Tag Archives: Energy

January 17, 2021 · 21:26

A fence is for fencing

Yup, that did not make sense did it, although, it is not that far from the truth. It is pretty much on the level of ‘if a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?’ I know, it sounds lame, but the setting is a bit lame and it is open to debate who is right, I for one am clearly in the mindset that I could be wrong, I freely admit that off the bat.

You see, the UK (aka United Kingdom) has a problem, it is coming up short to a much larger degree with energy and that will go on 3-5 years at the very least. Shale Gas is too dangerous in the UK. You merely have to look at the Netherlands for that example as well as the papers of the Dutch NAM to see that there is a larger problem and the Dutch North is in a terrible state because of it. The Netherlands is however on European main land, the UK is not, as such the dangers to groundwater could be a lot more hazardous. The second option is to add 1-2 nuclear reactors, but that is 5 years away and the UK is a bit empty on the coffer side of things, but it is an option for long term consideration. And then there is the reliable coal, a substance fought over since the Onedin line was a fashionable time (circa 1860). So when I see ‘Government defends Cumbria coal mine green light’ I get the response by BBC writer Roger Harrabin (at https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-55668507), and he is optionally correct, but the UK is dealt a set of cards that do not look prosperous and in the short term consider the power switched off in every house for 2 hours a day for the next three years. The issue is that pressing, so when I see “Environmentalists have reacted with astonishment and disbelief, saying the carbon from burning coal is clearly a global concern. They warned the decision will diminish the UK’s credibility.” I am not entirely sure if the environmentalists understand the situation as it is, yes we can be overly protective in the 11th hour, but that also means that for the next three years all houses will lose power 2 hours a day. No electricity of any kind, that is the setting the UK faces. Elon Musk is sitting on a solution to solve it, but that is also 1-2 years away and that will bring cost to EVERY house in the UK, it is up to you all, but we need to see that governments on a global scale were sitting on their hands whilst the energy shortage was clearly visible, the UK has only 2 direct options and one is 5 years away (it takes time to build a nuclear energy reactor). Now if Paul Miner gets his way (I a not saying he is wrong) and we see the setting “All coal mines should be refused planning permission, according to current government policy. So, it beggars belief why ministers have not stepped in and refused the planning application for this coal mine in Cumbria”, he must also deal with all the complaints when well over 40 million people will have to find a solution living on power 22 out of 24 hours a day, when that shortage is felt by the people in the UK, they need to visit Paul Miner and hand over their complaints to him.

Now, I am not in favour of coal mines and coal based energy systems, but the UK is now in a stage where they might not have a choice, the inactions over 1990-2010 will now be showing. When we get the numbers “Between 1990 and 2018, net imports of electricity increased by 60 percent” (source: Statista), we need to realise that it will get worse, in addition we are given “In 2017 UK Net imports made up 36% of UK energy needs (paraphrased)”, as such 2021 could spell that energy imports could hit the 50% marker.

So why might I be wrong?
I accept I might be wrong, The stage Statista shows is one that causes questions, first off, Statista has always been a reliable source of information, as such I could be wrong, yet I have issues with the setting that power needs between 2009-2019 has gone down from 400 GWh to 345 GWh. That is a decrease of a little over 13%, and when we see how electronics have been either on par and in some cases higher, 15% is large, and I believe it is not entirely accurate, I personally believe that over the next 3 years, power needs will increase well over 10%, The net import of electricity rise of 60% is partial evidence, our changing habits on the internet, streaming and all the devices relying on IoT are a secondary level of evidence and there is more to come, all whilst the UK is coming up short again and again and at some point France and Norway will not be able to provide the energy required. But the Statista curve is also optional evidence that my way of thinking is incorrect and that too needs to be out there.

So we might be on the fence, we might fence with the numbers we see, but it is clear that there is a larger stage and I am willing to bet that some numbers are behind a curtain so that we remain lulled to sleep, until it is too late, and by my personal reckoning it is already too late, because if there was still time there would not be any coal mine in the planning stage, whether it is local or not, whether that stage is global, all whilst I showed on December 10th 2020 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/12/10/uniform-nameless-entitlement-perforation/) in my blog ‘Uniform Nameless Entitlement Perforation’ that 1% of the industries account for 50% of the damages. The chart was clear and as I now see “it further fuels climate and ecological breakdown”, all whilst the actions against the 1% industrials who create the massive pollution damage are nowhere in sight, hypocrisy anyone?

