Of polar caps and climate change

[Anomalism]

They accuse you of what they do and keep right on lying.


600 miles to the pole, pal.

You can't refute it.

Nobody can refute it.


Earth climate change now is 99% about WHERE LAND IS....

You authoring it yourself is the key detail here. A rule you invented isn’t evidence. There is no recognized geophysical threshold at 600 miles from the pole that determines ice ages. Ice sheets form and retreat based on temperature, precipitation, atmospheric CO2, and ocean circulation. Antarctica glaciated when CO2 dropped in the Eocene. It has expanded and contracted multiple times since. Greenland’s ice history doesn’t map to a fixed mileage rule either.

You also have causality backwards. Ice doesn’t control temperature as the primary driver. It responds to temperature and amplifies it through albedo feedback. Lower CO2 cools the planet, ice expands, reflectivity increases, and cooling amplifies. Higher CO2 warms the planet, ice retreats, reflectivity drops, and warming amplifies. Mars’ seasonal CO2 cycle is a thin atmosphere phase change effect, not an analog for Earth’s energy balance.

Now...

You don't actually understand what any of that means because you're uneducated, so you'll say something along the lines of "LOL!!! Bullshit! Climategate! Hurricanes!"

 

[EMH]

You authoring it yourself is the key detail here. A rule you invented isn’t evidence.

Translation - YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO THINK FOR YOURSELF. YOU ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO PARROT


never mind she CANNOT REFUTE IT.... and when actual science cannot refute, it accepts as VALID....

There is no recognized geophysical threshold at 600 miles from the pole that determines ice ages

There is on USMB, it has been here for years.

It has expanded and contracted multiple times since.

The ice cores completely refute that, and you have NO EVIDENCE other than "I'm parroting McBullshit" which is another CO2 FRAUD lie completely busted on USMB, and indeed by agreeing that 2.5 mile thick glacier is way older then 75k years, YOU DISAGREE WITH McBULLSHIT which is what you are citing now...

Greenland’s ice history doesn’t map to a fixed mileage rule either.

The evidence is

1. it started at the northernmost top 1-2 million years ago
2. it got to the middle 450k-800k years ago
3. it just iced up the southern tip in the past 1000 years


That's the evidence.

 

[Anomalism]

Translation - YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO THINK FOR YOURSELF. YOU ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO PARROT


never mind she CANNOT REFUTE IT.... and when actual science cannot refute, it accepts as VALID....






There is on USMB, it has been here for years.








The ice cores completely refute that, and you have NO EVIDENCE other than "I'm parroting McBullshit" which is another CO2 FRAUD lie completely busted on USMB, and indeed by agreeing that 2.5 mile thick glacier is way older then 75k years, YOU DISAGREE WITH McBULLSHIT which is what you are citing now...







The evidence is

1. it started at the northernmost top 1-2 million years ago
2. it got to the middle 450k-800k years ago
3. it just iced up the southern tip in the past 1000 years


That's the evidence.

You’re confusing “no one on the forum has refuted it in my opinion” with “it withstands scientific scrutiny.” Those are not the same thing. Science isn’t validated by arguments on USMB. It’s validated by published evidence, reproducibility, and consistency with physics. A rule you proposed needs supporting data and a mechanism, which it doesn't and never will have.

And the Greenland timeline you listed actually contradicts a fixed 600 mile trigger. Greenland has been near the pole for tens of millions of years. What changed 2-3 million years ago wasn’t latitude; it was global temperature and CO2 levels crossing thresholds that allowed sustained glaciation. Ice cores, marine sediments, and isotopic records all show expansion and contraction tied to orbital cycles and greenhouse gas levels, not continental drift over a few hundred miles. If proximity alone controlled ice, the timing wouldn’t line up with atmospheric chemistry the way it demonstrably does.

 

[EMH]

You’re confusing “no one on the forum has refuted it in my opinion” with “it withstands scientific scrutiny.” Those are not the same thing. Science isn’t validated by arguments on USMB. It’s validated by published evidence, reproducibility, and consistency with physics. A rule you proposed needs supporting data and a mechanism, which it doesn't and never will have.

And the Greenland timeline you listed actually contradicts a fixed 600 mile trigger. Greenland has been near the pole for tens of millions of years. What changed 2-3 million years ago wasn’t latitude; it was global temperature and CO2 levels crossing thresholds that allowed sustained glaciation. Ice cores, marine sediments, and isotopic records all show expansion and contraction tied to orbital cycles and greenhouse gas levels, not continental drift over a few hundred miles. If proximity alone controlled ice, the timing wouldn’t line up with atmospheric chemistry the way it demonstrably does.

LMFAO!!!

CO2 FRAUD lying about tectonic plate movement again.

Greenland's plate is moved by the expansion of the fault at the center bottom of the Atlantic. On the other side, Europe is being pushed SE, why all of its glaciers are melting. But Greenland's been moving NW for the past 100 million years...

 

[Anomalism]

LMFAO!!!

CO2 FRAUD lying about tectonic plate movement again.

Greenland's plate is moved by the expansion of the fault at the center bottom of the Atlantic. On the other side, Europe is being pushed SE, why all of its glaciers are melting. But Greenland's been moving NW for the past 100 million years...

Greenland has been moving with the North American plate for tens of millions of years, yes, at a few centimeters per year. That’s standard plate tectonics. But that motion is far too slow and far too small over the last few million years to explain the timing of glaciation cycles.

Greenland didn’t suddenly lurch 600 miles in the last 2-3 million years. Its latitude has been broadly similar while ice volume expanded and contracted repeatedly during glacial-interglacial cycles. Those cycles track orbital variations and greenhouse gas concentrations, not bursts of plate motion. Europe’s glaciers aren’t melting because the continent is drifting southeast. They’re melting because regional temperatures have risen.

Plate tectonics operates on tens of millions of years. Ice ages cycle on tens of thousands. If your mechanism can’t match the timescale of the observed changes, it’s not the driver. Physics cares about rates, not your slogans and self-authored nonsense.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Old Rocks]

Climate change is a science. You cannot refute one word I've posted.

Global Warming, the theory that CO2 has anything to do with Earth climate change, is 100% bullshit and proven so easily.

YOU DENY CLIMATE CHANGE by insisting CO2 FRAUD is not FRAUD when it is and always was.

Nobody here has to disprove your drivel. The scientists from Tyndall to Mann already have.

 

[Anomalism]

Nobody here has to disprove your drivel. The scientists from Tyndall to Mann already have.

The complete lack of epistemic humility in this subforum is jarring sometimes. I appreciate your presence. Lol

 

[Old Rocks]

Renewable energy is in decline in America. There is no evidence only invalid correlational studies. The climate change lie has damaged our economy and has now ended.

Silly ass liar.

In 2025, the U.S. solar energy sector is experiencing a significant increase in capacity and generation. Here are some key points highlighting the growth:

• Utility-scale solar: Expected to increase from 290 BkWh in 2025 to 424 BkWh by 2027, with almost 70 GW of new solar generating capacity projects scheduled to come online in 2026 and 2027.
  
  1
• Battery storage capacity: Grown by 133% in 2025, reaching 26 GW, which helps support fluctuations in solar output during the day.
  
  1
• Regional growth: Solar generation grew most in regions where demand rose the fastest, such as Texas and the Midwest, where solar met 81% of the increase in electricity demand.
  
  2
• Overall demand: Solar now generates 8.5% of all US electricity, with solar meeting 61% of the growth in US electricity demand in 2025.
  
  2
  
  These developments indicate a robust and growing solar energy sector in the U.S., with a focus on increasing capacity and efficiency to meet the nation's energy needs.
  
  6
• 
  
  
  
  
  
  6 Sources
• 
  
• 36%
  The United States is expected to add more than 7 gigawatts (GW) of wind installations in 2025, marking a 36% increase over the previous year. This growth is part of a broader trend, with the US projected to add 46 GW of new wind capacity from 2025 to 2029. The increase is driven by a combination of factors, including rising power demand, IRA incentives, and the establishment of new manufacturing facilities. Wind power is now the most-used renewable source in the U.S., surpassing the previous record set in 2024.
  
  Windpower Engineering & Development+4
• • Battery Storage: An expected addition of 18.2 GW of utility-scale battery storage capacity, marking a record growth.
    
    1
  • Energy Storage: The U.S. energy storage industry installed a record 57.6 GWh of new capacity in 2025, the largest single year of new battery capacity additions on record.
    
    1
  • First Quarter Addition: In the first quarter of 2025, the U.S. added a record 1,602 MW of battery storage capacity, equivalent to the energy generation capacity of one large coal-fired power plant.
    
    1
  • Solar and Energy Storage: The U.S. aims to add approximately 97 GW of new electricity capacity, largely driven by renewable sources, including solar power and energy storage systems.
    
    1
    These developments indicate a robust expansion in the U.S. energy storage sector, contributing to the country's transition to a more sustainable energy future.
  • 
    
    
    
    
    
    4 Sources

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL!!!

Then there would be no ice on Antarctica. The truth is the annual ice core layer exceeds the mass of the iceberg loss on AA, has for 40 million years and is still doing so.

Silly little dork, show us the evidence for that? You know, measurements made by scientists and instruments like the satellites that measure gravity.

