It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Wednesday, November 17, 2021
3D Printing Could Transform The Oil And Gas Industry
The oil and gas industry is finally getting in on the 3D printing revolution, using the technology to solve supply chain problems, lower costs, and reduce emissions
The tech could save the oil and gas industry $30 billion annually
The 3D printing revolution has been significantly bolstered by the global pandemic and supply chain issues, and it is now maturing into a major industry
Port congestion, delivery delays, and shortages have become a mark of the pandemic world that is not showing signs of going away anytime soon. It is in times like this that disruptive, transformational technology shines and 3D printing is no exception.Additive manufacturing, as it is also known, has been around for quite a while now, and while we haven’t yet reached the point of having 3D printers in every home, energy companies have been paying close attention and are now using the technology to cope with part shortages.
The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Chevron had turned to additive manufacturing to secure parts necessary for the maintenance of its $54-billion Gorgon LNG project. Chevron had to turn to additive manufacturing due to fears that maintenance would be delayed if the company had ordered ready-made parts.
“We’ve learned a lot from those parts. The most important thing is that we’ve shown that this flexible, right part, right time digital supply-chain approach can be successful, and it can meet our needs in a sort of reactive mode,” the WSJ quoted Chevron manager Robert Rettew as saying.
Chevron is hardly an exception. Shell recently boasted cost reductions, shorter lead times, and perhaps more importantly in the context of the global political agenda, a lower carbon footprint thanks to an increased reliance on 3D printing, per a report in 3D Printing Industry.
The oilfield service giants have also been active in the additive manufacturing space. According to them, 3D printing allows for the construction of much more complex components than traditional manufacturing at a much lower cost—but with the same high precision. These complex components could significantly enhance the efficiency of all sorts of operations, from oil drilling to gas turbine manufacturing.
The oil and gas industry is notorious for being slow to adopt new technology, but 3D printing adoption is proving that even the slowest tech adopters could change. And there is a good reason for that change. According to the World Economic Forum, additive manufacturing could save the oil and gas industry some $30 billion annually in time and costs.
It could also save billions in unplanned downtime. According to the Wall Street Journal report, one company has estimated that unplanned downtime in the Gulf of Mexico could cost an oil company some $20 million annually. For a bigger operator, Energy and Industrial Advisory Partners estimates the annual cost of unplanned downtime at up to $50 million.
At a time when oil and gas companies are being constantly pressured to keep their costs low—and their carbon footprint even lower—additive manufacturing could really come into its own in this industry.
The technology can certainly help companies overcome the challenges posed by supply chain disruptions. This is, in fact, one of the biggest growth areas for additive manufacturing in oil and gas, Baker Hughes’ global head of additive manufacturing services, Mikhail Gladkikh, told Oilprice last year when the global supply chains began breaking down amid the lockdowns.
Another growth area is in complex parts, which would be a lot more expensive to produce using traditional manufacturing methods. This does not mean, however, that every part is cheaper with 3D printing. On the contrary, the most common parts used in the oil and gas industry will continue to be more affordable when traditionally produced. Yet, as the industry seeks ever newer ways to keep its costs low while increasing the efficiency—and lowering the carbon footprint—of its operations, demand for new, complex parts is likely to rise in the coming years.
By 2025, the additive manufacturing market could be worth $32 billion, rising to $60 billion by 2030, even if it currently represents a minute 0.1 percent of the global manufacturing market. In this context, the port logjams, delivery delays, and shortages are positive things for additive manufacturing. These challenges are driving the faster adoption of the technology as companies lack any other alternatives.
“Companies who may have tentatively taken their first steps last year are now starting to mature their interest,” the chief executive of 3D Metalforge, told the Wall Street Journal.
“Because of supply chain disruptions, we have significantly been growing in the order of a few folds,” chimed in the head of Italy-based Roboze, which opened an office in Houston last year and has since then doubled its global staff to keep up with the rising demand for its 3D printing services, the WSJ notes.
Additive manufacturing has always held substantial promise for the oil and gas industry because of its nature, which involves the use of complex machinery. This promise may have been slow to be realized, but the persistent challenges posed by the pandemic have sped up the process. These challenges may have also turned 3D printing from a somewhat exotic technology for use in emergencies only into something that is as mainstream as remote work.
By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com
Could An Energy Crunch Lead To A Worldwide Financial Crisis?
