How much can renewable energy save us?

[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.

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

all we need, is a better grid. you make it seem; like there is not Always wind blowing, somewhere in the US.

 

[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."

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

It is about balancing our energy portfolio and improving technologies; sextuple. that is what got me interested.



and is bird safer.

 

[danielpalos]

...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.

For the same reason, our alleged, capitalist in chief, preferred not to finance his own cruiser and merely, "take care of business" in the Middle East.

That is why.

 

[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.

For the same reason, our alleged, capitalist in chief, preferred not to finance his own cruiser and merely, "take care of business" in the Middle East.

That is why.

You don't say what the reason is so I'll guess your take is wind farms are not investments that pay for themselves, they're purchases like cruisers that we buy and hope we don't have to use them.


Did I guess right? I'm not to good at guessing games, if I missed this one then let's just say what we mean --like how you don't want to invest your own money in wind/solar because it doesn't work and I invest my own money in oil because it works.

 

[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

all we need, is a better grid. you make it seem; like there is not Always wind blowing, somewhere in the US.

I never said that but the wind certainly isn't turning every windmill at the same time either which is why windmills only produce on average 25% of their rated capacity and that is not an acceptable output for the money

 

[Skull Pilot]

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

It is about balancing our energy portfolio and improving technologies; sextuple. that is what got me interested.



and is bird safer.

Here is the question you will not be able to answer.

6 times more rated capacity or 6 times more actual energy output?

And no matter how you slice it wind is at best an intermittent source for power.

 

[danielpalos]

...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.

For the same reason, our alleged, capitalist in chief, preferred not to finance his own cruiser and merely, "take care of business" in the Middle East.

That is why.

You don't say what the reason is so I'll guess your take is wind farms are not investments that pay for themselves, they're purchases like cruisers that we buy and hope we don't have to use them.


Did I guess right? I'm not to good at guessing games, if I missed this one then let's just say what we mean --like how you don't want to invest your own money in wind/solar because it doesn't work and I invest my own money in oil because it works.

State capitalism, a form of socialism, works better than truer forms of capitalism; that is why.

Technology is improving all the time; wind energy works, and with better technologies and an upgraded grid; we could have cost effective energy to balance our energy portfolio.

And, I prefer to advance fusion (an energy with a future) over fossil fuels.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

...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.

For the same reason, our alleged, capitalist in chief, preferred not to finance his own cruiser and merely, "take care of business" in the Middle East.

That is why.

You don't say what the reason is so I'll guess your take is wind farms are not investments that pay for themselves, they're purchases like cruisers that we buy and hope we don't have to use them.


Did I guess right? I'm not to good at guessing games, if I missed this one then let's just say what we mean --like how you don't want to invest your own money in wind/solar because it doesn't work and I invest my own money in oil because it works.

State capitalism, a form of socialism, works better than truer forms of capitalism; that is why.

Technology is improving all the time; wind energy works, and with better technologies and an upgraded grid; we could have cost effective energy to balance our energy portfolio.

And, I prefer to advance fusion (an energy with a future) over fossil fuels.

Technology is improving all the time; wind energy works,

Excellent news.
You should invest all your weed earnings in wind energy.

 

[danielpalos]

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

all we need, is a better grid. you make it seem; like there is not Always wind blowing, somewhere in the US.

I never said that but the wind certainly isn't turning every windmill at the same time either which is why windmills only produce on average 25% of their rated capacity and that is not an acceptable output for the money

The latest wind technology sextuples the energy output of current wind turbines. And, with an upgraded grid; wind energy can be used to supplement traditional energy sources; at least until fusion (an energy with a future) comes online.

How much more efficiency can we extract from fossil fuels? they just get, "more expensive" and we merely, "sink costs".

 

[danielpalos]

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

It is about balancing our energy portfolio and improving technologies; sextuple. that is what got me interested.



and is bird safer.

Here is the question you will not be able to answer.

6 times more rated capacity or 6 times more actual energy output?

And no matter how you slice it wind is at best an intermittent source for power.

6 times more than we get from current wind turbine technology. And, with an upgraded grid, we can connect wind power, Any Where, in the US.

Chicago (the windy city) seems like a good place to have some advanced wind energy technologies.

 

[danielpalos]

...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.

For the same reason, our alleged, capitalist in chief, preferred not to finance his own cruiser and merely, "take care of business" in the Middle East.

That is why.

You don't say what the reason is so I'll guess your take is wind farms are not investments that pay for themselves, they're purchases like cruisers that we buy and hope we don't have to use them.


Did I guess right? I'm not to good at guessing games, if I missed this one then let's just say what we mean --like how you don't want to invest your own money in wind/solar because it doesn't work and I invest my own money in oil because it works.

State capitalism, a form of socialism, works better than truer forms of capitalism; that is why.

Technology is improving all the time; wind energy works, and with better technologies and an upgraded grid; we could have cost effective energy to balance our energy portfolio.

And, I prefer to advance fusion (an energy with a future) over fossil fuels.

Technology is improving all the time; wind energy works,

Excellent news.
You should invest all your weed earnings in wind energy.

No thanks; I like to balance my portfolio; not just invest in fossil fuels.

 

[HenryBHough]

Kinda fun watching how the magical renewable pumped storage hydro project is working out for Oroville, California just now.

 

[Skull Pilot]

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

all we need, is a better grid. you make it seem; like there is not Always wind blowing, somewhere in the US.

I never said that but the wind certainly isn't turning every windmill at the same time either which is why windmills only produce on average 25% of their rated capacity and that is not an acceptable output for the money

The latest wind technology sextuples the energy output of current wind turbines. And, with an upgraded grid; wind energy can be used to supplement traditional energy sources; at least until fusion (an energy with a future) comes online.

