mr. Biden appointed Mr. Joyce to a national advisory committee on international trade called the President’s Export Council.

The company’s bankruptcy comes despite billions in funding and tax credits for electric buses through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and President Biden’s taxand- climate spending law known as the Inflation Reduction Act.

Mr. Biden still struck an upbeat tone Tuesday on his administration’s efforts to reduce emissions, which largely depends on remaking the transportation sector that is America’s second-largest source of emissions.

“All these historic measures put us on track to cut all American emissions in half — in half — by 2030, and we’re well on our way,” the president said during remarks in Arizona while unveiling a new national monument to protect the land from uranium mining. “There’s a lot of good that’s going to come from the sacrifices of dealing with taking on the climate crisis.”

Critics of Mr. Biden’s green energy agenda compared Proterra to Solyndra, the solar panel startup that received a more than $500 million loan under the Obama administration before going belly-up

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
WSJ: Weed into jet fuel?
« Reply #1190 on: August 09, 2023, 12:55:57 PM »
second

What Was Once a Weed Could Fuel Jet Engines
Scientists are developing nonfood plants to take the place of corn and soybeans as sources for biofuels
A crop called CoverCress, a source for biofuel that is aimed for cultivation on farms in harvest offseasons,  was developed from a plant considered a weed.
A crop called CoverCress, a source for biofuel that is aimed for cultivation on farms in harvest offseasons, was developed from a plant considered a weed. COVERCRESS
By Yusuf KhanFollow
Aug. 9, 2023 10:50 am ET



Field pennycress, a plant in the Brassica family related to mustards and cabbages, is usually considered a weed. But one feature made it less of a wallflower: its very high oil content, about 50% higher than that of a soybean. After close to a decade of controlled breeding and gene-splicing, the onetime weed is being cultivated as a source for renewable diesel or sustainable aviation fuel.


Most biofuels in the U.S. currently come from corn or soybeans. But as demand for green fuels rises, global food shortages are also threatening. That’s bringing a push for low-carbon fuels that can be made without using edible grains—and spurring research on crops like field pennycress.

“Today the dominant feedstock oil source for [biofuels] would be soybeans, which creates this dynamic of, ‘Are we going to be using our soybean oil and our soybean meal for the fuel market vs. the food and feed markets?” says Mike DeCamp, the chief executive of CoverCress, the company that developed field pennycress. The plant, now also dubbed CoverCress, is aimed for cultivation on farms in harvest offseasons, as a so-called cover crop that can help prevent erosion and provide revenue when primary crops are fallow.


CoverCress is one of three nonfood cover crops that have received funding from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, where scientists have been hoping to find oilseed plants that could potentially produce renewable fuels without competing with food sources. The other two—Nuseed Carinata and a plant called camelina marketed by Global Clean Energy Holdings—are also oilseed crops that are grown during the winter fallow period.

Major oil companies have been getting on board. In 2022, BP agreed to buy Nuseed Carinata oil to process or sell as a supply of sustainable biofuels. Chemical and pharmaceutical giant Bayer expanded its stake in CoverCress to a 65% ownership share, with the remainder held by Chevron and agricultural trading house Bunge. Exxon Mobil has a multiyear agreement with Global Clean Energy Holdings to purchase renewable diesel made from camelina.


Growing these oilseed plants between main crop rotations on land already used for farming helps limit damage like deforestation, says Alex Clayton, global strategy and commercial lead for Nuseed Carinata.

Carinata, also known as Ethiopian Mustard, isn’t a weed like pennycress but also isn’t edible by humans. The crop, grown between November and May in the offseason for cotton and peanuts, is being tested by farmers in Alabama, Georgia and Florida, as well as in Argentina. The oilseed is crushed in Europe for use as a biofuel.

The companies behind these crops tout benefits to farmers, but convincing farmers to grow them can be a major hurdle.


“Farmers are very cautious, conservative and skeptical because they have heard a lot of promises that haven’t panned out,” says John Sedbrook, a professor of genetics at Illinois State University who is researching cover crops. “It has a lot of potential but there is a lot of work to be done.”

In most cases, farmers are contracted to grow the crops, with the companies determining when and how to use fertilizers as well as ensuring the plants are crushed and sent to the refiners. That loss of control, as well as overlaps of up to a month with cash crops that can delay planting can make these cover crops a tough sell.


