$34.8B, that seems like a lot.

You're on quite a losing streak.

Wind and Solar Energy Are Cheaper Than Electricity from Fossil-Fuel Plants

Next you'll be telling us vaccines cause autism. :auiqs.jpg:
Nonsense, without subsidies, both industries would go bankrupt. In fact, quite a few went into bankruptcy, pending, or abandoned massive projects because the lack of subsidies.
 
No, otherwise the Ivanpah facility wouldn't shut down comes Jan. 2026. Say what you will about wins and solar. End of day, the cost to operate vs. revenues matter.
Ivanpah is totally different than modern solar generation. Since Ivanpah was constructed, photovoltaics have dramatically decreased in cost effectiveness.
 
Ivanpah is totally different than modern solar generation. Since Ivanpah was constructed, photovoltaics have dramatically decreased in cost effectiveness.
Ok, tell us why wind and solar are more expensive for customers than coal. If Democrats really want to fight global warming, pay for solar installation for homeowners and businesses rather than handing money to these companies which turned around charging customers an arm and a leg for energy.
 
No, otherwise the Ivanpah facility wouldn't shut down comes Jan. 2026. Say what you will about wins and solar. End of day, the cost to operate vs. revenues matter.
It's frustrating to provide info proving the beliefs you folks hold are factually inaccurate that you don't read.........or believe.

This year's edition, which was released Monday, is notable because it comes as President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans are trying to eliminate tax credits for wind and solar. The political debate is playing out at a time when energy forecasters are projecting a rapid increase in electricity demand due to data centers and artificial intelligence.

Lazard calculates an energy resource's levelized cost, or LCOE, by dividing a project's lifetime energy production by its cost. This year's report concludes that renewables are the "most cost-competitive form of generation," even without subsidies.

"As such, renewable energy will continue to play a key role in the buildout of new power generation in the U.S," the bank wrote. "This is particularly true in the current high power demand environment, where renewables stand out as both the lowest-cost and quickest-to-deploy generation resource."
 
It's frustrating to provide info proving the beliefs you folks hold are factually inaccurate that you don't read.........or believe.

This year's edition, which was released Monday, is notable because it comes as President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans are trying to eliminate tax credits for wind and solar. The political debate is playing out at a time when energy forecasters are projecting a rapid increase in electricity demand due to data centers and artificial intelligence.

Lazard calculates an energy resource's levelized cost, or LCOE, by dividing a project's lifetime energy production by its cost. This year's report concludes that renewables are the "most cost-competitive form of generation," even without subsidies.

"As such, renewable energy will continue to play a key role in the buildout of new power generation in the U.S," the bank wrote. "This is particularly true in the current high power demand environment, where renewables stand out as both the lowest-cost and quickest-to-deploy generation resource."
Hey ace, wind and solar cannot meet the demand when AI is fully deployed. Nuke power is the answer.

How many alternative energy company stock is going up vs. nuclear and uranium stocks?
 
Hey ace, wind and solar cannot meet the demand when AI is fully deployed. Nuke power is the answer.

How many alternative energy company stock is going up vs. nuclear and uranium stocks?
Sure, but we aren't going to have nuclear reactors ready for a long time.

It sure as hell doesn't make sense to be cancelling wind and solar projects when clearly we need all the capacity we can get.

Too bad we have irrational people running the country.
 
Sure, but we aren't going to have nuclear reactors ready for a long time.

It sure as hell doesn't make sense to be cancelling wind and solar projects when clearly we need all the capacity we can get.

Too bad we have irrational people running the country.
If wind and solar can provide much cheaper energy than coal, then I will be more than happy to sign up. I say the same about EV. If Tesla or any EV makers can bring the cost much lower than gas powered, then I will buy one.

If any president can remove 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs, then I will buy one. However, there is no chance in hell that will happen as Chinese EV makers will completely destroy American EV makers.
 
Sure, but we aren't going to have nuclear reactors ready for a long time.

It sure as hell doesn't make sense to be cancelling wind and solar projects when clearly we need all the capacity we can get.

Too bad we have irrational people running the country.

Stupid unreliable capacity is a waste of money.
 
If you only need a few hours of electricity a day, wind and solar is fine.

If you need it 24/7, it's a stupid waste of money.

Fake LCOE numbers fail in reality.
The sun shines for more than a few hours a day. This isn’t Estonia.
 
I've come to realize it's fruitless to discuss anything with someone so totally brainwashed as your post indicates you are. No means of energy production is perfect. But the use of oil/gas is unequivocally bad for the environment and must be reduced quickly if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic consequences which are unfolding before our eyes.

Collin Rees, United States Campaigns Manager at Oil Change International, said the Trump Administration is not really interested in free market capitalism and keeping the hand of government away from the energy industry, as it claims. Instead, the administration is trying to undermine clean energy to reward Trump’s fossil fuel donors, which spent over $200 million to elect Trump and Republicans in Congress last election.

The hoaxers threw your dumbass under the bus, dumbass.
 
Last edited:
15th post
Back
Top Bottom