2024 Hurricane Season

[CajunVic]

Wow! Impressive.

not looking to impress . . . just looking to keep the playing field level . . .

[SlickRick]

https://www.facebook.com/reel/472811.obeXctTp5pD3Zm

[Cajunrunner]

I am OK with electric cars but not subsidies. People say the oil and gas industry gets subsidies. In actuality, they can tax deductions for investments made (something I know a lot about as I focused on project economics for much of my career). No investment, no deduction. Many of the climate projects get actual subsidies.

Cajunsmike knows the difference between a tax break and a subsidy.

Many of the voting populous does not, unfortunately, and politicians and media switch the two around all the time to fit their agendas.

[Cajunrunner]

Many climate predictions are based upon computer modeling. I used computer modeling to predict performance of oil and gas reservoirs in my days as an engineer in the energy industry. I learned a key there is requiring a good history match. If you look at the history of the climate predictions, you will see the match is very poor. Go back and look at the gloom and doom predictions of the 80's and 90's which never came to pass. Those were based upon models as well. I grant that the technology today has improved and may be more accurate. However, the question of what to do about the climate is a difficult one. Whatever we do in the US is immaterial when you consider what is going on in Asia. They are still building coal plants galore there while understanding that going to natural gas is probably in their best interest. That is where some of the big discoveries of Australia are being marketed to via LNG. It is foolish to try to pause this like the Biden administration is doing now. As far as electric cars go, I am all for them as long as they are not mandated. The Biden administration can claim all day they are not mandating them but their tailpipe emissions requirements in effect is a mandate. This is a foolish policy as consumers will simply keep their ICE vehicles longer and many of those are not very energy efficient. It may cripple the auto manufacturing business as people will simply not buy new cars without the freedom to buy what they prefer. Electric vehicles would be a disaster when trying to evacuate for hurricanes or in the post hurricane days.

Our power grid can BARELY handle the current energy needs for our population, housing, transportation and industry needs. Just imagine what would happen if even 50% of households and apartment complexes had their occupants charging vehicles around the clock. All while many of the same segment pushing for banning ICE vehicles are also in favor of banning fossil fuel exploration and production.

I have no problem with us trying to be cleaner. Industry is making great strides, including the oil & gas and petrochem industries, in this arena. Some may say "Well what took them so long?", but those same folks may also need to consider that you can't overnight scale up new cleaner technologies in these industries without increased costs being passed on to the consumer.

We should strive to be greener, but we have to do it in a responsible way that doesn't stifle energy production growth at a time when our energy needs continue to grow. That is just as reckless and irresponsible as if we'd revert back to the old Evangeline oilfield boom days of just letting all the produced saltwater from oil wells run all over the surface and discharged into bayous.

[fpc4life99]

Cajunsmike knows the difference between a tax break and a subsidy.

Many of the voting populous does not, unfortunately, and politicians and media switch the two around all the time to fit their agendas.

While they operate differently, wouldn't both ultimately impact taxpayers by reducing potential tax revenue or requiring direct expenditure?

[Cajunrunner]

While they operate differently, wouldn't both ultimately impact taxpayers by reducing potential tax revenue or requiring direct expenditure?

Sure, POTENTIALLY.

But it would still be nice if folks would actually use the terms correctly. One avenue is offering a reduction in the tax burden an individual or entity is already paying, and it's based on capital investments being made by said individual or entity. The other is simply government handing over taxpayer money, regardless of what investment is being made or what, or if, a tax burden is even being paid at the end of the day.

[fpc4life99]

Sure, POTENTIALLY.

But it would still be nice if folks would actually use the terms correctly. One avenue is offering a reduction in the tax burden an individual or entity is already paying, and it's based on capital investments being made by said individual or entity. The other is simply government handing over taxpayer money, regardless of what investment is being made or what, or if, a tax burden is even being paid at the end of the day.

Tax Deductions as Subsidies
Oil and Gas Industry:

Intangible Drilling Costs (IDCs):

Description: Allows companies to deduct most of the costs associated with drilling new wells, regardless of whether production occurs or future revenue is generated. (This effectively means handing over taxpayer money even if the company doesn't end up paying taxes.)

Impact: Immediate reduction in taxable income, encouraging further investment in exploration and drilling, regardless of the company’s overall tax burden at the end of the day.
Percentage Depletion Allowance:

Description: Permits companies to deduct a fixed percentage of their gross income from oil and gas wells. This can result in deductions that exceed the original investment, providing financial benefits beyond the actual costs incurred.

