Biden to cancel Keystone XL pipeline permit.

[phylodog]

I guess the pollution being made elsewhere is out of sight out of mind

It's not about what is right, it's about feelings. Germany can say they aren't burning coal so they get to feel all good about themselves.

Gosh, hypocrisy rears it's head yet again in a discussion involving lefties. Shocking

 

[INgunowner]

600 amps of 480V AC three phase

That
is
adorable.

(I agree with you point completely. Panel A on Production side is currently reading 1185)

 

[Lushamania]

Crude is typically transported by four means: truck, rail, ship, and pipe. I fail to see how shutting down the pipeline can be justified while pretending that the other means of transportation are any less dangerous. It is just an exercise in political virtue signaling to uninformed individuals.

From my vantage point, it's been about how the Keystoke XL pipeline has been ignorant of its environmental impact on freshwater since the inception. Of the 4 transportation methods you've listed, I'd argue ship and pipe (I'm going to include oil rigs under "pipes) have the biggest potential for negative environmental impact, to all life, not just humans, simply because of the quantity transported at any given time.

Factor in water and the impact increases exponentially. Cleanup, as we know, becomes far more difficult in water. And that's not to speak of the dependency of water and the things therein.

Why?
Why must we go down a very expensive road that leads to no where?

My honest answer? One word:

Capitalism.

Renewables have their place.
But to dream that they can replace traditional power plants is crazy talk to anyone who works with industrial power.

I am sitting in a building at work, I am currently pulling 600 amps of 480V AC three phase on a cloudy winter day.
Try to make that much energy with solar.....

I hope we can get there one day and I don't think that's so wrong.

You know more about this than I do, but aren't hydro-electric plants capable of addressing the industrial power load you speak of, too? I don't know the number, but I could swear I've read of a hydro-electric dam or 2 in Indiana. Wouldn't adding in wind and solar as supplemental help even more, if that were the case?

Especially in Indiana... In January.

Well, hopefully @woowoo2 or someone else could shed some light (sorry, puns!) on my question above.

I'm quite familiar with that wind farm, I live maybe 10 minutes away. Do you know what the lifespan of one of those is? About 20 years, the blades aren't recyclable they have to go into a landfill. A good bit of the rest is, but virtually none of it can be reused, so they have to start from scratch including the giant cement pad they sit on. They are currently having a problem with that in Europe.

Interesting. I've seen them being transported on I-65 and I-80/94, but I've never been close enough to see what they're made of.

Per your link we are expected to have about 5.4 gigawatts by 2024 in storage capacity. The average wind turbine in the US running at 33% capacity produces about 400k kwh per month. So it's estimated we'll have enough storage capacity by 2024 to hold about months worth of output for 13.5 wind turbines. Or enough to power about 186k average homes for a day.

Producing that storage is extremely bad for the environment and the planet.

You want to promote clean energy? Promote nuclear, it's about the only way to go.

How many homes can an average wind turbine power? | U.S. Geological Survey

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the average U.S. home uses 893 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity per month. Per the U.S. Wind Turbine Database, the mean capacity of wind turbines that achieved commercial operations in 2020 is 2.75 megawatts (MW). At a 42% capacity...

www.usgs.gov

This thread is moving fast, so you may have missed it, but I am for nuclear energy. I think that ship is sailing for the United States, though.

You made a comment upthread about turning in your prius for a 1970s car so similar. From a strictly energy and environmental view, that would be a good trade. Actually it would be a tremendous one. An electric vehicle is much more destructive environmentally and energy wise than the average dinosaur burner when factoring in lifespan and energy/materials used to produce each.

I don't think I've directly offered my commentary on this, but you are correct. The environmental impact for producing an energy vehicle is greater than producing a gasoline equivalent. Electric-vehicles are going to become the norm, though, and as the focus on renewable energy sources shifts, then the industry will too.

I found this Business Insider article to be a great read. I've picked a couple things in that article pertaining to our discussion, but there's a lot more fascinating information to the steps manufacturers are taking to lower the environmental impact

"The CO2 emissions from making a battery are higher than what you save from not making the engine and transmission," David Reichmuth, a senior engineer in the clean-vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told Business Insider.