Reduced capital investment in upstream sources for new supplies of petroleum, match the similar scenario of the 2008-9 financial crisis
Spending on fossil fuels has declined precipitously from 2014, reaching a bottom only last year
The action of governments and activist shareholders to foster so-called "green energy" alternatives through edicts, tax subsidies, and regulatory barriers have discouraged upstream investment in oil and gas
Two of the things that precipitated the financial crisis of 2008 were a leveraged asset bubble in housing and a maturing commodities super-cycle
There is a case that can be made that the present day liquidity profile and reduced capital investment in upstream sources for new supplies of petroleum, match the similar scenario of the 2008-9 financial crisis. In recent times, and partially as a result of the global pandemic, huge infusions of cash have been pumped into the market to achieve a number of objectives. Commodities began an extreme pricing upswing last year as a result of this cash infusion and pent-up demand from the shut-down phase of the pandemic. As a result, not only are there strong parallels to 2008, but current conditions are even more exaggerated as we approach 2022, thanks to continued governmental and financial intervention in the markets. In this article, we will examine some of the key causes of the 2008 financial meltdown, and compare them against relevant data in the present day. We will then tie that to current data on petroleum supplies and production to make our final case about the likelihood of a severe global financial crisis.
Lack of capital investment in upstream petroleum supplies
If you follow the news you will become quickly and acutely aware that things are different on the global energy front. Strikingly different from just a year ago. One of the things that drives the conversation is the speed at which the market has flipped from assuming that oil would be plentiful and low priced well into the future to just the inverse. There was even a catch-phrase to describe this scenario, used as recently as March of 2020-Lower For Longer.
So what happened? As you can see below spending on fossil fuels has declined precipitously from 2014, reaching a bottom only last year. Estimates vary from between $600 bn to $1.0 Trillion of capital has been lost to oil and gas extraction since 2014.
Two primary reasons have been the cause of most of this capital restraint. The first is prices well below an acceptable rate of return for oil companies for much of this period. Lower for Longer carried an enormous financial impact onto the balance sheets of oil producers, and they did what oil companies do when oil prices drop. They stopped spending...on oil and gas. Even now, with prices that are much higher, domestic oil companies are choosing to pay down debt, buy back their stock, and raise dividends as opposed to increasing their capital budgets. This was discussed in detail in an OilPrice article in September.
The second principle chilling effect on global fossil fuel investment has been the action of governments and activist shareholders to foster so-called "green energy" alternatives through edicts, tax subsidies, and regulatory barriers. Following the Paris Accords, signatories have moved swiftly to reward investment in these alternative energy sources, primarily-wind, solar, and biomass. This, despite the fact that many of these alternative technologies are still evolving, and lack supporting infrastructure. We have in effect, "jumped" into the pool and then checked for water. We explored the actions by European governments in this OilPrice article.
International companies like, Shell, (NYSE:RDS.A), (NYSE:RDS.B) and BP, (NYSE:BP) are doing some of the same things, but also are diverting capital to renewable energy projects in an effort to reduce the carbon footprint of their operations. In a moment of candor and clarity, in response to an activist investor pushing the company to spin off its legacy assets, Shell CEO, Ben van Beurden said-
The needs of Shell’s customers, and the company’s efforts to pivot away from fossil fuels, were better served by keeping its range of assets and businesses. In particular, he said the company’s legacy oil-and-gas assets were needed to fund its investments in lower-carbon energy.
These companies are also scaling down their carbon-based operations, monetizing assets up and downstream. Shell in particular has led the way with their sale of their Permian assets to ConocoPhillips, (NYSE:COP). BP is considering further steps, but has not made any big moves in this regard recently. These actions will result in their portfolios becoming less carbon intensive as the alternative energies they are investing in now, come online mid-decade. Will they be as profitable? Doubts have emerged, but this is a question for a future article.
One need not worry about the financial viability of these green energy projects, over the short run at least, as there are ample government stipends in place to pay all or part of their costs. Domestically, and across the pond, governments have paved the road for a green energy transition. The market has already decided about this capital shifting as relates to these companies, bidding up their share prices by about half since the first of the year.
The problem for world energy consumption is that oil remains a fundamental driver of energy security globally and demand is running ahead forecasts with demand above 100 mm BOPD. Prices have gone higher. Much higher, and that could be problematic for the stability of the financial system if the thesis we are constructing comes into play.
We see oil demand rebounding strongly as we come out of the global recession precipitated by the pandemic. Global growth-we add 120 mm people to the planet yearly, and pent up demand are the drivers here. It comes at the worst possible time for storage volumes, both domestically and internationally. In the U.S. we are near the bottom of 5-year averages for this time of year. 425 mm bbl may sound like a lot, but at 21.5 mm BOPD of consumption, it's less than a 20-day supply.
To no great surprise, European petroleum stocks are down at similarly low levels.
Two of the things that precipitated the financial crisis of 2008 were a leveraged asset bubble in housing and a maturing commodities super-cycle. Growth in commodities brought on by the Chinese economic boom led to oil topping out at nearly $150 per bbl in 2008. This boom continued to mid-2014, with oil regaining $110 bbl before succumbing to OPEC's desire to retake market share from U.S. shale producers, and lower growth in the Chinese market. Oil became plentiful as OPEC opened the taps, and prices stayed low for the next 6-years.That is one key difference from 2008 that will tend to extend and exacerbate a downturn if it occurs. Oil is not plentiful and prices are spiking.
We are now seeing an asset pricing bubble on a scale never before seen. In the span of a year and a half, the money supply has increased from $4.5 trillion to nearly $20 trillion, and there is more coming. The recently passed Infrastructure Plan will bring another couple of trillion of direct and ancillary spending. The Build Back Better plan waiting in the wings for a reconciliation passage will add another $2.0 to $3.5 trillion to the Fed's balance sheet.
In the past 5-years the median U.S. home price has climbed 68% with much of that coming since the first of the year. Anyone who doesn't recognize the effervescence, or bubbliness in that number may have napped during Econ 101. You can argue that the world has changed since Covid rode the jet stream west, but there is no argument that house prices have not out-stripped wages of this time period.
Once again, FRED is helpful here as it reveals the median household cannot afford an entry level home at $270K. A buyer at the median level with a $25K down payment will only qualify for a $231K house.
In summary, the present situation has close parallels to the financial crisis of 2008. We think that the current situation may have consequences that are more extreme, as the amount of liquidity pumped into the system is vastly higher. Further, the stockpiles of energy are much lower than in the 2008 time frame, thanks in some measure to the diversion of capital toward renewables, the restraint of capital due to low prices, government intervention, and a rebounding element of demand.
Climate policy will directly impact economic growth
We are already beginning to see the second-order effects of the climate policies being adopted in the wake of the Paris Accords and its offspring the COP-26 love fest in Glasgow this year. I am referring, of course to the energy crisis in the UK, brought on by unanticipated underperformance of wind farms, and under-investment and early retirement of petroleum energy sources, over the last few years. This has all been pretty well documented, and I am not going to belabor them further now.
One of the things that astounds me about the green energy movement is the number of unasked, or unanswered questions related to its full spectrum adoption. Assumptions have been blithely put forward as fact with no supporting evidence. In fact, if you do ask questions you are labeled a "climate denier," and ignored or canceled.
So what is one assumption that seems to have not been entirely thought through? Let's start with the plan for wind power to provide up to 40% primary electricity generation by 2030, now codified virtually around the world in tax and carbon policy. I ran across a calculation by William Lacey on another site that was quite revelatory. I am paraphrasing his work on that site here in the next couple of paragraphs.
Can this really be done? A study promulgated by Arcelor Mittal, the world's leading steel producer is revealing.
“Steel will play an important role in all renewables, including and especially solar and wind. Each new MW of solar power requires between 35 to 45 tons of steel, and each new MW of wind power requires 120 to 180 tons of steel.”
According to the OECD the global capacity to make steel rests at about 2.5 mm metric tons. If we are going to replace the electricity supplied by fossil fuels, about 131 billion MWH, we would need to generate another 6 bn tons of steel. Or about 2.5X the annual present capacity of the global industry. Are we really going to divert 100% of the steelmaking capacity of the planet to building wind farms for 2.5 years? What about copper? What about other metals used in EV battery production. These are profound questions that just don't get asked.
After Lacey
In summary, I think the unasked questions will begin to be asked at some point. Will it be when some entity wants to build a car plant, and is told, "Sorry we don't have the power generating capacity." It is going to happen. It is "baked" into this cake from the under-investment in fossil fuels.
Your takeaway
I said at the beginning there is a reasonable case that a financial crisis could result from the lack of upstream investment we have discussed so far, and the continuing bashing of the industry that is vital to maintaining our standards of living. As I've noted and world events are beginning to reveal, the hour is very late in terms of being able to respond to a prolonged price spike, or physical shortage of oil. A renewed will accompanied by some acknowledgement of just how vital oil and gas are to our energy security might shorten the effects that could possibly emerge from a financial crisis. But, that is not the trend presently.
Even the hedge fund Green Energy zeitgeist, Larry Fink of Blackrock is back-peddling a bit on his dire pronouncements, and now acknowledges that-shock-horror, we are totally dependent on oil and gas. As an oily, it’s kind of fun to see Larry squirm a bit.
In summary, I am not predicting a financial crisis. I am saying there are strong parallels today to a recent past crisis, and that if one occurs tightness of the energy supply from lack of upstream investment could play a role in its depth and duration.
By David Messler for Oilprice.com
GOT HIM TO SPACE GAME OVER
Billionaire Branson sells US$300M stake in Virgin Galactic
Ben Stupples, BNN Bloomberg
Richard Branson
Richard Branson sold another US$300 million in Virgin Galactic Holdings Inc. stock, tapping his biggest listed asset again to prop up a business empire that’s been suffering during the coronavirus pandemic.
The billionaire offloaded 15.6 million shares -- about 6 per cent of the space-travel company -- through a company he controls, leaving him with an 11.9 per cent interest, according to a regulatory filing.
The proceeds will support Branson’s travel and leisure businesses, as well as help develop new and existing ventures, a Virgin Group representative said. The 71-year-old billionaire remains Virgin Galactic’s biggest shareholder with a stake worth almost US$600 million, based on its closing share price Monday.
The Virgin brand Branson founded as a mail-order retailer in 1970 has since become linked to more than 40 businesses worldwide -- from record labels to soft drinks and British bank Virgin Money UK Plc.
Palihapitiya, chairman and another large holder of the space-travel firm, sold US$213 million in Virgin Galactic stock in March.
Virgin Galactic’s stock has tumbled 20 per cent this year, partly due to delays for the start of its commercial flights. Still, the shares have risen more than 60 per cent since the firm began trading publicly after merging in 2019 with a special purpose acquisition company set up by Chamath Palihapitiya.
The move takes Branson’s total Virgin Galactic sales beyond US$1 billion since the outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. He sold US$300 million in stock in August and US$150 million four months earlier after raising more than US$300 million in the first half of 2020. He has a net worth of about US$6 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.
Virgin Galactic, based in Las Cruces, New Mexico, expects to be flying paying passengers to space three times a month in 2023.
Rory McIlroy pays thousands to offset carbon footprint of flying to golf events
By Iain CarterBBC golf correspondent Last updated on 16 November 2021
Rory McIlroy racks up thousands of miles in the air each year, traversing the globe to play golf
Rory McIlroy says the environmental "guilt" he feels for traversing the golfing globe in private jets has caused him to spend tens of thousands of pounds to offset his carbon footprint.
The four times major champion was speaking after travelling from his Florida home for this week's DP World Tour Championship in Dubai.
When asked by BBC Sport whether sustainability is something that bothers him, McIlroy said that the issue first came into his conscience after winning in Shanghai two years ago.
"I flew back home privately, and it was just me on the plane," he said. "And I just got this massive sense of guilt come over me, just because this can't be good and all that sort of stuff.
"So we ended up reaching out to the GEO Foundation who do a lot of great sustainability things in golf."
McIlroy now pays extra fees, thought to be around $150,000 (£110,000) a year, to offset his carbon footprint.
"I wouldn't self-profess to be an eco-warrior," he added. "But I'm someone that doesn't want to damage the environment. So how can I make my travel around the world neutral? How can I neutralise what I do?
"And they came up with a few different ways that I can do that. So on top of what I pay to fly private, I pay quite a bit more on top of that to make sure I'm carbon neutral by the end of the year."
McIlroy, the former world number one from Northern Ireland, says he recognises the importance of environmental issues. "It's something that I have a conscience about," he said.
"I take it seriously, especially when you see some of these weather events that are happening. And I live in a part of the world where hurricanes are very prevalent and becoming more and more prevalent as the years go on.
"I think we can all play our part in some way or another."
McIlroy was speaking in the same week that BBC Radio 5 Live airs a special programme on golf's environmental impact - on Thursday, 18 November from 22:00 GMT. The show looks at ways the game is trying to make itself more eco-friendly.
But golf still attracts criticism. Environmental scientist and campaigner Abbie Richards has gathered a large TikTok following with her anti-golf stance.
The 24-year-old American describes courses as "a terrible waste of space and the worst fake sport on the face of this planet".
Speaking on 5Live, Richards added: "Golf seems to be under the impression that it is somehow good for the environment or somehow natural when in reality it is very wasteful."
She argues that the building and maintenance of golf courses harms the environment. "The building phase is extremely damaging to what was there before it," she said.
"In the US I think it is over two billion gallons of water are used each day on golf courses, which is truly an egregious amount of water when other people don't have drinking water."
But the golf industry insists steps to make the game more environmentally friendly are occurring at an increasing rate.
The United Arab Emirates is the centre of golfing attention with this week's finale to the European Tour season. Its courses are irrigated using recycled effluent water rather than desalinated supplies, as was the case when desert golf first emerged.
"In this part of the world we have been working very hard for at least the best part of the past decade in making sure that we are as environmentally friendly as we can be," said Chris May, chief executive of Dubai Golf.
"We have looked at reducing unnecessary turfed grass areas that require irrigation and also being more efficient with the systems we use."
May says a new watering system on the Majlis Course at the Emirates club, which stages the Dubai Desert Classic, has reduced consumption by around 40%.
Like McIlroy, Dubai Golf has partnered with the GEO Foundation for Sustainability in Golf. "Golf is the one sport that is probably as close to nature as any sport," said spokesman Roddy Williams.
"I think golf has a real opportunity to be a part of the solutions for climate change and not part of the problem."
The foundation ran a Drive for Net Zero event at the recent COP 26 in Glasgow. "Golf's got some wonderful opportunities, great eco-systems, great natural environments," Williams added.
"It's fantastic for health and for communities and there's a real opportunity to step forward."
From the professional game, McIlroy provides a lead but other players are more reticent.
"I think we need to look at all scenarios and cases before we make a decision," said American Billy Horschel.
"We're never going to always agree on the right direction. But at the end of the day, travel is what I do for my job.
"I try and do it responsibly, I try and do it smart. But for me to do what I want to do, I have to travel. Simple as that."
A similar message came from Britain's Matt Fitzpatrick, who says he does think about the environment and drives an electric car, but claims there is little he can do regarding the global footprint of his chosen profession.
"It's my job," he told me. "I've got to get on a flight and go from Miami to Bermuda or wherever it is, or Miami to Mexico, Miami to Dubai, wherever it is, just part of it, really.
"It's not something that I've ever really thought about purely because I'm doing it for a living. If I couldn't get on planes, I probably only play about five tournaments a year."
THEY SHOVELED THE SNOW OFF THE FIELD
SOCCER
Canada moves into first in World Cup qualifying with win over Mexico
A record-tying night from Cyle Larin not only propelled Canada to a 2-1 win over Mexico on Tuesday at Commonwealth Stadium, but put the Canadians at the top of their CONCACAF World Cup group.
The Canadian Press
EDMONTON — A record-tying night from Cyle Larin not only propelled Canada to a 2-1 win over Mexico on Tuesday at Commonwealth Stadium, but put the Canadians at the top of their CONCACAF World Cup group.
That’s right. As the eight remaining teams in CONCACAF each completed the eighth of their 14-game schedules in the Octagon, Canada (4-0-4), a country that hasn't been to a World Cup since 1986, is tops. A point up on the Americans. Two points up on the Mexicans and Panamanians. The top three qualify for the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, while the fourth-place team gets a final shot to qualify via an intercontinental playoff.
Larin’s two-goal performance gave him a total of 22 for the national side, tying Dwayne De Rosario as the top Canadian men’s goal-scorer in history.
Just before the end of the first half, a skipping shot from Canadian defender Alistair Johnston could only be parried by Mexican keeper Guillermo Ochoa. The ball fell right into the path of Larin, who made no mistake.
Johnston’s shot looked to accelerate after it took a wicked hop on the artificial turf, an effect of a slick, cold ball on a hardened playing surface. According to Environment Canada, the game time temperature was at — 9 C, with a wind chill of — 14 C. If there was a moment that justified Canada Soccer’s decision to stage this game in Edmonton on a November night, that was it.
Larin struck again seven minutes into the second half, as he side-footed home an inch-perfect cross from Stephen Eustaquio, leaving Ochoa flailing on the goal line.
The Mexicans made it close with an 89th-minute goal from the head of substitute Henry Martin.
And then, in five minutes of added time, they came at the Canadians in waves, forcing 'keeper Milan Borjan into two goal-line saves.
Larin’s opener punctuated what was a chippy first half from both teams. Right after the opening kickoff, a Canadian defender flattened Mexican star winger Hirving “Chucky” Lozano. Guatemalan referee Mario Escobar ruled it a legal challenge, but Lozano was down on the turf for several minutes.
The game then transformed into a maelstrom of fouls — a total of 23 in the first half, with 13 of them called on the Mexicans.
Escobar also showed yellow cards to both teams’ benches in the first 45.
But the Mexicans were held to zero attempts on target. It wasn’t until the dying moments of the team, down two goals, that the visitors came alive.
By the end of the match, the foul count was 21-16, Mexico.
On a night that Larin was in the spotlight, Atiba Hutchinson started the game for Canada — earning his 90th cap for his country. He passed Julian de Guzman as the most-capped men’s player in Canadian soccer history.
