US hit record oil production of 13.1M - Thanks Biden!

Not a pipe dream....I have a client who is passionate about creating affordable, clean energy. Not sure exactly how, but he has partnered up with a Ph.D. who has the patents on a new technology that is very promising. They they found a public company willing to finish funding the R&D and manufacture and install the systems. Their problem: utilities won't touch it with a ten foot pole. There are a few who have put my client's previous generation of clean coal technology into operation before the Biden administration killed the tax credits for clean coal but none of them are willing to commit capital under the current administration's energy policies and regulatory practices. Coal plants are being shuddered at a dramatic piece. And, it isn't just the Biden administration. A lot of state regulatory bodies (utility regulators) are also committed to eradicating coal. BTW, the public company doesn't even disclose this in their 10Ks...not sure if that is because it is such a small pebble in their huge pond or if they don't want the public relations blackeye of the public learning they are funding clean coal research and application

 

I’m not against pursuing any new technology. The reason I said pipedream is

1. Seems like I’ve been hearing about “clean coal” for 2 decades now but I’ve yet to see it close to implementation

2. Coal is already higher cost than new solar and wind. Now add new clean coal technology it becomes even more expensive.

The reason coal is dying is natural gas was cheaper. Full stop. Now solar and wind are becoming cheaper too.

Also I’m kind of skeptical about the whole carbon sequestration thing, but I’m admittedly not an expert

 

https://cleantechnica.com/2024/01/1...r-behind-renewables-in-china-deployments/amp/

This article demonstrates how wind and solar are increasing by massive proportions over nuclear in China.

 

if his tech worked it would be funded by private capital to capture the carbon credits. heck, companies would sponsor them to decrease their carbon footprint, wyoming, as a state, would install it. it must be cost prohibitive if it is effictive

 

On the surface your comment makes a lot of sense. I can't reveal too much. But his first Clean Coal project was a huge success but was tied to the tax credits given for developing clean coal technology. Goldman Sachs was a partner and was busy monetizing the tax credits generated when a utility installed this technology. You take the tax credits away, and the monetization dries up and utilities will no longer invest, particularly when their boards and management see an administration determined to kill their industry. Now there are no tax credits and in the second iteration of his venture into clean coal technology he found a public company impressed enough with the technology that they want to do the R&D necessary to commercialize it. But in the meantime the marketplace (coal fired utility plants) is a wastleland. So at the end of the day the free enterprise system and the partnership of science and economy function best when there is a level playing field. I'm critical of the subsidies given to wind and solar and the funding of the carbon vacuum cleaners because it's not a level playing field. And, if you want to be really cynical it isn't just government. As soon as they couldn't make easy money off the tax credits for clean coal Goldman Sachs moved on. Unlike my client they aren't motivated deeply by saving good paying jobs and providing clean, cheap fuel. They only respond to the financial stimulai of subsidies. So they just move from one goverment subsized field to another. It's all about the money.

 

So in your version of a level playing field, solar and wind would not be subsidized and not as cost effective as they are today and your clean coal technology would not go anywhere either. We would likely just be more dependent on natural gas.

I think your technology should be subsidized, but I remain skeptical of its viability. If coal can’t compete with natural gas, and now wind and solar, how can it compete when you add the expense of “clean coal” technology?

 

us refiners and western production to benefit from suez canal closures as Europe looks west for refined fuel and unrefined oil. the wti discount should get reduced by this

As more tankers divert from Suez Canal, there's a 'sea change' in way Europe is buying crude (msn.com)

Energy prices for Europe are expected to increase as more petroleum products and crude tankers are diverting away from the Rea Sea and Suez Canal. Longer trips for the Middle-Eastern barrels that replaced Russian flows to Europe introduce supply issues, and this is leading to a "sea change" in commodity purchases by Europe, and a boost for Atlantic Basin crude suppliers including the U.S. and Brazil.
.........................................
"It's not just the arrival that is delayed, the tankers have a longer route home to be filled back up," Katona said. "You are looking at 90 days for one delivery. That is a huge amount of time. The market is underestimating the impact of the transit duration." He said to expect tankers on the spot market see an increase in freight rates, and noted that in the past few days tankers carrying "clean products" such as diesel and gasoline have been going up.
....................

Katona warned that the diversions are going to be a prolonged, painful event, but a boost for both the U.S. and Brazilian energy industry. "We are seeing Europeans remodeling their purchasing patterns from companies in the Atlantic basin with no logistics constraints," he said.

The U.S. is the largest supplier to the European market of diesel, with diesel rates recently hitting their highest level in seven years.