Major US fuel pipeline forced to shut down after being targeted in cyberattack

[roguenuke]

Oh. Well then that should be the argument, since economically speaking it doesn't seem to work out except at the very best case scenarios.

Which isn't true, and I showed why. Plus, electricity costs are always rising and with a crisis that effects our infrastructure, that means electricity costs will likely rise more.

 

[code1211]

People should be celebrating this. Hopefully this pipeline never comes back online and accelerates the east coasts adoption of renewable energy.

WOW!. The ignorance in this post just goes on and on.

Incredible economy of words to cover the number of disasters suggested.

 

[code1211]

Keystone was not operational.

Nord Stream 2 was not operational either.

The construction of one that was stopped by fear of Trump in Russia is once again being built.

The Construction of one that was stopped by fear of idiots in the US is still stopped.

Putin has NOTHING to fear fro Biden. Biden is controlled and directed by those who who also control the idiots who vote for him.

We see what happens when a pipeline moving fuels get shut down. Can you imagine the differences in the coverage by the Fake News Media of this if a Republican was in office when it happened?

Poor and minorities hardest hit.

 

[code1211]

That's funny because I live in a fairly middle class neighborhood and several of my neighbors have solar panels on their roofs. But somehow this guy who has a lot of money feels it isn't justified as a cost? These are people who live in pretty moderately priced homes, not mansions. We're looking into it too.

Solar shingles, not panels.

 

[jonny5]

Yes, nothing and no one travels the globe without airplanes today.. . SMH. Life would be basically uninterrupted for the vast majority of people without air travel. And much improved for most.

Almost no one travels the globe without airplanes today, you are correct. And 60 million tons of freight are sent by air. Life would certainly not be basically uninterrupted.

 

[Metric Mouse]

Almost no one travels the globe without airplanes today, you are correct. And 60 million tons of freight are sent by air. Life would certainly not be basically uninterrupted.

For the vast majority of people? Uninterrupted. A small fraction of the planet flies each year. They can afford 5x or 10x the current ticket price if it's so important to them to take selfies at tourist traps across the planet.

 

[jonny5]

I disagree in a sense, we can have it all!
We can make carbon neutral fuels to run our jets, ships, trains, and even cars.
The fuel is made from atmospheric CO2, hydrogen from water, and electricity.
and it is not decades off, but the first jet fuel plant is already under construction.
Europe’s first power-to-liquid demo plant in Norway plans renewable aviation fuel production in 2023
The Navy, whose process is older and less efficient, thinks they can make fuel for between $3 and $6 a gallon.
We are really just waiting on economic viability, which is tied to the price of oil, vs the wholesale price of electricity.

Not carbon neutral, he said renewable. And liquid hydrogen requires a lot of electricity to make, which currently is made primarily by fossil fuels. And thats just planes. He wants to shut down all fossil fuel, today. Unless youre willing to go nuclear, producing that amount of electricity is not possible.

 

[Metric Mouse]

Which isn't true, and I showed why. Plus, electricity costs are always rising and with a crisis that effects our infrastructure, that means electricity costs will likely rise more.

No, you didn't show why. I showed the math; you didn't. You claimed people had $200 electric bills, and then claimed they were only using 900 kwh @ $0.13 per kwh... it doesn't math out at all.

 

[jonny5]

For the vast majority of people? Uninterrupted. A small fraction of the planet flies each year. They can afford 5x or 10x the current ticket price if it's so important to them to take selfies at tourist traps across the planet.

No, ending air travel, and worse, all other dependencies on fossil fuel, would interupt things greatly. Theres 240,000 flights every day. 4.5 billion passengers a year. Thats a LARGE fraction.

 

[BlueTex]

 

[longview]

Not carbon neutral, he said renewable. And liquid hydrogen requires a lot of electricity to make, which currently is made primarily by fossil fuels. And thats just planes. He wants to shut down all fossil fuel, today. Unless youre willing to go nuclear, producing that amount of electricity is not possible.

