83 thoughts on “The EIA and Futures Outlook for Oil Prices

  1. pgl

    For those who think the world is coming to an end because Putin cut off supplies of natural gas to the EU, here is a little tale of how markets work:


    Energy giant Chevron (NYSE: CVX) is working to help solve these problems by looking for ways to boost its liquefied natural gas (LNG) capabilities and send more supplies to Europe. That potentially positions the oil company to capitalize on the strengthening LNG market. Chevron has a sizable LNG business. It owns interests in several LNG export facilities around the world, including Gorgon in Australia. It focuses on producing LNG for the Asian market because it has been a big demand driver in recent years. However, the company has started pivoting its LNG activities and ramping them up in response to surging European demand.

    The Gorgon natural gas sector has been the biggest news in Australia. Yea less natural gas for China but more for Germany. While the stock price for Gazprom has declined since Putin invaded Ukraine – the stock price for Chevron has risen:


    1. Anonymous

      given time and resources….

      terminal receiving and distribution is an issue in nw eu toward central and south eu/formers.

      it also takes time to ramp up export capacity….

      supply chain for petro is different than for widgets. it is a production and distribution “problem”

  2. pgl

    DOJ has appealed that insane ruling by Judge Aileen Cannon with some very strong arguments. Of course pretend lawyer Rick Perry Mason Stryker will once again totally misrepresent everything. That is what he do. DOJ in their appeal blew away Ricky Boy’s favorite little argument which was already discussed here:


    As noted yesterday, Judge Aileen Cannon enjoined the government from conducting a criminal investigation into violations of the Espionage Act and obstruction because around 4.5% — possibly as little as .5% — of the materials seized from Trump in 27 boxes amount to things more personal than MAGA hats and press clippings. Her logic rests on a series of false claims about what amounts to being owned. To understand why, you need to understand how a conservative Republican judge — child of a refugee from Communist Cuba! — upended property rights to halt a criminal investigation into the theft of property.

    Ah yes the Rule 41(g) motion that Ricky boy got all excited about!!!! But wait:

    But, as DOJ’s head of the Espionage section. Jay Bratt, explained when he described in a hearing before Judge Cannon that DOJ was treating this as a Rule 41(g) motion and why this should end everything, Rule 41(g) only works if someone is trying to claw back their own property. Trump doesn’t own the vast majority of what was seized.

    EmptyWheel went into the judge’s bizarro ruling in detail but let’s sum this up in two words – Classified Materials.

    Now may Ricky the great lawyer can mansplain to us how Classified Materials somehow became the personal property of citizen Donald Trump. But DOJ does not agree. In fact anyone with an IQ above the teens and even a shred of integrity would disagree with the serial BS being peddled here by keyboard lawyer Rick Stryker.

    1. Rick Stryker


      You call me a keyboard lawyer but then you post legal analysis by a blogger who is not a lawyer but rather has a PhD in comparative literature!

      1. pgl

        How dumb are you? I am not the person who start this keyboard lawyer routine. After all you are Ricky Perry Mason Stryker. BTW that blogger knows a lot more about the law than you will ever learn by watching Faux News.

      2. pgl

        “Now may Ricky the great lawyer can mansplain to us how Classified Materials somehow became the personal property of citizen Donald Trump. ”

        I see you had no answer to a rather key question. What’s the matter Ricky pooh? Westlaw cut off your subscription because you never paid up?

        1. Rick Stryker


          I explained this to you already. I didn’t say the documents were Trump’s personal property. I said the PRA has no enforcement mechanism to decide what is personal property and what are presidential records. As a consequence, the DOJ has no legal basis to seize a former President’s records under the PRA. I’ve already cited Judicial Watch v NARA, which is right on point. Moreover, as I’ve already explained, there is no statute that specifies that a President can’t keep classified records as part of his personal records. That’s why the DOJ cited statutes in the warrant that do not require the documents to be classified but rather require that the documents be related to the national defense. If they could have cited a statute that mentioned classified documents, they would have done so.

