If 25% of a commodity is removed, will the consumers' cost go up?

[FA_Q2]

I always find the war against domestic oil production totally nuts. Regardless of what prices do as a result, the fact is that limiting local production is 100% NEGATIVE for the environment. The US has standards, laws and, importantly, control over how domestic products are obtained. The only thing that reducing production here does is move that production to places that do not have those same regulations, safety concerns and have absolutely zero environmental concerns.

It is nothing more than virtue signaling to the base while going completely counter to everything that they claim to stand for. It shows how little politicians like Biden actually care about the crap they spew.

You're assuming a lot. Saudi ARAMCO has a stellar safety record and environmental controls.

Not really assuming much, I have been there and seen what their environmental standards are if you can call them that.

 

[surada]

I always find the war against domestic oil production totally nuts. Regardless of what prices do as a result, the fact is that limiting local production is 100% NEGATIVE for the environment. The US has standards, laws and, importantly, control over how domestic products are obtained. The only thing that reducing production here does is move that production to places that do not have those same regulations, safety concerns and have absolutely zero environmental concerns.

It is nothing more than virtue signaling to the base while going completely counter to everything that they claim to stand for. It shows how little politicians like Biden actually care about the crap they spew.

You're assuming a lot. Saudi ARAMCO has a stellar safety record and environmental controls.

Not really assuming much, I have been there and seen what their environmental standards are if you can call them that.

When were you last there and how many years were you there?

 

[NightFox]

Actually, much carbon is released during the manufacturing process. Even in the Netherlands, it takes 10 years for a carbon footprint from a windmill to get to zero. The Netherlands is the BEST place for wind energy.

The carbon footprint for electric car batteries rarely exceeds the life of the batteries.

The whole global warming business is a scam

"More specifically, they figure that wind turbines average just 11 grams of CO2 emission per kilowatthour of electricity generated. That compares with 44 g/kwh for solar, 450 g for natural gas, and a whopping 1,000 g for coal.

But beating them all is the original large-scale zero-carbon power source, nuclear power, at 9 g/kwh.

Thanks to technology, these stats aren’t static. Offshore wind turbines are becoming enormous, with General Electric’s GE -2.9% Haliade X featuring blades 360 feet long and generating 14 megawatts. The carbon footprint of such monsters could get as low as 6 g/kwh. "

How Green Is Wind Power, Really? A New Report Tallies Up The Carbon Cost Of Renewables

Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

www.forbes.com

I wasn't talking about the cost of operating the windmill after it's built, I was talking about the carbon footprint of building it.

You didn't know it takes carbon to build a windmill? Seriously?

And I said "during the manufacturing process," moron. READ what you are responding to

You didn't think to READ the link where those figures came from, here you go:

"Of course the wind blows without carbon emissions, but catching it isn’t easy. Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

All of it has a carbon footprint. Making steel requires the combustion of metallurgical coal in blast furnaces. Mining metals and rare earths is energy intensive. And the manufacture of concrete emits lots of carbon dioxide.

In the case of wind and solar power, those emissions are nearly all front-loaded. That contrasts with fossil-fueled electric power plants, where emissions occur continuouisly as coal and natural gas are combusted."

But then again you hardly ever provide links to the numbers you throw out there.

Windmills generate tiny energy compared to natural gas and nuclear. It doesn't take one windmill to replace a power plant, it takes thousands of them. They can't do it, it's not feasible. You're just playing games on the fringes, not solving anything

Success is found in a can.

Cool. That's normally where you can be found, leaning over one

Nope, dope. Because you will always find failure in can't!

“You will always find failure in can’t”

Nice turn of phrase Boo, I think I’ll steal that one and use it the next time one my junior engineers claim …”but that’s just CAN’T be done!”.

 

[danielpalos]

Simply upgrading the grid may potentially improve supply by twenty-five percent.

 

[kaz]

Question... If 25% of a commodity is reduced and eventually eliminated, will that increase the costs to the consumers of that commodity?

FACT:
About a quarter (25%) of U.S. oil and an eighth of the nation's natural gas is produced on federal lands.
Supporting link: U.S. oil and natural gas production to fall in 2021, then rise in 2022 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

FACT:
If 25% of oil and gas on Federal lands is eliminated from the supply will the cost go up to gasoline consumers?

PROOF!!!

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden​

Biden's attack on U.S. energy producers, starting with his freeze on federal oil and gas leases, will assuredly take a toll on output down the road and cause prices at the pump to rise.
But today, Biden has pushed those prices, which were already rising because of severe weather, even higher by gratuitously alienating Saudi Arabia. The Gulf kingdom just surprised energy markets by announcing it would not raise oil output, despite developing supply constraints and rising prices.
Oil prices jumped on the news, popping 4 percent to pre-pandemic levels for the first time in a year; the surge rattled markets alread

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden

Doesn't mean much with the left's push toward electric vehicles. Demand could be decreased by twenty-five percent as well.

Right... so where does the lubricant for your electric cars come from?
I use to think ah the answer is "synthetic oil"... Right?
But then.. a little research...
"The base material, however, is still overwhelmingly crude oil that is distilled and then modified physically and chemically."

Synthetic oil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So.... all the electric cars will still need increasingly more expensive "crude oil" to make synthetic lubricants... PLUS
hmmm... where will the power come from to charge those EVs?
Hmmm... Nuclear for sure but...
There are 53 nuclear reactors currently under construction around the world.
Only two are in the United States, once the world’s leader in nuclear energy development

Slow, Steady Progress for Two U.S. Nuclear Power Projects

Plant Vogtle in Georgia installs more Westinghouse reactors while Oregon-based NuScale awaits final approval of its small modular reactor design

spectrum.ieee.org

So it seems we'll still need more costly crude oil which will either be imported and GROSSLY expensive...just to lubricate EVs
not even mentioning all those wind turbines that use oil.
Tsk..tsk.tsk... leaking oil polluting the environment!

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil​

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil

Building and operating an offshore wind turbine requires immense amounts of oil to build, according to a Wednesday Forbes article.

dailycaller.com

View attachment 502441

So what? It is the burning of the fuel that is releasing the sequestered carbon not using oil as a lubricant.

Actually, much carbon is released during the manufacturing process. Even in the Netherlands, it takes 10 years for a carbon footprint from a windmill to get to zero. The Netherlands is the BEST place for wind energy.

The carbon footprint for electric car batteries rarely exceeds the life of the batteries.

The whole global warming business is a scam

"More specifically, they figure that wind turbines average just 11 grams of CO2 emission per kilowatthour of electricity generated. That compares with 44 g/kwh for solar, 450 g for natural gas, and a whopping 1,000 g for coal.

But beating them all is the original large-scale zero-carbon power source, nuclear power, at 9 g/kwh.

Thanks to technology, these stats aren’t static. Offshore wind turbines are becoming enormous, with General Electric’s GE -2.9% Haliade X featuring blades 360 feet long and generating 14 megawatts. The carbon footprint of such monsters could get as low as 6 g/kwh. "

How Green Is Wind Power, Really? A New Report Tallies Up The Carbon Cost Of Renewables

Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

www.forbes.com

I wasn't talking about the cost of operating the windmill after it's built, I was talking about the carbon footprint of building it.

You didn't know it takes carbon to build a windmill? Seriously?

And I said "during the manufacturing process," moron. READ what you are responding to

You didn't think to READ the link where those figures came from, here you go:

"Of course the wind blows without carbon emissions, but catching it isn’t easy. Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

All of it has a carbon footprint. Making steel requires the combustion of metallurgical coal in blast furnaces. Mining metals and rare earths is energy intensive. And the manufacture of concrete emits lots of carbon dioxide.

In the case of wind and solar power, those emissions are nearly all front-loaded. That contrasts with fossil-fueled electric power plants, where emissions occur continuouisly as coal and natural gas are combusted."

But then again you hardly ever provide links to the numbers you throw out there.

Windmills generate tiny energy compared to natural gas and nuclear. It doesn't take one windmill to replace a power plant, it takes thousands of them. They can't do it, it's not feasible. You're just playing games on the fringes, not solving anything

Windmills have a higher energy conversion efficiency potential than both natural gas and nuclear (up to 45% on wind versus around 38% max for NG and Nuke).

The problem with windmills isn't energy production, it's reliability (dependent on wind speed), IF you have reliable sustained wind speeds then windmills are a more efficient choice than the alternatives, of course given the dynamics of electrical grids it's not an either-or proposition, you can utilize both.

The problem with windmills is:

1) Tiny energy production (compared to other sources). A giant, butt ugly, windmill farm can be replaced by a relatively tiny natural gas plant

2) You have to BUILD the windmill, not just operate it

3) And yes, reliability. Though if you've been to the Netherlands you know that isn't a problem there

 

[kaz]

I wasn't talking about the cost of operating the windmill after it's built, I was talking about the carbon footprint of building it.

You didn't know it takes carbon to build a windmill? Seriously?

And I said "during the manufacturing process," moron. READ what you are responding to

You didn't think to READ the link where those figures came from, here you go:

"Of course the wind blows without carbon emissions, but catching it isn’t easy. Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

All of it has a carbon footprint. Making steel requires the combustion of metallurgical coal in blast furnaces. Mining metals and rare earths is energy intensive. And the manufacture of concrete emits lots of carbon dioxide.

In the case of wind and solar power, those emissions are nearly all front-loaded. That contrasts with fossil-fueled electric power plants, where emissions occur continuouisly as coal and natural gas are combusted."

But then again you hardly ever provide links to the numbers you throw out there.

Windmills generate tiny energy compared to natural gas and nuclear. It doesn't take one windmill to replace a power plant, it takes thousands of them. They can't do it, it's not feasible. You're just playing games on the fringes, not solving anything

Windmills have a higher energy conversion efficiency potential than both natural gas and nuclear (up to 45% on wind versus around 38% max for NG and Nuke).

The problem with windmills isn't energy production, it's reliability (dependent on wind speed), IF you have reliable sustained wind speeds then windmills are a more efficient choice than the alternatives, of course given the dynamics of electrical grids it's not an either-or proposition, you can utilize both.

You just can't have any capacity reliant on wind. It can only supplement existing capacity.

Yep. Also, we already produce as much as we can. When leftists do things like shut down the Keystone pipeline, it's not replaced by wind it's replaced by overseas oil or coal

 

[kaz]

The pause for review on new leases did not cause a drop in production on federal lands.

I believe the point was that it *could* result in contraction of the domestic production possibilities curve in the future for those commodities, which is true, however given that the market isn't as simple as some apparently believe it doesn't necessarily entail corresponding price increases, for example we import crude oil, refine it and then turn around and export the refined products, contraction of the domestic crude oil PPC might involve reducing such exports to meet domestic demand.

Saudi Arabia accounts for less than 10 % of our petroleum imports.

7% in 2020 (on a downward sloping trend line).

BlindBoob want's to keep funding terrorist supporting and oppressive governments and not develop energy domestically. He's a dick that way.

But in his defense, BlindBoob realizes that terrorist supporting and oppressive government's aren't on the earth as we are and drilling oil there and shipping it across oceans doesn't affect our environment.

