Gas Prices Out of Control

[BennyV]

Battery storage is the biggest limiting factor for clean energy. The technology simply isn’t there yet.

Those windmills actually use oil in the turbines to keep them turning nicely. They are also not recyclable once they come to the end of their lifecycle.

The digger you deep, the more you realize as our current technology isn’t there yet, and the old ways are the same if not better.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

Yes, it absolutely is. Even more so when you remove the subsidies Big Oil gets, somewhere around 100 Billion a year -- mostly military costs for dealing with nasty people associated with the oil shipping. As exemplified in our recent adventures.

I think a lot of opposition to "clean energy" stems from the very name "clean energy," which is strongly linked to environmentalists which are overwhelmingly Democrats, and supporting anything that arose from those people is something to be avoided at all costs. But regardless of the reduced environmental costs of clean energy (and they are substantial), moving away from fossil fuels is overwhelmingly in the nation's best strategic interest. And will be mandatory at some point, anyway. This is a case where the Democronkies and the Tree Huggers got it mostly right.

In my mind my objection is based on this moronic all or nothing conversion plan that is being implemented. Our greatest strength is diversity in energy. People will adopt when and where it makes sense.

$6.49 diesel here in N. Cal today.

 

[Carl-NC]

Battery storage is the biggest limiting factor for clean energy. The technology simply isn’t there yet.

Those windmills actually use oil in the turbines to keep them turning nicely. They are also not recyclable once they come to the end of their lifecycle.

The digger you deep, the more you realize as our current technology isn’t there yet, and the old ways are the same if not better.

Of course the battery tech is "there," millions of EV cars just in the US are using it. On a large scale, batteries are probably not a good solution, and gravity reservoirs are being used instead. It's all working very well.

Yes, wind turbines use oil, but many oils (like what I use in my truck) are entirely synthetic. I don't know what that has to do with the viability of wind turbines. The blades are the only difficult part to recycle, and one method grinds up the fiberglass and mixes it with concrete for reinforcement. I once had a basement floor poured with fiber-reinforced concrete, no steel meshing required. Worked extremely well. But as I said before, even if you put all those blades in a landfill, wind power still beats fossil fuels.

Current tech is "there," already the better path, and getting better each year. Solar power just surpassed coal power in a single month, and wind power did the same about 3 years ago.

 

[Carl-NC]

In my mind my objection is based on this moronic all or nothing conversion plan that is being implemented. Our greatest strength is diversity in energy. People will adopt when and where it makes sense.

I agree, some of the mandates are misguided, like Washington state's law that will ban ICE passenger vehicles in just 8 more years. I'm sure it ain't gonna happen because it simply can't happen, not that fast. And solar & wind energy will still have gaps that need to be filled in the near term, likely with natural gas-fired plants. But none of this makes for a Good Reason to oppose clean energy; it's something we should all want to get to eventually, and sooner is better than later.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

I agree, some of the mandates are misguided, like Washington state's law that will ban ICE passenger vehicles in just 8 more years. I'm sure it ain't gonna happen because it simply can't happen, not that fast. And solar & wind energy will still have gaps that need to be filled in the near term, likely with natural gas-fired plants. But none of this makes for a Good Reason to oppose clean energy; it's something we should all want to get to eventually, and sooner is better than later.

How about banning all new small engines? Thats a crazy California law. Even applies to generators! Craziness.

 

[newnan man]

Windmills are made from both domestic and imported components, like lots of other things. Sure, I'd love for them to be 100% on-shored. But here's the funny bit: even if a windmill (or a solar panel) is made 100% in a Chinese factory using 100% coal power, the emissions and cost break-even points are still very fast. They still win.

The point is we can't cherry pick what we get from China because we want one thing but boycott another. Solar is not a win, just alternative energy that is ugly, kills birds, relies heavily on fossil fuels for manufacture, installation, maintenance & has a relatively short life in the field. If you want me to boycott Walmart because they sell Chinese goods, praising their wind turbines is disingenuous. When traveling through the rural countryside and encountering vast fields of ugly wind turbines the word "win" doesn't come to my mind.

 

[Tpmetal]

Windmills are made from both domestic and imported components, like lots of other things. Sure, I'd love for them to be 100% on-shored. But here's the funny bit: even if a windmill (or a solar panel) is made 100% in a Chinese factory using 100% coal power, the emissions and cost break-even points are still very fast. They still win.

I would love to see what numbers you are talking about with wind mills. Every breakdown I see that claims this conveniently leaves out certian parts of production and installation, repairs and maintenance of the windmills and their grid, or fudge the numbers of what they actually produce assuming absolutely ideal weather conditions. Others in the past claimed longer lifespans of 20 to 30 years, and we have found that's not true after having some of them around failing structurally in as little as 10 years due to vibrations and other factors.
Also your fear over the waste from nuclear is no longer a problem. They have reactors that utilize the waste from the primary reactors as a energy source now, leaving essentially harmless waste in terms of radiation afterwards. The only real problem now with nuclear is making sure its overseen and no corners are cut on maintenance, as well as proper planning on locations to leave the least amount of impact should something go wrong.

