Pipelines, energy and natural resources

[ytz]

Nuclear is subject to a lot of litigation.

Put environmental tariffs on Chinese products sufficient to cover the massive externalities currently being permitted and check the cost gap again.

You don't have to worry about Chinese solar panels coming to Canada.

 

[suffolkowner]

Nuclear is subject to a lot of litigation.

Put environmental tariffs on Chinese products sufficient to cover the massive externalities currently being permitted and check the cost gap again.

is it subject to litigation in China?
was there a lot of litigation holdup with Ontarios recent recommitment to nuclear

 

[Brad Sallows]

Except we kinda do. The rest of the world is buying Chinese solar and EVs. At an alarming rate. Trump pushes them out of the US (and Canada by default) and this happens:

Like I said, the rest of the world doesn't have the luxury of burning oil and gas they don't have on principle. Whatever gets them the lowest $/watt and $/km wins.

Sure. Those are countries with plenty of self-inflicted problems. All of the ideas of the west have already been dumped into their laps. I don't expect them to reap any higher fraction of benefit from the electrification revolution than they did from liberal institutions or the agrarian revolution. Africa always wins.

In my lifetime and before it, pretty much everyone promising some kind of extraordinary change in 5 or 10 years has been wrong. Electrification will increase. It will be driven by cost, despite short bursts of political effort. It will take a long time. Today's market leaders will not likely maintain position indefinitely. No-one is sitting on tech or resources that aren't available elsewhere or substitutable.

 

[Brad Sallows]

is it subject to litigation in China?
was there a lot of litigation holdup with Ontarios recent recommitment to nuclear

The point is that China's cost advantages would decrease if not be eliminated if we adopted their standards or held them to ours.

 

[ytz]

The point is that China's cost advantages would decrease if not be eliminated if we adopted their standards or held them to ours.

Who is "we"? Cause "we" already tariff the hell out of them. What is relevant in this discussion isn't what happens in Canada. It's the billions of people who don't yet have AC and family cars.

 

[suffolkowner]

The point is that China's cost advantages would decrease if not be eliminated if we adopted their standards or held them to ours.

yes but within China they are competing within themselves? nuclear vs solar vs .....

 

[ytz]

yes but within China they are competing within themselves? nuclear vs solar vs .....

Not quite. Nuclear for China is competing first with imported LNG and oil. And next with coal. The Chinese understand that you don't need baseload at 100%. They use renewables to provide most of the cheap electricity. And then build coal, nuclear and gas plants (in that order) as needed. There's also the curious phenomenon of building coal plants as seasonal reserve. It's why their actual coal power utilization rates are down. They aren't running all the time.

We need to worry about Chinese solar because:

1) Risk of it displacing global LNG demand (growth or absolute).

2) Their $/W advantage can be weaponized to win in manufacturing, AI, etc.

 

[suffolkowner]

Not quite. Nuclear for China is competing first with imported LNG and oil. And next with coal. The Chinese understand that you don't need baseload at 100%. They use renewables to provide most of the cheap electricity. And then build coal, nuclear and gas plants (in that order) as needed. There's also the curious phenomenon of building coal plants as seasonal reserve. It's why their actual coal power utilization rates are down. They aren't running all the time.

We need to worry about Chinese solar because:

1) Risk of it displacing global LNG demand (growth or absolute).

2) Their $/W advantage can be weaponized to win in manufacturing, AI, etc.

i was more referring to the regulatory environment

 

[Kirkhill]

Let's assume that the whole world goes off fossil fuels and that there is zero commercial value in any carbon fuel source.

What is the cost of fuel in the ground? If I park a factory on top of a zero cost fuel source and have zero transportation costs what does that do to my cost of production?

If you have cheap fuel available you will use it.
If you don't you will find the next cheapest solution and adapt your economy accordingly.

The problem is that not all locations have ready fuel supplies to support the economies they wish and so they sought to level up the playing field by ensuring that everyone was equally handi-capped.

The issue started in Europe with Germany and France chasing Britain's industrial revolution which was powered by native coal and iron deposits. Germany and France found themselves fighting over Belgian coal mines. They decided to solve their problems by first signing a Coal and Steel treaty and then, concurrently, putting their faith in the new kid on the block, the atom, and establishing Euratom.

Britain played along but then the North Sea happened making gas more attractive and nuclear accidents took the bloom off the atomic rose. Plan B involved sun and wind at exorbitant costs and doing a deal with the devil to access cheap Russian gas necessary to back up those fitful renewables.

....

If everybody went off fossil fuels, places like Alberta that are sitting on them would still use them, even if it meant having to invest some of the transportation savings on scrubbers and carbon capture.

And its neighbours would be trying to figure out if they could tap into the supply cheaply.

 

[ytz]

Let's assume that the whole world goes off fossil fuels and that there is zero commercial value in any carbon fuel source.

What's the point of this hypothetical? This is obviously something that can't happen. As long as somebody is willing to use a thing, it has economic value to said somebody. Relative economic value can change. If you have cheap oil coming out of the ground, it will make sense to use it. Most of the world doesn't have that though. Heck, most of Canada doesn't have that.

Let's consider an alternative hypothetical that might be plausible over the next 10-15 years. You go to the dealership and the BEV and ICEV are priced exactly the same out the door. What do you think the majority of people would buy?

And for governments it gets substantially more complex. Every dollar (or Euro) used to import fuel is one less to buy something else needed for industry. Or other consumption.

 

[Kirkhill]

What's the point of this hypothetical? This is obviously something that can't happen. As long as somebody is willing to use a thing, it has economic value to said somebody. Relative economic value can change. If you have cheap oil coming out of the ground, it will make sense to use it. Most of the world doesn't have that though. Heck, most of Canada doesn't have that.

Let's consider an alternative hypothetical that might be plausible over the next 10-15 years. You go to the dealership and the BEV and ICEV are priced exactly the same out the door. What do you think the majority of people would buy?

In Ontario or Alberta?

Where is the fuel cheapest? What is the maintenance cost? What is performance like in the requisite environments?

The point of the hypothetical was to drive home the impact of policy on decision making and the limits of policy. Policy didn't drive the industrial revolution, economics did. Policy tried to constrain the revolution. I think it is demonstrably failing. What was an economic revolution is at risk of becoming a political revolution in many places.

 

[ytz]

Policy didn't drive the industrial revolution, economics did.

I agree. What's interesting is that people understand this for the original industrial revolution but fail to understand it for the current revolution.

 

[Kirkhill]

I agree. What's interesting is that people understand this for the original industrial revolution but fail to understand it for the current revolution.

If by that you mean that the politicians and the proselytizers should get out of the way then we agree.

I grew up with diesel buses, coal fires, petrol cars, gas stoves, electric lights, trolleys, delivery vans and trains.

Economics decided on the solution adopted.