Arguing with leftists is always an experience in stupid

You want cheap gasoline at any price? Then nationalize the US oil industry. We have the highest lift costs in the world. Our domestic producers have to make a profit or go out of business.

Well said, too bad those naysayers won't respond to this logical post.

Another of the girls in the Democrat locker room poking and giggling each other.

So it makes sense to buy energy from despots and ship it across oceans rather than keeping the money and jobs here. That made sense to you. Rock on, girlfriend! Poke, poke, giggle, giggle ...

Do you have anything intelligent to offer?

Well, by your standard of intelligent = parroting Democrats, no, not really ...

 

[kaz]

You didn't think to READ the link where those figures came from, here you go:

"Of course the wind blows without carbon emissions, but catching it isn’t easy. Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

All of it has a carbon footprint. Making steel requires the combustion of metallurgical coal in blast furnaces. Mining metals and rare earths is energy intensive. And the manufacture of concrete emits lots of carbon dioxide.

In the case of wind and solar power, those emissions are nearly all front-loaded. That contrasts with fossil-fueled electric power plants, where emissions occur continuouisly as coal and natural gas are combusted."

But then again you hardly ever provide links to the numbers you throw out there.

Windmills generate tiny energy compared to natural gas and nuclear. It doesn't take one windmill to replace a power plant, it takes thousands of them. They can't do it, it's not feasible. You're just playing games on the fringes, not solving anything

Success is found in a can.

Cool. That's normally where you can be found, leaning over one

Nope, dope. Because you will always find failure in can't!

OK

 

[Nostra]

Question... If 25% of a commodity is reduced and eventually eliminated, will that increase the costs to the consumers of that commodity?

FACT:
About a quarter (25%) of U.S. oil and an eighth of the nation's natural gas is produced on federal lands.
Supporting link: U.S. oil and natural gas production to fall in 2021, then rise in 2022 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

FACT:
If 25% of oil and gas on Federal lands is eliminated from the supply will the cost go up to gasoline consumers?

PROOF!!!

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden​

Biden's attack on U.S. energy producers, starting with his freeze on federal oil and gas leases, will assuredly take a toll on output down the road and cause prices at the pump to rise.
But today, Biden has pushed those prices, which were already rising because of severe weather, even higher by gratuitously alienating Saudi Arabia. The Gulf kingdom just surprised energy markets by announcing it would not raise oil output, despite developing supply constraints and rising prices.
Oil prices jumped on the news, popping 4 percent to pre-pandemic levels for the first time in a year; the surge rattled markets alread

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden

Yes, but only because ORANGE MAN BAD!

 

[FA_Q2]

I always find the war against domestic oil production totally nuts. Regardless of what prices do as a result, the fact is that limiting local production is 100% NEGATIVE for the environment. The US has standards, laws and, importantly, control over how domestic products are obtained. The only thing that reducing production here does is move that production to places that do not have those same regulations, safety concerns and have absolutely zero environmental concerns.

It is nothing more than virtue signaling to the base while going completely counter to everything that they claim to stand for. It shows how little politicians like Biden actually care about the crap they spew.

You're assuming a lot. Saudi ARAMCO has a stellar safety record and environmental controls.

Not really assuming much, I have been there and seen what their environmental standards are if you can call them that.

When were you last there and how many years were you there?

I have spent a total of 6 years in various countries in the ME. I was not involved with the drilling process but did have contact with the process after it left the ground.

Been about 6 years since I was there. In general, the attitude could be summed up as not giving a shit. Used to watch them drive water buffalos out to wash petroleum products that spilled off into the sand because 'that's where it came from.'

Meanwhile, had a spill of a few hundred pounds in the states and the government came in and basically dug out the entire area and carted it away. Took months.

I do wonder what the carbon cost of all that work was though - it was ridiculous what they did. Of course, we are also worried about damaging the water supply so there is more to consider.

 

[Nostra]

Simply upgrading the grid may potentially improve supply by twenty-five percent.

Renovating Ellis Island and putting a world class research facility there would do the trick too, right?

 

[kaz]

Question... If 25% of a commodity is reduced and eventually eliminated, will that increase the costs to the consumers of that commodity?

FACT:
About a quarter (25%) of U.S. oil and an eighth of the nation's natural gas is produced on federal lands.
Supporting link: U.S. oil and natural gas production to fall in 2021, then rise in 2022 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

FACT:
If 25% of oil and gas on Federal lands is eliminated from the supply will the cost go up to gasoline consumers?

PROOF!!!

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden​

Biden's attack on U.S. energy producers, starting with his freeze on federal oil and gas leases, will assuredly take a toll on output down the road and cause prices at the pump to rise.
But today, Biden has pushed those prices, which were already rising because of severe weather, even higher by gratuitously alienating Saudi Arabia. The Gulf kingdom just surprised energy markets by announcing it would not raise oil output, despite developing supply constraints and rising prices.
Oil prices jumped on the news, popping 4 percent to pre-pandemic levels for the first time in a year; the surge rattled markets alread

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden

Doesn't mean much with the left's push toward electric vehicles. Demand could be decreased by twenty-five percent as well.

Right... so where does the lubricant for your electric cars come from?
I use to think ah the answer is "synthetic oil"... Right?
But then.. a little research...
"The base material, however, is still overwhelmingly crude oil that is distilled and then modified physically and chemically."

