Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Vast LWC, Jul 30, 2012.
Yeah -- the only thing stopping you then would be a rain/snow storm, your lattitude or night..
So, just how long have you been a Pelosi fan?
Not since that last Botox injection that stopped her blinking. Must have been administered way too deep because blinking and thinking are both non-existent.
Muller was never a skeptic as is blindingly clear if you watch any of his youtube videos. he is a commited supporter of the IPCC. neither is he in bed with the climate science community which he shows a certain amount of distain for. Muller had scathing criticism for Michael Mann which was thoroughly deserved, and a deep concern that the various temperature series were compromised by poor siting and poor adjustment methodology.
once he started the BEST study he found out that it is difficult to reinvent the wheel when the data has been irrevocably contaminated by past adjustments so he just added his own adjustment of kridging together past homogenized readings and followed past SOP of ignoring the uncertainty for data of many areas around the world.
what few people seem to realize is how weak and equivical the evidence is. take a look at the actual proxies that make up some of the temperature reconstructions. look at the history of New Zealand's temperature series to see how lax and incompetent its operation was (and is). check out the amazing differences in the single location GISS temperature graphs from year-to-year. every time you look closer than just the headline story you will find glaring discrepancies and distorted logic.
why won't the right embrace renewable energy? Every single time someone brings up non-polluting, green energy solutions, the right acts like someone shot their dog.
There are logical and practical solutions that only need to be assimilated into the mainstream to lower the cost....sure, it's expensive now....it's in it's infancy and not being mass produced. I even thought of a work around for hydrogen production....a massive solar array in the SW desert that's sole use is to run a hydrogen production plant. Why keep burning shit that causes pollution?
So really, you don't agree....because just keeping on doing what we already do is not a solution....the only thing you agree with in my post is the last line... Sorry that was a footnote, an added bonus, if you will....not the main point.
Because MOST of the list of "Alternatives" are frauds and not ecologically sound. I am an enviromentalist. And I'll tell you that ---
Biomass is garbage incineration with much the same problems as burning coal.
Geothermal is a dirty mining operation.
Hydro is now REFUTED by most Enviro operations because of it's massive impact on the enviroment. AND it's been been realized it is a large source of CO2.
Which leaves us with wind and solar. Both of which are TANKING in terms of marketability. Look at the stocks.
NOW -- You have a FABULOUS idea for using wind and solar to produce hydrogen.. I LOVE that concept because that doesn't mind spikey unreliable sources of power.
But wind is a nightmare for general grid integration and defers LITTLE in terms of fossil or nuclear capacity because it has to be backed up on the grid MINUTE TO MINUTE by some other PRIMARY source. Using it as YOU suggest --- for Off-Grid applications makes sense.
Relying on it to SUBSTITUTE on the grid for nuclear, hydro, fossil is a sure loser..
THAT'S why the eco-frauds HAVE ***** my pooch with their fraudulent efforts to pass off Biomass/Geothermal and push wind onto the grid.. Time to get real and realize why that list is NOT a list of "Alternatives" for Grid Produced GREEN energy...
explain what you mean by your comments on geothermal. We(my wife and I) have been kicking around the idea of going with geothermal for our house's heating and cooling needs. We figure it'll cost 2x the price of a standard central air system...but the numbers I've seen say that it will pay for itself in 7-10 years.
we realize that we will still use heating oil and electricity, but from the research I've done, it'll be a heck of a lot less.
Not the same geothermal that Al Gore was ranting about. You are only gonna recirculate cooled air below ground. Geothermal is a drilling operation that boils water from magma heat. Contains tons of toxic stuff -- rots, creates rivers of effluent and kills life for a wide radius if it blows out.. Been thrown out in a lot places after these effects became common knowledge.
Also important -- those wells are not renewable without RE-DRILLING and periodic reconstruction of the whole plumbing because of the corrosive rot.. Despite what fantastic stories you've been fed about how GREEN this is --- it's anything but and OPPOSED by MANY enviromentalists like me...
Actually -- what you're proposing does make some sense for home construction as does solar thermal (not PhotoVoltaic).
What we need is technical discussion about WHERE increased capacity on the grid is gonna come from for EVs and economic expansion. And how best to use solar and wind for OFF-Grid applications to make hydrogen, chemicals, biofuel and other STORABLE commodities.
But more than anything -- we need to CUT SUBSIDIES and increase plain R&D for "renewables" because they have not proven to be Alternatives.. Emphasize Hydrogen generation and infrastructure in the mix and IMMEDIATELY act to plan and propose to replace and INCREASE our nuclear generation..
Separate names with a comma.