Is Modern CO2 just different?

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Low end coal, 6.6 cents per kilowatt, low end gas, 6.1 cents per kilowatt, wind without subsidies, 3.7 cents per kilowatt". Right in the article, you lying ass.

Those prices were made possible by generous subsidies that could soon diminish or expire, but recent analyses show that even without those subsidies, alternative energies can often compete with traditional sources.

But in a straight comparison of the costs of generating power, Mr. Mir said that the amount solar and wind developers needed to earn from each kilowatt-hour they sell from new projects was often “essentially competitive with what would otherwise be had from newly constructed conventional generation.”

Then why take the subsidies? Their whole analysis is questionable as hell based on what is known about wind and solar production rates. They're lying through their teeth. Here in Carson City they installed huge solar arrays at the schools and very properly provided a live feed at the City Hall so you could see what was being produced.

They stopped the live feed after a few months when people started running the numbers and figured out that the modules would never pay for themselves.

And why do the oil companies take their subsidies?

And why do the oil companies take their subsidies?

What oil companies subsidies?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Depreciation is a subsidy?????

 

[westwall]

Oncor proposes giant leap for grid batteries Dallas Morning News

Utility-scale batteries have been a holy grail within the energy sector for years. With enough storage space, surplus electricity can be generated at night, when plants usually sit idle, to be used the next day, when demand is highest. Power outages would become less frequent. Wind and solar power, susceptible to weather conditions, could be built on a larger scale. The only problem has been that the price of batteries has been too high to make economic sense. But if they’re purchased on a large enough scale, that won’t be the case for long, said Oncor CEO Bob Shapard.

“Everyone assumed the price point was five to six years out. We’re getting indications from everyone we’ve talked to they can get us to that price by 2018,” he said in an interview Wednesday.

The Dallas-based transmission company is proposing the installation of 5,000 megawatts of batteries not just in its service area but across Texas’ entire grid. That is the equivalent of four nuclear power plants on a grid with a capacity of about 81,000 megawatts.

That will put the nails in the coffin of coal fired plants. They will be shutting them down by 2020. And by 2030, many of the gas fired plants. Market based decisions.

I do find it hilarious that you guys rail against things that are already in place and ignore the construction and consequent pollution generation to create your batteries. Tesla's gigafactory (actually scheduled to be in operation by 2016, not 2017 as stated in the article) is truly gigantic. 5.4 million square feet under one roof. But that's not going to create any pollution at all to build..

 

[Old Rocks]

There goes ol' Walleyes, yelling 'Get a horse'. Why are the "Conservatives" so much against progress? And Musk's battery factory will have a lot of solar power built in.

Elon Musk s other Gigafactory breaks ground in Buffalo - SFGate

Call it the “other” Gigafactory.

SolarCity, Elon Musk’s fast-growing solar leasing business, broke ground Tuesday on a huge factory in Buffalo, N.Y., to build high-efficiency solar panels. When fully operational, the plant will produce enough panels per year to generate a gigawatt of electricity, roughly the output of a nuclear reactor. The facility is expected to employ 1,450 people.

The news comes two weeks after Tesla Motors, Musk’s electric-car company, firmed up plans for a $5 billion Gigafactory near Reno that will build advanced batteries. Musk serves as CEO of Tesla and chairs the corporate board of SolarCity, which is led by his cousin, Lyndon Rive.

The two projects bear similarities. In each case, Musk’s companies are trying to ensure a future supply of low-cost, high-quality equipment to fuel their expansion. And each project has attracted significant taxpayer dollars.

See, Walleyes, there are the doers and shakers, and then there are the fools standing beside the road, shouting 'Get a horse'. You surely fall in the latter category. People like Elon Musk make people like you irrelevant.

 

[Billy_Bob]

I just have to laugh at the CAGW morons..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

CO2, modern CO2, acts like a layer of Saran Wrap. In fact, the company that makes Saran Wrap was considering making their product out of CO2 but was afraid the "product would be too powerful and exacerbate the melting of the polar ice caps. I wish we could get some of the old school CO2 that wasn't as powerful, but that's our misfortune"

 

[westwall]

There goes ol' Walleyes, yelling 'Get a horse'. Why are the "Conservatives" so much against progress? And Musk's battery factory will have a lot of solar power built in.