Impact: (Can lead to deductions that return more than the initial investment, effectively reducing the overall tax burden over the long term, regardless of whether a tax burden is incurred.)
Domestic Manufacturing Deduction:

Description: A percentage deduction on income derived from domestic production activities, including oil and gas. This deduction is available regardless of whether the activity generates tax revenue.

Impact: Reduces taxable income, promoting domestic production. (This benefit applies even if no actual tax revenue is generated from these activities.)

Both the oil and gas industry and renewable energy projects ultimately cost taxpayers money, regardless of their potential tax revenue. It is particularly striking that while about 20% of electricity in Louisiana comes from non-oil and gas sources, such as nuclear and renewables, the concept of electric cars still seems to alarm many individuals.

[RedTails]

We should strive to be greener, but we have to do it in a responsible way that doesn't stifle energy production growth at a time when our energy needs continue to grow. That is just as reckless and irresponsible as if we'd revert back to the old Evangeline oilfield boom days of just letting all the produced saltwater from oil wells run all over the surface and discharged into bayous.

Agreed

[Cajunrunner]

Description: Allows companies to deduct most of the costs associated with drilling new wells, regardless of whether production occurs or future revenue is generated. (This effectively means handing over taxpayer money even if the company doesn't end up paying taxes.)

If said company is receiving this check without a tax burden, then sure, chalk it up as a subsidy. But those companies are going to typically be your small couple man operators that in reality, if they drill too many wells where money made is so little that their check from the government is larger than their tax burden, they won't be in business long. THAT's not who the media and politicians are targeting in their rhetoric about subsidies to oil & gas industry. They want you thinking of Exxon, Chevron, EOG, OXY, Marathon, etc. You know, big EVIL oil & gas making millions and billions in profits (which they are paying taxes on). What those companies are able to write off amounts to tax breaks.

Both the oil and gas industry and renewable energy projects ultimately cost taxpayers money, regardless of their potential tax revenue.

I guess it means what you define as costs taxpayers, especially when local and overall economic impact is considered.

It is particularly striking that while about 20% of electricity in Louisiana comes from non-oil and gas sources, such as nuclear and renewables, the concept of electric cars still seems to alarm many individuals.

I have zero issue with EVs being out there as an option for people. Just like for energy production, optionality is great to have. I have a HUGE issue with politicians drafting and signing bans on ICEs, natural gas stoves and furnaces, etc.

With Beryl, you know what I was thankful for? Natural gas still running into my home. Gasoline and propane to run my generator.

The 2021 Freeze in Houston area, damn thankful for my natural gas stove to heat up gumbo and soup from the freezer to have something warm while it was 42 degrees for two days straight in my home.

[fpc4life99]

If said company is receiving this check without a tax burden, then sure, chalk it up as a subsidy. But those companies are going to typically be your small couple man operators that in reality, if they drill too many wells where money made is so little that their check from the government is larger than their tax burden, they won't be in business long. THAT's not who the media and politicians are targeting in their rhetoric about subsidies to oil & gas industry. They want you thinking of Exxon, Chevron, EOG, OXY, Marathon, etc. You know, big EVIL oil & gas making millions and billions in profits (which they are paying taxes on). What those companies are able to write off amounts to tax breaks.

So you’re okay with subsidies to small startups but prefer them not to be given to big existing companies?

By the way, all of the companies listed are investing in renewable energy and receiving subsidies.

ExxonMobil
ExxonMobil has several significant investments in renewable energy:

Renewable Diesel: ExxonMobil has committed to purchasing up to 5 million barrels per year of renewable diesel from Global Clean Energy’s biorefinery in Bakersfield, California. This project uses the camelina crop, a non-food source, to produce the fuel, significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional diesel​ (ExxonMobil)​.
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): ExxonMobil is heavily involved in CCS technology, developing several CCS hubs in Houston and Wyoming, as well as international projects in Scotland, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands​ (ExxonMobil)​​ (ExxonMobil)​.
Hydrogen: ExxonMobil is working on producing low-carbon hydrogen using CCS technology to reduce emissions​ (ExxonMobil)​​ (ExxonMobil)​.
Chevron
Chevron is also investing in renewable energy:

Biofuels: Chevron has invested in several biofuel initiatives, including partnerships with companies like Brightmark to produce renewable natural gas and renewable diesel.
Geothermal Energy: Chevron has a long-standing involvement in geothermal energy, continuing to develop and invest in geothermal projects worldwide.
Hydrogen: Chevron is developing hydrogen projects, exploring hydrogen production and fuel cell technology.
EOG Resources
EOG Resources has been more focused on improving the efficiency of its operations rather than direct investments in renewable energy. However, they have initiatives aimed at reducing emissions:

Emissions Reduction: EOG has focused on reducing methane emissions and improving overall environmental performance through various technological innovations.
Occidental Petroleum (OXY)
Occidental Petroleum has made notable investments in carbon management and renewables:

Carbon Capture: OXY is a leader in direct air capture technology, aiming to remove CO2 directly from the atmosphere and use it for enhanced oil recovery or permanent storage.
Solar Energy: OXY has invested in solar energy projects to power some of its operations, reducing reliance on traditional fossil fuels.
Marathon Petroleum
Marathon Petroleum has also stepped into the renewable fuels sector:

Renewable Diesel: Marathon has converted its Martinez refinery to produce renewable diesel, leveraging feedstocks such as animal fats, soybean oil, and corn oil.
Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF): Marathon is exploring the production of SAF from renewable feedstocks.
Each of these companies is taking steps toward integrating renewable energy into their portfolios, with varying degrees of investment and commitment to different technologies.

I guess it means what you define as costs taxpayers, especially when local and overall economic impact is considered.

https://rebusinessonline.com/first-s.ish-louisiana/


In September 2023, First Solar, the world's largest solar panel manufacturer, broke ground on a $1.1 billion manufacturing facility in Iberia Parish, Louisiana, near the Acadiana Regional Airport. The facility is expected to be operational by the first half of 2026 and will be the company's fifth fully vertically integrated factory in the United States.

The facility will produce high-performance photovoltaic (PV) solar modules, including First Solar's Series 7 modules, which are expected to be made with 100% U.S.-made components. Designed to transform a sheet of glass into a ready-to-ship module in about 4.5 hours, the facility will produce more than a dozen new solar panels every minute.

First Solar's investment is expected to create approximately 1,400 new jobs in Acadiana, including more than 700 direct manufacturing jobs and an estimated 694 new indirect jobs. These jobs are expected to have an average annual salary of $80,000, contributing to an annual payroll of over $40 million. Additionally, First Solar is seeking local and regional suppliers to assist with the construction.

Louisiana's deep talent pool in the solar energy sector was a key factor in First Solar's decision to locate the facility in the state. The company believes this facility will be the largest capital investment in the area's history and will significantly expand America's capacity to produce PV solar panels.

If you think renewable energy doesn't have local impacts, you're missing out on significant developments happening right in your community.

I have zero issue with EVs being out there as an option for people. Just like for energy production, optionality is great to have. I have a HUGE issue with politicians drafting and signing bans on ICEs, natural gas stoves and furnaces, etc.

With Beryl, you know what I was thankful for? Natural gas still running into my home. Gasoline and propane to run my generator.

The 2021 Freeze in Houston area, damn thankful for my natural gas stove to heat up gumbo and soup from the freezer to have something warm while it was 42 degrees for two days straight in my home.

The Hazlett family's 37 rooftop solar panels withstood Hurricane Ida’s Category 4 winds, which had maximum gusts of 172 mph. These panels enabled them to power parts of their house, while their neighbors, who relied on gasoline-powered emergency generators, faced difficulties refilling their fuel supply due to closed fuel stations.

For more details on this story, you can read the full article on NOLA.com: Rooftop solar systems survived Hurricane Ida.

During the February 2021 freeze in Houston, solar power played a significant role in alleviating some of the power crisis impacts. Rooftop solar systems, had supplied more than enough electricity to meet the grid’s shortfall during the winter storm. This renewable energy source was found to have contributed to meeting power demand during 13 of the 20 peak load hours of the freeze.

After storms, finding gasoline can be challenging, as highlighted in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEMgZzqluvk. After Hurricane Beryl, there was no shortage of solar radiation, which provided power directly to homes. In emergencies, using all available resources, including natural gas or propane, is essential. Personally, I've used a solar panel to power lights, a small fridge, and a window unit in my shop for years. The initial cost was small, but it provides unlimited power. While I still drive a gas vehicle and use oil and gas for my home, I've experienced the benefits of solar energy and know it works.

