Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
What a crock. No way to STORE it. Besides ,Green Energy sucks. Ibnstead if fuckin' around with all this green shit ,we should build more NUKE power plants. And do massive R&D on FUSION power.
The White House on Monday detailed an ambitious plan to expand wind farms along the East Coast and jump-start the country’s nascent offshore wind industry, saying it hoped to trigger a massive clean-energy effort in the fight against climate change.
The plan would generate 30 gigawatts of offshore wind power by the end of the decade — enough to power more than 10 million American homes and cut 78 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions. To accomplish that, the Biden administration said, it would speed permitting for projects off the East Coast, invest in research and development, provide low-interest loans to industry and fund changes to U.S. ports.
The initiative represents a major stretch for the United States. The country has only one offshore wind project online at this time, generating 30 megawatts, off Rhode Island.
--------In addition, they will partner with corporate America to help map out data regarding ocean climate and bio-diversity.--------
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has entered a memorandum of agreement with Ørsted Wind Power North America LLC, an offshore wind development company to share physical and biological data in Ørsted-leased waters subject to U.S. jurisdiction. NOAA anticipates that Ørsted’s data will fill gaps in ocean mapping and observing to help NOAA better understand weather, climate and ocean processes and build resilient coastal communities and economies. As part of the agreement, NOAA will also share its publicly available data with Ørsted. Together, this information sharing will be used to ensure that offshore renewable energy technologies and infrastructure are developed, deployed, and maintained effectively.
Well, looks like they want to move towards cleaner energy. They want it to look like this:
View attachment 473947
I have nothing against nuclear if they figure out ways to handle the radioactive waste. Some say they know how. But that isn't a renewable source, either. I like the idea of power generation that never runs out, like hydro, wind and solar. Wind and solar aren't steady sources of power, though, and need a backup that can kick on at a moment's notice when the wind stops blowing. Either that, or they need to figure out ways to store it longer. So it's likely there will be a combination of sources, which is fine. The cleaner and less CO2 we're adding to the atmosphere, the better. Now if we could get people to stop throwing their garbage in the ocean....that's not renewable.Nuclear is the best option but extremists mislead people about that.I'm all for renewable energy; we have to have the power, so there's no argument it has to come from somewhere. Just be aware nothing's free. There is always a cost.
The Fukushima tsunami disaster resulted in zero deaths from radiation. All deaths were from drowning and misguided evacuation orders. No radiation issues at all.
But the extremists propagate otherwise.
This entire energy/green-bullshit thing has nothing to do with the environment. It’s all about economic squeeze-down and Marxist control.
CO2 emissions is a bullshit agenda, too.I have nothing against nuclear if they figure out ways to handle the radioactive waste. Some say they know how. But that isn't a renewable source, either. I like the idea of power generation that never runs out, like hydro, wind and solar. Wind and solar aren't steady sources of power, though, and need a backup that can kick on at a moment's notice when the wind stops blowing. Either that, or they need to figure out ways to store it longer. So it's likely there will be a combination of sources, which is fine. The cleaner and less CO2 we're adding to the atmosphere, the better. Now if we could get people to stop throwing their garbage in the ocean....that's not renewable.Nuclear is the best option but extremists mislead people about that.I'm all for renewable energy; we have to have the power, so there's no argument it has to come from somewhere. Just be aware nothing's free. There is always a cost.
The Fukushima tsunami disaster resulted in zero deaths from radiation. All deaths were from drowning and misguided evacuation orders. No radiation issues at all.
But the extremists propagate otherwise.
This entire energy/green-bullshit thing has nothing to do with the environment. It’s all about economic squeeze-down and Marxist control.
If you want to see problems solved you voted for the wrong guy in 2020I have nothing against nuclear if they figure out ways to handle the radioactive waste. Some say they know how. But that isn't a renewable source, either. I like the idea of power generation that never runs out, like hydro, wind and solar. Wind and solar aren't steady sources of power, though, and need a backup that can kick on at a moment's notice when the wind stops blowing. Either that, or they need to figure out ways to store it longer. So it's likely there will be a combination of sources, which is fine. The cleaner and less CO2 we're adding to the atmosphere, the better. Now if we could get people to stop throwing their garbage in the ocean....that's not renewable.Nuclear is the best option but extremists mislead people about that.I'm all for renewable energy; we have to have the power, so there's no argument it has to come from somewhere. Just be aware nothing's free. There is always a cost.
The Fukushima tsunami disaster resulted in zero deaths from radiation. All deaths were from drowning and misguided evacuation orders. No radiation issues at all.
But the extremists propagate otherwise.
This entire energy/green-bullshit thing has nothing to do with the environment. It’s all about economic squeeze-down and Marxist control.