Nuseed Carinata is grown in the offseason for crops such as cotton and peanuts. PHOTO: NUSEED
How the crops have been developed also can be an issue. In the U.S. growing GMO crops is legal, though regulated by groups like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. However GMO crops are largely banned in the EU, which is a limitation for CoverCress. By contrast, Nuseed Carinata and camelina were developed mainly through selective breeding, rather than genetic modification.

Aviation is among the industries that are pushing demand for biofuels like those produced with cover crops. Sustainable aircraft fuel, or SAF, is still very much in its infancy. Output in 2021 was 100 million liters but in order for the industry to achieve net zero carbon output by 2050, around 449 billion liters will be needed, according to the Montreal-based International Air Transport Association. In 2022, 450,000 flights used SAF as a fuel source, the IATA estimates—just 1.5% of the flights that took place.


“We don’t have the solutions at scale today to actually solve the problem of decarbonizing how we fly,” says Lauren Riley, chief sustainability officer at United Airlines Holdings.

“If you think about some other markets, like ground transportation, they’re electrifying. They have batteries that are becoming more efficient and energy-dense with each generation. We don’t have sort of the equivalent of that for aviation.”


The new nonfood sources of biofuels are promising, she says. “Cover crops have the potential to take us to almost a carbon-neutral fuel which is exceptionally exciting.”

However, cover crops can only supply so much, says Hemant Mistry, director of energy transition at the International Air Transport Association. “A diversity [of sources] will be needed to ramp up SAF production going forward.”

“CoverCress, camelina and Carinata combined are not going to be the solution [alone],” says CoverCress CEO DeCamp. “It’s still not going to be enough oil to meet the demand based on the amount of capacity that’s coming online.”

“None of these crops are the magic bullet,” he says, “but they are part of a fabric that can really help in long-term lowering greenhouse gas emissions in the world.”

Write to Yusuf Khan at yusuf.khan@wsj.com
« Last Edit: August 09, 2023, 01:00:27 PM by Crafty_Dog »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
WSJ: Magoo uranium speech in need of clarification
« Reply #1191 on: August 09, 2023, 01:01:59 PM »
third

Another Biden Speech in Need of Clarification
Limiting fuel for nuclear plants will not reduce emissions of greenhouse gas.
By
James Freeman
Follow
Aug. 8, 2023 7:16 pm ET




President Joe Biden has been known to get into trouble when he strays from his scripted remarks, but this doesn’t explain the confusion embedded in his Tuesday address in Arizona.

Chris Megerian and Terry Tang report for the Associated Press from Grand Canyon National Park:

Declaring it good “not only for Arizona but for the planet,” President Joe Biden on Tuesday signed a national monument designation for the greater Grand Canyon, turning the decades-long visions of Native American tribes and environmentalists into reality...

“Preserving these lands is good, not only for Arizona but for the planet,” said Biden, who spoke with a mountain vista behind him using a handheld mic to counter the wind and wearing a baseball cap and sunglasses to shield him from the sunshine...

The president tied the designation to his administration’s larger push to combat climate change and noted this summer’s extreme heat, which has been especially punishing in places like Phoenix. He said extreme heat was responsible for more deaths than other natural disasters like floods and hurricanes but added, “None of this need be inevitable.”

No, it doesn’t. And shielding oneself from the Arizona summer sunshine seems sensible enough. The confusion lies in the fact that the president is locking up nearly a million acres and the principal result is to limit potential uranium mining in the region. Uranium fuels nuclear power, a rare technology that can efficiently generate lots of energy while generating zero greenhouse-gas emissions. With this designation he’s just made it harder to meet his climate goals but seems to be under the impression that he’s done the opposite.

One might assume that the president decided to repeat his climate talking points at the wrong moment, or perhaps that a summer intern loaded the wrong speech into the teleprompter. But this seems to have been the White House plan all along—and this time Mr. Biden’s subordinates appear to be just as confused as he is.

On the Monday flight out to Arizona aboard Air Force One, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre went with the same approach of presenting the administration’s new obstacle to zero-emission energy as some sort of climate initiative.

“President Biden continues to make combating the climate crisis a core tenet of his presidency,” said Ms.Jean-Pierre, who then introduced reporters to assistant to the president and national climate adviser Ali Zaidi. Ms. Jean-Pierrer said that Mr. Zaidi was “here to share more about the President’s climate agenda and the trip that we’re heading to.”

Here’s what he said, according to the White House transcript:

Great. As Karine said, the President has been focused on mounting an all-of-government response to the climate crisis. We see the impacts in our communities every single day. And the West, in particular, has been feeling the brunt of this, with heat waves blanketing communities, the skies turning orange.

