Green Energy wont work - Who are you kidding?

[Charles_Main]

I have been reading some of the posts on other threads and I still dont see anyone who can support the Green position with facts. We need to drill for oil. Do you really think we are going to cut down energy use in this country? or plug in a car every night?

Plug a car into a socket and what you have is a car power by Mostly COAL fired power plants. Not exactly an ideal environmental solution IMO.

That said, Of course green solutions can work. The problem comes with people who want to leap off a cliff to them when we are not ready and send out economy into the shitter in the process.

 

[MikeK]

The key to making green energy work is conscientious control of wasteful energy use.

 

[KissMy]

My wind & solar equipment was made in China. I am ok with it & I paid for it all myself with no tax credit of government subsidy. I installed it myself so now the whole system is going to pay for itself in 2 to 3 years. If china makes a decent (PHEV) Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicle for a cheap price I will buy that to. Then we as a nation can import less energy from foreigners. Life without oil will be a lot different & maybe a bit more difficult but it will be more free.

 

[Old Rocks]

Government subsidized green energy will fail as all government subsidized programs do.

I see. The Corps of Discovery was such a failure, right?

The grant for the investigation of the properties of obscure materials called semi-conductors in 1948 was another failure, correct?

The money we spent on the ocean exploration that map the magnitism of of the Juan de Fuca rift zone was another failure, correct?

Skull, why do you insist on repeating that very stupid Conservative Mantra that has been proven to be false? The Interstate Highway System.

Do you really call the waste graft and corruption that defines the highway system a success?

If the government takes over energy, it will be rife with political payoffs and out of control spending. The government will decide which companies succeed and fail based not on quality or competitiveness but on who is sucking a politician's dick.

The idiots in government don't care what something costs because they don't care if they make a profit. After all as far as the fucking government is concerned we are all nothing but walking ATMs.

Good lord, Skull. Whatever graft there was building the Interstate System pales beside that when we threw the railroads across the continent. But, in spite of the graft and corruption, the nation benefited greatly from that project.

 

[Old Rocks]

yes, we can only use light crude. Moron. Peak oil is a political fantasy. Technology improves retrieval and recovery efforts all the time, making more and more sources viable. Yet you remain doggedly attached to only ONE type of oil. Talk about dishonest. You like to play "hard" numbers when it suits the negative in the form of usage and demands and then play "soft" numbers of supply and prevaricate and de-emphasize numbers on the estimates. All in an effort to fudge the perception and make things make look worse than they are.

Whatever. You're not an honest vendor here and are just selling bunk to suckers.

My, my, Fritz, old boy, you seem to know a lot of things that are not true.

The Hubbert Peak was the work of Dr. Hubbert. In 1948 he predicted the peak oil for the US based on known fields and rate of discovery. His prediction was correct to the year, 1970. And his curve for the downward slide of production has been dead on.

 

[Old Rocks]

I have been reading some of the posts on other threads and I still dont see anyone who can support the Green position with facts. We need to drill for oil. Do you really think we are going to cut down energy use in this country? or plug in a car every night?

Plug a car into a socket and what you have is a car power by Mostly COAL fired power plants. Not exactly an ideal environmental solution IMO.

That said, Of course green solutions can work. The problem comes with people who want to leap off a cliff to them when we are not ready and send out economy into the shitter in the process.

Once again, even if you use coal generated electricity, you will have less of a CO2 footprint because of the inherent inefficiency of the ICE. However, the prices of the solar panels are coming down rapidly enough that by the time there are some good plug in hybrids, or full EVs on the market, the payback powering your home and fueling your vehicle may be down to 3 to 5 years.

 

[Old Rocks]

My wind & solar equipment was made in China. I am ok with it & I paid for it all myself with no tax credit of government subsidy. I installed it myself so now the whole system is going to pay for itself in 2 to 3 years. If china makes a decent (PHEV) Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicle for a cheap price I will buy that to. Then we as a nation can import less energy from foreigners. Life without oil will be a lot different & maybe a bit more difficult but it will be more free.

Soon, you will be able to buy Chinese panels assembled, and, down the road, manufactured here in Oregon.

"Grape Solar takes wraps off expansion plans in Eugene" — Solar Oregon

By Richard Read, The Oregonian
>>click here for original article

Grape Solar doesn't grow silicon crystals or make solar cells at its Eugene headquarters. Essentially, it just imports low-cost solar panels from China and re-sells them here.

