10/2020: Solar is now ‘Cheapest Electricity in History’, confirms IEA

[Stann]

So funny, Stann disagrees that he is of low intelligence but can't reply to prove differently

Trolling doesn't work on me. You'll have to try to victimize someone else ,stupid you.

 

[elektra]

Trolling doesn't work on me. You'll have to try to victimize someone else ,stupid you.

You are an idiot. You put you 2 cents in, you replied to comment that you had nothing to do with. You are trolling my posts, you are negative rating my posts, now you play the victim.

Stann proving when challenged, the low intelligence democrats can only flame troll and play victim

 

[elektra]

Initially , as most of things are today. The important thing is that one time use allows them to capture the heat of the sun and the power of the wind for years ( Non-polluting and very low cost to maintain the free energy that the natural systems of the physical world gives US all. )

Moron, low cost? Wind and Solar cost the Tax payers over a trillion dollars this year alone. In direct spending. No telling the hidden costs in the subsidies they call tax credits

 

[Stann]

Moron, low cost? Wind and Solar cost the Tax payers over a trillion dollars this year alone. In direct spending. No telling the hidden costs in the subsidies they call tax credits

As opposed to the $20 billion spent on fossil fuels EVERY year for the past 100 years. And last year hit an all time record. So it's getting worse for dwindling returns. Time to pull that plug. They made a record 3 trillion in profits .

 

[ding]

As opposed to the $20 billion spent on fossil fuels EVERY year for the past 100 years. And last year hit an all time record. So it's getting worse for dwindling returns. Time to pull that plug. They made a record 3 trillion in profits .

Money well spent. The industrial revolution greatly improved the standard of living and was powered by fossil fuels.

 

[Stann]

Money well spent. The industrial revolution greatly improved the standard of living and was powered by fossil fuels.

Correct but now we must embrace the future. And that means relegating fossil fuels to limited specialized uses and developing and embracing the use of renewables. In that way future generations will at least know the value of fossil fuels and the role they played in the evolution of mankind on this planet.

 

[jc456]

A basic assumption of Stann's that is wrong.

Stand is insinuating, stating, the fossil fuel industry is competing with Solar and Wind. The fossil fuel industry is not. Solar and Wind are a product of the fossil fuel industry. Solar and wind increase the use fossil fuels.

The fossil fuel industry supports Solar and wind, it is a profitable industry for fossil fuels.

Thanks for the information. It's amazing the things the demofks can't understand.

 

[Stann]

Thanks for the information. It's amazing the things the demofks can't understand.

It's amazing the things you people believe. All the lies , so gullible. Really pathetic.

 

[ding]

Correct but now we must embrace the future. And that means relegating fossil fuels to limited specialized uses and developing and embracing the use of renewables. In that way future generations will at least know the value of fossil fuels and the role they played in the evolution of mankind on this planet.

Why?

 

[Stann]

Why?

Do you think we should use up all the fossil fuels and leave future generations with none of them ? Besides leaving them with a world much worse off than we had.

 

[ding]

Do you think we should use up all the fossil fuels and leave future generations with none of them ? Besides leaving them with a world much worse off than we had.

So in either case they get all used up? What's the difference who uses them up? Besides there's quite a bit of remaining fossil fuels. Wouldn't it make more sense to let the transition happen organically instead of artificially?

And how exactly are we leaving a world much worse off? Isn't it worse to deprive the poorer countries of fossil fuels? Shouldn't we be making their lives better by producing more fossil fuels to drop the price so they can afford them?

 

[elektra]

As opposed to the $20 billion spent on fossil fuels EVERY year for the past 100 years. And last year hit an all time record. So it's getting worse for dwindling returns. Time to pull that plug. They made a record 3 trillion in profits .

I thought you were done, stann?

I would gladly speak of what is spent on fossil fuels. I agree, subsidies should not be given to any corporation.

$20 billion is that a tax deduction all corporations use or direct subsidies.

I don't doubt that democrats will give the fossil fuel industry a subsidy, which democrats can then point to and say, "fossil fuels get subsidies,"

 

[Stann]

I thought you were done, stann?

I would gladly speak of what is spent on fossil fuels. I agree, subsidies should not be given to any corporation.

$20 billion is that a tax deduction all corporations use or direct subsidies.

I don't doubt that democrats will give the fossil fuel industry a subsidy, which democrats can then point to and say, "fossil fuels get subsidies,"

They were listed as subsidies paid by the US government. End of story

 

[elektra]

They were listed as subsidies paid by the US government. End of story

Why don't you want to have a discussion?