 

[doverturtle]

Taxpayer subsidies should be eliminated for all sources of energy. Let the free-market sort it out.

Spoiler alert: Renewable energy would decimate energy produced by fossil fuels if this were done.

 

[Carl-NC]

The point is we can't cherry pick what we get from China because we want one thing but boycott another.

My point was that opposing clean energy because some of it is made in China in factories powered by coal power is disingenuous because it ignores the vast amount of other stuff we gladly buy from China, made in factories powered by coal power. But, yes, we can and should cherry-pick what we buy from China. That was another point I brought up: critical tech should be re-onshored to the US. A majority of chips made for every product you can think of are currently produced by TSMC in Taiwan. What would happen if all those chips were suddenly unavailable? I know, Taiwan isn't China, but tell that to China. If China decided to invade (and about right now would be the ideal time), we would suddenly be cut off from chips, plus most every other electronic component (resistors, capacitors, etc) which are practically all made in China. I think most people don't realize what a bind we've put ourselves in. If you think the Iran invasion caused a global oil problem, you ain't seen nothing yet.

When traveling through the rural countryside and encountering vast fields of ugly wind turbines the word "win" doesn't come to my mind.

Which of the following do you consider attractive:

• Vast fields of oil donkeys in Texas and Oklahoma
• Oil derricks in the Gulf of Mexico
• Coal strip mines in West Virginia
• Oil refineries sprinkled everywhere
• Oil spills
• City smog

Again (and again), there is no perfect solution. Every method of producing energy has downsides. But hydro, solar, and wind currently have the overall lowest environmental impact. Coal is the worst, oil is second worst.

 

[Carl-NC]

I would love to see what numbers you are talking about with wind mills. Every breakdown I see that claims this conveniently leaves out certian parts of production and installation, repairs and maintenance of the windmills and their grid, or fudge the numbers of what they actually produce assuming absolutely ideal weather conditions. Others in the past claimed longer lifespans of 20 to 30 years, and we have found that's not true after having some of them around failing structurally in as little as 10 years due to vibrations and other factors.

No, the sources I've read over the years have made it crystal clear that, with 100% of the life-cycle costs accounted for, solar and wind are easy picks. This was not the case early on, where the only way to make them successful was with heavy government subsidies. But more and more infrastructure is now being built with zero subsidies, because it's now very profitable.

Wind turbines last about 20 years, solar cells about 25 years. There have been cases where turbines failed because they were placed in highly turbulent locations, but overall the 20-year lifespan has been holding up.

Also your fear over the waste from nuclear is no longer a problem. They have reactors that utilize the waste from the primary reactors as a energy source now, leaving essentially harmless waste in terms of radiation afterwards. The only real problem now with nuclear is making sure its overseen and no corners are cut on maintenance, as well as proper planning on locations to leave the least amount of impact should something go wrong.

Agreed. New reactor tech is both safer and produces less (but not zero) nasty stuff. Building new reactors becomes a political NIMBY challenge.

 

[russau]

My point was that opposing clean energy because some of it is made in China in factories powered by coal power is disingenuous because it ignores the vast amount of other stuff we gladly buy from China, made in factories powered by coal power. But, yes, we can and should cherry-pick what we buy from China. That was another point I brought up: critical tech should be re-onshored to the US. A majority of chips made for every product you can think of are currently produced by TSMC in Taiwan. What would happen if all those chips were suddenly unavailable? I know, Taiwan isn't China, but tell that to China. If China decided to invade (and about right now would be the ideal time), we would suddenly be cut off from chips, plus most every other electronic component (resistors, capacitors, etc) which are practically all made in China. I think most people don't realize what a bind we've put ourselves in. If you think the Iran invasion caused a global oil problem, you ain't seen nothing yet.


Which of the following do you consider attractive:

• Vast fields of oil donkeys in Texas and Oklahoma
• Oil derricks in the Gulf of Mexico
• Coal strip mines in West Virginia
• Oil refineries sprinkled everywhere
• Oil spills
• City smog

Again (and again), there is no perfect solution. Every method of producing energy has downsides. But hydro, solar, and wind currently have the overall lowest environmental impact. Coal is the worst, oil is second worst.

Carl all 6 of your following points have the smell of BIG money ! Yes I know they big polutors and the problem with the air we breath BUT we are the cleanest Country's enviromentaly , WAY better then the second place country in the WORLD ! So where do we turn from here ??

 

[Tpmetal]

No, the sources I've read over the years have made it crystal clear that, with 100% of the life-cycle costs accounted for, solar and wind are easy picks. This was not the case early on, where the only way to make them successful was with heavy government subsidies. But more and more infrastructure is now being built with zero subsidies, because it's now very profitable.

Wind turbines last about 20 years, solar cells about 25 years. There have been cases where turbines failed because they were placed in highly turbulent locations, but overall the 20-year lifespan has been holding up.