Elon Musk s other Gigafactory breaks ground in Buffalo - SFGate

Call it the “other” Gigafactory.

SolarCity, Elon Musk’s fast-growing solar leasing business, broke ground Tuesday on a huge factory in Buffalo, N.Y., to build high-efficiency solar panels. When fully operational, the plant will produce enough panels per year to generate a gigawatt of electricity, roughly the output of a nuclear reactor. The facility is expected to employ 1,450 people.

The news comes two weeks after Tesla Motors, Musk’s electric-car company, firmed up plans for a $5 billion Gigafactory near Reno that will build advanced batteries. Musk serves as CEO of Tesla and chairs the corporate board of SolarCity, which is led by his cousin, Lyndon Rive.

The two projects bear similarities. In each case, Musk’s companies are trying to ensure a future supply of low-cost, high-quality equipment to fuel their expansion. And each project has attracted significant taxpayer dollars.

See, Walleyes, there are the doers and shakers, and then there are the fools standing beside the road, shouting 'Get a horse'. You surely fall in the latter category. People like Elon Musk make people like you irrelevant.

And why do your "doers" always have to use public money to do it? Why is it, that a billionaire is so unwilling to risk his own money that he suckles up to the public tit for his "investment" money? I hope the battery plant does well. I hope his solar module plant likewise does well. However the reality of those projects are that the solar module plant is probably going to be an enormous loser. Panasonic is actually going to run the battery plant out here, so I have hope that they will be able to make it work.

Musk is merely the figurehead for the project out here.

 

[Billy_Bob]

There goes ol' Walleyes, yelling 'Get a horse'. Why are the "Conservatives" so much against progress? And Musk's battery factory will have a lot of solar power built in.

Elon Musk s other Gigafactory breaks ground in Buffalo - SFGate

Call it the “other” Gigafactory.

SolarCity, Elon Musk’s fast-growing solar leasing business, broke ground Tuesday on a huge factory in Buffalo, N.Y., to build high-efficiency solar panels. When fully operational, the plant will produce enough panels per year to generate a gigawatt of electricity, roughly the output of a nuclear reactor. The facility is expected to employ 1,450 people.

The news comes two weeks after Tesla Motors, Musk’s electric-car company, firmed up plans for a $5 billion Gigafactory near Reno that will build advanced batteries. Musk serves as CEO of Tesla and chairs the corporate board of SolarCity, which is led by his cousin, Lyndon Rive.

The two projects bear similarities. In each case, Musk’s companies are trying to ensure a future supply of low-cost, high-quality equipment to fuel their expansion. And each project has attracted significant taxpayer dollars.

See, Walleyes, there are the doers and shakers, and then there are the fools standing beside the road, shouting 'Get a horse'. You surely fall in the latter category. People like Elon Musk make people like you irrelevant.

And why do your "doers" always have to use public money to do it? Why is it, that a billionaire is so unwilling to risk his own money that he suckles up to the public tit for his "investment" money? I hope the battery plant does well. I hope his solar module plant likewise does well. However the reality of those projects are that the solar module plant is probably going to be an enormous loser. Panasonic is actually going to run the battery plant out here, so I have hope that they will be able to make it work.

Musk is merely the figurehead for the project out here.

One need only look to Germany and the EU who stopped wind power subsidies last year. To date there are now 1,600 wind turbines setting mothballed and not used.. And three other companies are looking at bankruptcy totaling another 3,000+ wind turbines. They simply can not compete in today's markets due to reliability issues and cost to keep running.

 

[rdean]

This is why Republicans make me laugh at their tardation. We evolved to fit our environment. We didn't exist millions of years ago. Environment was only one of the factors that helped us evolve into what we are today. But it obviously was a factor.
Republicans crying "We can't change our environment. Only God can do that". It's so ******* stupid. What would happen to our environment if we had a nuclear war? Obviously, it would be destroyed. So Republicans are saying Nuclear War is the ONLY way? How stupid. If there is one way, then there are more than one. Making it dirty works. Only it's slower.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This is why Republicans make me laugh at their tardation. We evolved to fit our environment. We didn't exist millions of years ago. Environment was only one of the factors that helped us evolve into what we are today. But it obviously was a factor.
Republicans crying "We can't change our environment. Only God can do that". It's so ******* stupid. What would happen to our environment if we had a nuclear war? Obviously, it would be destroyed. So Republicans are saying Nuclear War is the ONLY way? How stupid. If there is one way, then there are more than one. Making it dirty works. Only it's slower.

