2015 Nuclear Power Will Be 99% Of New Generating Capacity.

[elektra]

I think US should go forward on the climate area. Nuclear Power should cover at least 30% of the energi production in a couple of decennium. Nuclear Power gain the climate and is costworthy. I think US should be total independence on oil supplies and should stop importing oil from Russia.

America should decrease the amount of oil energy production to show China and other undeveloped
countries that a radical change in the climate is possible.

A nice thought but Green/Renewable energy is 100% dependent on ever increasing consumption of Oil.

Green Energy moves us backwards and increases dependence on oil.

And you are one of the stupidest liars on this board. Links to real information. Because what you are pulling out of your asshole stinks.

I admit, you are a bit gross smelling stuff from my butt, but as you know it stinks, that certainly is not a lie, huh Old Crock?

It really is simple Old Crock, it takes a lot of Oil and HydroCarbons to build over a 1,000 sq. miles of Solar Panels.

That is a lot of panels, Old Crock tells us they are going to build them non-stop for the next 40 years. Of course in that time period, all those Solar Panels will wear out, but faster than that they will be Obsolete, and as we know everything installed today is already Obsolete, what with all the great advances. So forever we must use Oil as fast as possible to constantly build 1,000's of sq. miles of Solar Panels.

Yep, pulled all that right out my but, including the fact that this is going to cost 10$ Trillion.

That is a lot of money, that buys a lot of stuff only made with Oil.

 

[RGR]

I think America should show Europe and the rest of the world a green way to lead the climate dilemma. 80% of the energiproduction come from directly hurtfull oil for the climate, that I think America should think beyond.

What? A green way to lead the climate dilemma??? What climate dilemma, you mean the cooling trend we are facing?

 

[RGR]

[
By doing what? Nationalizing perhaps the most efficient free market business in the entire country, and then turning back the taps by 10%? 20% 2%/year?

I always get bumps when people think interfering with the markets is a good idea, particularly the piece of the supply chain that is really good at what it does.

Really? So you think that the REA was a bad idea? That the people in the rural areas of the US should have waited until the market was ready to ship them electricity?

The REA was a perfectly reasonable societal response to a need, and it utilized the free market to get the job done, as opposed to taking over a profitable industry, and, as the government is wont to do, screw it up.

 

[Old Rocks]

I think America should show Europe and the rest of the world a green way to lead the climate dilemma. 80% of the energiproduction come from directly hurtfull oil for the climate, that I think America should think beyond.

What? A green way to lead the climate dilemma??? What climate dilemma, you mean the cooling trend we are facing?

Source, please.

 

[Old Rocks]

I think America should show Europe and the rest of the world a green way to lead the climate dilemma. 80% of the energiproduction come from directly hurtfull oil for the climate, that I think America should think beyond.

What? A green way to lead the climate dilemma??? What climate dilemma, you mean the cooling trend we are facing?

And this article says something vastly differant. You have my source, what is your?

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2008/09/02/0805721105.full.pdf+html

 

[Treeshepherd]

I drive all around the fancy neighborhoods (for my job) in San Francisco, the East Bay, Napa, Sonoma, Marin County, and Santa Cruz County. What I see everywhere is the installation of solar panels. The solar revolution is fully underway. A third of all electrical capacity developed in the USA during the first 6 months of 2014 can be attributed to solar.

World Solar Power Capacity Increased 35 In 2013 Charts CleanTechnica

The solar revolution is still an upper middle class to wealthy phenomenon, just like the digital revolution was during its infancy, when during the mid 1990's a crappy personal computer cost $2,500. But, it's underway, and inevitable, and unstoppable.

It makes too much sense to go solar. I'm not talking about Solyndra, or massive solar plants out in the desert piping the energy into municipalities. I'm talking about making your own power. I'm talking about personal energy independence, where you make your own power. Throw up some panels, and maybe add in the new $500.00 plug-and-play wind turbine that generates 400 watts at a 27 mph wind speed, and now you're cooking with butter. Now you're flinging up your middle finger toward the energy company. It's anarcho-capitalism. It's libertarianism in the purest form. It's clean energy. It is beauty incarnate. Who could be against that, unless you're from South Dakota or a coal state?

Anyway, I'm not advocating anything. I'm telling you what I see happening, and what is about to come your way. I call it like I see it. In 20 years, solar will be the dominant energy source, if we don't blow ourselves up with nukes first.

 

[elektra]

[QUOTE ="Treeshepherd, post: 9994579, member: 51930"]I drive all around the fancy neighborhoods (for my job) in San Francisco, the East Bay, Napa, Sonoma, Marin County, and Santa Cruz County. What I see everywhere is the installation of solar panels. The solar revolution is fully underway. A third of all electrical capacity developed in the USA during the first 6 months of 2014 can be attributed to solar.

World Solar Power Capacity Increased 35 In 2013 Charts CleanTechnica

The solar revolution is still an upper middle class to wealthy phenomenon, just like the digital revolution was during its infancy, when during the mid 1990's a crappy personal computer cost $2,500. But, it's underway, and inevitable, and unstoppable.

