Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, mikewof said:

If you made an attempt to read, you might learn something. I'll nutshell it for you, as applied to your own little island continent ...

  1. Australia burns a metric fuck ton of coal,
  2. Australia exports an even bigger metric fuck ton of coal,
  3. Australia's coal industry is a top-ten industry, worth about $70 billion per year.
  4. Coal is a twilight industry, it's highly polluting and produces an enormous public heath cost.
  5. Unlike the USA, Australia doesn't have a cohesive national plan to replace coal the power source and coal the energy source.
  6. In order to avoid thinking about any of this, this sampling of Australians have proven themselves adept at displacing their anxiety about their own miserable coal train and pointing fingers at Wyoming, or me, if they really suffer from dipshititis.
  7. You, Shaggybaxter, have outdone yourself in Item #6. Good boy. Sit. Roll-over. But like your fellow Aussie Ease The Sheet, I suspect you will not in fact endeavor to learn fuck-all about rare earth elements. As long as you can drive through the fast-food pickup window and have some teenager shove something down your throat, you're not going to complain.

You know it's a thread about Wyoming?

That's probably why even Australians are talking about Wyoming.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 242
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

As a community service, I decided to give MIke the benefit of the doubt, so over the last week I have attempted to read his posts and research his position if I was unsure.  The results are now i

Why don't you just assign me a stance and argue against that?  You seem to be comfortable doing so. In the meantime, I am going back to pretending you don't exist.  Go right ahead in your Quixoti

Or not sailors at all. Can't remember too much on the sailing front from the numpty brigade.  Which begs the question...wtf are they here for? Edit: sorry, that's obvious, if they act like t

Posted Images

5 hours ago, mikewof said:

 

Ah, so Wyoming is socialist, at least for the folks who contribute to the Republicans. Why didn’t you just say that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

You know it's a thread about Wyoming?

That's probably why even Australians are talking about Wyoming.

It's not a thread about Wyoming the way The Sopranos was a show about eating pork.

This is a thread about coal, about the changing economics of the energy industry, and what people have decided to do about these changes.

This has been a huge focus in the USA, we have "de-coaled" faster than most countries, we're down to about 15% or so, and we're investing a lot of money into what comes after coal, like REEs. I think the USA is going in the right direction here, Australia and China, not so much.

Have you learned anything about Rare Earth Elements yet? You brought it up, remember?

On 5/9/2021 at 11:13 PM, Ease the sheet. said:

You'd think the state would have funding for life after coal, like rare earths?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Ah, so Wyoming is socialist, at least for the folks who contribute to the Republicans. Why didn’t you just say that?

If that's your opinion, so be it. Every state has policies that are collective and that's often a good thing.  What's your point about that?

Wyoming is the smallest state, there is a lot of poverty and job stress there in part because they don't have a lot of industry, which in partly due to historical reasons. It's hard to grow things there, the wind is nonstop, grazing is tough, water is scarce, winters are difficult, there isn't a lot of rail or even roads through vast chunks of the state, and Wyoming gets bypassed a lot.

The USA (i.e. you, me, your Uncle and my accountant's nephew) decided that we want power, and part of that power is coal. Wyoming delivered the coal we asked them to deliver, and now we've decided that we want to pivot away from coal faster than originally planned. Does someone like you take pleasure in seeing a Wyoming family who can't afford to put food on the table because the coal PPA ended prematurely? A family reduced to use EBT and subsidies to keep propane in the tank so their kids don't freeze to death? I suspect that this would bother you as much as it bothers me.

So Wyoming has a plan, and they want to pivot as the rest of the country pivots, instead of getting left behind. I think they're going to succeed too. But it's going to be hard. Unlike West Virginia and Pennsylvania, they're far, far away from population centers and they can't necessarily attract big companies just for the fuck of it. They allocated a bit of money to protect the citizens of Wyoming, and for some reason, you have a problem with this? Why?