If you make carbon neutral fuel from renewable energy or nuclear energy, it contributes zero
new CO2 to the atmosphere. Sunfire energy is claiming their process can be 80% efficient,
While the Navy is saying theirs is 60% efficient.
If we look at the numbers, 60% efficient means it takes 55 Kwh of electricity to create a 33 Kwh gallon of gasoline.
80% means it would take 42 Kwh to create the same 33 Kwh gallon of gasoline.
Sunfire E-fuel
Naval Research Labs E-fuel
The man made fuels are drop in replacements for fuels made from oil, but can be carbon neutral.
The wild card in all this, is the oil companies, who have the best research teams, and the best funding.
I suspect, they know exactly where the economic viability point is, and will cut over, when it is the path of greater profits.
I think nuclear energy is a requirement to move from where we are to where we need to be.
For me, it is not about CO2, but sustainability. We have to have a path forward that could sustain everyone
alive, at a first world lifestyle, and that will take a lot more energy than oil can provide.

 

[code1211]

Well I am not sure why
but there could be a lot of reasons one among them would be the safety record of the construction co.
they are known to have put in a lot of pipelines that leak and seeing they want to run that pipeline right over one of the Biggest aquifers in the country with their record it might not be a good idea.
They are going to pump tar sands oil in that pipe the dirtiest oil known to man , to the sea ports in the south to be shipped over seas it is not used here and we get no benefit from having it possibly destroying that aquifer and having millions of people losing their water supply
It will put something like 15 or 20 people to work ( maybe a few more but not a lot more ) when it is done and that ( from what I read and understand) would be to patrol the pipe for leaks , there is over 1000 miles of pipe and that would be an avg. of 1 person on patrol for every 500miles per shift 7 days a week or less
and if there was a small leak say several hundred barrels a day they may not see it at the end of the line and it might be several days before they saw it and by then that water supply could be gone
and one more thing if this pipeline and this construction company was so good ( and safe ) and such a good idea why didn't they run it to the west coast of Canada?
it would have been shorter and cost less
Have a nice afternoon

You present worst case scenarios. You omit the consideration of the East Coast gas lines disaster. One more disaster to add to the disaster at the US-Mexico Border and others by the Biden Administration.

Can you link to the "small leaks" of "several hundred barrels a day" that happen with pipelines around the country right now? "Small leaks" would seem to be common as you imply.

Also, pipelines are proven to be the most economical and safest way to transport fuels. Without Keystone XL, the same fuel will be transported in trains and trucks.

This question is not an "IF" fuel is transported. It is a "HOW". Also, the Nord Stream 2 pipeline transporting Russian fuels to Germany was re-started when Putin was certain that Trump was out and Biden was in.

Whether you're talking about the US-Mexico Border, Pipelines, subsidizing terror or promoting unemployment, none of it makes sense and none of it is being covered honestly or completely by the Fake News Media.

Why?

Study Shows Pipelines are Safest Way to Transport Oil

As crude output from shale plays push pipeline capacity to its limits, the use of alternative transport methods to get oil from well sites to refiners have become increasingly prominent.

auduboncompanies.com

 

[longview]

This is crazy, I would think it would be better to keep the fuel flowing and manually estimate usage.

 

[jonny5]

If you make carbon neutral fuel from renewable energy or nuclear energy, it contributes zero
new CO2 to the atmosphere. Sunfire energy is claiming their process can be 80% efficient,
While the Navy is saying theirs is 60% efficient.
If we look at the numbers, 60% efficient means it takes 55 Kwh of electricity to create a 33 Kwh gallon of gasoline.
80% means it would take 42 Kwh to create the same 33 Kwh gallon of gasoline.
Sunfire E-fuel
Naval Research Labs E-fuel
The man made fuels are drop in replacements for fuels made from oil, but can be carbon neutral.
The wild card in all this, is the oil companies, who have the best research teams, and the best funding.
I suspect, they know exactly where the economic viability point is, and will cut over, when it is the path of greater profits.
I think nuclear energy is a requirement to move from where we are to where we need to be.
For me, it is not about CO2, but sustainability. We have to have a path forward that could sustain everyone
alive, at a first world lifestyle, and that will take a lot more energy than oil can provide.