The crowd was announced at 44,212 — despite the fact Canada Soccer announced on Monday that more than 50,000 tickets were sold. But Edmonton was hit with heavy snow Monday and through the day Tuesday, leading to no-shows. A total of 48,806 showed up for Friday’s 1-0 triumph over Costa Rica, on a calm 1 C evening.
Crews worked furiously before the game, repainting the field lines and shovelling snow that had accumulated near the pitch.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 16, 2021.
Soccer
Canada able to freeze out Mexico in World Cup qualifier in Edmonton
With the win, Canada leapt over both the Mexico and the United States and into top spot in the final Concacaf qualifying group with six games left
Author of the article:Derek Van Diest Publishing date:Nov 17, 2021 •
YES THATS SNOW ON THE GROUND
Canada celebrates their first goal against Mexico in added time in the first half at Commonwealth Stadium in Edmonton. Canada defeated Mexico 2-1 on November 16, 2021. PHOTO BY GREG SOUTHAM /Postmedia
They came to Edmonton to freeze out the competition on the road to the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar and it all worked out to plan for head coach John Herdman and the Canadian men’s national soccer team.
After defeating Costa Rica on Friday in front of a packed house of more than 48,000 at Commonwealth Stadium, Canada did one better on an even colder night, defeating Mexico 2-1 in front of 44,212 on Tuesday. Over 51,000 tickets to the game had been sold, but a major snowstorm Monday, which carried into Tuesday afternoon made the highways into Edmonton too dangerous to travel for some out-of-town ticket holders.
“I have to give a massive thanks to the city of Edmonton, they’ve been different class and they’ve done literally everything to create a fortress here, to help this team, to make us feel welcomed,” Herdman said. “We’ve had the Oilers help us, we’ve had the Elks helping. The country is behind us and we felt it and the boys delivered tonight.”
Cyle Larin, getting the start up front in place of Jonathan David who netted the goal against Costa Rica, scored both goals for Canada in its first win against Mexico since the 2000 Gold Cup quarter-finals. Canada had not beaten Mexico in World Cup qualifying since 1976 in Vancouver.
Hector Herrera scored in the 90th minute for Mexico to make for a tense five minutes of injury time. Mexico came within inches of tying it off a corner, but Canada goalkeeper Milan Borjan was able to smoother a ball directed at the net on the goal line.
“We learned that the game is not over until that final whistle blows,” Herdman said. “That was probably the longest six minutes of my bloody life. Thank God for Milan Borjan and everyone one else that put their bodies on the line there to see us through.”
With the win, Canada leapt over both the Mexico and the United States and into top spot in the final Concacaf qualifying group with six games left.
The top three in the eight-team group qualify for Qatar, while the fourth-place team advances to a continental playoff for en extra berth in the 32-team World Cup tournament.
Canada has not competed in a men’s World Cup since its only appearance in 1986 and now have one foot in another with 16 points from its first eight games. The United States, who drew 1-1 at Jamaica on Tuesday sit second one point back, while Mexico and Panama are tied for third with 14 points.
Larin scored two minutes into first-half injury time and then added another in the 52nd minute.
“I think we have two wonderful strikers both in great form, one scored one night and the other scored in the other,” Herdman said. “He was feeling ill the first few days we got here and hadn’t eaten for two days and had a lot of travel. The squad is deep and we were able to rest him out that first game.
“We knew the Mexicans were going to press high, we knew they would be on the front foot and to have Cyle as a point man to have someone that could create that link between the lines and you see how good he is at holding the ball up and bringing other players in.”
The next round of World Cup qualifying games takes place at January and beginning of February, with Canada playing in Honduras and then hosting the United States at a yet-to-be named location. They will then close out the international window with a game in El Salvador.
Canada decided to play its two home games in Edmonton during this international window to take advantage of the frigid temperatures in Edmonton in November and the potential of drawing huge crowds at Commonwealth, which seats just over 56,000.
Edmonton came out in droves for the game against Costa Rica, played in just above freezing temperatures and again on a night where the thermostat dropped to minus-9 C at kickoff, but felt more like minus-14 C with the windchill.
Canada started with an attacking formation with Larin up front as the target man, while Tajon Buchan and Alphonso Davies flanked him along the wings.
As expected, the game was choppy from the start and Canadian centre back Doneil Henry set the tone early, bowling over Hirving Lozano early as the Mexican forward was attempting to control a throw-in. Henry was fortunate not to be given a yellow card for the challenge and likely would have, had it not been so early in the game.
Lozano got his pound of flesh a couple of minutes later when he chopped Stephen Eustaquio well after the Canadian midfielder played the ball.