You got up this morning, maybe made some coffee in your kettle, ran your microwave, maybe heated or cooled your home, ran your computer, charged your phone, charged your Tesla EV, turned on some lights perhaps. All of that was connected to coal. In a sense, you're presenting yourself as one of these "Hell and Brimstone" preachers who sanctifies his congregation with his piety, and then after work he goes out and bangs a transvestite hooker and does a few lines of blow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mikewof said:

 

 

Fuck off. My family were miners in Northern Minnesota. Needed steel for the war? That's the place you went. '79 was the peak of the boom, 750,000 people lived in the arrowhead. Now 200,000 do. Didn't hear you and your elk crying for them. You retrain, you move. Old folks are left behind. It's how it works.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Fuck off. My family were miners in Northern Minnesota. Needed steel for the war? That's the place you went. '79 was the peak of the boom, 750,000 people lived in the arrowhead. Now 200,000 do. Didn't hear you and your elk crying for them. You retrain, you move. Old folks are left behind. It's how it works.

So then you can appreciate that Wyoming wants to protect the livelihoods of people in that state.

Good man. Now you go fuck right on off ...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mikewof said:

 

 

Actually, I think they're being republican dumbasses who are going to blame a shifting energy economy on "blue" states and SUE them. Dumbasses.  Window dressing from dumbasses to make other dumbasses feel good.

Take the $1.2M(which is nothing) and start building some retraining programs. Maybe send some coal-miners kids to community college so they can build a skill.  Maybe use that 2 senator power to get some federal help. Oh, that's right, they hate the gov't. dumbasses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Actually, I think they're being republican dumbasses who are going to blame a shifting energy economy on "blue" states and SUE them. Dumbasses.  Window dressing from dumbasses to make other dumbasses feel good.

Take the $1.2M(which is nothing) and start building some retraining programs. Maybe send some coal-miners kids to community college so they can build a skill.  Maybe use that 2 senator power to get some federal help. Oh, that's right, they hate the gov't. dumbasses.

WTF? Contractual disputes with PPAs are with public utilities, distributors, and independent providers. Why would they sue a state? I don't know of a state that does their own power generation without going through a lease, do you? Even Texas, with their private grid, has public utilities and privates managing their own easements and leases.

As you note, $1.2 million isn't much for most states, but for Wyoming, that's not insignificant, it's the smallest state in the USA, and they have a major revenue hit this year, some $1.5 billion loss. Link. And regardless what you write, the largest employer in Wyoming, in large part thanks to State legislation, bigger than energy, tourism or ranching, is higher education and health.

If this is how they leverage their limited funds to protect the jobs of people in Wyoming, then this is how they do it. Are you suggesting they should instead just shrug their shoulders and absorb the loss of revenue from early terminations on their PPAs?

You increasingly come across as the kind of person who would spit on a homeless person begging for change and tell them "get a job."

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mikewof said:

 

I don't recognize your expertise on this topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

I don't recognize your expertise on this topic.

And you've apparently never been to Wyoming or lived near a Colorado coal plant that is slated for early closure, so you seem to have no expertise yourself on which to draw.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Actually, I think they're being republican dumbasses who are going to blame a shifting energy economy on "blue" states and SUE them. Dumbasses.  Window dressing from dumbasses to make other dumbasses feel good.

Take the $1.2M(which is nothing) and start building some retraining programs. Maybe send some coal-miners kids to community college so they can build a skill.  Maybe use that 2 senator power to get some federal help. Oh, that's right, they hate the gov't. dumbasses.

Their population is equivalent to Staten Island, the NYC borough everyone loves to hate. That lawsuit money is beyond stupid, it is just showboating that they are sticking it to states that are accepting of progress. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LenP said:

Their population is equivalent to Staten Island, the NYC borough everyone loves to hate. That lawsuit money is beyond stupid, it is just showboating that they are sticking it to states that are accepting of progress. 

So in your opinion, Wyoming coal should just accept early termination of their PPAs, brush off the dust, wander back the dugout and blame it on themselves?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I can tell, this is just a fund for lawsuits. The lawsuits have not yet been filed. If there is no suit filed, it is awfully hard to comment on the merits of it. The article in the OP implied the lawsuits are expected to be directed at other states, presumably for legislation that restricts or discourages burning coal. Suing another state for protecting it's citizens' health seems like a losing proposition in addition to being immoral. I think the legislators who passed the law which created the fund know that it will do nothing to prevent the coal industry from collapsing, but have no problem taking money from their citizens in order to showboat and tell their citizens how they are sticking it to other states. If there were a legitimate contractual issue, then the privately owned suppliers could sure the privately owned utilities and win the case handily. This lawsuit fund is not about the law, it is about posturing and bullshitting. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LenP said:

As far as I can tell, this is just a fund for lawsuits. The lawsuits have not yet been filed. If there is no suit filed, it is awfully hard to comment on the merits of it. The article in the OP implied the lawsuits are expected to be directed at other states, presumably for legislation that restricts or discourages burning coal. Suing another state for protecting it's citizens' health seems like a losing proposition in addition to being immoral. I think the legislators who passed the law which created the fund know that it will do nothing to prevent the coal industry from collapsing, but have no problem taking money from their citizens in order to showboat and tell their citizens how they are sticking it to other states. If there were a legitimate contractual issue, then the privately owned suppliers could sure the privately owned utilities and win the case handily. This lawsuit fund is not about the law, it is about posturing and bullshitting. 

You seem to have read what you want to have read from the article. I can't debate what's in your head. However the early termination of coal power -- at least in my own state -- is established and known, and it's common for States to protect their own interest in PPAs, something which you suggest isn't necessary by your comment "win the case handily." Xcel has already announced that they're moving up the close-date of the Hayden coal burning power plant in Colorado, (and yes, its proximity to Wyoming is not an accident, it's a lot cheaper to move electrons over long distances than coal): https://coloradosun.com/2021/01/04/hayden-power-plant-early-closure-colorado/

There is no "handily" when it comes to coal. It's Public Enemy Number One and coal PPAs have now been broken with little consequence, because coal workers and companies are now perceived as something only slightly better than criminals.

Not only are are these cases not won "handily" but the providers that take early exits from coal PPAs are actually rewarded with higher ratings! https://www.fitchratings.com/research/corporate-finance/angamos-early-termination-of-ppa-strengthens-aes-gener-decarbonization-commitment-12-08-2020

I'll nutshell it for you, lest I be accused of having forced you to read something ...

  1. You hand-roll cigars, your customers love them.
  2. One distributor says "Len, your hand-rolled cigars are the cat's meow, I want you to agree to make a thousand a week for me for the next ten years."
  3. Len says, "Golly, nice dough for something I'm good at. Yeah, I'll do it." You then hire a few employees, invest in some machines, and you start to deliver a thousand cigars a week. Your break-even is four years for the employees and equipment, but with a ten year contract, it's worth it.
  4. Five years into the contract, the distributor says to you, "Shame on you Len! You have supplied us with a product that is known to kill us! My customers still smokes lots of your cigars, but they're smoking less now, and we're not sure what we're going to do, but you are the worst kind of human for making these cigars that kill your customers."
  5. You put your foot to the ground, and say "I'm going to defend my contract, they want my cigars, the distributor is much bigger than me, he's going to have to absorb any losses, he shouldn't have signed a ten year contract, but that's not my problem, I'm finally making some money."
  6. The contractor says he's only going to buy 500 cigars a week from you, agreement can be damned, his demand has dropped, new technology has come in, and the kids love vape. You take him to court. Court says "how dare you, make these cigars that kill your fellow American, and then hold this honest distributor to task. The banks just upgraded the distributors rating since he has declared his intent to be cigar-free, and be 100% vape."

Unlike the cigar example, PPAs rely on century-old law that applies to railroads, ditch operators and canal operators. They are wildly complex, almost always involving multiple states, and they are almost never won or lost "handily."

I've been a clear opponent to coal and nuclear power for my whole career. My opposition to the filth, danger and public health costs of coal and nuclear however, are tempered by the reality that us Americans, people like you and me have created that demand for coal, and we do in fact owe something to the people who have devoted their lives to our comfort. You can't have any idea how utterly hellish it is to work outdoors in Wyoming in the winter, and how hot, dry and windy it is to work there in the summer. We don't think about it, because have comforts created by those coal workers.

This is often the point where you write something insulting to me, but maybe you actually are interested in a conversation this time ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, mikewof said:

This is often the point where you write something insulting to me, but maybe you actually are interested in a conversation this time ...

Says the guy who said I am sucking the dick of another poster.

GFY with your sanctimonious bullshit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2021 at 1:49 PM, mikewof said:

You see Bus, when you suck off Ease, his Stupid Bugs end up in your mouth.

In case Mikey tries to deny doing so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, until we see an actual lawsuit filed, it is only speculation as to it's merits. You can imagine all you want, but that is all there is at this point. The article in the OP does imply the intention to sue states, not the utilities. If that is correct, that is very stupid and immoral.

Contracts are contracts, and both parties should fully understand the potential risks and rewards before entering into them. If a contract is broken, then the courts are the right place to settle it, and without the govt subsidizing one party over another. If your claim is that the courts are biased against coal companies, then funding lawsuits to be filed in those same courts seems pretty stupid. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

Says the guy who said I am sucking the dick of another poster.

GFY with your sanctimonious bullshit.

It happens that way a lot with you ...

  1. I write an opinion,
  2. Someone disagrees with me,
  3. You pop up out of nowhere to respond to #2, complain about me and insult me,
  4. I give you back one insult to your ten,
  5. You cry for the next week like a whipped puppy.

If you can dish it out, you should learn to take it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LenP said:

Again, until we see an actual lawsuit filed, it is only speculation as to it's merits. You can imagine all you want, but that is all there is at this point. The article in the OP does imply the intention to sue states, not the utilities. If that is correct, that is very stupid and immoral.

Contracts are contracts, and both parties should fully understand the potential risks and rewards before entering into them. If a contract is broken, then the courts are the right place to settle it, and without the govt subsidizing one party over another. If your claim is that the courts are biased against coal companies, then funding lawsuits to be filed in those same courts seems pretty stupid. 

 

I've discussed this to death with Raz'r, so when you wrote that in the previous post, it just suggests that you didn't read the thread. I already know there isn't a lawsuit filed, that took about six posts with Raz'r to settle. And for all we know there may not be a lawsuit.

The early out of existing coal PPAs is projection based on existing natural gas production and power demands. Nissan, Tesla and Toyota suddenly starting selling lots of plug in EVs, and that kind of took the industry by surprise, existing baseload looked insufficient ... just five years ago, there was so much baseload that some grid operators had negative index pricing, where they accepted credits from the producers to clear power from their feed lines, the demand wasn't there at night. I'll wager even in Pennsylvania, you're not seeing the kind of nighttime power discounts that you used to.

The best laid plans of mice and men go oft' awry ... in this case, the need to transition cut out coal carbon may come a bit longer down the road than expected, and in that case, you, me, Raz'r and your bookie's wife will continue to use about 15% coal power when we charge our Teslas and run our computers. And then Wyoming exits coal the way they didn't have the luxury of going in, with something resembling an organized plan ... yes, hopefully into rare earth elements, or maybe gassification, geothermal, possibly even pumped power. Pulling the rug out on any industry is hard, and you need to remember that the threat of Wyoming going to bat for their industry might push the buyers to do the right thing and offer a graceful exist for coal so that tens of thousands of families aren't suddenly thrown into the welfare.

But it seems your entire knowledge of coal PPAs and Wyoming's position is based on one Guardian article with an clickbait headline that doesn't even connect all that well to the actual story. Before you decide on Wyoming's intention or position, why not read up on the problem? I gave you two links in the previous post, one about Xcel's plans to exit their existing coal production early, and one about a South American utility who was rewarded for shitting on their PPA. But those didn't have clickbait headlines, so I'm not sure if you read them.

As for "contracts are contracts" remember that these PPAs are wildly complex agreements, it's not just a matter of dumping the contract on the judge's lap and expecting justice to be served. Xcel Energy pulls in $10 billion in revenue per year. The single biggest coal producer in Wyoming (Arch) pulls about $1 billion/year, and they don't have the ability to raise legal funds quickly like Xcel, who controls tens of billions of dollars in easements and leases. Further, if the PPA bypasses Arch, and just fucks some a smaller coal company, then from where do the legal costs come other than the State?

Do you think that a small-time coal operator has the ability to take on Xcel over coal? Xcel is already rebranding themselves as the "clean" provider, they're very public with their plans to dump coal, and generate lots of renewables ... all made possible by the miracle of fracking for natural gas. (Funny how we don't read too much about the environmental impacts of deep well injection from natural gas, and photochemical ozone pollution from natural gas NOx, but we read lots of about the environmental impact of coal particulates.)

"Contracts may be contracts" but a contract is more like a hunting license than a law ... it's a document which establishes the ability of one company to go after another. And regardless your ideas of justice, a 20 kilogram tiger isn't going to have much of a chance in the jaws of a 200 kilogram crocodile. If The People of Wyoming don't go to bat for Wyoming coal, and work for the transition, there may be nothing to protect once the economic realities of "post-coal" come to light. And lawsuits in this space are like complaining about the gate being left open after the horses already ran off. The damage is done by that point, the plants are shuttered, and the damages are often tokenized and go into the owners' pockets since there is no longer an operation to keep running.

Yeah, some folks out in Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Florida or Brisbane may not care all that much, but out West, even small industries are critical, in Wyoming even more so. We can transition away from coal in a way that improves public health, that decreases carbon, that helps the environment. We don't have to shit on people who helped to power this country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, mikewof said:

It happens that way a lot with you ...

  1. I write an opinion,
  2. Reality disagrees with me

....   ....

FIFY

It's all downhill from there

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

FIFY

It's all downhill from there

- DSK

Thus, what I've written here about Wyoming Coal doesn't agree with reality, in your opinion?

So do tell, what is the correct take here?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mikewof said:

It happens that way a lot with you ...

  1. I write an opinion,
  2. Someone disagrees with me,
  3. You pop up out of nowhere to respond to #2, complain about me and insult me,
  4. I give you back one insult to your ten,
  5. You cry for the next week like a whipped puppy.

If you can dish it out, you should learn to take it.

 

At least you didn't deny the homophobic insult.

I guess we can count that as progress.

But, you might want to stop bitching about the insults others hurl your way.

Unless you enjoy exposing your hypocrisy.

Funny how you missed my first comment in this thread was a direct response to you.  I didn't respond to someone else.  Just to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

At least you didn't deny the homophobic insult.

I guess we can count that as progress.

But, you might want to stop bitching about the insults others hurl your way.

Unless you enjoy exposing your hypocrisy.

Funny how you missed my first comment in this thread was a direct response to you.  I didn't respond to someone else.  Just to you.

So Mikey’s a homophobic misogynist. Anyone surprised?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

At least you didn't deny the homophobic insult.

I guess we can count that as progress.

But, you might want to stop bitching about the insults others hurl your way.

Unless you enjoy exposing your hypocrisy.

Funny how you missed my first comment in this thread was a direct response to you.  I didn't respond to someone else.  Just to you.

I've no problem with being insulted, I just tend to return the favor.

As for your first comment, I noticed it, and it didn't urge me to comment on it. The comment was apparently directed at a caricature of who you think I am, since I support Wyoming's right to protect their workers. "Free market" are not something with which I am particularly preoccupied.

Yeah, I get it, you see that I support Wyoming's coal industry, and you apparently jump to this position of "well yeeha, here's a chance to shove some of that Ayn Rand stuff up this Glen Beck fanboy's ass." But that ain't me, as inconvenient as it might be for you to reckon. I live in a close to zero-carbon house, highly efficient with 6kW of solar on the roof, and I've been railing against coal and nuclear on PA for at about ten years. You might remember that I also work in the public health problems of air pollution.

But sure, it's incredibly easy to get Blue Staters wound up over coal, they seem to be under the impression that it's this big evil entity set out to destroy the planet, rather than the reality that it's us, the consumers who have little to no interest to pay a premium for low-entropy produced energy. Coal power still exists a bit here (and a whole lot in Australia) for the same reason nuclear power still exists, and deep-well injection exists, and terrain-wrecking hydropower still exists, and PM2.5, ground level ozone and contaminants in water still exist, because we have proven time and again as consumers that we are willing to parrot what we are supposed to parrot, but we don't really give a shit about the underlying problems and opportunities enough to pay extra to fix these problems. Why are there suddenly all these Teslas on the roads? Because the driver's give a rat's ass about air quality and environment? Clearly not, these new EVs have about the same footprint of destruction of gasoline vehicles, once the rare earth elements, lithium, production cycle and power requirements are considered. But it's a luxury car that gives the illusion that the driver cares deeply about saving the planet, and that's enough.

