Renewables: 50 Years of Broken Dreams

skookerasbil

Platinum Member
Aug 6, 2009
37,962
6,380
1,140
Not the middle of nowhere
You read some of the crackpot predictions on this forum and one would think America is hurtling towards a green energy world. But according to FORBES Magazine, nothing coould be further from the truth.

Here are a few memorable predictions of our energy future:

•1945. Oak Ridge National Laboratory nuclear physicists Weinberg and Soodak predict that nuclear breeders will be man’s ultimate energy source; a decade later, the chairman of the US Atomic Energy Commission predict it would be “too cheap to meter”
•1973. “Let this be our national goal: At the end of this decade, in the year 1980, the United States will not be dependent on any other country for the energy we need to provide our jobs, to heat our homes, and to keep our transportation moving.” — Richard Nixon
•1978. “Through modeling of supply and demand for over 200 US utilities it was projected that, by the year 2000, almost 60% of U.S. cars could be electrified, and that only 17% of the recharging power would come from petroleum”
•1979. An influential Harvard Business School study projects that by 2000, the US could satisfy 20% of its energy needs through solar
•1980. Physicist Bent Sorenson predicts that 49% of America’s energy could come from renewable sources by the year 2005
•1994. Hypercar Center established, whose lightweight material and design would yield 200 mpg cars with a 95% decline in pollution
•1994. InterTechnology Corporation predicts that solar energy would supply 36% of America’s industrial process heat by 2000
•1995. Energy consultant and physicist Alfred Cavallo projects that wind could have a capacity factor of 60%, which when combined with compressed air storage, would rise to 70 – 95%
•1999. US Department of Energy hopes to sequester 1 billion tonnes of carbon per year by 2025
•2000. Fuel cell companies announce 250-kilowatt production plants that can fit into a conference room and produce energy at 10 cents per kilowatt hour, with the goal of 6 cents by 2003
•2008. “Today I challenge our nation to commit to producing 100% of our electricity from renewable energy and truly clean carbon-free sources within 10 years. This goal is achievable, affordable and transformative.” Al Gore
•2009. Gene scientist Craig Venter announces plans to develop next-generation biofuels from algae in a partnership with Exxon Mobil


fAiL



Even funnier.............check this out re: Energy Capacity Factors....................


capacity-factor-table.jpg




graphic fail..........check link

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2011/11/22/renewable-energys-sixty-years-of-broken-dreams-but-keep-those-ideas-coming/


also..........a quote from the article..........."but as things stand now, the world has almost no electricity storage".



So the next time you see some dolt posting up crap about solar, wind or electric cars, just remember Skooks posted up a thread that blew their shit to shit.:D:D:D:fu:



Told you the science doesnt matter!!!!


chess_pieces_on_chess_board_csl076.jpg
 
Last edited:
ps.........note that this thread will get minimual traction because the AGW True Believers cannot respond and want to distract with bogus information links that have little to do with the real world.
 
wind solar and biofuels are not scaleable to our needs. even as supplimental power they are more trouble than they are worth.
 
Hey.........Europe is in full fledged retreat from renewable subisdies. No longer can afford it. Renewables havent been able to stand on their own in the marketplace. Keep an eye on Europe the next couple of years for a sobriety marker on renewable energy.

Green energy not the future - Spokesman Mobile - March 20, 2012


Meanwhile, natural gas is cheap by comparison and when the fracking starts, it'll get cheaper. Its all about the market because ultimately, its all about where the investment is going. Some will feast off suckers who want to invest in an energy that will be a sliver of the overall pie in the coming decades. But the days of subsidizing green energy are quickly coming to an end as the debt goes nuclear. If it can grow on its own in the marketplace and booms past conventional energy sources.,.........then God Bless. Im on board. But I highly doubt it. If renewables are at 10% of energy production by 2035, I'd be thrilled if Im an environmentalist. But lets face it...........there is not one single environmentalist alive who gives a hoot about the debt. To them, its like it doesnt exist.


Anyway...........this is all moot banter. When Obama gets shitcanned in November, this whole green energy BS is going to get virtually mothballed for a long time. Perhaps..........perhaps..............it can get rolling again with pro-growth economic policies, but not a moment sooner. Thats just the way it is.....................which makes zero sense to be an environmentalist and support a Keynesian economic strategy. Its a total disconnect, logically. Innovation is the mother of invention, as they say. Innovation in the market doesnt happen when the people in charge are pushing anti-growth, big government economic policies. Its that simple.
 
Last edited:
Looks like Nixon was right again. Too bad democrats prevented the US from being energy independent for the last forty years.
 


Like Ive been saying for years West...........liberals never care to answer two questions related to green energy...........

1) At what cost?

2) As compared to what?


Never important AT ALL to them. Thakfully for you and me, a large majority DO ask those questions, thus, fossil fuels will dominate for decades.:banana:
 


Like Ive been saying for years West...........liberals never care to answer two questions related to green energy...........

1) At what cost?

2) As compared to what?


Never important AT ALL to them. Thakfully for you and me, a large majority DO ask those questions, thus, fossil fuels will dominate for decades.:banana:
1) half the cost
2) Compared to fossil fuels.
Sadly many people are 100% ignroant just liek yourse;f
 
Coal Does More Harm Than Good in Kentucky: $62 Million for Asthma Costs, $10 Billion for Lost Lives | ThinkProgress
^Another study finds that coal mining in Kentucky has a negative impact overall on the economy

Economists: Coal Is Incredibly Costly | ThinkProgress
^New study finds that Coal and Oil are more costly then renewable energy once health and environmental effects are included.







Think Progress:lol::lol: Yeah right, a political advocacy group is allways going to "find" what they want. Only problem is they pulled those numbers out of their collective asses.
 
The biggest myth about renewables is that they are viable.


Like Ive been saying for years West...........liberals never care to answer two questions related to green energy...........

1) At what cost?

2) As compared to what?


Never important AT ALL to them. Thakfully for you and me, a large majority DO ask those questions, thus, fossil fuels will dominate for decades.:banana:
1) half the cost
2) Compared to fossil fuels.
Sadly many people are 100% ignroant just liek yourse;f





Half the cost? Really? Let me see......over the last year, we've seen around 3 BILLION dollars of US taxpayers cash go down the drain. Europe is abandoning green energy as being far too costly for the return.


You might want to look at your numbers there boyo. They don't add up.
 

Forum List

Back
Top