Volkswagen, which has perhaps the most ambitious electric-vehicle investment plans of any major automaker over the next decade, said that part of its agreement with LG Chem, one of its battery suppliers, requires the chemical company to use only environmentally friendly sources of electricity. And Tesla intends for its battery factory in Nevada to one day run entirely on renewable energy.


Tesla and BMW are also engaging in battery-recycling programs, which the ICCT cites as another way to reduce the emissions from battery manufacturing. Overall, decarbonizing electric grids, recycling batteries, and increasing battery-energy density could decrease the emissions produced by battery manufacturing by up to 49%, the ICCT estimates.

Solar. What a total joke for Indiana.

As the lefty's out themselves I feel less inclined to think we are a 2-A forum anymore.

How a person looks at the world makes me no never mind but if you come into a gun forum and act like you care.........

And a 70 year old man is not going to sell his truck. Of course I us it. Why would I have it. Again.....the lefty mindset.

If you want to roll in a battery powered car so be it. "DO NOT TELL ME HOW I SHOULD USE MY TRUCK". I came into this with gasoline and I will go out with it.

Just dont do it.

I've tried to be patient and take all the insults on the chin, but I will not apologize for your falsified black-and-white worldview being challenged.

 

[Jaybird1980]

I'm quite familiar with that wind farm, I live maybe 10 minutes away. Do you know what the lifespan of one of those is? About 20 years, the blades aren't recyclable they have to go into a landfill. A good bit of the rest is, but virtually none of it can be reused, so they have to start from scratch including the giant cement pad they sit on. They are currently having a problem with that in Europe.


Per your link we are expected to have about 5.4 gigawatts by 2024 in storage capacity. The average wind turbine in the US running at 33% capacity produces about 400k kwh per month. So it's estimated we'll have enough storage capacity by 2024 to hold about months worth of output for 13.5 wind turbines. Or enough to power about 186k average homes for a day.

Producing that storage is extremely bad for the environment and the planet.

You want to promote clean energy? Promote nuclear, it's about the only way to go.

How many homes can an average wind turbine power? | U.S. Geological Survey

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the average U.S. home uses 893 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity per month. Per the U.S. Wind Turbine Database, the mean capacity of wind turbines that achieved commercial operations in 2020 is 2.75 megawatts (MW). At a 42% capacity...

www.usgs.gov

Also Hydroelectric, but again environmentalist. Doesn't matter people love to learn the hard way, instead of paying attention to things around them. As @BugI02 pointed out, there are already examples, people only need to admit it to themselves instead of the "I have to prove them wrong" mentality

 

[churchmouse]

Yeah, the NiMH battery in my Prius is less than ideal, if I've not made it clear on my personal viewpoint there. And I am super concerned about the world's increasing demand of Lithium.

I don't understand your part about making us vulnerable, though. Would you mind expanding upon that, please?

I am happy to at least see us be on common ground, regarding renewable resources being needed.

I'm not proclaiming to be an oracle and never have been; I'm simply backing up what I say with a relevant news article. Might I also add, while not being dismissive, flippant, or insulting.

No you are not being flippant or insulting. But you are singing "AT" the choir.
There are some very smart folks in this forum and we are all pretty well versed in many things. And many are pretty much set in our ways.


Edit....OK so somehow my 2 posts were blended and make not a lot of sense. Been having issues all day with the new format.

This is America. We built this place. We have enough fuel/oil/nat gas to run us out the back door as other forms of transport get developed. And I realize this will be the future. And i willBut stuff the tax's they intend to put on me because I have to have a truck.

From my vantage point, it's been about how the Keystoke XL pipeline has been ignorant of its environmental impact on freshwater since the inception. Of the 4 transportation methods you've listed, I'd argue ship and pipe (I'm going to include oil rigs under "pipes) have the biggest potential for negative environmental impact, to all life, not just humans, simply because of the quantity transported at any given time.

Factor in water and the impact increases exponentially. Cleanup, as we know, becomes far more difficult in water. And that's not to speak of the dependency of water and the things therein.


My honest answer? One word:

Capitalism.


I hope we can get there one day and I don't think that's so wrong.