If you actually think any of this is "hypocrisy" then please feel free to be specific and we can discuss. In case you didn't notice, I do have some opinions on energy, pollution, environment and science.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

At least you didn't deny the homophobic insult.

I guess we can count that as progress.

But, you might want to stop bitching about the insults others hurl your way.

Unless you enjoy exposing your hypocrisy.

Funny how you missed my first comment in this thread was a direct response to you.  I didn't respond to someone else.  Just to you.

Just like his comments on rare earths was the first mention of them in the thread....

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

So Mikey’s a homophobic misogynist. Anyone surprised?

Did you come to this conclusion before or after you started beating your wife up again?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Just like his comments on rare earths was the first mention of then in the thread....

And then you commented on rare earths, apparently without having any kind of knowledge or opinion on them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, mikewof said:

 

Yeah, I get it, you see that I support Wyoming's coal industry, and you apparently jump to this position of "well yeeha, here's a chance to shove some of that Ayn Rand stuff up this Glen Beck fanboy's ass." But that ain't me, as inconvenient as it might be for you to reckon. I live in a close to zero-carbon house, highly efficient with 6kW of solar on the roof, and I've been railing against coal and nuclear on PA for at about ten years. You might remember that I also work in the public health problems of air pollution.

 

If you actually think any of this is "hypocrisy" then please feel free to be specific and we can discuss. In case you didn't notice, I do have some opinions on energy, pollution, environment and science.

You clearly have misread me.  In fact, you are so fucking far from the mark, well, it's hilarious.

Oh, and EVERYONE is well aware you have opinions.  Your missives make that clear.  Crystal clear.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2021 at 3:13 PM, Ease the sheet. said:

You'd think the state would have funding for life after coal, like rare earths?

 

1 hour ago, mikewof said:

And then you commented on rare earths, apparently without having any kind of knowledge or opinion on them.

Mikey, you are a lying piece of shit.

My comment was about Wyoming using that money for a future after coal.

Now we all know how you like to twist and turn and use a posters words out of context to attack them. It's what you do.

You come here to disrupt and troll. You come here to soothe your ego, not participate. You come here to offend.

You are a disgrace, an empty vessel making noise.

And your treatment of Mel is despicable.

Fuck you.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/12/2021 at 4:59 AM, mikewof said:

It's happening in North America and Europe, and gradually spreading to Asia.

The LED light has been one of the biggest changes, because they light efficiently, but more than that, they don't product much waste heat that needs to be removed by commercial HVAC systems. And the LED lighting industry barely existed before Obama, that's practically a technological explosion, ignore it at your peril. Building insulation has improved, windows have improved. Vehicle efficiency hasn't improved much, in fact electric vehicles are in many ways more polluting than gasoline vehicles. But now we have telework, which helps. Industrial efficiency has improved. Solar has grown very fast, all these homes now have decent-sized photovolatic arrays on the roof where there none just a few years ago. My roof has 6 kw of solar up there and it has fed the region grid steady for about six years now with zero maintenance. We have energy storage on a scale now that we could have never imagined twenty years ago, with megawatts and even gigawatts of compressed air power and pumped power on-demand as the grid demands it.

These changes are happening because millions of people have devoted their careers to these efficiency improvements. If you don't know about them, it doesn't mean they don't exist, it just means you haven't learned about them yet. But efficiency is damned near a religion to the people who work on it ...

And yet Wyoming want to sue other states for not buying coal...

The market is shifting due to gas, renewables and efficiencies, as we all know and has been predicted for years.

So what exactly is your argument? If a contract was signed, present it, but I would be surprised if any contract doesn't include clauses that allow the other states to only purchase what coal they require. Coal purchase agreements have been around a long time, and would/should already deal with reductions in demand.

 

This says it all really, it is a political move, not an economic one...

Godby said lawmakers privately acknowledge that coal is in a steep decline that will force either cuts in services or wildly unpopular tax increases, but that fighting for the industry publicly has become a litmus test for the Republican-voting electorate.

“The lawsuits will fulfill that rhetoric because it will look like the state is pushing back against the leftists,” he said. “But it’s symbolic, the fight is over – even if you win a court case it’s a pyrrhic victory because no – one really wants the coal. The losses to the state are going to be so large that the rationale is to try to postpone that for as long as possible.”

