Natural Gas Industry and their Banks are blowing smoke in our eyes

Industry Discussions Energy & Utilities
1

An executive with the TC Energy, a group that is among the largest operators of natural gas pipelines in North America, said electricity demand from energy-intensive data centers will support an increased need for the fuel in the coming years.

Stanley Chapman, executive vice president and COO of Calgary, Alberta-based TC Energy, in a May 3 company earnings call said he expects demand for natural gas tied to data center operations will rise by as much as 8 billion cubic feet a day (Bcf/d) by 2030. That level is equal to about 21% of the current demand for the fuel at U.S. gas-fired power plants.

Said Chapman, “We do see a meaningful load-in growth opportunity and increased demand in coming years due to data centers.” Chapman said his company is upgrading its pipeline network across some states, and increasing connections to local distribution networks, as part of its strategy to support the demand growth for natural gas.

A Wells Fargo analysis of the electricity sector, published in April, said data centers and technology related to artificial intelligence (AI) alone are expected to add about 323 TWh of power demand in the U.S. by 2030. Goldman Sachs has said data centers will account for 8% of total U.S. electricity consumption by the end of the decade.

Data centers are driving increased demand for electricity worldwide, in part because they support technology related to AI and computing networks. The power demand is so great that many analysts say growth in the use of renewable energy resources will not be enough to satisfy increased electricity consumption, including from electrification of transportation.

That’s why Chapman and others in the natural gas industry say demand for their fuel will increase as a cost-effective way to produce power. Richard Kinder, executive chairman of pipeline operator Kinder Morgan, during the company’s earnings call in April said, “This type of need demonstrates that the emphasis on renewables as the only source of power is fatally flawed in terms of meeting the real demands of the market. The primary use of these data centers is big tech and I believe they’re beginning to recognize the role that natural gas and nuclear must play.”

ers-will-drive-demand-for-natural-gas/?oly_enc_id=5568E7128245G3Y

There is a concerted effort by the Natural Gas Industry to stop renewables from dominating the growth of electrical power generation. They want all the coal fired power plants to be replaced by natural gas fired plants. They are already doing this in several places in the country:

I do not buy their propaganda! Natural Gas power plants still emit CO2 and the get natural gas out of the earth, processed and put into pipelines to deliver the gas to the power plants results in significant amounts of methane leaked into the atmosphere.strong text Solar with batteries and wind with batteries will kill the economics of Natural Gas slowly but surely. And when non-battery long term energy storage (> 24 hours) is developed into economic technology we will see less stress and strain put on the Lithium battery materials mining and processing.

2 Likes
2

Jaagu,

Have you found a price for the CTAL Tenner system megapack. It is a 6.25 megawatt hour pack in a 20 foot container. If it could be had for 500,000 (80 dollars a kilowatt hour) it would be an excellent pack for replacing standby diesel generators at small telecom installations.

Heres the math, a small regeneration hut uses about 10 kilowatts or about 240 kilowatt hours a day. A 6.25 mwh hour pack would provide over 3 weeks worth of energy. As the back up power is stone reliable this would replace both the generator set and the 48 volt battery plant.

Cellular sites use more electricity than regen huts, upwards of 50 kilowatts for some sites, so they would only have about 5 days of back up energy. This is actually enough. A back up generator typically needs human intervention in 4 days.

Add in a 40 to 200 kilowatt solar panel and you have a completely self sustaining and distributed power system for close to the capital cost of the current system.

I wish I could find the price of that system.

Cheers
Qazulight

3 Likes
3

The only “green” energy sources I would consider would be nuclear, hydro, and thermal.
I can’t think of a reason to utilize wind or solar with battery backup, for large scale power generation. Wind, solar, and batteries have no momentum to integrate to the grid so that every cycle has to be timed to meet the current grid power. Besides, we currently have no way to recycle windmill blades, solar panels, or lithium. We are creating an ecological disaster for future generations.

Solar has very limited niche applications which make sense where portability and resource scarcity are determining factors. We are still stuck with how to prevent the heavy metals from the panels from entering the environment.

Hydro and Thermal have very limited geological factors to be considered economical.

Nuclear is the way to go for compatible energy production if you are concerned about not adding to more CO2 into the atmosphere or the diminishing supplies of fossil fuels. Since CO2 is required for all aerobic life on the planet, I’m not against having more of it and greening the planet.

I guess you haven’t paid attention to what the future administration is going to do with all the subsidies that make most “green” generators profitable.

4

Every power generation method has some kind of impact, so maybe you should quantify the negative effects of every source and compare on a per kwh basis. BTW, we do have methods to recycle batteries, and this includes more than just lithium.

Mike

3 Likes
5

This is a start from MS co-pilot

image
image877Ă—449 22.7 KB

Notes:

  • CO2 Emissions: Represents the amount of carbon dioxide emitted per MWh of electricity generated.
  • Air Pollution: Includes other pollutants like sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter.
  • Water Usage: Amount of water used in the generation process.
  • Land Use: The amount of land required per MWh of electricity generated.
  • Waste: Includes solid waste produced during the generation process.
  • Other Impacts: Additional environmental or social impacts specific to each energy source.
1 Like
6

As a nuclear/mechanical engineer I can not understand your objections to wind/solar with battery/energy storage backup for large scale power generation. Already wind/solar with battery backup is providing large scale power generation in California, Texas, Iowa, N. Carolina and many other states. Wind/solar with battery backup is being used for large scale power generation in Germany, Scandinavia, UK, France and many other European countries. Wind/solar with battery backup is being used for large scale power generation in Japan, China and many other European countries.

  1. Nuclear power generates nuclear waste every year that must be kept away from humans and it is harmful to the environment.
  2. Coal power generates horrible solid/liquid/gaseous waste every year that is killing people and destroying the environment.
    Jaak
1 Like
7

Nuclear is the most expensive way to generate electricity. That is why Texas and California are have not opted for new nuclear power. Instead Texas and California are investing in solar/wind the cheapest electricity in the country and adding battery/energy storage backup.

1 Like
8

CO2 is causing global warming. Global warming is creating bigger storms, dumping more rain, and massive flooding of cities, villages, farm lands and destroying environments in some parts of the world. In other parts of the world global warming is causing severe lack of rain, massive forests fires, polar ice melting, glaziers melting, rivers running dry, oceans getting warmer, climates getting hotter for humans and wildlife.

2 Likes
9

Wrong. Batteries supply instant power. Batteries supply power faster than trying to ramp up gas turbines, coal fired steam turbines, hydroelectric water turbines, or the snail pace of nuclear power driven steam turbines.

2 Likes
10

CO2 is required for life…and so is water.
But too much of either is a problem. It is just easier to see when we have too much water

image
image736Ă—480 45.5 KB

image
image536Ă—394 108 KB

Mike

11

I am not against batteries, just the lithium, where there is no safe, economical or efficient method.
There was a massive fire in Missouri of a plant attempting to recycle lithium batteries.
If you can provide an example of where lithium, solar panels, and windmill blades are recycled safely and economically, I’d like to hear it.

1 Like
12

LOL! Do you mean recycle/disposal of lithium is your major concern?

Why don’t you care about the recycle/disposal of:

  • nuclear waste including uranium mining waste
  • coal mining waste, coal burning waste such as coal ash, heavy metals (mercury, arsenic, thorium, cadmium, etc.), sulfur, particulates, etc.

These nuclear and coal wastes are more dangerous, more expensive, and less efficient than lithium wastes!

13

If you think CO2 is a pollutant, I guess that would be a concern for some power generation methods. I consider it a vital trace gas ~ .04% of the atmosphere.

Modern coal and gas power generators emit very little pollutants and in some cases are cleaner than some indoor areas. Unless you think CO2 is a pollutant, which I don’t.

Modern power generators have designs to limit water usage with the emissions generally coming out cleaner than when they came in. Water usage is only significant with hydro due to its very nature. Reservoirs are needed to provide a consistent supply to drive the turbines.
Coincidentally, they also can prevent flooding due to periods of high rainfall. Spain flooding is a direct result of eliminating dams.

Land usage is exorbitant with hydro, solar and wind because the energy they collect is of a very low concentration. For wind and solar that requires widespread usage of additional transmission lines in addition to the typical distribution network.

Waste should include the remediation costs to recycle the equipment, if it was a good study. Presently, blades are put into landfills. I think panels are too. The blades won’t break down into something organically useful for centuries. The solar panels will leach out heavy metals even where they are installed and will certainly leach out when in a landfill.
Coal ash as a byproduct is used in concrete. Modern designs are adept at gathering this product and very little is expelled into the environment. Unfortunately, China is using old designs so, if you want to rage on someone for releasing particulates, go protest them.
Lithium is a neurotoxin. Mining, processing and recycling are problematic. The leach field ponds look like any other pond except that any contact with an creature results in death within seconds. Of course they are fire hazards that cannot be easily put out and release toxic clouds when a fire occurs.

