More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[ScienceRocks]

Running the damn coal or natural gas plant half of the time = half of the fossil fuels burnt. The name of the game is reduction of fossil fuels.

Plus I hope we build more nuclear, hydro and possibly fusion to help us get to our goal.

 

[flacaltenn]

I read a paper the other day that was an elaborate study of life cycle costs for various generating technologies. It concluded that solar was the most expensive, which piqued my curiosity so I looked more closely into it. The study's major mistake was to highly penalize solar for availability. Why? As long as there are other fuel using waste producing assets that can be idled when solar is available, every kilowatt can be productively used.

The study's major mistake was to highly penalize solar for availability. Why? As long as there are other fuel using waste producing assets that can be idled when solar is available, every kilowatt can be productively used.

You want to build an expensive fossil fuel plant and run it only part of the time, and you don't think that solar should be penalized for the inefficient use of the fossil fuel plant?

You're yet another example of a liberal who failed economics.

We already have all of the fossil fuel pants we'll ever need.

You're yet another example of a conservative who failed common sense.

Solar, but more particularly wind NEED to be penalized for inefficiencies associated with idling the main generators. You cannot idle a coal plant and expect it to be there instantly when a cloud passes by or tthe wind lulls. Nat gas and hydro are quicker, but when you shut down a nat gas gas plant, you are wasting heated water .. Same with a nuclear plant..

These are REAL costs of trying back up unreliable sources...

 

[flacaltenn]

Running the damn coal or natural gas plant half of the time = half of the fossil fuels burnt. The name of the game is reduction of fossil fuels.

Plus I hope we build more nuclear, hydro and possibly fusion to help us get to our goal.

Where you gonna find the rich morons to build primary capacity that gets preempted for 30 minutes every hour? I suspect theyll have to functionally economically illiterate. In other words ---- leftist eco frauds..

 

[freedombecki]

The study's major mistake was to highly penalize solar for availability. Why? As long as there are other fuel using waste producing assets that can be idled when solar is available, every kilowatt can be productively used.

You want to build an expensive fossil fuel plant and run it only part of the time, and you don't think that solar should be penalized for the inefficient use of the fossil fuel plant?

You're yet another example of a liberal who failed economics.

We already have all of the fossil fuel pants we'll ever need.

You're yet another example of a conservative who failed common sense.

Solar, but more particularly wind NEED to be penalized for inefficiencies associated with idling the main generators. You cannot idle a coal plant and expect it to be there instantly when a cloud passes by or tthe wind lulls. Nat gas and hydro are quicker, but when you shut down a nat gas gas plant, you are wasting heated water .. Same with a nuclear plant..

These are REAL costs of trying back up unreliable sources...

Yet most power companies, although they are private, try to accommodate the wishes of the people in the area they serve. It's good Public Relations when a guy with a windmill out back he rigged up all by himself earns him half his power usage back, and sometimes he even breaks even. We knew one guy who actually put out more than he used some months and carried around his check stubs to brag to his friends who were paying $200 a month in the cold months in Wyoming. It shows the industry still has a lot of good sports running the power companies in a manner befitting the people in the community.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Running the damn coal or natural gas plant half of the time = half of the fossil fuels burnt. The name of the game is reduction of fossil fuels.

Plus I hope we build more nuclear, hydro and possibly fusion to help us get to our goal.

Running the damn coal or natural gas plant half of the time = half of the fossil fuels burnt.

Exactly! Half the revenues for your huge capital investment.

The name of the game is reduction of fossil fuels.

You should invest billions in such a plant, and use it as little as you'd like.

Plus I hope we build more nuclear, hydro and possibly fusion

Nuclear, great idea.
Hydro, idiot leftists want to tear out the dams we have, they'll never let us build new ones.
Fusion, great idea.....don't hold your breath.

 

[HenryBHough]

Fusion, great idea.....don't hold your breath.

That last, perhaps something we should encourage in the circumstance......

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Fusion, great idea.....don't hold your breath.

That last, perhaps something we should encourage in the circumstance......

The planet might warm less if he did that.

 

[PMZ]

The study's major mistake was to highly penalize solar for availability. Why? As long as there are other fuel using waste producing assets that can be idled when solar is available, every kilowatt can be productively used.

You want to build an expensive fossil fuel plant and run it only part of the time, and you don't think that solar should be penalized for the inefficient use of the fossil fuel plant?

You're yet another example of a liberal who failed economics.