The game looked as though it was going into halftime scoreless, when a clearance dropped to Alistair Johnston and set up perfectly for a half volley. Johnston hit the ball from 25 yards out, forcing Mexico goalkeeper Guillermo Ochoa to make a good diving save as the shot bounced just in front of him. Larin then beat Mexico defender Nestor Araujo to the ball and slotted it into the net.
Four minutes into the second half Buchanan and Davies broke out essentially against one defender. Buchanan hesitated to slide the ball over to Davies, who was all alone to his left, and by the time the pass was played it was too late.
Canada did score eight minutes later when Eustaquio swung a free kick to the far post where Larin was able to slot it past Ochoa, who was rooted to his spot. Mexico had never played a World Cup qualifier under such extremely cold conditions, although they have made teams go to the altitude and smog and heat of Mexico City regularly, scheduling kickoffs in the afternoon sun.
They tried to mount a comeback, but left themselves susceptible to the counter attack with Canada fielding so much speed in midfield with Davies, Buchanan, Ritchie Laryea and then David, who came on for Larin with 17 minutes left.
Canada could not put away a handful of break opportunities, and then Martin scored in the 90th minute heading in a cross from Jesus Corona to give Mexico life.
Shortly after, Borjan made a miraculous save on the goal line, and Canada was able to hold on through five minutes of injury time.
“Every country uses its terrain as an advantage and we saw this as a genuine advantage,” Herdman said. “This was an opportunity to bring out the Canadian in our players. They’ve all grown up on plastic pitches and cold conditions. For us we wanted them to feel like it was home and for the Mexicans they had to adapt like we had to adapt to altitude.”
Despite the snow and frigid temperatures in Edmonton Tuesday, Commonwealth Stadium was packed with fans for the FIFA World Cup qualifying match between the Canadian Men's National Soccer Team and Mexico.
Perhaps the weather gave the Canadians the advantage, or it was the emergence of several Canadian soccer superstars. Whatever the case, it resulted in a stunning 2-1 victory for the home team and another step toward next year's World Cup in Qatar.
"I'll never forget this," said head coach John Herdman in an interview posted online by Canada Soccer. "The snow, the crowd, the Mexicans, just brilliant."
Herdman did not hesitate when asked if the weather gave Canada a leg up.
"Absolutely. No one wants to play in that, especially the Mexicans," he said. "First time I think we've beaten them in decades; so just proud, just a proud night for the lads."
The snow even became part of the celebration when Canadian defender Sam Adekugbe dove into a bank at the side of the pitch after a goal.
While the weather may have prevented some out of town fans from getting to the match, 44,212 made it into the stands, including Edmontonian Michelle Peters-Jones and her 14-year-old daughter Aditi Jones.
"Oh my goodness, it was so absolutely insane, the atmosphere was electric," she said. "The game itself was so amazing."
Peters-Jones describes it as a once in a lifetime opportunity.
"Especially against a really good team like Mexico which is rated ninth in the FIFA list," she said. "Winning against them, I can't even describe the emotions."
Peters-Jones grew up in India and has traditionally cheered for England in World Cup play but her allegiances are shifting.
"I have to add Canada to the list because I've been living in Canada for the last 11 years," she said. "I've been really interested in the way the Canadian men's and women's teams have performed on the international stage."
Peters-Jones has no doubt the weather worked to Canada's advantage.
"You've got to be prepared that Edmonton in November is going to have some snow storms; it's going to have some serious winter issues," she said. "I think it really worked in our favour because our boys are definitely more used to the cold than Mexico was."
Peters-Jones admits it was a bit of a challenge for her as well, given she grew up in a tropical climate.
"I think I had every single item in my wardrobe on me," she said. "I'm not really used to the cold even though I say I'm an Edmontonian now." 'We were jumping up and down'
The excitement and the enthusiasm in the crowd also helped.
"We were all cheering really heavily, we were jumping up and down, we were banging on drums, we were waving flags," Peters-Jones said. "It kept us warm."
She believes Canada's success in soccer, and Edmonton's changing demographics are helping to draw more interest.
"Edmonton has a lot of immigrant families and a lot of us bring the sport with us because soccer is a game that's pretty universal," she said. "We don't need a lot of equipment for it, just a ball and a pitch."
Luca Mosele, whose family owns the Eurosport Soccer Stores in Edmonton, agrees interest in the sport is growing.
"People were always coming by here looking for Canadian gear towards the matches," he said.
"It gives the kids something to look up to now that the national team program is top quality. It excites kids, maybe something to strive for in the future, or even just something to excite them to play locally."
Coach Herdman thanked the fans, the city and the country for the support.
"The whole time we've been here they've made it our fortress," he said. "We've had the Oilers helping us, we've had messages from Gretzky, we've had the PM visiting us."
