REAL Green wrote:I don't agree with that outsourcing point if you are talking the last decade.
No, I meant as you wrote. They have been flat because of the GFC and a decline in GDP that affected US manufacturing.
REAL Green wrote:I don't agree with that outsourcing point if you are talking the last decade.
MonteQuest wrote:I remember back in 2004 when modern renewables were only .5% of our primary energy and everyone was giving me shit for saying they weren't going to capture a significant share of the energy pie anytime soon. And here we are 16 years later and they have only increased that share 1.5%.
Plantagenet wrote:One could imagine.....just barely.....that the US could go on a "war footing" and spend whatever it takes to attempt to end fossil fuel use and shift to renewables.
REAL Green wrote:Europe’s 100% renewable push by 2050 seems like lots of hopium. The Midwest where I live has lots of room for more wind. That was before this pandemic shock. It is hard to say what is going to happen now. Fossil fuels are dirt cheap and demand has been crushed. That is not a great business plan starter. Yet, let’s say we have a U-shaped recovery and green policy push. There is more green growth ahead in this scenario but modest growth not the 100% transition kind. IMO.
MonteQuest wrote: Europe's 100% renewable push is just for electricity. That's 25-28% of energy demand. I live in NW Missouri. Over two hundred wind turbines within eyesight. They often sit idle due to a lack of line capacity to move the power. I see no V, or even a U shaped recovery. More like an L. With oil this cheap, it will be used to fuel any attempt at a recovery.
REAL Green wrote:I don't believe it is just electricity but I will have to review my notes. Europe is moving to phase out ICE vehicles. A big push is for alternative heating like heat pumps.
REAL Green wrote:Well I am a doomer "lite" so when I say U shaped recovery it is a recovery back to something less. I am also hedging there saying "if" becuase nobody knows at this point if everything will click into place to recover at all. That is just the general feeling and feelings are emotional. I don't see a collapse. This has never happened before not even in 08. That was a Minsky moment of systematic financial failure not a demand shock. Demand was appearing to shut down but after a few months of central bank servicing the crisis a new bubble was inflated.
Newfie wrote:I think most of us can agree that there is a great deal of waste in our systems and that we should be looking hard at ways to become more efficient, less consumptive. Reduce, reuse, recycle.
Ibon wrote:It is now 12 years that our pelton wheel has churned out 8KW 24/7. In these 12 years we had to fix the penstock once when a tree fell on it, we had to change the bearings one time and we had to change the belt that connects the pelton wheen to the generator twice. That was the total maintenance in 12 years. Our power is more reliable than the local grid that goes down frequently. The initial investment has now paid for itself.
MonteQuest wrote:Newfie wrote:I think most of us can agree that there is a great deal of waste in our systems and that we should be looking hard at ways to become more efficient, less consumptive. Reduce, reuse, recycle.
And therein lies our conundrum. Our system only works in one direction-growth. Conservation is a deathknell. It reduces economic activity. Efficiency gains leads to greater use-Jevons' Paradox. And there is no waste in our system that isn't paid for before it is wasted--it's part of the economy.
Newfie wrote:Exactly, and that means we Miller change the system.
Very, very, very few are open to that concept.
MonteQuest wrote:Ibon wrote:It is now 12 years that our pelton wheel has churned out 8KW 24/7. In these 12 years we had to fix the penstock once when a tree fell on it, we had to change the bearings one time and we had to change the belt that connects the pelton wheen to the generator twice. That was the total maintenance in 12 years. Our power is more reliable than the local grid that goes down frequently. The initial investment has now paid for itself.
Too bad the world can't run on that simple scale. However, one day we may have to. In the USA, we are barely seeing modern renewable penetration. I have 155 large wind turbines 5 miles south of my farm that often sit idle due to lack of transmission line capacity to move the power.
Sweeney wrote:Here in France the government has said that in about 9 years it will no longer be possible to buy heating oil. I expect that that will lead to the installation of a huge number of electric heat-pump systems. Our 1970s house still has oil-fired central heating; I'm hoping the government will eventually offer subsidies for swapping it out. They have already been running a huge scheme subsidizing the installation of insulation in lofts.
MonteQuest wrote:Newfie wrote:Exactly, and that means we Miller change the system.
Very, very, very few are open to that concept.
Easier said than done, regardless of a willingness to do so. Our world-wide fiat debt-based money system requires growth to exist. We have $250 trillion in outstanding debt. And if we don't grow, each year the per capita share of what is produced shrinks as the population grows.
Sweeney wrote:I think that Americans should be able to reduce their energy usage to European levels without too much pain.
Sweeney wrote:Here in France the government has said that in about 9 years it will no longer be possible to buy heating oil. I expect that that will lead to the installation of a huge number of electric heat-pump systems.
C8 wrote:That's an amazing slide. It seems solar and wind account for only 3% of the total- 3% !!!. I can remember 10 years ago when greens were touting massive gains in renewable technology that would make it self sustaining in a decade- this clearly hasn't happened.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 63 guests