Congress did give a billion dollar green energy subsidy to the fossil fuel industry in connection with the fossil fuel industry making solar panels.

Nobody disagrees that congress is buying corporations with tax money.

If you would like, stann, you could tell us specifically what you are talking about.

 

[Stann]

Why don't you want to have a discussion?

Congress did give a billion dollar green energy subsidy to the fossil fuel industry in connection with the fossil fuel industry making solar panels.

Nobody disagrees that congress is buying corporations with tax money.

If you would like, stann, you could tell us specifically what you are talking about.

You can't even acknowledge that fossil fuels have been given subsidies for over 100 years. Yet you want to deny the fledgling renewables energy platform a good startup. I think discussion board s useless you have all the answers you want. Right or wrong you keep saying them over and over. Obviously trying to convince yourself it's true.

 

[abu afak]

You can't even acknowledge that fossil fuels have been given subsidies for over 100 years. Yet you want to deny the fledgling renewables energy platform a good startup. I think discussion board s useless you have all the answers you want. Right or wrong you keep saying them over and over. Obviously trying to convince yourself it's true.

First, if you'll notice on the last Page, Elektra tried to Bully/Bury you with 2 responses (once 3!) for every one of yours. One of his Often used Abusive tactics. (in lieu of facts).
ie, He Triple posted me because he was stingingly refuted on he last page.
This page he has some help/allies so is down to one.. almost.

As to the topic at hand a quick overview from the Top of a Google query:

""
AI Overview
Learn more…Opens in new tab

The government subsidizes oil and gas in a variety of ways, including:

• Tax breaks
  The tax code includes provisions that provide direct subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, such as tax breaks on exploration for oil and intangible drilling costs. The percentage depletion tax break allows independent producers to recover development costs.
• Discounted leasing
  The government provides discounted leasing costs for federal lands used for fossil fuel extraction.
• Public assistance
  The government provides public assistance to low-income households to help with heating costs, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates that global fossil fuel subsidies reached $1 Trillion in 2022, with the United States being a major contributor. Economists generally agree that these subsidies offer little benefit, such as lower prices at the pump, or increased energy security.""""

- - - - - -
`

 

[jc456]

So in either case they get all used up? What's the difference who uses them up? Besides there's quite a bit of remaining fossil fuels. Wouldn't it make more sense to let the transition happen organically instead of artificially?

And how exactly are we leaving a world much worse off? Isn't it worse to deprive the poorer countries of fossil fuels? Shouldn't we be making their lives better by producing more fossil fuels to drop the price so they can afford them?

that dude got all tied up in his nonsense, nice work, I was thinking the same exact thing. he wasn't, he doesn't think.

 

[jc456]

You can't even acknowledge that fossil fuels have been given subsidies for over 100 years. Yet you want to deny the fledgling renewables energy platform a good startup. I think discussion board s useless you have all the answers you want. Right or wrong you keep saying them over and over. Obviously trying to convince yourself it's true.

nope, tax breaks is not subsidies.

 

[jc456]

First, if you'll notice on the last Page, Elektra tried to Bully/Bury you with 2 responses (once 3!) for every one of yours. One of his Often used Abusive tactics. (in lieu of facts)
This page he has some help/allies so is down to one.. almost.

As to the topic at hand a quick overview from the Top of a Google query:

""
AI Overview
Learn more…Opens in new tab

The government subsidizes oil and gas in a variety of ways, including:

• Tax breaks
  The tax code includes provisions that provide direct subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, such as tax breaks on exploration for oil and intangible drilling costs. The percentage depletion tax break allows independent producers to recover development costs.
• Discounted leasing
  The government provides discounted leasing costs for federal lands used for fossil fuel extraction.
• Public assistance
  The government provides public assistance to low-income households to help with heating costs, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates that global fossil fuel subsidies reached $1 Trillion in 2022, with the United States being a major contributor. Economists generally agree that these subsidies offer little benefit, such as lower prices at the pump, or increased energy security.""""

- - - - - -
`

this made me laugh!!!

 

[jc456]

that dude got all tied up in his nonsense, nice work, I was thinking the same exact thing. he wasn't, he doesn't think.

ahh Stann , you make me laugh dude. Especially the part about letting our kids use up the fuel we're using. Hilarious my man. Did you make that up, or did someone give that to you?