U.S. says it will cut costs for clean energy projects on public lands

The American way... Not in my backyard mining.
Out of sight, out of mind.
Let's depend on China for our resources.
There's a gradation between doing everything domestically vs allowing imports where the exporter has the material/product in greater supply and can provide it at lower costs, right? I mean we've all benefited from reduced product costs from the latter. Everyone is currently complaining about the lack of ____ service or product, do we really want to bring tons of additional "work" to America when every business I know of has help wanted signs? There's big picture issues associated with why that is that I'm sure we won't agree on, but there is also a basic practicality of that we still live in reality and if we want/need X maybe we can't do it domestically, produce it domestically, because we simply don't have to labor to do it.

Unless, of course, we want to open those borders a little wider... ;)
 
@neffa3 , My point, you may have missed within the 250 + posts, if we are leading ourselves to the required resources of China, to be "green", on a massive scale of all power use for America... And they say, we're sanctioning the U.S. for whatever U.S. says of China WE, THE PEOPLE, eat it.

if you think that's far fetched, we are in the midst of a trade battle that has left all manner of electronic life in paralysis in this great nation and hampered their trade as well... We are giving them the golden ticket to force us to oblige their demands.

Maybe, just maybe, we tolerate what we have of current O&G while advancing nuclear reactors for America's independence vs the dependence of China. 😉

I'm curious if the wars of the future will focus on mined resources vs current oil. U.S. is very, "I'm pro electricity though not in my backyard" focused on the mining for the solar and battery requirements of today and ever growing tomorrow. There is a trend that will likely transform the future of the world power - China.

Copper, molybdenum, graphite, and lithium as the primaries (yes, others as well) - product rich mining reserves/producers of the world:

China = Copper.
China = Molybdenum.
China = Graphite.
Chile = Lithium 3x's the second largest producer, Australia, followed by #3 China*.

*Also, applicable to note: Chinalco - Chinese State owned, is the largest stakeholder in Rio Tinto, the largest mining operation in Australia and 2nd/3rd largest of all mining revenue, worldwide.
 
Curious.

Has anyone done the calculations on increase in earth surface temp, and loss of CO2 using plant life when they talk about Solar farms curbing climate change?

Ive never heard the topic discussed
 
Curious.

Has anyone done the calculations on increase in earth surface temp, and loss of CO2 using plant life when they talk about Solar farms curbing climate change?

Ive never heard the topic discussed

Boom, baby.

 
This is a fascinating discussion. I've never had this particular talk with so many informed folks and so little mud-slinging. We have this in common:
No habitat, no hunting.
 
@neffa3 , My point, you may have missed within the 250 + posts, if we are leading ourselves to the required resources of China, to be "green", on a massive scale of all power use for America... And they say, we're sanctioning the U.S. for whatever U.S. says of China WE, THE PEOPLE, eat it.

if you think that's far fetched, we are in the midst of a trade battle that has left all manner of electronic life in paralysis in this great nation and hampered their trade as well... We are giving them the golden ticket to force us to oblige their demands.

Maybe, just maybe, we tolerate what we have of current O&G while advancing nuclear reactors for America's independence vs the dependence of China. 😉


I get the risk of importing raw materials from other countries. But if the alternative is to simply not have those resources then what is the actual risk? Raw lithium is obviously a different discussion than an i-phone or plastic toy... but it's still the same general idea.
 
The carbon credit racket will be short lived. I've looked into biochar and the price needs to come way down if it ever has a chance of being anything more than a novelty. I won't invest in it. Sounds like you are sold on it. Good luck!
You are entitled to your opinion on carbon markets and biochar. No need for luck. Those with business sense can see what's coming.
 
Which has nothing to do with carbon credits or biochar. Nice work completely changing the subject. lol
It has everything to do with carbon credits. The states pushing carbon credits like California, by taxing reliable and affordable energy sources to prop up unreliable and expensive energy such as solar, are the states that will be most vulnerable to blackouts. Most people get this. Some don't.