          1. Barkley Rosser


            Before Trump left the White House, several WH counsels told him that the vast majority of the documents he was sitting on, especially including the classified ones, were not his personal documents and needed to go to the National Archives. He ignored them.

            Of course Judsge Cannon is just going along with all sorts of loony bin stuff that will get tossed by higher courts, but the historical record regarding what counts as “personal” is stuff like diaries or maybe recorded interviews with historians, with none of this classified.

            You are again way off in some wacko portion of the legal landscape with your ever-shifting arguments. Hey, you migft be able to get a job on the Trump legal team! Just do not expect to ever get paid for it.

          2. Barkley Rosser

            BTW, Ricki, youir “pg13” routine is getting old. This sort of name calling is more what we expect from total morons like CoRev.

            Do you want people to start emphasizing once again that your name is the same as that of a notorious porn statr? I remember your pathetic effort to accuse me of homophobia when I noted that the porn star actually named “Rick Stryker” has appeared on the cover of gay porn mags.

            Really, “Rick Stryker,” I think you would be the last person around here to be making fun of other peoples’ names give how totally stupid you were in selecting this totally embarrassing one you parade around here with.

          3. Rick Stryker


            No, I’m not way off on the legal analysis–I’m spot on. Three weeks ago in comments when the raid first happened (if you don’t recall, I’ll link to them) I outlined the essentials of the law: the PRA has no enforcement mechanism and no way for the PRA to stop Trump from keeping records, if he wants to. Neither the DOJ, the PRA, or anyone else has any legal means to stop that. I cited the governing case, Judicial Watch v NARA. Thus, the search was not legal if justified by the PRA. I also pointed out that the President has absolute power to declassify whatever he wants in whatever manner he wants. (Navy v Egan) Thus, the idea that a former President can commit a crime by holding allegedly classified documents is a huge stretch, one that an apolitical Justice Department would never take. I’ve pointed out several times that there aren’t even statutes on classified documents the DOJ could cite, which is why DOJ cited statutes that do not depend on docs being classified in the warrant and affadavit. Moreover, the DOJ is violating the PRA by not allowing Trump access to his Presidential records and by sharing them outside the parameters specified by the PRA. (But Trump has no way to enforce that too, other than partially through the 41(g) motion)

            The only possible charge the DOJ realistically could think about making is an obstruction charge. But that is fraught with legal difficulty as well. I don’t think an apolitical DOJ would even think about such a thing if anyone other than Trump were involved.

            As I’ve told you and others repeatedly, I’m very familiar with legal issues and very confident I’m right. If you think I’m wrong in this legal analysis, then I invite you to take the Bitcoin bet I offered Macrod!*k when he challenged my legal analysis. I’ll give you 2-1 odds. I’ll put up $2000, you put up $1000; you’ll win $2000 if you are right.

            How to operationalize the bet? Since I think my legal analysis is correct, I think Trump’s lawyers will essentially make the same arguments I’ve made if the DOJ doesn’t drop this matter. So here’s the bet: if within the next year the DOJ continues legal action against Trump, Trump’s lawyers will 1) bring up the PRA analysis I did; 2) bring up the classification analysis I did; 3) in the event of an obstruction charge, (as I predicted to pg13), will assert that he de-classified the documents.

            Just to be clear, I’m saying that in the event of an obstruction charge, they will definitely assert that he declassified the docs. But I’m not saying that’s the only circumstance in which Trump will do that. There might be other legal reasons not clear at the moment where that might make sense. Thus, I won’t lose the bet if the DOJ doesn’t bring an obstruction charge but Trump does for other reasons assert that he de-classified the docs.

      3. Rick Stryker


        In your comment above, you said: “In fact anyone with an IQ above the teens and even a shred of integrity would disagree with the serial BS being peddled here by keyboard lawyer Rick Stryker.”

        I looked at the blog you linked to. The blogger is making silly legal arguments, and why wouldn’t she? Her background is in comparative literature.

  3. Ivan

    That looks about right where we want it to be: $80-100 per barrel. High enough that it will incentivize alternative energy sources and reduction in use. But not so low that it will limit production in US.

