The Permian Basin in West Texas is a big producer of oil and gas but also a big producer of wind energy. For what it's worth.
My Illinois grandfather came down to Oklahoma before my parents' wedding. When the rest of the Illinois contingent got off the train at Oklahoma City, the first words out of my grandfather's mouth were, "Don't say a word about the wind."
The left needs to consider green policies in context of their own economic frameworks, structures and systems. TL;DR Green power can never be marketed "competitively" with fossil fuels.
BACKGROUND: Marx argued that labor was distinct from all other factors of production (land, methods, raw materials, ... long list) in that labor's value had "use it or lose it" constraints. A bundle of wool or the edge on a blade were just as valuable Wednesday as Monday. But if the value of 6 or 8 or 10 hours "labor" wasn't consumed by production on Monday, it was lost forever. Certainly didn't carry over to Wednesday. (Consequently the trade between a "capitalist" who owned wool and a "laborer" unfairly favored the capitalist.)
AT PRESENT the value of wind and solar is constrained in the same way as labor. Nobody can store or carry a bucket of wind from Monday into Wednesday. (Speak of batteries, but know that "a bucket" of wind, because of natural physics, loses "value" when converted to a "partial-bucket" of electricity in even the best modern lithium battery. When the electricity is re-extracted only a fraction-of-a-part of the original bucket of wind is available.) So wind and sunlight, like labor, aren't durable.
And therefore suffer an asymmetric market position with gas or oil. Capitalists can ALWAYS hold back buckets of (fossil fueled) energy until they sell for a price they like. Green providers, like labor, must sell when the power is available, at whatever market price is -- at that moment -- SET BY THE COMPETITION.
The only way around this is for the central planning committee to take over the whole shebang...
J's comment indirectly points up one problem with the currently favored "alternative power" sources, and Eric's gets close to it. Natural gas and coal powered power plants, petroleum (diesel) generators and pumps, all work in all weather, barring extremes that are rarely encountered in the Lower 48 States. Those in Alaska have been engineered to cope with Alaska's cold and storms. Wind turbines must be heated to remove ice/snow build up, and don't work when a large dome of high pressure stills the wind. Solar is only good when the sun is up, and when the panels are not blocked by snow (a problem in parts of Texas most winters, not just during Snowvid 21) or degraded by dust (a problem in the western part of Texas and other states.)
Not only must wind and solar be used "fresh" to prevent the loss of efficiency, but they lose usefulness when most needed. I will not go into the longer-term environmental problems caused by the construction of large wind farms, starting with loss of grazing and interference with local ground water flows (in relatively shallow aquifers.)
Won't work. Need a bucket of solar panel photons. Take up less space, too, and lighter to carry around.
ReplyDeleteEric Hines
The Permian Basin in West Texas is a big producer of oil and gas but also a big producer of wind energy. For what it's worth.
ReplyDeleteMy Illinois grandfather came down to Oklahoma before my parents' wedding. When the rest of the Illinois contingent got off the train at Oklahoma City, the first words out of my grandfather's mouth were, "Don't say a word about the wind."
If you've got lemons, make lemonade.
The Permian Basin in West Texas is a big producer of oil and gas but also a big producer of wind energy.
ReplyDeleteYeah, but, neglecting economic cycles, oil and gas production is capable of a much longer wave periodicity than wind production.
Eric Hines
The left needs to consider green policies in context of their own economic frameworks, structures and systems. TL;DR Green power can never be marketed "competitively" with fossil fuels.
ReplyDeleteBACKGROUND: Marx argued that labor was distinct from all other factors of production (land, methods, raw materials, ... long list) in that labor's value had "use it or lose it" constraints. A bundle of wool or the edge on a blade were just as valuable Wednesday as Monday. But if the value of 6 or 8 or 10 hours "labor" wasn't consumed by production on Monday, it was lost forever. Certainly didn't carry over to Wednesday. (Consequently the trade between a "capitalist" who owned wool and a "laborer" unfairly favored the capitalist.)
AT PRESENT the value of wind and solar is constrained in the same way as labor. Nobody can store or carry a bucket of wind from Monday into Wednesday. (Speak of batteries, but know that "a bucket" of wind, because of natural physics, loses "value" when converted to a "partial-bucket" of electricity in even the best modern lithium battery. When the electricity is re-extracted only a fraction-of-a-part of the original bucket of wind is available.) So wind and sunlight,
like labor, aren't durable.
And therefore suffer an asymmetric market position with gas or oil. Capitalists can ALWAYS hold back buckets of (fossil fueled) energy until they sell for a price they like. Green providers, like labor, must sell when the power is available, at whatever market price is -- at that moment -- SET BY THE COMPETITION.
The only way around this is for the central planning committee to take over the whole shebang...
J's comment indirectly points up one problem with the currently favored "alternative power" sources, and Eric's gets close to it. Natural gas and coal powered power plants, petroleum (diesel) generators and pumps, all work in all weather, barring extremes that are rarely encountered in the Lower 48 States. Those in Alaska have been engineered to cope with Alaska's cold and storms. Wind turbines must be heated to remove ice/snow build up, and don't work when a large dome of high pressure stills the wind. Solar is only good when the sun is up, and when the panels are not blocked by snow (a problem in parts of Texas most winters, not just during Snowvid 21) or degraded by dust (a problem in the western part of Texas and other states.)
ReplyDeleteNot only must wind and solar be used "fresh" to prevent the loss of efficiency, but they lose usefulness when most needed. I will not go into the longer-term environmental problems caused by the construction of large wind farms, starting with loss of grazing and interference with local ground water flows (in relatively shallow aquifers.)
LittleRed1