CO2 is plant "oxygen." Liberals call it a pollutantCO2 emissions is a bullshit agenda, too.I have nothing against nuclear if they figure out ways to handle the radioactive waste. Some say they know how. But that isn't a renewable source, either. I like the idea of power generation that never runs out, like hydro, wind and solar. Wind and solar aren't steady sources of power, though, and need a backup that can kick on at a moment's notice when the wind stops blowing. Either that, or they need to figure out ways to store it longer. So it's likely there will be a combination of sources, which is fine. The cleaner and less CO2 we're adding to the atmosphere, the better. Now if we could get people to stop throwing their garbage in the ocean....that's not renewable.Nuclear is the best option but extremists mislead people about that.I'm all for renewable energy; we have to have the power, so there's no argument it has to come from somewhere. Just be aware nothing's free. There is always a cost.
The Fukushima tsunami disaster resulted in zero deaths from radiation. All deaths were from drowning and misguided evacuation orders. No radiation issues at all.
But the extremists propagate otherwise.
This entire energy/green-bullshit thing has nothing to do with the environment. It’s all about economic squeeze-down and Marxist control.
It’s all a Marxist control scam.
The White House on Monday detailed an ambitious plan to expand wind farms along the East Coast and jump-start the country’s nascent offshore wind industry, saying it hoped to trigger a massive clean-energy effort in the fight against climate change.
The plan would generate 30 gigawatts of offshore wind power by the end of the decade — enough to power more than 10 million American homes and cut 78 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions. To accomplish that, the Biden administration said, it would speed permitting for projects off the East Coast, invest in research and development, provide low-interest loans to industry and fund changes to U.S. ports.
The initiative represents a major stretch for the United States. The country has only one offshore wind project online at this time, generating 30 megawatts, off Rhode Island.
--------In addition, they will partner with corporate America to help map out data regarding ocean climate and bio-diversity.--------
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has entered a memorandum of agreement with Ørsted Wind Power North America LLC, an offshore wind development company to share physical and biological data in Ørsted-leased waters subject to U.S. jurisdiction. NOAA anticipates that Ørsted’s data will fill gaps in ocean mapping and observing to help NOAA better understand weather, climate and ocean processes and build resilient coastal communities and economies. As part of the agreement, NOAA will also share its publicly available data with Ørsted. Together, this information sharing will be used to ensure that offshore renewable energy technologies and infrastructure are developed, deployed, and maintained effectively.
Well, looks like they want to move towards cleaner energy. They want it to look like this:
View attachment 473947
noAnd are there plans to protect the birds?
oh yeah, tiny footprint as the folks from Chernobyl know.Nuclear gives you greater electric production from a vastly smaller footprint.
The wind turbines will end hurricanes, cuz no more global climate warming changeWhen a hurricane comes along what then?
Just make sure you can't see them from Martha's Vineyard.
The White House on Monday detailed an ambitious plan to expand wind farms along the East Coast and jump-start the country’s nascent offshore wind industry, saying it hoped to trigger a massive clean-energy effort in the fight against climate change.
The plan would generate 30 gigawatts of offshore wind power by the end of the decade — enough to power more than 10 million American homes and cut 78 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions. To accomplish that, the Biden administration said, it would speed permitting for projects off the East Coast, invest in research and development, provide low-interest loans to industry and fund changes to U.S. ports.
The initiative represents a major stretch for the United States. The country has only one offshore wind project online at this time, generating 30 megawatts, off Rhode Island.
--------In addition, they will partner with corporate America to help map out data regarding ocean climate and bio-diversity.--------
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has entered a memorandum of agreement with Ørsted Wind Power North America LLC, an offshore wind development company to share physical and biological data in Ørsted-leased waters subject to U.S. jurisdiction. NOAA anticipates that Ørsted’s data will fill gaps in ocean mapping and observing to help NOAA better understand weather, climate and ocean processes and build resilient coastal communities and economies. As part of the agreement, NOAA will also share its publicly available data with Ørsted. Together, this information sharing will be used to ensure that offshore renewable energy technologies and infrastructure are developed, deployed, and maintained effectively.
Well, looks like they want to move towards cleaner energy. They want it to look like this:
View attachment 473947
Have you actually studied Keynes' economic theories, FFrench?Weren't you around when FDR and Keynes were still alive? Both of them were part of the New Deal/World War II economy...you know that. Now stay on topic of the wind farms, Sparky
You're the type of tree hugger where if Obama or Biden said that, "We would be better off with nuclear", you would be straight up their anus if they bdropped their trousers instead of weighing up the pros and cons.noAnd are there plans to protect the birds?
oh yeah, tiny footprint as the folks from Chernobyl know.Nuclear gives you greater electric production from a vastly smaller footprint.
Yes or a Tsunami.When a hurricane comes along what then?
wind mills will beat natural earth evolution!in the fight against climate change.
Accidents happen. WOOPS!noAnd are there plans to protect the birds?
oh yeah, tiny footprint as the folks from Chernobyl know.Nuclear gives you greater electric production from a vastly smaller footprint.