 

Wyoming needs to diversify its investments, and politicians need to lead that diversification or be held to account for not doing so.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

You clearly have misread me.  In fact, you are so fucking far from the mark, well, it's hilarious.

Oh, and EVERYONE is well aware you have opinions.  Your missives make that clear.  Crystal clear.

That was what I read, apologies that I didn't parse your true intention.

So what do you mean by your "free market" thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

 

Mikey, you are a lying piece of shit.

My comment was about Wyoming using that money for a future after coal.

Now we all know how you like to twist and turn and use a posters words out of context to attack them. It's what you do.

You come here to disrupt and troll. You come here to soothe your ego, not participate. You come here to offend.

You are a disgrace, an empty vessel making noise.

And your treatment of Mel is despicable.

Fuck you.

Okay, so you would like Wyoming to use some of their coal revenue to develop a rare earth element industry? 

That's what I've spent half this thread describing. Why didn't you just agree with me? Even the U.S. Government has set aside about ten million a year for that.

Now, have you leaned why it's important to transition coal to rare earth elements?

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, mikewof said:

That was what I read, apologies that I didn't parse your true intention.

So what do you mean by your "free market" thing?

Why don't you just assign me a stance and argue against that?  You seem to be comfortable doing so.

In the meantime, I am going back to pretending you don't exist.  Go right ahead in your Quixotic quest to prove you know more about everything than anyone.  In that way, you remind me of The Former Guy. 

He is an asshole, too.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ncik said:

Wyoming needs to diversify its investments, and politicians need to lead that diversification or be held to account for not doing so.

Yeah, maybe not. Cheney is an example of a Wyoming politician being held accountable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ncik said:

And yet Wyoming want to sue other states for not buying coal...

The market is shifting due to gas, renewables and efficiencies, as we all know and has been predicted for years.

So what exactly is your argument? If a contract was signed, present it, but I would be surprised if any contract doesn't include clauses that allow the other states to only purchase what coal they require. Coal purchase agreements have been around a long time, and would/should already deal with reductions in demand.

 

This says it all really, it is a political move, not an economic one...

Godby said lawmakers privately acknowledge that coal is in a steep decline that will force either cuts in services or wildly unpopular tax increases, but that fighting for the industry publicly has become a litmus test for the Republican-voting electorate.

“The lawsuits will fulfill that rhetoric because it will look like the state is pushing back against the leftists,” he said. “But it’s symbolic, the fight is over – even if you win a court case it’s a pyrrhic victory because no – one really wants the coal. The losses to the state are going to be so large that the rationale is to try to postpone that for as long as possible.”

 

Wyoming needs to diversify its investments, and politicians need to lead that diversification or be held to account for not doing so.

 

There is a limitation with basing one's opinion on a clickbait headline and a single article. The exit of coal from the energy mix has been happening for a long time. It wasn't that long ago that Wyoming was barely an also-ran in the coal industry compared to the Appalachian anthracite producers.

This "privately acknowledge" thing is not a secret, it's fully open knowledge in the USA that coal is on the way out, made possible by fracking and energy storage.

Regardless what you write, and regardless the clickbait headline, Wyoming isn't suing states, (nor would there even be a mechanism in these PPAs for them to sue states), and they aren't even suing on the PPAs yet, because we still burn a LOT of coal in the USA. I see the trains come down from Wyoming, a hundred car-trains, each car with a heaping boxload of coal. Yeah, I see the trains with the wind turbine blades too, but it's still an unusual sight compared to the daily sight of the coal trains heading out West, out East, down South. We still burn a lot of coal in the USA. It's not as important to our power generation as it is in Australia, but it's far from dead here.

And yes, Wyoming's move IS political, why wouldn't it be political? If nothing else, political moves are the only reliable thing politicians are good at. The writing is on the wall, the providers have openly said that they're going to end their PPAs early or not renew them, what else is Wyoming supposed to do? Hang their heads, kick at the sand and wander back to the dugout?