Hey if we're talking about nuclear, then great. They point I was making however was in regards to his statement to just let the pipeline stay shut down, implying that we just stop delivering fossil fuel and start using renewable energy. Batteries are not going to be powering planes anytime soon. And as we know the same people are against nuclear typically. If people are willing to generate massive amounts of electricity and deal with all the other environmental problems from batteries, transmissions, etc, then great. But we havent seen that.

 

[longview]

Hey if we're talking about nuclear, then great. They point I was making however was in regards to his statement to just let the pipeline stay shut down, implying that we just stop delivering fossil fuel and start using renewable energy. Batteries are not going to be powering planes anytime soon. And as we know the same people are against nuclear typically. If people are willing to generate massive amounts of electricity and deal with all the other environmental problems from batteries, transmissions, etc, then great. But we havent seen that.

I agree totally, Batteries are a long way from filling all the roles of fuels made from oil.
We do not know if batteries can ever be there, the energy density is still 5 times less than a low efficiency heat engine.
As we develop technology, I could see a hydrocarbon fuel as a hydrogen carrier for a fuel cell electric vehicle,
but that is not a battery in the conventional sense.
I see hydrocarbon fuels being with us for a long time, they just might not be made from oil!

 

[Tbird19482]

I agree totally, Batteries are a long way from filling all the roles of fuels made from oil.
We do not know if batteries can ever be there, the energy density is still 5 times less than a low efficiency heat engine.
As we develop technology, I could see a hydrocarbon fuel as a hydrogen carrier for a fuel cell electric vehicle,
but that is not a battery in the conventional sense.
I see hydrocarbon fuels being with us for a long time, they just might not be made from oil!

The newer " Quantum glass Battery " is I believe the way things will go
it is smaller, can power a car for ( they say ) over a thousand miles ( 12- 1400 mi ) and can be recharged in min. not hours and hours

Glass Battery to Replace Lithium-Ion Battery - A Technology Revolution In The Making

A group of researchers at the University of Texas have devised a new lithium glass battery technology which is expected to upheave electric vehicle business

pakwired.com

3x Storage Capacity​

it has been found that, as compared to lithium-ion battery, the glass battery has three times more storage capacity. In addition, the new electrolyte is not flammable, thereby, eliminating the danger of causing fire in devices. In this way, if the concept of glass battery actually comes to life and lives long enough to be launched worldwide, the issues of combustion in laptops, mobiles and other devices will become a problem of the past.

Quick Read: Reports of iPhone getting exploded following Samsung’s battery afflictions

Fast Charging​

The co-developer of lithium-glass battery, Maria Helena Braga said that the battery takes only few minutes to charge. The reason behind this phenomenon is due to the greater charge-storage capacity of the battery offered by the sodium/lithium glass doping. In this way, the battery acts as an extremely efficient super capacitor.
if this is true and works out it could change everything
Have a nice day

 

[longview]

The newer " Quantum glass Battery " is I believe the way things will go
it is smaller, can power a car for ( they say ) over a thousand miles ( 12- 1400 mi ) and can be recharged in min. not hours and hours

Glass Battery to Replace Lithium-Ion Battery - A Technology Revolution In The Making

A group of researchers at the University of Texas have devised a new lithium glass battery technology which is expected to upheave electric vehicle business

pakwired.com

3x Storage Capacity​

it has been found that, as compared to lithium-ion battery, the glass battery has three times more storage capacity. In addition, the new electrolyte is not flammable, thereby, eliminating the danger of causing fire in devices. In this way, if the concept of glass battery actually comes to life and lives long enough to be launched worldwide, the issues of combustion in laptops, mobiles and other devices will become a problem of the past.

