War in Ukraine

#19,651
#19,651
OHvol40 said:
Those are all reasons not to move to alternatives. We’re trying to solve several obvious problems here. The reasons to move toward them: reducing CO2 emissions, oil is a volatile market (that we don’t control), OPEC’s control of oil, becoming truly energy independent, cost efficiency, sustainability, creating new industry, improved public health, stable energy prices, lower maintenance requirements.

Now, I’m not saying there aren’t challenges. Nuclear has a host of challenges. Alternatives aren’t entirely carbon-free (as you point out), there is limited storage capacity at the moment, geography limits some possibilities… I understand all of this, but again in today’s context it makes a whole sh*t ton of sense to make that move and troubleshoot along the way.
Click to expand...

Nuclear power is baseload - not suitable for peaking. You still have to have peaking or storage capacity to fill in when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow - that generation will almost always be some sort of fossil fuel. Thermodynamics says that if you produce power and convert it to store you always lose; and when you convert back, you lose again. Also there are heavy losses when you transmit electric power over power lines - the longer the worse it gets. Seems like the most effective and efficient use of resources is still to directly burn fuel for motive needs and forget all the inefficiencies in generation and transmission for electric vehicles. At least, unless you go all nuclear and people who use solar go dark when the sun goes down and don't ask for power when they disrupt the grid to be environmentally conscious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO, InVOLuntary and USF grad in TN
#19,652
#19,652
AM64 said:
Nuclear power is baseload - not suitable for peaking. You still have to have peaking or storage capacity to fill in when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow - that generation will almost always be some sort of fossil fuel. Thermodynamics says that if you produce power and convert it to store you always lose; and when you convert back, you lose again. Also there are heavy losses when you transmit electric power over power lines - the longer the worse it gets. Seems like the most effective and efficient use of resources is still to directly burn fuel for motive needs and forget all the inefficiencies in generation and transmission for electric vehicles. At least, unless you go all nuclear and people who use solar go dark when the sun goes down and don't ask for power when they disrupt the grid to be environmentally conscious.
Click to expand...
I think a hybridization of the grid in its entirety with the goal of reducing our reliance on fossil fuels is all kinds of good. Being solution oriented is important.

For example, it is my understanding that there are great advancements in CSP (concentrating solar power) systems that concentrate, collect, and store thermal energy very effectively for surges in demand or at night, so people don’t have to “go dark”.

It’s a complex problem that requires complex solutions, I know, but I invite you to imagine an America that actually addresses problems (and our reliance on fossil fuels is a problem). We’ve done it before (taxation without representation, taming the west, slavery, the great derepression, WWII… all required grit, ingenuity, and purpose) but it’s been a long time.
 
#19,658
#19,658
clarksvol00 said:
Do you have a number of permits being applied on approved leases that are being slow walked? If Keystone were still 9 months away instead if 24 would it be increasing production today? If so, by how much?
Click to expand...

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but the tar sand the XL was supposed to bring to Port Author was just going to be exported and both Obama and Trumps own officials noted that the pipeline would have no affect on domestic gas prices.

The misnomer that was being foisted was that the tar sands were going to be refined, but that was never going to be the case as we lack the capacity to do that. This was ultimately just a cheap way for TC Energy to get this nasty caustic oil from there mines to a container ship as cheaply as possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and clarksvol00
#19,660
#19,660
Septic said:
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but the tar sand the XL was supposed to bring to Port Author was just going to be exported and both Obama and Trumps own officials noted that the pipeline would have no affect on domestic gas prices.

The misnomer that was being foisted was that the tar sands were going to be refined, but that was never going to be the case as we lack the capacity to do that. This was ultimately just a cheap way for TC Energy to get this nasty caustic oil from there mines to a container ship as cheaply as possible.
Click to expand...

Keystone in its current form has the capacity of 700k barrels per day. It only averages 550k barrels per day. There is still available capacity now.
 
#19,661
#19,661
***RoadVol*** said:
Keystone in its current form has the capacity of 700k barrels per day. It only averages 550k barrels per day. There is still available capacity now.
Click to expand...

Capacity to what? Get more Canadian oil onto container ships to add to the net export of crude? The US exports about 8.x million b/d.

Can someone explain how the XL pipeline will reduce domestic gas costs when it's all being exported for profit?

You know what... This is topic for a different thread. No need to hijack this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and NEO
#19,664
#19,664
[QUOTE="luthervol, post: 21060023, member: 68321"]That Biden is better for the country and its future than was Trump.
But I guess we have differing opinions on this.[/QUOTE]

How? What exact policies of Biden's are better than Trump era policies? One look at the catastrophe on our southern border probably renders any point you may make useless.
 
#19,665
#19,665
luthervol said:
That Biden is better for the country and its future than was Trump.
But I guess we have differing opinions on this.
Click to expand...

Oh yes , we all feel so much better now than we did when Trump was POTUS . Lol smh
Trump had us arguing over pee tapes , and mean tweets , Biden .. well this is page 787 of 787
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, AM64, red butler and 1 other person
#19,666
#19,666
0nelilreb said:
Oh yes , we all feel so much better now than we did when Trump was POTUS . Lol smh
Trump had us arguing over pee tapes , and mean tweets , Biden .. well this is page 787 of 787
Click to expand...
And look at how many pages are in the COVID thread; which we all know happened during Trump's term.
Had Trump not been president, the people in the Wuhan lab would have been much more careful and less stressed....never would have been released...........Thanks Trump.
 
#19,667
#19,667
luthervol said:
And look at how many pages are in the COVID thread; which we all know happened during Trump's term.
Had Trump not been president, the people in the Wuhan lab would have been much more careful and less stressed....never would have been released...........Thanks Trump.
Click to expand...
Thats probably your worst take ever posted. And that's saying a lot. 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, NEO, red butler and 3 others
#19,669
#19,669
luthervol said:
That Biden is better for the country and its future than was Trump.
But I guess we have differing opinions on this.
Click to expand...
Indeed. And the latest polls continue to show that your opinion is in an ever shrinking minority. Trump would be returned to office in Triumph if the election were held today
 
#19,672
#19,672
OrangeTsar said:
Indeed. And the latest polls continue to show that your opinion is in an ever shrinking minority. Trump would be returned to office in Triumph if the election were held today
Click to expand...

One things for sure , Joe would never get those 81 million votes again and Kamala’s glass ceiling will never be broken ( not by a vote anyway)
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and MWR
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top