Synthetic oil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So.... all the electric cars will still need increasingly more expensive "crude oil" to make synthetic lubricants... PLUS
hmmm... where will the power come from to charge those EVs?
Hmmm... Nuclear for sure but...
There are 53 nuclear reactors currently under construction around the world.
Only two are in the United States, once the world’s leader in nuclear energy development

Slow, Steady Progress for Two U.S. Nuclear Power Projects

Plant Vogtle in Georgia installs more Westinghouse reactors while Oregon-based NuScale awaits final approval of its small modular reactor design

spectrum.ieee.org

So it seems we'll still need more costly crude oil which will either be imported and GROSSLY expensive...just to lubricate EVs
not even mentioning all those wind turbines that use oil.
Tsk..tsk.tsk... leaking oil polluting the environment!

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil​

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil

Building and operating an offshore wind turbine requires immense amounts of oil to build, according to a Wednesday Forbes article.

dailycaller.com

View attachment 502441

So what? It is the burning of the fuel that is releasing the sequestered carbon not using oil as a lubricant.

Actually, much carbon is released during the manufacturing process. Even in the Netherlands, it takes 10 years for a carbon footprint from a windmill to get to zero. The Netherlands is the BEST place for wind energy.

The carbon footprint for electric car batteries rarely exceeds the life of the batteries.

The whole global warming business is a scam

"More specifically, they figure that wind turbines average just 11 grams of CO2 emission per kilowatthour of electricity generated. That compares with 44 g/kwh for solar, 450 g for natural gas, and a whopping 1,000 g for coal.

But beating them all is the original large-scale zero-carbon power source, nuclear power, at 9 g/kwh.

Thanks to technology, these stats aren’t static. Offshore wind turbines are becoming enormous, with General Electric’s GE -2.9% Haliade X featuring blades 360 feet long and generating 14 megawatts. The carbon footprint of such monsters could get as low as 6 g/kwh. "

How Green Is Wind Power, Really? A New Report Tallies Up The Carbon Cost Of Renewables

Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

www.forbes.com

I wasn't talking about the cost of operating the windmill after it's built, I was talking about the carbon footprint of building it.

You didn't know it takes carbon to build a windmill? Seriously?

And I said "during the manufacturing process," moron. READ what you are responding to

The problem with your thinking is that the carbon footprint for the windmill is a one time thing and once it’s in operation it has an almost negligible carbon footprint whereis oil is the gift that keeps on giving. It’s adding CO2 to the atmosphere at every step in its production, refining and use.

10 years to get to break even is a hell of a "one time thing."

Note you also whiffed on that is BEST CASE. Nowhere in the world is as windy as the Netherlands.

The problem is that windmills just produce so much less energy than comparable fissile fuels, including low emissions natural gas, which is the best solution for our level of technology.

Keep the Chinese disinformation coming, George! I'll keep correcting it for you!

There is no break even point.

Question... If 25% of a commodity is reduced and eventually eliminated, will that increase the costs to the consumers of that commodity?

FACT:
About a quarter (25%) of U.S. oil and an eighth of the nation's natural gas is produced on federal lands.
Supporting link: U.S. oil and natural gas production to fall in 2021, then rise in 2022 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

FACT:
If 25% of oil and gas on Federal lands is eliminated from the supply will the cost go up to gasoline consumers?

PROOF!!!

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden​

Biden's attack on U.S. energy producers, starting with his freeze on federal oil and gas leases, will assuredly take a toll on output down the road and cause prices at the pump to rise.
But today, Biden has pushed those prices, which were already rising because of severe weather, even higher by gratuitously alienating Saudi Arabia. The Gulf kingdom just surprised energy markets by announcing it would not raise oil output, despite developing supply constraints and rising prices.
Oil prices jumped on the news, popping 4 percent to pre-pandemic levels for the first time in a year; the surge rattled markets alread

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden

Doesn't mean much with the left's push toward electric vehicles. Demand could be decreased by twenty-five percent as well.

Right... so where does the lubricant for your electric cars come from?
I use to think ah the answer is "synthetic oil"... Right?
But then.. a little research...
"The base material, however, is still overwhelmingly crude oil that is distilled and then modified physically and chemically."

Synthetic oil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So.... all the electric cars will still need increasingly more expensive "crude oil" to make synthetic lubricants... PLUS
hmmm... where will the power come from to charge those EVs?
Hmmm... Nuclear for sure but...
There are 53 nuclear reactors currently under construction around the world.
Only two are in the United States, once the world’s leader in nuclear energy development

Slow, Steady Progress for Two U.S. Nuclear Power Projects

Plant Vogtle in Georgia installs more Westinghouse reactors while Oregon-based NuScale awaits final approval of its small modular reactor design

spectrum.ieee.org

So it seems we'll still need more costly crude oil which will either be imported and GROSSLY expensive...just to lubricate EVs
not even mentioning all those wind turbines that use oil.
Tsk..tsk.tsk... leaking oil polluting the environment!

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil​

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil

Building and operating an offshore wind turbine requires immense amounts of oil to build, according to a Wednesday Forbes article.

dailycaller.com

View attachment 502441

So what? It is the burning of the fuel that is releasing the sequestered carbon not using oil as a lubricant.

Actually, much carbon is released during the manufacturing process. Even in the Netherlands, it takes 10 years for a carbon footprint from a windmill to get to zero. The Netherlands is the BEST place for wind energy.

The carbon footprint for electric car batteries rarely exceeds the life of the batteries.

The whole global warming business is a scam

"More specifically, they figure that wind turbines average just 11 grams of CO2 emission per kilowatthour of electricity generated. That compares with 44 g/kwh for solar, 450 g for natural gas, and a whopping 1,000 g for coal.

But beating them all is the original large-scale zero-carbon power source, nuclear power, at 9 g/kwh.

Thanks to technology, these stats aren’t static. Offshore wind turbines are becoming enormous, with General Electric’s GE -2.9% Haliade X featuring blades 360 feet long and generating 14 megawatts. The carbon footprint of such monsters could get as low as 6 g/kwh. "

How Green Is Wind Power, Really? A New Report Tallies Up The Carbon Cost Of Renewables

Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

www.forbes.com

I wasn't talking about the cost of operating the windmill after it's built, I was talking about the carbon footprint of building it.

You didn't know it takes carbon to build a windmill? Seriously?

And I said "during the manufacturing process," moron. READ what you are responding to

You didn't think to READ the link where those figures came from, here you go:

"Of course the wind blows without carbon emissions, but catching it isn’t easy. Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

All of it has a carbon footprint. Making steel requires the combustion of metallurgical coal in blast furnaces. Mining metals and rare earths is energy intensive. And the manufacture of concrete emits lots of carbon dioxide.

In the case of wind and solar power, those emissions are nearly all front-loaded. That contrasts with fossil-fueled electric power plants, where emissions occur continuouisly as coal and natural gas are combusted."

But then again you hardly ever provide links to the numbers you throw out there.

Windmills generate tiny energy compared to natural gas and nuclear. It doesn't take one windmill to replace a power plant, it takes thousands of them. They can't do it, it's not feasible. You're just playing games on the fringes, not solving anything

Success is found in a can.

"There is no break even point."

Of course there is

 

[FA_Q2]

Question... If 25% of a commodity is reduced and eventually eliminated, will that increase the costs to the consumers of that commodity?

FACT:
About a quarter (25%) of U.S. oil and an eighth of the nation's natural gas is produced on federal lands.
Supporting link: U.S. oil and natural gas production to fall in 2021, then rise in 2022 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

FACT:
If 25% of oil and gas on Federal lands is eliminated from the supply will the cost go up to gasoline consumers?

PROOF!!!

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden​

Biden's attack on U.S. energy producers, starting with his freeze on federal oil and gas leases, will assuredly take a toll on output down the road and cause prices at the pump to rise.
But today, Biden has pushed those prices, which were already rising because of severe weather, even higher by gratuitously alienating Saudi Arabia. The Gulf kingdom just surprised energy markets by announcing it would not raise oil output, despite developing supply constraints and rising prices.
Oil prices jumped on the news, popping 4 percent to pre-pandemic levels for the first time in a year; the surge rattled markets alread

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden

Doesn't mean much with the left's push toward electric vehicles. Demand could be decreased by twenty-five percent as well.

Right... so where does the lubricant for your electric cars come from?
I use to think ah the answer is "synthetic oil"... Right?
But then.. a little research...
"The base material, however, is still overwhelmingly crude oil that is distilled and then modified physically and chemically."

Synthetic oil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So.... all the electric cars will still need increasingly more expensive "crude oil" to make synthetic lubricants... PLUS
hmmm... where will the power come from to charge those EVs?
Hmmm... Nuclear for sure but...
There are 53 nuclear reactors currently under construction around the world.
Only two are in the United States, once the world’s leader in nuclear energy development

Slow, Steady Progress for Two U.S. Nuclear Power Projects

Plant Vogtle in Georgia installs more Westinghouse reactors while Oregon-based NuScale awaits final approval of its small modular reactor design

spectrum.ieee.org

So it seems we'll still need more costly crude oil which will either be imported and GROSSLY expensive...just to lubricate EVs
not even mentioning all those wind turbines that use oil.
Tsk..tsk.tsk... leaking oil polluting the environment!

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil​

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil

Building and operating an offshore wind turbine requires immense amounts of oil to build, according to a Wednesday Forbes article.

dailycaller.com

View attachment 502441

So what? It is the burning of the fuel that is releasing the sequestered carbon not using oil as a lubricant.

Actually, much carbon is released during the manufacturing process. Even in the Netherlands, it takes 10 years for a carbon footprint from a windmill to get to zero. The Netherlands is the BEST place for wind energy.

The carbon footprint for electric car batteries rarely exceeds the life of the batteries.

The whole global warming business is a scam

"More specifically, they figure that wind turbines average just 11 grams of CO2 emission per kilowatthour of electricity generated. That compares with 44 g/kwh for solar, 450 g for natural gas, and a whopping 1,000 g for coal.

But beating them all is the original large-scale zero-carbon power source, nuclear power, at 9 g/kwh.

Thanks to technology, these stats aren’t static. Offshore wind turbines are becoming enormous, with General Electric’s GE -2.9% Haliade X featuring blades 360 feet long and generating 14 megawatts. The carbon footprint of such monsters could get as low as 6 g/kwh. "

How Green Is Wind Power, Really? A New Report Tallies Up The Carbon Cost Of Renewables

Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

www.forbes.com

I wasn't talking about the cost of operating the windmill after it's built, I was talking about the carbon footprint of building it.

You didn't know it takes carbon to build a windmill? Seriously?

And I said "during the manufacturing process," moron. READ what you are responding to

The problem with your thinking is that the carbon footprint for the windmill is a one time thing and once it’s in operation it has an almost negligible carbon footprint whereis oil is the gift that keeps on giving. It’s adding CO2 to the atmosphere at every step in its production, refining and use.

10 years to get to break even is a hell of a "one time thing."

Note you also whiffed on that is BEST CASE. Nowhere in the world is as windy as the Netherlands.

The problem is that windmills just produce so much less energy than comparable fissile fuels, including low emissions natural gas, which is the best solution for our level of technology.

Keep the Chinese disinformation coming, George! I'll keep correcting it for you!

There is no break even point.

Question... If 25% of a commodity is reduced and eventually eliminated, will that increase the costs to the consumers of that commodity?

FACT:
About a quarter (25%) of U.S. oil and an eighth of the nation's natural gas is produced on federal lands.
Supporting link: U.S. oil and natural gas production to fall in 2021, then rise in 2022 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

FACT:
If 25% of oil and gas on Federal lands is eliminated from the supply will the cost go up to gasoline consumers?

PROOF!!!

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden​

Biden's attack on U.S. energy producers, starting with his freeze on federal oil and gas leases, will assuredly take a toll on output down the road and cause prices at the pump to rise.
But today, Biden has pushed those prices, which were already rising because of severe weather, even higher by gratuitously alienating Saudi Arabia. The Gulf kingdom just surprised energy markets by announcing it would not raise oil output, despite developing supply constraints and rising prices.
Oil prices jumped on the news, popping 4 percent to pre-pandemic levels for the first time in a year; the surge rattled markets alread

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden

Doesn't mean much with the left's push toward electric vehicles. Demand could be decreased by twenty-five percent as well.

Right... so where does the lubricant for your electric cars come from?
I use to think ah the answer is "synthetic oil"... Right?
But then.. a little research...
"The base material, however, is still overwhelmingly crude oil that is distilled and then modified physically and chemically."

Synthetic oil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So.... all the electric cars will still need increasingly more expensive "crude oil" to make synthetic lubricants... PLUS
hmmm... where will the power come from to charge those EVs?
Hmmm... Nuclear for sure but...
There are 53 nuclear reactors currently under construction around the world.
Only two are in the United States, once the world’s leader in nuclear energy development

Slow, Steady Progress for Two U.S. Nuclear Power Projects

Plant Vogtle in Georgia installs more Westinghouse reactors while Oregon-based NuScale awaits final approval of its small modular reactor design

spectrum.ieee.org

So it seems we'll still need more costly crude oil which will either be imported and GROSSLY expensive...just to lubricate EVs
not even mentioning all those wind turbines that use oil.
Tsk..tsk.tsk... leaking oil polluting the environment!

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil​

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil

Building and operating an offshore wind turbine requires immense amounts of oil to build, according to a Wednesday Forbes article.

dailycaller.com

View attachment 502441

So what? It is the burning of the fuel that is releasing the sequestered carbon not using oil as a lubricant.

Actually, much carbon is released during the manufacturing process. Even in the Netherlands, it takes 10 years for a carbon footprint from a windmill to get to zero. The Netherlands is the BEST place for wind energy.

The carbon footprint for electric car batteries rarely exceeds the life of the batteries.

The whole global warming business is a scam

"More specifically, they figure that wind turbines average just 11 grams of CO2 emission per kilowatthour of electricity generated. That compares with 44 g/kwh for solar, 450 g for natural gas, and a whopping 1,000 g for coal.

But beating them all is the original large-scale zero-carbon power source, nuclear power, at 9 g/kwh.

Thanks to technology, these stats aren’t static. Offshore wind turbines are becoming enormous, with General Electric’s GE -2.9% Haliade X featuring blades 360 feet long and generating 14 megawatts. The carbon footprint of such monsters could get as low as 6 g/kwh. "

How Green Is Wind Power, Really? A New Report Tallies Up The Carbon Cost Of Renewables

Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

www.forbes.com

I wasn't talking about the cost of operating the windmill after it's built, I was talking about the carbon footprint of building it.

You didn't know it takes carbon to build a windmill? Seriously?

And I said "during the manufacturing process," moron. READ what you are responding to

You didn't think to READ the link where those figures came from, here you go:

"Of course the wind blows without carbon emissions, but catching it isn’t easy. Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

All of it has a carbon footprint. Making steel requires the combustion of metallurgical coal in blast furnaces. Mining metals and rare earths is energy intensive. And the manufacture of concrete emits lots of carbon dioxide.

In the case of wind and solar power, those emissions are nearly all front-loaded. That contrasts with fossil-fueled electric power plants, where emissions occur continuouisly as coal and natural gas are combusted."

But then again you hardly ever provide links to the numbers you throw out there.

Windmills generate tiny energy compared to natural gas and nuclear. It doesn't take one windmill to replace a power plant, it takes thousands of them. They can't do it, it's not feasible. You're just playing games on the fringes, not solving anything

Success is found in a can.

"There is no break even point."

Of course there is

Not with burning fossil fuels. You keep harping on windmills not being carbon neutral. Why is carbon neutral the requirement for windmills when comparing it to fossil fuels which can never be carbon neutral?

Pointing at the fact windmills have a carbon footprint is rather silly tbh considering that ignores the fact there is a massive difference in that carbon footprint over those ten years and the one that a power source using fossil fuels would produce in that time period.

 

[BlindBoo]

Actually, much carbon is released during the manufacturing process. Even in the Netherlands, it takes 10 years for a carbon footprint from a windmill to get to zero. The Netherlands is the BEST place for wind energy.

The carbon footprint for electric car batteries rarely exceeds the life of the batteries.

The whole global warming business is a scam

"More specifically, they figure that wind turbines average just 11 grams of CO2 emission per kilowatthour of electricity generated. That compares with 44 g/kwh for solar, 450 g for natural gas, and a whopping 1,000 g for coal.

But beating them all is the original large-scale zero-carbon power source, nuclear power, at 9 g/kwh.

Thanks to technology, these stats aren’t static. Offshore wind turbines are becoming enormous, with General Electric’s GE -2.9% Haliade X featuring blades 360 feet long and generating 14 megawatts. The carbon footprint of such monsters could get as low as 6 g/kwh. "

How Green Is Wind Power, Really? A New Report Tallies Up The Carbon Cost Of Renewables

Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

www.forbes.com

I wasn't talking about the cost of operating the windmill after it's built, I was talking about the carbon footprint of building it.

