EIA: US Fossil Fuels Production to Reach Record Highs in 2023… The Permian is already there!

Guest “Frac On!” by David Middleton

JANUARY 21, 2022
EIA expects U.S. fossil fuel production to reach new highs in 2023

After declining in 2020, the combined production of U.S. fossil fuels (including natural gas, crude oil, and coal) increased by 2% in 2021 to 77.14 quadrillion British thermal units. Based on forecasts in our latest Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO), we expect U.S. fossil fuel production to continue rising in both 2022 and 2023, surpassing production in 2019, to reach a new record in 2023.

Of the total U.S. fossil fuel production in 2021, dry natural gas accounted for 46%, the largest share. Crude oil accounted for 30%, coal for 15%, and natural gas plant liquids (NGPLs) for 9%. We expect those shares to remain similar through 2023.


Principal contributor: Ornella Kaze

Tags: production/supply, coal, natural gas, STEO (Short-Term Energy Outlook), liquid fuels, crude oil, oil/petroleum

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, 
Monthly Energy Review and Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO)

The average daily production of crude oil is projected to exceed the 2019 all-time high by 2023.

Natural gas production has already exceeded the 2019 record.

Of course, the Permian Basin is leading the charge…

Permian Oil Output Hits Record
By Irina Slav – Jan 19, 2022

Crude oil production in the Permian shale play reached a record-high last month, averaging 4.92 million bpd, the Energy Information Administration reported in the latest edition of its Drilling Productivity Report.

But the top shale play in the United States is seen boosting output even higher, to 4.996 million bpd this month and 5.076 million bpd in February, the EIA also said. Bloomberg noted in a report on the news that this makes the Permian alone a bigger producer than any OPEC members except Saudi Arabia.



February 2020 “We are going to get rid of fossil fuels”

January 2022

5 21 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Peter W
January 22, 2022 6:07 am

I am certainly glad to hear this!

Reply to  Peter W
January 22, 2022 6:37 am

It’s one way to fight price inflation, increase supply.

January 22, 2022 6:25 am

Biden is a 💩

David Kamakaris
Reply to  Derg
January 22, 2022 6:40 am

How much would you like to bet that Bidet will take credit for the record production.

Bryan A
Reply to  David Kamakaris
January 22, 2022 9:27 am

Well of course…
We will end fossil fuels by pumping ALL that is available out of the ground thereby assuring “Peak Oil” is reached during my Presidency

Reply to  Bryan A
January 22, 2022 9:49 am

That’s essentially what Jimmy Carter said, or at least all the oil companies could produce for $3/ barrel.

Reply to  David Kamakaris
January 22, 2022 11:49 am

Obama did, why wouldn’t Brandon?

Reply to  Derg
January 22, 2022 6:44 am

In his press conference this past week, after describing all of his administration’s achievements, including bringing down the price of gasoline, he was asked, “Why do you suppose such large segments of the American electorate have come to harbor such profound concerns about your cognitive fitness?”
“I have no idea,” was Biden’s response.


Reply to  Scissor
January 22, 2022 7:30 am

That was funny.

Steve Case
Reply to  Scissor
January 22, 2022 8:35 am

“I have no idea,” was Biden’s response.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! First chuckle of my day (-:

Reply to  Scissor
January 22, 2022 9:43 am

Biden admin and MSM are so dishonest (Biden himself is just clueless)

While gasoline prices have dropped on average by 11 cents (3% lower) in last two months (which may very well have been wiped out by a recent 20-30 cent hike that I’m seeing in local prices two days ago) the prices are still 37% higher than on inauguration day. (source: gasbuddy)

So he gets kudos for supposedly clawing back less than 10% of the price rise that has occurred since he was in office?

Reply to  menace
January 22, 2022 4:07 pm

That’s the New Math that I’ve heard about for three decades of my 86+ years?

Dick Reed
Reply to  Derg
January 22, 2022 8:51 am

Let’s go Brandon!