So yes, I am not in favour of this coal mine, but I wonder if the UK has too many options left and when the UK faces brown-outs like California does and it happens in winter, I wonder how many snivelling people will cry for energy relief and that is if the people in the UK can still afford energy bills in 2022, because that too is a question that might not be as easy to answer as we think, especially if all that energy is to be imported. Yet none of that is seen in the article (which is fair), yet ignoring the larger stage is folly, especially in these times.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as BBC, EEP, Elon Musk, Energy, France, NAM, Netherlands, Norway, Paul Miner, Roger Harrabin, Statista, UK, UNEP

December 16, 2020 · 21:06

Dangerous conclusions

We all come to them, conclusions that are shaped in the mind, usually they are based on facts making them speculations, some are based on speculations making them pure delusions, some are in-between and that is the dangerous part, are they visionary, are they speculative delusions? The point is that the writer will see them as visionary, but the writer (even me) is not the best judge in this.

For the exercise I need to grasp back to a story I did recently. ‘Trillion dollar Musk’ was written on December 3rd (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/12/03/trillion-dollar-musk/), I there ‘accused’ Elon Musk that his value would skyrocket to $1.2 trillion collars. I also gave the readers “The UK (via the Guardian) inform us of “Britain’s electricity will be in short supply over the next few days after a string of unplanned power plant outages and unusually low wind speeds this week”, the UK has an increasing need for Scandinavian power and soon it cannot be met. I reckon that in the next 2-3 years that shortage will be close to systemic all over the EU”, the stage was set and I still believe that we are 2-3 years away, but are we? Bloomberg (at https://www.bloomberg.com/sponsors/jll/seven-ways-to-retrofit/index.html) gives us ‘7 Ways to Retrofit Buildings for Energy Efficiency’, it is a setting and it is sponsored by JLL, a real-estate and investment firm who gives us “We’re here to create rewarding opportunities and amazing spaces around the globe where people can achieve their ambitions. In doing so, we are building a better tomorrow for our clients, our people and our communities”, I believe that we are about to hit an energy snag, a little sooner than I anticipated.

So as the JLL gives us

Upgrade you lighting
Upgrade the HVAC
Optimise Performance
Implement a Waste Strategy
Use Continuous Commissioning
Organize “Treasure Hunts”
Elevator Controls
Added by me: Upgrade kitchens.

Now the Elon Musk battery shows the issues, even as we are now hearing more and more on the need for carbon neutral in commercial buildings, the private places are merely one step away.

Forbes reported in August “At first, the state’s electrical grid operator last night asked customers to voluntarily reduce electricity use. But after power reserves fell to dangerous levels it declared a “Stage 3 emergency” cutting off power to people across the state at 6:30 pm” and this is only the beginning. Elon is about to get a massive increase of value and his wealth might go up well beyond $1.2 trillion.

It is not limited to California, although they are the most visible one, New York, the United Kingdom, and parts of Europe and Australia will see a drastic need for power sooner rather than later. At that point the rich we can ignore, they will get what they need, the middle income section, that is where the massive gains are made, a lot will add a growing carbon neutral stage with the adapted Tesla battery, the power grid adaptions for lights, Air conditioning, water heaters (boilers), fridges and freezers. There will be a massive option for growth there, the adaptation of AC equipment to DC equipment, a stage where some will buy new stuff and some will need adaption with new power units for both. I came up with a new sort of roof tile, made from recyclable plastics, and each tile will have solar cells, instead of putting panels on top (some will still do that), to tiles where people can grow their power creation stage, two tiles, the highest levels which connects to the second grid and the battery and other tiles that will connect to other tiles and a highest layer tile. The benefit of that is that people do not need to splurge on massive panels, with the battery they get tiles, but it is a basic level, as some need more power more quickly, more sets of tiles can be bought, giving the people months to grow their setting and reduce their carbon footprint. In addition, some will add wind-vanes. It is a stage that is as essential and as clear as traffic jams, we have been increasing power needs with an average of 5% per year. How long did you think that the energy companies could deliver? Consider your fridge, what you had 10 years ago and what you have now. Larger families needing more boiler water and the summers require more and more air conditioning units, all set to a lower temperature burning power away and California can no longer cope with the need. They are the first, but they are not alone. How many devices require a charger? In 1990 that was 1 perhaps 2, now it is 5-8 PER HOUSE, routers, Wifi modules, and the PC went from the ‘high end’ of 300 Watts to the average PC now needing 600-1100 Watts. In 1990 there were less than 700,000,000 globally that were into gaming, now that number is 2,000,000,000 higher (globally), two billion additional devices, the consoles do not use that much, but still 150 watts, times a billion is still a lot, they also need a TV running, now, the TV is actually a massively low energy user if it is a LED flatscreen. But the numbers are not looking good and that is before you realise that PC’s were something a company had in 1990, now, for the most, nearly every employee at every firm has one, there tend to be low energy versions, but they are still there and often they are on day and night. When you see this list and do the numbers, you need to see that energy firms needed to double their options in 2000, that never happened and now they need and alternative and Elon Musk has it, and owns the IP no less.

So is my version so much more visionary because Bloomberg had a sponsored JLL article? I don’t think so, but I believe that awareness is being created at higher levels and we need to catch on sooner rather than later, because the prices of electricity will go up again and again in the next 2 years. Consider your budget and consider your energy costs will go up by 10% in 2021, how much more budget will you not have?

That is the stage I foresaw some time ago, I will let you decide how right or how wrong I am.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, Science

Tagged as Battery, bloomberg, electricity, Elon Musk, Energy, Forbes, IP, JLL, solar cells, Tesla

December 3, 2020 · 21:43

Trillion dollar Musk

I got some questions thrown at me in the last few days, they were pretty much all about me over valuing Elon Musk, but am I? I stated before that in the next 3-4 years his value will increase to roughly $1.2 trillion dollars, or in a less shorthand version $1,200,000,000,000, yes that is where he is heading and he already has most of the IP in his possession to do so. The second part I get is what do I get out of it. Nothing, well, like most I would like a 3.75% commission on the increase with a maximum of €5 B (a man is allowed to dream) and it would amount to less than one percent of his gain, I am not overly filled with confidence I will see a penny, but his increase is almost set in stone.

Why set in stone?
The UK (via the Guardian) inform us of “Britain’s electricity will be in short supply over the next few days after a string of unplanned power plant outages and unusually low wind speeds this week”, the UK has an increasing need for Scandinavian power and soon it cannot be met. I reckon that in the next 2-3 years that shortage will be close to systemic all over the EU.

Why?
Consider most houses and apartments. Only a decade ago our power needs were not that high, now many houses have more than one gaming console. The fridges are 200%-400% in size, PC’s that had a 300 watt power supply now has a 600-1200 watt supply, if it was one apartment it was a small issue, but this is now covering millions of places all over Europe and millions op places in the US. I reckon that in 3 years the political screaming starts for Carbon Neutral houses and apartments, and Elon Musk has the battery. It is more than the battery, the larger need for an individual solar and wind power base will increase, you see in 2-3 years the power outages will start to really hit, so as infrastructure (like hospitals) will need protection, houses will see power cost go through the roof and political parties will all unite to vie for subsidies on a larger scale and Elon Musk has the larger base of goods.

Yet he cannot do it alone, DC appliances, like lights is easy and not the larger bulk, yet the fridges, the freezers, the water boilers and heaters, they take up a much larger part and new houses will all be outfitted with carbon neutral settings, as the houses has either via new tiles based on recycled plastic, with the high end having solar cells in the tiles, we will see a growth setting where people have a cell foundation and a growing amount of tiles with solar cells, some will also have wind fans, all generating the house power, all captured in the Musk battery. It will grow slowly, the harder hit area’s first, but it will grow and at some point there will be a near exponential growth for a little while. Germany and France (rural parts) are the most likely area’s, the UK and Belgium. But it will grow into the US as well. Even as the US seems to hide behind “A report by the US Department of Energy site weather-related power outages as the leading cause of power outages in the United States. The report and the Pew research both also acknowledge an aging infrastructure as part of the problem. Some of the US power grid dates back to the earliest onset of electricity”, the actual problem is near systemic, power needs have grown well over 10% annually in the last 5-10 years. Computers, AC systems, larger fridges and the list goes on. TV’s less so, yet in many ig not most households, from 11 Mega Watt a month, we see that many houses are now on 1100-1800 Watt per hour for a larger part of the day, each day and that is starting to add up, as such when the Musk Battery becomes the stretch of time that nations need his value goes through the roof and in that the $1.2T might be a conservative cautious number at present. It is a lot depending on the larger power needs that the EU, UK and US are staging, but the growing need cannot be hidden, even as we see that the weather is ‘apparently’ the larger cause as some claim it, it is not the only cause and when the people see the musk solution as a larger stage for resolving brown out damage, the people will push for that solution as well. So when the GeGaLo Index can no longer supply to the needs the buyers want it, energy prices will quite literally go through the roof and the Musk battery is only one element but it is his IP and it is for too many a solution.