And Wyoming does diversify ... their top five biggest employers are higher education, scientific instruments and construction. Trying to pivot their dying coal industry into an emerging industry would be applauded if it was done in a "blue" state. But maybe that's the real unspoken issue here, and it speaks to Bus Driver's "free markets" comment that he won't clarify, it seems the real issue here is the general polarization of the USA. Wyoming is perceived as one of the "bad guys" because they voted for Trump, while Colorado is a "good guy" because we voted for Biden. So now, we can close our coal plants early, shit on Wyoming's coal industry with impunity because we're a good guy state that's shitting on a bad guy energy that comes from a bad guy state.

But ultimately, these voters are still Americans. At some point we'll need to open our eyes to that, and politics shouldn't be something that divides us to this degree. Similarly, when Central Americans and Mexicans come across our Southern border, we need to see them for who they are, Americans. Their families have likely done as much for our wealth and success as anyone else. But they have a label on them, and therefore they're demonized, while we simultaneously use them to do the jobs we can't find other Americans to do.

So it seems, this Wyoming brouhaha is that same thing from the other side ... why else would so many Sailing Anarchists even care? I've been droning on and on about energy policy to mostly deaf ears, other than CMillikan, who has some of the same concerns that I do, and PA generally didn't care. But now, all of a sudden, let's insult and marginalize a bunch of Blue Staters, while we simultaneously use their sweat and their blood to transition us over to cleaner energy and while we use the coal they dig to power our computers that we use to insult them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Olsonist said:

Yeah, maybe not. Cheney is an example of a Wyoming politician being held accountable.

For now, an interesting take is that she's gaining publicity and popularity to bring about a R party internal revolution to take away Trumps hold on the party, and that is her plan. It might be working, good luck to her. Fealty to the former/current dear leader appears to be waning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ncik said:

For now, an interesting take is that she's gaining publicity and popularity to bring about a R party internal revolution to take away Trumps hold on the party, and that is her plan. It might be working, good luck to her. Fealty to the former/current dear leader appears to be waning.

You can't tell from the slobbering and fawning coming out of the Jellyfish Party in Congress.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2021 at 3:27 PM, Ishmael said:

You can't tell from the slobbering and fawning coming out of the Jellyfish Party in Congress.

Oh, I meant from the public. I think some people are waking up from their cool-aid comas.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2021 at 8:55 PM, Ncik said:

For now, an interesting take is that she's gaining publicity and popularity to bring about a R party internal revolution to take away Trumps hold on the party, and that is her plan. It might be working, good luck to her. Fealty to the former/current dear leader appears to be waning.

We’ll disagree on that. Cheney got removed in a closed doors, no debate, see ya, wouldn’t want to be ya, voice vote. She was then replaced with a Shitstain loyalist.

Republican fascists have to survive 2022 first and as of now they only know their Shitstain. In 4 years Shitstain will be 78, a dumb corpulent 78. And still they will only know their Dear Leader. After their boy Shitstain, le déluge, or whatever. But they will stave off that day for as long as possible, a Peter Pan party that refuses to grow up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Olsonist said:

We’ll disagree on that. Cheney got removed in a closed doors, no debate, see ya, wouldn’t want to be ya, voice vote. She was then replaced with a Shitstain loyalist.

Republican fascists have to survive 2022 first and as of now they only know their Shitstain. In 4 years Shitstain will be 78, a dumb corpulent 78. And still they will only know their Dear Leader. After their boy Shitstain, le déluge, or whatever. But they will stave off that day for as long as possible, a Peter Pan party that refuses to grow up.

I am worried who the next shitstain might be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bridhb said:
1 hour ago, Olsonist said:

We’ll disagree on that. Cheney got removed in a closed doors, no debate, see ya, wouldn’t want to be ya, voice vote. She was then replaced with a Shitstain loyalist.

Republican fascists have to survive 2022 first and as of now they only know their Shitstain. In 4 years Shitstain will be 78, a dumb corpulent 78. And still they will only know their Dear Leader. After their boy Shitstain, le déluge, or whatever. But they will stave off that day for as long as possible, a Peter Pan party that refuses to grow up.

I am worried who the next shitstain might be.

I am worried that the Trumpists and Republicans will regain control of the House and Senate in 2022 and forget this little spat.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

I am worried that the Trumpists and Republicans will regain control of the House and Senate in 2022 and forget this little spat.

- DSK

It'd be like back to the future 3 where Biff ruled the world.....  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...