@ThomBrady5 Candidates for office were chosen by the party, with the righteous DEI objective of diversity, instead of the people choosing. It’s happening in the US too.
@FmrRepMTG Exactly right. Refining, chemicals, and other basic process industries are the foundation of any secure manufacturing base. Without them you have no resilient industrial economy. They deliver high-skilled, well-paying jobs, even if the headcount is small relative to the massive CAPEX needed to build these plants. Non-commercial Chinese state finance created structural overcapacity that undercut Western facilities and killed new investment here. Offshoring was the wrong answer. Targeted government financial support to keep this strategic capacity onshore was the one that should have been chosen decades ago.
@afneil You post some great stuff but in this you are misled. Pipeline gas is always cheaper than LNG because LNG typically has oil linked pricing. Once you remove taxes and royalties you will be surprised just how much cheaper domestic natural gas is.
@TiceRichard I disagree, reducing consumer energy demand through enhanced efficiency is good v policy. It just needs to be combined with North Sea, onshore shale and West of Shetland drilling, and Arctic exploration
Government policy killed the 120yr plant due to 1) higher national insurance, pension costs, and union agreements, 2) high Industrial electricity and gas prices due to policy levies, carbon pricing, and grid charges, and 3) higher business rates/taxes than in many Spanish industrial zones, plus the benefits of being inside the EU single market. Thats why the plant lost the powder washing machine detergent consolidation to Spain.
I came to the US in 2000 on an L1 to plug a blowout in the Gulf of Mexico. It was producing 160Mcfd of HPHT gas up the a-annulus. I developed new tools to cut the first of it’s kind casing, then I pulled a million pounds to retrieve it to access the reservoir (pucker factor). Killed the well, circulated out the contents, set a bridge plug, attempted to squeeze cement into the formation, set a bridge plug and then cement ontop. That was the end of a 400oF 20,000-psu well. Of course now Macondo steels the show - I was 26!
@War4theWest@KatTimpf My mother died of cervical cancer when I was fourteen - it’s something you never get over and like you I shed a tear on Mother’s Day too. Thanks for sharing.
@afneil Spot on with the numbers. The Type 45s were made so complex (integrated electric propulsion, etc.) that they now have terrible uptime and endless refits. Same story with the remaining Type 23s.
The US Navy runs carriers and destroyers/frigates on the classic operate/train/maintain cycle - that’s why they need a 3:1 ratio just to keep one forward deployed. We don’t.
Maybe, just maybe, we simply don’t have enough hulls any more.
READ THIS:
- Hydraulic fracturing and all the drilling and completion infastructure associated with it is required for geothermal anywhere #sage #fervo #zanskar
- We still need oil regardless of your views on net zero, it’s simply not ethical to push that burden elsewhere when we can produce it in the UK.
- We have enough natural gas in the UK to be energy self-sufficent (I should know I did the first shale gas resource assesment in Europe for CERA in 2012).
Water intensity in lithium extraction, thermal risk in geothermal drilling, and grid-edge reliability in microgrids all need the same upstream risk-management DNA:
- Probabilistic modeling
- Real-options valuation
- Regulatory & ESG integration
#EnergyTransition #WaterResources #Geothermal #Microgrids
@AlbemarleCorp@ScaleMicrogrids@PGE4Me@WoodMackenzie
@BBCWorld This offshoring binge is corporate seppuku by proxy, betting short-term profits on long-term loyalty from abroad. If India calls the bluff, U.S. STEM becomes a spectator to its own empire's fall - IT, Oil, Pharma, Consulting …
@Mike_Pence Tariffs are paid by US Importers, I should know - I am writing the cheques. Smuggling using $0.7/lb DDP schemes avoid the tarriff altogether, please investigate.
Affordability is the correct normative goal, yet California’s regulatory framework still optimizes for lowest apparent ¢/kWh rather than lowest system-cost ¢/kWh when wildfire risk, resilience, and decarbonization are fully internalized.
The inconvenience is real: we’re asking a 100-year-old cost-of-service model to fund a 21st-century energy transition.
Until the CPUC (and legislature) shift allowed returns from risk-reduction and long-term system value rather than just wires-in-the-ground, high bills will remain the symptom, not the disease.
Spot-on critique of monopoly risk, but California’s challenge is unitary: one state, 40M people, wildfire terrain, and the nation’s most ambitious decarbonization mandate.
The real metric isn’t raw ¢/kWh - it’s ¢/kWh delivered safely and reliably through a modernized, resilient grid.
An indexed “Value-Add per Dollar Invested” (safety + reliability + emissions avoided + economic multiplier) would show where infrastructure spend actually creates net benefit for customers.
Happy to share a framework I’ve used in upstream transition planning that adapts perfectly to utilities.