No Excuses Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 13 hours ago, twa said: They did come back in Germany They have increased co2 and particulate emissions for the last few years but Paris..... Make Germany Great Again doesn't have quite the same appeal to Gary the coal miner in bum**** Pennsylvania. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 hour ago, RedskinsMayne said: which world is switching to renewables? The world that doesn't produce anything? I have no problem with the world switching to renewables. If they are hold such great promise, some entrepreneur will surely invest in order to make money.... if not, i guess we can count on government to throw money at the problem. Your kidding, right? https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjSj_a2op_UAhWIJCYKHVIAC00QjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.arcadiapower.com%2Ftimeline-wind-power-us%2F&psig=AFQjCNGH-Ki2WJ-8YJL22Hlrb7ZMPtSd5A&ust=1496496600263852 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsMayne Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 minute ago, RedskinsFan44 said: Your kidding, right? Still waiting for a response about how China is leading the way to renewable energy... first movers aren't in the advantage, second movers are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Well, I think the current numbers are: they could build a coal power plant a month if they wanted to (and have), but I heard they're closing a few instead. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjy5P3Zo5_UAhVIMSYKHQZ4A1oQFggmMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2017%2F01%2F18%2Fworld%2Fasia%2Fchina-coal-power-plants-pollution.html&usg=AFQjCNGf0NAKSaKnG3Gx7n8FBK-10Q41tA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Even though I am a Libertarian and as such am skeptical of most government outlays, one huge exception is research. It was government, or more specifically DARPA, that provided us with the internet and GPS - technologies that have thrust the US back into the economic forefront. Our information age relies on the application of modern physics theories developed in the 1920s which were considered just an intellectual exercise for decades, with no practical applications. Where I might differ from say, Obama's approach, is I want funds for partnerships between government and higher education for research, with private companies then able to use whatever technologies they deem worthy. Obama's stimulus was aimed at providing capital to companies the government approved as worthy in the development of green tech. In fairness, despite Solyndra, overall his success rate was reasonably good (especially compared to the billions he pissed away on high speed rail that never materialized), but I prefer the government not pick winners, particularly in any area where technologies change almost overnight. Trump's disdain for research is painfully shortsighted, even excruciatingly so. Still, a brief look at his upbringing explains his contempt. Trump grew up in an era where real estate was king, especially in NYC. As the son of a real estate mogul, it looked inevitable that he would reign as one of the wealthiest men in America. Now, the information revolution has made dozens of billionaires of young upstarts. Parvenus have amassed fortunes that make Trump's net worth paltry in comparison. No doubt the wealth of guys like Zuckerberg, Bloomerg, Gates, Musk, et al drives him nuts, and has left him hopelessly nostalgic for an era when Texas Instruments made headlines for selling a desk calculator. He is essentially a disenfranchised nobleman in a post-revolutionary world, obsessed with restoring aristocratic supremacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 2 hours ago, RedskinsMayne said: which world is switching to renewables? The world that's going to run out of **** to dig out of the ground. You know, the one with the humans on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 10 minutes ago, RedskinsMayne said: Still waiting for a response about how China is leading the way to renewable energy... first movers aren't in the advantage, second movers are. This is a laughable statement. The US is top dog in science and technology because it's almost always been first to ground breaking work that gives us a net advantage. 6 minutes ago, Riggo-toni said: Even though I am a Libertarian and as such am skeptical of most government outlays, one huge exception is research. It was government, or more specifically DARPA, that provided us with the internet and GPS - technologies that have thrust the US back into the economic forefront. Our information age relies on the application of modern physics theories developed in the 1920s which were considered just an intellectual exercise for decades, with no practical applications. There was once bipartisan agreement on keeping America the leader in science and technology. And then the Cold War ended. At this point the Republican Party really stands for absolutely nothing that will remotely have a positive impact on America's future in terms of innovation. As hopeless as the Neanderthals who vote for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 14 minutes ago, RedskinsFan44 said: Your kidding, right? https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjSj_a2op_UAhWIJCYKHVIAC00QjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.arcadiapower.com%2Ftimeline-wind-power-us%2F&psig=AFQjCNGH-Ki2WJ-8YJL22Hlrb7ZMPtSd5A&ust=1496496600263852 Nice chart .....unfortunately it did not even provide 1% of our electricity at utility scale https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3 Throw in rooftop and such and it is a massive 1.47% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 13 hours ago, AsburySkinsFan said: Once again, Trump voters you are complicit. You will have to explain this to your grandchildren. I hope they are forgiving. They wont have to explain ****. They'll pretend they never spent well over a decade being ignorant little ****s and a bunch of tribalist dweebs all over the country will go along with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 7 minutes ago, No Excuses said: This is a laughable statement. The US is top dog in science and technology because it's almost always been first to ground breaking work that gives us a net advantage. 