    1. pgl

      I would agree this is the sweet spot. But poor little Brucie Hall will not be able to buy gasoline for $2 a gallon. Ahhhhh!

    2. Anonymous

      Huh? How is that a a sweet spot? ”

      High enough that it will incentivize alternative energy sources and reduction in use. But not so low that it will limit production in US.”

      Both of your conditions are floors. “high enough” and “not so low” are floors.

      Also, logically, high price incentives US oil production. And high price incentivizes switching to alternatives. (To include less consumption, basic supply and demand for any at all elastic product.)

      So, $150 would be even better for both of your concerns.

      Or maybe you mean US GDP (by “production”), not oil production. [But in which case, you should still say “not so high” rather than “not so low”]

      Also, I still, I don’t see how that is a “sweet spot”. Lower prices are a windfall for consumers. It’s not like some sudden step change.

  4. pgl


    Germany is relying more on coal to produce electricity as Europe’s energy crisis worsens.
    Coal-generated electricity rose by 17.2% year-on-year in the first half, per Destatis data.
    Meanwhile, Germany only derived 11.7% of its electricity from natural gas, down from 14.4%.
    Germany is relying more on coal to generate electricity, as Russian gas cuts force the country to seek alternative sources of fuel before winter. The European nation produced 82.6 kilowatt-hours of electricity from coal-fired power plants in the first six months of 2022, a 17.2% rise from the the same period last year, according to new data from Germany’s national statistics office, Destatis. As a result, it generated 31.4% of its electricity from coal. Meanwhile, Germany slashed its electricity production from natural gas, reducing it from 14.4% to 11.7% of its total electricity mix, Destatis noted. Soaring prices have made natural gas less and less affordable in recent months.

    I get why Germany has to do this given the Ukraine situation but this is going to accelerate climate change alas. Oh wait CoRev gave us one of Dr. Tol’s rather biased studies on the benefits of using coal v. the high social marginal cost. CoRev tried to tell us the former trumped the latter but that is because he cannot read even his own links. Even Tol admits the social marginal cost of using coal is higher than the private benefits.

    1. Anonymous

      labor density: a function of low power density, intermittency, small availability, high maintenance and sustainment overheads.

      labor is a life cycle cost driver in any “system”

      another factor, of many, left out of engineering renewables

      unaffordable is one of many components of unsuitable.

      my economy for an engineer!

      1. Baffling

        But a natural gas plant just runs by itself? Tell that to the folks in texas when they froze. What a weird comment.

  5. Macroduck

    Off topic, Criminal indictment –

    Steve Bannon has been indicted for fraud, money laundering and conspiracy in New York – five counts in all:


    Bannon’s lawyer immediately started claiming the case is political, despite the fact that Trump pardoned Bannon on similar charges at the federal level immediately prior to leaving office; Federal pardon requires admission of the crime for which one is pardoned.

    1. Macroduck

      Alvin Bragg, the prosecutor who has brought the case, had previously declined to bring charges against Trump of financial fraud, reportedly because he was concerned he might lose the case. Perhaps this time, Bragg is more confident.

      1. pgl

        Mark Pomerantz was one of the lead prosecutors on this case and he thought they could win this case. Bragg never really met with the team before dismissing it. Nothing against Bragg personally but he should have trusted the team.

  6. joseph

    Ya gotta love those confidence intervals. That’s the market throwing up their hands saying “Who knows? Anything could happen!” A lot of traders are going to get rich or go broke. Flip a coin.

  7. Bruce Hall

    The uncertainty portion:
    “The Inflation Reduction Act will put us on our way toward a future where we depend on the wind, the sun and other clean sources of energy. We will rid ourselves from our dependence on fossil fuels,” Yellen said.

    Will that discourage production before windmills and glass fields can power our EVs and will we end up like California? Or will we see a miracle of unlimited free energy? Or will we come to our senses like some European nations, but just too late? The future seems to be writ large in California and the Northeast US.

    1. pgl

      Is this babbling the best Kelly Anne has given you of late? I get it that her husband routinely embarrasses her boss but not being able to distinguish between a short term issue from long term policy goals – come on Bruce. We know you are dumb – but DAMN!

