Nearly every American is just hearing about Ukraine for the first time, apart from Hunter's exploits yet the Russians are very aware of what has been happening.
Congratulations, Mr. Bowman. One of your most best columns.
The sad irony here: those suffering the most from the folly unleashed by Biden and his ilk are those they claim to represent and defend…the working poor, immigrants, people of color, etc.
Roberta Flack had a song that started "First time I ever saw...". For the first time, I just saw a video of a maintenance man scrubbing dirt and dust from atop an array of solar panels. He was using an oblong roller comprised of what looked like bunched cotton similar to what is used to apply wax to a floor. However, he was using soapy water and rinsing off with a water hose.
How often does this need to be accomplished to maintain electrical capability?
How can this be accomplished with acres and acres of panels and at what cost?
Is this maintenance included in anyone's comparisons as to the real cost of this 'cheap' method of electricity generation? If one cannot tell the whole truth, elide.
It's amazing to me how many Americans smugly drive their EVs without any regard to where the electricity comes from or how it is generated. There is no economy of scale, and few people would have bought them were it not for the tax incentives/rebates.
It requires same energy (more or less) to move a car a certain distance. Gas, Nat Gas, Electric the energy required to move the vehicle is the same.
The only difference is the efficiency from energy source to movement. Internal combustion engines are what...30% efficient in a car? What is the EV efficiency of energy (gas, U, C) to a power station, powerlines/transmission, conversions etc and then to move the vehicle?
The net efficiency would be a useful number to know. Rigt now arguments are based on emotion, arm-waving and general BS Baffles Brains approach.
You mentioned that you thought that the energy efficiency from energy source to movement for internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle was 30%. I think that the actual number is closer to 10% because there are additional energy losses downstream of where the engine converts the energy in the fuel to rotating mechanical motion of the engine. Additional energy losses are incurred downstream of the engine and experienced in the drivetrain, rolling resistance of the tires, air drag, braking, etc.
Calculating the "net energy efficiency" of EV's versus ICE-powered vehicles requires an understanding of the entire value delivery/supply chain. Calculating the net energy efficiency is really quite complicated. It requires a life cycle analysis of the entire value delivery chain and the analysis can be affected quite dramatically depending on specific situations and locales. This type of life cycle analysis needs to be accurate and requires strong engineering expertise to be done successfully. The underlying data inputs and assumptions built into these life cycle analyses can be hotly debated.
These are some of the main reasons why "net energy efficiency" data are rarely described in the general media.
Another reason might be that the overall "net energy efficiency" numbers may not provide a clear-cut winner between EV's and ICE-powered vehicles today, given the current state of EV technology (cost/expected life/long-term maintenance requirements, etc.). However, there is a belief/faith that all the technologies needed to support EV's will continue to evolve and improve at a significant rate. ICE-powered vehicle technology, and the infrastructure to fuel these vehicles, have experienced 100+ years of operating history and ongoing improvements. There is likely to be only incremental improvements in the ICE vehicle industry going forward, as it pertains to energy efficiency and environmental footprint. The EV industry has really only about 1/10th the operating history and has a greater probability of more significant ongoing improvements.
Still another reason .... Significant transformation of electrical generation and transmission/distribution is required to support EV's. EV's will only create transformational energy efficiency gains and environmental benefits to society if the electricity generation/storage/transmission/distribution infrastructure is transformed at the same time.
Overall, the thermal energy efficiency of the electric vehicle and charging infrastructure system is significantly better than the gasoline or diesel vehicles (and the associated petroleum production/distribution/fueling infrastructure). The energy cost to drive EV's as compared to ICE engines is much lower (2 to 10 times lower depending on specific circumstances). The cost difference provides good insight into the gains of energy efficiency for driving EV's versus ICE vehicles.
However, the costs and energy consumption needed to make and maintain all of the components of the EV's/batteries and renewable energy infrastructure is likely to be quite significant. If batteries last up to 100,000 miles or 10 years, then batteries will need to be replaced, adding to the energy intensity of the overall EV system. Solar panels have a finite life and there is now a trade-off between price of the solar PV equipment and its expected life. More operating experience will be required to understand the economics and environmental footprint of these systems over their lifetimes.
EV's are expected to be more reliable and to require less maintenance than ICE-powered vehicles. If this turns out to be true, and we will only know the extent of this advantage after more time and experience, then the costs/waste/energy intensity of maintaining EV's will be lower than ICE-powered vehicles.
Since both parties are bought and paid for by the elites, why not start a 3rd party. The independent party candidate could not have a net worth over $1,000,000. That perhaps might get rid of the "snollygosters".
Thanks for the missive. It seems our nation's top officials are too busy bringing our country down to be burdened with such things as data or facts. But at least she seems to have taken the Hillary Clinton course on how to be deft at being evasive (not that Hillary should be given credit for inventing it). From all accounts, high prices are here to stay (the new normal). I can only wonder who wants this, and why?
