[theluckycountry]

Another possible cause of non-spin... if the grid has no place for the electricity to go, either to current oversupply or inadequate grid capacity.

Bitcoin can fix that.

A shill by any other name.

[Tanada]

DAVID BLACKMON: The Green Energy Breakthrough Is Always Just Around The Corner

The road towards this current, faltering energy transition has been filled with myriad lofty promises of technological miracles to come. Those predicted quantum leaps are always just around the corner, but too often that corner never ends up being turned. When that happens, one of two options present themselves: Either a change in direction, or another promise of another unproven miracle solution to come. Again, it’s just around the corner.

Nowhere has this oft-repeated cycle of failed promises been more prominent than in the space needed to solve the problem of scalable storage for electricity generated by intermittent renewable power sources, i.e., wind and solar. In my own career, I have frequently written about developing technologies in the battery space for more than a decade now, and none of the promised solutions I’ve detailed have come to fruition. The technologies that were just around the corner in 2012 remain just around that same corner today despite billions of dollars in subsidized investments.

Most often, those stories have involved one form or another of stationary battery technologies designed to become needed upgrades to current lithium-ion tech, a great deal of which has now been installed across the globe. The biggest problems with lithium-ion batteries are 1) they discharge rapidly even in ideal weather conditions, and 2) like wind and solar, their performance is also greatly diminished when the weather conditions become less than ideal. The average cycle time for stationary batteries installed in Texas, for example, is roughly 3 hours, leaving them of little value in a major winter storm that lasts for the better part of a week like Texas experienced in February 2021.

New technologies designed to mitigate these issues like solid state, liquid metal, and vanadium batteries have been the focus of major investments and have advanced in feasibility as time has gone on. But none have turned that crucial corner that would allow them to become the magic bullet the power industry still seeks.

A new report from the UK Royal Society at Cambridge University advances a finding that that particular corner may never be turned, at least as it applies to the UK’s power grid. While this study claims it is still feasible for renewable energy sources to fulfill all of the UK’s electricity needs by 2050 at sustainable costs, the authors contend that the storage needs for such a grid cannot be met by stationary battery technology.

As an alternative, the researchers turn to a largely unproven technology that also amounts to a magic bullet that lies just around the proverbial corner. “Meeting the need for long-duration storage will require very low cost per unit energy stored,” the report says. “In GB [Great Britain], the leading candidate is storage of hydrogen in solution-mined salt caverns, for which GB has a more than adequate potential, albeit not widely distributed.”

It is key to note those final qualifiers the authors admit: This is an experimental technology that has potential, but no one really knows right now if it can be scaled up to meet society-changing needs.

In case this experimental hydrogen thing won’t actually work, the researchers point to a second, even less proven magic bullet, that of ammonia, in the very next sentence: “The fall-back option, which would be significantly more expensive, is ammonia.”

Going into this brave new power storage world equipped only with these two unproven options for renewable storage is akin to going into a gunfight armed with a Star Trek phaser set on stun with a Star Wars light sabre in your hip pocket for backup.

This study presents a perfect microcosm of what is happening all over the world in the green energy space as the harsh reality sets in about the futility of trying to replace 80% of the current sources of global primary energy with unreliable, unpredictable, intermittent wind and solar power generation and EVs. There is no truly feasible way yet discovered to achieve this, mainly because the laws of physics, thermodynamics, and supply and demand are immutable laws, and not mere guidelines or suggestions that can be waived away by a combination of hope and fantasy solutions that are always just around the corner.

Daily Caller

[theluckycountry]

Is The UK Giving Up On Solar Power?

As expected, Government's everywhere continue backing away from the rebuildables scam.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's policy changes, including delays in transitioning to electric vehicles and restrictions on solar energy, have raised concerns about the UK's commitment to climate action.
The Conservative government in the U.K. has been accused of backtracking on several of its climate pledges over the last few months and the solar energy industry is the latest to be affected. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is following in his predecessor’s footsteps by imposing restrictions on new solar energy developments in the U.K., which could lead the country to rely on foreign energy imports to meet its growing demand for renewable energy and ensure its energy security.

In September, Sunak confirmed the massive rollback of several of the U.K.’s climate policies during a speech. This came after a government plan on updated climate action was leaked.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gene ... Power.html

When faced with a doubling of energy costs to install the stuff (Germany), and having to do that every 2 decades, since that's as long as the junk lasts, they are finally surrendering to reality. Even household solar is a scam. I never would have bought into it hadn't the government paid half the cost and the chinese been selling the panels near true cost. (look up "china price")

But I do have it, and it's great!
après moi le déluge

[theluckycountry]

Another shoe drops.