You know more about this than I do, but aren't hydro-electric plants capable of addressing the industrial power load you speak of, too? I don't know the number, but I could swear I've read of a hydro-electric dam or 2 in Indiana. Wouldn't adding in wind and solar as supplemental help even more, if that were the case?


Well, hopefully @woowoo2 or someone else could shed some light (sorry, puns!) on my question above.


Interesting. I've seen them being transported on I-65 and I-80/94, but I've never been close enough to see what they're made of.

Per your link we are expected to have about 5.4 gigawatts by 2024 in storage capacity. The average wind turbine in the US running at 33% capacity produces about 400k kwh per month. So it's estimated we'll have enough storage capacity by 2024 to hold about months worth of output for 13.5 wind turbines. Or enough to power about 186k average homes for a day.

Producing that storage is extremely bad for the environment and the planet.


This thread is moving fast, so you may have missed it, but I am for nuclear energy. I think that ship is sailing for the United States, though.


I don't think I've directly offered my commentary on this, but you are correct. The environmental impact for producing an energy vehicle is greater than producing a gasoline equivalent. Electric-vehicles are going to become the norm, though, and as the focus on renewable energy sources shifts, then the industry will too.

I found this Business Insider article to be a great read. I've picked a couple things in that article pertaining to our discussion, but there's a lot more fascinating information to the steps manufacturers are taking to lower the environmental impact

I've tried to be patient and take all the insults on the chin, but I will not apologize for your falsified black-and-white worldview being challenged.

Listen to me please. I know people that work in the field. One of the largest installers in the state at one time so I know exactly what I am speaking of.
In the dead of summer yes. You will make some power. Is it economically made after you pay fror4 the system and maintain it. What it the actual time frame from install.....payment....throwing the switch and breaking even. Forget making any money or living free of the grid I am talking payback.
There are "HUGE" solar fields around the airport and the Indy 500. Look outside and you tell me how much power is being or has been actually put in the battery's in the last cloudy week. And how much of our money (Gov. subsidies) went towards those fields. More than you know my friend. Far more than you know
I maintained a back up system for a Sprint site that was solar and diesel. In the words of those who payed for the system the solar was a joke.
The fields at the airport were insanely expensive to put in place and to maintain. I have 2 long time friends that are associated at the tower and we often have a good laugh about the place "Growing" power. Again huge fed subsidies. Just like everything else wind and solar. It is a joke as it stands now. We are miles from being free of coal power.

So stuff your meme.

 

[d.kaufman]

We may all know about the wind farm north of Lafayette. Yes, the area it takes up is huge, but that land still holds its farmland use, too. As more and more renewable energy generating sources are put into the grid, normalization will occur and will fill the void that non-renewable energy plants leave.

Curious what your thoughts are on this

Wind Turbine Blades Can’t Be Recycled, So They’re Piling Up in Landfills

Companies are searching for ways to deal with the tens of thousands of blades that have reached the end of their lives.

www.bloomberg.com

 

[Jaybird1980]

You know more about this than I do, but aren't hydro-electric plants capable of addressing the industrial power load you speak of, too? I don't know the number, but I could swear I've read of a hydro-electric dam or 2 in Indiana. Wouldn't adding in wind and solar as supplemental help even more, if that were the case?


Well, hopefully @woowoo2 or someone else could shed some light (sorry, puns!) on my question above.

There will never be another river Dammed in this country, not in my lifetime at least.
Also the industrialization would have to be in the vicinity of the production

 

[churchmouse]

That
is
adorable.

(I agree with you point completely. Panel A on Production side is currently reading 1185)

Yup. The ammonia screws we worked on for refrigeration had 1100 and they converted to DC for soft start in the magic panel. Man those things would grown when we brought up 1000 HP........

Exactly how that worked I can not say. Not my side of the work.

 

[printcraft]

From my vantage point, it's been about how the Keystoke XL pipeline has been ignorant of its environmental impact on freshwater since the inception. Of the 4 transportation methods you've listed, I'd argue ship and pipe (I'm going to include oil rigs under "pipes) have the biggest potential for negative environmental impact, to all life, not just humans, simply because of the quantity transported at any given time.

Factor in water and the impact increases exponentially. Cleanup, as we know, becomes far more difficult in water. And that's not to speak of the dependency of water and the things therein.

