As I understand the issues, its not a matter of being economic its all to do with the technicalities of using batteries but what does a simple mechanical engineer know. I'll refer this to my electrical engineering friends.
Not at all - battery storage is rapidly becoming economic. For reference see the article linked to below. Note that it is cheaper to build new wind and solar and add storage than to keep running existing coal stations:
"Renewable technologies are already at a cost point where they make investment in fossil powered electricity generation uncompetitive in most locations; within five years they will finish the job and no new fossil stations will be built".
Lets hope that the remaining fossil stations last long enough for effective storage to be developed. I understand that battery storage is only suitable for frequency control at the moment.
'I suspect that this case is nothing more than symbolic'
Absolutely. But don't let that fool you into thinking it is irrelevant. The whole objective of the divestment movement is to destroy the social licence of the oil companies and make them pariah's. This is being successful far more rapidly than even the most optimistic of us could have imagined. The same is true of the court case; it sets a marker which says these companies are the enemies of the people and we must take action against them. As such it is of course also a direct snub to the Trump line that what is good for oil/gas/coal is good for America and its people.
Change the narrative and you change the operating environment. Buying an electric car and installing solar panels become socially positive actions because they punish the oil companies, not just because they make sense.
Renewable technologies are already at a cost point where they make investment in fossil powered electricity generation uncompetitive in most locations; within five years they will finish the job and no new fossil stations will be built. Transport is the next key area and the rapidly accelerating pace of movement by car companies (eg Ford's announcement earlier this week) into EV and fuel cell vehicles foreshadows the end for oil and gas.
The time frame may be uncertain (in my view it will be much sooner than anyone currently forecasts); but the destination is not.
I suspect that this case is nothing more than symbolic. Even in the case of tobacco and cancer, those who get cancer are unable to make compensation claims since the risks of harm are well known. The same argument would apply to the NYC case against oil companies.
In any case, how do you apportion the blame when many factors are at play, including coal and power generation and overseas contributions to climate change. More locally, besides the energy consumption required to manage municipal building and facilities and the home of the populace, the local authority still runs a fleet of around 6,000 busses that are powered by deisel or compressed natural gas that must also be contributing to the problem. The following give more details:
For information - spotted in today's Business section of the Daily Telegraph
15 JANUARY 2018 4:12PM
Royal Dutch Shell will pile fresh investment into a new North Sea project for the first time in six years to increase its UK oil production by a third.
The oil major gave the go-ahead to expansion plans for the Penguins oil field in the Northern North Sea, which will use a floating storage and production vessel to pump 45,000 barrels of oil a day from the field once it reaches its peak production rate, adding to its existing 135,000 barrel a day production.
The oil can be produced at a cost of $40 a barrel, handing Shell a high return on its sales amid global market prices of almost $70 a barrel.
Andy Brown, who runs Shells upstream oil and gas business, said the project is another example of how we are unlocking development opportunities, with lower costs.
Shell sold off around half of its North Sea assets to a private equity backed producer, Chrysaor, for around £2.4bn this time last year. However, the oil major has consistently argued that it is not retreating from the North Sea.
Steve Phimister, Shells UK and Ireland upstream boss, said the group plans to grow the oil production in one of Shells heartlands through the core production assets still remaining after the mega-sale.
The vessel will be based 150 miles off the north east coast of the Shetland Islands and marks Shells first manned offshore installation in the northern North Sea in almost 30 years.
The new crude flows follow a ten-year high for new oil and gas projects in the North Sea last year, after the basin slashed its costs in half, to weather the oil market downturn.
Deirdre Michie, head of Oil and Gas UK, said the investment decision shows the investment potential the UK continental shelf still holds.
We are hopefully entering a more positive phase for our industry in the UK with new projects on the horizon that I hope will bring a much needed boost for companies in the supply chain, she added.
it is ridiculous, it's frivolous, they should counter sue for wasting court time. NY might as well sue it's own citizens for living a life style that uses hydrocarbons. Unless the oil companies have been deliberately trying to damage the environment, or have been negligent, the case surely has no hope.
I am sure the Suits will be the main winners in this case but it seems to me that it's motor companies that should be at the receiving end of a law suit for making the engines rather than the oil explorers for supplying the fuel.
Surprised not to see any mention on this board of the fact that New York is not only planning on divesting from oil shares, but is also going to sue 5 major companies for the costs it is incurring as a result of climate change.
This will present the companies with a major PR problem. They (mostly) want to be seen as acting responsibly and moving into the clean green economy; but now they are going to have to argue that climate change has nothing to do with their previous activities. Which is obvious nonsense.
Apparently the average price of crude paid in Asia is already $70.6. Cold weather in the US must be helping, and the Petroleum Institute said late on Tuesday that US crude inventories fell by 11.2 million barrels in the week to Jan 5, to 416.6 million barrels. Also, the EIA has raised its consumption estimates by 100,000 barrels per day.
Given that Shell's profitability increases almost exponentially once the poo is above break even (?$50ish) even if it slips back to $65, the next quarter's figures could be pleasant reading.
