After nailing consumers with the left jab of even more rolling blackouts in the future, California has decided to hit them with the right hook of taking away their ability to hedge against such inevitabilities.
Here is information showing the Socialist roots of the German Green movement. the political advocacy of German Greens is partially funded via German taxpayers through the Heinrich Böll Foundation (hbs.) Here's an anti-nuclear power example post: "Renewables replace nuclear and lower emissions simultaneously," Craig Morris, 20 Nov 2019, Energy Transition - The Global Energiewende blog. https://energytransition.org/2019/11/renewables-replace-nuclear-and-lower-emissions-simultaneously/ I attempted to post a rebuttal of the nonsense contained in their article. As of August 8, 2024, my rebuttal has not been published. Californians for Green Nuclear Power has included this information in some of our nonprofit's filings https://greennuke.substack.com/p/cgnps-opposition-to-the-wwgpi The decision makers still appear to be ignoring our fact-based testimony.
Wait, PGE is decommissioning the plant because the plant is very costly to upkeep. Its not because Big Govt decided so. I am pro-nuclear energy but its also very expensive to turn a profit on a nuclear power plant(10-20 years+), and in an era of increasing interest rates is essentially a long duration asset.
Nonsense. Californians for Green Nuclear Power https://CGNP.org has shown in its written testimony at the local, state, and federal level that Diablo Canyon's power price typically undercuts the power production cost at PG&E's natural gas-fired power plants. During Diablo Canyon's extended operations, the cost will likely decrease because owner PG&E aggressively fully depreciated the plant during the first 40 years of operation. No more expensive cost of capital.
Without dismissing the current, and near-term, value of Diablo to California's electricity needs and costs, maybe there's more to be reckoned with regarding flexibility vs baseload plants and their futures. As a starting point, a view of baseload from the "green" side,
if i'm not mistaken, diablo canyon sits directly on the san andreas fault. although it is designed to [supposedly] withstand a 7.5 magnitude earthquake, i think it reasonable to be concerned about this. i am a big supporter of nuclear power, but the location of this particular facility gives me some qualms. i do not think the california electricity and water policies are at all sensible, but sometimes even an idiot will make a reasonable decision.
Nope. Diablo Canyon is on the western edge of San Luis Obispo County, California. The San Andreas Fault (SAF) runs roughly parallel with the eastern edge of the county in the Carrizo Plain. Any earthquake energy from the SAF would be sharply attenuated while it traverses the county. Diablo Canyon is designed to continue to operate safely in response to any credible nearby earthquake. As an example the magnitude 6.7 San Simeon earthquake on December 22, 2003 did not disrupt Diablo Canyon operations. The plant ran with full power before, during, and after the earthquake. This earthquake killed two in Paso Robles, California.
What happens when the state regulators of AZ, NV and OR have had enough of CA and shutdown power exports. In the event of power failures/shortages in the exporting states, why would they consent to export power they need?
That's not how interstate power export policy is decided. The cynical view is that policy is based on "greasing palms" aka bribery. Berkshire Hathaway Energy (BHE) subsidiary PacifiCorp likely did something like that to significantly expand its coal-fired exports into California following the unnecessary closure of San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station at the end of January, 2012. A 2022 update from Californians for Green Nuclear Power is found here: https://greennuke.substack.com/p/bhe-is-a-likely-opponent-of-dcpp BHE is now spending unprecedented amounts in lobbying California decision makers. Their likely goal is to shut down Diablo Canyon in 2030.
This advice might seem premature, but I think that those seeking to move to less insane states are only running before the flames. Emigrate. Look for a country where Western culture is not committing suicide. Not for your sake - the fire can take a long time coming, but for the sake of your children and theirs.
Ignoring all their friend's advice, in the late 70's my parents left Africa entirely, bound for Paraguay, instead of simply going to South Africa, like everyone else. At the time it seemed lunacy, and their prescient wisdom took decades to be revealed, but now their offspring salute them for their courage and vision.
It is my philosophy that, as irresponsible as Government can be, the fault is with the voters. They have the power (and in my mind, the responsibility) to vote these idiots out of office, or better yet, to do at least a modicum of due dilligence, and not put them in a position of power to begin with. If they suffer because of Government, they brought it on themselves.
“We are led by unserious people…” No, these people are very serious—serious like cancer. What is happening in Germany and California are the fruits of the Culture of Death.
Circa 1944 US Treasury Secy. Henry Morganthau proposed a plan which envisaged a postwar Germany as an agricultural, deindustrialized country which would be divided. After the war Pres. Truman sent Herbert Hoover to Germany to assess the feasibility of implementing Morganthau's plan. Hoover reported back that the population of Germany would have to be reduced by several million people in order for the plan to work. There appears to be evidence that Morganthau anticipated that and accepted the death or removal of that many more Germans for the sake of world peace.