Republicans crying "We can't change our environment.

Don't be an idiot, I mean more than your usual idiocy.
We changed the environment for thousands of years.
Look at overgrazing and the hunting of megafauna to extinction.
But when liberal idiots, but then I repeat myself, whine that any temperature change, up or down, will
ruin the planet, that's when reality based conservatives have to mock you.

Why is the current temperature best? How much should we waste to raise or lower the temperature
by 0.1 degrees in 2080? And why do liberal solutions always include higher taxes and more government control
over everything, but never include nuclear power?

 

[westwall]

This is why Republicans make me laugh at their tardation. We evolved to fit our environment. We didn't exist millions of years ago. Environment was only one of the factors that helped us evolve into what we are today. But it obviously was a factor.
Republicans crying "We can't change our environment. Only God can do that". It's so ******* stupid. What would happen to our environment if we had a nuclear war? Obviously, it would be destroyed. So Republicans are saying Nuclear War is the ONLY way? How stupid. If there is one way, then there are more than one. Making it dirty works. Only it's slower.

Only someone who is truly delusional, like you, could ever post something this ignorant, and stupid.

 

[Old Rocks]

This is why Republicans make me laugh at their tardation. We evolved to fit our environment. We didn't exist millions of years ago. Environment was only one of the factors that helped us evolve into what we are today. But it obviously was a factor.
Republicans crying "We can't change our environment. Only God can do that". It's so ******* stupid. What would happen to our environment if we had a nuclear war? Obviously, it would be destroyed. So Republicans are saying Nuclear War is the ONLY way? How stupid. If there is one way, then there are more than one. Making it dirty works. Only it's slower.

Republicans crying "We can't change our environment.

Don't be an idiot, I mean more than your usual idiocy.
We changed the environment for thousands of years.
Look at overgrazing and the hunting of megafauna to extinction.
But when liberal idiots, but then I repeat myself, whine that any temperature change, up or down, will
ruin the planet, that's when reality based conservatives have to mock you.

Why is the current temperature best? How much should we waste to raise or lower the temperature
by 0.1 degrees in 2080? And why do liberal solutions always include higher taxes and more government control
over everything, but never include nuclear power?

First of all, I have many posts in which I state that I include nuclear power as part of the solution to clean and plentiful power. However, it must be sited very carefully, and heavily regulated as we have seen the results three times so far of errors that have led to major accidents. And nuclear is very expensive.

We are not talking about 0.1 degree in 2080. We are talking about 1 to 3 more degrees by that time on top of the 0.8 C we have already added since 1880.

You say reality based conservatives. Yet you people were insisting right up to 1998 that the warming was not happening at all. And since then, you are saying that it is due to natural causes, yet cannot name those causes. Worse yet, you have the conservatives insisting that GHGs have no effect on the atmosphere, in contradiction to all known physics. And you have conservatives like Inhofe flat lying about the scientists that are studyng this issue. I am seeing no reality in the official position of the present GOP.

Well, we had to have regulations to clean our rivers and prevent business and municipalities from making them into open sewers. If people would do what is in all of our interests voluntarily, we would not need regulations or laws. But that is completely ignoring reality, and for the conservatives to make the claim that the regulations are not needed because people will do that makes a mockery of your claim of reality based conservatives.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This is why Republicans make me laugh at their tardation. We evolved to fit our environment. We didn't exist millions of years ago. Environment was only one of the factors that helped us evolve into what we are today. But it obviously was a factor.
Republicans crying "We can't change our environment. Only God can do that". It's so ******* stupid. What would happen to our environment if we had a nuclear war? Obviously, it would be destroyed. So Republicans are saying Nuclear War is the ONLY way? How stupid. If there is one way, then there are more than one. Making it dirty works. Only it's slower.