That is what will soon set the beginning of Elon Musk becoming the first trillionaire, and optionally over time it will make him the first multi trillionaire. I reckon that bad boy Billy Gates never considered being passed to this degree (or would that be bing passed), but I reckon that he will not care.

4 Comments

Filed under Finance, Science

Tagged as Battery, Bill Gates, electricity, Elon Musk, Energy, Eu, GeGaLo Index, power, UK, US

October 24, 2013 · 20:35

A Label for Labour

If we can use the information (to some extent) that the Guardian gave us this morning, then the first reference would be ‘Whinging’ 1. To complain, whine 2. A message from the labour party! So, the second one actually explains part of the newscast. The story was how according to Miliband, Cameron was losing control over the energy policy. (At http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/24/edmiliband-davidcameron) How does he figure that?

The facts are not that unclear. There once was a non-fairy tale involving 6 commercial enterprises, who to some degree had to make a profit. In addition, the following headline should be interesting “Every UK home to face 15pc energy price rise” (Jan 2008)

Not to mention that parliament had an interesting document (at www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn04153.pdf ). There are two issues, one, several sources mention an average 16% annual increase during 3 terms of labour. I mention it, but some numbers are sketchy, so I have some reservations how correct those numbers were, even though the parliament briefing papers do show a spike in that time frame.

It does not matter what the direct cause was, however, in three labour terms, nothing was done to limit that price increase, so labour’s nagging whilst the honourable Ed Miliband is on the non-winner side of the isle is rather fishy to say the least. Yes, we should acknowledge that The Electricity Act 1989 was enacted under the conservatives by Baroness Thatcher, then Prime Minister Thatcher. I reckon that there should always be a certain amount of questions when we privatise any form of utility. Commerce is the quickest attack on any wallet (a life lesson that is universally accepted).

So, even though there are questions, the one involving 3 terms of labour and energy prices should remain high on that list.

The article has a few other points of attention, Miliband’s quote “But this prime minister is too weak to stand up for the consumer and he always takes the side of the big six companies.” Really Edward? You do remember the greed issues involving a commercial enterprise? Or perhaps the London School of Economics classes (the ones on Economy) had a different focus? ;-), you party animal you! 🙂

Anyway, we can nag on the last three terms (but then we might sound like labour), in this term there needs to be an actual focus not on stopping (which is slightly non-realistic), but to some extent limiting price increases. Although allowing the French and the Chinese into the UK energy game might put a limit on price hikes to some extent, but it remains to be left in the hands of non-government, hence at that point, it remains a commercial play. What are the options?

There is actually an idea that might work. The idea was not mine; I picked it up in Sweden around 2001. The idea was that sound stable firms started to buy and install wind farms (in this case 1-3 turbines per firm). There are plenty of places to do that. The UK and Scotland could offer such areas too. Yes, in many places people might complain on the view, and they could select to pay £100-£200 a year more, or just accept the ‘lesser’ view. Consider that these people will get some tax benefits, but more importantly, they could lessen the power grid pressure and at times contribute to the net inviting refunds. There is an additional benefit. As the net gets a power feed, all over the place, losing power points would not have the blackout results other solutions have. So consider that through whatever non-governmental funding these windmills are added, the UK grid could end up getting a solid power addition by 1500-3000 turbines.

In the past I have ALWAYS spoken out against the irresponsible investment of retirement funds. If we accept that these turbines would prove to be a stable return on investment, keep price hikes down and allow for alternative ways to stabilise power needs, then why not look into such an adoption?

I never heard anything mentioned in that regard in the House of Commons (I do admit, I dozed off at some point, but it was 02:00 when that happened). So perhaps we can all look for a solution together? Because no matter where you live, we all need water and power, having alternatives when greed driven elements strike is NEVER a bad idea.

Scolding Labour’s Energy call

In the UK Ed Milliband is at it again. Of course, as Labour is getting closer to the elections, more interesting offers will be made to the electorate in a hope to get the votes up by a lot. As Mr Milliband is not polling to strong, more is needed.

Sky News reported on the notion that Ed Milliband has voiced options to freeze energy prizes, should Labour make it as the new tenant, getting the keys to that famous door on Downing Street (I think it was number 10).