.
Now it sure looks like Germany itself is implementing much of Morganthau's plan.
Cheap and abundant energy has done more to lift our civilisation from Victorian squalor than perhaps any other material factor. The Chinese understand this- which is why, in addition to investing crowd-pleasing solutions which don't really work at scale, they are working on SMR's, investing in nuclear and have built Big Hydro at exactly the point when it makes the most sense- when the current cheapness of construction labour compared to the future turns the investment into a dividend for their grandchildren.
Western civilisation by comparison is institutionally myopic to the point of partial blindness. The intellectual laziness of our political system always opts for the easy answers- in short our leaders prefer to follow the mood of the crowd, rather than to even attempt to make an empirical argument which might upset the zealots. In so many areas of public policy, we live in the Dictatorship of the Small Minority.
Here in the UK, our results are more mixed. We have opted more for wind more than solar as a crowd-pleasing solution, which the economists are at in some agreement is a somewhat better investment than solar, but only if one factors in the externalities of carbon mitigation. Pity we also decided to locate most of our turbines offshore, where they are also more costly.
Even our recent decision to marginally upgrade our nuclear capacity, hedging against the potentially cheaper energy of SMR's at a future date, is not without its controversies. When commissioning the private sector to build infrastructure, energy or otherwise, it is wise to ask the companies involved to bear an element of risk- otherwise one introduces a moral hazard.
But any deal which doesn't take advantage of government's ability to bear risk at rates which the market simply cannot match is not only stupid, but criminally negligent. Government's ability to bear risk is one of the very few things it is good at, precisely because it doesn't have to do anything! As an underwriter, government in unparalleled.
The Swedish managed to do nuclear cheaply, as did the French- the latter of which is a major source of consternation as a Brit. If we had only owned about 80% of the risk we could have had it cheaply as well. It's not that our leaders are stupid. It's just that they are far too prone to waving the white flag in the face of political realities. After all, we wouldn't want to reduce any blue-haired vegan girls from the Home Counties to tears. We may not care about her vote- precarious and unlikely as it is- but we certainly care about her parent's votes.
I'm sure they have a great deal to worry about already...
What was the killer Michael Shellenberger Tweet? By 2025, the Germans will have paid 580 billion dollars to ensure they have energy twice as expensive and ten times as carbon intensive as the French...
The Swedes recently voted to expand their nuclear. I was looking at the price points for SMRs. It looks like the first gen reactors will be around $60 to $90 per megawatt hour. However, Wright's Law and the Experience Curve would tend to dictate that these prices will come down substantially.
I kicked myself recently. At one point I was seriously considering investing in Rolls Royce, but ultimately decided not to on the basis that it's a crowded fielded with over 80 companies working on SMRs globally. Since I first looked at Rolls Royce, share price has increased 530%!
Sadly, German political leaders seem incapable of admitting they enacted very harmful national energy policies starting a couple of decades ago. What will it take to turn this around?
The main argument in Germany against nuclear seems to be the handling of waste (they like to portray it with leaky barrels in salt mine storage facility gorleben). Would love to get some insights on handling of waste and recylcing.
The Finns seem to have a decent solution. They've even gone as far as considering the labelling for a far future generation, cut-off from us historically in a language and cultural sense. I'm not sure whether the mine involved is 2 km or 2 miles down.
Still, it's infinitely preferable to the real human costs of radioactive coal ash, or to the future embedded costs of disposing of all those heavy metals involved in solar PV cells.
Couldn’t agree more. The German nuclear waste panic comes mainly from a few green activists groups but is spread across the population. That’s where you’d have to start to make nuclear favourable again.
Here is information showing the Socialist roots of the German Green movement. the political advocacy of German Greens is partially funded via German taxpayers through the Heinrich Böll Foundation (hbs.) Here's an anti-nuclear power example post: "Renewables replace nuclear and lower emissions simultaneously," Craig Morris, 20 Nov 2019, Energy Transition - The Global Energiewende blog. https://energytransition.org/2019/11/renewables-replace-nuclear-and-lower-emissions-simultaneously/ I attempted to post a rebuttal of the nonsense contained in their article. As of August 8, 2024, my rebuttal has not been published. Californians for Green Nuclear Power has included this information in some of our nonprofit's filings https://greennuke.substack.com/p/cgnps-opposition-to-the-wwgpi The decision makers still appear to be ignoring our fact-based testimony.
