Anyone else never been able to square the message that we hear over and over that fossil fuel is dead because renewables are so cheap now with the plans for developing countries to use fossil fuels?
https://www-bbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/science-environment-56596200
Thanks for all the comments. Just don’t know who to believe
Both of those locations are building out both as an energy mix. Why build out 100 MW coal when you can build out 50MW coal with 200 MW solar to cover the same thing. There is zero way solar (by itself) can power the grid 24/7.
Renewables argument today isn't the build the cheapest energy source. It's make all the energy sources work together to provide the cheapest wholesale price. As renewables become cheaper, fossil demand is going to further be reduced.
It just doesn’t add up that China and India are building coal plants if solar is cheaper
Crude is Lubricants too.
If it moves, it needs that.
They are. It is a part of their energy mix, just like the developed countries in the world. Solar being the cheapest to produce is only a piece of the energy infastructure. It's not all of it.
https://www.greencitytimes.com/the-biggest-solar-plant-on-the-globe-in-india/amp/
Fwiw, any renewable project that is constructed reduces the total amount of fossil fuels needed to support the grid annually. More infastructure means declining fossil fuel demand. The real question is how long will energy demand grow versus the amount of fossil fuels required to meet that demand.
I’m not convinced. If renewables are so cheap why wouldn’t the developing countries use them?
You are missing the point.. Just because one country does not impose those same kind of subsidies does not mean that they do not benefit from them.
You are missing the point. Are you saying India, Africa, and other developing countries have tax codes that favor oil and gas? They are not going renewable driven strictly by economics - lowest cost energy solution is what they seek.
No. O&G has more tax breaks versus other companies. Just because you look and follow the tax code
https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-fossil-fuel-subsidies-a-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs
The federal government provides numerous subsidies, both direct and indirect, to the fossil fuel industry. Special provisions in the U.S. tax code designed to specifically support and reward domestic fossil fuel‐related production are direct subsidies. Other provisions in the tax code aimed at businesses in general create indirect subsidies that are not exclusive to the fossil fuels industry. In certain cases, quantifying these subsidies is fairly simple. In the case of indirect subsidies, establishing an amount associated with these subsidies is more challenging. While not covered in this fact sheet, another source of federal aid to the fossil fuel industry is the discounted cost of leasing federal lands for fossil fuel extraction. Some fossil fuel subsidies provide public assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), which assists low-income households with heating costs.
@1vjt+1ahQtkcN
Just like I thought, you know the talking point but don’t actually know anything about it. I asked the question already knowing the answer. My primary job is running the financial calculations on drilling oil and gas wells and I have to use the tax code in those calculations. What anti-O&G people call “subsidies” are the same tax deductions that ANY company operating in the US can take for capital investments. There are NO direct checks getting cut from the US Treasury to oil and gas companies. That same thing can not be said for EVs and renewables.
You can research for yourself what subsidies have been provided to O&G over the years.
Plenty of sources for this information - it's in the billions over past 20 years just in USA alone.
(Must confess - I worked for the US Minerals Management Service during the period it was exposed as a corrupt bribery mill in the early 90's.)
Dollar for dollar, O&G has been more benefited by Corporate Socialism than even the Dairy/Cheese industry. Just for comparison.
And for the comments on "Africa" situation - the biggest efforts for electrification throughout the continent are being subsidized by China, using solar and other economical non-Carbon technologies. That's called 'progress' - long delayed by the ex-colonizers of the continent.
@uwd+1ahQtkcN
Please list the “subsidies” oil and gas companies get that ONLY apply to oil and gas companies.
Tired of the subsidies argument for renewables. O&G also receives subsidies. If anything, renewable energies are going to continue and even get more subsidies in the near future where as O&G is getting more taxes. Politicians will use the "hard economic times" to invest more in green energies.
Spend some time in Africa and you will get your answer. Millions starving, homeless, struggling to survive. They tap live pipelines just to get a few gallons of fuel, often killing many. No market for EVs or clean energy here.
Renewables are the rage for wealthy countries where some people need a cause to live for. Without subsidies and politics, renewables would remain a tiny portion of the market. Look around. Hard economic times are approaching for many wealthy countries, and the renewables craze is likely to stall.
Technology isn't there yet. But I wouldn't bet the farm on no future technological advancements. I won't pretend to know the future, but in parts of the more "advanced" developing world they have far better technologies around cellular for example because they leap-frogged much of the out dated technologies that older developed nations were dependent on and resistant to change from (land lines, fax, outdated cellular tech, etc). I wouldn't be surprised to see something similar in energy technology as our capabilities expands while developing nations began to grow and build out their infrastructure network. Maybe it will be in 5 yrs, 10 yrs, 50+ yrs I don't know, but things will change that much is certain. I just need to make a few more bucks in this old industry while I can and call it a day. Good luck out there.
Developing countries are building fossil fuel based power generation. Discussion isn’t about transport fuel.
Renewables aren't cheaper. Building a wind turbine or solar panel can produce electricity cheaper than other forms when it is producing.
A renewable only system would be more expensive than a fossil fuel system to provide electricity 24/7
Dumb discussion. The billions of little people simply want the cheapest monthly cost for transportation. Whatever you offer them will not matter until its cheapest out if pocket. Right now its petrol for a motorbike in most countries, even cheaper than public transportation. Only USA has a bunch of SJWs who can afford to philosophize over what others in the world should be doing and state it is some facts.
Captain Obvious - what are you paid for this gig?
Pretty lame material, so I'm assuming not much.
Put in a little effort some time.
Dead industry means in decline. It doesn't mean that it is done with today nor will it be in a few years. Blockbuster is still around today, yet is non-existant in the majority of peoples lives. O&G is heading that same direction, just over a longer period of time.
With declining demand and oversupply, it means less margins for producers. That means less money to invest in growth/margin improvement projects and less employees required to support these efforts. Less and less people are going to be employed by exxonmobil in the coming years. Either by retirement, attrition, PIP/PILs, or additional layoffs, the company WILL get rid of people as the product is in less demand.
With your comment on renewables, you clearly can't see past next quarter. If you are nearing retirement, awesome! You took your cut of the industry and retiring nicely. If you are 10~20+ years away, you better be planning for worst case scenario of being let go before reaching retirement age. The next decade plus is going to be bumpy!
It’s all a political game, both ways