Of course the CEO of an oil company would make these outsized claims. But where is India going to get the money to increase the imports?
1 Like
New Delhi: Indiaâs 14th National Electricity Plan (NEP) sets it on a path to more than triple its renewable energy capacity by 2030, but the country needs a whopping USD 293 billion to achieve this, according to a report released by global energy think tank Ember on Wednesday.
Read more at:
From a growing economy and exports.
The worldâs fastest-growing big economy is living up to its billing
India has reported surprisingly robust economic growth, ending 2023 on a high noteâŠGross domestic product (GDP) in the worldâs fastest growing major economy surged 8.4% in the final three months of 2023 compared with a year prior, up from growth of 7.6% in the June-to-September period.
https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/oil/021424-indian-refiners-push-expansion-with-tilt-towards-petrochemicals-smaller-carbon-footprint
The IEA released a report titled âIndian Oil Market â Outlook to 2030â at the conference in which it said that Indian oil companies were investing heavily in the refining sector to meet the rise in domestic oil demand.
âOver the next seven years, 1 million b/d of new refinery distillation capacity will be added â more than any other country in the world outside of China. Several other large projects are currently under consideration that may lift capacity beyond the 6.8 million b/d capacity that we expect so far,â it addedâŠ
The IEA said Indiaâs refining industry had built an enviable reputation as a key source of light and middle distillate supplies to global markets, in addition to meeting robust domestic demand growthâŠIn 2023, India was the fourth-largest exporter of middle distillates globally and the sixth largest refinery product exporter at 1.2 million b/d, the IEA said.
DB2
1 Like
With a robust economy India can accelerate getting rid of fossil fuels:
India is one of the world leaders in renewable energy. By 2030, the country plans to have 50% of its power-generating capacity from non-fossil fuel sources. As the country pushes to achieve this ambitious goal, it must also ensure grid stability.
As solar and wind power are variable and depend on weather conditions, they can create supply-demand imbalances. For handling such imbalances, the grid needs a fast-responding backup power resource to even out the short and sudden variability in renewable energy generation of less than four hours. Incumbent thermal generators meet longer and more predictable variability of renewables.
Unlike many developed countries with net-zero commitments by 2050 or earlier, where coal generation has to stop outright, this backup strategy allows a gradual phasing out of Indiaâs relatively new coal fleet, in line with Indiaâs goal of achieving net zero by 2070.
Globally, gas-based power plants have acted as a backup resource. In India, gas availability is scarce and the landed cost of imported gas is high, making it unviable. India has coal capacity, but coal-based plants are less flexible and take time to come online as incremental capacity. Neither can store excess wind and solar generation. Thus, Indiaâs choice of power backup resources boils down to pumped-hydro storage plants and battery-based energy storage systems (BESS).
2 Likes
Looking at the carbon dioxide issue from a wide perspective, below are the global CO2 emissions from energy and the average CO2 air concentrations measured at the NOAA monitoring station in Hawaii.
Emissions Concentration Year MtCO2 PPM 1990 22,753 354 2000 25,501 370 2010 33,306 390 2020 35,008 414 2022 37,150 419
Both of the trends are increasing. Iâm old enough to remember when the Kyoto Protocol was going to save the day for the climate. That was reportedly when the world finally got serious about curtailing the burning of fossil fuels. That was 1998, over 25 years ago. Since then, numerous other international meetings and conferences have taken place, each with the intention of reducing the global use of fossil fuels and slowing the atmospheric concentration rise.
None of it has worked. The air concentration just keeps going up. Worse yet, the world burns more fossil fuels than ever before.
But donât worry. Weâll just keep reciting the same fairy tale about how Renewable Prince Charming will come to save the day. Lately, the valiant prince has been seen riding his trusted horse called Lithium Battery. So handsome and romantic. Disney should make a movie.
But, oops, here comes reality againâŠ
- Pete
2 Likes
I remember that the Kyoto Protocol was never ratified by the global leader in CO2 emissionsâby farâat the time, the United States. This was seen as a major victory for the fossil fuel industry.
5 Likes
That is true in part and it is not an either/or.
But solar and wind are profitable. India as a region is going to love renewables for profits. Plus a deflationary energy policy makes far more sense than wasting money on oil, gas, or coal. Those are losses for India.
India is also shifting to EV. Hydrogen wonât be far behind.
This has been a steady drumbeat to this day.
Across scenarios, CO2 emissions would begin to decline by 2025. Thanks in part to these global efforts to control emissions, CO2 emissions are projected to begin to decline by as early as 2025.Jan 24, 2024
Well here comes the new super fairy tale about how Nuclear Prince Not-Charming will come to save the day. Lately the Nuclear Prince has been accused of dithering (excessive years to finish), gluttony (costing too much) and safety (costly accidents). This tub of lard prince has no shame for promising unbelievable speed of construction, reduction of cost, and no safety issues with unforeseen natural or man made accidents.