An Initiative of the Heinrich Böll Foundation. © 2012 - 2024. The Heinrich Böll Foundation receives German taxpayer funded subsidies. The hbs has elegant offices in Berlin. The hbs also has offices in the West Bank of Palestine, Moscow, Russia, Beijing, China, and Washington, DC. Many of the policies of the hbs are socialist policies.
Wait, PGE is decommissioning the plant because the plant is very costly to upkeep. Its not because Big Govt decided so. I am pro-nuclear energy but its also very expensive to turn a profit on a nuclear power plant(10-20 years+), and in an era of increasing interest rates is essentially a long duration asset.
Nonsense. Californians for Green Nuclear Power https://CGNP.org has shown in its written testimony at the local, state, and federal level that Diablo Canyon's power price typically undercuts the power production cost at PG&E's natural gas-fired power plants. During Diablo Canyon's extended operations, the cost will likely decrease because owner PG&E aggressively fully depreciated the plant during the first 40 years of operation. No more expensive cost of capital.
More proof nuclear energy is a giant fraud.
Without dismissing the current, and near-term, value of Diablo to California's electricity needs and costs, maybe there's more to be reckoned with regarding flexibility vs baseload plants and their futures. As a starting point, a view of baseload from the "green" side,
https://www.nrdc.org/experts/kevin-steinberger/debunking-three-myths-about-baseload
The NRDC view is based on wishful thinking, not principles of power engineering. Here's a nontechnical debunking of the NRDC nonsense dated March 4, 2024. . https://greennuke.substack.com/p/why-is-grid-inertia-important
if i'm not mistaken, diablo canyon sits directly on the san andreas fault. although it is designed to [supposedly] withstand a 7.5 magnitude earthquake, i think it reasonable to be concerned about this. i am a big supporter of nuclear power, but the location of this particular facility gives me some qualms. i do not think the california electricity and water policies are at all sensible, but sometimes even an idiot will make a reasonable decision.
Nope. Diablo Canyon is on the western edge of San Luis Obispo County, California. The San Andreas Fault (SAF) runs roughly parallel with the eastern edge of the county in the Carrizo Plain. Any earthquake energy from the SAF would be sharply attenuated while it traverses the county. Diablo Canyon is designed to continue to operate safely in response to any credible nearby earthquake. As an example the magnitude 6.7 San Simeon earthquake on December 22, 2003 did not disrupt Diablo Canyon operations. The plant ran with full power before, during, and after the earthquake. This earthquake killed two in Paso Robles, California.
thanks for the clarification
You are welcome. My wife and I live about ten air miles from Diablo Canyon. We've lived in San Luis Obispo County since 2006.
What happens when the state regulators of AZ, NV and OR have had enough of CA and shutdown power exports. In the event of power failures/shortages in the exporting states, why would they consent to export power they need?
That's not how interstate power export policy is decided. The cynical view is that policy is based on "greasing palms" aka bribery. Berkshire Hathaway Energy (BHE) subsidiary PacifiCorp likely did something like that to significantly expand its coal-fired exports into California following the unnecessary closure of San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station at the end of January, 2012. A 2022 update from Californians for Green Nuclear Power is found here: https://greennuke.substack.com/p/bhe-is-a-likely-opponent-of-dcpp BHE is now spending unprecedented amounts in lobbying California decision makers. Their likely goal is to shut down Diablo Canyon in 2030.
Is it really a buch of morons or masterfully planned path to trigger inflation to preserve the debt based status quo?
Both - morons with a "brilliant plan" - that will totally fail in all aspects
This advice might seem premature, but I think that those seeking to move to less insane states are only running before the flames. Emigrate. Look for a country where Western culture is not committing suicide. Not for your sake - the fire can take a long time coming, but for the sake of your children and theirs.
Ignoring all their friend's advice, in the late 70's my parents left Africa entirely, bound for Paraguay, instead of simply going to South Africa, like everyone else. At the time it seemed lunacy, and their prescient wisdom took decades to be revealed, but now their offspring salute them for their courage and vision.
It is my philosophy that, as irresponsible as Government can be, the fault is with the voters. They have the power (and in my mind, the responsibility) to vote these idiots out of office, or better yet, to do at least a modicum of due dilligence, and not put them in a position of power to begin with. If they suffer because of Government, they brought it on themselves.
usa == fairest elections where no fraud exists????
“We are led by unserious people…” No, these people are very serious—serious like cancer. What is happening in Germany and California are the fruits of the Culture of Death.
The solution is simple...electric-powered generators!
In a democracy, people get the government they deserve.
Circa 1944 US Treasury Secy. Henry Morganthau proposed a plan which envisaged a postwar Germany as an agricultural, deindustrialized country which would be divided. After the war Pres. Truman sent Herbert Hoover to Germany to assess the feasibility of implementing Morganthau's plan. Hoover reported back that the population of Germany would have to be reduced by several million people in order for the plan to work. There appears to be evidence that Morganthau anticipated that and accepted the death or removal of that many more Germans for the sake of world peace.