One hint is that it's institutional. If you look at the US government debt and entitlements (Fed, state, local) you know that they cannot be repaid or honoured. Serious inflation and suppression of interest rates ("financial repression") make it appear that they are manageable.
The problem is actually structural, as in "House of Cards."
Now other US politicians are saying that North America is self sufficient...Keystone? Enbridge's Michigan pipeline?
Seems like there is now a transportation problem. Canada should sell at international prices ++ to cover the country risk that America presents to Canadian oil delivery.
Not happening. See our history and branch plant (owned) status, and look at WCS vs WTI differentials over time. This was considered at the time of the first oil crisis and Eastern Canada opted for world prices(cheaper) rather than pay higher national production costs from the west.
Pundits say America is net self sufficient in 'oil'.
If that were true why does US price follow international prices. Buy some, sell some different products ...it should more or less be a wash...if self sufficient.
I could be wrong on this, but some years ago (5,10?) when fracking was getting going, I believe the law was quietly changed to allow domestic oil to be exported. I remember discussing the potential ramifications with my wife. Since domestic producers can sell on the international market, we pay international prices. I also remember reading that terminals that had been originally designed to receive imported liquified natural gas to the US were being reconfigured to EXPORT the surplus natural gas produced by fracking. I have suspicions that at least some of the US opposition to the second Russian pipeline to Germany (Nord Stream 2) was about sending US liquified gas to Germany instead. It’s just a wild guess but, if so, it looks like our exporters will get their wish. Happy heating season next year.
This more than about oil., folks. The Patriarch of the Russian Church, Kiril, iterated that not only he was against LBGTG and abortion but that the west should not be digitizing money. He does not want the people's cash taken away from them. Put the banking back on the gold/silver standard. The people need their freedom, need their silver certificates. The Swedish minister said said the Patriarch Kiril was in a 'Golden Cage', in referring to a prison. No, the Patriarch was referring to self-discipline and monetary discipline. That is something the western governments and banks have not had since 1913 and cannot break away from the evil of that addiction and so create a powerless people.
And it will cause food to sky rocket with civil rest in poorer countries to follow.
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/global-food-crisis?s=w
Before you come to the conclusion the average Russian is against the war, watch this:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=OisJkpGYpAo&feature=share
Nearly every American is just hearing about Ukraine for the first time, apart from Hunter's exploits yet the Russians are very aware of what has been happening.
Very well summarizing video. Thanks for sharing!
Congratulations, Mr. Bowman. One of your most best columns.
The sad irony here: those suffering the most from the folly unleashed by Biden and his ilk are those they claim to represent and defend…the working poor, immigrants, people of color, etc.
Roberta Flack had a song that started "First time I ever saw...". For the first time, I just saw a video of a maintenance man scrubbing dirt and dust from atop an array of solar panels. He was using an oblong roller comprised of what looked like bunched cotton similar to what is used to apply wax to a floor. However, he was using soapy water and rinsing off with a water hose.
How often does this need to be accomplished to maintain electrical capability?
How can this be accomplished with acres and acres of panels and at what cost?
Is this maintenance included in anyone's comparisons as to the real cost of this 'cheap' method of electricity generation? If one cannot tell the whole truth, elide.
It's amazing to me how many Americans smugly drive their EVs without any regard to where the electricity comes from or how it is generated. There is no economy of scale, and few people would have bought them were it not for the tax incentives/rebates.
It requires same energy (more or less) to move a car a certain distance. Gas, Nat Gas, Electric the energy required to move the vehicle is the same.
The only difference is the efficiency from energy source to movement. Internal combustion engines are what...30% efficient in a car? What is the EV efficiency of energy (gas, U, C) to a power station, powerlines/transmission, conversions etc and then to move the vehicle?
The net efficiency would be a useful number to know. Rigt now arguments are based on emotion, arm-waving and general BS Baffles Brains approach.
You mentioned that you thought that the energy efficiency from energy source to movement for internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle was 30%. I think that the actual number is closer to 10% because there are additional energy losses downstream of where the engine converts the energy in the fuel to rotating mechanical motion of the engine. Additional energy losses are incurred downstream of the engine and experienced in the drivetrain, rolling resistance of the tires, air drag, braking, etc.
Calculating the "net energy efficiency" of EV's versus ICE-powered vehicles requires an understanding of the entire value delivery/supply chain. Calculating the net energy efficiency is really quite complicated. It requires a life cycle analysis of the entire value delivery chain and the analysis can be affected quite dramatically depending on specific situations and locales. This type of life cycle analysis needs to be accurate and requires strong engineering expertise to be done successfully. The underlying data inputs and assumptions built into these life cycle analyses can be hotly debated.
These are some of the main reasons why "net energy efficiency" data are rarely described in the general media.