It appears current and ex Shell staff arrested after involvement in diesel theft from Shell's Singapore refinery.
mmm, LKH was last heard of in that neck of the woods and Vulganus reportedly significant diesel habit. No he is far too much above board to engage in such skullduggery, and in any case I think too smart to get caught, but If you are sweltering in Changi prison, use your one call to post to this BB and we'll arrange a whip-round for your bail.
Seriously mate, hope all is well with you and that we hear from you in due course.
Staff at Royal Dutch Shell have been charged with the theft of industrial volumes of diesel from the companys biggest refinery after raids in Singapore last weekend. The Anglo-Dutch oil major confirmed that eight present or former employees of Shell Eastern Petroleum, its Singaporean subsidiary, were among eleven men charged in connection with the alleged theft from its Pulau Bukom site. The Times
Shell are at odds with BHP re shale strategy. Here's what Van Beurden had to say about shale, today:-
"LONDON (Alliance News) - Royal Dutch Shell PLC Chief Executive Ben van Beurden said the company's growth in the next decade will depend on shale production, the Financial Times reported Sunday.
According to the newspaper, van Beurden sees "chemicals, electricity and biofuels as key sectors for Shell's long-term future". Depending on the price of oil in the 2020s, the CEO said, the oil major would probably want to continue investing in shale "because we will really want to grow this business quite quickly".
Van Beurden said Shell has been working hard in the past few years to reduce shale production costs, and with "a little bit of help from the oil price going up, we now see that we can significantly accelerate investment into this opportunity".
The recovery in oil prices and lower costs mean "you will see a tremendous amount of growth" in cash generation from shale, said van Beurden."
Meanwhile, BHP is still looking to offload their shale assets - may be to Shell?
Here's a thought: with the high cost and long lead times from exploration to production from conventional, and mostly offshore, assets, coupled with a certain amount of uncertainty over oil demand over the medium term, shale has great attractions.
In the early 2020s, the poo should rocket, given the recent lack of investment in exploration. While all oil production would benefit, shale would come into its own as it would be far easier to cut back on production should environmental influences (EVs and stuff) really kick in.
So who's got it right - Shell or BHP, leaving aside activist pressure on BHP, which, anyway, could be said to work either way: BHP get shot of shale or deep sea assets.
Yes, you're quite right, I've just checked the BP. board and his posting isn't there now. Moreover the posting by Two Sporrans on 23 December implies that it never was there. I am flummoxed. I know I didn't dream seeing it! And the posting located him and the Vulganus by The Minkies, south of Jersey, somewhere I'd never heard of before seeing it on that posting yesterday. So: a mystery. Possibly explanations: the posting was on another board, and I mistakenly thought it was on the BP. board; the posting was from a different year, and I mistakenly thought it was 2017. Running my mind over my browsing history on ii yesterday I can't really see how I could have made either mistake, but the fact remains, LKH is definitely not on the BP. board, so apologies to all whom I have given false hope!
If LKH reappeared on Easter Sunday that would be highly appropriate provided it was before midday looking at the date.
Given that someone knows the whereabouts of the wash & valet surelyit would be possible to look up whether it has been sold etc if people are interested. Really its none of our business but he did bring a great deal of interest to this and other boards.
Often. One would think that iii would ensure that the information displayed is correct at all times - excusing the odd thick finger jobbie which should normally only be seen for a few seconds or minutes at most.
BLND had a similar problem I noticed about 1 hour ago but has since been amended.
iii have blamed "third party" sites publishing these strange figures which then automatically appear on iii pages. Perhaps iii should find a more reliable "third party" and stop confusing members of these boards
Fair chance he's reading all the glowing tributes and trying to decide when to emerge to general applause, lol.
I liked his insightfulness, if there's such a word, and shrewd comments. He could, however, be pretty spiteful - especially of sloppy posts, and, as said, spelling errors. I had noticed that towards the end of his posting, he was becoming careless himself; so perhaps he has reached the end of the line - shame really.
I hope I'm wrong but he was actively sorting out his inheritance tax affairs shortly before he 'disappeared' so maybe he knew his time was nearing an end"
Your killing him off with that statement,
He never mentioned any illness.
Important message from the Financial Conduct Authority:
Posting inside information that is not public knowledge, or information that is false or misleading, may constitute market abuse.
This could lead to an unlimited fine and up to seven years in prison.
If you have any information, concerns or queries about market abuse, click here.
The content of the messages posted represents the opinions of the author, and does not represent the opinions of Interactive Investor Trading Limited or its affiliates and has not been approved or issued by Interactive Investor Trading Limited.
You should be aware that the other participants of the above discussion group are strangers to you and may make statements which may be misleading, deceptive or wrong.
Please remember that the value of investments or income from them may go down as well as up and that the past performance of an investment is not a guide to its performance in the future.
The discussion boards on this site are intended to be an information sharing forum and is not intended to address your particular requirements.
Whilst information provided on them can help with your investment research you need to consider carefully whether you should make (or refraining from making) investment or other decisions based on what you see without doing further research on investments you are interested in.
Participating in this forum cannot be a substitute for obtaining advice from an appropriate expert independent adviser who takes into account your circumstances and specific investment needs in selected investments that are appropriate for you.