Ron Long
January 22, 2022 6:38 am

Right on, David! And the actual product of the “Biden Administration” trying to curtail fossil fuels was to drive up prices. Imagine producing at the same level, with some inflation, but the price of your product doubling? Nice to see the onset of significant fracking obvious in your charts. Press On.

January 22, 2022 6:40 am

Hey, ho, ol’ Joe’s gotta go…

January 22, 2022 7:17 am

Natives are rebelling !
Environmental Uprising of Serbia is forcing the country’s government to ban mining of the light metals lithium and boron on its territory. This follows ban on building nuclear power station in the neighboring Croatia which is kindly offering to build one in Slovenia, just five miles from its border.

January 22, 2022 7:27 am

What comes after the Permian? 😮

Reply to  Phil Salmon
January 22, 2022 7:31 am

Humans flourishing

Steve Case
Reply to  Phil Salmon
January 22, 2022 8:26 am

What comes after the Permian?

Dinosaurs with funny names, I like saltopus the best.

Reply to  Steve Case
January 22, 2022 4:08 pm

Isn’t that the Press Secretary?

Bryan A
Reply to  David Middleton
January 22, 2022 9:30 am

And, of course, as demonstrated by our current head of state we are firmly in the I’MANASSTIC Period

Reply to  Phil Salmon
January 22, 2022 9:33 pm

There are at least two formation below the Bakken. They are firing up in North Dakota again. My last place I lived in before Arizona was Watford City North Dakota and from what I am hearing they are looking for workers again big time. Oh by the way that oil is on private land and the Feds can’t stop it, since they don’t own the mineral rights.

Reply to  Phil Salmon
January 23, 2022 12:57 am

The Permian-Triassic “great dying” was the biggest mass extinction since the Cambrian. Although ritually claimed to be due to CO2 warming, it was in fact cases by a short sharp ice age (during a hot period):


Paul Hurley (aka PaulH)
January 22, 2022 7:32 am

Now that’s a good looking hockey stick. 🙂

January 22, 2022 7:34 am

The Permian is our least unprofitable shale play.. It is dong quite well now as PDP’s and DUC’s are harvested. The $ are going mostly for buybacks, dividends, like for like acquisitions, which, given the history and trends, makes good business sense. After that, down, down, down. Oilprice.com is a relentless cheerleader, but what is missing from all of their pom pom missives are:

  1. Mentions of committed, sustainable, 2022 CAPEX for even Permian developments.
  2. Mentions of medium/long term favorable price agreements with the oilfield servicers.

Permian shale, as with the others, is also cursed geologically. First, us petroleum engineers have been utterly worthless in coming up with economic solutions to ever increasing frac hits. The only real “solution”, preloading, is not economic. Then, they will have increasing problems with frac water disposal.


Shale oil in general, is also internationally uncompetitive. Permian shale oil is closer, but still no cigar.


The 2016 graph is older, but the separation is just as great now, and will become greater as geology and skyrocketing service costs take their toll on shale plays, 2022 forward.

An example. ConocoPhillips has committed $700MM of 2022 CAPEX to develop their (new and old) Permian shale assets, which include those bought from Shell for $9.5B. Seems like lots, until you see that they need to maintain the PDP base of ~175,000 boe/d, with a current composite decline of at least 30%/year, just for their newly acquired shale assets (I don’t know what they had before, but it must have been >0). They will also get lots of less bang/buck, from their CAPEX.


“And while the oil and gas industry is preparing to increase spending in 2022, more than half of those outlays will be just to keep pace with escalating oilfield service prices, Rystad said in a Dec. 1 report.”

Bottom line, CoP got out evaluated by Shell, who put these assets in the rear view mirror. Shell got cash in fist, relief from an unsustainable development scenario, and a Trumpian YUGE lightening of their booked FASB143 obligations (the actual costs will certainly be much higher). Long story short, ConocoPhillips will be chasing those $9.5B – well – forever.  

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 8:16 am

Wow, all that blahblah to say absolutely nothing. Cut&paste is clearly your primary skill, boob.

