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.
How much did the pyramids cost the pharaoh's to build. And going to green energy would be nothing compared to that feat. Also, the solar collectors they have built out west are reliable. And are working quite well.Yes, when you're building expensive, unreliable power generation, you need to build twice what you need.
That's some really expensive, unreliable stuff you're pushing.
You never got to the good math or econ classes before you dropped out, did you?
Or science, obviously.
How much did the pyramids cost the pharaoh's to build.
All the labor and materials, they ended up being pretty pricey.
And going to green energy would be nothing compared to that feat.
I agree, based on the expense of unreliable "green energy", it would be dumber than the pyramids.
Also, the solar collectors they have built out west are reliable.
Yeah, the stuff that will never earn back its cost of construction....real reliable.
Slave labor isn't very pricy. As for the materials, they were under their feet. Next, do the pyramids produce anything? Next, from what I hear, it doesn't take all that long for the solar energy systems that people buy to pay for themselves. No dount the same would be true for scaled up solar or solar electric power plants. Even for the one I have been hearing about that isn't quite meeting its contractual obligations, it is still producing power. Sooner or later, it will pay for itself.
Next, from what I hear, it doesn't take all that long for the solar energy systems that people buy to pay for themselves.
After you get your ears checked, feel free to post some actual figures, so you can be mocked properly.
If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself. I don't care if you believe me or not. If you don't, it's your loss, not mine.
And if you would bother to check you would find that not a single one of them is working. Ivanpah a billion dollar solar plant in the desert is having to increase the amount of natural gas it is using to try and meet it's power contracts, and it is STILL failing. To the point that it is in danger of losing its license. Like I said, your knowledge level is laughable.
You have to be high. Of course they are working. What would keep them from working. As long as the sun shines on them they will work. Also, I doubt very much if any of them even have a natural gas pipeline running to them. They were designed to work with sunlight. Not gas. And whoever built them would have had to have known what to expect from them. So any "contracts" would have had that output in mind.
Ummmm, my guess would be the fact that they don't. But that's just a guess. Don't believe me look it up here. But only read the article if you really want to learn something.
Could California’s massive Ivanpah solar power plant be forced to go dark?
Published: Mar 16, 2016 8:18 p.m. ET
"A federally backed, $2.2 billion solar project in the California desert isn’t producing the electricity it is contractually required to deliver to PG&E Corp., which says the solar plant may be forced to shut down if it doesn’t receive a break Thursday from state regulators."
Could California’s massive Ivanpah solar power plant be forced to go dark?
So you came up with an article that shows that particular design of solar energy may not be working as well as expected. That doesn't make it junk. And there are probably other solar plants of that desigh in other placeas. Are they "just crap" too? All that aside, maybe they should have just went with solar electric pannels.
Listen up junior. I have had a solar panel system for over 30 years now. I built it myself so I have a sneaking suspicion I know more about the subject than you ever will.
Solar works fine in a limited application. Namely as a single family EMERGENCY power supply.
Even there it has limits. Scaled up for commercial use it fails. It simply isn't efficient enough.
Some day, when you have grown up you might actually learn something.
But I doubt it.
You do an excellent job at sounding like you don't know what you're talking about. There are homes and businesses out there that actually SELL energy back to the utilities. Because they produce MORE than they need. Also, everybody around here keeps yapping about how unreliable green energy is. Including your solar power. Isn't it pretty stupid to use something that is "unreliable" as an emergency alternative?
If I really cared, I would ask you what in the hell you're talking about.
And a fraction of an inch of snow will virtually KILL the output from a solar panel.. So will bird poo or pollen..
And paint and titanium dioxide ointment and 8 meters of volcanic ash.
Wait till you see what metal filings do in the lube oil of a gas turbine. Or a crud burst on the restart of a nuke plant.
And the last recorded nuclear disaster from a "crud burst" was --------------------------- ? I'm sure proper maintenance takes crud into consideration.
I was dealing with the proud dropout Krypto who knows just enough to believe that paving roads with PV solar is an excellent way to power something..
Many nuclear plants have passed their expected lifespan. Yet they are still being run. Also, cleaning any "crud" out of them would probably be prohibitively expensive. Also, when a nuclear accident happens, there isn't enough money in the world to clean up the mess. How "cost effective" is that. Also, from what I "hear," the core at Chernobyl is expected to remain dangerous for about the next 4.5 billion years. Also, most roads just sit there absorbing sunlight. Why not build solar pannels into them. And don't tell me it is beyond our technology.
How much did the pyramids cost the pharaoh's to build. And going to green energy would be nothing compared to that feat. Also, the solar collectors they have built out west are reliable. And are working quite well.
How much did the pyramids cost the pharaoh's to build.
All the labor and materials, they ended up being pretty pricey.