It makes too much sense to go solar. I'm not talking about Solyndra, or massive solar plants out in the desert piping the energy into municipalities. I'm talking about making your own power. I'm talking about personal energy independence, where you make your own power. Throw up some panels, and maybe add in the new $500.00 plug-and-play wind turbine that generates 400 watts at a 27 mph wind speed, and now you're cooking with butter. Now you're flinging up your middle finger toward the energy company. It's anarcho-capitalism. It's libertarianism in the purest form. It's clean energy. It is beauty incarnate. Who could be against that, unless you're from South Dakota or a coal state?

Anyway, I'm not advocating anything. I'm telling you what I see happening, and what is about to come your way. I call it like I see it. In 20 years, solar will be the dominant energy source, if we don't blow ourselves up with nukes first.[/QUOTE]
Solar is a second run energy source, using a huge amount if oil upfront.

Hoe is that drought going, all those panels you see get cleaned with purified water, just like you got to clean your glass windshield, solar panels need to be cleaned.

Don't make much sense.

Besides, you do not see a solar revolution. You see government waste, everything you see is bought by government, hardly a revolution.

Government spending on solar is a revolution, just like computers and click phones, I do not remember the government spending on personal computers?

 

[Old Rocks]

Hey Elektra, just keep repeating really stupid things. No reason to change character now.

Yes, the government has helped to solar industry get started. Just as it did with computers, airplanes, railroads, and canal, among so many other things in this nation. But now, it is taking off on it's own. At present prices, the systems make sense even without government subsidies. Add in the proliferation of EV's and plug in hybrids, and the systems are real winners.

 

[elektra]

Hey Elektra, just keep repeating really stupid things. No reason to change character now.

Yes, the government has helped to solar industry get started. Just as it did with computers, airplanes, railroads, and canal, among so many other things in this nation. But now, it is taking off on it's own. At present prices, the systems make sense even without government subsidies. Add in the proliferation of EV's and plug in hybrids, and the systems are real winners.

How much is the unsubsidized price of this fantasy, until you at the least, admit to costs, you are simply posting platitudes.

Now how about replying to all those posts you hide from.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.wholesalesolar.com/gridtie.html

Complete systems, 6kw at about 10K.

 

[elektra]

http://www.wholesalesolar.com/gridtie.html

Complete systems, 6kw at about 10K.

from your link Old Crock,

The price seems to be a bit different old crock? How about installation? Roof replacement? Permits? Added insurance? Structural drawings and engineered plans for the installation? Cleaning and Maintenance.

SolarEdge Astronergy Grid-tie Solar System 20,400 watts

20,400/18,472

Included

up to 2,771 kWh

80

2 SE10000

1890544

$31,587

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[RGR]

And this article says something vastly differant. You have my source, what is your?

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2008/09/02/0805721105.full.pdf html

First author on your report is Mann. Sorry, but he is the guy who already famously screwed the pooch. And my reference doesn't use Mann proxies assembled to return a specific profile.


The big picture 65 million years of temperature swings JoNova

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.wholesalesolar.com/gridtie.html

Complete systems, 6kw at about 10K.

from your link Old Crock,

The price seems to be a bit different old crock? How about installation? Roof replacement? Permits? Added insurance? Structural drawings and engineered plans for the installation? Cleaning and Maintenance.

SolarEdge Astronergy Grid-tie Solar System 20,400 watts

20,400/18,472

Included

up to 2,771 kWh

80

2 SE10000

1890544

$31,587

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Damn, you are a slimy little bastard, Elektra. I posted that a 6 kw system was available for about 10K. And you post a 20 kw system for 31.5K. From the same column the 6 kw is in. Purposefully posting a lie.

Installation? Local codes and laws vary. Some individuals can do all the work themselves, others are less capable.

 

[Moonglow]

In ten years fusion reactors with fit in the back of a pick up truck.. one for every home....

 

[Old Rocks]

And this article says something vastly differant. You have my source, what is your?

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2008/09/02/0805721105.full.pdf html

First author on your report is Mann. Sorry, but he is the guy who already famously screwed the pooch. And my reference doesn't use Mann proxies assembled to return a specific profile.


The big picture 65 million years of temperature swings JoNova

There have been more than a dozen reports since then, most of which Mann has nothing to do with, that have supported Mann's findings.

The Hockey Stick The Most Controversial Chart in Science Explained - The Atlantic

"The basic conclusion of Mann et al. (1998, 1999) was that the late 20th century warmth in the Northern Hemisphere was unprecedented during at least the last 1,000 years. This conclusion has subsequently been supported by an array of evidence that includes both additional large-scale surface temperature reconstructions and pronounced changes in a variety of local proxy indicators, such as melting on ice caps and the retreat of glaciers around the world."

It didn't change the minds of the deniers, though--and soon Mann and his colleagues were drawn into the 2009 "Climategate" pseudo-scandal, which purported to reveal internal emails that (among other things) seemingly undermined the hockey stick. Only, they didn't.