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 9:36 am

And you want more windmills..carry on Stormtrooper

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 10:18 am

And Biden’s administration was not responsible for closing coal plants…remember when you stated that stupid?

Reply to  Derg
January 22, 2022 11:42 am

No you said that stupid. Along with Obama didn’t close any plants. We see your stupidity on display

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 12:39 pm

But you lied earlier, so nobody trusts you. Take your windmills elsewhere

Reply to  Derg
January 22, 2022 12:43 pm

But you lied earlier, so nobody trusts you.”

Link please? You can actually do this for the offending comment.

Folks, what is a person who lies about lying. Aksin’ for an unnamed WUWT poster…

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 1:24 pm

Lol you go look it up. You came on here blah blah blah Obama didn’t shut down any coal plants and I gave you a link. Crickets. Are we dealing with a Simon here?

Get your clown show under control.

Reply to  Derg
January 22, 2022 1:28 pm

“Lol you go look it up.”

Not how it works, above ground. Your claim, your responsibility to back it up. AGAIN, Chris Hitchens nailed it:

“What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.” 

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 2:15 pm

Yes how it works. You find your post and you will see the answer..the oh I don’t remember doesn’t fly. You and your clown show.

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 11:17 am

Moderator: Why do you censor some people who cut and paste and post the same stuff over and over but not BigOilyBoob, griffter, and many others?

In order to maintain credibility, you need to enforce the rules evenly or not at all.

Reply to  meab
January 22, 2022 12:13 pm

Because they would then have to limit some initial posters. I only respond to them. But it appears that some moderation is working. No more self serving CCS articles. Also, posters who continually post their uncited nonsense papers are close to what you are actually criticising.

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 12:40 pm

Nonsense from you indeed.

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 9:35 pm

Bakken oil in Mckinzie county is profitable well below $50 a barrel. Transportation is a problem.

Reply to  MAL
January 23, 2022 6:34 am

See previously documented comments on why that is in the rear view mirror.

Gary Pearse
January 22, 2022 7:35 am

We need some climate change in eastern Ontario. I’d like to have 2100’s worth right now. We’ve been in a prairies-like freeze (lows of – 29- 31°C or -22°F for last week) for much of January and our Bosch Greenstar gas – hot water heating unit quit 4 days ago. From the ‘fault’ readout d3, it’s the high temperature sensor that’s broken (its happened before).

We seem to have fallen prey to the “supply chain” pandemic much talked about these days. Repair people are busy and we are slated for a tech visit next Friday. I’ve been thinking about shorting this circuit out. Any suggestions on WUWT?

Reply to  Gary Pearse
January 22, 2022 8:36 am

Do so.

Cycle the unit manually every couple of hours if you are not too cold.

Get more than one spare unit, whatever the cost. You can’t afford to be without heat in that climate.

Bob Hunter
Reply to  Gary Pearse
January 22, 2022 8:40 am

Aren’t you the guys living in Central Canada that voted to shut down CDN fossil fuels? (albeit 90+% of CDN fossil fuels are located on the CDN Prairies)

Reply to  Gary Pearse
January 22, 2022 10:09 am

You have to look at the circuit to determine if just shorting out the sensor will work.
If it is a simple normally closed switch that opens when reaching a pre-determined temperature, then shorting the sensor will work. You will lose the protection of that sensor and it could be catastrophic if your system overheats.
I have shorted out a sensor as a troubleshooting technique to determine if that was the problem but immediately changed the sensor out. If this is a recurring problem, you may consider stocking up on replacements.
Good luck.

January 22, 2022 7:49 am

Energy Information Administration reported in the latest edition of its Drilling Productivity Report.”

Dead to me link…

Reply to  David Middleton
January 22, 2022 8:55 am

Yes, all true. Now, do you have anything that rebuts the commercial/petroleum engineering/geological claims I made, and documented?

BTW, folks, Dip in to Mr. M’s link and click on the “low hanging fruit” DUC’s. As has already been well reported, we’re eatiin’ em up.