    2. pgl

      Ever notice how our lying troll takes a single line out of Dr. Yellen’s speeches in order to misrepresent and mock. I would suggest such dishonest behavior should get the guilty troll banned from this blog but our host is all too forgiving. In the meantime since Bruce Hall cannot be bothered to provide a link to anything Dr. Yellen said – permit me:


      Read for yourself what she said in the entirety as we all know Bruce Hall is a serial liar.

      1. Bruce Hall

        Yeah, Europe says, “Been there; done that; ooops.”

        Don’t forget your mukluks this winter; you’ll need them in New York.

        1. pgl

          Brucie thinks he is a very cute little boy. Sorry troll but natural gas prices in the US are still a tiny fraction of the EU price. And gasoline prices have fallen a lot. Oh gee – Kelly Anne is still requiring you to spend $5 a gallon? Boy little Brucie boy – inept lies to spend and overpriced gasoline too. Awwww!

        2. pgl

          BTW Brucie – I noticed you never leave a comment over at Marginal Revolution. Why not? Are you scared their readers will call you out for your stupidity, dishonesty, racism? Or did Alex and Tyler decide to bank your garbage? If they did – good for them.

          1. pgl

            Bruce Hall
            September 9, 2022 at 3:09 pm

            I guess you don’t read those comments as a lot of people ripped Alex apart on his latest. Come on Brucie – be a man and admit you are a total coward.

    3. baffling

      maybe you did not read the article, bruce (what a surprise). but the problem is that natural gas and oil supplies are simply unreliable. bruce, there is a reason every single one of the relevant auto makers is moving to EV’s. they are the future, and gas powered systems are a relic of the past. I know a changing world is scary for an old white guy. but it will be painless, despite your fears. nobody today wants a return to 1950’s Mayberry. it was quaint, sure, but no longer desirable. it was a fiction.

      1. Bruce Hall


        but the problem is that natural gas and oil supplies are simply unreliable.

        Now who is making those supplies “unreliable”? Hint, he dodders around the White House shaking hands with no one. Of course he’s got some little green friends in the Northeast working with him.

        U.S. natural gas production is soaring, up 91% since 2005—and the country is now exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) all over the world, including to China, Chile, and India.* Despite this surfeit, dozens of communities in New York and Massachusetts are subject to moratoriums on new gas connections due to shortages of the fuel.

        The shortages are due in large part to New York State regulators, who are refusing to allow the construction of new gas pipelines. While these restrictions are claimed to be necessary to protect the environment from harm, they will likely result in increased use of heating fuel oil, which means increased air pollution and carbon-dioxide emissions. New York and the New England states already have some of the highest residential gas and electricity rates in the country, and these rates will only rise as a result of the blockade. This paper highlights the need for more natural gas supplies in the Northeast to heat homes, buildings, and generate electricity, and it explains how efforts to restrict those supplies are hurting consumers and the environment.
        — Manhattan Institute – 2019 (prescient)

        But it’s still ideology over reality:
        The New York City Council on Wednesday voted to pass legislation banning the use of natural gas in most new construction, a move that will substantially slash climate-changing greenhouse gas emissions from the country’s most populous city.

        The bill now goes to Mayor Bill de Blasio’s desk for signature. Once signed, the measure will go into effect at the end of 2023 for some buildings under seven stories, and in 2027 for taller buildings. Hospitals, commercial kitchens and laundromats are exempt from the ban.

        Keep buying those EVs in California:

        More ideology over reality. Key warm with your hot cup of ideology, Baffled.

        1. pgl

          Manhattan Institute? A right wing rag.

          2019? A little outdated.

          At least they get we are making a lot of profits by exporting natural gas but that is the only contribution from your latest feeble BS.

          1. pgl

            I bet Brucie has no clue who Oren Cass is? But he is the Romney advisor and general political hack who this Manhattan Institute relies on for climate change issues. And even Oren admits climate change is a real issue.

            Brucie – I bet you did not know that. Of course he has a habit of seriously underestimating the cost of climate change. Then again he is a right wing hack not exactly seen as a real expert on the issues where he writes his questionable analyzes.

            But please continue to cut and paste the Alternative Facts from Kelly Anne without providing proper links to statements you attribute to others. We all know she is using you to write misleading garbage do why change now?

          2. Bruce Hall

            pgl, thanks for saying “outdated” since it is 3-years old. My point that it was 3-years old. Note the parenthetical. That “right wing rag” as you (CV?) put it was spot on, eh? But I understand, you’re blinded by the light of ideology.

            As for Californian’s needing to “conserve energy”…
            Oh, but that is 2-years old from that rag, the NYT. PPPPPP… piss poor planning prevents proper performance. You might have learned that in business school.

            Enjoy your hot cup of ideology this winter with Baffled.

          3. pgl

            Brucie thinks something written 3 years by a discredited political hack is up to date modern research on climate change? Seriously Brucie – your stupidity and dishonesty was proven 3 years ago and you keep providing more evidence on this obvious point? OK!

        2. pgl

          Brucie cannot even read the first sentence of his last link:

          Californians may need to take measures to conserve energy, including by avoiding charging electric vehicles, to prevent strain to the state’s power grid over the Labor Day weekend

          Why is it so damn hot out there? Oh yea climate change. Brucie – you do not have to prove you are dumber than a rock every day. We all have known that for years.

          1. CoRev

            Ole Bark, bark can not see the forest for the trees: “Why is it so damn hot out there? Oh yea climate change.” Another WEATHER EVENT claimed as climate change????? Did you even notice that we are under the influence of a nearly unprecedented la Nina? There is NO LINKAGE of ENSO events to climate. They do influence weather across the US and especially in the West.

            When everything is blamed upon climate change then nothing can be proven.

            Proving you, bark bark, are dumber than a rock every day. Enjoy that cup of ideology.

          2. Barkley Rosser


            Funny thing about those “weather events.” After one has one 1000 year weather even after another 1000 year weather event after another 1000 year weather event after another, as we have now had recently, well, buster, that begins to look like “climate change.” Sorry, loser.

          3. CoRev

            Barkley, do you know anything about statistics? “After one has one 1000 year weather even after another 1000 year weather event after another 1000 year weather event after another,..” Coincidence, random weather events, or unsupported, exaggerated claims- a lie. List those ole 1000 year weather events, to help us decide. I’m especially interested in those ole 1000 year record(s).

            I’ll wait.

            Enjoy that cup of ideology.

        3. pgl

          Oh my – my city is taking the lead on the climate change issue. Brucie on the other hand wants to set the clock back 170 years when he can own slaves and treat women as property.

          BTW King Charles III is in favor of addressing the climate change issue but not the moron who takes bleach to treat COVID19.

          1. Bruce Hall

            Chuckie won the “who looks most like Alfred E. Neuman contest by Canadians. Yeah, I understand you’re a big fan of III now that he is king. You’ll spend your nights drooling over images of III and his consort, Camel-ah.

            Your city can’t take the lead on crime in the subway issue.

          2. pgl

            Bruce Hall
            September 9, 2022 at 12:42 pm
            Chuckie won the “who looks most like Alfred E. Neuman contest by Canadians.

            Charles is the King of the United Kingdom. He is also 1000 times more intelligent than Bruce Hall could ever imagine and certainly more honest.

        4. pgl

          I noticed the Real Estate sector (aka the rich landlords) have decided they can’t afford to address climate change. Damn Brucie – I did not know you needed to shill for the most hated people on the damn planet. Anything to make billionaires richer I guess. MAGA!

        5. pgl

          BTW lying troll – you can’t even bother to provide a link to what a right wing rag like the Manhattan Institute wrote?

          Look clown – you have zero credibility here. So it might be in your interest to provide links as NO ONE believes a damn word you write.

        6. baffling

          bruce, a moratorium on natural gas to new construction does not decrease the supply of natural gas to the northeast. in fact, it should result in an oversupply, because the demand is lower. basic economics here bruce.

          you want to know why you have unreliable natural gas in the northeast? because the big oil companies have successfully lobbied to increase lng shipments overseas. the more we export, the less is available domestically. that is why natural gas prices decreased this summer when the Freeport facility blew up. it stopped the export of natural gas. this was a real world experiment, and the results are obvious. if you are willing to listen, bruce.

