'Renewable Energy re-writes the Rules of Global Geopolitics'

[Martin Marprelate]

Interesting article from Forbes magazine:
https://www.hl.co.uk/news/2019/2/8/...s-as-influence-of-fossil-fuel-producers-falls

The West needs to keep China from taking over the DRC (Congo) since that is the main source of cobalt which is used in batteries.

 

[HankD]

Interesting article from Forbes magazine:
Forbes: Renewable energy rewrites rules of global geopolitics as influence of fossil fuel producers falls

The West needs to keep China from taking over the DRC (Congo) since that is the main source of cobalt which is used in batteries.

Having an engineering background I have always thought that we need a breakthrough in battery technology.
IOW eliminate the need or make a replacement for the cobalt requirement.

Not smart enough or sufficient funds myself to try it.

That would probably be better than a confrontation with China.

 

[church mouse guy]

The Forbes article is a puff piece. Solar panels are very expensive and not so durable. Wind turbines have proven to be a failure. Both items use up a lot of land and destroy a lot of animals. Sure solar should work well for rich Arabs who want to have mansions in the desert. People off the grid in Alaska have solar for the summer but it is a high price to pay for electricity. Electric cars are garbage. Some warehouses around here use electric forklifts to escape propane fumes but they use so much electricity that the costs are high but necessary because of ventilation problems. Warehouses that deal in large items in a dirty industrial manner still use a lot of propane.

There is nothing wrong with fossil fuels. Gas runs cars very well for over a century now. Europe made the mistake of going to diesel for passenger cars and they have smogged up their own nests and a few are admitting that gas would be better. Diesel still fuels large vehicles. Electric batteries could never fuel large vehicles or emergency vehicles.

Natural gas heats well here and is now cheaper than electricity even over long distances, a reversal of just a few years ago when heat pumps were the rage.

Ethanol exists in the USA due to federal subsidies. I have read that corn ethanol costs about ten dollars a gallon. Farmers are getting rich and the poor are struggling with high food prices as half of the corn crop is burnt at government expense due to the clout of large landowners. Brazil uses sugar cane for ethanol but they are tropical and able to use vast tracts of jungle to the cultivation of sugar cane. The greed of American farmers knows no limits. American farmers are not the salt of the earth as they have been under the thumb of Congress for 100 years and now they have turned the tables on the politicians.

The New World has vast supplies of coal. It is safer than nuclear, which does not have such a promising future in the USA. Another source of power would be to burn the memory of Malcom Forbes.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The Forbes article is a puff piece. Solar panels are very expensive and not so durable. Wind turbines have proven to be a failure

You are quite some way out of date. The price of solar panels has come down hugely and their efficiency has gone up. Wind turbines likewise have become far more efficient

The market for green energy is vast, especially in the developing world. My daughter is living in Xian, China, at present, and she tells me that when the wind doesn't blow, the pollution in the atmosphere is around 500 times the W.H.O. safety levels. I was in Delhi a couple of years ago and you could just about eat the air with a knife and fork! The U.K. and U.S.A. ought to be in the forefront of energy conservation and pollution reduction, because that is where the market is, and rightly so.

It's already cheaper to buy and run an all-electric car over four years than a petrol or diesel car in most of Europe because of subsidies, but the subsidies will not be needed by about 2025-2030 because the price of batteries will have come down so much. If you guys want to export any cars around the world, you'd better get with the beat.

 

[HankD]

You are quite some way out of date. The price of solar panels has come down hugely and their efficiency has gone up. Wind turbines likewise have become far more efficient

The market for green energy is vast, especially in the developing world. My daughter is living in Xian, China, at present, and she tells me that when the wind doesn't blow, the pollution in the atmosphere is around 500 times the W.H.O. safety levels. I was in Delhi a couple of years ago and you could just about eat the air with a knife and fork! The U.K. and U.S.A. ought to be in the forefront of energy conservation and pollution reduction, because that is where the market is, and rightly so.

It's already cheaper to buy and run an all-electric car over four years than a petrol or diesel car in most of Europe because of subsidies, but the subsidies will not be needed by about 2025-2030 because the price of batteries will have come down so much. If you guys want to export any cars around the world, you'd better get with the beat.

Agree. My days (1964,,,) at San Jose College engineering school have since changed remarkably.
Because of the pollution device laws one can see the valley hills now. That was a rare day in the 60's.

The burning of fossil fuel should cease - in a sane manner without a TKO to our present economy.

