A fracking mess

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
I also question the premise that PV panels have to be made with coal. The materials used in the panels are energy intensive but that energy can come from any source. Most vetted sources usually cite around a 2.5 year energy payback for a new panel. In theory panels can be recycled at end of life but few panels really "die" they just keep putting power out at a lower output. I think the Europeans forced vendors to come up with recycling.

You tube is a great place for some things but there is no third party review.
 
It was a Michael Moore doc, so to be viewed with a grain of salt, but most of the "green" energy is far from it. It's just worse than I thought it was. Like the Ivanpah molten salt solar plant that is started by burning natural gas in an external combustion engine... It will probably reach obsolescence long before it pays for the carbon used to build it. There are many other examples, not only from the Michael Moore doc either.

There are many examples for sure, solar thermal has always been questionable in the first place, but made sense because of the high cost of PV. But as for carbon, did the plant really consume much more carbon in its construction than a comparable natural gas plant? If they are at least equal again its a mute point, as a power plant would have been built to generate that energy anyway.

I think a lot of people overstate the carbon generated in the construction of these projects. The neighboring province did a study on wind turbines and concluded within 1 year they had paid back the energy used to make them, assuming a 25 year life they had less than 5% of the CO2 emissions of using coal.

 
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceBus
It was a Michael Moore doc, so to be viewed with a grain of salt, but most of the "green" energy is far from it. It's just worse than I thought it was. Like the Ivanpah molten salt solar plant that is started by burning natural gas in an external combustion engine... It will probably reach obsolescence long before it pays for the carbon used to build it. There are many other examples, not only from the Michael Moore doc either.
There's a discussion of this movie in the Green Room. The movie is meant to be provocative and to nudge us out of complacency. Not all green solutions are green and to be wary of how the dollar can coopt and corrupt good causes. Ultimately it is pointing out that lesson from the Overstory - Exponential growth inside a finite system leads to collapse. Too many people on the planet are consuming too much chit with the wealthiest nations leading the pack.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceBus
There's a discussion of this movie in the Green Room. The movie is meant to be provocative and to nudge us out of complacency. Not all green solutions are green and to be wary of how the dollar can coopt and corrupt good causes. Ultimately it is pointing out that lesson from the Overstory - Exponential growth inside a finite system leads to collapse. Too many people on the planet are consuming too much chit with the wealthiest nations leading the pack.
A reduction in consumption is necessary and with covid 19 is clearly possible.
 
Oh SpaceBus. I love Michael Moore (on other things). I will have to check it out. I think that greenwashing is rampant and the feel goods associated with it are a major impediment to the necessary change. Case in point, people driving their non-recyclable plastic to a recycling center, that will landfill it anyway, in their SUV, and then feeling they have 'done their part'.

As for the coal/solar thing....crystalline silicon production is VERY energy intensive (it a refractory material), and this has been studied extensively by scientists and engineeers for many years. Most give a carbon/energy payback period of 9-18 mos depending on where its deployed, which is clearly a benefit over a 20-30 year lifespan of the modules. And this number has been falling for years with simple measures like making the cells thinner so they use less Si, and more efficient sawing. The same things that reduce cost also reduce carbon impact of the cells, so a lot of the cost reductions seen in recent years have helped this issue AND older studies about energy/carbon cost of solar are now obsolete to the point of being misleading.

One interesting factor is that if you tried to double your installed solar every payback period, you would have not net improvement in carbon emissions until you were done with rollout!
 
JCP workforce is low pay and low impact due to being widely dispersed.
Fossil workforce is high pay and highly concentrated and therefore well represented.
Not best example.

But of course, the Retail service sector is not just JCP....its more than an order of magnitude larger than that. And has been under threat from online shopping for a long time, C19 might have just pulled forward that trend.

As for the concentration of the industry in a few states, its tragic. But if the industry is fundamentally un-economic (fracking oil in the US, say a globally fungible and cheap commodity) with no prospect of becoming economic in the future, why should we bail it out again?

As for energy independence, why not spend the money on fracking gas (with appropriate regulation of that industry), building out solar and wind and storage and pulling forward EV adoption?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceBus
I'm always happy to learn. I think I've learned more in the five years I've been out of the army, most of it in the last two years, than I did the whole 25 years I was alive before getting out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bholler
But of course, the Retail service sector is not just JCP....its more than an order of magnitude larger than that. And has been under threat from online shopping for a long time, C19 might have just pulled forward that trend.

As for the concentration of the industry in a few states, its tragic. But if the industry is fundamentally un-economic (fracking oil in the US, say a globally fungible and cheap commodity) with no prospect of becoming economic in the future, why should we bail it out again?

As for energy independence, why not spend the money on fracking gas (with appropriate regulation of that industry), building out solar and wind and storage and pulling forward EV adoption?

What this doesn't take into account though is the number of jobs created by online retailers, Amazon surpassed 750,000 employees late last year, and I'm not sure if anyone has tried to calculate the additional staff for the delivery of the products through outside companies like UPS.

I definitely see the benefit of online shopping, and the cost savings and environmental benefit of not building brick and mortar stores in every town.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceBus
This is having a major impact on the area where I live. In Southeastern Ohio, the NG industry has been a huge shot in the arm. I am not for fossil fuels of any kind, but NG is still better than coal. But what's more of an issue is that people don't have the time or energy to give a damn about the environment if they are busy trying to literally feed their kids. I have worked my way personally though the spectrum of being in college and thinking anyone that mined or drilled was killing my future, to the opinion that its not the employees, its the owner of the company manipulating the employees and the government and finally to the opinion that the environmental side has done a terrible job of getting their ideas across. Instead of bashing coal miners and frackers, you have to help frackers and miners get jobs, show them a better future than their current option, and then they may have the stability in life to give a damn about something other than just getting by.
Again, I am not for fossil fuels at all, but I am a supporter of the jobs it has given my community, the conversation of coal power plants to NG it has encouraged and the new schools that the new NG powered electrical plant is going to pay for.
However, construction of this plant is slowing because of the slowing of gas production. No NG plant means no new schools for a poor community, and I cannot give kids an improved education to improve their future so they can make better environmental choice as they age.
 
I'm not sure how one would get along in this world with no fossil fuels 'at all'. IMO they will have a place for a very long time to come. Maybe at a reduced capacity as time progresses, but will still be needed.
 
I'm not sure how one would get along in this world with no fossil fuels 'at all'. IMO they will have a place for a very long time to come. Maybe at a reduced capacity as time progresses, but will still be needed.
I don't see them going away entirely either, but at least to a point that the carbon released could be sequestered somehow.
 
I think you are both correct. Just imagine the environmental benefit if we just moved electricity production to "green" options (solar, wind, new tech NG like the plant being constructed here) and industrial transportation (semis, barges, planes, trains, etc) were alternatively powered? Keep your oil powered (gas/ diesel) vehicles, tractors, machines etc.
 
If nothing else, with the Covid-19 slowdown we are getting a glimpse of what our planet looks like without a haze of pollution. Out here the views of the Cascades and Olympics have been spectacular lately and the air is noticeably cleaner. The yellowish haze at ground level is completely gone, even when looking at Seattle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceBus