FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

[drom]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

deleted posting

[drom]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

Has EJ discussed the possibility of going long lithium miners and or bio diesel producers at some time in the future?
Or is there a reason one or both of these are bad ideas in his opinion?
Also where does he forecast the energy will come from to charge the batteries, clean coal and/or nuclear? If so has he mentioned being bullish on producers of these energy sources in future?

I understand he believes in an alternative energy bubble, are there any investments he has suggested to hold at this time? Or is this a bubble he thinks will happen but has not began in a significant way just yet but will as we move closer to peak cheap oil?

[FRED]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

Has EJ discussed the possibility of going long lithium miners and or bio diesel producers at some time in the future?
Or is there a reason one or both of these are bad ideas in his opinion?
Also where does he forecast the energy will come from to charge the batteries, clean coal and/or nuclear? If so has he mentioned being bullish on producers of these energy sources in future?

I understand he believes in an alternative energy bubble, are there any investments he has suggested to hold at this time? Or is this a bubble he thinks will happen but has not began in a significant way just yet but will as we move closer to peak cheap oil?

Please post this to Ask EJ for comments on Lithium investments.

[Starving Steve]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

Bill Gates, May 3, 2011: " 'Cute' tech won't solve planet's energy woes."

The remark was made in New York City, May 3, 2011. Bill Gates was referring to windmills and solar solutions, especially solar panels on homes. Gates said that nuclear power still offered the best option for mankind, especially with innovation in the field of nuclear power-plant design.

[drom]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

It looks like Volvo will be the first to have such a vehicle (PHEV diesel) available, the V60 scheduled to be released next year in Europe for fleet use only at first. As of now they plan on selling the PHEV diesel version in Europe and the PHEV gasoline version here in the US. It is expected to be available to individuals in 2013/2014. Unfortunately it looks like it will be made in China, but hopefully it will be a success and lite a fire under American auto makers to follow suit.

Volvo is owned by Geely Automobile Holdings Ltd. (0175.HK)

Here is an article with a video about the car.
http://green.autoblog.com/2009/06/01...ybrid-w-video/

Article about the release time frames
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1...firmed-for-u-s

V60 on Volvos website
http://www.volvocars.com/intl/campai...s/default.aspx

[c1ue]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

I recently bought a Zero S 100% electric motorcycle. For my purposes it exceeded my expectations. I can ride it to run errands and attend meetings if the full trip is less than 50 miles. It takes 2 hours to fully charge and I can top it off like a laptop at many locations so I've never come close to running out of juice.

The main reason it works so well is that the bike is light and so am I. Otherwise, the range will be much lower and the usefulness more limited. For cars, necessarily heavy, the amount of raw materials needed to create a car with any reasonable range and recharge time is cost-prohibitive.

My motorcycle costs about two and a half times the equivalent 250CC gasoline motorcycle. It only costs 49 cents per charge. Gasoline costs about $10 to go as far on a 250CC gas bike. The price difference doesn't pay off until you ride 25,000 miles. But then you need a new $4,500 replacement battery, so you never break even.

As I've noted many times in my references to my own electric vehicle: a converted Goped ESR 750EX

http://www.itulip.com/forums/archive...p/t-15633.html

http://www.itulip.com/forums/archive...p/t-17014.html

http://www.itulip.com/forums/archive...p/t-16348.html

http://www.itulip.com/forums/archive...p/t-15515.html

For my work purposes, the Goped works great; it is relatively light, I can take it on board public transit and/or airplanes, cheap to recharge.

However, for a daily commuter it is pretty damned expensive: a new 32 Ah Lithium Ion ESR 750 EX costs upwards of $4000 list price with a $3200 price on Amazon now.

Battery replacement costs about $900.

While I'm getting full use of my Goped - the 10000 to 18000 miles I'll get out of the Goped (3-5 years worth for the initial setup, with 2 in the books) yield a total cost per mile of roughly $0.255 to $0.142 per mile, with a battery + electricity only cost of between $0.095 to $0.052 per mile.

Going fully Goped in my family, however, besides the huge barrier of my wife never wanting to be seen on such a dorky vehicle (her words), would require a capital investment of $7K to $10K today, plus a full vehicle backup ($50/month rental cars or CityCarShare/ZipCar type arrangement).