And FMI, how do they get a 2/22 “New well production/rig”. Prescience in action…

Last edited 1 year ago by bigoilbob
Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 9:26 am

Sorry Mr. M. You provided a good version of that link. But my other questions remain unanswered…

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 9:59 am

Not to answer for David Middleton, but I only see one question that you asked above, “Now, do you have anything that rebuts the commercial/petroleum engineering/geological claims I made, and documented?”

It, and your posts above are, to say the very least, vague. I’d suggest that you narrow your claims and question(s) if you would like a serious response.

Reply to  Scissor
January 22, 2022 12:16 pm

Read my initial post. But yes, I did not make my other claims in the form of questions. Got me there.

I won’t be “narrowing my claims”. They are all valid and documented. But I will consider any data based rebuttals. Anyone, anyone….

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 1:25 pm

Because you make stuff up and make crazy assertions. Stupid indeed.

John Hultquist
Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 10:01 am

 The carbon-based industries are mammoth and amazing and complex. No one is surprised that there will always be issues to be solved, regardless of how much you like to point them out.
Might I suggest you read Julian Simon’s the ‘Ultimate Resource’ (human ingenuity, the cascading resource). Maybe you could refocus on the positives of our society instead of trying to dismantle it.  

Reply to  John Hultquist
January 22, 2022 12:27 pm

Maybe you could refocus on the positives of our society instead of trying to dismantle it.”

Is accurately evaluating the present day commerciality of the Permian shale really “dismantling society”. IMO, somewhat hyperbolic.

A bone throw:

Sooner or later the lower CAPEX and OPEX/boe OPEC+ hydrocarbons will get produced off. In my engineering judgment as a long time OPEC+ oilfield trasher, 10-15 years. Then, US shale oil will get pulled off of life support to develop some fraction of the hydrocarbons in place.

Shale asset retirement obligations are going to be hyper high $. To the point that much of it will be communized onto the rest of us, done 0.5 assed, or some combination. I have no problem delaying this Gong Show until the the lowest OPEC+ fruit is plucked, oil prices rise towards break even for US shale, and some of the rest of it is developed, using best practices.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  bigoilbob
January 22, 2022 7:33 pm

Report back in 15 years.

Reply to  bigoilbob
January 23, 2022 3:41 am

You write gibberish. If English is your second language, then keep practicing. If not, Dude you remind me of Pete “word salad” Buttigieg.

Reply to  Derg
January 23, 2022 7:12 am
Reply to  bigoilbob
January 23, 2022 7:51 am

Exactly you may be Pete…word salad extraordinaire.

Bruce Cobb
January 22, 2022 7:52 am

And just think; dinos gave up their lives so we could eat, zoom around, and stay warm. Taking advantage of fossil fuels is the least we can do to honor them! Thank god for fossil fuels. And don’t forget to thank the dinos.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
January 22, 2022 7:31 pm


Michael in Dublin
January 22, 2022 8:19 am

It is quite shocking to see where the US is importing from and how much (10%?) when they should be able to be supplying most of their own needs.

January 22, 2022 8:19 am

Here in PA old, apparently played out wells are getting reworked and coal is being dug every day. Americans will continue to use real, renewable energy in spite of Faux Joe and the Dumbasscrat Party.

January 22, 2022 8:20 am

Competition time!

How many cubic feet of gas is the UK fracking now and projected to frack in 2024?

“US Sends Fleet Of LNG Ships To Fuel-Starved Europe”


How much are they charging….

Rich Davis
Reply to  fretslider
January 22, 2022 12:04 pm

Hopefully we’re gouging you for every penny that Vladimir is charging you, if not more.

Stupid people deserve to get what they vote for good and hard. Especially stupid people who are trying the lead the world in stupidity.

Rich Davis
Reply to  David Middleton
January 22, 2022 3:24 pm

Makes sense of course. The delivered price of a commodity sold on the spot market is based on the total supply and total demand. So actually by adding American supply, we are driving down the price that the Brits are paying for spot market gas from all sources.

You’re welcome griff! Without us, your idiotic scheme to run a country’s grid on unreliable ruinables may have collapsed already.