Yes, freezing prices. It is an option to offer, but as Sky news showed in more than one way, it is not a very realistic one. I reckon that all parties need to realise that the next 3 terms will be about cutting the deficit. If the economy is to have ANY kind of a chance to get stronger and to get the UK back on some level of forward momentum, then the deficit and the debt need to go. Not realising that this is to be the number one priority is the party that has self, not the nation in mind.

The Dutch are dealing with this in a bad way. They have to cut 6 billion, or face a billion in fines. The survival of ALL the European players is to cut outstanding debts. It is a lesson the USA is currently not willing to face and it is about to get a lot harder for them.

Labour has more issues, but about that more soon. If we focus (not just UK) on these options, then we have options to strengthening all our economies. When we consider the option to unite the labour surplus and shortage of Australia, Canada, New Zealand and UK then we might cancel out a few shortages. If the world is a global workforce then the Commonwealth has one of the most global covering work force on the planet. Why is this not more strongly investigated? if we can get work flowing, then we get revenue moving and the reduction on welfare could be the start of it all. If we believe the news then there are many young workers looking for a job. Why not enable that workforce to work in any of these nations in certain areas? Even, if it is only for 1-2 years. That means hundreds of thousands could end up having an income. And the nice part is except for Quebec they all speak English (in Quebec they speak an additional language, so you could end up learning a second language there).

Anyway, this is not about language. Or is it?

The language of Labour has been off in several nations. In the UK the language is stretched for the votes, yet that could change sooner rather than later. In Australia Labour lost on message and on a public getting sick to watch the labour bickering. First there was Kevin Rudd, then Julia Gillard, then Kevin Rudd again and now after the Labour defeat the new ringleaders are in a rope pulling match between Anthony Albanese and Bill Shorten. Watching the ‘who gets to be in charge fight’ is immensely less entertaining to the labour supporters, if nothing (I mean way too little) is getting accomplished.

Ed Milliband has a different power struggle. His is about energy and the non-reality that these prices can get frozen. The margins are not that great when investments and infra structures are considered. If we believe the Guardian, then the energy moguls are in the market for cold blooded profiteering, which came from an article they published in April 13th 2013. Is this about profit? Who pays for the investments? We all are so nice about carbon emissions, getting green energy and such, but how does that get paid for?

Let us not forget that these are Commercial energy providers and they live on that pesky little thing called profit. British Energy is part of EDF, a combination that pays for almost 20,000 people. So if the income in Pounds is set to an average of 26,500, then they need to make a profit of over half a billion to just pay the average income (and this is only one of the six providers). Where will all that money come from?

So, apart from the workforce there are the plants, which need gas, oil, Uranium or other materials to create the energy. Not really a high yielding profit margin. I know about those ‘cheaper’ options, but for now a water powered fusion reactor remains a non-reality.

So as Ed Milliband makes this vow to freeze prices and as we know everything gets more expensive and these workers want a raise at some point. How can this promise be met? I do apologise for playing the realistic focussed pragmatist. It is just not a reality to see that happen. Not without adding to the debt by large steps, which in the end will be the UK downfall, missing whatever small curve of industry they could get.

So I remain, to be honest, as a conservative in a mindset that the UK alone might not hack it (not because they do not want to), but because the negative waves are too strong. Yet, the UK does not stand alone, we are all together the commonwealth. I prefer the old name, we ARE the British Empire. If Australia has such shortages in engineering (Western Australia), and healthcare in the UK is falling short, can we not slam our hands together? There is also Canada. With these three, we cover the entire global timeline. So many companies promise 24:7 support and then outsource it to India (also a Commonwealth nation), which gave many all kinds of language issues at times (not all the time mind you).

If labour needs a strong message, then why not focus on solutions, especially those not in the box. That part is shown with the NHS that does not fit into any box (apart from a coffin it might soon end up in, if nothing gets done right quick).

We should not rephrase messages, we should not change messages and we all need to look into new messages. Not doing so is a disservice to all constituents. The US to some extent still goes for the message “In god we trust all others pay cash“, Let our message not be some political clarion call, but a message that reverberated strongly throughout India, driving it to independence and turning it into a world power in less than 65 years. Not the worst example to follow! We all need to embrace both Mahatma Ghandi’s and Jawaharlal Nehru’s call for Global Cooperation. As they were both honourable members of the Inner Temple, we could see their view as one that had British foundations (that’s me thinking wishfully) and remains one that is worthy of pursuing.