Agreed. New reactor tech is both safer and produces less (but not zero) nasty stuff. Building new reactors becomes a political NIMBY challenge.

I live in western ny....the turbines here have not been lasting 20 years. And we live in a favorable area in terms of turbulence. Most of them remain idle more than they spin and never produce even close to what was projected. A huge number of them have already been torn down and replaced. I often drive past the yard where they were storing the torn down ones before they got shipped off to wherever they were disposing of them. That yard was consistently full. Again you got any sources for your numbers?
I agree with the politics on nuclear, it's hard to convince anyone. As well as others with conflicting interests who lobby against it.

 

[newnan man]

Im not beating the drum for fossil fuels. What we are conviently forgetting is everything we enjoy as a society here and in all developed countries is from the impact fossil fuels has had on where we currently stand & how we live today. Manufacturing , transportation, shipping, farming, home heat, cooking, cooling, lighting, cars. Northern cities in the winter would have been uninhabitable and our prestigious universities would not exist in the northern climates. Look around you now, how many items are you currently using & wearing that are made from petroleum? The US dollar is the world's currency because of petroleum (petro dollar). What happens to the dollar if petroleum is no longer needed? The "alternative energy" that we see being promoted today is never going to replace fossil fuels. Is solar or wind going to fuel a semi truck? Look at the incredibly enormous business that has developed around oil. Do you think these companies are just going to say, hey this solar & wind shit looks good, let's wrap it up and go home? Oil industry jobs? What about poor Mr. Tesla? He had developed a device that would grab power from the environment, free to all. Research what happened to him. Big, TRILLIONS big, money is behind oil and with that power. It will never go away until an "alternative energy" is developed that the billionaires can charge you for. We have all benefited from oil but it is time for it to bow out and let a better, cleaner alternative energy take its place. Solar, wind, they're pissing in a hurricane. Nuclear power is most likely the best candidate, see above statement about the power of the oil industry.

 

[russau]

Well the fuel prices are going down slowly BUT I limit or share trips to help this ole bird conserve $$ !

 

[jeff of pa]

Sunday it was still $3.999 here in town

The Cheapest Station here, Before The War was around $2.999
I Had to use Store Discounts To get Lower.
We are Always Robbed at The Pumps

I'm Expecting another Increase By the Time I need a Fill Up

 

[3cylbill]

Still $4.59 in the boonies of NY state

 

[pepperj]

I agree, some of the mandates are misguided, like Washington state's law that will ban ICE passenger vehicles in just 8 more years. I'm sure it ain't gonna happen because it simply can't happen, not that fast. And solar & wind energy will still have gaps that need to be filled in the near term, likely with natural gas-fired plants. But none of this makes for a Good Reason to oppose clean energy; it's something we should all want to get to eventually, and sooner is better than later.

2030 was the greatest pike of Bull floppers ever piled on the masses.
Companies lined up grabbing the $Billions in Government subsidies and incentives.
Now the company's are dropping off the table left and right because the buy EV push isn't going well.
The harder it crammed down the faster it's purged. Just got the certification done on a 2008 B4000 pickup. It has 68,000 miles on the clock.
Should last me for many years.
Gas is $3.74
I

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

This morning, Gas Buddy app.. $3.35 is SAMS....

 

[BennyV]

Of course the battery tech is "there," millions of EV cars just in the US are using it. On a large scale, batteries are probably not a good solution, and gravity reservoirs are being used instead. It's all working very well.

Yes, wind turbines use oil, but many oils (like what I use in my truck) are entirely synthetic. I don't know what that has to do with the viability of wind turbines. The blades are the only difficult part to recycle, and one method grinds up the fiberglass and mixes it with concrete for reinforcement. I once had a basement floor poured with fiber-reinforced concrete, no steel meshing required. Worked extremely well. But as I said before, even if you put all those blades in a landfill, wind power still beats fossil fuels.

Current tech is "there," already the better path, and getting better each year. Solar power just surpassed coal power in a single month, and wind power did the same about 3 years ago.

Battery storage is not where it needs to be. The grid would never support the demand either if everyone switched to an electric car.

If it was the better path energy prices would be coming down. That’s obviously not the case, but hey how else are the states going to afford all those windmills and solar panels. The green new steal.

Nuclear is the only, truly clean & viable energy we have available. Unfortunately the left made it so hard to get a plant online that it is almost totally impossible due to over-regulation.

 

[doverturtle]

Battery storage is not where it needs to be. The grid would never support the demand either if everyone switched to an electric car.

If it was the better path energy prices would be coming down. That’s obviously not the case, but hey how else are the states going to afford all those windmills and solar panels. The green new steal.

Nuclear is the only, truly clean & viable energy we have available. Unfortunately the left made it so hard to get a plant online that it is almost totally impossible due to over-regulation.

Nuclear would be unaffordable without the massive subsidies to that industry. Fusion would be the best, but it always seems to be several decades away from primetime. Next best would be an orbiting station that collects solar energy and beams it to earth for use in the electric grid.