This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

"Polar Vortex" Shock And Awe: The Utility Bill Arrives (And Why It Will Get Worse Before It Gets Better)

Tyler Durden's picture


The "polar vortex" shock has arrived, only this time it is not in the form of another 12 inches of overnight snow accumulation but in the shape of household utility bills. A reader was kind enough to send us his just received ConEd bill for the month ended Februery 10. The result speaks for itself. It also speaks for where so much of US household disposable income will go in first quarter. Spoiler alert: not toward discretionary purchases.


If readers have more dramatic instances of the "Polar Vortex" invoice shock, please forward them to us at the usual address.

And unfrotunately it will get worse before it gets better. On the back of a rapid decline in the "glut" of low cost natural gas (as stockpiles are drawn down to the lowest level since 2004) and the shift in forecast (that the freezing weather could last well into March), Natural gas futures are soaring (up over 10% today). This is the highest front-month futures contract price since December 2008 as "the possibility of periodic shortages now looms."



Charts: Bloomberg


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:51 | 4453505 RacerX
RacerX's picture

cue the obligatory "Hitler gets his electric bill" video.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:56 | 4453534 Headbanger
Headbanger's picture

Because Obama..   Again.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:01 | 4453557 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Is it possible to have one post without Zero's name drug into it? I don't like him either, but I'm not to the point where I'm deranged.... at least when it comes to him.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:03 | 4453567 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

You'll get past that, Doc.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:12 | 4453630 john39
john39's picture

just wait until the marxist renewable energy mandates really kick in over the next decade.  consumers will be required to buy energy from  wind and solar (at a much higher cost).  bend over...   but thank goodness we are stopping global warming....  bwahahaha!!!!!

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:22 | 4453703 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

if he had a smart meter he could have managed his use better

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:30 | 4453735 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

electric for the last bill 280 bucks

100 gallons of oil at 3.89

n wilmington de

heat pump w/oil backup

14 seer

87% oil burner

edit: thats why we are selling this monstrosity and down sizing to 672 sq ft plus a loft

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:55 | 4453894 janus
janus's picture

after reviewing your utility bill, read this piece by P. Noonan.

i don't think i've ever shared anything from an olde line pub here on the Hedge...but, goddamit, seems some sense may be seepin in somewhere.

but, with respect to my purposes, i more than hope the 'elites' continue on blaspheming decency and honor.  the french sure did take kindly to such effrontery back some 200 or so years ago...and, hell's bells, the french peasants didn't even have guns.  this should be fun.

who needs a guillotine when you've got an AR-15.

happiness is a warm gun,


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 16:22 | 4454027 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

One bedroom apartment in sunny Mt. Pleasant, SC which usually is $85/month was $225 from Jan 4- Feb 4

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 16:57 | 4454183 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

It's not like Obummer didn't warn you about what he was going to do:

"Electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket"

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:34 | 4455246 BeanusCountus
BeanusCountus's picture

Skyrocketing rates are a non-issue. No one will be any poorer because the increases wont be included in any "inflation" numbers because of the "product substitution" factor! Thats because some asshole will figure that this "increased cost" can be avoided by doing something like "periodically burning scrap paper and plastic in the center of one's living room seventeen times per day" to minimize the impact. But wait! It gets better! The actual out of pocket spending on utilities will be reported by CNBC as "an increase in consumer spending" that proves the economic recovery is ALIVE AND WELL!. Plus, i have yet to see an "increase" in consumer spending attributed to the weather.

And so it goes.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 22:12 | 4455419 mjcOH1
mjcOH1's picture

"Skyrocketing rates are a non-issue. No one will be any poorer because the increases wont be included in any "inflation" numbers because of the "product substitution" factor!"


It's true.   Just substitute being cold for being warm and it's all good.

Thu, 02/20/2014 - 00:39 | 4455995 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

Plus, people will burn more calories trying to stay warm with their thermostats set at 60 degrees, leading to less obesity!!  The "I Cannot Afford to Heat My Home Diet".


Thu, 02/20/2014 - 08:56 | 4456716 RazvanM
RazvanM's picture

Nope, just use one more winter jacket indoors. East european communist experience ;)

Thu, 02/20/2014 - 10:02 | 4456949 MontgomeryScott
MontgomeryScott's picture

And you thought this stuff was natural, didn't you?


The third project also utilizes the mixture of barium salts in the atmosphere. Weather control is a project of the U.S. Air Force and utilizes Nikola Tesla concepts of radio frequency radiation (HAARP) against the ionosphere above the earth and control the jet stream. Fragile life support systems in our environment are being manipulated, tested and altered by government for military advantage. Air Force documents implied, "the risks are high but the rewards are worth it." The mixture of barium salts, supporting moisture, is encouraged along the weather fronts and
manipulated in a control fashion. It is believed microwave energy is also utilized in the weather control program. Weather data is also a required input to the VTRPE program of the RFMP system.

In the broadest sense, weather- control can be divided into two major categories: suppression and intensification of weather patterns. In extreme cases, it might involve the creation of completely new weather patterns, attenuation or control of severe storms, or even alteration of global climate on a far-reaching and/or long-lasting scale. In the mildest and least controversial cases it may consist of inducing or suppressing precipitation, clouds, or fog for short times over a region. Other low-intensity applications might include the alteration and/or use of near space as a medium to enhance communications, disrupt active or passive sensing, or other purposes. The primary areas include generation and dissipation of precipitation, clouds, and fog; modification of localized storm systems; and
the use of the ionosphere and near space for space control and communications dominance.

Thu, 02/20/2014 - 10:39 | 4457111 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Don't strap that tinfoil hat on too tightly, you might cut off the circulation to your brain...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:46 | 4455308 Just Observing
Just Observing's picture

Yep.....and I was sure this was CHANGE that sorry fck was kidding about.

So, in addition to the wood we've always burned, I installed enough solar so our Jan bill was 11 bucks.

Thu, 02/20/2014 - 02:40 | 4456288 cbxer55
cbxer55's picture

One bedroom apartment in Midwest City Oklahoma. 

Normal is around $65.00 to 75.00.

The last two have been almost $150.00.  ;-(

Not a killer, but still a pisser.


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:56 | 4453898 walküre
walküre's picture

that's why skinny women suck as a bed warmer

most of them can't cook to save their life either

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 18:01 | 4454465 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Had to do a double take...

Thought you said skinny women suck cock in bed better...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:14 | 4455174 pursueliberty
pursueliberty's picture

That isn't true either, bigger women try harder.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:14 | 4455177 HyBrasilian
HyBrasilian's picture

No ~ He said you suck & are a bed wetter

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:53 | 4455330 willwork4food
willwork4food's picture

I thouht he said skinny women warm the cock better.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 22:23 | 4455464 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

skinny woman as a cock warmer

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:51 | 4455320 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

You can heat a house cheaper than satiating a chunky female with Sees Chocolates.


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 17:32 | 4454352 Seer
Seer's picture

The farther from the equator you are the more you want to ensure that you have a nice east<->west axis home/living space with ample glazing (I believe 15% to 18% of total floor space) facing toward the equator.  And, of course, no significant obstructions to block the free solar anergy.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 23:37 | 4455800 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

even the ancient Greeks designed for passive solar. It really does work. And it's cheap and easy to insulate 

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:16 | 4455185 Infinite QE
Infinite QE's picture

Are you building or buying to achieve that size? Most housing stock out there was built for 1950's level energy prices.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 22:34 | 4455516 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture


28x24 with 24x14 loft bedroom

triple pane argon low-e windows

r-49+ roof insulation

6 inch walls r-cant remember and foil backed foam on the outside adds another r-4

catalytic wood burner

dry well septic

shallow well fed off the 'ledge' bedrock

timber should last 30 years on 14 acres

plus apple and pear trees

multiple kinds of berries

greenhouse 20x12

bear,deer,turkey hunting

debating backup heat source of electric or propane

stream fed from snowpack

one of two properties with access to 3350 acres of forever wild state parkland behind me up the hill

april 14th cant come fast enuf

Thu, 02/20/2014 - 09:44 | 4456879 Infinite QE
Infinite QE's picture

That's sound great. You may want to consider a radiant heat system with a concrete slab. Can run an external wood stove to generate thermal storage in the heat slab.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:32 | 4453776 jbvtme
jbvtme's picture

how is it that the weather chanel has been 100% correct all winter about the forcast (going out ten days)?

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:50 | 4453868 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Maybe GS is running the weather trading desk?

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 17:19 | 4454287 jimmytorpedo
jimmytorpedo's picture

The weather channel has an inside guy at HAARP?

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 18:05 | 4454487 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You realize that HAARP is not currently operational?

Not that it would make a lick of difference...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:57 | 4454894 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

Oh My Gosh, Flak is right about something, I hear angel trumpets..  Now if we could just figure a way for Government to have complete control over all energy usage and increase taxes these pesky climate variations would go away and the ideal climate would emerge from its hidey hole in Santas cave at the N. Pole.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 23:53 | 4455222 TheGoldMyth
TheGoldMyth's picture

Calmyourself, yes Flakmeister is right about HAARP, but then what is his replacement theory? Where is the climate coming from now?

Economic Climate Science can provide answers to this question.

""Allow me to control the CO2 emissions your economy produces, and i care not who has HAARP""

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:08 | 4455148 TheGoldMyth
TheGoldMyth's picture

As ZH resident Economic Climate Change Scientist i look at how economic activity increases or decreases the very  CO2 emissions that cause climate.

HARRP is no longer needed now that weather modification is achieved directly by modifying/controlling the CO2 levels more efficiently using economic means. 

"Give me control of CO2 production, and i care not who has HAARP"

As you probably already know, CO2 causes climate and therefore if the economy improves (Generates more CO2) we Economic Climate Change Scientist's can know in advance that the weather gets warmer due to xtra CO2 that creates a man made greenhouse.

In the case of polar vortex's these are created by crashing an economy until its capacity to generate CO2 is thwarted. Foreclosed houses collectively cannot produce CO2 and these aggregate with other poor economic factors until CO2 generation grinds to a halt which of course removes the greenhouse effect exposing the region to intense cold.

In the end game, the only CO2 necessary to maintain a warm Climate is produced by Molotov cocktails. But the emission of CO2 from Molotov cocktails is not enough to aggregate sufficient CO2 to return the climate to greenhouse conditions.

HAARP is no longer used and is old technology now that CO2 that causes climate can be controlled using economic means on a regional basis.

This is the stuff us Economic Climate Scientists (ECS) study/predoct.

You will note that as ZH resident ECS, i was well ahead of the curve and have been predicting an economic ice age for some time.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:09 | 4455152 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:16 | 4455184 TheGoldMyth
TheGoldMyth's picture

Flakmeister, you sir are not listening. This is totally new science!!

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:32 | 4453773 DCFusor
DCFusor's picture

Well, myself, I *volutarily* went off-grid re power in '79 and the system's paid for itself, and this storm, I was the only one in my neighborhood that didn't lose power.  I heat with wood, prepaid in the sense I cut it last year.  While I  usually drive an electric car, this snow was a bit past what it will navigate, and so I burned ~5 gal of gas in my truck - my total gasoline this year.

The "standard" lifestyle isn't the only option, bitchez - you choose to be dependent, you take the whole package.

Start your own business - telecommute, make others commute to you, otherwise.  Cube slave and commuting in a city is for suckers, who never get an even break.  Get off your whiney keyboard and change your life, instead.  It's better.

It's not less work, it's just different work.  I find it more fulfilling, personally.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:53 | 4453881 Renewable Life
Renewable Life's picture

Amen Brother, I'm with you!

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 19:48 | 4454875 Seer
Seer's picture

I burn diesel.  And I'm happy that I have it.  Takes energy to fetch the firewood (although my dog is a bigger dog it's not nearly big enough to play the part of draft horse).

As to wood-cutting, I've never even attempted to cut using electric, and axes are out of the question (though I do split manually via splitting axe [Fiskars makes a kick-ass one]).  So... I think you might be understating your fuel consumption a bit.

Though we use propane to cook with (consumption is extremely low) my wife CAN cook via wood fire (assuming the weather is decent enough).

Lastly, PASSIVE SOLAR.  I've done enough research on the solar tech side of things to know that the "return" can't begin to approach the payback of passive: batteries don't last forever and, they're not cheap! (cheaper than piped-in electricity perhaps, but that stiall doesn't equate to "affordable" [passive solar has ZERO cost]).

For sure, best to have alternatives.  But, not all "alternatives" are the be-all-end-all, in which case one should consider alternatives to "alternative" (energy sources), if applicable.

"Start your own business - telecommute, make others commute to you, otherwise.  Cube slave and commuting in a city is for suckers, who never get an even break.  Get off your whiney keyboard and change your life, instead.  It's better."

This strategy would fail if everyone were to do it.  Those folks with city jobs have city pay.  My customers tend to be city customers who can afford to pay more than what grocery stores price at.  Yeah, it's a HUGE connundrum for me: I try and keep my costs low in the belief that the grocery store stuff has nowhere to go but up (and, so far, it's panning out exactly this way).

Do I like cities?  Not necessarily.  Do I like living and working hard in the country?  YES.  I have no illusions that [in the US] 300+ million people can move to the country and all become self-sufficient.

The answers need more questions...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:45 | 4455060 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

well...they don't have many trees due west of Ohio.

also coal is by far the most efficient heating source. well, next to used tires apparently.

And of course if you're from Chicago

unlike New York City which uses steam.

In other words if you're living in Chicago you're not a happy camper here.
On the other hand
and yes...they do used wood boilers to generate electricity up there too.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 16:03 | 4453927 Renewable Life
Renewable Life's picture

If any schmuck out there thinks that the centraliztion of the energy, fuel, and utility complex is the answer......I feel sorry for ya son, your fucked! Big energy aint in business to give a shit about the indivdual and their "money problems"!!!

If you cant pay, fuck off and freeze, if you cant pay, fuck off and walk, and so on and so on! The great scheme of globalization wont be turned back, by thinking you can buy your fuel and energy cheaper in some "deregulated" bullshit market, either produce what you need yourself in a decentralized manner, or get down on your fucking hands and knees slave! 

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 22:56 | 4455630 Meat Hammer
Meat Hammer's picture

In my area of California, you can't warm yourself with a fire whenever you want. I'm starting to think the energy companies have greased the palms of the politicians to sell this as "Spare the Air" nonsense to keep the serfs using their heaters. 

It is your responsibility to Check Before You Burn. First time violations will result in a $50 fine or an option to complete and pass a wood smoke awareness course. Fines for subsequent violations are higher.

I'd use the $50 ticket as kindling for the next night's fire.

And it gets better...

To report a complaint or suspected violation from November through February,
call the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District at 1-800-880-9025.


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 16:08 | 4453944 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Marxist, shmarxist.  On this one I'm gonna have to respectfully disagree.

Carbon fuels might be compact, cost-effective and convenient energy sources, but let's be honest:  Even carbon fuels are nothing more than nature's BATTERIES.  EverReady, move over!  Carbon fuels are the real long-life batteries, and they store ancient sunlight -- for the most part, if we bracket out the geo-thermal dynamics of Natural Gases created during earth's formation.

Ultimately, ALL useful, non-nuclear fuel comes from the true "Giver of Life" on Earth:  the SUN. 

Unless we have a massive global depopulation to stretch out the dwindling supply of carbon fuels (for decades or centuries more, depending on the population and its consumption rate), the laws of math and physics will give us NO choice but to start capturing and using as much solar/renewable power as possible. We need to diversify our energy sources from all sources, and we need way more local and regional solutions.  In short, a whole new Ecosystem in the creation and delivery of energy is emerging -- with oil-drilling old-timers trying to hang to their market share and lifestyle.  I get that.

But if you've seen any recent TV commercials (in the last few years), you'll note that even Big Oil is (BP, Shell) is getting into the Green/Renewable act.  And it's more than just PR.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 17:01 | 4454206 Professorlocknload
Professorlocknload's picture

23 million years of stored sunlight, the cheap half of which was used up in a bit over a hundred years.

The North and East will be forced South and West, gradually, as the price of fuels rises. And that's if Statist carbon taxes don't materialize. If they do the warmist tax gig, the relocation process will accelerate.

I would expect more Detroits up there in future. Sure don't think I would invest in Ice Belt RE.




Wed, 02/19/2014 - 17:24 | 4454317 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

How could you grasp the intrinsic nature of fossil fuels and be oblivious to the fact  that releasing all that sequestered carbon in such a short period time will result in a climatic shock....

Inquiring minds want to know...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 18:46 | 4454653 TheAnswerIs42
TheAnswerIs42's picture

I dunno, why would that happen now when it didn't happen in the past?


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 18:56 | 4454686 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Really, I suggest you google PETM...

Hint P is for Paleocene....

And that was slow motion compared to the present...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 19:21 | 4454776 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Why don;t you remind us of what "Present" means in GISP2 data?

Are you ignorant or just trying to lie to us? Seriously, this is the kind of bullshit that gives used car salesmen a bad name...

Since our friend is not going to be forthright, I'll tell you, 1855....

Yes, 158 years ago... 

And what has happened in Greenland since then

Since that is behind a paywall some nice people made a figure that is worth 1,000 words,

Now, if you combine that information with the plot you linked you get this


Your plot is tired old bullshit that deniers peddle out either to fool newbies or just to make themselves feel better...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 19:25 | 4454795 TheAnswerIs42
TheAnswerIs42's picture

Thanks, but I don't see anything about fossil fuels (CO2?) in those measurements?


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 19:39 | 4454850 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You are a clearly bald faced bullshit artist that has no interest in reality...

Or too stupid to grasp what you (alledgedly) just looked at...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:56 | 4454903 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

Flak I will say it even slower this time you may get it..  It does not matter what you think your psuedo science proves you cannot get the public to put their head in the noose, better start advocating adaptation like a smart organism..  Flatworms do it you can too..

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 23:08 | 4455685 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Instead of spouting content free bullshit you should have been helping out your buddy "TheAnsweris42" with some real research...

In case you didn't notice he just got his ass handed to him....

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:14 | 4454951 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture




You idiot.


The whole CO2 hoax is based on flawed statistics on a HOCKEY STICK graph (by Mann) that the IPCC doesn't even acknowledge anymore!


And the so-called climate 'models' are beyond phucked ...


Give it up, alarmist.



Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:17 | 4455190 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

The perfect Poe....

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 19:54 | 4454893 TheAnswerIs42
TheAnswerIs42's picture

1855? Uh not really. Try 1950...

D17O of atmospheric oxygen from the GISP2 and the Siple Dome ice cores in per meg (d17O- 0.521*d18O)*1000. Note: All data is on the Meese et al., 1994 GISP2 time scale. 0 BP is 1950.
Thu, 02/20/2014 - 02:19 | 4455173 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

And look at the data, from the link you just gave:


The data is in four columns: 
Column 1: Depth (meters below the surface) 
Column 2: Age (calendar years before 1950) Column 3: D17O mean values (per meg)
Column 4: D17O Standard error (per meg)
GISP2 Depth Gasage D17O Standard error
[m] [yr BP] [per meg] [per meg]
194.10 478 -0.2 7.2
374.55 1284 -9.6 12.7
491.00 1862 12.6 15.8
478 years BP

Depth Gasage D17O Standard error
[m] [yr BP] [per meg] [per meg]
179.46 2130 -1.6 8.1
239.50 3196 -4.4 8.9
360.35 5340 -2.0 9.5
448.90 6912 10.6 17.8
540.92 8545 2.4 13.4

2130 years BP

You should just give up, you are clearly in way the fuck over your head....
Wed, 02/19/2014 - 19:07 | 4454731 TheAnswerIs42
TheAnswerIs42's picture

Of course on the long term view you are correct, but that has nothing to do with human emissions now does it?

Maybe a review of what is actually at fault with the projections would help?

When will the hand waving stop?


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 19:23 | 4454790 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Give it up, little 12 minute videos full of El Nino cherry picks and borderline scientific fraud ain't gonna cut it...

This isn't Bible School...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 19:26 | 4454801 TheAnswerIs42
TheAnswerIs42's picture

You need to be a little more specific about that general cherry picking statement...


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 19:43 | 4454865 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Fess up to either being fooled or admitting your dishonesty about your GISP2 data plot maybe I will humor you by pointing out the psuedo-science in your little video...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:17 | 4454955 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture

The only FOOL is FLAK.

He has NO concrete evidence of warming, only models and surface temp records that have been JACKED with.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:23 | 4454988 TheAnswerIs42
TheAnswerIs42's picture

Oh sure, go right ahead. Knock yourself out.

Just remember to cite which data contained in the supporting document you disagree with.

Document here:


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:18 | 4455198 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

First things first...

What about the GISP2 data you quoted?

Are you simply stupid and got fooled or are you deliberately trying to lie to us?

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:30 | 4455239 TheAnswerIs42
TheAnswerIs42's picture

So what?  You are a broken record. The current temp increase is just a blip on the paleao scale.

Get off it.

Still waiting for a response on the evans video/data...


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:55 | 4455333 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You first buddy, check the timestamps...

Better yet,  just take your bitch slapping like man and walk away while you still have some shred of dignity...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 23:33 | 4455765 TheAnswerIs42
TheAnswerIs42's picture

The only reason this conversation is even continuing is because you are either determined to prove yourself a complete fool or you are actually promoting the fact that the whole AGW thing is a grand hoax.

So which is  it?

Sorry, that was a loaded question and I apologize.

I have answered your question, still waiting for a response to the evans video/documentation....

And please, no more potty mouth, that really demeans you and denigrates anything useful you may have to contribute.




Thu, 02/20/2014 - 02:30 | 4456070 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

I asked you to fess up:

I demonstrated that the plot you showed based on GISP2 data was not what you thought it was..

I then showed your very own data link you supplied to be at least 478 years before present again exposing you as either a fool or a liar...

Very simple...

So admit you were misled and fooled by the person that made your plot or that you know full well what the plot actually was and were intentionally lying so as to decieve...

You have absolutely zero credibility and nothing to lose. At least try to hold on to some self-respect...

And really, are you reduced to concern trolling, here at ZH, of all places??

Thu, 02/20/2014 - 04:18 | 4456430 John_Coltrane
John_Coltrane's picture

The absorbance band of CO2 is 99% saturated at 200 ppm, 90% at 20 ppm.  Its the exponential nature of the Beer-Lambert intensity attenuation law.  Learn about it!

That's why the temperature at 1 Bar of pressure on Venus (95% CO2) matches that on the earth at 1 Bar (.04% CO2) (normal atmosphere) when the relative distances of earth and venus from the sun and the inverse square law is used to normalize the radiant flux on the two planets. 

Thu, 02/20/2014 - 09:31 | 4456813 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Ahh, if it was only so simple...

You seem to forget that the C02 reradidates that IR, 1/2 upwards and 1/2 downwards at every altitude. At some pressure/altitude there is no longer enough C02 to fully absorb the re-radiated upward going radiation... We are a long, long way from saturation....

Besides. a satellite measurement of the IR spectrum in 1996 showed greater absorption than in 1970 clearly showing no saturation.....

taken from

Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997
Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:39 | 4455041 Seer
Seer's picture

"But if you've seen any recent TV commercials (in the last few years), you'll note that even Big Oil is (BP, Shell) is getting into the Green/Renewable act.  And it's more than just PR."

Sigh, it's mostly an attempt to sucker the greenies, to look good, to wipe off of some of that "foul" fossil fuel appearance.  Wide-spread applications won't happen: we're too broke.  So, it'll be what it mostly always has been, and that's the domain of the wealthier among us: don't kid yourselves, we here are easilly in the top 10% globally (shit, there's 750 million people in India living on $0.50/day!).

I've studied energy.  I've studied high-tech solar, taken classes even.  My positions are based on experience and observation: I was a HUGE proponent in earlier times.  I can confidently state that our energy sourcing will become ever closer to real-time solar.

While things are closer to the "truth" they're still missing a firm anchoring in fundamentals.  Just as "security" minded folks talk a LOT about guns and tend to fail to advocate for possessing a dog (when you going to sleep?), "solar energy" folks tend to fail to acknowledge PASSIVE SOLAR as the SINGLE greatest, and cheapest, energy source.  Gizmos, gizmos, gizmos... (it's a Bitcoin mind)

Some of us will deck ourselves out with tech stuff, and some will even be able to maintain any such systems down the road.   Most, however, won't be able to, and it won't necessarily be because they are stupid/ignorant.  Tech solar is no different than any other industry in that there's plenty of marketing happening.  I know that it's not all that is claimed/marketed, and I don't think that it can become what it is projected (marketing for capital).  And those that have investments aren't likely going to acknowledge the shortcomings: kind of like owners of higher-priced vehicles tend to not talk about the failures/weaknesses of those vehicles out of fear that it would make them look bad in the judgement department.

Lastly, economies of scale.  A perpetual pitch is that volume will bring down pricing.  Well, fine, I agree; IF, that is, volume can be attained, that there's enough people to afford the prices: less and less owners and more and more renters- I suppose that if the property owners (who are likely to have connections/money [more so than the renters]) can wrangle subsidies so they could "upgrade," but they (in most cases) wouldn't be looking to do so because they thought it was the right thing to do for the tenants.  Not everyone can be employed making solar panels and whatnot AND be able to afford them.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 23:28 | 4455771 TheGoldMyth
TheGoldMyth's picture

Seer....I too have solar and MPPT charge controllers and i feel terrible about not being able to do my bit to release CO2 into the atmosphere to get our greenhouse effect back.

I invented ECCS  or Economic Climate Change Science where i look at realtime economic data/activity to detect economic factors that increase or decrease the very  CO2 emissions that cause climate.

The conbined effect of austerity, global economic collapse and the proliferation of solar panels will plunge the curent allready depleted levels of CO2 even further.

The polar vortex will then solidify and become a glacier without an improvement in the current massive decline in CO2 emissions. Solar panels will make things worse.

Look around at what the economiic collapse has allready done to decrease CO2 emissions. ONly healthy vibrant economies produce enough CO2 to create a manmade greenhouse effect to improve the climate and arrest the loss of heat from the sun that is gradually cooling as it cools and runs out of power.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 17:17 | 4454282 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

John39  stick to thumping your Bible....

You are so blinded by your partisanship that you forget that great Cellulosic Ethanol Mandate brought to you by W... Unless you think he and Dick Cheney were Marxists...

BTW, if you remove the indirect subsidies for coal, wind and solar kicks it's ass... 

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:22 | 4454983 Ident 7777 economy
Ident 7777 economy's picture

Flak is going to side step which congress wrote this law too. Aren't ya Flak

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:48 | 4455074 Seer
Seer's picture

Congress writes shit?

Try: Big industry lobbyists.

Thu, 02/20/2014 - 04:25 | 4456439 John_Coltrane
John_Coltrane's picture

solar kicks it's ass

Except at night and when the wind isn't blowing (i.e. on average about 1/2 the day in each case).  Then it blows-and not in a good way.  Only nuclear fission is a viable, continuous energy source compatible with the current grid structure with negligible environmental (i.e. mining) impact.  That's why Germany buys French nuclear power to subsidize their uneconomic wind and solar "industries". 


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:17 | 4453651 Headbanger
Headbanger's picture


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:30 | 4453759 duo
duo's picture

ask any unemployed coal miner how Obama is working out for him.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:33 | 4453783 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

we NEED t cut back ocoal use offset the pollution from chinas coal burning that gets here

and cutting our use is the best way

because we are stupid

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:40 | 4453821 Doubleguns
Doubleguns's picture

How about stop breathing to reduce the co2 because we need to offset the co2 from all the chinese breathing. They are so many we are so few but if everyone stopped breathing it would help. /s


Oh yea, you go first. 

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 23:50 | 4455803 TheGoldMyth
TheGoldMyth's picture

Doubleguns....What you are suggesting would plunge temperatures down further. We need as many people breathing, SUV's with full tanks of fuel, houses with huge CO2 emissions, Bushfires, eetc to help boost CO2 levels to get the greenhouse effect back.,

The sun is in a cooling cycle, and having austerity and other economic effects that reduce CO2 will solidify the polar vortex if we do not carefully increase CO2 emissions.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:41 | 4453824 Doubleguns
Doubleguns's picture

Oops -double post.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 16:55 | 4454179 newdoobie
newdoobie's picture

more "likes" on yr double post

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 18:03 | 4454476 Doubleguns
Doubleguns's picture

Does oops have some special meaning.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:03 | 4455123 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

Yeah, oops = foad pseudo scientific flakmeister

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 16:21 | 4454014 Kirk2NCC1701
Kirk2NCC1701's picture

The US was smart to use up other countries' fuels first.  Last guy left standing over oil & gas well, and coal mines... Wins.

Renewables help us stretch out the timeline for the Non-Renewables -- thus also stretching out the lifetime of the fiat currency upon which it is based. 

For better or for worse, the reality of the modern world is that the USD needs Energy way more than it needs PM.  PM is ok, but it's for "financial mind-games".  Key Energy + Key Resources is for true power.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 19:02 | 4454706 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Maybe you could demonstrate that coal production is indeed down, you might have a point..

But you don't....

Why not ask all those West Virginians drinking bottled water (and not by choice) what they think...

Do I also need to bring up Duke Energy and their recent "little" spill?

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:53 | 4455090 Seer
Seer's picture

And we should bring back the trolly car indusrty?

Sometimes industries just die.

Flat-earhers believe that resources are finite.  NEVER does it occur to such folks that continually building up the dependence on a finite resource might not be good for long-term survivability.  But, yeah, the rich oligarchs will brainnwash people into cutting their own throats so that the same oligarchs can get them to do all the dirty work.

I say let's just dig it all up and burn it as quickly as we can so that the bitching can stop once and for all.  After all, we have the oligarchs to protect...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:23 | 4455219 Grouchy Marx
Grouchy Marx's picture

...other industries die suspicious deaths...

Still other industries, not viable on their own, thrive because they reside in states that voted for the current elite, or because the current elite and friends have front run the operation with call options before the legislation is passed or contacts awarded.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 23:31 | 4455778 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Sounds just like West Virginia...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 17:08 | 4454239 Whalley World
Whalley World's picture

His name drug: Cocaine!

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:17 | 4454965 VD
VD's picture

here in Manhattan Con-Ed has been raping me and i did notice last month was unusually high given season...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:58 | 4455104 Seer
Seer's picture

My ex's father once complained about his electricity bill.  No rate changes.  He was USING more.  And despite pointing this out to him he was still mad.

No numbers, no sense (can be made)...

Continue to whine or do something to change things (and no, I don't need you to look to change the World [in which 2/3 of its inhabitants couldn't afford your LOWEST utility bill], just change what you have the power to change).

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:02 | 4453560 DoChenRollingBearing
DoChenRollingBearing's picture

Al Gore: "It's all George Bush's fault."

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:58 | 4455107 Seer
Seer's picture

I blame all the fucking Party Pussies.  And you, DoChen, tossing stuff out just to feel at home with the mood of the day, well, it's cheap...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:56 | 4453535 Pooper Popper
Pooper Popper's picture

Fucking epa...


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:50 | 4453699 booboo
booboo's picture

For Hire:

Global Elites are looking to employ eco tards well versed in eco tardism. Must be able to cut and paste fake science from fake scientist to hammer blogs in order to sell the needed a carbon tax that will solve this problem of man made changing weather (and fleece the people that can least afford it). Note, tards will be exempt from new higher Minimum Wage law that said tards yammered for due to "the because we can" loophole inserted into said law.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:51 | 4453514 TradingFinn
TradingFinn's picture

Is electricity really that expensive in the US? Over $0.25/kWh? It's < $0.18/kWh here in Finland, and we just love taxes.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:58 | 4453542 Fix-ItSilly
Fix-ItSilly's picture

$0.095 in New Jersey with moar daylight to boot!

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:04 | 4453571 DavrosoftheDaleks
DavrosoftheDaleks's picture

I locked 18 months starting Oct 2013 .0785kwh.  Pennsylvania

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:16 | 4453635 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Gets rapidly up to.35$/kwh in California, if you go over your allocation as decided by state regulations.

It's a Marxist inspired from each/to each system. I live in a very mild microclimate, so the state penalizes our family for that choice, by giving us a much lower allocation of the cheaper rate power-for-the-people. They do the same with natural gas. They do t invoke Marx, preferring "tiered rate structure" or some such.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 16:01 | 4453919 silverserfer
silverserfer's picture

enron softened up cali and theyve never been the same since. 

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:08 | 4455147 Seer
Seer's picture

But, wait!  Was Enron Marxist?

The story is pretty interesting:

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 17:14 | 4454265 Professorlocknload
Professorlocknload's picture

In this part of the Southwest electric is 14 cents per KWH peak, but they offer a "generous" 2 cents purchase from grid tie solar. Must have cut a deal with Southwest Gas, their steam turbine energy suplier?



Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:19 | 4453679 firstdivision
firstdivision's picture

Well I can tell you various markets in the NE US had serious rate spikes to $1000+/MWh.  Funny thing is that it was only like that for one day, then the day ahead market and futures went bat shit crazy and haven't calmed down since.  Real-Time pricing hasn't come in that strong as the Day-Ahead nor the futures would have you believe.  Too bad for the customer that their load is bid in on the Day-Ahead market, so as long as those prices stay elivated, the customer is screwed.  Oh and btw, several retail suppliers have called it quits recently.  Nevermind that JPM/Barclays/et. al are trying to sell their merchant generation portfolios in these elevated prices that make their portfolos appear to be ITM. 

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:42 | 4453827 Lumberjack
Lumberjack's picture

I saw that too. Not only that, but rates were quietly increased and my bill (and everone elses) nearly doubled for the same usage (standard offer). I wonder how all that wind is going to work out in Texas (now that the enron guys are now based in Massachusetts. The wind issue here in N.E. and market manipulation is outrageous. Like some of the banks that were 'fined', Ferc did that here too, but Eric Holder's old firm minimized the damge to cover up something even bigger.


Transmission and Distribution charges are a seperate part of the bill, vary and are subject to guaranteed increases. I would like to remind everyone about how those subsidies have affected the price. Here we have people going door to door (think Amway etc., and I shit you not), selling wind power at slightly lower rates for the short term. The devil is in the details and it's not included in the fine print. Watch the fuck out.







Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:48 | 4455075 FredFlintstone
FredFlintstone's picture

No, Midwest is 8 to 10 cents per khw.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:11 | 4455162 Grouchy Marx
Grouchy Marx's picture

In New England, we pay $.11 base, but $.12 taxes and fees bring the total to $.23/kwh. We plan to install solar electric this summer, if the snow pile ever melts. I'm getting a little concerned over the snow load on the roof and the growing ice dams.

Thu, 02/20/2014 - 10:23 | 4457046 firstdivision
firstdivision's picture

In the NE you should really look into fuel cell over solar.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:37 | 4455269 Cleveland Steamer
Cleveland Steamer's picture

$.0622 / kWH in NE Ohio.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:54 | 4453516 you can't fix stupid
you can&#039;t fix stupid's picture

locked in at $0.089 per KWH for 15 months, God Bless Texas

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:55 | 4453529 skipjack
skipjack's picture

paying .0808 here in the people's republik of PA, then another .08 for distribution.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:08 | 4453600 Ignatius
Ignatius's picture

"...then another .08 for distribution."

Cash n carry, baby. 

Plus it looks cool walking down the street with a lightening bolt under your arm.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:51 | 4455319 El Crusty
El Crusty's picture

show up to the plant with a truck and tell them you are there to pick up some electricity factory direct.
"just load it in the bed, i'll handle it from there.."

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:36 | 4453798 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

what i dont like about texas is all my exes live there

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:29 | 4455242 Seer
Seer's picture

And then there's the issue of it's population increasing, mostly from folks leaving CA:

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:52 | 4453519 cherry picker
cherry picker's picture

The large homes may be nice to have but expensive when weather extremes arrive.

Unfortunately when the chips are down, for some inexplicable reason the utilities become extremely expensive and you discover they are reaping record profits at your expense.


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:58 | 4453543 Freddie
Freddie's picture

Long molotov cocktails.

Those rocket stove/heaters are pretty cool.

Thu, 02/20/2014 - 05:21 | 4456472 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

Yes, but, you know? Ironically, the EPA mandates on wood stoves were the best thing (maybe the only good thing) the EPA and maybe the federal government ever did. Oh, sure. Yeah, they were intending to do away with burning wood altogether, so as to make people dependent, but instead they forced manufacturers to come up with designs that truly do produce twice as much heat with half as much wood.


Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:37 | 4453804 skwid vacuous
skwid vacuous's picture

Long Ralston Purina, and whoever makes Spam and Bunsen burners 

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:53 | 4455329 booboo
booboo's picture

The carbon goofs will have wood pellet stoves outlawed by 2016, sorry.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:34 | 4453790 DCFusor
DCFusor's picture

Yup, that's why I built small buildings and can shut down a few in crazy weather if I choose.

And it ain't called the power company because of electricity - it's that other kind of power - over you.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:38 | 4455271 Seer
Seer's picture

I'd be worrying about the long-term maintenance on large homes.  IF you have a lot of people then you'll likely be able to make it work: that's how it used to be- lots of big houses got converted to multiple residences.

"Unfortunately when the chips are down, for some inexplicable reason the utilities become extremely expensive and you discover they are reaping record profits at your expense."

Not sure that all are reaping record profits, but... energy industries also face periods in which profits are pretty shitty: I suspect as people become more poorer that the energy companies will ultimately find their margins squeezed.

Again, business is in business to make money.  Only three ways to deal with it (legally): 1) Accept it; 2) Reduce your costs/exposure; 3) Ask someone else (govt?) to "fixx" it.

Entire civilizations have gone extinct because they were unable/unprepared to deal with a worsening climate.

Being proactive tends to extend one's survivability, at the cost of being more foot-loose today.  Pay now or pay later, no one get's away without paying (even the oligarchs will end up paying).

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:53 | 4453522 Rukeysers Ghost
Rukeysers Ghost's picture

So the economic softmess IS because of the weather?

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:40 | 4455279 Seer
Seer's picture

Geez, do I have to spell it out for you?  Snow IS S-O-F-T! :-)  It's kind of like a soft landing :-)

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:55 | 4453525 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Can I send in my polar vortex wine expenditures? It can get pretty boring sitting in the house for weeks when it's below zero.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:42 | 4455287 Seer
Seer's picture

Isn't this covered by Unexcited Insurance?

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:53 | 4453526 GooseShtepping Moron
GooseShtepping Moron's picture

Thank you for posting this sensible article. May I take it that bad weather is no longer "just an excuse"?

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:04 | 4453573 Dollarmedes
Dollarmedes's picture

That depends on your viewpoint: did consumers know utilities were going to eat their disposable income a month ago?

We're a lucky country to have such high-information voters!

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:50 | 4455318 Cleveland Steamer
Cleveland Steamer's picture

When analysts and government officials claim soft demand due to weather, they count it as bullish for future demand. Unfortunately, higher electricity bills will not increase demand.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:54 | 4453528 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

    I wish someone would shove a pole up Zeros vortex...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:26 | 4453724 jbvtme
jbvtme's picture

wouldn't that be reggie's job?

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:55 | 4453530 sangell
sangell's picture

I remember post Katrina. Our customers gas bills were higher than their mortgage payment. The delinquency rates were phenomenal ( and we couldn't cut gas service if the temperature was forecast to fall below 32 in the time window we had to restore service). In fact, Katrina and the rise in gas prices may have been what tipped the housing bubble over into bust as people realized they could not afford to heat (or air condition )their McMansions.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:09 | 4453602 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

I think Katrina was where the oil companies (and those bastards trading commodities) finally got it through their thick skulls they could charge almost anything for gas/oil.  Katrina showed they could double the price of gas, double it again, lean on people till it hurt and then magically make all the demand come back by knocking it down 20% from there.  Everything changed in the world of gasoline prices after Katrina.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:18 | 4453664 sangell
sangell's picture

Well Katrina ( and Rita right after Katrina) pretty much wrecked the gas fields in the GOM ( 25% of US supply back then) and a lot of the infrastructure onshore so the only thick skull around here seems to be on the end of your neck.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:47 | 4455309 Seer
Seer's picture

Sigh, people just don't get it that a LOT of this stuff is justs a sneeze away from being hammered into the Red.  Like it's not a big cost to lose a huge swatch of sales AND to have to do MASSIVE rebuilding (to the infrastructure)?

I don't get it, all the "pro capitalists" complaining when businesses make more money...  Whenever it becomes disagreeable folks start blaming anyone and everything for their own situation: just like my ex's dad who complainned about having to pay more for using more electricity!

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:36 | 4453799 avenriv
avenriv's picture

Marxists !

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:55 | 4453533 The worst trader
The worst trader's picture

NAT GAS shortage? If so why are we liquifieing it and selling it to China?Maybe the stimulis plan should have included infatructure to the north ereas who do not have access to gas and increase pipeline sizes? I call Douchebag!

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:14 | 4453639 sangell
sangell's picture

There has not been any LNG shipments to China from the US. Chenaire Energy has a permit to export but their facility is not yet operational as does Dominion Resource which, has a reversed its Cove Point, Md. facility from being a import terminal for LNG ( back when it looked like we were running out of natural gas) to an export terminal for LNG. Chenaire is a year or so away from beginning exports and Dominion is looking at 2017 to start shipping LNG but right now Mexico is the big buyer of US natural gas and it isn't liquified but shipped via conventional pipeline. As to building new pipelines you have to ask Obama and the DoT about that. They have to approve them and until recently Obama hated natural gas but its saving his worthless mongrel butt and the US economy right now.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 15:57 | 4453906 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

And despite the boom in NG production, the US is *still* a net importer....

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 20:28 | 4455005 The worst trader
The worst trader's picture

Thanks for the correct info.......

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 21:53 | 4455328 Seer
Seer's picture

" Obama hated natural gas but its saving his worthless mongrel butt and the US economy right now."

Really, we're being saved?


Meanwhile where's the comments about all the NG imports?  Still a net importer (as of 2012):

Drill baby drill! (strength through exhaustion, yeah, that's the way to become energy independent!)

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:57 | 4453539 ziggy59
ziggy59's picture

ConEd? Yes we are..

It should be ConALL...

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:59 | 4453546 10mm
10mm's picture

Long budget plans.

Wed, 02/19/2014 - 14:59 | 4453550 fzrkid
fzrkid's picture

Isnt this a keynesian dream, when consumers are 'encouraged' to spend money. Hey, otherwise that money may havegotten dustry stting in the bank collecting interest or paid off some credit card debt.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!