How much can renewable energy save us?

[Toddsterpatriot]

"It's going to get uglier." U.S. oil patch heads to the insolvency zone

What's interesting in our discussion here is the fact that we got 2 controversies where we disagree on what's happening but we can agree on policy.

The first is whether solar is viable; you say it is and I say it isn't but we should both agree (for opposite reasons) that public policy makers should end solar tax financed subsidies. The other controversy is whether the U.S. petroleum industry outlook is rebound or collapse. If you seriously believe your view that the sector's about to tank then many of my collegues in the financial markets would love to sell you short contracts that would pay you handsomely if you're right. Pse let me know when you've thought it through.

One last thought, if you decide that solar is not worth risking your own money, then I'd beg you to consider how I feel about the previous president taking my money by force and wasting it on solar scams like Solyndra LLC when Obama-backed green energy failures leave taxpayers with $2.2 billion tab, audit finds

Obama Has Done More for Clean Energy Than You Think

The biggest challenge the loan program faced may not have been public criticism of failed deals like Solyndra, Fisker Automotive and Beacon Power or technology letdowns such as the Ivanpah solar-thermal power plant producing less electricity than expected. Rather, the biggest challenge came from within the Obama administration itself, particularly the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which stood athwart greater ambition. For example, one deal, dubbed SolarStrong, would have loaned $344 million to put solar panels on housing on military bases across the country. But OMB axed the deal because budget rules require it to assume that the Department of Defense might not have the appropriations to repay the loan in future decades. "At which point, all you can do is go home and have a scotch," Silver recalls.

"Military appropriations are not considered permanent appropriations," explains Peter Davidson, who oversaw the LPO from 2013 to June of this year. "It's the environment we have to work in, we try and do what we can."

In the end, the LPO's successes helped kill off some of its own portfolio of projects. Building utility-scale solar photovoltaic plants like Agua Caliente and Antelope Valley helped render obsolete solar thermal power plants like Ivanpah and Solana as silicon technology improved dramatically and costs dropped whereas the price of steel and glass remained relatively high. Large photovoltaic installations also helped make solar panels so cheap that it drove companies like Solyndra—whose business model relied on PV remaining expensive—into bankruptcy. "We were simply financing the best deals available," Silver says, noting that the program could not independently seek out good projects. "The single thing that bound all these applications together was not their size or technology or geography or financing structure. The single thing that bound them together is that they applied."

That also means the loan program may have taken too little risk. The program has made a profit of nearly $1 billion in interest payments to the U.S Treasury to date. At least $5 billion more is expected over the next few decades as loans are paid back. That compares with $780 million in losses to date, the bulk of which is accounted for by the $535 million loaned to Solyndra. And more money could be made if the program were to ever sell its group of loans rather than managing them for the next few decades.

I think that I put more trust in the assessment of the Scientific American than a newspaper.

That also means the loan program may have taken too little risk. The program has made a profit of nearly $1 billion in interest payments to the U.S Treasury to date.

I'd like to see the backup for this "profit".

 

[Old Rocks]

Google at your finger tips.

 

[danielpalos]

Banks are supposed to make money, not get bailed out, ceteris paribus.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Google at your finger tips.

Lot's of crap on Google.
Not much proof of profit.

 

[danielpalos]

Google at your finger tips.

Lot's of crap on Google.
Not much proof of profit.

I found it. Just right wing laziness while blaming the poor? how, unhypocritical, is that.

 

[expat_panama]

whether the U.S. petroleum industry outlook is rebound or collapse. If you seriously believe your view that the sector's about to tank then many of my collegues in the financial markets would love to sell you short contracts

if you decide that solar is not worth risking your own money, then I'd beg you to consider how I feel about the previous president taking my money by force and wasting it on solar scams like Solyndra

...$780 million in losses to date, the bulk of which is accounted for by the $535 million loaned to Solyndra....

You're not quite answering but what the rest of us here gather is that you don't want to risk your money on green energy but you do want to spend our money. My guess is that those bad old days are fading into history and things are changing for the better.

Your beliefs in what works is going to need your money; my money has been spoken for.

 

[expat_panama]

$1 billion in interest payments to the U.S Treasury to date. I'd like to see the backup for this "profit".

Google at your finger tips.

OldRocks may be thinking of U.S. Expects $5 Billion From Program That Funded Solyndra . Sure, expecting $5B is nice, but somehow I seriously doubt it means that when my tax bill comes due I won't have to actually pay it, I'll only need to tell the IRS to "expect" it instead.

 

[Skull Pilot]

According to a recent report, even a massive Marshall like plan (huge investment) in renewables will not meet the goals laid out in the Paris Accords.

"Moreover, the share of fossil fuels—nearly 87 percent—has not budged due to a retreat in nuclear power over the same 15-year period."