Republicans crying "We can't change our environment.

Don't be an idiot, I mean more than your usual idiocy.
We changed the environment for thousands of years.
Look at overgrazing and the hunting of megafauna to extinction.
But when liberal idiots, but then I repeat myself, whine that any temperature change, up or down, will
ruin the planet, that's when reality based conservatives have to mock you.

Why is the current temperature best? How much should we waste to raise or lower the temperature
by 0.1 degrees in 2080? And why do liberal solutions always include higher taxes and more government control
over everything, but never include nuclear power?

First of all, I have many posts in which I state that I include nuclear power as part of the solution to clean and plentiful power. However, it must be sited very carefully, and heavily regulated as we have seen the results three times so far of errors that have led to major accidents. And nuclear is very expensive.

We are not talking about 0.1 degree in 2080. We are talking about 1 to 3 more degrees by that time on top of the 0.8 C we have already added since 1880.

You say reality based conservatives. Yet you people were insisting right up to 1998 that the warming was not happening at all. And since then, you are saying that it is due to natural causes, yet cannot name those causes. Worse yet, you have the conservatives insisting that GHGs have no effect on the atmosphere, in contradiction to all known physics. And you have conservatives like Inhofe flat lying about the scientists that are studyng this issue. I am seeing no reality in the official position of the present GOP.

Well, we had to have regulations to clean our rivers and prevent business and municipalities from making them into open sewers. If people would do what is in all of our interests voluntarily, we would not need regulations or laws. But that is completely ignoring reality, and for the conservatives to make the claim that the regulations are not needed because people will do that makes a mockery of your claim of reality based conservatives.

First of all, I have many posts in which I state that I include nuclear power as part of the solution to clean and plentiful power.

A tiny number of warmers don't think nuclear is worse than CO2. Congrats.

We are not talking about 0.1 degree in 2080.

Yes we are, when we look at the actual reduction in CO2 we'll get, for the tens of trillions we'll waste.

You say reality based conservatives. Yet you people were insisting right up to 1998 that the warming was not happening at all.

How much is happening? Based on the real numbers, not the ones warmers keep adjusting, to make the past colder and the present warmer.

And since then, you are saying that it is due to natural causes, yet cannot name those causes.

Just as warmers can't name the reasons for the pause in warming, despite the ever higher levels of CO2 over the last 15 years.

Well, we had to have regulations to clean our rivers and prevent business and municipalities from making them into open sewers. If people would do what is in all of our interests voluntarily, we would not need regulations or laws.

And we needed to pass Kyoto, in order to reduce our CO2 output. Wait, what?

 

[Old Rocks]

We reduced our CO2 output without Kyoto, and will reduce it even farther as the economics of grid scale batteries and cheap wind and solar force the shutdown of coal fired plants. Not overnight, but that is what will happen.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We reduced our CO2 output without Kyoto, and will reduce it even farther as the economics of grid scale batteries and cheap wind and solar force the shutdown of coal fired plants. Not overnight, but that is what will happen.

We reduced our CO2 output without Kyoto

Holy crap!!! You must be joking. The private sector did something useful without a heavy handed government mandate?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What if Modern CO2 evolves and doubles or triples the amount of radiation it receives?

Huh?

You DENIERS!!! ever think about that?

 

[rdean]

This is why Republicans make me laugh at their tardation. We evolved to fit our environment. We didn't exist millions of years ago. Environment was only one of the factors that helped us evolve into what we are today. But it obviously was a factor.
Republicans crying "We can't change our environment. Only God can do that". It's so ******* stupid. What would happen to our environment if we had a nuclear war? Obviously, it would be destroyed. So Republicans are saying Nuclear War is the ONLY way? How stupid. If there is one way, then there are more than one. Making it dirty works. Only it's slower.

Republicans crying "We can't change our environment.

Don't be an idiot, I mean more than your usual idiocy.
We changed the environment for thousands of years.
Look at overgrazing and the hunting of megafauna to extinction.
But when liberal idiots, but then I repeat myself, whine that any temperature change, up or down, will
ruin the planet, that's when reality based conservatives have to mock you.