[Big Tyme]

Our power grid can BARELY handle the current energy needs for our population, housing, transportation and industry needs. Just imagine what would happen if even 50% of households and apartment complexes had their occupants charging vehicles around the clock. All while many of the same segment pushing for banning ICE vehicles are also in favor of banning fossil fuel exploration and production.

I have no problem with us trying to be cleaner. Industry is making great strides, including the oil & gas and petrochem industries, in this arena. Some may say "Well what took them so long?", but those same folks may also need to consider that you can't overnight scale up new cleaner technologies in these industries without increased costs being passed on to the consumer.

We should strive to be greener, but we have to do it in a responsible way that doesn't stifle energy production growth at a time when our energy needs continue to grow. That is just as reckless and irresponsible as if we'd revert back to the old Evangeline oilfield boom days of just letting all the produced saltwater from oil wells run all over the surface and discharged into bayous.

Excellent post. I would imagine that the vast majority of people feel exactly this way whichever way they lean. The poles probably make the most noise though and that's who gets the attention. The answer has to be a middle ground.
There is an engineering YouTube channel that addresses the grid issue. I will try to find and post.
I am certainly no expert on tax code but if private industry gets tax payer funds, whether before or after the fact, it's a subsidy. Like the people who feel the need to say the US isn't a democracy, it's a republic. That is like saying it's not a dog, it's a Labrador.

[CajunNation]

Then, there's this

https://www.goldmansachs.com/intelli.er-demand.html

At present, data centers worldwide consume 1-2% of overall power, but this percentage will likely rise to 3-4% by the end of the decade. In the US and Europe, this increased demand will help drive the kind of electricity growth that hasn’t been seen in a generation. Along the way, the carbon dioxide emissions of data centers may more than double between 2022 and 2030

Sachs Research estimates the overall increase in data center power consumption from AI to be on the order of 200 terawatt-hours per year between 2023 and 2030. By 2028, our analysts expect AI to represent about 19% of data center power demand.

Another reason why AI sucks.

[Big Tyme]

Then, there's this

https://www.goldmansachs.com/intelli.er-demand.html






Another reason why AI sucks.

That is incredible. Those numbers are mind-boggling.

[fpc4life99]

Then, there's this

https://www.goldmansachs.com/intelli.er-demand.html

Another reason why AI sucks.

We should look at the whole story:

While the increase in power demand from AI technologies, particularly generative AI, is substantial, there is also significant potential for sustainability benefits. Here are several ways in which the integration of AI could lead to more efficient power usage in other sectors, potentially balancing out some of the increased demand from data centers:

Energy Efficiency in Data Centers
Optimization of Data Center Operations:
AI for Cooling Systems: AI can optimize the cooling systems of data centers, which are one of the largest consumers of energy within these facilities. By predicting cooling needs and adjusting systems in real-time, AI can reduce unnecessary energy consumption.
Dynamic Power Management: AI can help in dynamically adjusting power usage based on the workload, ensuring that servers and other infrastructure are only using as much power as necessary at any given time​ (Datacenter Dynamics)​​ (Morgan Stanley)​.
Smart Grids and Energy Distribution
Smart Grid Management:
Load Balancing: AI can be used to predict and manage power loads more efficiently across the grid, reducing the need for peak power plants, which are typically less efficient and more polluting.
Integration of Renewables: AI can help integrate renewable energy sources into the grid more effectively by predicting supply and demand patterns and managing storage systems to ensure a steady supply of power​ (Morgan Stanley)​.
Industrial and Commercial Applications
Process Optimization in Manufacturing:

Predictive Maintenance: AI can predict equipment failures before they happen, allowing for timely maintenance that prevents energy waste.
Process Improvements: AI can optimize manufacturing processes to reduce energy consumption, such as optimizing the operation of machinery and the scheduling of energy-intensive tasks during off-peak hours​ (Datacenter Dynamics)​.
Building Energy Management:

Smart HVAC Systems: AI can manage heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems in buildings more efficiently, adjusting settings based on occupancy patterns and weather forecasts.
Lighting Controls: AI can optimize lighting based on usage patterns, ensuring lights are only on when needed​ (Datacenter Dynamics)​​ (Morgan Stanley)​.
Transportation and Logistics
Electric Vehicles and Charging Infrastructure:
Optimal Charging: AI can manage the charging of electric vehicles (EVs) to avoid stressing the grid during peak times, spreading the load more evenly and using renewable energy sources when available.
Route Optimization: AI can optimize logistics and transportation routes to reduce fuel consumption and improve overall efficiency​ (Datacenter Dynamics)​​ (Morgan Stanley)​.
Environmental Monitoring and Climate Management
Environmental Impact Reduction:
Emissions Monitoring: AI can monitor and manage emissions from various sources, helping to reduce the overall environmental footprint.
Climate Control Systems: AI can help manage urban climates by optimizing the operation of city-wide systems such as heating, cooling, and lighting based on real-time data​ (Datacenter Dynamics)​​ (Morgan Stanley)​.
Conclusion
While the increased power demand from AI technologies is undeniable, the potential for AI to enhance energy efficiency across various sectors is significant. By optimizing processes, integrating renewable energy sources more effectively, and improving the management of energy consumption, AI could help balance the additional demand it creates. This holistic view highlights the dual role of AI as both a consumer of energy and a facilitator of energy efficiency improvements across the board.

https://www.morganstanley.com/ideas/.infrastructure

[Cajunrunner]

So you’re okay with subsidies to small startups but prefer them not to be given to big existing companies?

By the way, all of the companies listed are investing in renewable energy and receiving subsidies.

ExxonMobil
ExxonMobil has several significant investments in renewable energy:

Renewable Diesel: ExxonMobil has committed to purchasing up to 5 million barrels per year of renewable diesel from Global Clean Energy’s biorefinery in Bakersfield, California. This project uses the camelina crop, a non-food source, to produce the fuel, significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional diesel​ (ExxonMobil)​.
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): ExxonMobil is heavily involved in CCS technology, developing several CCS hubs in Houston and Wyoming, as well as international projects in Scotland, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands​ (ExxonMobil)​​ (ExxonMobil)​.
Hydrogen: ExxonMobil is working on producing low-carbon hydrogen using CCS technology to reduce emissions​ (ExxonMobil)​​ (ExxonMobil)​.
Chevron
Chevron is also investing in renewable energy:

Biofuels: Chevron has invested in several biofuel initiatives, including partnerships with companies like Brightmark to produce renewable natural gas and renewable diesel.
Geothermal Energy: Chevron has a long-standing involvement in geothermal energy, continuing to develop and invest in geothermal projects worldwide.
Hydrogen: Chevron is developing hydrogen projects, exploring hydrogen production and fuel cell technology.
EOG Resources
EOG Resources has been more focused on improving the efficiency of its operations rather than direct investments in renewable energy. However, they have initiatives aimed at reducing emissions:

Emissions Reduction: EOG has focused on reducing methane emissions and improving overall environmental performance through various technological innovations.
Occidental Petroleum (OXY)
Occidental Petroleum has made notable investments in carbon management and renewables:

Carbon Capture: OXY is a leader in direct air capture technology, aiming to remove CO2 directly from the atmosphere and use it for enhanced oil recovery or permanent storage.
Solar Energy: OXY has invested in solar energy projects to power some of its operations, reducing reliance on traditional fossil fuels.
Marathon Petroleum
Marathon Petroleum has also stepped into the renewable fuels sector:

Renewable Diesel: Marathon has converted its Martinez refinery to produce renewable diesel, leveraging feedstocks such as animal fats, soybean oil, and corn oil.
Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF): Marathon is exploring the production of SAF from renewable feedstocks.
Each of these companies is taking steps toward integrating renewable energy into their portfolios, with varying degrees of investment and commitment to different technologies.

1- I never said anything at all about ok with subsidies for one and not for the other. Again, though, the oil & gas companies paying a net negative in taxes are the ones not in business long and don't represent the ones driving the industry. The ones driving the industry, they are paying net positive overall in taxes.

2- You're not telling me anything I don't already know about those companies mentioned above and their "renewable" or "low carbon" arms and business ventures they've established. I am extremely well informed on that end, especially the CCS and emissions reductions technologies. I've discussed those here in the past, and if you're asking my personal opinion, no, I don't believe the government should be shelling out billions in tax dollars for CCS projects, ESPECIALLY the direct air capture stuff that appears to be wastefully inefficient. At least the point-source stuff is direct and efficient from the emitters to the injection site via pipeline, not wasting ungodly vast amounts of water and electricity in the process. However, at the end of the day, government wanted to force industry into these types of projects, so industry successfully lobbied with "Hey, if you want it so bad, then YOU help out".

Sign me up as skeptical.