"Even a renewables Marshall Plan would face an unyielding deadline: To stay under 2C, the global economy must be carbon neutral—producing no more CO2 than can be absorbed by oceans and forests—by mid-century."

Renewables can't deliver Paris climate goals: study

So how are they going to spend that "carbon tax" money many politicians are so eager to start collecting?

.

technology is improving all the time. many wind energy farms merely need to upgrade to the latest wind generating technologies, to sextuple their energy output. that is where our tax dollars should be going; not, playing "shellgames" with Statism.

no you can't make the wind blow more than it already does and that is the only way to get more power out of a windmill

and in case you haven't bothered to look into windmills you might want to know that even the newest windmills on average only produce 25% of their rated capacity

 

[danielpalos]

According to a recent report, even a massive Marshall like plan (huge investment) in renewables will not meet the goals laid out in the Paris Accords.

"Moreover, the share of fossil fuels—nearly 87 percent—has not budged due to a retreat in nuclear power over the same 15-year period."


"Even a renewables Marshall Plan would face an unyielding deadline: To stay under 2C, the global economy must be carbon neutral—producing no more CO2 than can be absorbed by oceans and forests—by mid-century."

Renewables can't deliver Paris climate goals: study

So how are they going to spend that "carbon tax" money many politicians are so eager to start collecting?

.

technology is improving all the time. many wind energy farms merely need to upgrade to the latest wind generating technologies, to sextuple their energy output. that is where our tax dollars should be going; not, playing "shellgames" with Statism.

no you can't make the wind blow more than it already does and that is the only way to get more power out of a windmill

and in case you haven't bothered to look into windmills you might want to know that even the newest windmills on average only produce 25% of their rated capacity

I don't take your arguments seriously; simply because you seem to have, lousy reading comprehension.

technology is improving all the time.

many wind energy farms merely need to upgrade to the latest wind generating technologies, to sextuple their energy output. that is where our tax dollars should be going; not, playing "shellgames" with Statism.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Google at your finger tips.

Lot's of crap on Google.
Not much proof of profit.

I found it. Just right wing laziness while blaming the poor? how, unhypocritical, is that.

I found it.

I await your post of your find on the thread.

 

[danielpalos]

How much can renewable energy save us?

Since it has the capacity to satisfy human needs in ways that will prevent poisoning ourselves out of existence, it could be said that it will save us everything.

it really doesn't have the capacity to meet our power needs

we need a better grid and increased capacitance, to "catch and store" lighting energy.

no

Yes, we do. Don't be a "big chicken."

 

[danielpalos]

Google at your finger tips.

Lot's of crap on Google.
Not much proof of profit.

I found it. Just right wing laziness while blaming the poor? how, unhypocritical, is that.

I found it.

I await your post of your find on the thread.

Just right wing laziness; that is all.

Already, Tesla has repaid its $465-million loan nine years early, thanks to the innovative financing terms devised in its deal, part of $3.5 billion in loans that have already been repaid.--https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/obama-has-done-more-for-clean-energy-than-you-think/

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

$1 billion in interest payments to the U.S Treasury to date. I'd like to see the backup for this "profit".

Google at your finger tips.

OldRocks may be thinking of U.S. Expects $5 Billion From Program That Funded Solyndra . Sure, expecting $5B is nice, but somehow I seriously doubt it means that when my tax bill comes due I won't have to actually pay it, I'll only need to tell the IRS to "expect" it instead.

Thanks.

The Department of Energy has disbursed about half of $32.4 billion allocated to spur innovation, and the expected return will be detailed in a report due to be released as soon as tomorrow, according to an official who helped put together the data.

Looks like they've lent about $16 billion.

The program has made a profit of nearly $1 billion in interest payments to the U.S Treasury to date. At least $5 billion more is expected over the next few decades as loans are paid back.

Are they considering any interest payment to be profit?
Hard to tell without more backup.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Google at your finger tips.

Lot's of crap on Google.
Not much proof of profit.

I found it. Just right wing laziness while blaming the poor? how, unhypocritical, is that.

I found it.

I await your post of your find on the thread.

Just right wing laziness; that is all.

Already, Tesla has repaid its $465-million loan nine years early, thanks to the innovative financing terms devised in its deal, part of $3.5 billion in loans that have already been repaid.--https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/obama-has-done-more-for-clean-energy-than-you-think/

Thanks.
If only that was proof that there is $1 billion in profit to date.

 

[danielpalos]

Google at your finger tips.

Lot's of crap on Google.
Not much proof of profit.

I found it. Just right wing laziness while blaming the poor? how, unhypocritical, is that.

I found it.

I await your post of your find on the thread.

Just right wing laziness; that is all.