But on Wednesday, Grape made it clear it would like to ripen into a manufacturer with the capacity to employ as many as 200 workers in economically depressed Lane County. The company signed a lease for 53,000 square feet of factory space in Eugene, with an eye toward a $10 million plant with the capacity to churn out 100 megawatts of solar panels annually.

Grape President Ocean Yuan said the company's sales have rocketed from zero to $20 million in the past nine months, and he's waiting to see more orders come through. But he'd eventually like to build three North American assembly plants -- in Oregon, New Jersey and Ontario -- to be closer to customers. Fully assembled solar panels are bulky and can be expensive to ship from overseas

 

[Skull Pilot]

I see. The Corps of Discovery was such a failure, right?

The grant for the investigation of the properties of obscure materials called semi-conductors in 1948 was another failure, correct?

The money we spent on the ocean exploration that map the magnitism of of the Juan de Fuca rift zone was another failure, correct?

Skull, why do you insist on repeating that very stupid Conservative Mantra that has been proven to be false? The Interstate Highway System.

Do you really call the waste graft and corruption that defines the highway system a success?

If the government takes over energy, it will be rife with political payoffs and out of control spending. The government will decide which companies succeed and fail based not on quality or competitiveness but on who is sucking a politician's dick.

The idiots in government don't care what something costs because they don't care if they make a profit. After all as far as the fucking government is concerned we are all nothing but walking ATMs.

Good lord, Skull. Whatever graft there was building the Interstate System pales beside that when we threw the railroads across the continent. But, in spite of the graft and corruption, the nation benefited greatly from that project.

The waste and corruption is justified then?

Tell me that when the only way to make wind work is ever increasing tax subsidies to the one or two companies that happened to have a fucking politician in their pocket when the law was signed. If you want reliable, cost efficient alternative energy, then get the fucking government out of it.

 

[Old Rocks]

Do you really call the waste graft and corruption that defines the highway system a success?

If the government takes over energy, it will be rife with political payoffs and out of control spending. The government will decide which companies succeed and fail based not on quality or competitiveness but on who is sucking a politician's dick.

The idiots in government don't care what something costs because they don't care if they make a profit. After all as far as the fucking government is concerned we are all nothing but walking ATMs.

Good lord, Skull. Whatever graft there was building the Interstate System pales beside that when we threw the railroads across the continent. But, in spite of the graft and corruption, the nation benefited greatly from that project.

The waste and corruption is justified then?

Tell me that when the only way to make wind work is ever increasing tax subsidies to the one or two companies that happened to have a fucking politician in their pocket when the law was signed. If you want reliable, cost efficient alternative energy, then get the fucking government out of it.

No, the waste and corruption was not justified. But, whenever a paradigm change is occuring, you are still dealing with people. Insisting that a project be completely free of corruption or waste is impossible as we are dealling with humans, not paragons of virtue.

As far as the wind working, it already is.

EIA - Electricity Data, Analysis, Surveys

Net generation from renewable energy sources, excluding conventional hydroelectric generation, increased 19.9 percent in 2008, following an increase of 9.0 percent in 2007 (Table 2.1a). A large part of this growth was due to increased wind generation, which totaled 55.4 million MWh, or 1.3 percent of total net generation. For the first time, wind generation constituted a larger share than biomass, and also a larger share than petroleum. The top 5 wind-generating States were Texas, California, Minnesota, Iowa, and Washington. Texas, where wind generation was up 80.2 percent in 2008, was by far the largest source of wind generation with more than three times that of California, the Nation’s second-largest provider. Nationally, wind generation increased 60.7 percent from its 2007 level. 72.6 percent of the national increase was accounted for by increases in Texas, Colorado, Minnesota, Illinois, Oregon, and Iowa. Wood and wood-derived fuels, representing 0.9 percent of total net generation, accounted for 37 million MWh, down 4.4 percent from 2007. Geothermal power plants supplied 15 million MWh of net generation and other biomass plants generated 18 million MWh; each of these renewable sources accounted for approximately 0.4 percent of total net generation in 2008. Generation from solar thermal and photovoltaic sources was up 41.2 percent from 2007, at 864 thousand MWh. Wood and wood derived fuels and geothermal have maintained fairly stable output levels since 1997, averaging 38 million MWh and 15 million MWh per year, respectively. Other biomass generation has declined from a 23 million MWh peak in 2000 to 18 million MWh in 2008.

