Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"How to Lower U.S. Living Standards"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "How to Lower U.S. Living Standards"

    Easy... Fundamentally transform the U.S. into North Korea...
    How to Lower U.S. Living Standards
    The drastic ‘80 by 50’ goal would reduce the energy use of Californians to that of North Koreans today.



    By ROBERT BRYCE
    Updated Sept. 21, 2015 7:00 p.m. ET
    848 COMMENTS

    California Gov. Jerry Brown has a vision: When it comes to greenhouse-gas emissions, he wants his fellow Californians to emulate North Koreans. Meanwhile, many of Mr. Brown’s fellow Democrats—including President Obama, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders—will settle for putting Americans on a par with residents of Mexico.

    That’s the essence of the climate-change agenda of America’s most prominent Democrats. They have pledged to cut carbon-dioxide emissions by 80% by 2050, (aka 80 by 50). Their plan will take those emissions to levels that are common today in countries far poorer than the U.S.

    [...]


    What would 80 by 50 mean for individuals? According to the International Energy Agency, the world per capita average for carbon-dioxide emissions is 4.51 tons a year. Residents of California are responsible for the emission of about twice that amount, 9.42 tons a year. Assuming that the state population doesn’t increase, an 80% cut means the average Californian would be emitting 1.88 tons by 2050.

    In other words, those future Californians will be asked to emit less carbon dioxide than do current residents of North Korea. In 2012, according to the IEA, the average North Korean was responsible for 1.83 tons of carbon dioxide. Per capita GDP in North Korea: $1,800 a year.

    Achieving 80 by 50 on a national basis will be similarly painful. In 2012 per capita carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. totaled 16.15 tons. Achieving 80 by 50 would mean each resident of the U.S.—where per capita GDP is $54,600 a year—would emit 3.23 tons annually. That’s less than Mexicans, who emit 3.72 tons and have a per capita GDP of about $10,400 a year.

    [...]

    What would 80 by 50 cost? None of the Democrats has provided a cost estimate, but we can get an idea by looking at Germany, which has set a goal of getting 80% of its energy from renewables by 2050.

    Germany has already spent $100 billion on subsidies for renewables and its environment minister, Peter Altmaier, has estimated that hitting its 80 by 50 target will require spending another $1.3 trillion over the next two decades. The U.S. economy is four times as large as Germany’s, and U.S. energy consumption is seven times as large. Reaching 80 by 50 in the U.S. would likely cost more than $5 trillion. For reference, the cost of ObamaCare over the next decade is projected at $1.2 trillion.

    [...]

    Mr. Bryce, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, is the author of “Smaller Faster Lighter Denser Cheaper: How Innovation Keeps Proving the Catastrophists Wrong” (PublicAffairs, 2014).

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-to-l...rds-1442876463


    If the whole world, including Red China followed suit, the CO2 level would only rise to 435 ppmv instead of 470 ppmv by 2050. The radiative forcing differential would be immeasurably small. The transformation of the U.S. into North Korea will only avert about 0.1 °C of warming.




    16
    Dumb idea.
    0.00%
    0
    Really dumb idea.
    0.00%
    0
    Dumber than a bag of hammers idea.
    75.00%
    12
    But 97.3% of scientists said something!
    25.00%
    4
    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

  • #2
    This is roughly the current cost per kWH by nation.



    At about a cost of $.25 per kWH it becomes cheaper to operate your own diesel or natural gas generator than connect to the grid.

    Given the above, it would be absolutely insane to implement the 80 by 50 plan as people will simply stop buying their electricity and generate their own. The plan is for all intents self-defeating without also implementing a government dictatorship over all energy production with a draconian policing effort to get people to comply.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
      This is roughly the current cost per kWH by nation.



      At about a cost of $.25 per kWH it becomes cheaper to operate your own diesel or natural gas generator than connect to the grid.

      Given the above, it would be absolutely insane to implement the 80 by 50 plan as people will simply stop buying their electricity and generate their own. The plan is for all intents self-defeating without also implementing a government dictatorship over all energy production with a draconian policing effort to get people to comply.
      No, the wealthy and well-educated land owner will generate their own power. The poor and the uneducated will get shafted.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
        At about a cost of $.25 per kWH it becomes cheaper to operate your own diesel or natural gas generator than connect to the grid.
        Does the above include the cost of a generator of sufficient capacity?

        Comment


        • #5
          The wealthy land owners may sell there cheaper to make electricity to those poor people. It may become so sucesfull they end up building giant building just to make power. ��
          you think you a real "bleep" solders you "bleep" plastic solders don't wory i will make you in to real "bleep" solders!! "bleep" plastic solders

          CPO Mzinyati

          Comment


          • #6
            Depends, of course, on how much electricity you have to generate to run your entire home, and how much gas is costing. Obviously, Doc's employers would see this as an excellent opportunity to hike fuel costs, and what - we should ask - is the carbon footprint of millions of Americans running their own generators? Plus driving to and from the gas station to fill up fuel containers for those generators?