Reply to  fretslider
January 23, 2022 12:50 am

Yes the USA can bully Europe and everyone else into not buying gas from Russia, and get it at twice the price from them across the Atlantic. Gunboat diplomacy is alive and well!

And then they blame the Russians for telling other nations who they can and can’t do business with?? That’s triple-distilled hypocrisy.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Phil Salmon
January 23, 2022 6:20 am

I know, right Phil? Those commodity traders are in it for the long game. They first forced you sheep to ban fracking your own land, then forced you to rely on windmills, then managed to manipulate you into not agreeing to long-term contracts for Russian gas. Oddly they had LNG on the way to Asia and turned it around to go to Europe. Almost as if they didn’t expect this situation and were just taking advantage of an opportunity. Obviously a ploy. Sneaky little commodity traderses! Wicked, tricksey, false!

Frankly I half hope to see Putin take over from Lisbon and Galway to Vladivostok and finally close the pieholes of all you whining socialist ingrates who feel so very put upon by us evil cowboys. How’s your Russian, Phil?

Rich Davis
Reply to  Rich Davis
January 23, 2022 6:36 am

добро пожаловать в английскую область

Reply to  Rich Davis
January 23, 2022 7:50 am

Vsyem mozhno Google translate izpolzovat, koneshno. Ya govoryu tak sebye.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Phil Salmon
January 23, 2022 1:13 pm

For those who don’t want to be bothered going to Google Translate, my comment says Welcome to the English Oblast.

Words to memorize when greeting your Russian conquerors on the streets of London. You’ll need to practice the pronunciation Phil, you can’t just show them your phone.

Maybe Trump was right about ditching NATO. Lots of American blood spilled for a bunch of craven ingrates.

Paul Hurley (aka PaulH)
January 22, 2022 8:26 am

From The Telegraph (paywalled):

Energy crisis bursts green shares bubble

Surging gas prices brings an end to the green market bubble as private equity hugely increased investment into oil and gas firms last year

Pat Frank
January 22, 2022 9:01 am

David, what are the current estimates for the long-term production of shale gas?

Rud Istvan
Reply to  David Middleton
January 22, 2022 2:14 pm

Some supporting oldish data from the energy essays in Blowing Smoke. When written in 2014, recovery factors for fracked oil were averaging about 1.5%, and fracked gas 15-18% depending on shale basin. At that time, the industry expectation was oil could push to 3-4%(better fracking, more propant) and gas to 20-25%. For gas, those numbers have already been reached. And, there is a lot of US nat gas shale essentially not yet tapped, like the massive Utica underlying much of the Marcellus.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
January 22, 2022 9:41 pm

From what I understand there is recoverable gas in all but two counties in North Dakota. Most is untapped due to lack of pipelines to get it out of state.

Willem Post
January 22, 2022 9:03 am

My grandfather used to blank-stare like that, before we decided to put him into a nursing home.

He was much happier among his peers, and no longer having to run a business.

Last edited 1 year ago by wilpost
Rud Istvan
January 22, 2022 9:46 am

I suspect oil back about $80 and US nat gas nearing $4 has something to do with the EIA projected increase in Permian output. And, IMO those numbers will be fairly stable going forward a few years for two reasons:

  1. Deepwater (Brazil subsalt) needs about that to produce.
  2. The annual decline in the world’s 700 largest oil fields reported by IEA in 2008 (5.7% pa) means deepwater and fracked shale increasingly have to take up the slack.
January 22, 2022 10:21 am

My V8 Toyota thanks you and my periodic drive through the Permian Basin is inspiring. Thanks to everyone working in that corridor.

January 22, 2022 10:23 am

The Putin tank exercise will take oil to $100.

January 22, 2022 10:41 am

One year ago my natural gas cost (Nicor) in the Chicago suburbs was 0.29 per therm, last month it was 0.68.
what is going on ??

michael hart
January 22, 2022 12:55 pm

Gotta love those British thermal units. The sort of thing to build an empire.

Loren C. Wilson
Reply to  michael hart
January 22, 2022 6:04 pm

They did build an empire. Think of all the countries that were colonized or conquered by Great Britain. While I agree that the joule is a better unit, Great Britain was one of the greatest empires this world has known.

Reply to  Loren C. Wilson
January 22, 2022 8:54 pm

Well, one therm is a more convenient unit than 100,000 Btu – and far more convenient than 100,000,000 and some odd Joules. At least for people trying to read their monthly gas bill.

January 22, 2022 6:07 pm

Frack On.

willem post
January 23, 2022 5:05 am

Even though US fossil fuel production is increasing, the extreme-leftist White House cabal, nevertheless wants to install 30,000 MW of expensive offshore wind turbines to further debilitate the US trade deficit.

Are those folks in cahoots with Europe, which stands to gain enormously from the cabal’s foolishness?


The Biden administration announced on October 13, 2021, it will subsidize the development of up to seven offshore wind systems (never call them farms) on the US East and West coasts, and in the Gulf of Mexico; a total of about 30,000 MW of offshore wind by 2030.
Biden’s offshore wind systems would have an adverse, long-term impact on US electricity wholesale prices, and the prices of all other goods and services, because their expensive electricity would permeate into all economic activities.
The wind turbines would be at least 800-ft-tall, which would need to be located at least 30 miles from shores, to ensure minimal disturbance from night-time strobe lights.
Any commercial fishing areas would be significantly impacted by below-water infrastructures and cables. The low-frequency noise (less than 20 cycles per second, aka infrasound) of the wind turbines would adversely affect marine life, and productivity of fishing areas.
Production: Annual production would be about 30,000 x 8766 h/y x 0.45, capacity factor = 118,341,000 MWh, or 118.3 TWh of variable, intermittent, wind/weather/season-dependent electricity.
The additional wind production would be about 100 x 118.3/4000 = 2.96% of the annual electricity loaded onto US grids.
That US load would increase, due to tens of millions of future electric vehicles and heat pumps.
This would require a large capacity of combined-cycle, gas-turbine plants, CCGTs, to cost-effectively:
1) Counteract the wind output variations, MW, aka grid balancing
2) Fill-in wind production shortfalls, MWh, during any wind lulls
Such lulls occur at random throughout the year, and may last 5 to 7 days in the New England area.
These URLs provide examples of similar wind/solar lull conditions in Germany and New England
High Costs of Balancing the Grid with Increased Wind and Solar: The ANNUAL grid balancing costs are entirely due to the variations and intermittencies of wind and solar, because the OTHER power plants have to operate far from their efficient modes of operation, 24/7/365. They experience:

1) More up/down production at lower efficiencies, which have more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh
2) More equipment wear-and-tear cost/kWh, due to up/down production 
3) More-frequent plant starts/stops, which have high Btu/kWh, high CO2/kWh 

Increased wind and solar also requires:

– Increased hot, synchronous (3600 rpm), standby plant capacity, MW, to immediatelyprovide power, if wind/solar generation suddenly decreases, or any other power system outage occurs.
– Increased cold, standby plant capacity, MW, to provide power after a plant’s start-up period. 

When wind and solar were only a very small percent of the electricity loaded onto the NE grid, those balancing costs were minimal, sort of “lost in the data fog”
When wind and solar became a large percent, those balancing costs in the UK became 1.3 BILLION U.K. pounds in 2020, likely even more in 2021, 2022, etc.
Those balancing costs should have been charged to the Owners of wind and solar systems, but, in reality, they were politically shifted to taxpayers, ratepayers, and government debts.
Those balancing costs are in addition to the various government subsidies, which are also politically shifted to taxpayers, ratepayers, and government debts.
Now you all are finally beginning to see just how wonderful wind and solar have been, and will be, for your pocketbook.
Energy systems analysts, with decades of experience, saw this mess coming about 20 years ago, but all-knowing legislators and bureaucrats ignored them, because they were pressured into aiding and abetting the harvesting of federal and state subsidies.
The Biden fools adding 30,000 MW of very expensive offshore wind, would be donating a financial bonanza to Europe, because it would make oodles of money, plus it would permanently saddle the US, a trade competitor, with much higher energy costs, in addition to the enormous ANNUAL costs of defending Europe. 