I'd also note that I hardly ever actually go on the road - I stay on the sidewalk.

The problem with 'going light' is the pain and injury factor; I've already had 2 minor injury accidents.

[flintlock]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

Bill Gates, May 3, 2011: " 'Cute' tech won't solve planet's energy woes."

The remark was made in New York City, May 3, 2011. Bill Gates was referring to windmills and solar solutions, especially solar panels on homes. Gates said that nuclear power still offered the best option for mankind, especially with innovation in the field of nuclear power-plant design.

Kind of ironic, since GATES are one of the best uses I've found for solar + battery power. Of course I'm talking electric powered gates in remote locations, driveways, etc,

[Starving Steve]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

As I've noted many times in my references to my own electric vehicle: a converted Goped ESR 750EX

http://www.itulip.com/forums/archive...p/t-15633.html

http://www.itulip.com/forums/archive...p/t-17014.html

http://www.itulip.com/forums/archive...p/t-16348.html

http://www.itulip.com/forums/archive...p/t-15515.html

For my work purposes, the Goped works great; it is relatively light, I can take it on board public transit and/or airplanes, cheap to recharge.

However, for a daily commuter it is pretty damned expensive: a new 32 Ah Lithium Ion ESR 750 EX costs upwards of $4000 list price with a $3200 price on Amazon now.

Battery replacement costs about $900.

While I'm getting full use of my Goped - the 10000 to 18000 miles I'll get out of the Goped (3-5 years worth for the initial setup, with 2 in the books) yield a total cost per mile of roughly $0.255 to $0.142 per mile, with a battery + electricity only cost of between $0.095 to $0.052 per mile.

Going fully Goped in my family, however, besides the huge barrier of my wife never wanting to be seen on such a dorky vehicle (her words), would require a capital investment of $7K to $10K today, plus a full vehicle backup ($50/month rental cars or CityCarShare/ZipCar type arrangement).

I'd also note that I hardly ever actually go on the road - I stay on the sidewalk.

The problem with 'going light' is the pain and injury factor; I've already had 2 minor injury accidents.

Oh, I see: That little Hitler who is the Solicitor General of Motor Vehicles in British Columbia took away your driving license, too.
If that's the case, I think we both can join the adolescents who have lost their "driving privilege" too, and maybe we all can go have a beer at The 17-Mile House Pub. Maybe all of the kids and all of the senior citizens can join a common revolt against an over-zealous provincial government.

In British Columbia, that little Hitler is trying to make it a crime or a violation of the Motor Vehicle Code for electric carts (the kind that senior citizens use for mobility) to be driven on the sidewalk.

One would think that the New Democratic Party in British Columbia, the so-called "opposition party" in the Legislature, would be onto this Solicitor General of Motor Vehicles and make his arrogance and over-reaching an issue. But the NDP would rather debate ecology non-issues and preservationist non-issues with the ruling Liberals. Sad to say, the NDP and the Liberals do nothing for common people in British Columbia.

Mobility is NOT at right in B.C. Mobility is A PRIVILEGE? Mobility to get food and necessities of life is a PRIVILEGE granted by government????????????? If I were in the NDP, I would tear the government in BC to shreds on this one issue alone! Otherwise, what does the NDP really stand for?

[Starving Steve]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

One could make their own alcohol at home in a still, for the 10% of bio-diesel fuel that is alcohol, but that still would have to be cooking ( distilling ) all day and all night. Imagine what that would cost (and waste) in electricity, propane, or natural gas! One way or another, the energy has to be put-in to make the alcohol required as a base for bio-diesel fuel.... And then there is the problem with making lye, that 1% content of bio-diesel.

As I posted, these proponents are indeed "eco-frauds", because they always leave-out or omit or conveniently forget to tell you all of the important details you need to know. Solar photo-voltaics, even passive solar, windmills, diesel, bio-diesel, ethanol, tidal power, geo-thermal, plug-in electric cars, even hybrid-electric cars have all kinds of hidden costs and hidden problems. They are not such wonderful, viable, simple, cheap, energy efficient, nor sometimes not even "green solutions" for the world.