When you are having increases of 40% to 60% capacity in the major alternative energy methods, it is really hard to state that they are not successful.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Good lord, Skull. Whatever graft there was building the Interstate System pales beside that when we threw the railroads across the continent. But, in spite of the graft and corruption, the nation benefited greatly from that project.

The waste and corruption is justified then?

Tell me that when the only way to make wind work is ever increasing tax subsidies to the one or two companies that happened to have a fucking politician in their pocket when the law was signed. If you want reliable, cost efficient alternative energy, then get the fucking government out of it.

No, the waste and corruption was not justified. But, whenever a paradigm change is occuring, you are still dealing with people. Insisting that a project be completely free of corruption or waste is impossible as we are dealling with humans, not paragons of virtue.

As far as the wind working, it already is.

EIA - Electricity Data, Analysis, Surveys

Net generation from renewable energy sources, excluding conventional hydroelectric generation, increased 19.9 percent in 2008, following an increase of 9.0 percent in 2007 (Table 2.1a). A large part of this growth was due to increased wind generation, which totaled 55.4 million MWh, or 1.3 percent of total net generation. For the first time, wind generation constituted a larger share than biomass, and also a larger share than petroleum. The top 5 wind-generating States were Texas, California, Minnesota, Iowa, and Washington. Texas, where wind generation was up 80.2 percent in 2008, was by far the largest source of wind generation with more than three times that of California, the Nation’s second-largest provider. Nationally, wind generation increased 60.7 percent from its 2007 level. 72.6 percent of the national increase was accounted for by increases in Texas, Colorado, Minnesota, Illinois, Oregon, and Iowa. Wood and wood-derived fuels, representing 0.9 percent of total net generation, accounted for 37 million MWh, down 4.4 percent from 2007. Geothermal power plants supplied 15 million MWh of net generation and other biomass plants generated 18 million MWh; each of these renewable sources accounted for approximately 0.4 percent of total net generation in 2008. Generation from solar thermal and photovoltaic sources was up 41.2 percent from 2007, at 864 thousand MWh. Wood and wood derived fuels and geothermal have maintained fairly stable output levels since 1997, averaging 38 million MWh and 15 million MWh per year, respectively. Other biomass generation has declined from a 23 million MWh peak in 2000 to 18 million MWh in 2008.

When you are having increases of 40% to 60% capacity in the major alternative energy methods, it is really hard to state that they are not successful.

Wind on average supplies only 30% of rated capacity. So if X gigawatts of rated capacity windmills are built the actual output is .33X GW. Factor that into the cost and you'll realize that wind is not such a good deal. Then factor in the government subsidies and it looks even worse.

Energy Tribune- Wind Power Exposed: The Renewable Energy Source is Expensive, Unreliable and Won?t Save Natural Gas.

Independent reports have consistently revealed an industry plagued by high construction and maintenance costs, highly volatile reliability and a voracious appetite for taxpayer subsidies. Such is the economic strain on taxpayer funds being poured into wind power by Europe's early pioneers -- Denmark, Germany and Spain – that all have recently been forced to scale back their investments.

 

[KissMy]

China is world's number one energy user.

The Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal cited a top IEA official as saying the Asian giant had taken over the top spot in 2009, earlier than expected.

According to the IEA, China consumed 2.252 billion tons of oil equivalent of energy in 2009, from sources that included coal, nuclear power, natural gas and hydroelectric power -- about four percent more than the United States.

But an official with China's National Energy Administration told reporters the report was flawed.

"The IEA's data on China's energy use is unreliable," the official, Zhou Xian, was quoted by Xinhua news agency as saying.

The Financial Times quoted IEA chief economist Fatih Birol as saying: "In the year 2000, the US consumed twice as much energy as China; now, China consumes more than the US."

The United States still uses far more energy than China on a per capita basis, but China is less energy-efficient, the report said.

The IEA, the energy strategy branch of the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, said the data was still preliminary but that the trend was clear, the newspaper reported.

China has embarked in recent years on an aggressive campaign to secure overseas energy supplies and satisfy sky-rocketing demand fuelled by its fast-expanding economy and citizens' increasing consumerism.

Late last year, Beijing announced ahead of the Copenhagen climate change summit that it would embark on a major energy efficiency drive to curb growth in its world-leading greenhouse gas emissions.

