China has said it will not approve wind and solar power projects unless they can compete with coal power prices. Beijing pulled the plug on support for large solar projects, which had been receiving a per kWh payment, in late May. That news came immediately after the country’s largest solar industry event and caught everyone by surprise. –John Parnell, Forbes, 10 January 2018
Shares in China’s new energy vehicle (NEV) makers and other firms in the industry chain are pummelled, after media reports that Beijing this year could continue to cut subsidies for NEVs. —The Economic Times, 9 January 2019
Saudi Arabia is nearing a deal to invest in U.S. liquefied natural gas, a landmark decision for the kingdom, which in the past had been a huge supplier of energy to America. America’s shale revolution has broken years of dependence on Middle Eastern oil, to the extent that the International Energy Agency expects the U.S. to become a net energy exporter by 2023. —The Wall Street Journal, 9 January 2019
China National Petroleum Company (CNPC) reported that shale gas production from its Sichuan Basin project increased by 40% between 2017 and 2018. Total gas output was pegged at 4.27 billion cubic meters (bcm), with a daily output amounting to 20 million cubic meters (mcm). The figures are record highs, the company said. —JPT Digital, 10 January 2019
Support in German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition for a major new Russian gas pipeline is slipping as frustration with the Kremlin’s brinkmanship grows and pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump starts to bite. —Bloomberg, 7 January 2019
BP discovers 1 billion barrels of oil at its Thunder Horse field in the Gulf of Mexico. The oil giant also says it will spend $1.3 billion to develop the third phase of its Atlantis offshore field south of New Orleans. BP credits its investment in advanced seismic technology for speeding up its ability to confirm the discoveries. —CNBC, 8 January 2019
Great news from China. At least they’re actually practical. Eventually wiser heads prevail. Wind and Solar are irrational, childish nonviable leftwing pipedreams. It’s economic suicide to dump money into a poverty-inducing black hole. Strip away the subsidies and see if they can exist on their own. If not, let them die by the free market.
Surely we have a Physicist out there who can answer this……..
Thinking about the Earth’s NATURAL daily “Sun energy budget” and the 50 United States.
Let me restate… percentage wise,
How much of Earth’s natural “daily Sun energy budget” for all 50 states would the “Green New Deal” need to consume to meet The Green New Deal’s transition to 100% (EVERYTHING converted to electric power) green renewable energy, over all 50 states(no nukes or natural gas) by 2030?
See: The Jacobson plan – detailed below.
http://www.gp.org/gnd_full
“Going to 100% clean energy by 2030 means reducing energy demand as much as possible. This will require energy conservation and efficiency; replacing non-essential individual means of transport with high-quality and modern mass transit; and eliminating the use of fossil-based fertilizers and pesticides. Along with these steps it will be necessary to electrify everything else, including transport, heating, etc.”
“The Jacobson plan – which, while only one potential approach, is currently the most detailed and well-known – would be met with 30.9% onshore wind, 19.1% offshore wind, 30.7% utility-scale photovoltaics (PV), 7.2% rooftop PV, 7.3% concentrated solar power (CSP) with storage, 1.25% geothermal power, .37% wave power, 0.14% tidal power, and 3.01% hydroelectric power.”
“Over all 50 states, converting would provide 3.9 million 40-year construction jobs and 2.0 million 40-year operation jobs for the energy facilities alone, the sum of which would outweigh the 3.9 million jobs displaced in the conventional energy sector.”
“… non-essential individual means of transport …”
“Non-essential” to whom?? Right now my wife and I are in an RV Park in Gila Bend, AZ. A 27 foot travel trailer, pulled by a Ford F-350 diesel. Tomorrow we’re headed for Quartzsite AZ to spend several weeks with longtime friends – also retirees – also RV’ers. If someone from the government (US or UN)(“We’re here to help you”) were to tell any of us that “You can’t do this any more – you must use public transport”, I think there might be a slight discussion about that…..
“Jobs displaced”?? Since it’s winter – ‘public transportation’ – no more snow sports – skiing etc. That’s few more jobs gone. Summer – fishing? A few more jobs. In fact any activity that involves ‘private’ transportation, when where and how by an individuals choice, will suffer if the alternative is “public transportation”. (I try to avoid snow, but have wet a line on occasion.)
No private transport? The long-distance truckers will be stuck with the full cost road maintenance. The retail price on everything they haul will go up – from apricots to maxi-pads to zucchini. Think about it…..
The benefit of “green jobs” has always been a lie. Depending on location it has been shown that for every green job created, 2.1 to 2.7 traditional jobs are lost. This phenomenon is so well know in Europe they even have a special name for it. It is the “carbon leak” to describe industries moving to where energy is more affordable and taking their jobs with them.
Green jobs are very bad for rate payers. Germany has tripled its utility power rate by adding 30% renewable energy to their mix.
The people trying to dictate to us how we live our lives have no idea how many people in our country live. We live in Cascade Foot Hills where bus routes will never go and we are miles from the nearest park and ride. To use public transportation private cars are needed. When our four kids were in college and my wife and I working that is six cars to support different schedules and destinations. We can’t afford one electric car let alone six.
My oldest daughter did drive to a park and ride for awhile and then take public transportation but it doubled her commute time. For this and other reasons public transportation is an inferior life style which is exactly what the leftists are trying to force us into.
The environmental left ignores anything that doesn’t support their agenda and a big one is that 100% renewable energy isn’t possible without nuclear. That is because when the sun doesn’t shine and wind doesn’t blow backup fossil fuel power plants that are kept idling have to cut in. Going to 100% renewable energy means no back up power. There is no feasible way to store enough power to run our grids. Southern Australia’s $50 million battery only had enough capacity to run their grid for a few minutes. The most feasible way to store enough power would be to build a massive artificial hydroelectric power system. For every one reservoir in a natural hydroelectric system two would have to be build because there would have to be one high altitude dam and one low altitude dam with water pumped between the two. The cost would be impossible and if it was the environmental impact would be severe. The only feasible way to go to 100% renewable energy is to accept long daily black outs as a normal way of life.
The only reason we can feed our expanded population is with the use of fossil-based fertilizers and pesticides. Eliminate these and there would be famine.
Attempting to implement the “Green New Deal” is impossible. The good news, there is no need. In recent history there is a very low correlation between carbon dioxide levels and temperature, but a very high correlation with solar output.
I wonder if anyone else has noticed that China not using renewables unless they can compete with coal, which is impossible, violates the agreement that Obama made with China. That agreement only had two provisions. One, China would peak its green house gas emissions by 2030. Two, china would rapidly expand its development of renewable energy. There was great fan fair when this deal was made. I wonder how much coverage it will get now that China has broken the deal.
How is market place economics being demonized ?
Well, the smellocrat party exists !
It doesn’t matter to destroy a country’s identity,
borders, culture and tradition.
It only matters that the smellocrats rule and
REDUCE everyone to what they call equality.
For everyone but them
an EQUALITY of Misery.
To them
EQUALITY
was NEVER about bringing anyone up to anything
It was reducing everyone but themselves to the
LEAST COMMON DENOMINATOR
An equality of misery.
That they would not be part of BUT
RULE OVER .
This is the USA Communist Party
THIS IS the Democrat Party.