[dropthatcash]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

first off, i consider myself an 'environmentalist' and back the development of solar, wind, biomass/biochem/algae-to-oil technologies, as i simply refuse to believe these options arent viable - even IF they will require massive amounts of gov subsidy - has _any_ major endeavor in The US _not_ been the recipient of fed subsidy somewhere along the line?

going backward and 'conservation' and green-marketing BS is NOT the answer.

Regardless of what you "believe", real science needs to be based on facts. All the options you what to see developed have been around for a 100 years or more and have never been economically viable. Cars, planes, trains and personal computers increased by a factor of 1000's within the first decade after proof of concept, all without government money. Solar, wind and biomass actually had 20 year long negative growth rates after the last government boondoggle subsidies of the 1970's.

You claim to be an environmentalist yet consider conservation going backward. This is so typically liberal, to reject the certain in favor of the hoped for.

[ltullos]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

I
I drive a diesel BMW 335D. It's by far the best car I've ever owned. It actually gets 36MPG as advertised, and it's as fast as my old M3. I'll buy a diesel hybrid when one becomes available. I hope that it, like my motorcycle, will be made in USA.

Just wondering what mileage you get driving the 335D like an M3? Top Gear had a great bit on M3 vs Prius, which although a bit absurd in it's contruct at least made the point that driving behavior is as or more important than vehicle design when it come to fuel economy. As a "driving enthusiast" who really wants to see Tesla succeed at least in terms of changing the expectations for EVs, I'm more interested in fuel economy under my real-world driving conditions.

[Ghent12]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

This post will focus on the original topic and not on the electric vehicle aspect.

Has anyone linked to the real cost of all that wind and solar power in Taxachusetts? How many coal and natural gas plants were created, expanded, or brought up in capacity to provide 100% backup for every single Watt produced by those unreliable wind and solar generators?

Wind and solar power, because of their unreliability, do literally nothing at all to provide a supply of energy to people utilizing any first-world standard (on-demand electricity). The Brits know this well, and that is why some of their prominent enviromentalists (sic) have warned that the days of on-demand electricity in Britain may not last forever. Wind and solar power add to the demand side of the electrical grid, in addition to the supply side. Every single MW of Wind and Solar capacity that is built must be backed up by a reliable generator, which means that for every MW of Wind and Solar capacity you must build or increase capacity in coal, natural gas, or nuclear power. At that point alone it becomes absolutely pointless to build any Wind or Solar capacity.

There is only one justifiable reason to build Wind or Solar power capacity, and it is the exact same analysis you would do for your own home. Compare the cost of fuel (or grid electricity in your own home) saved against the capital investment of the wind generator(s) or solar panel(s). Even with the phenomenon of Peak Cheap Oil, there is very little chance that the savings will justify the capital investment in any location on the globe at any time in the intermediate future (20+ years out).

This isn't about denial, this is about data. Wind and solar power are energy wasting devices of unparalleled hype. It is a truly sad development.

[lektrode]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

Regardless of what you "believe", real science needs to be based on facts. All the options you what to see developed have been around for a 100 years or more and have never been economically viable.

what besides windmills have been around for 100 years?

certainly not PVsolar, that one, nears i know, was an offshoot of the space program and altho 'biomass' energy is as old as burning wood for heat, the concept of biochem/algae-to-oil has only been around as long as cheap(powerful) computers that gave rise to gene-splicing etc, and nears i know, the first computers were a DOD initiative to break encoded enemy transmissions during ww2 (subsidized) - were they not?

but Cars, planes, trains?
lets see: cars: the DOD/eisenhower interstate highway system... jetplanes: DOD war machines, FAA-funded airports, FAA-funded air-traffic system and trains???? like the ones that the railroad-land barons over-built that led up to the panic of 1870 or amtrak, that happened as a result of bankruptcy of PennCentral (a result of the rail unions and the highway-building lobby) - all of which ended up being 'subsidized' somehow, one way or another (and yes, i eagerly await being educated here if i'm wrong = why i hang out here, so go ahead - hit me... mr c1ue? ;)

Cars, planes, trains and personal computers increased by a factor of 1000's within the first decade after proof of concept, all without government money. Solar, wind and biomass actually had 20 year long negative growth rates after the last government boondoggle subsidies of the 1970's.