A master stroke, in deed, and the US is falling into their very expensive, debilitating trap.

BTW, Europe must have wind and solar, because it imports huge quantities of energy (mostly from unfriendly countries), whereas the US is nearly energy independent

Turnkey Capital Cost: The turnkey capital cost for wind systems, plus offshore/onshore grid extension/augmentation would be about 30,000 MW x $5,000,000/MW = $150 BILLION, excluding financing costs. Biden’s excessive inflation rates, about 7% at present, surely would increase that cost.
Area Requirements: The 8-MW wind turbines would be arranged on a grid, spaced at least one mile apart (8 rotor diameters), about 1 sq mile per wind turbine. The minimum sea area requirement for 30,000/8 = 3,750 wind turbines would be 3,750 sq miles, or 2,400,000 acres
Electricity Cost/kWh: Based on the real-world European, mostly UK and German, operating experience in the North Sea and Baltic, such highly subsidized wind turbine systems:
1) Last about 20 years
2) Have high maintenance and operating costs, due to the adverse marine environment
3) Produce electricity at an “al-in” cost of about 2 times the “calculated” values
The “all-in” wholesale prices of the offshore electricity of new systems are calculated at about 17 c/kWh, without cost shifting and subsidies, and about 9 c/kWh, with cost shifting and subsidies. The shifted costs and subsidies would result in:
1) Increased tax burdens on taxpayers
2) Increased household electric rates on ratepayers
3) Additions to federal and state government debts.
4) Additional burdens on the owners of traditional generators, because their power plants have to counteract the wind output variations, 24/7/365; the more wind (and solar), the greater the electricity quantities involved in the counteracting, plus their plants have to spend more time on standby, and are required to have more-frequent start/stops. See URLs and Appendix

NOTE: These rates compare with the average New England wholesale price of 5 c/kWh, during the 2009 – 2022 period, 13 years, courtesy of:
1) Abundant, domestic, natural gas-fueled CCGT plants, that have: 1) low-cost/kWh, low-CO2/kWh, extremely-low particulate/kWh
2) Domestic, uranium-fueled nuclear plants, that have low-cost/kWh, near-zero CO2/kWh, zero particulate/kWh
3) Long-lasting hydro plants, that have low-cost/kWh, near-zero-CO2/kWh, zero particulate/kWh
NOTE: Cost shifting and subsidies have not yet affected NE wholesale prices, because the percent of new RE (mostly wind and solar) on the NE grid is very small, after 20 years of subsidies.
The image shows the negligeable “contribution” of wind + solar to the NE grid load, during 2021, after 20 years of subsidies!!
Wind and solar became significant in Germany and Denmark after more than 20 years of subsidies, resulting in:
– Politicians excessively allocating RE costs to households, thereby greatly increasing household electric rates.
– Politicians keeping industrial rates artificially low for international competitiveness reasons (a hidden trade subsidy). See URL

Hans Erren
January 24, 2022 5:54 am

The Permian is already there!

The Permian (/ˈpɜːr.mi.ən/PUR-mee-ən)[4] is a geologic period and stratigraphic system which spans 47 million years from the end of the Carboniferous Period 298.9 million years ago (Mya), to the beginning of the Triassic Period 251.902 Mya.

January 24, 2022 6:33 am

Now if only we can get some of that natural gas to Europe, I think tensions might ease over there. Here in Coos Bay, Oregon we had a perfect spot, away from town, and a great natural harbor for ships to come and take the gas. Unfortunately the whole plan was shot down by the Dems and Greens. I mean, it is a bad thing for prosperity to come to small coastal towns, isn’t it. About 15 years ago they shot another LNG plant down on the Columbia near Astoria. How can we provide cheap, clean gas to people if we can’t build the plants?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights