Promises, promises

Investment Analysis Clubs Macro Economic Trends and Risks
1

COP26: No countries have delivered on promise to improve climate plans
www.newscientist.com/article/2320379-cop26-no-countries-have…
One of the headline promises of the Glasgow Climate Pact [November 2021] was that this year, 196 countries would “revisit and strengthen” their plans for curbing emissions by 2030. Without stronger action plans, the target of keeping below 1.5°C of warming will be out of reach…

Sharma said that the UK government is looking at ways to strengthen its 2030 national climate plan, but to date, no countries have formally submitted a blueprint that goes further than what they promised before or at COP26…

“I’m afraid it was pretty clear in Glasgow that we were unlikely to see these revisions [to climate plans in 2022]. Because if they were going do it, they would have done it in Glasgow. All the signals are that it’s not going to happen in Sharm El-Sheikh [COP27, November 2022] unfortunately,” says Betts.

DB2

5 Likes
2

DB2,

That is a total failure.

Owning shares in XOM just feeds into a massive failure.

I guess we have our ideas on how to screw things up entirely. No surprise.

2 Likes
3

COP26: No countries have delivered on promise to improve climate plans
—
That is a total failure.

Agreed. At the same time, the original plans (from COP21 in Paris, 2015) were not real world – “The paper promises of Paris”.

James Hansen, father of climate change awareness, calls Paris talks “a fraud”
www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-cli…

DB2

1 Like
4

DB2,

We can come to dominate entire alternative energy markets with the right investments. Or we can fail on the premise that no one else is doing it.

The idea is there is limited competition. We can walk in and take it.

It means doing what the Rockefeller family did and dumping XOM…etc…

2 Likes
5

COP26: No countries have delivered on promise to improve climate plans

===================================================

USA is a big failure because of fossil fuels producing and consuming states, but California is doing very well along with some other states and cities.

Here is a good article showing which states have the highest CO2 emissions:

https://solarpower.guide/solar-energy-insights/states-ranked…

Texas drags down USA the most for CO2 emissions. And Texans are not building solar fast enough to benefits the rate-payers with cheaper electricity and cleaner air.

Jaak

2 Likes
6

"Here is a good article showing which states have the highest CO2 emissions:

https://solarpower.guide/solar-energy-insights/states-ranked……

Funny that you show a map where NM and OK have the same CO2 output as TX, and the population of TX is 14 times that of NM and 7 times the population of OK.

As for solar power

https://www.progressiverecruitment.com/en-us/blog/2020/june/…

We keep adding thousands of MW hour capacity farms in TX…

https://www.progressiverecruitment.com/en-us/blog/2020/june/…

"California currently has the most installed utility-scale solar capacity of any state, but Texas is catching up. California is expected to add 10 gigawatts (GW) of utility-scale solar capacity by the end of 2022, far short of what Texas is adding.

There was 2.5 GW of solar capacity installed in Texas in 2020 marked the beginning of the solar boom in the state. EIA expects another 4.6 GW of solar capacity to be added in 2021 and 5.4 GW in 2022. By the end of 2022, Texas will have 14.9 GW of installed solar capacity"

https://dailyenergyinsider.com/news/30029-texas-expected-to-…

Not only will TX have more windpower than CA - by far, but we will have more solar power at the end of this year than all of CA.

"Texas Installed Over 6 GW, Becoming the Top Solar Market

Texas added 6,060 MW of solar power in 2021, which represents 25% of total capacity added during the year. Texas is the top solar market for the first time on record, while California is now in second place with 3,640 MW."

https://quickelectricity.com/texas-has-the-most-solar-power-…

Maybe it’s time for Jaak to actually read some links?

t.

6 Likes
7

Not only will TX have more windpower than CA - by far, but we will have more solar power at the end of this year than all of CA.

==============================================

Texas will not have more solar power than CA at the end of this year.

CA has installed capacity of 36,000 MW in 1Q2022
TX has installed capacity of 14,000 MW in 1Q2022

https://www.seia.org/states-map

Jaak

2 Likes
8

Funny that you show a map where NM and OK have the same CO2 output as TX, and the population of TX is 14 times that of NM and 7 times the population of OK.