if the arabs jacking up prices during the 70's-80's (and the peanut farmer's screwball foreign policies) hadnt caused the economic meltdown which then caused oil demand/prices to plummet by the early-mid80s, then those subsidies might've worked out better?...

but it seems to me the subsides of cars/planes in particular over the past 40years have put us in the situation that we are in today - and altho amtrak's subsidies are a difficult question for me, because i'm a railroad fan (model trains as a kid, and because my ole man liked to visit his ww2 buddy in PA, we went several times via train from BOS to PHL and absolutely love the california zephyr trip thru the plains/rockies/desert/sierra - and have to think that ole warren buffet must be 'on the right track' buying BNSF as, well... warren dont screw up very often, even in spite of when he bailed out GS)

You claim to be an environmentalist yet consider conservation going backward.

guess i didnt fully finish my thot on that statement, as i shouldve mentioned that altho i'm concerned about keeping the land, water and air we breath as clean as possible, think that PEOPLE COME FIRST - but only in the sense that if we dont at least try to economically justify pollution controls/regulations, what good will having a clean environment be if we're all out of a job? (about the same as a 2 TRILLION DOLLAR borrowed-money 'recovery' that still claims 9 (15or20)% unemployment as an 'accomplishment' ?)

but i do think that things like changing out edison's heatbulbs, to CFL's makes a lot of $ense, along with elimination of as much waste in the energy equation as possible (even if subsidized), as anything that allows us to break free of the nightmare in the middle east is a good thing - again: even if it takes subsidies to do it - because hey!
subsidizing energy development is still way cheaper that spending TRILLIONS to buy or bomb our way to filling our gas tanks, dont you think??? (tho i draw the line at converting whats left of our topsoil to ethanol = insanity)

This is so typically liberal, to reject the certain in favor of the hoped for.

ya know... i been accused/mistaken/hopeful for a _lot_ of stuff in my career - but 'typically liberal' ???
a guy who refers to himself as a former (economic refugee) of taxachusettes? who's more inclined to say he's from the Live Free or Die State (since that's where i spent most of my formative years)
never mind one who thinks that the 'liberals' (or more precisely: the liberal interpretation of the constitution)
have done more damage to The USA over the past 40or50 years than _anything_ osama bin laden could have _ever_ done?

guess you must not have been reading many of my posts?

[/rant mode]

[lektrode]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

BK, mr c1ue, et al - see my edit/add to the prev reply to this

[lektrode]

Re: FT: Massachusetts reaps a wind and solar harvest, 6/8/2011

...
There is only one justifiable reason to build Wind or Solar power capacity, and it is the exact same analysis you would do for your own home. Compare the cost of fuel (or grid electricity in your own home) saved against the capital investment of the wind generator(s) or solar panel(s). Even with the phenomenon of Peak Cheap Oil, there is very little chance that the savings will justify the capital investment in any location on the globe at any time in the intermediate future (20+ years out)....

i guess its simply a matter of 1: how much do you pay per kwh of electric? (we pay upwards of $.45/kwh here in HI)
2: how fast does one think this cost will escalate (10% a year we have seen out here the past few)
3: what it the value of having YOUR lights on, when the rest of the 'hood is dark? (like say, after a storm, never mind when the rolling blackouts begin, because its not a question of 'if' only when they will begin, peak cheap oil or not, due to the luddites stranglehold on the discussion of energy supply and distribution: NIMBYism will eventually cause the grid to go down)
4: considering its quite doable to cut yer electric bill by 50-100% with PVsolar (quit using electric to make heat and its easy and 'relatively' cheap, getting cheaper every year, while the kwh prices continues UP) sides putting yer excess cash into gold or the casino, can you think of any other kind of investment that will yield anywhere from 10-25% annual/tax free?
since thats quite easy to do these daze, with the subsidies, of course, but if the .gov will help pay for it, why wouldnt you want to?

altho subsidizing the utility industry is a different matter entirely, IMHO - the stockholders ought to be investing in these options, NOT the rate/tax payers (and yes, i realize its one and the same, but i dont think subsidizing the yield on utilities bonds/investment is the same _direct_ benefit as subsidizing the homeowner or utility consumer to install solar etc)