.
Now it sure looks like Germany itself is implementing much of Morganthau's plan.
Yup.
Regarding Germany, believe me, it's actually much worse than that.
And we haven't even reached the stage of utter delusion - a German specialty. Stay tuned.
Cheap and abundant energy has done more to lift our civilisation from Victorian squalor than perhaps any other material factor. The Chinese understand this- which is why, in addition to investing crowd-pleasing solutions which don't really work at scale, they are working on SMR's, investing in nuclear and have built Big Hydro at exactly the point when it makes the most sense- when the current cheapness of construction labour compared to the future turns the investment into a dividend for their grandchildren.
Western civilisation by comparison is institutionally myopic to the point of partial blindness. The intellectual laziness of our political system always opts for the easy answers- in short our leaders prefer to follow the mood of the crowd, rather than to even attempt to make an empirical argument which might upset the zealots. In so many areas of public policy, we live in the Dictatorship of the Small Minority.
Here in the UK, our results are more mixed. We have opted more for wind more than solar as a crowd-pleasing solution, which the economists are at in some agreement is a somewhat better investment than solar, but only if one factors in the externalities of carbon mitigation. Pity we also decided to locate most of our turbines offshore, where they are also more costly.
Even our recent decision to marginally upgrade our nuclear capacity, hedging against the potentially cheaper energy of SMR's at a future date, is not without its controversies. When commissioning the private sector to build infrastructure, energy or otherwise, it is wise to ask the companies involved to bear an element of risk- otherwise one introduces a moral hazard.
But any deal which doesn't take advantage of government's ability to bear risk at rates which the market simply cannot match is not only stupid, but criminally negligent. Government's ability to bear risk is one of the very few things it is good at, precisely because it doesn't have to do anything! As an underwriter, government in unparalleled.
The Swedish managed to do nuclear cheaply, as did the French- the latter of which is a major source of consternation as a Brit. If we had only owned about 80% of the risk we could have had it cheaply as well. It's not that our leaders are stupid. It's just that they are far too prone to waving the white flag in the face of political realities. After all, we wouldn't want to reduce any blue-haired vegan girls from the Home Counties to tears. We may not care about her vote- precarious and unlikely as it is- but we certainly care about her parent's votes.
I'm sure they have a great deal to worry about already...
Sweden and France provide great examples of enlightened public policy in choosing nuclear power to run their nations.
What was the killer Michael Shellenberger Tweet? By 2025, the Germans will have paid 580 billion dollars to ensure they have energy twice as expensive and ten times as carbon intensive as the French...
The Swedes recently voted to expand their nuclear. I was looking at the price points for SMRs. It looks like the first gen reactors will be around $60 to $90 per megawatt hour. However, Wright's Law and the Experience Curve would tend to dictate that these prices will come down substantially.
I kicked myself recently. At one point I was seriously considering investing in Rolls Royce, but ultimately decided not to on the basis that it's a crowded fielded with over 80 companies working on SMRs globally. Since I first looked at Rolls Royce, share price has increased 530%!
Michael Shellenberger made a similar quote in his July 28, 2021 Forbes article, " German Emissions From Electricity Rose 25% In First Half Of 2021 Due To The Lack Of Wind Power, Not Willpower" https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2021/07/28/german-emissions-from-electricity-rose-25-in-first-half-of-2021-due-to-the-lack-of-wind-power-not-willpower/ ....As a result, Germany’s renewables experiment is effectively over. By 2025 it will have spent $580 billion to make its electricity nearly twice as expensive and ten times more carbon-intensive than France’s......
Sadly, German political leaders seem incapable of admitting they enacted very harmful national energy policies starting a couple of decades ago. What will it take to turn this around?
The main argument in Germany against nuclear seems to be the handling of waste (they like to portray it with leaky barrels in salt mine storage facility gorleben). Would love to get some insights on handling of waste and recylcing.
The Finns seem to have a decent solution. They've even gone as far as considering the labelling for a far future generation, cut-off from us historically in a language and cultural sense. I'm not sure whether the mine involved is 2 km or 2 miles down.
Still, it's infinitely preferable to the real human costs of radioactive coal ash, or to the future embedded costs of disposing of all those heavy metals involved in solar PV cells.
Couldn’t agree more. The German nuclear waste panic comes mainly from a few green activists groups but is spread across the population. That’s where you’d have to start to make nuclear favourable again.
An exhibit showing the power of propaganda. Unfortunately, Vladimir Putin also has a role.