cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Honored Advisor

Re: The challenge of the next decade

ok sd and time.......

I respect your data.... and I know your not the one who printed that 4.5 cents lie.  We saw that here with wind promotion but havent seen anything under 9 cents in reality.  But what is going to be the effeciency point--30% of capacity--maybe 50% ?  And your comment about Arizona or anywhere southwest or west-- including Southern Cal.   Indiana cannot generate with the sw on a solar scale.     Can they?    No more clouds in indiana -----no more winter lake effect snow....??   We would and do take solar out with a hail storm two years out of ten.  

And rent at $700 per acre......... They could get 3 acres for the cost of one ............in a better climate for production??

do they have to be close to that end user ??

The effeciency of solar (so far) hasn't been much better than wind... nuclear has to be far cheaper....  

 

I'll take 750 acres to garden or feed livestock and 2 oil and gas wells on the other 30 acres (probably far less).... It is just better use of land...... even if its raising christmas trees or pine trees.  ---- and here is my point.... I think when it is all said and done ----- 40 years down the road..... the global energy or carbon footprint will be similar in size if not greater than fossil fuels .  You gave up any future use of land and still have the ownership responsibility & property tax burdon.     Those solar facilities still need steel and cement and copper wore and battery storage.    

It is a bad time for farming and that is a good price to sell at..... and it is a sale in terms of land use.  

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: The challenge of the next decade

So scrap the panels or windmills and move on after 20 years.

The net energy payback on either is now less than 2 years*.

Unlike fossil fuels, which are finite.

Old nukes are much more expensive but thoruim might be the answer to baseload. But that assumes a government not owned by the buggywhip lobby. Or like wind and solar, just let the Chinese do it.

*and the energy and effort input is GDP and jobs, jobs jobs, a lot more than drilling oil and those pore coal miners.

 

 

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: The challenge of the next decade

4.5 cents on the front end of the grid with large scale solar is a real thing.

Offshore wind, solar are blowing everything else away as they scale up, and storage is improving.

BTW, I don;t apprecaite being called a liar just for challenging what you glean from your corrupt trusted sources.

 

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Honored Advisor

Re: The challenge of the next decade

This whole "renewable" verses "fossil" fuels debate....I`m not an expert on kilowatt rates and all that stuff.  But I drive past miles and miles of windfarms and miles and miles of solar farms, new ones coming up and you commonly meet a 200` windmill blade being hauled down the road.  I mean, what more can we do???  i see electrics cars and hybrids, but if you have a large family, cold weather, drive a lot of miles and can`t afford to spend $80,000 or whatever they cost.  Some of us have never been able to afford a new vehicle and to buy a used electric car could be a money pit.

When I hear "can`t let the Chinese get ahead of us on this!  We gotta do more more more" .  What I`m reading between the lines is pass unachievable fuel standards to force gasoline and diesel out prematurely and subsidize the crap out of so-called renewable energy. 

Maybe 20 years from now that timing will be right on target, but if you tear down our tried and true energy sources too soon, you`ll bankrupt the country.  And like I say what more can we do? Windmills and solar panels all over the place now and yes they are subsidized.  I`d love to have 3 windmills on my place, it`d be like winning the lottery!

So, we talk about "fossil fuels"  .."dinosaurs died and turned into crude oil ...and we`re running out of it!!!".   Okay so riddle me this: A oil rig is in the Gulf of Mexico goes a mile through water and then a few miles down to strike oil, so how the hell did dinosaurs get 5 miles down and turn into crude oil?

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Funny you should ask.

Stop growing corn & beans and cover my whole farm with solar panels?

  Funny you ask, at the moment you need to be within 600 ft of a three phase line and I'm a couple thousand feet away.

  But, on my way to the combine salvage yard to pick up part I passed construction site in the middle of a 50A  field of corn stubble and asked the salvage yard operator what it was going to be.  Guess what, a solar farm.

For sometime now,  the big dairy farmers in that area have only had to compete with each other for rented land and they had an understanding not to poach each others territory.  Now they've got competition and they aren't happy.

  The plan for this solar farm is to fence it and grow meat sheep & goats around the panels.  Given the demand for ethnic  goat meat on the East Coast it will probably work out just fine.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Honored Advisor

Re: Funny you should ask.

Rick you can easily pay to extend the 3 phase to your property. We had to extend a line 4 miles when we built our new grain handling facility back in 2013. :-) A few thousand feet would be nothing, maybe $10,000.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Honored Advisor

Re: Funny you should ask.

Around here anyway, the solar panels have to be fenced off, no grazing animals around them. 

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Funny you should ask.

About the poroject I referred to- it is for a very large institution that will use 100% so the cost from day 1 will be 4.5 cents vs the 12 or so they're now paying.

They already own the land so there isn't a csot other than opportunity on it.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: Funny you should ask.

About the dead dinosaurs thing- that's just a bit of propaganda snark that climate science deniers and young earthers use. The source of oil was mostly dead plant material that built up in shallow oceans in the primordial past. A very small amount ever became oil- it also required geological events to "cap" it with a rock layer where it degraded into pure hydrocarbon and stayed in place. Those precise conditions were fairly rare. The processes happened around 300- 400 million years ago.

Another piece of snark is about "common sense", and all that. Common sense might actually tend to suggest that every year burning fossil fuels that took a million years to form out of natural processes might in fact be destabilizing to the natural system.

One of the other disinformation techniques is intentionally confusing historical and geological time. 

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Honored Advisor

Re: The challenge of the next decade


@sdholloway56 wrote:

So scrap the panels or windmills and move on after 20 years.  -----

The net energy payback on either is now less than 2 years*.  ****** If this were anywhere near true I would be cheering for the change.... but it is not true at all...... If we assume the government gifts never have to be paid back(like a student loan to our gifted masses) I still cant pay the cost of the turbine generated electricity in two years...... maybe 20  ..... It is like farming.... you can have all the tax incentives in the world but if you can't generate a profit, they are meaningless. ---- Problem.... You can't even opperate those systems until a consumer plugs in to them so their not being paid when their not in use.... That is the efficiency problem we see in wind .  No sales when the customer shuts you off.  They are not generating anything of value --example-- (what will be planted acres in Iowa if every bushel harvested has to have a contract up front and delivered as needed when needed?-- No long term storage for volume.. so harvest has to be a 365 days a year small operation.  The producer assumes all production costs, delivery costs, and transformation to a useable form-- and expects all input costs will be paid back in two years.)----- Granted things would be different if we had to find a buyer before we buy seed....

Unlike fossil fuels, which are finite.   ---- Based on assumptions we do not know as fact.  are they finite?  This is where you get lost believing theory is fact.   It has always been the goal of oil... to promote or create finite supply to support price.  Believing it was always a bit risky........ are we sure it is true.  Most science these days has become Vegas science= "what are the odds"

Old nukes are much more expensive but thoruim might be the answer to baseload. But that assumes a government not owned by the buggywhip lobby. Or like wind and solar, just let the Chinese do it.  This statement assumes too much hocus-- little more than "hopeful rumor"  But the last line points out the ultimate issue,  Someone needs to prove the theories are fact without Gifts from God(seems obvious that the US taxpayer is believed to be)  and work out the feasibility for large scale acceptance...  Way too much of green energy is our grasp for quick and easy answers.... to problems that may or may not be.

*and the energy and effort input is GDP and jobs, jobs jobs, a lot more than drilling oil and those pore coal miners.    And finally------ questions --- how many chinese work in the oilfields or refining industry?-- if this statement is true.... it cannot be cheaper to produce.... if it takes more labor.... US GDP or Chinese GDP???

 

 


 

0 Kudos