 

[Anomalism]

Silly little dork, show us the evidence for that? You know, measurements made by scientists and instruments like the satellites that measure gravity.

Maybe you've thought about this already, but consider this for a moment.

These people use the studies and measurements of the very people they disagree with to create arguments against their findings. How absurd is that? How RIDICULOUS is it to link to data provided by scientists that believe AGW is happening, and then try to reinterpret that data?

I mean, what else can they do? I guess they're limited when nobody on their side is actually doing science. Lol

 

[Old Rocks]

This is absolutely hilarious.

So how did Antarctica ever acquire ice in the first place?

We know what the ice cores document, it grows a new layer of ice every year. Explain to us how that causes "ice loss."

LOL!!!


Funny thing is, even after 40 million years in ice age, Antarctica has not yet reached that "equilibrium point" where the mass of icebergs lost exceeds ice gained in the annual top ice layer. It may eventually reach that point, but it is still growing.

We went to court on that issue in 2007

Court Identifies Eleven Inaccuracies in Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’

Here's something American media are virtually guaranteed to not report: a British court has determined that Al Gore's schlockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" contains at least eleven material falsehoods. It seems a safe bet Matt Lauer and Diane Sawyer won't be discussing this Tuesday morning...

www.newsbusters.org

• The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.

What evidence? Present that evidence. Here is evidence that it is definitely melting.

Recent studies indicate a significant decrease in Antarctic ice mass measured by gravity satellites.

• Between 2002 and 2025, Antarctica shed approximately 135 gigatons of ice per year, contributing to a global sea level rise of 0.4 millimeters per year.
  
  1
• The mass loss has been particularly pronounced in the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, with areas like the Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers experiencing substantial ice loss.
  
  1
• Overall, the Antarctic ice sheet has lost about 150 gigatons of ice annually from 2002 to 2023, highlighting the urgent need for climate action to mitigate its impact on global sea levels.
  
  1
  These findings underscore the critical role of ice mass changes in understanding climate dynamics and their implications for sea level rise.
• 
  
  
  
  
  
  2 Sources

 

[EMH]

But that motion is far too slow and far too small over the last few million years to explain the timing of glaciation cycles.

Those "glaciation cycles" are all McBullshit and you already admitted that by admitting that 2.5 mile thick glacier was WAY OLDER than what McBullshit claims, 75k years. The only "cycle" is that the ice age starts when it gets within 600 miles and does not melt until it gets out of 600 miles, as North America save Ellesmere just did.

Greenland didn’t suddenly lurch 600 miles in the last 2-3 million years.

Where does this BS come from?

As CO2 FRAUD gets destroyed on issue after issue, it starts doing this. Greenland in the past 2 million years, or 50 miles or so of tectonic movement, got to the 600 miles to the Pole, the "rim" of where the Earth polar cap starts manufacturing ice.

Europe’s glaciers aren’t melting because the continent is drifting southeast. They’re melting because regional temperatures have risen.

LOL!!!

Hint = "regional temperatures" of a plate moving away from the nearest pole go up because the further away from the pole, the more heat energy from Sun it receives.

 

[EMH]

Nobody here has to disprove your drivel. The scientists from Tyndall to Mann already have.

Then show us this refutation - link??

LOL!!!

 

[EMH]

Silly little dork, show us the evidence for that? You know, measurements made by scientists and instruments like the satellites that measure gravity.

The actual measurements of Antarctic Ice have shown growth during the entire duration of CO2 FRAUD. The claims of "melting" are laughable. YOUR SIDE FUDGES DATA.

If Antarctica was melting, you could show us a photo of ocean rise. You can't.

 

[EMH]

Recent studies

This is a problem that goes beyond just CO2 FRAUD. Government should collect and publicize DATA only. It should not hire treasonous big government liars to fudge data and claim some faux "crisis" to enrich and empower themselves.

 

[Anomalism]

Those "glaciation cycles" are all McBullshit and you already admitted that by admitting that 2.5 mile thick glacier was WAY OLDER than what McBullshit claims, 75k years. The only "cycle" is that the ice age starts when it gets within 600 miles and does not melt until it gets out of 600 miles, as North America save Ellesmere just did.






Where does this BS come from?

As CO2 FRAUD gets destroyed on issue after issue, it starts doing this. Greenland in the past 2 million years, or 50 miles or so of tectonic movement, got to the 600 miles to the Pole, the "rim" of where the Earth polar cap starts manufacturing ice.








LOL!!!

Hint = "regional temperatures" of a plate moving away from the nearest pole go up because the further away from the pole, the more heat energy from Sun it receives.