          1. pgl

            Basic economics has never been Brucie’s thing. After all – he is nothing more than a Steno Sue for Kelly Anne’s Alternative Facts. In fact he is such a coward that he cannot make a comment over at Marginal Revolution.

        7. pgl

          September 10, 2022 at 4:18 am

          Hey Brucie – your boyfriend is upset you are not feeding him his bone. The two of you really need to go on a real date.

      2. pgl

        Bruce never reads his own links. He also does not write his own dumb comments as he is cutting and pasting emails from Kelly Anne.

      3. pgl

        Hey unlike Bruce I did read that story. The Biden Administration is working with local officials to find practical solutions. Now had Trump been President all he would have done is to throw people a few paper towels.

        1. Bruce Hall

          pgl, “practical solutions”. Well, with Old Uncle Joe, that will never happen. Impractical solutions? More than likely.

          1. pgl

            Keep on repeating what Kelly Anne told you to write. It is stupid but Brucie is such a good little boy he has to anyway.

  8. baffling

    off topic, tangentially:
    hydrogen continues to make inroads. I know macro and I disagree on how to get there, but I think we are still making good progress. that green hydrogen subsidy is going to be very helpful. once the hydrogen use cases grow, then we can put the clamps on things other than green hydrogen. we just need to do as much as possible now to increase the use cases for hydrogen. it has great potential to work with the renewable revolution currently underway.

    1. pgl

      This is a good discussion. Odd it never said we would have unlimited free clean energy. Oh right – Dr. Yellen never said that either. Yes – Bruce Hall just made that up in order to mock efforts to promote clean energy. Don’t you just love all the lies that this little troll comes up with?

      1. Bruce Hall

        My goodness, pgl, you surprised me that you noticed I was mocking the not-so-“clean” energy crowd. Of course, that was known 15-years ago.

        But repeat a lie often enough… and it will continue to be challenged.

        Looks as if you’ll take real pollution over a model that says “fear the CO2”. Ideology over reality, once again.

        1. pgl

          I see – repeat the canard that all forms of green energy do more harm than coal. I do like this “repeat a lie often enough”

          That is exactly what your comments are – repeating same stupid lie over and over again.

        2. pgl

          “Ausubel came to this conclusion by calculating the amount of energy that each renewable source can produce in terms of area of land disturbed.”

          Your 2007 study is even dumber than you are. Land disturbed = global warming? Damn you are dumb!

          1. CoRev

            Bark bark doesn’t understand even another climate issue: ” Land disturbed = global warming? Damn you are dumb!”

            Land use is one of the primary causes of warming. How much difference is there between clearing and then constructing roads and buildings on a piece of land versus clearing and then constructing roads and wind mills and solar plants? That land is still no longer as a big a carbon dioxide sink as before.

            Damn you are dumb! Enjoy that cup of ideology.

        3. pgl

          ‘Jaya Nayer is a senior editor and staff writer for the HIR. She is interested in environmental issues and international law. She is getting a joint concentration in Government and Philosophy.’

          A student is your new guru? Of course Jaya gets that there are both tradeoffs as well as evolving and improving means of efficiently using green energy. Or did you again not read what your own link said? This student is certainly way smarter and more honest than you could ever be.

          Gee I see a pattern. Brucie finds another article to cherry pick and misrepresent even if he is too stupid to know what his own link said. Bruce – this is a terrible habit even for a disgusting little troll like you. But you continue to do this garbage.

          1. pgl

            CoRev has adopted Bruce Hall’s stupid “cup of ideology”? Oh wait – both of these clowns take their cues from Kelly Anne Conway. Can you believe off her game Ms. Alternative Facts has become. I guess her marital problems with George is to blame.

      2. pgl

        Green energy may require using some land but guess what else requires the use of land – farming. Gee Brucie – you need to tell your mommy to stop buying you fruits and vegetables because is destroying the earth.