And going to green energy would be nothing compared to that feat.
I agree, based on the expense of unreliable "green energy", it would be dumber than the pyramids.
Also, the solar collectors they have built out west are reliable.
Yeah, the stuff that will never earn back its cost of construction....real reliable.
Slave labor isn't very pricy. As for the materials, they were under their feet. Next, do the pyramids produce anything? Next, from what I hear, it doesn't take all that long for the solar energy systems that people buy to pay for themselves. No dount the same would be true for scaled up solar or solar electric power plants. Even for the one I have been hearing about that isn't quite meeting its contractual obligations, it is still producing power. Sooner or later, it will pay for itself.
Next, from what I hear, it doesn't take all that long for the solar energy systems that people buy to pay for themselves.
After you get your ears checked, feel free to post some actual figures, so you can be mocked properly.
If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself. I don't care if you believe me or not. If you don't, it's your loss, not mine.
If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself.
I have, a lot of that crap will never break even.
I don't care if you believe me or not.
What is there to believe? You provide nothing but hearsay.
Post some actual figures, we'll point out where you went wrong.
You have to be high. Of course they are working. What would keep them from working. As long as the sun shines on them they will work. Also, I doubt very much if any of them even have a natural gas pipeline running to them. They were designed to work with sunlight. Not gas. And whoever built them would have had to have known what to expect from them. So any "contracts" would have had that output in mind.
Ummmm, my guess would be the fact that they don't. But that's just a guess. Don't believe me look it up here. But only read the article if you really want to learn something.
Could California’s massive Ivanpah solar power plant be forced to go dark?
Published: Mar 16, 2016 8:18 p.m. ET
"A federally backed, $2.2 billion solar project in the California desert isn’t producing the electricity it is contractually required to deliver to PG&E Corp., which says the solar plant may be forced to shut down if it doesn’t receive a break Thursday from state regulators."
Could California’s massive Ivanpah solar power plant be forced to go dark?
So you came up with an article that shows that particular design of solar energy may not be working as well as expected. That doesn't make it junk. And there are probably other solar plants of that desigh in other placeas. Are they "just crap" too? All that aside, maybe they should have just went with solar electric pannels.
Listen up junior. I have had a solar panel system for over 30 years now. I built it myself so I have a sneaking suspicion I know more about the subject than you ever will.
Solar works fine in a limited application. Namely as a single family EMERGENCY power supply.
Even there it has limits. Scaled up for commercial use it fails. It simply isn't efficient enough.
Some day, when you have grown up you might actually learn something.
But I doubt it.
You do an excellent job at sounding like you don't know what you're talking about. There are homes and businesses out there that actually SELL energy back to the utilities. Because they produce MORE than they need. Also, everybody around here keeps yapping about how unreliable green energy is. Including your solar power. Isn't it pretty stupid to use something that is "unreliable" as an emergency alternative?
No, they really don't. Take away the subsidies that they get from the government, who gets that money by assessing a fee on those who don't have solar systems, and the net result is the modules will usually fail before they pay for themselves. Down in Carson City they installed with much fanfare a nice solar array on one of the middle schools and for about a month they kindly had a live feed of all that energy the modules were producing. After a month they killed the feed because it became very apparent that they weren't going to be as useful as they were claimed.
I dare you to actually go and LOOK at the real facts and figures of the various "renewables" you tout so much. No matter which one you check, you will find that it is not producing as advertised. Period.
If I really cared, I would ask you what in the hell you're talking about.
Intellectual curiosity certainly doesn't appear to be one of your attributes.
I already know just about everything I need to know.
Which is more than you know. Also, if whoever it was that I said that to had anything sensible to say, they probably would have told me what they were talking about.
If I really cared, I would ask you what in the hell you're talking about.
Intellectual curiosity certainly doesn't appear to be one of your attributes.
I already know just about everything I need to know. .....
And a fraction of an inch of snow will virtually KILL the output from a solar panel.. So will bird poo or pollen..
And paint and titanium dioxide ointment and 8 meters of volcanic ash.
Wait till you see what metal filings do in the lube oil of a gas turbine. Or a crud burst on the restart of a nuke plant.
And the last recorded nuclear disaster from a "crud burst" was --------------------------- ? I'm sure proper maintenance takes crud into consideration.
I was dealing with the proud dropout Krypto who knows just enough to believe that paving roads with PV solar is an excellent way to power something..
Many nuclear plants have passed their expected lifespan. Yet they are still being run. Also, cleaning any "crud" out of them would probably be prohibitively expensive. Also, when a nuclear accident happens, there isn't enough money in the world to clean up the mess. How "cost effective" is that. Also, from what I "hear," the core at Chernobyl is expected to remain dangerous for about the next 4.5 billion years. Also, most roads just sit there absorbing sunlight. Why not build solar pannels into them. And don't tell me it is beyond our technology.