            TANSTAFL:

            There
            Ain't
            No
            Such
            Thing
            As
            Free
            Lunch


            Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Gorque View Post
              Does the above include the cost of a generator of sufficient capacity?
              Yes. For a typical home a 10 KW unit is more than sufficient. I can purchase one for about $5,000. A 25 KW unit would run about $15,000. Materials for install are about another $1500, give or take.
              In my case there is no labor cost as I can do the work myself. But, all told, a 10 KW unit installed would run about $15,000.

              Assume a 10 year service life. $1500 a year + about $3 fuel an hour to run it (that's high but okay) comes out to about $.30 an hour. If your costs go down just slightly (as mine would) you are in the $.20 an hour vicinity. That makes commercially generated power more expensive than doing it yourself. You might go in with a couple of neighbors and lower the cost slightly more...
              Running on natural gas or propane would be the obvious best choices compared to diesel. But, since you aren't using it in a car, you can buy cheaper #1 off road diesel to drive the cost of that down. Any wholesaler of off road diesel would be more than happy to come once a week and fill your tank for you.

              Basically, the Left's "green energy" scheme is economically a total bust and only, as Doc would put it, a Greentard would happily and willingly go along with it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                Yes. For a typical home a 10 KW unit is more than sufficient. I can purchase one for about $5,000. A 25 KW unit would run about $15,000. Materials for install are about another $1500, give or take.
                In my case there is no labor cost as I can do the work myself. But, all told, a 10 KW unit installed would run about $15,000.

                Assume a 10 year service life. $1500 a year + about $3 fuel an hour to run it (that's high but okay) comes out to about $.30 an hour. If your costs go down just slightly (as mine would) you are in the $.20 an hour vicinity. That makes commercially generated power more expensive than doing it yourself. You might go in with a couple of neighbors and lower the cost slightly more...
                Running on natural gas or propane would be the obvious best choices compared to diesel. But, since you aren't using it in a car, you can buy cheaper #1 off road diesel to drive the cost of that down. Any wholesaler of off road diesel would be more than happy to come once a week and fill your tank for you.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                  Yes. For a typical home a 10 KW unit is more than sufficient. I can purchase one for about $5,000. A 25 KW unit would run about $15,000. Materials for install are about another $1500, give or take.
                  In my case there is no labor cost as I can do the work myself. But, all told, a 10 KW unit installed would run about $15,000.

                  Assume a 10 year service life. $1500 a year + about $3 fuel an hour to run it (that's high but okay) comes out to about $.30 an hour. If your costs go down just slightly (as mine would) you are in the $.20 an hour vicinity. That makes commercially generated power more expensive than doing it yourself. You might go in with a couple of neighbors and lower the cost slightly more...
                  Running on natural gas or propane would be the obvious best choices compared to diesel. But, since you aren't using it in a car, you can buy cheaper #1 off road diesel to drive the cost of that down. Any wholesaler of off road diesel would be more than happy to come once a week and fill your tank for you.

                  Basically, the Left's "green energy" scheme is economically a total bust and only, as Doc would put it, a Greentard would happily and willingly go along with it.
                  How many years would it take to recoup your initial investment costs?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                    No, the wealthy and well-educated land owner will generate their own power. The poor and the uneducated will get shafted.
                    Along with the urban dwelling and renter almost regardless of income...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                      How many years would it take to recoup your initial investment costs?
                      I based it on a 10 year service life. Replacing the generator that often.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                        How many years would it take to recoup your initial investment costs?
                        Correct me if I'm wrong, but over a ten year life, that comes out to 17 cents per KwH. No?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Gorque View Post
                          Correct me if I'm wrong, but over a ten year life, that comes out to 17 cents per KwH. No?
                          Well, throw in a little more for repairs, oil changes, other maintenance, that sort of thing. It definitely beats paying $.25 + a kWH for commercial power like people do in countries that have heavily invested in "Green" energy.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I think my number should have been 17 cents per hour based on a 10 year life. For a 10 Kw unit, I think that drops it down to 1.7 cents per KwH on the initial $ 15,000.00 investment.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Gorque View Post
                              I think my number should have been 17 cents per hour based on a 10 year life. For a 10 Kw unit, I think that drops it down to 1.7 cents per KwH on the initial $ 15,000.00 investment.
                              Your major cost isn't the generator, it's the fuel. A 10 KW unit uses about a gallon of diesel an hour in operation, give or take. The generator is costing you about $5 a day on the investment (includes some extra for maintenance). That's about $.017 for the generator and $.30 for the fuel or about $.31 cents a KWH. That's really a bit higher than actual, but it illustrates the point I'm making. When you invest heavily in wind and solar self generation becomes a better, cheaper option.

                              The only thing that makes sense that the Greenies like is micro-hydro. That beats the snot out of a gas generator. So, if you have water on the property that's the way to go... At least until the EPA finds out...

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X