Prediction: Coal has fallen. Nuclear is next then Oil.

[mspohr]

No need for countries to issue new oil, gas or coal licences, study finds

Researchers say world has enough fossil fuel projects planned to meet demand forecasts to 2050 if net zero is reached

www.theguardian.com

The world has enough fossil fuel projects planned to meet global energy demand forecasts to 2050 and governments should stop issuing new oil, gas and coal licences, according to a large study aimed at political leaders.

The data offered what they said was “a rigorous scientific basis” for global governments to ban new fossil fuel projects and begin a managed decline of the fossil fuel industry, while encouraging investment in clean energy alternatives. By establishing a “clear and immediate demand” political leaders would be able to set a new norm around the future of fossil fuels, against which the industry could be held “immediately accountable”, the researchers said.

 

[mspohr]

Small modular nuclear reactors get a reality check in new report

A new report has assessed the feasibility of deploying small modular nuclear reactors to meet increasing energy demands around the world. The findings don't look so good for this particular form of energy production.

newatlas.com

The rhetoric from small modular reactor (SMR) advocates is loud and persistent: This time will be different because the cost overruns and schedule delays that have plagued large reactor construction projects will not be repeated with the new designs," says the report. "But the few SMRs that have been built (or have been started) paint a different picture – one that looks startlingly similar to the past. Significant construction delays are still the norm and costs have continued to climb."

At least 375,000 MW of new renewable energy generating capacity is likely to be added to the US grid in the next seven years," they say. "By contrast, IEEFA believes it is highly unlikely any SMRs will be brought online in that same time frame. The comparison couldn’t be clearer. Regulators, utilities, investors and government officials should acknowledge this and embrace the available reality: Renewables are the near-term solution."

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

I know this is repeating but solar panel production was .05% of China's energy use. I am not sure why this tiny amount means we give them a pass.

And it "only grew" 20% YOY in the first quarter. So maybe it is now .06%.

I really don't understand this "letting China off the hook" so to speak just because they manufacture solar panels. And at 20% YOY - civilization is toast at that pace. Does that even keep up with a/c use?

I wonder if March was also warm in China? Lets compare NG use in the US for March 2024 to prior year? Winter energy use, we are all going to decline around the North world. And I think the take home from that long article is the decrease in construction as the largest factor. Which is really just stopping a poorly planned RE construction boom. Wasted construction is wasted carbon.

Yeah, where did you get your statistic 0.05%?!

Silicon ingot production is the most energy intensive part of making solar cells, and the amount of silicon used in a single 1 sq meter solar panel (300w) is equivalent to 600 i9-core processors, or 10,000 microcontrollers, or 83,000 LED chips.

The semiconductor industry in china consumes 3% of china's energy production, so there's no way that solar panel production (which uses 1/4 of all the silicon that china produces) only consumed less than a fraction of a percent of that. You're off by a factor of 20 at least.

Not to mention the amount of clean water that's consumed! There are huge ecological costs to solar panel production that china needs to get under control if they don't want to kill their citizens in the process.

So unless you want to bring that ecological disaster onshore (in order to buy domestic), we're going to have to give them a pass or go without any solar panels.