I've already told you why embedding solar panel farms in roadways is a fabulous waste of money. YET -- you're still all for it. There was a "go fund me" for the idea. I suggest you open your wallet and dump EVERYTHING into the idea.
Just so you can come back here in a couple years and shove that "success" in my face..
Can't wait to see the lawsuits that occur because the roads no longer have ANY traction in poor weather. I imagine the number of bodybags used per capita will increase a bit. I'll put MY wallet into whoever makes the body bags.
You're RIGHT about old power plants. We're ignoring that problem. It needs to be addressed. So to stop GW -- we need 50 NEW nuclear plants PLUS about 40 to cover the old ones.
And a fraction of an inch of snow will virtually KILL the output from a solar panel.. So will bird poo or pollen..
And paint and titanium dioxide ointment and 8 meters of volcanic ash.
Wait till you see what metal filings do in the lube oil of a gas turbine. Or a crud burst on the restart of a nuke plant.
And the last recorded nuclear disaster from a "crud burst" was --------------------------- ? I'm sure proper maintenance takes crud into consideration.
I was dealing with the proud dropout Krypto who knows just enough to believe that paving roads with PV solar is an excellent way to power something..
Many nuclear plants have passed their expected lifespan. Yet they are still being run. Also, cleaning any "crud" out of them would probably be prohibitively expensive. Also, when a nuclear accident happens, there isn't enough money in the world to clean up the mess. How "cost effective" is that. Also, from what I "hear," the core at Chernobyl is expected to remain dangerous for about the next 4.5 billion years. Also, most roads just sit there absorbing sunlight. Why not build solar pannels into them. And don't tell me it is beyond our technology.
I've already told you why embedding solar panel farms in roadways is a fabulous waste of money. YET -- you're still all for it. There was a "go fund me" for the idea. I suggest you open your wallet and dump EVERYTHING into the idea.
Just so you can come back here in a couple years and shove that "success" in my face..
Can't wait to see the lawsuits that occur because the roads no longer have ANY traction in poor weather. I imagine the number of bodybags used per capita will increase a bit. I'll put MY wallet into whoever makes the body bags.
You're RIGHT about old power plants. We're ignoring that problem. It needs to be addressed. So to stop GW -- we need 50 NEW nuclear plants PLUS about 40 to cover the old ones.
If I had a home and a little extra money, I would get solar electric pannels. As for doing so for roads, a project of that size would require government funding. And something like that should be done. Even if it required a sort of "Marshal Plan." Also, for all you know, the kind of road solar panels I talked about might increase traction.
Another thing is that it would only take a square area of land 44 miles per side to power the U.S. with electricty. That could probably be done with the amount of rooftops available.
As to your nuclear stupidity, I can't say it surprises me. Radaition isn't cost effective. Also, it no doubt takes energy to mine and process ore into usable uranium. Another thing is that I think I told you that the core at Chernobyl is expected to stay dangerous for the next 4.5 billion years. When a nuclear accident happens, there isn't enough money in the world to clean up the mess.
So Krypto. You've about covered the "ecology and racism" bullet list.
So I got to ask -- which are you more afraid of?
1) Non-White minorities
2) Global Warming
3) Nuclear Power
4) Suits and Ties
Intellectual curiosity certainly doesn't appear to be one of your attributes.
And paint and titanium dioxide ointment and 8 meters of volcanic ash.
Wait till you see what metal filings do in the lube oil of a gas turbine. Or a crud burst on the restart of a nuke plant.
And the last recorded nuclear disaster from a "crud burst" was --------------------------- ? I'm sure proper maintenance takes crud into consideration.
I was dealing with the proud dropout Krypto who knows just enough to believe that paving roads with PV solar is an excellent way to power something..
Many nuclear plants have passed their expected lifespan. Yet they are still being run. Also, cleaning any "crud" out of them would probably be prohibitively expensive. Also, when a nuclear accident happens, there isn't enough money in the world to clean up the mess. How "cost effective" is that. Also, from what I "hear," the core at Chernobyl is expected to remain dangerous for about the next 4.5 billion years. Also, most roads just sit there absorbing sunlight. Why not build solar pannels into them. And don't tell me it is beyond our technology.
I've already told you why embedding solar panel farms in roadways is a fabulous waste of money. YET -- you're still all for it. There was a "go fund me" for the idea. I suggest you open your wallet and dump EVERYTHING into the idea.
Just so you can come back here in a couple years and shove that "success" in my face..
Can't wait to see the lawsuits that occur because the roads no longer have ANY traction in poor weather. I imagine the number of bodybags used per capita will increase a bit. I'll put MY wallet into whoever makes the body bags.