We already have all of the fossil fuel pants we'll ever need.

You're yet another example of a conservative who failed common sense.

And yet, more fossil fuel plants are built all the time.

You realize that when you build a plant, and only run it 50% of the time, there is a cost involved, right?

Not in this country.

Most of the cost of fossil fuel generation is fuel and waste related. No energy requires no fuel and creates no waste.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We already have all of the fossil fuel pants we'll ever need.

You're yet another example of a conservative who failed common sense.

And yet, more fossil fuel plants are built all the time.

You realize that when you build a plant, and only run it 50% of the time, there is a cost involved, right?

Not in this country.

Most of the cost of fossil fuel generation is fuel and waste related. No energy requires no fuel and creates no waste.

In every country, building an expensive piece of equipment and only using it part of the time, has a cost.

Your ignorance of economics is not surprising.

 

[PMZ]

And yet, more fossil fuel plants are built all the time.

You realize that when you build a plant, and only run it 50% of the time, there is a cost involved, right?

Not in this country.

Most of the cost of fossil fuel generation is fuel and waste related. No energy requires no fuel and creates no waste.

In every country, building an expensive piece of equipment and only using it part of the time, has a cost.

Your ignorance of economics is not surprising.

So why would anybody build a new plant using fuels that we're running out of?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not in this country.

Most of the cost of fossil fuel generation is fuel and waste related. No energy requires no fuel and creates no waste.

In every country, building an expensive piece of equipment and only using it part of the time, has a cost.

Your ignorance of economics is not surprising.

So why would anybody build a new plant using fuels that we're running out of?

Natural gas production in this country is booming.
We need electricity, reliable electricity.
Any other silly questions?

 

[PMZ]

In every country, building an expensive piece of equipment and only using it part of the time, has a cost.

Your ignorance of economics is not surprising.

So why would anybody build a new plant using fuels that we're running out of?

Natural gas production in this country is booming.
We need electricity, reliable electricity.
Any other silly questions?

Plants are being converted from expensive dirty coal to cleaner natural gas. A good, though temporary, solution.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So why would anybody build a new plant using fuels that we're running out of?

Natural gas production in this country is booming.
We need electricity, reliable electricity.
Any other silly questions?

Plants are being converted from expensive dirty coal to cleaner natural gas. A good, though temporary, solution.

Good solutions don't involve spending hundreds of millions of dollars to build a plant and then idle it for half the day.

 

[skookerasbil]

Natural gas production in this country is booming.
We need electricity, reliable electricity.
Any other silly questions?

Plants are being converted from expensive dirty coal to cleaner natural gas. A good, though temporary, solution.

Good solutions don't involve spending hundreds of millions of dollars to build a plant and then idle it for half the day.

Todd.....those are awesome-type solutions for the AGW nutters......."costs" don't matter to these people.......which is exactly why the skeptics are winning.

 

[PMZ]

The cheapest alternative is to do nothing, wait for fossil fuels to run out, move back to the caves, try to get a cave that's higher than the new sea level.

Very, very cheap.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The cheapest alternative is to do nothing, wait for fossil fuels to run out, move back to the caves, try to get a cave that's higher than the new sea level.

Very, very cheap.

You're right, we don't want to move back to the caves in the future.

Your solution is to move back to the caves today.

 

[PMZ]

The cheapest alternative is to do nothing, wait for fossil fuels to run out, move back to the caves, try to get a cave that's higher than the new sea level.

Very, very cheap.

You're right, we don't want to move back to the caves in the future.

Your solution is to move back to the caves today.

Wrong!

That's the job of doing nothing.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The cheapest alternative is to do nothing, wait for fossil fuels to run out, move back to the caves, try to get a cave that's higher than the new sea level.

Very, very cheap.

You're right, we don't want to move back to the caves in the future.

Your solution is to move back to the caves today.

Wrong!

That's the job of doing nothing.

Wrong!

Crippling our economy now, by insisting on less reliable, more expensive energy, will send us back to the caves.

 

[skookerasbil]

The cheapest alternative is to do nothing, wait for fossil fuels to run out, move back to the caves, try to get a cave that's higher than the new sea level.

Very, very cheap.

Oh Gawd!!

Progressives are the glass half empty contingent. On the other hand, these is something called "innovation". It is the future of energy......if the government can only get the **** out of the way that is.

People come up with shit every day..........







except for he k00ks.......

 

[skookerasbil]