=====================================================

Look at the article again:

TX: CO2 emissions 706.5 (Million metric tons) per year
OK: 92.7
NM: 48.7

Jaak

1 Like
9

COP26: No countries have delivered on promise to improve climate plans
—
USA is a big failure because of fossil fuels producing and consuming states, but California is doing very well along with some other states and cities.

The article was about the failure to submit climate plans since the Glasgow meeting in November eight months ago. That is the responsibility of the administration in Washington, DC.

DB2

3 Likes
10

Texas is the top solar market for the first time on record, while California is now in second place with 3,640 MW.

You realize that northernmost latitude for the state of Texas is 36.5000 degrees North; the southernmost latitude is approximately 25.8368 degrees North. 2/3s of California is North of 36.5000 degrees. San
Francisco is near the same latitude as Washington DC.
The real question is, what took Texas so long to produce as much solar energy as California?
It’s amazing how people in Texas are obsessed with comparing Texas to California.
If California had not invested in a large solar energy commitment, Texas would probably still half a dozen panels on random homes.

23 Likes
11

The article was about the failure to submit climate plans since the Glasgow meeting in November eight months ago. That is the responsibility of the administration in Washington, DC.

Yeah, we can’t be blamed for ignoring the revised plan until it actually exists.

(I remember the fuss over the Kyoto Accord back in '97. The US President at the time, knowing that it had zero chance of being ratified by the US Senate, quietly neglected to send it to them. That was okay. His successor publicly acknowledged that he wouldn’t bother to send the Accord to the Senate for formal rejection, and was widely criticized for it. Meanwhile the US came closer than most other industrialized countries to meeting the goals declared in the agreement, and got less credit for it than countries who had formally and completely approved the deal and then made no effort to actually comply with it. Verbally declaring intent, you see, is vastly more important and productive than taking action.

And the agreement didn’t even ask China or India to increase their CO2 emissions more slowly - if ALL the industrialized nations including the US had FULLY lived up to the accord while the second and third world continued on their then-current course, as the accord allowed, CO2 emissions would have gone UP not down.)

3 Likes
12

COP26: No countries have delivered on promise to improve climate plans

And:
All the signals are that it’s not going to happen in Sharm El-Sheikh [COP27, November 2022] unfortunately,” says Betts.

It turns out, people and nations do what is in their own self interest.

I looked at the BP Statistical Report on Energy for the latest year CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. Dividing the world into four groups: Europe, North America, China (including Hong Kong), and then every other country (Rest of World), the following are the CO2 emissions for 2021.

CO2 from the big three fossil fuels (oil products, natural gas, coal)
       Europe:  3,793.7 million metric tonnes  (11% of total)
North America:  5,602.2  (16.5%)
        China: 10,587.6  (31%)
Rest of World: 13,900.6  (41%)

https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/c…

Bottom line: The atmospheric CO2 concentration is just going to keep rising. It is currently around 420 ppm, and going up 2 to 3 ppm every year. The developing world, which includes China, India, other Asian nations, developing Africa, etc. will keep demanding more energy to fuel their growing economies. It is in their own self interest to do so. From their perspective, if there is some future where the amount of CO2 in the air becomes a big problem, then that issue will be dealt with at that time, by someone else. Right now, it is more important to raise their populations out of poverty.

  • Pete
9 Likes
13

“You realize that northernmost latitude for the state of Texas is 36.5000 degrees North; the southernmost latitude is approximately 25.8368 degrees North. 2/3s of California is North of 36.5000 degrees. San Francisco is near the same latitude as Washington DC.”

So? It snows a foot, sometimes 18 inches in the Wash DC area. Lived there. Shoveled snow. When was the last time you even read about an inch of snow in San Francisco?

Other than the top teeny part - where hardly anyone lives - most of CA climate is controlled by the Pacific Ocean and winds from the east. Yeah, Death Valley and Barstow and places like that are ‘inland deserts’…good for solar farms.

“The real question is, what took Texas so long to produce as much solar energy as California?”

Heck, with NG at under $1/therm in TX…and next to no NG in the entire state of CA…when our heating bills were $40/winter and electric bills were $30…it was a no brainer to burn fossil fuels. we had scads of gas to burn CHEAPLY.