Why is the current temperature best? How much should we waste to raise or lower the temperature
by 0.1 degrees in 2080? And why do liberal solutions always include higher taxes and more government control
over everything, but never include nuclear power?

Stop saying it's liberals who want more government. No one invades our bedrooms more than nasty minded right wingers.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This is why Republicans make me laugh at their tardation. We evolved to fit our environment. We didn't exist millions of years ago. Environment was only one of the factors that helped us evolve into what we are today. But it obviously was a factor.
Republicans crying "We can't change our environment. Only God can do that". It's so ******* stupid. What would happen to our environment if we had a nuclear war? Obviously, it would be destroyed. So Republicans are saying Nuclear War is the ONLY way? How stupid. If there is one way, then there are more than one. Making it dirty works. Only it's slower.

Republicans crying "We can't change our environment.

Don't be an idiot, I mean more than your usual idiocy.
We changed the environment for thousands of years.
Look at overgrazing and the hunting of megafauna to extinction.
But when liberal idiots, but then I repeat myself, whine that any temperature change, up or down, will
ruin the planet, that's when reality based conservatives have to mock you.

Why is the current temperature best? How much should we waste to raise or lower the temperature
by 0.1 degrees in 2080? And why do liberal solutions always include higher taxes and more government control
over everything, but never include nuclear power?

Stop saying it's liberals who want more government. No one invades our bedrooms more than nasty minded right wingers.

What nasty minded government intrusion into your bedroom is on the wish list of the incoming Republican Congress?
How is it equivalent to the trillions in cost the green agenda would like to impose on our economy?

 

[westwall]

This is why Republicans make me laugh at their tardation. We evolved to fit our environment. We didn't exist millions of years ago. Environment was only one of the factors that helped us evolve into what we are today. But it obviously was a factor.
Republicans crying "We can't change our environment. Only God can do that". It's so ******* stupid. What would happen to our environment if we had a nuclear war? Obviously, it would be destroyed. So Republicans are saying Nuclear War is the ONLY way? How stupid. If there is one way, then there are more than one. Making it dirty works. Only it's slower.

Republicans crying "We can't change our environment.

Don't be an idiot, I mean more than your usual idiocy.
We changed the environment for thousands of years.
Look at overgrazing and the hunting of megafauna to extinction.
But when liberal idiots, but then I repeat myself, whine that any temperature change, up or down, will
ruin the planet, that's when reality based conservatives have to mock you.

Why is the current temperature best? How much should we waste to raise or lower the temperature
by 0.1 degrees in 2080? And why do liberal solutions always include higher taxes and more government control
over everything, but never include nuclear power?

Stop saying it's liberals who want more government. No one invades our bedrooms more than nasty minded right wingers.

As reprehensible as that is, it pales in comparison to the progressives desire to invade EVERY ASPECT OF HUMAN LIFE. From telling people what they can eat or drink, to denying them the ability to defend themselves from predators and insane people. Progressivism is by far the worst attack on civil liberties known to man.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is why Republicans make me laugh at their tardation. We evolved to fit our environment. We didn't exist millions of years ago. Environment was only one of the factors that helped us evolve into what we are today. But it obviously was a factor.
Republicans crying "We can't change our environment. Only God can do that". It's so ******* stupid. What would happen to our environment if we had a nuclear war? Obviously, it would be destroyed. So Republicans are saying Nuclear War is the ONLY way? How stupid. If there is one way, then there are more than one. Making it dirty works. Only it's slower.

Republicans crying "We can't change our environment.

Don't be an idiot, I mean more than your usual idiocy.
We changed the environment for thousands of years.
Look at overgrazing and the hunting of megafauna to extinction.
But when liberal idiots, but then I repeat myself, whine that any temperature change, up or down, will
ruin the planet, that's when reality based conservatives have to mock you.

Why is the current temperature best? How much should we waste to raise or lower the temperature
by 0.1 degrees in 2080? And why do liberal solutions always include higher taxes and more government control
over everything, but never include nuclear power?

Stop saying it's liberals who want more government. No one invades our bedrooms more than nasty minded right wingers.

Huh? Ever hear of ObamaCare?

"Keep the government out of my vagina!! I only want you to pay for it"