Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in

The Lemming's Rush to Net Zero 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
hokie66 said:
Sounds lire Premier Smith knows when a ‘mandate’ is impossible to comply with.
Click to expand...

Nope. Alberta produces 80% of Canada's oil production. Cuts mean impacts to the tax revenue of Alberta, and by extension less votes in the next election.

She cares no more or less about the realities of climate change or the associated economics than any other politician. As is typical, she cares about preserving her probability of re-election.
 
A project building an offshore windfarm suspended due to rising manufacturing costs, or at least that's the claim. More likely they want to reprice the electricity

Vattenfall won a government contract to build the Norfolk Boreas project last year after bidding a record low price of £37.35 per megawatt hour (MWh) for the electricity generated.


That's 4p/kWh, rather more than the average for Australia last year.



Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
A comparison of the costs of various techs in Texas and Germany. Nuclear is more expensive than gas, but wind/solar is far more expensive than either, especially in germany. He's used 2 methodologies, reckons the 95 one is better. Mas nicht.

Screen_Shot_2023-07-31_at_10.48.41_am_rxkwx8.png








Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
Barron's article on the exciting prospects for offshore wind in the USA
But behind the scenes, the news about wind power is more sobering. Financially, the industry is teetering, with a parade of companies planning to renegotiate or pull out of contracts, jeopardizing plans for projects that were expected to provide electricity for millions of homes. Inflation is erasing profits, causing some of the largest energy firms in the world to back away. “Returns on offshore wind are becoming more and more challenged,” Shell CEO Wael Sawan told Barron’s last month, just days after a Shell joint venture said it would pull out of a power contract in Massachusetts. Shell won’t build renewable projects that can’t earn initial returns of 6% to 8%, he said.

At least eight multinational companies in three states have quietly started to back out of wind contracts, or ask to renegotiate deals in ways that will pass more costs to consumers. Beyond Shell (ticker: SHEL), they include BP (BP), Denmark’s Orsted (DNNGY), Norway’s Equinor (EQNR), Spain’s Iberdrola (IBDRY), Portugal’s Energias de Portugal (EDPFY), and France’s Engie (ENGIY) and state-owned Electricite de France. The projects those companies are building will collectively cost tens of billions of dollars to construct and connect to the grid. The cost problems they’re facing make offshore wind a dicey investment proposition today, with the potential for substantial write-downs ahead.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
Good old Dr Miner, weeping over the climate while flying around the world in fossil fuelled aircraft.

Dr. Miner has earned global recognition for her groundbreaking research, spanning from the Arctic to the summit of Everest – an expedition for which her team recently set a Guinness World Record.



Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
yes, but Oz will fall on it's sword and claim first dibs on the high throne of moral rectitude.

wait for the next election ... the public will probably revolt at the price they are being asked to pay.

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
I wish it was that easy. The incumbent party is pro solar/wind and antinuclear, and has only been in for 18 months. The opposition has mumbled about nuclear but is unlikley to get in in the next election.

One estimate for net zero was 9 trillion dollars. So in 12 years we'd need to spend 750 billion a year, about half our GDP.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
TugboatEng Yes - so true! "Renewable" is a misnomer. Energy must be extracted from the environment - not produced or "renewed". If the environment has no easily extracable energy, e.g. no wind, it is nighttime or has cloudy skies, then an alternate source must be used to allow work to be done or work has to be reduced. Another inconvenient truth: converting to environment extracted energy sources will necessitate reducing the work done by machines, thus reduce the work/productivity of the population. A compromise must be achieved. Certainly, we cannot polute the world to humankind extinction but we also cannot fool ourselves into believing world population energy needs/wants will ever reduce or be met by purely "renewable" sources.
 
why does an energy source need to be available 24hrs per day in order to qualify for the title "renewable" ? "Surely" solar (and wind and tidal) power is renewable when the next sun (wind or wave) arrives ? The energy is not renewable ... the source of the energy is. One dirty secret with "green" energy is the mess it takes to create the powerplant. What does it take to make a solar cell ? or an EV battery ??

But yes, if we are to forego our sources of power, who'll be in the 90% of the population that'll need to be "killed" off as food production decreases, as daily physical work increases. And as we circle back to a subsistence style of living, what about the medical care we'll surrender ?

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
"Renewable" isn't tied to 24 hour availability. Obviously the source is renewable but if it cannot supply when needed then it is not useful and either an alternate source must be used or the function/work has to be curtailed. Solar power is called "renewable" but obviously it does not work at night and it can be greatly reduced with cloud cover. Modern society is not timed by the daytime light cycle so cities demand energy at night as well as daytime. Transitioning to energy that is not available at night means choices will have to be made on the vibrancy and activity of major cities at night. The storage systems for many renewable energy systems are limited in capability and capacity. Modern society has been evolving into activity anytime in 24 hours - that concept may have to be adjusted based on energy.
 
I don't really worry about these hour by hour variations, our renewable grids have problems of the order of days/weeks/months, not hours. The optimum (cheapest) no fossil fuel wind/solar/battery mix for the UK needed 60 hours of storage, doubling the cost of the system, and incidentally making it more expensive than nuclear. Current grids avoid the huge cost of batteries by stressing the existing fossil fuel plants, that is not practical once the renewables form a large proportion of the grid.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
Here's why the frequently heard mantra "The wind is always blowing somewhere" is untrue. Even across the entire country of Australia, the same size as the 48 states, one anticyclone can sit on the continent for hours or even days

0323june2020synoptic_m1bq51.jpg

Since we haven't actually built turbines all over the joint the effect of a high over SE Australia is interesting. These can sit around for 3 days at a time.

062603windsouthausvic-1_uplbkn.jpg


062604synoptic26jun1600_qlqbqc.jpg


Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
"Transitioning to energy that is not available at night means choices will have to be made on the vibrancy and activity of major cities at night."

Yes Brian, they'll impose a curfew, or black-/brown-outs (if they terminology isn't considered offensive ... "racist" or colourist).

Anyone read 1984 ? ... feeling scared ??

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GregLocock
  • Locked
  • News
The wheels are falling off the Net Zero bandwagon
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
90
GregLocock
GregLocock
GregLocock
  • News
UK net zero electricity by 2030- easy to say before an election.
2
Replies
20
Views
45
GregLocock
GregLocock
GregLocock
  • Locked
  • News
Lemmings rush to EVs
Replies
2
Views
13
TugboatEng
TugboatEng
GregLocock
  • Locked
  • News
Some engineers look at the implications of net Zero for 2050 for the UK
Replies
15
Views
16
GregLocock
GregLocock
GregLocock
  • Locked
  • News
USA - Net zero by 2050 - a couple of reports from the grownups 1
Replies
4
Views
5
SnTMan
SnTMan
Back
Top