But embedded in this crisis is also an opportunity for us to bring the country together, to advance our conservation agenda, and to spark a manufacturing renaissance here in the country. The President’s trip will demonstrate how he’s doing that.

Tomorrow, he will be announcing his fifth new national monument. It’s nearly 1 million acres. And folks know about the 300-million-year-old cliffs that line the Grand Canyon. What’s less known is the 300 cultural sites that make up this area. They tell a rich and important history. And it’s the reason why 12 tribes stepped up to request that this monument be declared. The President is going to take action to do just that.

What would we do without climate advisers who are also ready to share their expertise on rich cultural history? One can’t help but be reminded of the public health experts who momentarily abandoned their opposition to unmasked gatherings during the Covid panic in order to endorse leftist political protest.

Perhaps voters will be reassured that the alleged climate crisis can’t be that bad if even the president’s climate adviser recognizes other priorities. A reasonable conclusion is that “an all-of-government response” is hardly necessary if even the White House climate office doesn’t want to go overboard in the pursuit of emissions reductions.

But apparently the loss of potential uranium mining isn’t the only problem with the president’s action. In the Salt Lake Tribune Mark Eddington reports:

Chris Heaton, a Kanab City Council member and sixth-generation rancher who grazes his 200 head of cattle on roughly 48,000 acres he owns or leases on the Arizona Strip, is especially worried. He said the monument includes 1,000 acres of his private property...

“Ranchers have been using this land since we came here, and we have done a pretty dang good job of it,” Heaton said. “That’s why the [federal government] wants it, because they think they manage it better than we can.”

Heaton also called the notion that the national monument would protect indigenous people’s culture and sacred sites a smokescreen because the government will lure thousands of people to the region through advertising, which will result in the land being desecrated with graffiti and human waste.
***

Perhaps the White House climate office should take time off from its intensive study of cultural treasures to notice that outside of nuclear power, the zero-emission energy movement isn’t exactly thriving. The Journal’s Mari Novik and Jennifer Hiller report:


The wind business, viewed by governments as key to meeting climate targets and boosting electricity supplies, is facing a dangerous market squall.

After months of warnings about rising prices and logistical hiccups, developers and would-be buyers of wind power are scrapping contracts, putting off projects and postponing investment decisions. The setbacks are piling up for both onshore and offshore projects, but the latter’s problems are more acute.

In recent weeks, at least 10 offshore projects totaling around $33 billion in planned spending have been delayed or otherwise hit the doldrums across the U.S. and Europe.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Sweden goes nuclear, major move
« Reply #1192 on: August 20, 2023, 03:07:50 PM »
"build at least ten large reactors to meet an anticipated surge in demand for zero-carbon power."

(If Sweden needs at least 10 new large nuclear plants, how many do we need?)

Did we mention, carbon-free?

This is the answer to ccp's point, Republicans should address climate change. Whether or not you believe humans are the main cause in warming, we should be building the facilities to produce massive carbon-free, round the clock energy for our grid, and this is how you do it.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sweden-to-return-to-uranium-mining-climate-minister-says-9w8mhs7rq,

Besides mining their vast uranium resources, they are building piwer plants:

From the article:
"Nearly 40 years after the completion of the country’s last new nuclear power plant, Pourmokhtari has announced plans to build at least ten large reactors to meet an anticipated surge in demand for zero-carbon power.
***
“The government is aiming at doubling electricity production in 20 years,” Pourmokhtari said. “For our clean power system to function, a large part of this has to be dispatchable [i.e., reliable] where nuclear power is the only non-fossil option. Nuclear power also has a reduced environmental footprint and requires limited resources in comparison with most energy sources.”
« Last Edit: August 20, 2023, 03:15:45 PM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18157
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1193 on: August 21, 2023, 06:31:27 AM »
"his is the answer to ccp's point, Republicans should address climate change. Whether or not you believe humans are the main cause in warming, we should be building the facilities to produce massive carbon-free, round the clock energy for our grid, and this is how you do it."

yes

whether or not it is true ignoring it won't convince anyone

the LEFT has won the brain wash the public and particularly the younger generations we are the cause and it is a crises.

long time before we ever get fusion
 or other physics based source of power.......

nuclear ok with me but LEFT has demonized this too.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1194 on: August 22, 2023, 09:22:21 AM »
Agree 100% that the Rep cranky curmudgeon strategy is a loser!