You didn't know it takes carbon to build a windmill? Seriously?

And I said "during the manufacturing process," moron. READ what you are responding to

You didn't think to READ the link where those figures came from, here you go:

"Of course the wind blows without carbon emissions, but catching it isn’t easy. Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

All of it has a carbon footprint. Making steel requires the combustion of metallurgical coal in blast furnaces. Mining metals and rare earths is energy intensive. And the manufacture of concrete emits lots of carbon dioxide.

In the case of wind and solar power, those emissions are nearly all front-loaded. That contrasts with fossil-fueled electric power plants, where emissions occur continuouisly as coal and natural gas are combusted."

But then again you hardly ever provide links to the numbers you throw out there.

Windmills generate tiny energy compared to natural gas and nuclear. It doesn't take one windmill to replace a power plant, it takes thousands of them. They can't do it, it's not feasible. You're just playing games on the fringes, not solving anything

Success is found in a can.

Cool. That's normally where you can be found, leaning over one

Nope, dope. Because you will always find failure in can't!

“You will always find failure in can’t”

Nice turn of phrase Boo, I think I’ll steal that one and use it the next time one my junior engineers claim …”but that’s just CAN’T be done!”.

No problem, I wish I could say I though of it, or even remember who I heard it from.

 

[Lesh]

10 years to get to break even is a hell of a "one time thing."

As opposed to fossil fuels which have similar upfront cost and are NEVER carbon neutral.

Not with burning fossil fuels. You keep harping on windmills not being carbon neutral. Why is carbon neutral the requirement for windmills when comparing it to fossil fuels which can never be carbon neutral?

Exactly

 

[danielpalos]

Geothermal: We should not attempt it because it is easy but Because it is hard.

 

[NightFox]

Question... If 25% of a commodity is reduced and eventually eliminated, will that increase the costs to the consumers of that commodity?

FACT:
About a quarter (25%) of U.S. oil and an eighth of the nation's natural gas is produced on federal lands.
Supporting link: U.S. oil and natural gas production to fall in 2021, then rise in 2022 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

FACT:
If 25% of oil and gas on Federal lands is eliminated from the supply will the cost go up to gasoline consumers?

PROOF!!!

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden​

Biden's attack on U.S. energy producers, starting with his freeze on federal oil and gas leases, will assuredly take a toll on output down the road and cause prices at the pump to rise.
But today, Biden has pushed those prices, which were already rising because of severe weather, even higher by gratuitously alienating Saudi Arabia. The Gulf kingdom just surprised energy markets by announcing it would not raise oil output, despite developing supply constraints and rising prices.
Oil prices jumped on the news, popping 4 percent to pre-pandemic levels for the first time in a year; the surge rattled markets alread

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden

Doesn't mean much with the left's push toward electric vehicles. Demand could be decreased by twenty-five percent as well.

Right... so where does the lubricant for your electric cars come from?
I use to think ah the answer is "synthetic oil"... Right?
But then.. a little research...
"The base material, however, is still overwhelmingly crude oil that is distilled and then modified physically and chemically."

Synthetic oil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So.... all the electric cars will still need increasingly more expensive "crude oil" to make synthetic lubricants... PLUS
hmmm... where will the power come from to charge those EVs?
Hmmm... Nuclear for sure but...
There are 53 nuclear reactors currently under construction around the world.
Only two are in the United States, once the world’s leader in nuclear energy development

Slow, Steady Progress for Two U.S. Nuclear Power Projects

Plant Vogtle in Georgia installs more Westinghouse reactors while Oregon-based NuScale awaits final approval of its small modular reactor design

spectrum.ieee.org

So it seems we'll still need more costly crude oil which will either be imported and GROSSLY expensive...just to lubricate EVs
not even mentioning all those wind turbines that use oil.
Tsk..tsk.tsk... leaking oil polluting the environment!

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil​

Dirty Secret Behind Wind Turbines, They Need Lots Of Oil

Building and operating an offshore wind turbine requires immense amounts of oil to build, according to a Wednesday Forbes article.

dailycaller.com

View attachment 502441

So what? It is the burning of the fuel that is releasing the sequestered carbon not using oil as a lubricant.

Actually, much carbon is released during the manufacturing process. Even in the Netherlands, it takes 10 years for a carbon footprint from a windmill to get to zero. The Netherlands is the BEST place for wind energy.

The carbon footprint for electric car batteries rarely exceeds the life of the batteries.

The whole global warming business is a scam

"More specifically, they figure that wind turbines average just 11 grams of CO2 emission per kilowatthour of electricity generated. That compares with 44 g/kwh for solar, 450 g for natural gas, and a whopping 1,000 g for coal.

But beating them all is the original large-scale zero-carbon power source, nuclear power, at 9 g/kwh.

Thanks to technology, these stats aren’t static. Offshore wind turbines are becoming enormous, with General Electric’s GE -2.9% Haliade X featuring blades 360 feet long and generating 14 megawatts. The carbon footprint of such monsters could get as low as 6 g/kwh. "

How Green Is Wind Power, Really? A New Report Tallies Up The Carbon Cost Of Renewables

Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

www.forbes.com

I wasn't talking about the cost of operating the windmill after it's built, I was talking about the carbon footprint of building it.

You didn't know it takes carbon to build a windmill? Seriously?

And I said "during the manufacturing process," moron. READ what you are responding to

You didn't think to READ the link where those figures came from, here you go:

"Of course the wind blows without carbon emissions, but catching it isn’t easy. Building and erecting wind turbines requires hundreds of tons of materials — steel, concrete, fiberglass, copper, and more exotic stuff like neodymium and dysprosium used in permanent magnets.