You're RIGHT about old power plants. We're ignoring that problem. It needs to be addressed. So to stop GW -- we need 50 NEW nuclear plants PLUS about 40 to cover the old ones.
If I had a home and a little extra money, I would get solar electric pannels. As for doing so for roads, a project of that size would require government funding. And something like that should be done. Even if it required a sort of "Marshal Plan." Also, for all you know, the kind of road solar panels I talked about might increase traction.
Another thing is that it would only take a square area of land 44 miles per side to power the U.S. with electricty. That could probably be done with the amount of rooftops available.
As to your nuclear stupidity, I can't say it surprises me. Radaition isn't cost effective. Also, it no doubt takes energy to mine and process ore into usable uranium. Another thing is that I think I told you that the core at Chernobyl is expected to stay dangerous for the next 4.5 billion years. When a nuclear accident happens, there isn't enough money in the world to clean up the mess.
What is the toxic "half-life" of all that battery waste that ends up in landfills? Is is greater than 4.5 billion years?
And you have an incredible capacity for just zipping your brain RIGHT OVER problems and facts that come your way? What is the TRACTION available on a solar panel when it's even slightly damp or on an incline?
What personal characteristic is that allows you to simply ignore facts, evidence, and problems? Who is gonna CLEAN miles of PV panels? What LOAD BEARING CAPACITY do they have? What in the BLAZES are you smoking?
And even WHEN you're done with that project -- You got a power source that does not work 16 or more hours of the day and only works partly for 240 - 300 days a year. What have you SOLVED?
.... Another thing is that I think I told you that the core at Chernobyl is expected to stay dangerous for the next 4.5 billion years. ...
.... Another thing is that I think I told you that the core at Chernobyl is expected to stay dangerous for the next 4.5 billion years. ...
Where did you "hear" that one, professor?
How much did the pyramids cost the pharaoh's to build.
All the labor and materials, they ended up being pretty pricey.
And going to green energy would be nothing compared to that feat.
I agree, based on the expense of unreliable "green energy", it would be dumber than the pyramids.
Also, the solar collectors they have built out west are reliable.
Yeah, the stuff that will never earn back its cost of construction....real reliable.
Slave labor isn't very pricy. As for the materials, they were under their feet. Next, do the pyramids produce anything? Next, from what I hear, it doesn't take all that long for the solar energy systems that people buy to pay for themselves. No dount the same would be true for scaled up solar or solar electric power plants. Even for the one I have been hearing about that isn't quite meeting its contractual obligations, it is still producing power. Sooner or later, it will pay for itself.
Next, from what I hear, it doesn't take all that long for the solar energy systems that people buy to pay for themselves.
After you get your ears checked, feel free to post some actual figures, so you can be mocked properly.
If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself. I don't care if you believe me or not. If you don't, it's your loss, not mine.
If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself.
I have, a lot of that crap will never break even.
I don't care if you believe me or not.
What is there to believe? You provide nothing but hearsay.
Post some actual figures, we'll point out where you went wrong.
Do you enjoy being wrong? Or do you just enjoy having me recheck what I already know. I entered into my Browser, "Can home solar power pay for itself." Every single website that I looked at said that it can. One said that it would take 8.4 years. Now, are you going to make me look up the number of homes and businesses with solar power actually sell power back to the utility?
.... Another thing is that I think I told you that the core at Chernobyl is expected to stay dangerous for the next 4.5 billion years. ...
Where did you "hear" that one, professor?
On some science show dealing with Chernobyl.
Slave labor isn't very pricy. As for the materials, they were under their feet. Next, do the pyramids produce anything? Next, from what I hear, it doesn't take all that long for the solar energy systems that people buy to pay for themselves. No dount the same would be true for scaled up solar or solar electric power plants. Even for the one I have been hearing about that isn't quite meeting its contractual obligations, it is still producing power. Sooner or later, it will pay for itself.
Next, from what I hear, it doesn't take all that long for the solar energy systems that people buy to pay for themselves.
After you get your ears checked, feel free to post some actual figures, so you can be mocked properly.
If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself. I don't care if you believe me or not. If you don't, it's your loss, not mine.
If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself.
I have, a lot of that crap will never break even.
I don't care if you believe me or not.
What is there to believe? You provide nothing but hearsay.
Post some actual figures, we'll point out where you went wrong.
Do you enjoy being wrong? Or do you just enjoy having me recheck what I already know. I entered into my Browser, "Can home solar power pay for itself." Every single website that I looked at said that it can. One said that it would take 8.4 years. Now, are you going to make me look up the number of homes and businesses with solar power actually sell power back to the utility?
Do you enjoy being wrong?
When I point out your errors, I'm the opposite of wrong.
"Can home solar power pay for itself." Every single website that I looked at said that it can. One said that it would take 8.4 years.
Congrats, you found the website of a company that sells solar power systems. Durr.