It has set a goal of generating 15 percent of its energy from renewable sources -- mainly wind and water -- by 2020.

The IEA's Birol told the Financial Times that while the United States had improved its energy efficiency by 2.5 percent annually over the past decade, China had only notched up a 1.7 percent annual improvement.

China still depends on coal for about 70 percent of its energy needs. It has surpassed Japan as the world's largest coal importer, despite its own vast coal resources.

 

[editec]

Government subsidized green energy will fail as all government subsidized programs do.

Worked out damned well for the Petroleum indistry, didn't it?

No industry I can think of gets more subsidies than they do.

 

[topspin]

the oil industry is the best economic engine this country has ever seen. I hope alternatives prove better. So far after several decades they still are exponentially less efficient.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Government subsidized green energy will fail as all government subsidized programs do.

Worked out damned well for the Petroleum indistry, didn't it?

No industry I can think of gets more subsidies than they do.

and when have i ever been in favor of oil subsidies?

Oil is profitable without subsidies. Wind isn't

 

[KissMy]

Solarfun Obtained RMB6 Billion Credit Facility With Bank of Shanghai

SHANGHAI, July 20 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Solarfun Power Holdings Co., Ltd. ("Solarfun" or "the Company") (Nasdaq: SOLF), a vertically integrated manufacturer of silicon ingots and photovoltaic ("PV") cells and modules in China, today announced that Jiangsu Linyang Solarfun Co., Ltd., a wholly owned subsidiary of Solarfun, has obtained a credit facility in the amount not exceeding RMB6 billion, or an equivalent amount of foreign currency, from Bank of Shanghai, Nanjing branch (the "Bank"). The contract has a term of 5 years. Specific drawdowns against this facility are subject to internal review and approval by the Bank.

Gareth Kung, Chief Financial Officer of Solarfun, commented, "We are pleased to expand our partnership with Bank of Shanghai and view this new credit facility as an important component of our long term financial plan. It provides us with the capital resources and flexibility to continue to grow our business aggressively in the future, including capacity expansions, investments in technology, branding and project financing."

 

[topspin]

it's comical thinking alt's can be remotely competetive anytime soon.
If you look deep you can see a decade ago oil below $20 bbl and hundreds of thousands of lawyoffs in the industry. Granted this was before the libtard demonization so as long as folks had cheap gas they could care less about the oil industry.

Republicans have not defended oil industry nearly enough.

 

[KissMy]

Why China Has To Dominate Green Tech

China just passed a new milestone: it consumes more energy than the United States, which had been the world leader ever since energy consumption started to be measured. Twenty years ago, such a milestone would have been marked with unabashed pride, but in today's energy-conscious world, it is not a good threshold. From now on, when it comes to global warming, pollution and related issues, China will no longer be able to hide behind its claims of being a developing nation.

On the policy level, the Chinese government has to perform a delicate balancing act, it has to balance the desire of many Chinese to live a Western lifestyle, together with its high energy consumption and waste, with the need to preserve the environment, since China, and the world, would suffer enormous damage if 1.3 billion people got all their energy needs from coal and oil, the two most widely used fossil fuels. China's political and social stability depends on finding the right balance, since the party has an implicit mandate: it will deliver economic growth to the Chinese people.

This is why the Chinese government has chosen to invest in developing new green energy technology.

The country is very fortunate in that most of the discovered deposits of rare earths used in the development of new technologies are found in China. While these deposits are very valuable, up until recently, the industry has not been regulated much by the Chinese central government. But now that Beijing is aware of their importance and value, it has come under much closer scrutiny. For one, Beijing wants to consolidate the industry and lower energy waste and environmental damage. (Ironically, the rare earth mining business is one of the most energy-wasteful and highly polluting industries around. Think Chinese coal mining with acid.)

At the same time, Beijing wants to cut back rare earth exports to the rest of the world, instead encouraging domestic production into wind and solar products for export around the world. With patents on the new technology used in manufacturing, China would control the intellectual property and licensing on the products that would be used all over the world. If Beijing is able to do this, it would control the next generation of energy products used by the world for the next century.

 

[KissMy]

The Oil Drum: Europe the 3-part view of power generation

 

[KissMy]

EPA is proposing to regulate coal ash for the first time. Your electric bill will rise if this happens.

 

[Old Rocks]

But maybe we won't see another river destroyed.