Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
...being destroyed!
[youtube]
Solar and geothermal (varying by region obviously) are much more feasible and cost-efficient, environment-friendly and sustainable than wind turbines.
That is overstating a fossil-fuel talking point.Solar and geothermal (varying by region obviously) are much more feasible and cost-efficient, environment-friendly and sustainable than wind turbines.
Solar sucks just like these stupid wind turbines.
There is only a narrow band in the SW of the US where it comes even close to being economical to use solar. Every place else it is a waste. Even her in Florida "The Sunshine State" it is not economical to generate electricity. Hell, we just had almost three solid weeks of overcast sky.
So you figure CA, AZ, NM, TX, OK, KS, UT, WY, and NV are a narrow band? All of these places have more sunshine than FL. That narrow band comprises over 25% of the lower 48.Solar and geothermal (varying by region obviously) are much more feasible and cost-efficient, environment-friendly and sustainable than wind turbines.
Solar sucks just like these stupid wind turbines.
There is only a narrow band in the SW of the US where it comes even close to being economical to use solar. Every place else it is a waste. Even her in Florida "The Sunshine State" it is not economical to generate electricity. Hell, we just had almost three solid weeks of overcast sky.
...being destroyed!
[youtube]
That is overstating a fossil-fuel talking point.Solar and geothermal (varying by region obviously) are much more feasible and cost-efficient, environment-friendly and sustainable than wind turbines.
Solar sucks just like these stupid wind turbines.
There is only a narrow band in the SW of the US where it comes even close to being economical to use solar. Every place else it is a waste. Even her in Florida "The Sunshine State" it is not economical to generate electricity. Hell, we just had almost three solid weeks of overcast sky.
I'm installing panels next year that will pay for themselves in less than 5, plus tax benefits in my state. Our well pump runs on some already. (on/off grid)
...being destroyed!
[youtube]
What do you have against wind power. The West was built with them.
I'm not talking about any kind of significant investment, nor am I going totally off grid. I'll let my electrician buddy sort out the details of changing out transformers, meters, and all the dealing with the power company people.Angelo
If you are off the grid and have nothing else then fine. It is just not economically viable for most Americans. Not by a long shot.
So you figure CA, AZ, NM, TX, OK, KS, UT, WY, and NV are a narrow band? All of these places have more sunshine than FL. That narrow band comprises over 25% of the lower 48.Solar and geothermal (varying by region obviously) are much more feasible and cost-efficient, environment-friendly and sustainable than wind turbines.
Solar sucks just like these stupid wind turbines.
There is only a narrow band in the SW of the US where it comes even close to being economical to use solar. Every place else it is a waste. Even her in Florida "The Sunshine State" it is not economical to generate electricity. Hell, we just had almost three solid weeks of overcast sky.
No shortage of fossil fuel shills here.What we need are more coal burning plants to keep the conservatives happy.
...being destroyed!
[youtube]
What do you have against wind power. The West was built with them.
Environmental Wacko's wet dream. Just like solar. It is one thing to have a low power water pump but is a terrible source of energy for the amount of electricity it reliably produces. Costly, hard to keep running, looks like shit on the landscape and destroys wildlife. It is never economical on its own without shitty government subsidies.
I think it is you who are confused. Solar panels are photo-voltaic which means they collect energy from light--not heat. The area of the US which is south of the 38th parallel and west of the Mississippi R. receives much more light during the year than not. I am not disagreeing that solar is not particularly efficient, but from the pollution aspect, it is better than fossil fuels but this is not to say that fossil fuels don't have their place.Solar panels are fine for providing a little more heat into a swimming pool.
...being destroyed!
[youtube]
What do you have against wind power. The West was built with them.
Environmental Wacko's wet dream. Just like solar. It is one thing to have a low power water pump but is a terrible source of energy for the amount of electricity it reliably produces. Costly, hard to keep running, looks like shit on the landscape and destroys wildlife. It is never economical on its own without shitty government subsidies.
So you're against trying things until they are perfect? That must be how they first made cars, perfect the first time?
...being destroyed!
[youtube]
What do you have against wind power. The West was built with them.
Environmental Wacko's wet dream. Just like solar. It is one thing to have a low power water pump but is a terrible source of energy for the amount of electricity it reliably produces. Costly, hard to keep running, looks like shit on the landscape and destroys wildlife. It is never economical on its own without shitty government subsidies.
So you're against trying things until they are perfect? That must be how they first made cars, perfect the first time?
I am against them because the filthy ass government subsidies a bad technology.
If the government didn't subsidize them or require that you put them in (like solar in California) then I wouldn't give a shit.
Government fucks up everything.
There is a reason that these power companies put in solar and wind farms and it has nothing to do with the economic viability.
Most American energy companies get their operating and capital funds from European banks. These stupid sicko EU banks require that a company must have a certian amount of "renewable" energy before they will lend money. So companies like Duke says 'fuck it we will put in the goddamn things". It is a small price to pay for having a line of credit.
...being destroyed!
[youtube]
What do you have against wind power. The West was built with them.
Environmental Wacko's wet dream. Just like solar. It is one thing to have a low power water pump but is a terrible source of energy for the amount of electricity it reliably produces. Costly, hard to keep running, looks like shit on the landscape and destroys wildlife. It is never economical on its own without shitty government subsidies.
So you're against trying things until they are perfect? That must be how they first made cars, perfect the first time?
I am against them because the filthy ass government subsidies a bad technology.
If the government didn't subsidize them or require that you put them in (like solar in California) then I wouldn't give a shit.
Government fucks up everything.
There is a reason that these power companies put in solar and wind farms and it has nothing to do with the economic viability.
Most American energy companies get their operating and capital funds from European banks. These stupid sicko EU banks require that a company must have a certian amount of "renewable" energy before they will lend money. So companies like Duke says 'fuck it we will put in the goddamn things". It is a small price to pay for having a line of credit.
Do you realize how much the government subsidizes the oil industry?