How much more efficiency can we extract from fossil fuels? they just get, "more expensive" and we merely, "sink costs".

currently we can get better than 90% efficiency from natural gas and about 85% from oil
nuclear power on the other hand will produce 90% or more of it's capacity 24/7/365 and we will never run out of fuel as we will with fossil fuels

Wind turbines of any sort will never come near producing their rated capacity because the wind doesn't blow all the time, sometimes it blows too fast and the turbines have to be shut down for safety reasons and sometimes it blows too slow to do any good

Wind is intermittent and not a good source of power on which to base our future power generation

 

[Skull Pilot]

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

It is about balancing our energy portfolio and improving technologies; sextuple. that is what got me interested.



and is bird safer.

Here is the question you will not be able to answer.

6 times more rated capacity or 6 times more actual energy output?

And no matter how you slice it wind is at best an intermittent source for power.

6 times more than we get from current wind turbine technology. And, with an upgraded grid, we can connect wind power, Any Where, in the US.

Chicago (the windy city) seems like a good place to have some advanced wind energy technologies.

well we get crap from wind now so 6 times crap is still crap.

and there are limitations to how far you can transmit electricity which is another large wind or solar farms in remote areas are not the best answer

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

...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.

For the same reason, our alleged, capitalist in chief, preferred not to finance his own cruiser and merely, "take care of business" in the Middle East.

That is why.

You don't say what the reason is so I'll guess your take is wind farms are not investments that pay for themselves, they're purchases like cruisers that we buy and hope we don't have to use them.


Did I guess right? I'm not to good at guessing games, if I missed this one then let's just say what we mean --like how you don't want to invest your own money in wind/solar because it doesn't work and I invest my own money in oil because it works.

State capitalism, a form of socialism, works better than truer forms of capitalism; that is why.

Technology is improving all the time; wind energy works, and with better technologies and an upgraded grid; we could have cost effective energy to balance our energy portfolio.

And, I prefer to advance fusion (an energy with a future) over fossil fuels.

Technology is improving all the time; wind energy works,

Excellent news.
You should invest all your weed earnings in wind energy.

No thanks; I like to balance my portfolio; not just invest in fossil fuels.

Investing in wind doesn't balance your portfolio?

 

[danielpalos]

Kinda fun watching how the magical renewable pumped storage hydro project is working out for Oroville, California just now.

I am glad we ended our useless, War on Marijuana in California. We expect around a billion in tax revenue; hopefully, we will be able to afford better maintenance.

 

[danielpalos]

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

all we need, is a better grid. you make it seem; like there is not Always wind blowing, somewhere in the US.

I never said that but the wind certainly isn't turning every windmill at the same time either which is why windmills only produce on average 25% of their rated capacity and that is not an acceptable output for the money

The latest wind technology sextuples the energy output of current wind turbines. And, with an upgraded grid; wind energy can be used to supplement traditional energy sources; at least until fusion (an energy with a future) comes online.

How much more efficiency can we extract from fossil fuels? they just get, "more expensive" and we merely, "sink costs".

currently we can get better than 90% efficiency from natural gas and about 85% from oil
nuclear power on the other hand will produce 90% or more of it's capacity 24/7/365 and we will never run out of fuel as we will with fossil fuels

Wind turbines of any sort will never come near producing their rated capacity because the wind doesn't blow all the time, sometimes it blows too fast and the turbines have to be shut down for safety reasons and sometimes it blows too slow to do any good

Wind is intermittent and not a good source of power on which to base our future power generation

Advances in technology is happening all the time. They are now making solar panels that are transparent and can be used for windows in existing buildings.

 

[danielpalos]

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

It is about balancing our energy portfolio and improving technologies; sextuple. that is what got me interested.



and is bird safer.

Here is the question you will not be able to answer.

6 times more rated capacity or 6 times more actual energy output?

And no matter how you slice it wind is at best an intermittent source for power.

6 times more than we get from current wind turbine technology. And, with an upgraded grid, we can connect wind power, Any Where, in the US.

Chicago (the windy city) seems like a good place to have some advanced wind energy technologies.

well we get crap from wind now so 6 times crap is still crap.

and there are limitations to how far you can transmit electricity which is another large wind or solar farms in remote areas are not the best answer

An upgraded grid can connect everything better. In any case, wind power is only one source of energy; and sextuple the amount of current energy being produced, is not, insignificant.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Let's bet the farm on the "Lazard Levelized Cost of Energy" Analysis, whatever it means

 

[danielpalos]

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.

For the same reason, our alleged, capitalist in chief, preferred not to finance his own cruiser and merely, "take care of business" in the Middle East.

That is why.

You don't say what the reason is so I'll guess your take is wind farms are not investments that pay for themselves, they're purchases like cruisers that we buy and hope we don't have to use them.


Did I guess right? I'm not to good at guessing games, if I missed this one then let's just say what we mean --like how you don't want to invest your own money in wind/solar because it doesn't work and I invest my own money in oil because it works.

State capitalism, a form of socialism, works better than truer forms of capitalism; that is why.

Technology is improving all the time; wind energy works, and with better technologies and an upgraded grid; we could have cost effective energy to balance our energy portfolio.

And, I prefer to advance fusion (an energy with a future) over fossil fuels.

Technology is improving all the time; wind energy works,

Excellent news.
You should invest all your weed earnings in wind energy.

No thanks; I like to balance my portfolio; not just invest in fossil fuels.

Investing in wind doesn't balance your portfolio?

Just attention deficits while claiming you have valid arguments?

You should invest all your weed earnings in wind energy.