Any job loses will be more than replaced by the new (NOT THE "NEW GREEN DEAL") introduction of non fossil fuel energy technologies.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

You are quite some way out of date. The price of solar panels has come down hugely and their efficiency has gone up. Wind turbines likewise have become far more efficient

The market for green energy is vast, especially in the developing world. My daughter is living in Xian, China, at present, and she tells me that when the wind doesn't blow, the pollution in the atmosphere is around 500 times the W.H.O. safety levels. I was in Delhi a couple of years ago and you could just about eat the air with a knife and fork! The U.K. and U.S.A. ought to be in the forefront of energy conservation and pollution reduction, because that is where the market is, and rightly so.

Are you suggesting China and India will be world markets for environmental cleanup and clean energy, or are you just pointing out how obviously little they care about the environment and their people?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Are you suggesting China and India will be world markets for environmental cleanup and clean energy, or are you just pointing out how obviously little they care about the environment and their people?

India is a democracy, and the Government is being forced to take notice of its people who increasingly are objecting to being poisoned. The case of China is more complicated, but the Government is investing heavily in green technology. Apparently the Sun sometimes shines in Beijing these days. The question is whether the West is going to leave China and India to corner the market in green technology or get with the beat.

 

[David Kent]

Many houses in this are have sola panels on their roofs. The original ones heated hot water, newer products generate electricity. Some houses have both on their roof.

When we used to go camping, we had a solar water heater made of plastic. It was supposed to be used as a shower, but the water got far too hot for a shower, but was great for washing dishes.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Another interesting Article (from B.P.) here:
https://www.hl.co.uk/news/2019/2/15...l-be-worlds-main-power-source-by-2040-says-bp

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

India is a democracy, and the Government is being forced to take notice of its people who increasingly are objecting to being poisoned. The case of China is more complicated, but the Government is investing heavily in green technology. Apparently the Sun sometimes shines in Beijing these days. The question is whether the West is going to leave China and India to corner the market in green technology or get with the beat.

Doesn’t that rather ignore the real story? Don’t both India and China want to cheat by poisoning their own populace (and others') while producing said technology, etc., for sale elsewhere? Don’t they want the rest of the world to OK this via “carbon credits” that will otherwise hamper the attempts of other countries to compete in the world market?

Aren’t globalist companies fine with this sort of thing, because they don’t really care and will gladly build in China and India, thus hampering the ability of companies in the free world to compete? Aren’t Socialists in the free world fine with this sort of thing, because they don’t really care and will gladly undermine their own countries to become like China and India, rather than expend efforts to bring China and India up to current free world standards?

(And although they’re no Pakistan, isn’t India really much less than democratic both culturally and religiously?)

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Another interesting Article (from B.P.) here:
The Guardian: Renewable energy will be world's main power source by 2040, says BP

Surprisingly, while worded a bit cagily, even strangely, as well as a bit optimistically, your article nonetheless does have some realistic sense to it.

But the company [BP], as in previous editions of its report, does not see oil going away any time soon. The outlook’s core scenario envisages that oil demand does not peak until the 2030s, though under its greener scenario that milestone could be reached between now and the early 2020s.

Regardless, BP sees a “major role” for hydrocarbons until 2040, which it says will require substantial investment. It expects global demand for oil and gas to be 80-130 million barrels per day by then, up from around 100mb/d today.

The company has ambitious plans to grow its oil and gas production 16% by 2025, according to figures compiled by the Norway-based consultants Rystad Energy.

The report is gloomy on prospects for avoiding dangerous levels of global warming. The central scenario expects carbon emissions to grow 10% by 2040, as world energy demand grows by a third and fossil fuels continue to play a key role.​

 

[FollowTheWay]

Surprisingly, while worded a bit cagily, even strangely, as well as a bit optimistically, your article nonetheless does have some realistic sense to it.

But the company [BP], as in previous editions of its report, does not see oil going away any time soon. The outlook’s core scenario envisages that oil demand does not peak until the 2030s, though under its greener scenario that milestone could be reached between now and the early 2020s.

Regardless, BP sees a “major role” for hydrocarbons until 2040, which it says will require substantial investment. It expects global demand for oil and gas to be 80-130 million barrels per day by then, up from around 100mb/d today.

The company has ambitious plans to grow its oil and gas production 16% by 2025, according to figures compiled by the Norway-based consultants Rystad Energy.

The report is gloomy on prospects for avoiding dangerous levels of global warming. The central scenario expects carbon emissions to grow 10% by 2040, as world energy demand grows by a third and fossil fuels continue to play a key role.​

Separately on Thursday, a think tank said fossil fuel giants are still failing to incentivise their workforces to switch away from hydrocarbons.

A report by CarbonTracker found that 92% of 40 oil and gas firms rewarded greater fossil fuel production with more pay. BP is mulling a link between carbon emission cuts and executive remuneration.