"No One Will Want Solar": California Cuts Rooftop Solar Subsidies In Blow To 'Green' Industry
https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/n ... n-industry
https://www.solar.com/learn/nem-3-0-pro ... omeowners/

Updates regarding legal action seeking to overturn NEM 3.0: On May 4, 2023, three environmental groups filed a lawsuit claiming the CPUC failed to consider the full benefits of rooftop solar ...NEM 3.0 features a 75% reduction in export rates

Solar can't pay for itself and like the ukrainian war, governments are giving up on it. But on a bright note those that could afford to install it are now cash cows to support the aging grids.

SunPower Corp., Sunnova Energy International Inc., Enphase Energy Inc., and SolarEdge Technologies Inc. are some of the largest solar companies operating in California. Shares in these companies have crashed this year.

And just how does California plan to eradicate fossil fuels with 'green energy' to meet 100% carbon-free electricity targets by 2045 if it disincentivized new solar development?

[Shaved Monkey]

You need a mix,you cant rely on one source that only creates energy during the day
There needs to be wind solar thermal and storage be it batteries or pumped hydro.

I too have solar panels and I am very happy especially with my government guaranteed high feed in tariff and my government hand out to buy them.
My last power bill was zero

[theluckycountry]

Rebuildables have two issues going forward, 1/ they are made from oil and always will be 2/ they are expensive and will be increasingly so, because of 1/

German electricity is 3 times as expensive as US power, this year the Germans shut down their last two nuclear reactors, in response to, Stupidity. One of the components of German power generation, 7%, is the burning of American woodchip. They may as well burn coal for all the difference it makes.

[Pops]

Rebuildables have two issues going forward, 1/ they are made from oil and always will be 2/ they are expensive and will be increasingly so, because of 1/

To tie in with the other thread,
by your estimate, new RE costs 2-3% of the value of the $6T total energy market
And, RE (excluding hydro) is producing 7% of total primary energy already,
Since 7% is greater than 3%, isn't RE effectively producing all new RE, and more?

Obviously electricity isn't diesel. But then again these are early days and the diesel's been around 140 years.. OIl's first use was lighting, after all, the Boss 429 came after.

Sound Check...
.

[Plantagenet]

Renewables are a great idea, but even though the US is building a lot of renewable energy, the US is also drilling a lot of oil wells and pumping huge amounts of oil.

In fact, the US just hit its all-time high in oil production.

us-oil-output-hits-record-

Joe Biden made all kinds of promises about reducing US dependence on fossil fuels, but in reality he is presiding over the greatest boom yet in US oil production.


Joe Biden is quietly carrying out the "drill baby drill" strategy and boosting US oil production to record levels.

Cheers!

[theluckycountry]

by your estimate, new RE costs 2-3% of the value of the $6T total energy market
And, RE (excluding hydro) is producing 7% of total primary energy already,
Since 7% is greater than 3%, isn't RE effectively producing all new RE, and more?

News Break jan 2023
Coal has been making headlines for the past few weeks with a 38 percent gain in prices last month. Over the last six months, the commodity’s price has seen a 160 percent gain and more than 200 percent in the current year itself. The price has gone up to an all-time high of $270 a tonne

https://www.cnbctv18.com/market/commodi ... l%20prices. Today's price $50 . Price volatility

isn't RE effectively producing all new RE, and more?

No, because those are $$$ values for energy, which are underwritten by the current low cost of fossil fuels used to produce the RE units in the first place. It's like when they conduct studies on the energy payback time of a solar panels. They take the electricity generated by the panel at today's electricity price in $$$ and compare that to the $$$ cost of the panel from the retailer.

Now remove all oil and coal and start mining Bauxite with electricity alone. Transporting the ore across land and ocean by electricity alone. Make the glass without it, run an arc furnace on the solar panel output. Things like arc furnaces for steel etc run at 3,000 °F and consume vast amounts of electricity, Producing aluminium (frames for solar PV) use mega amounts too.

Typically, 13 to 15 megawatt hours (DC) is required to produce one metric tonne of molten aluminium. Aluminium smelters therefore tend to be located close to sources of economical, reliable and plentiful long term power.

https://primary.world-aluminium.org/pro ... eneration/

Now try doing all that with solar panels and the equation changes dramatically. Solar powered D9s? Solar powered long haul trucks? Hydro is great, but if you do a little research your discover that all of the hydro dams have been built in the last 80 odd years. And that the average lifespan of a Dam is about 100 years, then it becomes unusable because of the silt buildup behind the dam wall. You can't remove this silt in any practical way either and you can't build another Dam on the same site.