Already, Tesla has repaid its $465-million loan nine years early, thanks to the innovative financing terms devised in its deal, part of $3.5 billion in loans that have already been repaid.--https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/obama-has-done-more-for-clean-energy-than-you-think/

Thanks.
If only that was proof that there is $1 billion in profit to date.

Banks are not in it to lose money by lending. The Fed also earns a profit. Yet, the right wing wants to audit a profit center like the Fed and not cost centers like our War on Drugs.

The War on Drugs Has Cost Taxpayers Over 1 Trillion Dollars--http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-09/war-drugs-has-cost-taxpayers-over-1-trillion-dollars

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Lot's of crap on Google.
Not much proof of profit.

I found it. Just right wing laziness while blaming the poor? how, unhypocritical, is that.

I found it.

I await your post of your find on the thread.

Just right wing laziness; that is all.

Already, Tesla has repaid its $465-million loan nine years early, thanks to the innovative financing terms devised in its deal, part of $3.5 billion in loans that have already been repaid.--https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/obama-has-done-more-for-clean-energy-than-you-think/

Thanks.
If only that was proof that there is $1 billion in profit to date.

Banks are not in it to lose money by lending. The Fed also earns a profit. Yet, the right wing wants to audit a profit center like the Fed and not cost centers like our War on Drugs.

The War on Drugs Has Cost Taxpayers Over 1 Trillion Dollars--http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-09/war-drugs-has-cost-taxpayers-over-1-trillion-dollars

Yeah, that's awful. Let me know if you ever find any backup for the $1 billion profit claim.

 

[Skull Pilot]

According to a recent report, even a massive Marshall like plan (huge investment) in renewables will not meet the goals laid out in the Paris Accords.

"Moreover, the share of fossil fuels—nearly 87 percent—has not budged due to a retreat in nuclear power over the same 15-year period."


"Even a renewables Marshall Plan would face an unyielding deadline: To stay under 2C, the global economy must be carbon neutral—producing no more CO2 than can be absorbed by oceans and forests—by mid-century."

Renewables can't deliver Paris climate goals: study

So how are they going to spend that "carbon tax" money many politicians are so eager to start collecting?

.

technology is improving all the time. many wind energy farms merely need to upgrade to the latest wind generating technologies, to sextuple their energy output. that is where our tax dollars should be going; not, playing "shellgames" with Statism.

no you can't make the wind blow more than it already does and that is the only way to get more power out of a windmill

and in case you haven't bothered to look into windmills you might want to know that even the newest windmills on average only produce 25% of their rated capacity

I don't take your arguments seriously; simply because you seem to have, lousy reading comprehension.

technology is improving all the time.

many wind energy farms merely need to upgrade to the latest wind generating technologies, to sextuple their energy output. that is where our tax dollars should be going; not, playing "shellgames" with Statism.

No our tax dollars should be spent on the energy source that provides the most consistent reliable output not wind which only supplies 25% or less of its rated capacity and what you don't understand is that that measly 25% is provided by the latest and best wind technology

 

[Skull Pilot]

How much can renewable energy save us?

Since it has the capacity to satisfy human needs in ways that will prevent poisoning ourselves out of existence, it could be said that it will save us everything.

it really doesn't have the capacity to meet our power needs

we need a better grid and increased capacitance, to "catch and store" lighting energy.

no

Yes, we do. Don't be a "big chicken."

a sporadic unpredictable energy source such as lightning is not where we should be investing money you moron

we need a power generation method that provides reliable abundant power 24/7/365 and is emission free

That is nuclear power plain and simple

 

[expat_panama]

...wind energy farms merely need to upgrade to the latest wind generating technologies, to sextuple their energy output. that is where our tax dollars should be going...

Why tax dollars, why not your dollars?

If you think the farms can actually produce electricity cheaper than what we already have then you're free to go right ahead w/o waiting for congress. The fact that neither of us wants our own money going there tells me that we both know they're a waste of time and money.

One option we got now however is that we could have the taxers take your money and invest it in say nuke&coal plants, but we won't for 2 reasons. One is that we don't need to, and the other is that taxing others for my own personal schemes is wrong.

 

[danielpalos]

Google at your finger tips.

Lot's of crap on Google.
Not much proof of profit.

I found it. Just right wing laziness while blaming the poor? how, unhypocritical, is that.

I found it.

I await your post of your find on the thread.

Just right wing laziness; that is all.

Already, Tesla has repaid its $465-million loan nine years early, thanks to the innovative financing terms devised in its deal, part of $3.5 billion in loans that have already been repaid.--https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/obama-has-done-more-for-clean-energy-than-you-think/

Thanks.
If only that was proof that there is $1 billion in profit to date.

Well, paying off a loan, early, does result in less profit to a bank.