Another reason might be that the overall "net energy efficiency" numbers may not provide a clear-cut winner between EV's and ICE-powered vehicles today, given the current state of EV technology (cost/expected life/long-term maintenance requirements, etc.). However, there is a belief/faith that all the technologies needed to support EV's will continue to evolve and improve at a significant rate. ICE-powered vehicle technology, and the infrastructure to fuel these vehicles, have experienced 100+ years of operating history and ongoing improvements. There is likely to be only incremental improvements in the ICE vehicle industry going forward, as it pertains to energy efficiency and environmental footprint. The EV industry has really only about 1/10th the operating history and has a greater probability of more significant ongoing improvements.
Still another reason .... Significant transformation of electrical generation and transmission/distribution is required to support EV's. EV's will only create transformational energy efficiency gains and environmental benefits to society if the electricity generation/storage/transmission/distribution infrastructure is transformed at the same time.
Overall, the thermal energy efficiency of the electric vehicle and charging infrastructure system is significantly better than the gasoline or diesel vehicles (and the associated petroleum production/distribution/fueling infrastructure). The energy cost to drive EV's as compared to ICE engines is much lower (2 to 10 times lower depending on specific circumstances). The cost difference provides good insight into the gains of energy efficiency for driving EV's versus ICE vehicles.
However, the costs and energy consumption needed to make and maintain all of the components of the EV's/batteries and renewable energy infrastructure is likely to be quite significant. If batteries last up to 100,000 miles or 10 years, then batteries will need to be replaced, adding to the energy intensity of the overall EV system. Solar panels have a finite life and there is now a trade-off between price of the solar PV equipment and its expected life. More operating experience will be required to understand the economics and environmental footprint of these systems over their lifetimes.
EV's are expected to be more reliable and to require less maintenance than ICE-powered vehicles. If this turns out to be true, and we will only know the extent of this advantage after more time and experience, then the costs/waste/energy intensity of maintaining EV's will be lower than ICE-powered vehicles.
Peter A
Since both parties are bought and paid for by the elites, why not start a 3rd party. The independent party candidate could not have a net worth over $1,000,000. That perhaps might get rid of the "snollygosters".
Voluntaryism shows how to go sans parties - voluntarily.
As always, Joel writes an article with facts, reflections, and just enough sarcasm to make it an enjoyable read!
I'm in favor of a world wide #throw the dumb asses and war mongers out. If they refuse to leave, just kill them.
Thanks for the missive. It seems our nation's top officials are too busy bringing our country down to be burdened with such things as data or facts. But at least she seems to have taken the Hillary Clinton course on how to be deft at being evasive (not that Hillary should be given credit for inventing it). From all accounts, high prices are here to stay (the new normal). I can only wonder who wants this, and why?
One hint is that it's institutional. If you look at the US government debt and entitlements (Fed, state, local) you know that they cannot be repaid or honoured. Serious inflation and suppression of interest rates ("financial repression") make it appear that they are manageable.
The problem is actually structural, as in "House of Cards."
Now other US politicians are saying that North America is self sufficient...Keystone? Enbridge's Michigan pipeline?
Seems like there is now a transportation problem. Canada should sell at international prices ++ to cover the country risk that America presents to Canadian oil delivery.
Not happening. See our history and branch plant (owned) status, and look at WCS vs WTI differentials over time. This was considered at the time of the first oil crisis and Eastern Canada opted for world prices(cheaper) rather than pay higher national production costs from the west.
The same players are still at the table, see JT.
Pundits say America is net self sufficient in 'oil'.
If that were true why does US price follow international prices. Buy some, sell some different products ...it should more or less be a wash...if self sufficient.
I could be wrong on this, but some years ago (5,10?) when fracking was getting going, I believe the law was quietly changed to allow domestic oil to be exported. I remember discussing the potential ramifications with my wife. Since domestic producers can sell on the international market, we pay international prices. I also remember reading that terminals that had been originally designed to receive imported liquified natural gas to the US were being reconfigured to EXPORT the surplus natural gas produced by fracking. I have suspicions that at least some of the US opposition to the second Russian pipeline to Germany (Nord Stream 2) was about sending US liquified gas to Germany instead. It’s just a wild guess but, if so, it looks like our exporters will get their wish. Happy heating season next year.
You are absolutely right!
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2022/02/america-defeats-germany-for-the-third-time-in-a-century-the-mic-bare-and-ogam-conquer-nato.html
Joel, you refer to our “Prez” as “Uncle Joe”. I believe that was the moniker that FDR and Churchill assigned to Stalin during the Yalta conferences.
Could this be a Freudian slip or intentional.
Dude, you’re good at this.
This more than about oil., folks. The Patriarch of the Russian Church, Kiril, iterated that not only he was against LBGTG and abortion but that the west should not be digitizing money. He does not want the people's cash taken away from them. Put the banking back on the gold/silver standard. The people need their freedom, need their silver certificates. The Swedish minister said said the Patriarch Kiril was in a 'Golden Cage', in referring to a prison. No, the Patriarch was referring to self-discipline and monetary discipline. That is something the western governments and banks have not had since 1913 and cannot break away from the evil of that addiction and so create a powerless people.
Another good read.
Fantastic stuff. I look forward every week to the Sunday Sesh.