There are only certain geographical sites suitable for Dams and many of these have already been utilized. So while Hydro is fine now, it's unsustainable in the future. Hoover Dam's Lake Mead lifespan was greatly extended by the construction of Glen Canyon Dam. it's lake, Lake Powell, will of course silt up at a rate as fast as Mead was before, and when it's full, all the silt will pass again into Mead. The politically correct report for Mead gives a new figure of a 1000 year lifespan, based on current inflows. But that will have to change when Powell is full of silt. In any event hydro power is not always near mines or other big industrial users so it's of limited value.

In the end the production of RE power systems cannot, from my studies on the subject, be feasibly powered by the energy they produce alone. Certainly not on a scale that can light our cities, power our industry and charge a billion EVs, most of which is the unproductive us of electricity. Look at my microcosm. I'm sitting here at home with a few lights on, the A/C unit running, the H/W system heating, the fridges cooling, computer powered up. And outside street lights glare all over town, refrigerators keep the supermarkets food cold, the pumps at the sewage transfer system are pushing the poo along, other pumps push water up into the reservoirs. All that is unproductive, it isn't making solar panels, all it does is make my personal life comfortable. Now multiply that for a few Billion people. If it wasn't for coal I'd be sitting in the dark!

We've had a 100 years of opulence powered by fossil fuels and everyone wants that to continue for ever. Is it any wonder so many people are claiming we can? All those claimants are living in luxury today and most can afford that luxury because they are being paid to find ways for it to continue. They have a vested interest in selling rebuildable technology but I assume many of them are like those highly paid Silicon valley programmers working on creating addictive kids games. They do the work, they get their salaries, but they in no way allow their children to play the games. They pointedly restrict their children's screen time.

Bill Gates and Steve Jobs raised their kids with limited tech — and it should have been a red flag about our own smartphone use. ...Even elite Silicon Valley schools are noticeably low-tech.

https://www.businessinsider.com/screen- ... ching-tv-4
You don't get smart kids from putting them in front of a computer, studies have proved that old fashioned reading and writing stimulates the creative centers of the brain. Especially writing in cursive believe it or not.

The benefit of cursive writing has been examined in numerous studies and has been shown to improve brain development, significantly for critical thinking...

https://www.smithbrooktuition.co.uk/how ... the-brain/
When I discovered that I switched from writing printed txt to cursive. No easy task, it took me weeks just to remaster it in an untidy manner.

We are not citizens Pops, we are a commodity, we are Human Capital, we are consumers in the eyes of these people. I tried to live a decent life, I did a productive job that didn't exploit people, I offered value for money and treated my clients as I would myself. I did not exploit for commissions or grants or extra profit over and above a decent income. But who is promoting rebuildable technologies. Fat-cats, corrupt politicians, entrepreneurs out to make big money. It doesn't matter. All the truth is coming out now.

US Clean Energy Stocks Have Lost $30 Billion In Value In The Last 6 Months https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/us-cl ... t-6-months

[Pops]

No, because those are $$$ values for energy

Seems to me they then cancel each other.

Now remove all oil and coal..

Well, no, that's not how things work. New technology does not start at conception in it's final form. Nor replace the established technology overnight.

Even fossils didn't take over in a decade or two. Oil wells were being drilled in China in the 4th century. The first coal mine was opened in the 16th century. Yet fossils did not displace animal power and biofuel until well into the 19th & 20th century. There was no instant transition even though concentrated fossil energy is the far superior technology.

Is RE a replacement for fossils? No. Society will need to adapt to more localized supply lines and adopt a lower standard of living simply because fossils are highly concentrated energy available effectively free. Most studies show RE to be energy positive, either a lot or a little. The more efficient they become the fewer people will die. After all 6-7 Billion people are the offspring of fossils.

Of course the world still runs on fossils, that's why to start transitioning now

.

[mousepad]

The first coal mine was opened in the 16th century. Yet fossils did not displace animal power and biofuel until well into the 19th & 20th century. There was no instant transition even though concentrated fossil energy is the far superior technology.
.

exactly. That's the scary part. It took centuries to transition from an inferior to a superior source. And now we try to transition from superior to inferior within a few decades. Good thing we have plenty of money to force-subsidize the transition. So no sweat. It's Saul Goodman.