In the meantime, those wacky scientists kept doing what they do best--finding out what's true. As Mann relates, over the years other researchers were able to test his work using "more extensive datasets, and more sophisticated methods. And the bottom line conclusion doesn't change." Thus the single hockey stick gradually became what Mann calls a "hockey team." "If you look at all the different groups, there are literally about two dozen" hockey sticks now, he says.

Mother Jones' Jaeah Lee traced the strange evolution of the hockey stick story in this video:

Indeed, two just-published studies support the hockey stick more powerfully than ever. One, just out in Nature Geoscience, featuring more than 80 authors, showed with extensive global data on past temperatures that the hockey stick's shaft seems to extend back reliably for at least 1,400 years. Recently in Science, meanwhile, Shaun Marcott of Oregon State University and his colleagues extended the original hockey stick shaft back 11,000 years. "There's now at least tentative evidence that the warming is unprecedented over the entire period of the Holocene, the entire period since the last ice age," says Mann.="#author-information">

A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11 300 Years

A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years

1. Shaun A. Marcott1,
2. Jeremy D. Shakun2,
3. Peter U. Clark1,
4. Alan C. Mix1

+Author Affiliations

1. [email protected]

• ABSTRACT
• EDITOR'S SUMMARY

Surface temperature reconstructions of the past 1500 years suggest that recent warming is unprecedented in that time. Here we provide a broader perspective by reconstructing regional and global temperature anomalies for the past 11,300 years from 73 globally distributed records. Early Holocene (10,000 to 5000 years ago) warmth is followed by ~0.7°C cooling through the middle to late Holocene (<5000 years ago), culminating in the coolest temperatures of the Holocene during the Little Ice Age, about 200 years ago. This cooling is largely associated with ~2°C change in the North Atlantic. Current global temperatures of the past decade have not yet exceeded peak interglacial values but are warmer than during ~75% of the Holocene temperature history. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change model projections for 2100 exceed the full distribution of Holocene temperature under all plausible greenhouse gas emission scenarios.

 

[elektra]

And this article says something vastly differant. You have my source, what is your?

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2008/09/02/0805721105.full.pdf html

First author on your report is Mann. Sorry, but he is the guy who already famously screwed the pooch. And my reference doesn't use Mann proxies assembled to return a specific profile.


The big picture 65 million years of temperature swings JoNova

There have been more than a dozen reports since then, most of which Mann has nothing to do with, that have supported Mann's findings.

The Hockey Stick The Most Controversial Chart in Science Explained - The Atlantic

"The basic conclusion of Mann et al. (1998, 1999) was that the late 20th century warmth in the Northern Hemisphere was unprecedented during at least the last 1,000 years. This conclusion has subsequently been supported by an array of evidence that includes both additional large-scale surface temperature reconstructions and pronounced changes in a variety of local proxy indicators, such as melting on ice caps and the retreat of glaciers around the world."

It didn't change the minds of the deniers, though--and soon Mann and his colleagues were drawn into the 2009 "Climategate" pseudo-scandal, which purported to reveal internal emails that (among other things) seemingly undermined the hockey stick. Only, they didn't.

In the meantime, those wacky scientists kept doing what they do best--finding out what's true. As Mann relates, over the years other researchers were able to test his work using "more extensive datasets, and more sophisticated methods. And the bottom line conclusion doesn't change." Thus the single hockey stick gradually became what Mann calls a "hockey team." "If you look at all the different groups, there are literally about two dozen" hockey sticks now, he says.

Mother Jones' Jaeah Lee traced the strange evolution of the hockey stick story in this video:

Indeed, two just-published studies support the hockey stick more powerfully than ever. One, just out in Nature Geoscience, featuring more than 80 authors, showed with extensive global data on past temperatures that the hockey stick's shaft seems to extend back reliably for at least 1,400 years. Recently in Science, meanwhile, Shaun Marcott of Oregon State University and his colleagues extended the original hockey stick shaft back 11,000 years. "There's now at least tentative evidence that the warming is unprecedented over the entire period of the Holocene, the entire period since the last ice age," says Mann.="#author-information">

A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11 300 Years

A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years

1. Shaun A. Marcott1,
2. Jeremy D. Shakun2,
3. Peter U. Clark1,
4. Alan C. Mix1

+Author Affiliations

1. [email protected]

• ABSTRACT
• EDITOR'S SUMMARY

Surface temperature reconstructions of the past 1500 years suggest that recent warming is unprecedented in that time. Here we provide a broader perspective by reconstructing regional and global temperature anomalies for the past 11,300 years from 73 globally distributed records. Early Holocene (10,000 to 5000 years ago) warmth is followed by ~0.7°C cooling through the middle to late Holocene (<5000 years ago), culminating in the coolest temperatures of the Holocene during the Little Ice Age, about 200 years ago. This cooling is largely associated with ~2°C change in the North Atlantic. Current global temperatures of the past decade have not yet exceeded peak interglacial values but are warmer than during ~75% of the Holocene temperature history. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change model projections for 2100 exceed the full distribution of Holocene temperature under all plausible greenhouse gas emission scenarios.

Hey, idiot, go post your garbage in the right thread, AFTER you read it.