        1. CoRev

          Bark bark, Damn you are dumb! Farming certainly is another land use issue for warming. BTW, isn’t improved food production through farming using fossil fueled equipment and fertilizer just one of the positive social benefits of fossil fuels. Y’ano those ole positive EXTERNALITIES you ideology can’t admit exist and are greater than the social costs?

          Your ignorance does amaze! Enjoy that cup of ideology.

          1. pgl

            “Farming certainly is another land use issue for warming.”

            I guess the Soybean Association of America has fired CoRev as their “chief economist”.

          2. Barkley Rosser

            CoRev corev. Damn you are dumb!


            Your ignorance does amaze. Enjoy that cup of ideology.

          3. CoRev

            Yup! There’s the ignorance: “THERE ARE NO POSITIVE EXTERNALITIES TO GLOBAL WARMNG!”

            Have you missed the whole Tol papers discussion? Give us a list of the negative externalities, so we can compare them to any positive counterpoints.

            Enjoy that cup of ideology.

        2. Baffling

          We just passed a large wind farm with turbines spotted throughout a farm. Probably 100 turbines. Very little land was lost to the turbines in this mixed use approach. This land loss argument people make is just silly.

          1. CoRev

            Baffled goes beyond ignorant. “Very little land was lost to the turbines in this mixed use approach. ” Still acres are lost to the bird choppers and their infrastructure, maintenance access roads and grid connectors and their infrastructure. BTW, how much of the warming can attributed to this lost land?

            Only in liberal land is very little land was lost a positive.

          2. baffling

            covid, your arguments make very little sense. these were turbines built on existing farmland. it was already cleared, and access available. in fact, it was visible from a 4 lane highway. furthest turbine was probably half a mile away. there was literally no loss of land. that was the point. hey covid, the sky is blue and the grass is green.

            “bird choppers”. funny. now all of a sudden covid has an environmental conscience? exxon valdez ring a bell?

    1. Bruce Hall

      I agree 100%, Fat Al with his 10K sf mansion and private jets is trying to be a C3 wannabe. There’s money in that there green. Just ask Old Uncle Joe.

  9. CoRev

    Did anyone notice the electricity forecast? “We forecast the U.S. residential price of electricity will average 14.8 cents per kilowatthour in 2022, up 7.5% from 2021. Higher retail electricity prices largely reflect an increase in wholesale power prices driven by rising natural gas prices. The Southwest region has the lowest forecast wholesale prices in 2022, averaging $69 per megawatthour (MWh), up 25% from 2021. The highest forecast wholesale prices are at more than $100/MWh in ISO New England (up 96% from 2021) and New York ISO (up 124% from 2021). ” I’m trying to decipher the increases in the NE’s, SW’s 25% and NY’s huge average increases and the nation-wide average of 7.5%.

    I have my thoughts about electricity/energy policy differences between NE & NY and the remainder of the country. I guess it is sufficient to say you reap what you sow.

    1. baffling

      interesting. electricity price increases are the lowest where we have built out the most renewable solar and wind sources. and highest where we continue to rely on fossil fuels like natural gas. thanks for bringing this to our attention.

  10. CoRev

    Baffled, how soon you forget that ole shining example of green electricity production, California. Thanks for bringing following Cali in NE and NY to our attention while showing your ignorance.

    Enjoy that ole cup of ideology. Only in Cali you should not stress the grid by warming it.

    1. baffling

      your comment does not make any sense. but it does not change the fact that prices increased the slowest where we had the most renewables.

      1. CoRev

        Baffled, I’m sure for you my ” comment does not make any sense.” It was based upon facts and not ideology.

          1. CoRev

            Only a liberal like Baffled would equate facts, like California, a state of the USA, which is trying to go full renewable sources for electricity -FACT and NE and NY are trying to follow CA with their own attempts to establish renewable electricity. All have some of the highest prices for consumers.

            But those are only gripes, because those FACTS can not be refuted.

          2. baffling

            and texas is going BIG on renewables. and its electricity rates are not rising as quickly. but you knew that already.

Comments are closed.