Quick Read: Reports of iPhone getting exploded following Samsung’s battery afflictions

Fast Charging​

The co-developer of lithium-glass battery, Maria Helena Braga said that the battery takes only few minutes to charge. The reason behind this phenomenon is due to the greater charge-storage capacity of the battery offered by the sodium/lithium glass doping. In this way, the battery acts as an extremely efficient super capacitor.
if this is true and works out it could change everything
Have a nice day

I think passenger vehicles are within reach already, but the real issue is aircraft, ships and Trucks.
Consider the 3X storage capacity for a second,
WiKipedia Energy density
Lithium-ion battery Watt-hours per kilogram 100.00–243.06,
Triple the high end gets you to 730 W-h/kg
Gasoline 12,094.5 W-h/kg
Gasoline in a vehicle IC engine, ~2,418 W-h/kg (20% Carnot efficiency)
For a modern turbofan jet engine, they can get 50% of the 12,757 W-h/kg in jet fuel , or 6,378 W-h/kg.
There is also the issue of infrastructure, and deployed demand.
How many years would it take to replace all the fuel vehicles with electric vehicles, even IF our infrastructure could support
a large number of electric vehicles?

 

[Tbird19482]

I think passenger vehicles are within reach already, but the real issue is aircraft, ships and Trucks.
Consider the 3X storage capacity for a second,
WiKipedia Energy density
Lithium-ion battery Watt-hours per kilogram 100.00–243.06,
Triple the high end gets you to 730 W-h/kg
Gasoline 12,094.5 W-h/kg
Gasoline in a vehicle IC engine, ~2,418 W-h/kg (20% Carnot efficiency)
For a modern turbofan jet engine, they can get 50% of the 12,757 W-h/kg in jet fuel , or 6,378 W-h/kg.
There is also the issue of infrastructure, and deployed demand.
How many years would it take to replace all the fuel vehicles with electric vehicles, even IF our infrastructure could support
a large number of electric vehicles?

If they get this perfected it sounds like it will be a really good thing
They say they can go 1200 to 1400 miles compared to about 300 and can be charged in min. not hours
and if they can I would like to see them used in D/E subs so they don't have to run their engines as long and go farther under water
one problem is that the Chinese and Russians will have it too and their subs will be harder to detect and track
Have a nice day

 

[longview]

If they get this perfected it sounds like it will be a really good thing
They say they can go 1200 to 1400 miles compared to about 300 and can be charged in min. not hours
and if they can I would like to see them used in D/E subs so they don't have to run their engines as long and go farther under water
one problem is that the Chinese and Russians will have it too and their subs will be harder to detect and track
Have a nice day

Cars were already really close, so a 500 mile plus battery would easily make cars viable.
Perhaps even semi tractor trailers, but still not ships and jets.
It sort of depends on what your goal of moving to battery electric vehicles is.
It it is reducing CO2 emissions, it is a long slow path, because you are waiting for people to cycle out of the Fuel cars,
and for the infrastructure to be able to keep those cars charged up.
Think about if everyone who now owns a car, increased their nightly electricity to twice the summer peak load?

 

[Carl Young]

Our last president sure didn't help.

Trump eliminates job of national cybersecurity coordinator

Top congressional Democrats immediately introduced a bill to restore the position of cyber czar.

www.nbcnews.com

Nor did Obama and his VP when the worst cases f cyber security were taking place. But nothing like this happened during Trump's watch and he also made his country energy independent,

 

[EnigmaO01]

Nor did Obama and his VP when the worst cases f cyber security were taking place. But nothing like this happened during Trump's watch and he also made his country energy independent,

Nor did what? Obama and Biden eliminated the chief of cyber security? No they didn't.

And how in holy hell did Trump make this country energy independent? You post is not only not factual it doesn't make sense.

 

[roguenuke]

Solar shingles, not panels.

The original poster you responded to said "panels". You changed it to shingles.

 

[EnigmaO01]

Zero percent of the renewable energy produced in Texas will be transported to the Eastern seaboard, and thus the risks of a similar issue of trans regional disruption are low. I don't think that will change.

But it will still be transmitted around the state and that can be subject to hacking -- especially in Texas -- that went on the cheap to maintain and bolster it's energy infrastructure. We saw the result this winter.

 

[Clicker III]

Think about if everyone who now owns a car, increased their nightly electricity to twice the summer peak load?

They'll just restart a few of the coal and fuel oil burners, cite the reduction in co2 overall and declare victory.

 

[longview]

They'll just restart a few of the coal and fuel oil burners, cite the reduction in co2 overall and declare victory.

And feel really good about themselves.
Denial is not a river in Egypt!