All of it has a carbon footprint. Making steel requires the combustion of metallurgical coal in blast furnaces. Mining metals and rare earths is energy intensive. And the manufacture of concrete emits lots of carbon dioxide.

In the case of wind and solar power, those emissions are nearly all front-loaded. That contrasts with fossil-fueled electric power plants, where emissions occur continuouisly as coal and natural gas are combusted."

But then again you hardly ever provide links to the numbers you throw out there.

Windmills generate tiny energy compared to natural gas and nuclear. It doesn't take one windmill to replace a power plant, it takes thousands of them. They can't do it, it's not feasible. You're just playing games on the fringes, not solving anything

Windmills have a higher energy conversion efficiency potential than both natural gas and nuclear (up to 45% on wind versus around 38% max for NG and Nuke).

The problem with windmills isn't energy production, it's reliability (dependent on wind speed), IF you have reliable sustained wind speeds then windmills are a more efficient choice than the alternatives, of course given the dynamics of electrical grids it's not an either-or proposition, you can utilize both.

The problem with windmills is:

1) Tiny energy production (compared to other sources). A giant, butt ugly, windmill farm can be replaced by a relatively tiny natural gas plant

You have point (They are ugly) I guess it depends on where you put it though, the one I’ve visited is in the desert (outside of Palm Springs on the I-10 corridor (basically a giant wind tunnel) not too ugly. As far as production I suspect it boils down to cost per KwH, which I would guess (haven’t run the numbers) is cheaper in those areas than the equivalent of building a different sort of plant.

As far as building windmills, the same is true for any other sort of plant, what’s the initial investment and ongoing operating costs versus other sort of energy production plants?

3) And yes, reliability. Though if you've been to the Netherlands you know that isn't a problem there

Obviously you’re only going to want to build wind farms where the historical wind data tells you that it’s going to make sense over the long term with respect to consistent output.

 

[Skylar]

Question... If 25% of a commodity is reduced and eventually eliminated, will that increase the costs to the consumers of that commodity?

FACT:
About a quarter (25%) of U.S. oil and an eighth of the nation's natural gas is produced on federal lands.
Supporting link: U.S. oil and natural gas production to fall in 2021, then rise in 2022 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

FACT:
If 25% of oil and gas on Federal lands is eliminated from the supply will the cost go up to gasoline consumers?

PROOF!!!

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden​

Biden's attack on U.S. energy producers, starting with his freeze on federal oil and gas leases, will assuredly take a toll on output down the road and cause prices at the pump to rise.
But today, Biden has pushed those prices, which were already rising because of severe weather, even higher by gratuitously alienating Saudi Arabia. The Gulf kingdom just surprised energy markets by announcing it would not raise oil output, despite developing supply constraints and rising prices.
Oil prices jumped on the news, popping 4 percent to pre-pandemic levels for the first time in a year; the surge rattled markets alread

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden

Depends on lots of things. What's the demand for the product in question? Is there an alternate source? If so, at what price?

 

[Dadoalex]

Question... If 25% of a commodity is reduced and eventually eliminated, will that increase the costs to the consumers of that commodity?

FACT:
About a quarter (25%) of U.S. oil and an eighth of the nation's natural gas is produced on federal lands.
Supporting link: U.S. oil and natural gas production to fall in 2021, then rise in 2022 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

FACT:
If 25% of oil and gas on Federal lands is eliminated from the supply will the cost go up to gasoline consumers?

PROOF!!!

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden​

Biden's attack on U.S. energy producers, starting with his freeze on federal oil and gas leases, will assuredly take a toll on output down the road and cause prices at the pump to rise.
But today, Biden has pushed those prices, which were already rising because of severe weather, even higher by gratuitously alienating Saudi Arabia. The Gulf kingdom just surprised energy markets by announcing it would not raise oil output, despite developing supply constraints and rising prices.
Oil prices jumped on the news, popping 4 percent to pre-pandemic levels for the first time in a year; the surge rattled markets alread

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden

Oil in the ground takes up to 5 years to reach the markets.
You're falling for a myth.

 

[healthmyths]

Question... If 25% of a commodity is reduced and eventually eliminated, will that increase the costs to the consumers of that commodity?

FACT:
About a quarter (25%) of U.S. oil and an eighth of the nation's natural gas is produced on federal lands.
Supporting link: U.S. oil and natural gas production to fall in 2021, then rise in 2022 - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

FACT:
If 25% of oil and gas on Federal lands is eliminated from the supply will the cost go up to gasoline consumers?

PROOF!!!

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden​

Biden's attack on U.S. energy producers, starting with his freeze on federal oil and gas leases, will assuredly take a toll on output down the road and cause prices at the pump to rise.
But today, Biden has pushed those prices, which were already rising because of severe weather, even higher by gratuitously alienating Saudi Arabia. The Gulf kingdom just surprised energy markets by announcing it would not raise oil output, despite developing supply constraints and rising prices.
Oil prices jumped on the news, popping 4 percent to pre-pandemic levels for the first time in a year; the surge rattled markets alread

As gas prices soar, Americans can blame Joe Biden

Oil in the ground takes up to 5 years to reach the markets.
You're falling for a myth.

You are absolutely right! The problem is though you aren't thinking about those people that invest in oil futures.
They buy for the future prices of oil. Take away as Biden wants 25% of Federal land leases means future oil prices
go up. It is as simple as that. Supply vs demand. Reduce the supply the prices increase.
I don't know why that is so hard to understand. Take away over the next 5 years future oil discoveries on Federal land and you make other prices go up. Very simple.