Energy transitions are slow, protracted affairs (coal surpassed global wood combustion only in 1900). From Vaclav Smil, âHalfway Between Kyoto and 2050: Zero Carbon Is a Highly Unlikely Outcomeâ:
"The International Energy Agencyâs World Energy Outlook 2023 illustrates both the widely misunderstood realities and the likely outcomes of the unfolding transitionâŠThe peak in energy-related CO2 emissions is to take place by 2025, and afterwards the demand for fossil fuels is to decline by average of 3 exajoules a year (EJ/year) until 2050âŠ
âIndeed, the accompanying figure from the IEAâs World Energy Outlook 2023 would have returned the consumers of media headlines back to reality. By 2050 even coal consumption, after an unprecedented projected decline, would still be as high as it was at the beginning of the 21st century; both crude oil and natural gas consumption (yet to peak) would be nearly as high (>95 percent) as in 2030; and a steady decline would still leave fossil fuel consumption at about 85 percent of the current level. That is, of course, very far from any zero carbon scenarios.â
DB2
The big banks were forced over the ESG individual idiot state objections to cover their behinds. I would not take JP Morgan as all that serious.
JPM didnât write the article; it is by Vaclav Emil. âHe is Distinguished Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Environment at the University of Manitoba. His interdisciplinary research interests encompass energy, environmental, food, population, economic, historical and public policy studies. He has also applied these approaches to energy, food and environmental affairs of China.â
DB2
Just to make these numbers a little less one sided I would just note that in 2022 global fossil fuel subsidies reached $7Trillion USD according to the International Monetary Fund. Thatâs for one year.
So letâs think about the numbers for a bit. Aramco say $10 Trillion over 20 years spent on renewables. That comes out to $0.5 Trillion/year. I estimate roughly from the IMF graph that about $40 Trillion was spent over eight years to subsidize fossil fuels. That comes out to about $5 Trillion/year.
$5T vs $0.5TâŠAnd the question is why isnât renewables displacing fossil fuels? Seriously? Perhaps it would if the playing field was level.
Would also note that estimated health care costs attributed to fossil fuel pollution and climate change has reached $820 Billion/year. Report: Health Costs from Climate Change and Fossil Fuel Pollution Tops $820 Billion a Year
And according to Energy Texas, a dollar spent on renewables creates on average 3X more jobs than a dollar spent on fossil fuels.
The Economic Benefits of Renewable Energy - Energy Texas.
So perhaps cutting that fossil fuel subsidy in half and giving it instead to renewables would be a good thing.
5 Likes
My main investment holdings are no longer oil and gas but rather Mexican Real Estate, but only because I use my petrodollars to buy land. Oil and Gas investments are obscenely valuable under the rug for reasons shown in this thread and for special tax treatment.
d fb
I hope his nose is held high to avoid the Canadian oil fumes.
I have zero faith in his credentials making any difference in his standards.
Where are the grants coming from for his department?
Vaclav Smil is the real deal. He is a prolific author and probably the world expert on the history of energy.
1 Like
I know you are neutral. I will take your word for it.
Looking into him he is all gloom. Part of that is meant to push people not to take the energy transition for granted.
He wonât admit success no matter what. He is pushing the worst case scenario.
In other words he is necessarily biased.
Vaclav Smil states the following interesting points which may not be accurate:
I must stress that the unfolding energy transition will not be replacing todayâs fossil fuel use and any of its future increases with the equivalent amount of non-fossil energies. That is mainly because the greater electrification of the global energy system based on renewable flows will raise overall efficiency of energy use by reducing conversion losses (Pahud et al. 2023). Specific reductions will vary.
Electric vehicles offer especially large efficiency gains: they could go more than four times further on a given amount of energy than gasoline-powered vehicles (Singer et al. 2023).
In contrast, there are no early prospects for electrifying shipping and flying.
Efficiency gains from the electrification of industrial processes would vary widely, and not all of them could be electrified.
Nuclear electricity generation has been only 33% efficient (and no imminent breakthroughs are expected) âŠ
Humankind has an (apparently) unlimited appetite for energy. As soon as we get more we find ways to use it, often unproductively. (Witness crypto mining. Probably more useful: AI data centers. Certainly less useful: Las Vegas strip signage. Etc.)
This is why Iâm pessimistic about it all.
Coal production/consumption since the turn of the century:
Even as we find more and more sources of more efficient energy, the worst energy sources donât go away. They barely budge. And woe be unto the political leader that says âTurn off your Christmas lights and turn down your furnace.â The last one who tried that was Jimmy Carter, and it didnât work out so well for him.
This is the tragedy of the common writ large enough to be the tragedy of the planet. And it will not change. We all just to damn self absorbed to sacrifice for the common good.
4 Likes