Other impacts includes difficulty with migration of fish in dammed rivers which can be rectified with well designed fish ladders.
Some solar facilities using highly focused light, burn birds in midflight.
The typical solar panel just blocks the sun from plants to grow and so reduces available farmland or grazing area for wildlife.
With windmills, otherwise known as bird and bat choppers, have piles of bodies underneath them. The wingtip is travelling faster than anything in nature so birds can be struck without them being the wiser. The bats don’t need to have to be struck. The air pressure difference between the front of the blade and the back is significant enough to make their lungs explode.

In short, batteries, wind and solar are not viable for large scale power generation. They should still be in the testing stage.
The only reason to use wind and solar with battery backup is to farm government subsidies.
In case you haven’t noticed, those subsidies are going to expire soon.

14

CO2 is a vital trace gas at lower concentrations. But besides CO2 there are methane emissions from coal mining, coal burning, natural gas/oil drilling, and natural gas/oil burning.

You are a climate change denier. Otherwise you would not be saying that more CO2 is great for the world.

15

Where are your facts to back up your claims? You posts are political and not based on science and engineering.

Most coal and gas power generation is very dirty and emit lots of CO2. Modern coal and gas power generators are cleaner than most old plants, but that does not mean they are clean. They still emit nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, CO2, CO, heavy metals and particulates. As noted before CO2 is a greenhouse gas which causes global warming.

16

You do not seem to understand thermal power plants (nuclear, coal, gas and oil). Modern thermal power plants do not limit water usage, some of them do recycle some of the water with cooling towers. They follow the thermodynamic Rankine and Brayton cycles, which requires cooling of the steam after going through the steam turbines. The quantity of water used is directly related to the efficiency of the power plant cycle. Nuclear power plants are about 30% efficient, coal fired power plants are about 40% efficient, and nat gas combined cycle power plants are about 60% efficient. Thus 70% of nuclear heat is waste heat, 60% of coal heat is waste heat, and 40% of nat gas heat is waste heat.

17

NO! Spain’s flooding is due to excessive rainfall in a short period of time. Valencia Floods

18

In the US we have hundreds of coal ash ponds that are old, leaking and even bursting their dams - flowing into creeks, rivers and lakes. Very little of the coal ash is being used for concrete.

19

Wind, solar and batteries have already gone through every kind of testing and have been in use utility use for many years. They are the fastest growing power generation around the world. Renewables have passed nuclear power and coal power.

Wind energy was the source of about 10% of total U.S. utility-scale electricity generation and accounted for 48% of the electricity generation from renewable sources in 2023. Wind turbines convert wind energy into electricity.

Solar photovoltaic and solar thermal power plants provided about 4% of total U.S. utility-scale electricity and accounted for 18% of utility-scale electricity generation from renewable sources in 2023. Nearly all solar electric generation was from photovoltaic systems (PV). PV conversion produces electricity directly from sunlight in a photovoltaic cell. Most solar-thermal power systems use steam turbines to generate electricity. EIA estimates that about 0.07 trillion kWh of electricity were generated with small-scale solar photovoltaic systems.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-the-us.php

Nuclear and natural gas subsidies are not expiring. Wind and solar subsidies are not expiring. Texas, California and the Southern states are adding solar as fast as they can. Texas and the Midwest states are adding wind as fast as they can.

20

CO2 is a vital trace gas approximately 420 ppm where as through history, it has generally been much higher - even in the thousands of parts per million which had life expand greatly over the planet. If the atmospheric content of CO2 goes below about 150 ppm, all plants die and most other life as well.
Methane doesn’t last long in the atmosphere because of water vapor. The only long wave absorption occurs in a lab with no humidity.

You are a climate alarmist. You repeat the talking points of the green blob that feeds from the trough of government subsidies.
Even the government body of the UNIPCC denies any claim that weather related damages are linked to CO2 concentrations.
NASA has satellite imagery showing the planet has gotten greener with additional CO2. Crop harvests are way up. Even the deserts are greening.

Do you have a problem with a greener world?