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
WSJ: EV car market deflating
« Reply #1195 on: August 22, 2023, 09:29:53 AM »
The Electric-Vehicle Bubble Starts to Deflate
Biden is imitating China just as its industrial policy starts to crack.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
Aug. 21, 2023 6:38 pm ET




2542

Gift unlocked article

Listen

(4 min)


image
PHOTO: NICOLAS MAETERLINCK/ZUMA PRESS
It’s ironic, to say the least, that the U.S. is seeking to imitate China’s economic model at the moment that its industrial policy fractures. Look no further than its collapsing electric-vehicle bubble, which is a lesson in how industries built by government often also fail because of government.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH
WSJ Opinion Potomac Watch
Donald Trump Says He'll Skip the First GOP Debate


SUBSCRIBE
Add to Queue
Explore Audio Center
Tesla last week slashed its prices in China to boost sales in an oversaturated EV market. In July Tesla and other auto makers in China agreed to stop their EV price war, only to scrap the cease-fire days later owing to government antitrust concerns. While lower prices may benefit consumers, auto makers in China are bleeding red ink and going bust.

A plethora of Chinese EV start-ups launched in the past decade, fueled by government support, including consumer incentives and direct financing. Auto makers churned out EVs to suck up subsidies. Giant property developer Evergrande Group launched an EV unit as its real-estate empire began to implode, but now the EV unit is foundering too.

About 400 Chinese electric-car makers have failed in the past several years as Beijing reduced industry subsidies while ramping up production mandates. Scrap-yards around China are littered with EVs whose technology has become outdated, redolent of its unoccupied housing developments created by government-driven investment.

Beijing recently extended an EV sales-tax exemption to soften the industry’s problems. Auto makers are nonetheless having to slash prices to sell cars they are required to make, which is eroding margins. China’s EV mandate is similar to those imposed by California and the Biden Administration and especially punishes the West’s traditional fossil-fuel auto makers.

Volkswagen’s joint-venture in China this month announced up to $8,200 in incentives for its electric ID.6 X model. GM Chevrolet dealers in China are discounting EVs by more than 25%. Although EVs now make up a third of auto sales in China, supply still far exceeds demand. This gap will likely grow as Chinese consumption weakens.

As with real estate, Chinese government support inflated EV investment and misallocated capital that could have been put to more productive uses. Now comes the destruction that invariably follows the government creation, which may be a harbinger for the U.S. as the Biden Administration emulates China’s EV industrial policy.

Cox Automotive reported this month that EV inventory had swelled to 103 days of supply in the U.S., about double that of gas-powered cars. Auto makers and dealers are discounting EVs to sell their growing supply. The average EV price paid by consumers has fallen 20% compared with a year ago to $53,438, driven by Tesla’s price cuts and dealer incentives.

Ford recently reduced its EV production targets as its losses and unsold inventory grow. At the end of June, it had 116 days of unsold Mustang Mach-Es, and GM’s electric Hummer had more than 100 days of supply. And this is in a growing economy.

Traditional auto makers will have to raise prices on gas-powered cars to compensate for their EV losses. A United Auto Workers executive said Sunday that Stellantis is threatening to move production of its Ram 1500 trucks to Mexico from suburban Detroit, no doubt to reduce costs. The EV jobs President Biden touts will come at the cost of union jobs building gas-powered vehicles.

Meantime, EV start-ups are floundering as interest rates climb, and they struggle to scale up manufacturing. Lordstown Motors filed for bankruptcy in June. Nikola Corp. warned this year that it had “substantial doubts” about its ability to stay in business.

Business failures are inevitable in a dynamic economy, but government will be mainly responsible for the destruction that results from its force-fed EV transition—and the damage may only just be starting

peregrine

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 199
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1196 on: August 30, 2023, 03:02:00 PM »
Lots of pages for me to read through.

I'll offer this rediculous link
https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1197 on: August 30, 2023, 07:12:40 PM »
Lots of pages for me to read through.

I'll offer this rediculous link
https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/

No mention that the only way you would achieve any much less all of those objectives would be through a system of free enterprise, private property rights and capitalism, 3 things they abhor.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68741
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1198 on: August 31, 2023, 07:46:48 AM »
Welcome back Peregrine!

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18011
    • View Profile
Re: Energy Politics & Science
« Reply #1199 on: September 07, 2023, 08:21:55 AM »
Shoring up his base. Selling out his country.  Energy Independence is what we sought for decades. We found it. And we destroyed it. This policy hurts our exports, weekends our position in the world, elevates China, and does nothing to help the environment.

We want energy companies to make long-term investments, and then we do this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/06/climate/biden-drilling-alaska-wildlife-refuge.html