just so you know where I am coming from

[Baruch Menachem]

I am one of the more vociferous opponents of the global warming hoax. That said, dumping tons of dirt in the atmosphere is stupid and unhealthy. Like in Pieking, it practically amounts to suicidal.

The stuff we are pouring into our atmosphere and digging up has all kinds of problems with it. The smokestacks in Boardman OR put more nuclear stuff, uranium, etc than was put into the atmosphere than was emitted on a daily basis than was emitted during the whole career of Trojan in Rainier. The sulfur, the fly ash that is dumped is just ignored.

We have to get cleaner fuels, like Thoruim based nuclear for example. Not going to Happen. The environmental lobby will drive their escalades and hummers and protest. Then go back to their coal heated homes. They won't install solar, they will insist their neighbors do so in rhetorical fashion.

Since three mile island, louder since Chernobyl, louder yet since Fukushima there is no way no nukes will be built. That makes sense. Of a sad type. For some reason Thorium is not being built, even in places supposedly hot for it like China and India. Which means their is some reason for it beyond my ken. We have to something better than coal. That means nuclear. Which no one trusts.

Cars can't yet be run off of batteries. They are tremendously more efficient then the were, and way cheaper. They are, however, way more expensive than gas cars. 20k verses 40 k. They just can't compete in the realm of the average consumer, who has to put food on the table rather than feel good. There are lots and lots of folks who want to feel good, more power to em.

There are all kinds of problems. I welcome discussion of real solutions, rather than the hysteria that its loudest defenders don't credit.

 

[Mr. H.]

Compressed natural gas vehicles.

Vehicles Natural Gas-Powered Vehicles NGVs

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Another hydrocarbon based motive power. Better, but not good

 

[Mr. H.]

Looks like you'll be having one long drawn out monologue in this thread.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

its all good. I just wanted to remind the global warming hysterics that just because I don't like their kool aid dosen't mean I like willy nilly like air pollution. they often seem confused by this.

 

[westwall]

Another hydrocarbon based motive power. Better, but not good

Not even better. They have half the energy as gasoline. Thus you have to burn more fuel to travel the same distance. By far the most efficient transport at the current time are the new generation of turbo diesels.

 

[Old Rocks]

The solution to our energy problems are actually happening as we post.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0

In Texas, Austin Energy signed a deal this spring for 20 years of output from a solar farm at less than 5 cents a kilowatt-hour. In September, the Grand River Dam Authority in Oklahoma announced its approval of a new agreement to buy power from a new wind farm expected to be completed next year. Grand River estimated the deal would save its customers roughly $50 million from the project.

And, also in Oklahoma, American Electric Power ended up tripling the amount of wind power it had originally sought after seeing how low the bids came in last year.

“Wind was on sale — it was a Blue Light Special,” said Jay Godfrey, managing director of renewable energy for the company. He noted that Oklahoma, unlike many states, did not require utilities to buy power from renewable sources.

“We were doing it because it made sense for our ratepayers,” he said.

According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energy is as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.

When you add the fact that Oncor, the biggest utility in Texas is planning to add 5000 mw of grid scale batteries to their grid starting 2018, the writing is on the wall. Renewables not only less costly than conventional, but 24/7.

 

[elektra]

The solution to our energy problems are actually happening as we post.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0

In Texas, Austin Energy signed a deal this spring for 20 years of output from a solar farm at less than 5 cents a kilowatt-hour. In September, the Grand River Dam Authority in Oklahoma announced its approval of a new agreement to buy power from a new wind farm expected to be completed next year. Grand River estimated the deal would save its customers roughly $50 million from the project.

And, also in Oklahoma, American Electric Power ended up tripling the amount of wind power it had originally sought after seeing how low the bids came in last year.

“Wind was on sale — it was a Blue Light Special,” said Jay Godfrey, managing director of renewable energy for the company. He noted that Oklahoma, unlike many states, did not require utilities to buy power from renewable sources.

“We were doing it because it made sense for our ratepayers,” he said.

According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energy is as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.

When you add the fact that Oncor, the biggest utility in Texas is planning to add 5000 mw of grid scale batteries to their grid starting 2018, the writing is on the wall. Renewables not only less costly than conventional, but 24/7.

Hey, idiot. How come Austin asked for a rate increase after they signed this deal?

Old Crock claims the price is going down, yet Austin Energy is asking for and got a rate increase because the costs went up?

Well, I guess I need to, "Believe" and have, "Faith", in a study Old Crock can link to, "for he who believes shall see the truth".

Austin Energy asks City Council to approve rate increase KXAN.com

Austin Energy wants you to pay more on your electric bills to make up for rising costs. The increase would be split between two charges you see on your bill.

The total will add $4.67 to the average monthly bill. If city council approves the increase during budget talks, customers will see the cost split between the “Regulatory Charge” and the “Power Supply Adjustment Charge.”

“I don’t feel too good about it,” said East Austin resident Earlene Love. She never finds the energy bill increases exactly welcome, but says they are inevitable. “If that’s what they have to do, that’s what they have to do.

 

[Pop23]

I am one of the more vociferous opponents of the global warming hoax. That said, dumping tons of dirt in the atmosphere is stupid and unhealthy. Like in Pieking, it practically amounts to suicidal.

The stuff we are pouring into our atmosphere and digging up has all kinds of problems with it. The smokestacks in Boardman OR put more nuclear stuff, uranium, etc than was put into the atmosphere than was emitted on a daily basis than was emitted during the whole career of Trojan in Rainier. The sulfur, the fly ash that is dumped is just ignored.

We have to get cleaner fuels, like Thoruim based nuclear for example. Not going to Happen. The environmental lobby will drive their escalades and hummers and protest. Then go back to their coal heated homes. They won't install solar, they will insist their neighbors do so in rhetorical fashion.

Since three mile island, louder since Chernobyl, louder yet since Fukushima there is no way no nukes will be built. That makes sense. Of a sad type. For some reason Thorium is not being built, even in places supposedly hot for it like China and India. Which means their is some reason for it beyond my ken. We have to something better than coal. That means nuclear. Which no one trusts.

Cars can't yet be run off of batteries. They are tremendously more efficient then the were, and way cheaper. They are, however, way more expensive than gas cars. 20k verses 40 k. They just can't compete in the realm of the average consumer, who has to put food on the table rather than feel good. There are lots and lots of folks who want to feel good, more power to em.

There are all kinds of problems. I welcome discussion of real solutions, rather than the hysteria that its loudest defenders don't credit.

You are absolutely correct about next generation nuclear power. It is an obvious solution. All the objections are based on old tech, but hey, change is tough on some.

You are incorrect if you think the only opposition is environmentalists though. Neither big coal or big oil are in love with next gen nukes. I have a feeling they actually support those opposed.