Biochar is a soil amendment, not a source of energy. Shouldn't be discussed in this topic, but you brought it up.
 
It has everything to do with carbon credits. The states pushing carbon credits like California, by taxing reliable and affordable energy sources to prop up unreliable and expensive energy such as solar, are the states that will be most vulnerable to blackouts. Most people get this. Some don't.

Biochar is a soil amendment, not a source of energy. Shouldn't be discussed in this topic, but you brought it up.

It surprises me that you are in some sort of a leadership position in the wood industry and are so anti biomass and biochar. BTW the carbon market is voluntary and primarily driven by companies like Microsoft. But if you want to believe it's just a bunch of crazy people and like most fads will pass go for it.

I pointed out that biomass and biochar production with carbon credits was going to be a popular renewable source of energy in the future. I posted links to a 30MW biomass/biochar facility in Oregon and showed how they are making $ on carbon credits on the voluntary market. I showed another in Montana that is doing the same thing. And I mentioned another coal reactor being shut down in Steamboat where they are looking at biomass/biochar as a replacement. So yea it has every place in this discussion on renewable energy. Biomass is the solution when the wind is not blowing and sun is not shining. Folks with business sense can see that as coal dies biomass will continue to grow as a source of renewable energy. The biochar production is the cherry on top worth $500-$2000 per ton plus another $100 a ton for the carbon credit. Even if you are not good at math it's easy to see how those projects can pay off when they are making $ on the electricity, biochar, and carbon credit.
 
Last edited:
Apologies to all for being crabby yesterday.
No apologies required. I'm always open to everyones point of view.

My reputation is on the line if I was to sidestep or try to skirt regs/laws. Just today I had a client try to do some stupid shit. I told them I wasn't putting my name on it, and they back-peddeled pretty fast.

The thing I get frustrated with is moving goal posts. Why have regs and laws if you just willy nilly do what we want based on political influence. My enginerd personality does not like grey (or is it gray, to much British English latlely) lines. If we want to protect super special areas, make it so.

Black Butte is a good project with little risk and they have done a good job of reducing it. The Smith has a ton of buffering capacity even if something where to happen. The math/chemistry doesn't support a massive die off (same with Pebble, BTW). There is more naturally occurring sulphides (or is it sulfides, eh) and lime stone in that drainage than about anywhere in the world. There is so much natural ARD that it actually retards the amount of trout that could be in that river. A Black Butte "disaster" would be background noise.

I work for a lot of owners that spend a ton of money and are genuinely conscience of the environment and standards. One recently wentbabove and beyond on a project to the tune of $20M. "Environmental capital" pays dividends. I don't work for assholes. They are usually easy to weed out especially when I ask for 100% retainer. 😀
 
It has everything to do with carbon credits. The states pushing carbon credits like California, by taxing reliable and affordable energy sources to prop up unreliable and expensive energy such as solar, are the states that will be most vulnerable to blackouts. Most people get this. Some don't.

Biochar is a soil amendment, not a source of energy. Shouldn't be discussed in this topic, but you brought it up.
That is not how the carbon credit market works. It is set up to incentivize companies to become more efficient over time regrading carbon emissions. Often time just reducing usage. It has shown to be very effective at that.
 
So is biochar applied topically to the soil? Is it primarily for crop land or rangeland? Can softwoods be grown fast enough to make it a major player in energy?
I use biochar as a soil ammendment for my potting/raised bed mixes for veggies and whatnot.
My understanding is that the having the carbon(some biochar comes pre-enriched with nutrients and humics) the carbon will absorb nutrients in the soils and make them more readily taken up by the plants. The carbon does a lot better at holding the nutes long term than just regular soil. The idea being if you add biochar to your soil you won't have to fertilize every year.20220610_085558.jpg
 
Leupold BX-4 Rangefinding Binoculars

Forum statistics

Threads
114,046
Messages
2,042,263
Members
36,442
Latest member
Grendelhunter98
Back
Top