Shot:

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, 1.3 million gallons (4.9 million liters) of petroleum are spilled into U.S. waters from vessels and pipelines in a typical year.

Chaser:

Natural oil seeps: These seeps contribute about 5 million gallons of oil to the ocean annually, with wide year to year variation. They likely have been leaking for thousands of years. Although their rate of release may vary over time, the locations of seeps are consistent and predictable.

Mother nature is a nasty polluting beotch, we should cancel her for the good of the planet.

 

[INgunowner]

I've tried to take all the insults, but I will not apologize.

Your emotions are unprofitable.
Your apologizes are unnecessary.

Our current industrial infrastructure has been built over the course of 200yrs.
Currently process innovation has stalled due to multiple factors.
Your cries for meaningful change will be met with opposition from those who understand the obstacles we face.

Unfortunately, those ignorant of the interconnected challenges we must overcome to "Save the planet" will continue to affect little positive change and possibly destroy us in the process.

We all share the same dream.
You simply find yourself in conflict with those who understand that only the living get to dream.

 

[BugI02]

You can bet your ass the dems will do everything in their power to make sure we cease being a net producer.

Yep, happened for the first time in 75 years under Trump. Let me guess, that was just the result of Obama's time in office that took awhile to reach fruition?

The most effective way to reduce demand is to increase prices. So if your goal is to reduce CO2 regardless of other factors, reducing supply will give them no choice but to use less

I'm not sure he has adequately considered what part of the socio-economic spectrum gets hurt the most in such changes. The part of that spectrum that doesn't work from home and can only afford to drive older, less efficient vehicles will be hurt the most by gas price increases. The part that can't afford to retrofit with improved insulation or supplement with solar will be hurt most by increased NG prices

I guess that from his viewpoint, you take enough from more productive people to subsidize those who can't keep up, but not only does that not decrease their energy usage but that capital is extracted from creating more wealth in the economy and puts a damper on production and investment. It is a graveyard spiral

 

[BugI02]

I've got no issue with them flooding the market, more supply is typically a good thing for consumers, at least when free markets are allowed to exist. The more we produce on our own the less we have to pay for oil produced elsewhere.

A great deal of our production is not viable below about $30/barrel. As far as the health of a domestic production industry is concerned, prices can be too low

Then, if a marketer like Saudi Arabia can destroy a domestic production capability by forcing prices low, it can recoup the lost income by driving prices much higher subsequently. Been there, done that, don't want to ride that ride again

 

[BugI02]

The difference is renewable is not 24-7 producer. And storage capabilities dont exist. If you're ready to tailor your usage to that of your output, but that's not how the world runs.
How much coal is used in the production of one windmill? How much fuel does it take to transport and erect 1 windmill, try that with your prius.
maybe do some research into battery technology and the damage it does to the earth, your prius doesn't even come close to cancelling that out

Beyond that, he should consider how much of what he buys for everyday needs arrives at the grocery store or Amazon warehouse via truck. Then think about how many non-experimental, viable electric over the road trucks are available right now (hint: none)

Then two further thoughts should occur.
1) A rise in oil prices will trigger a rise in the price of just about everything. Especially, with the economy in such a weakened state, providers will have reduced ability to absorb cost increases

2) In the event higher oil prices 'fueled' a move to electric trucking, what will the competing demand for the raw materials for batteries do to the cost of your next electric vehicle and any infrastructure to support it

 

[Chewie]

Solar. What a total joke for Indiana.

As the lefty's out themselves I feel less inclined to think we are a 2-A forum anymore.

How a person looks at the world makes me no never mind but if you come into a gun forum and act like you care.........

And a 70 year old man is not going to sell his truck. Of course I us it. Why would I have it. Again.....the lefty mindset.

If you want to roll in a battery powered car so be it. "DO NOT TELL ME HOW I SHOULD USE MY TRUCK". I came into this with gasoline and I will go out with it.

Just dont do it.

I'm only 67 but my truck stays! When I have to commute to work, its 100 miles round trip. No electric for me and I can't afford to move to within 15 minutes of work (at my age that's not very far).

 

[BIGE7.62]

Ooooh, little tanks. 36 in my f150. If you thought 24 hurt try 36 at least once a week just to commute back and forth to work.