"It's just been memories to cherish. As sort of an honorary Canadian now, these are some of the best moments of my life."
A $4B nuclear power plant backed by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett is set for construction in Wyoming
the Natrium project is considered to be a test by the federal government, which is footing up to half of the price tag.
Pending federal and local approval, TerraPower will build the $4 billion, 345-megawatt facility at the Naughton Power Plant in Kemmerer, Wyoming, about 130 miles northeast of Salt Lake City, the company announced Tuesday.
The relatively small "Natrium" reactor is similar to those used in some U.S. Navy submarines, and is designed to be faster and cheaper to build, and safer to run, than traditional large-scale reactors. The project has broad support from Wyoming's conservative political leaders and from the Biden administration.
“The Natrium reactor is the future of nuclear energy in America. It makes perfect sense to have it in Wyoming, the energy capital of the United States. Wyoming’s economy will grow from having this groundbreaking technology in our state," U.S. Sen. John Barrasso, a Wyoming Republican, said in a statement to USA TODAY. "Our abundant energy sources including coal, oil, natural gas, renewables, and now nuclear power will continue to provide good-paying jobs. Americans across the country will depend on Wyoming energy for decades and decades to come.”
Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway owns the coal-fired Naughton plant, and is shutting it down as part of the company's efforts to transition to cleaner fuels such as wind and solar. Nuclear power plants don't emit carbon pollution, and are considered by many experts to be a necessary step in reducing emissions to combat climate change.
Gates' TerraPower is partnering with GE-Hitachi to build the plant, which could be running within seven years, as mandated by federal officials. Putting the reactor adjacent to a coal-fired power plant takes advantage of existing infrastructure, including cooling water and high-capacity transmission lines. The plant would operate for 60 years, company officials said.
“This project is an exciting opportunity to explore what could be the next generation of clean, reliable, affordable energy production while providing a path to transition for Wyoming’s energy economy, communities and employees,” Gary Hoogeveen, president and CEO of Rocky Mountain Power, a division of Berkshire Hathaway's PacifiCorp, said in a statement
.
TerraPower officials say about 2,000 workers will be needed for construction at the project’s peak, with about 250 people working at the plant once operating. The 345-megawatt plant would produce enough power for roughly 250,000 homes, with the capacity to provide 500 megawatts during peak demand. Federal matching funding for the reactor was included in the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act signed by President Joe Biden on Monday. Kemmerer has about 2,700 residents.
Many of Wyoming's elected officials see the proposal as a potential lifeline for a state heavily dependent on mining and burning coal.
“This is great for Kemmerer and great for Wyoming,” Kemmerer Mayor Bill Thek said in a statement provided by TerraPower.
Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon also backs the plan, arguing that new nuclear plants could provide a market for the state's large reserves of radioactive uranium ore. The proposed plant uses uranium to heat liquid sodium metal to about 900 degrees F – natrium is an old word for sodium – which then makes steam to power a turbine to generate electricity. Using liquid sodium instead of traditional high-pressure coolant allows this reactor to operate at lower pressures, in theory making it less likely to suffer a meltdown like 1979's Three Mile Island or the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. Although similar reactor systems have been built before, the Natrium project is considered to be a test by the federal government, which is footing up to half of the price tag.
Because the Natrium plant is smaller and uses modern technology, its backers say it could be built faster and cheaper than a traditional large-scale nuclear power plant, primarily because it uses less expensive concrete to contain the reactor. Gates and Buffett said that once successfully demonstrated, the plant could be quickly expanded or replicated elsewhere.
“The energy communities that have powered us for generations have real opportunities to power our clean energy future through projects just like this one, that provide good-paying jobs and usher in the next wave of nuclear technologies," Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said in a statement.
Federal officials say the plant will produce nearly 3 million megawatt hours of carbon-free power annually and avoid almost 2 million metric tons of carbon that would otherwise have been emitted by a traditional power plant. It would be powered with fuel that is up to four times more powerful than the 5% enriched uranium typically used in nuclear power plants, and TerraPower is working with the federal government to develop a U.S.-controlled source of the fuel.
Today, coal and nuclear power plants across the country each generate about 20% of the nation's electricity, with renewables making up another 20%, and natural gas the remaining 40%.
Wyoming is the nation's leading producer of coal, which is burned to make electricity serving residents mainly in Oregon, California, Colorado and Washington. There are 55 commercial nuclear power plants in the United States, spread across 28 states. The newest power reactor opened in 2016, and there are two nuclear reactors under construction at a power plant in Georgia.
The company considered three other sites: Rock Springs, Gillette and near Glenrock in east-central Wyoming