3 minutes ago, twa said: Nice chart .....unfortunately it did not even provide 1% of our electricity at utility scale https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3 Throw in rooftop and such and it is a massive 1.47% Right. Thats why we should be continuing the research and getting it to acceptable levels so that we can sell it to other countries. Which is really the point of this (besides saving the planet bit whatevs) That you and your pals cannot see this is......fustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 11 minutes ago, No Excuses said: At this point the Republican Party really stands for absolutely nothing that will remotely have a positive impact on America's future in terms of innovation. As hopeless as the Neanderthals who vote for them. I think the Republican Party stands for tax cuts. That's about it. It may also stand for maximizing the amount of money in your pocket today without any regard whatsoever to tomorrow or any costs that money come with. In short, it stands for a degree of myopia that would make Mr. Magoo look like was the top Black Ops sniper in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 I like research, funding expansion of inferior tech is not research Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, twa said: Nice chart .....unfortunately it did not even provide 1% of our electricity at utility scale https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3 Throw in rooftop and such and it is a massive 1.47% Granted, the "nice chart" shows growth of around 3,000% in 4 years. (I'm just eyeballing a chart which seems to go from 100, in 2012, to 3000, in 2016.) Good thing we've got the government now trying to encourage us not to sustain that growth. Wouldn't want solar to go from 1% of electricity, to 30%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Just now, Larry said: Granted, the "nice chart" shows growth of around 3,000% in 4 years. (I'm just eyeballing a chart which seems to go from 100, in 2012, to 3000, in 2016.) Good thing we've got the government now trying to encourage us not to sustain that growth. Wouldn't want solar to go from 1% of electricity, to 30%. with it's subsidies we could not afford going to 30% why don't ya run that up a chart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, twa said: I like research, funding expansion of inferior tech is not research Just say you don't know what you are talking about. Same effect. The entire planet has agreed to use this inferior tech. Do you not see what we habe to gain by being the ones to do it right? Short sighted and stupid is a bad combo bro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 5 minutes ago, twa said: with it's subsidies we could not afford going to 30% why don't ya run that up a chart. What happens if we remove the tax break oil companies get from drilling wells up front and make them take the deduction over the life time of the well (which is how most companies have to take tax breaks on investments so essentially this is a huge subsidy to the oil industry) and use it fund solar? What if we take the equivalent money that oil industry has gotten from this subsidy over the last 50 years and put it to solar energy? (We've had this conversation before. You don't really want to talk about subsidies. When you start taking into account the decades of subsidies we've given the fossil fuel industry what the alternative energy industry has gotten is a drop in the bucket. And you know that.) (Jumbo in the climate change thread asked that this conversation be moved there so maybe future comments can go there.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Just now, PeterMP said: What happens if we remove the tax break oil companies get from drilling wells up front and make them take the deduction over the life time of the well (which is how most companies have to take tax breaks on investments so essentially this is a huge subsidy to the oil industry) and use it fund solar? Domestic production drops,tax revenue drops,solar still is too costly and you have a greater deficit along with folk like Saudi and Iran get your dollars.....oh and your energy bill rises. But feel free....I like to watch history repeat itself. care to chart subsidy comparisons per unit of energy generated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 12 minutes ago, twa said: Domestic production drops,tax revenue drops,solar still is too costly and you have a greater deficit along with folk like Saudi and Iran get your dollars.....oh and your energy bill rises. But feel free....I like to watch history repeat itself. care to chart subsidy comparisons per unit of energy generated? Oil prices go up. Solar becomes more competitive (and note, that's not a tax break on domestic drilling only. That's any oil well. I purposely didn't mention the specific tax break on domestic wells). Are you going to include tax breaks and the costs of having a military that can defend countries in the Middle East to deal with countries like Iran and Saudi's making money off of us (over the time span of decades)? Then sure. I'd love to see it. (Out of curiosity, what dollar figure are you going to put on the life of US military personal?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Just now, PeterMP said: Are you going to include tax breaks and the costs of having a military that can defend countries in the Middle East to deal with countries like Iran and Saudi's making money off of us (over the time span of decades)? Then sure. I'd love to see it. My solution makes them less relevant to us, your solution makes it needed. But if you want to rehash how stupid we were to kill independent production here in the past and make military intervention there a need we can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 21 minutes ago, Llevron said: Just say you don't know what you are talking about. Same effect. Nah. It's his god given right to pretend to be on equal footing with people of real expertise on complex issues. More power to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 minute ago, No Excuses said: Nah. It's his god given right to pretend to be on equal footing with people of real expertise on complex issues. More power to him. If the comments here on energy policy are real expertise we are in bigger trouble than I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 5 minutes ago, twa said: My solution makes them less relevant to us, your solution makes it needed. Your "solution" was policy under a liberal President who got us off the foreign oil tit. As it turns out there is a balancing act to this issue that Democrats are more than happy to play along with. It's too bad that Republicans are extremist morons to be even remotely sensible. 2 minutes ago, twa said: If the comments here on energy policy are real expertise we are in bigger trouble than I thought. Your comments on research and funding priorities are always enlightening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 If that is what you believe,tis your right. I'd look a bit closer and further back....but what do I know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillUnknown Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 Just now, twa said: but what do I know you placed that on a tee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 (full disclosure... i just googled for "solar cost graph" images... i cannot testify to the exact veracity of this chart. i CAN testify that it is approximately correct, and passes the eye-ball test) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.