34 gal in my Chevy 2500 hd . When I'm busy I fill it up 3-4 times a week .

 

[Chewie]

From my vantage point, it's been about how the Keystoke XL pipeline has been ignorant of its environmental impact on freshwater since the inception. Of the 4 transportation methods you've listed, I'd argue ship and pipe (I'm going to include oil rigs under "pipes) have the biggest potential for negative environmental impact, to all life, not just humans, simply because of the quantity transported at any given time.

Factor in water and the impact increases exponentially. Cleanup, as we know, becomes far more difficult in water. And that's not to speak of the dependency of water and the things therein.


My honest answer? One word:

Capitalism.


I hope we can get there one day and I don't think that's so wrong.

You know more about this than I do, but aren't hydro-electric plants capable of addressing the industrial power load you speak of, too? I don't know the number, but I could swear I've read of a hydro-electric dam or 2 in Indiana. Wouldn't adding in wind and solar as supplemental help even more, if that were the case?


Well, hopefully @woowoo2 or someone else could shed some light (sorry, puns!) on my question above.


Interesting. I've seen them being transported on I-65 and I-80/94, but I've never been close enough to see what they're made of.

Per your link we are expected to have about 5.4 gigawatts by 2024 in storage capacity. The average wind turbine in the US running at 33% capacity produces about 400k kwh per month. So it's estimated we'll have enough storage capacity by 2024 to hold about months worth of output for 13.5 wind turbines. Or enough to power about 186k average homes for a day.

Producing that storage is extremely bad for the environment and the planet.


This thread is moving fast, so you may have missed it, but I am for nuclear energy. I think that ship is sailing for the United States, though.


I don't think I've directly offered my commentary on this, but you are correct. The environmental impact for producing an energy vehicle is greater than producing a gasoline equivalent. Electric-vehicles are going to become the norm, though, and as the focus on renewable energy sources shifts, then the industry will too.

I found this Business Insider article to be a great read. I've picked a couple things in that article pertaining to our discussion, but there's a lot more fascinating information to the steps manufacturers are taking to lower the environmental impact

I've tried to be patient and take all the insults on the chin, but I will not apologize for your falsified black-and-white worldview being challenged.

If you are trying to become a comedian please pursue another line of work. You are expressing your opinion and others here are rejecting it. It's called the real world, only in utopia do you not have to deal with it (that is my opinion).

 

[INgunowner]

Increased NG prices.

Those price spikes get passed directly on to the consumer,
Which affects the profitablity and growth of domestic production in all sectors. Food, material, transport...

Energy prices directly affect society from the bottom up.
Demanding change harms people.
Engineering sustainable solutions takes time and ultimately makes us safer.

Patience.

 

[Chewie]

34 gal in my Chevy 2500 hd . When I'm busy I fill it up 3-4 times a week .

Ok, you got me beat! Ouch!

 

[BugI02]

We have to start somewhere.

The endgame is to be carbon neutral and to minimize our impact on the earth and its finite resources. Are you saying we shouldn't even try at all? Should we just continue to be wholly dependent upon fossil fuels? Throw our hands up in the air, buy cars manufactured before 1975, rip out their catalytic converters, then do laps around the country?

Might I suggest you start with the Chinese and see how that goes? They produce almost as much CO2 all by themselves as the rest of the industrialized world put together, and incremental gains by a large producer will have a greater effect

Have the Chinese DONE anything besides promise to improve? Are they using those solar panels or do they just want to sell them to us? Which countries are holding the line or reducing their CO2 production levels already

All this without even making the case that 'climate change' is even preventable or that the US going to net zero will have much of an effect or that that effect will be worth the cost

 

[BugI02]

Storage capabilities exist and will continue to improve. We are still very much in the infancy of renewable energy as a globally adopted energy source.


The storage capabilities are nowhere close to what is needed to replace fossil fuels, the other part is mining for components used in batteries are very destructive. People are not being honest about the technology we have at hand. I agree Renewable resource are needed, but the technology is not there Jumping on the bandwagon early does nothing but make is vulnerable.

i have no idea how i screwed up that quote so bad, also don't know how to fix it

But ... but ... you're supposed to jump off the cliff and build your wings on the way down!