Non-Green Energy: Oil and Gas

[sunday]

14 hours ago, lucklucky said:

Like i said and you also just said it is not a source. It is in fact a dematerialization of sources. It can be many.

That is a redundancy and security advantage. You can source electricity from wind to gas, to coal, to nukes, hydroeletric etc.

Only if you are willing to build a number of new power plants, and some have to be non-intermittent, i.e. conventional.

Edited June 15, 2024 by sunday
build, not buy

[lucklucky]

Yes, the issue already existed with hydro Vs coal, gas. Perhaps not so acute.

[Ssnake]

16 hours ago, lucklucky said:

If tomorrow nuke fusion or any other new tech is practical all people with electric devices not only vehicles, machinery etc. will smile.

Yeah, but we both know that this won't happen. Maybe in 40 years, like sixty years ago.

[JWB]

2 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

Yeah, but we both know that this won't happen. Maybe in 40 years, like sixty years ago.

Fusion has been just 20 years away for the last half century.

[Ssnake]

38 minutes ago, JWB said:

Fusion has been just 20 years away for the last half century.

I'm somewhat more upbeat. 60 years ago the estimation was that it'd take 40 more years. These days fusion propagandists seem to think that it's 30 years ahead. So I quickly drew a diagram to see where the two lines might converge, and they seem to meet around Christmas 2128.

[JWB]

8 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

............. Christmas 2128.

[urbanoid]

45 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

I'm somewhat more upbeat. 60 years ago the estimation was that it'd take 40 more years. These days fusion propagandists seem to think that it's 30 years ahead. So I quickly drew a diagram to see where the two lines might converge, and they seem to meet around Christmas 2128.

We should organize an I&I at that date to celebrate the great breakthrough.

[rmgill]

17 hours ago, lucklucky said:

Like i said and you also just said it is not a source. It is in fact a dematerialization of sources. It can be many.

That is a redundancy and security advantage. You can source electricity from wind to gas, to coal, to nukes, hydroeletric etc.

Its redundant only if you have something larger than N to effect supply. Daytime sources of electricity are not an addition to the N value. They are never an on demand source. 

Noone puts in Solar or wind as a backup source of power. The put in some some form of generator, usually diesel. 

N is the value needed for routine operations. 
N+1 is the value of N above plus one added source allowing one of the sources to fail without loss of normal operation.

2 N is the value needed for twice the capacity.

 

With wind and solar, you have to put in N+1 and double th cost of N at least to account for the wind and solar costs.

 

 

ALSO, can you explain what dematerialization of sources means? 

[rmgill]

4 hours ago, lucklucky said:

Yes, the issue already existed with hydro Vs coal, gas. Perhaps not so acute.

Substantially less acute. So much so, that coal, hydro, gas and nuke are in effect on demand. Solar and wind are entirely subject to the whims of mother nature. 

[rmgill]

I object to the boutique sources of luxury energy that cost 2-3 times the cost of conventional sources and have none of the reliability or operational flexibility. 

[lucklucky]

1 hour ago, rmgill said:

Substantially less acute. So much so, that coal, hydro, gas and nuke are in effect on demand. Solar and wind are entirely subject to the whims of mother nature. 

Well in winter we can run hydro up 70% or more, in summer the rivers are down the electrical production is much less. 

Dematerialization:

If means your electric car to move is not dependent on only one energy source(material). 

 

 

4 hours ago, Ssnake said:

eah, but we both know that this won't happen. Maybe in 40 years, like sixty years ago.

Yeah like peak oil...

Just making the point that any new technological development or new energy source that appears  it will have a big chance make those on electricity happy.  

Edited June 15, 2024 by lucklucky

[lucklucky]

https://www.newswire.com/news/infinity-power-unveils-highest-efficiency-atomic-battery-22333402

 

Quote

incredibly efficient

puts me already in back foot but here is one tech...

Edited June 15, 2024 by lucklucky

[Ssnake]

What?!

[Ssnake]

You're suggesting that cars be powered by this?

"It is incredible that this tiny coin-cell-style device can generate tens of milliwatts of power"

[Stuart Galbraith]

There has only ever been one choice.

[Josh]

On 6/13/2024 at 6:52 PM, Ivanhoe said:

The globalists failed to scare the plebs with peak supply, so now they are trying peak demand.

Of course, the globalist way of addressing peak demand is starvation and euthanasia.

 

I was just thinking about how sick I am of globalists getting in the way of oil production and starving people to death to prevent its use….

[rmgill]

20 hours ago, lucklucky said:

Well in winter we can run hydro up 70% or more, in summer the rivers are down the electrical production is much less. 
 

Depends on the rivers and the terrain above and its usual weather. If it has summer rains in abundance then the summer water power capacity is abundant. 
 

 

20 hours ago, lucklucky said:

Dematerialization:

If means your electric car to move is not dependent on only one energy source(material). 

In effect you become dependent upon the grid. Or you can tow a generator and fuel and you’ve lost more through thermodynamics. 
 

The recent Green Energy demonstration trip by the US federal energy secretary demonstrated its limitations. Sending functionaries ahead to park gasoline cars in charger spaces to ‘reserve’ them was the height of hubris. 

20 hours ago, lucklucky said:

Yeah like peak oil...

Just making the point that any new technological development or new energy source that appears  it will have a big chance make those on electricity happy.  

Thermodynamics doesn’t change. 

[rmgill]

7 hours ago, Ssnake said:

You're suggesting that cars be powered by this?

"It is incredible that this tiny coin-cell-style device can generate tens of milliwatts of power"

Sure, truckload stack for your tiny smart car. Load them like pez candy. 

[lucklucky]

9 hours ago, Ssnake said:

You're suggesting that cars be powered by this?

"It is incredible that this tiny coin-cell-style device can generate tens of milliwatts of power"

..... an example of new technologies being developed.

[lucklucky]

1 hour ago, rmgill said:

In effect you become dependent upon the grid.

In part, but if your grid is bad, your refineries and ports will not be in very good condition either.

Lots of people have own solar that at least in the summer makes own electrical production.

Depends on country solar advantages or not of that investment. One advantages of electric medium is that energy micro  independent production becomes possible. Off de grid might be a possibility.

Well ignoring chopping wood and making a fire.

[rmgill]

At this point, with California as an example, we have a demand to move more to the grid and at the same time the inability to support existing customers on said grid. To the extent of demanding that folks not use AC or charge their electric cars during said events. 

Everything dependent upon the grid makes for more single dependence. 

They're not managing the transition well at all. 

Edited June 16, 2024 by rmgill

[Ssnake]

4 hours ago, lucklucky said:

..... an example of new technologies being developed.

"New technologies" are being developed every day. Other than this platitude, do you think that beta decay radioisotope batteries have any relevance for

- electric vehicles

- stabilizing the grid, or contributing to the electricity market for industry or consumers ... outside of medical devices or for powering sensors?

 

If yes, please explain. How many of these batteries, do you think, would be required to power your average EV?

[lucklucky]

The point is the technology developments have more chances of improving electrification than oil for a start because there are more source feeds so more technological areas for improvement. 

[sunday]

36 minutes ago, lucklucky said:

The point is the technology developments have more chances of improving electrification than oil for a start because there are more source feeds so more technological areas for improvement. 

Thus wrote the faith on technical progress built upon God only knows.

Also:

 

Edited June 17, 2024 by sunday

[lucklucky]

2 hours ago, sunday said:

Thus wrote the faith on technical progress built upon God only knows.

Also:

 

What is the most probable assumption about the lets say next 30 years . No more advance than 5% regarding energy developments or more than 5%?