Plus we didn’t have a lot of environmental nuts…

and of course, generous federal subsidies for NEW wind/solar farms.

“It’s amazing how people in Texas are obsessed with comparing Texas to California.”

Why? CA was, repeat, was number one in solar. Now it’s number two. Despite all those teeny weeny rooftop installations…which add up to ‘not much’…TX has beat the pants off CA. And will pull further and further ahead. When your ‘king of the hill’…you get deposed.

CA was a ‘leader’ in wind power. Now it’s way behind TX and falling even faster behind.

“If California had not invested in a large solar energy commitment, Texas would probably still half a dozen panels on random homes.”

If the rest of the country weren’t sucking up NG to produce electricity…we’d still be having cheap electric and heating bills. Now that EVERYONE want ‘clean burning natural gas’ the price gas gone up by a factor of 10.

Now just watch. TX is installing residential solar by the megawatt and tens of thousands of homes. As well as gigawatt size solar farms in counties with population of 50, plus 5000 cows.

t.

3 Likes
14

Not only will TX have more windpower than CA - by far, but we will have more solar power at the end of this year than all of CA.

That’s great! Good that Texas is supplying their energy needs with renewable sources. The point isn’t how much you produce but how much does Texas produce to the energy need.
Dallas TX has about the same Population as San Diego CA. The weather in Dallas is 103 degrees today, the weather in San Diego is 72 degrees today, where do you think you’ll have to produce more energy? Even if Dallas could produce twice as much renewable energy as San Diego, Dallas would still require more than that…

5 Likes
15

So? It snows a foot, sometimes 18 inches in the Wash DC area. Lived there. Shoveled snow. When was the last time you even read about an inch of snow in San Francisco?

Somehow I just knew you were gonna say something about the weather difference. Solar power is produced in accordance with your proximity to the equator. Solar power is not about air temperature. In fact if you want to compare Washington DC direct beam radiation to San Francisco? San Francisco has far fewer sunny days in summer when solar production is most available.
Solar power is a function of direct beam radiation year round and your proximity to the equator improves this function exponentially.

Houston TX (the largest population in Texas) is closer to the equator than Tijuana Mx.

CA was, repeat, was number one in solar. Now it’s number two. Despite all those teeny weeny rooftop installations…which add up to ‘not much’…TX has beat the pants off CA.

I didn’t read the rest of you post… it sounds too much like Penis Envy.

3 Likes
16

Why? CA was, repeat, was number one in solar. Now it’s number two. Despite all those teeny weeny rooftop installations…which add up to ‘not much’…TX has beat the pants off CA.

=================================

Wrong again.

Texas does not and will not have more solar power than CA at the end of this year.

CA has installed capacity of 36,000 MW in 1Q2022
TX has installed capacity of 14,000 MW in 1Q2022

https://www.seia.org/states-map

Jaak

3 Likes
17

Somehow I just knew you were gonna say something about the weather difference.

Solar panels don’t work so good under a foot of snow. LOL

The Captain

2 Likes
18

Now it’s number two. Despite all those teeny weeny rooftop installations…which add up to ‘not much’…TX has beat the pants off CA.

It’s harder to site large projects in California because the real estate is expensive. Texas is bigger, and real estate is cheap because nobody wants to live there :wink:

You’re welcome.

22 Likes
19

USA is a big failure because of fossil fuels producing and consuming states, but California is doing very well along with some other states and cities.

The article was about the failure to submit climate plans since the Glasgow meeting in November eight months ago. That is the responsibility of the administration in Washington, DC.

DB2

=======================================================

You are wrong. How can the administration in Washington issue a climate plan with Supreme Court ruling that EPA can not regulate CO2 emissions and the conservatives in congress not supporting any climate plan to reduce CO2 emissions.

Jaak

6 Likes
20

Solar panels don’t work so good under a foot of snow. LOL

How Many Snowstorms Washington DC Gets
About half the days with snowfall in Washington leave just a skiff, amounting to less than an inch, of fresh snow on the ground. For four days a year on average, the amount of new snow totals at least an inch.

Snowstorms of over five inches a day don’t happen every year. But major blizzards that dump ten inches or more in one day are even rarer events that occur about once a decade.
https://weatherspark.com/y/20957/Average-Weather-in-Washingt…

2 Likes