Right, let’s cut the nonsense. The 600 miles rule is complete fantasy. Greenland has been near the North Pole for tens of millions of years. It didn’t suddenly trigger ice formation based on some arbitrary mileage. Ice volume responds to temperature and greenhouse gas levels, not a made up polar radius.

Europe’s glaciers aren’t magically controlled by distance from the pole either. Their melting tracks local warming and global climate trends, not continental drift. Sunlight intensity varies with latitude, yes, but the scale of tectonic motion over millions of years is irrelevant to the rapid glacial-interglacial cycles we see in the ice core record. Your logic has no timescale consistency and is just inventing physics that doesn’t exist.

I very, very rarely do this, so feel special. You are an idiot. You are beyond help. You are very possibly the dumbest person I've ever interacted with on the Internet, and I want you to understand how serious I am about that. You are a very simple human being. I'm surprised you managed to actually make an account and figure out how to post here.

 

[EMH]

2007 British Court affirmed actual data and certified Antarctic ice increasing

This is 2015

Study: Mass gains of Antarctic ice sheet greater than losses - NASA Science

A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

science.nasa.gov

Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008.

 

[EMH]

The 600 miles rule is complete fantasy

The "fantasy" is that you think by spazzing out you are "refuting" it, you aren't...


The direction of the fault at the center bottom of the North Atlantic pushes Greenland NW and Europe SE.


Greenland went into ice age.

Europe's glaciers have been melting for millions of years...

at the same time, on the same planet, with the same Sun, with the same atmosphere, with the same amount of CO2 in the atmosphere....

 

[EMH]

the rapid glacial-interglacial cycles we see in the ice core record

the funniest self defeating argument of all.


It warmed, and the ice melted, and "we know" this because we have ICE CORE RECORDS from GROWING ICE during the period...



How many Pfizer pills do you consume a day?

 

[Hafar1014]

Silly ass liar.

In 2025, the U.S. solar energy sector is experiencing a significant increase in capacity and generation. Here are some key points highlighting the growth:

• Utility-scale solar: Expected to increase from 290 BkWh in 2025 to 424 BkWh by 2027, with almost 70 GW of new solar generating capacity projects scheduled to come online in 2026 and 2027.
  
  1
• Battery storage capacity: Grown by 133% in 2025, reaching 26 GW, which helps support fluctuations in solar output during the day.
  
  1
• Regional growth: Solar generation grew most in regions where demand rose the fastest, such as Texas and the Midwest, where solar met 81% of the increase in electricity demand.
  
  2
• Overall demand: Solar now generates 8.5% of all US electricity, with solar meeting 61% of the growth in US electricity demand in 2025.
  
  2
  
  These developments indicate a robust and growing solar energy sector in the U.S., with a focus on increasing capacity and efficiency to meet the nation's energy needs.
  
  6
• 
  
  
  
  
  
  6 Sources
• 
  
• 36%
  The United States is expected to add more than 7 gigawatts (GW) of wind installations in 2025, marking a 36% increase over the previous year. This growth is part of a broader trend, with the US projected to add 46 GW of new wind capacity from 2025 to 2029. The increase is driven by a combination of factors, including rising power demand, IRA incentives, and the establishment of new manufacturing facilities. Wind power is now the most-used renewable source in the U.S., surpassing the previous record set in 2024.
  
  Windpower Engineering & Development+4
• • Battery Storage: An expected addition of 18.2 GW of utility-scale battery storage capacity, marking a record growth.
    
    1
  • Energy Storage: The U.S. energy storage industry installed a record 57.6 GWh of new capacity in 2025, the largest single year of new battery capacity additions on record.
    
    1
  • First Quarter Addition: In the first quarter of 2025, the U.S. added a record 1,602 MW of battery storage capacity, equivalent to the energy generation capacity of one large coal-fired power plant.
    
    1
  • Solar and Energy Storage: The U.S. aims to add approximately 97 GW of new electricity capacity, largely driven by renewable sources, including solar power and energy storage systems.
    
    1
    These developments indicate a robust expansion in the U.S. energy storage sector, contributing to the country's transition to a more sustainable energy future.
  • 
    
    
    
    
    
    4 Sources

They dont last long heres a list of bankruptcies

The renewable energy sector, particularly solar, is experiencing a wave of bankruptcies in 2025-2026 driven by high interest rates, policy shifts (e.g., California's NEM 3.0, federal policy changes), and unsustainable business models. Major, high-profile failures include Pine Gate Renewables, Sunnova, and SunPower, alongside over 100 contractor insolvencies.
Cleary Gottlieb | Content Hub +2
Key 2025–2026 Renewable Energy Bankruptcies & Closures

• Pine Gate Renewables: A major utility-scale developer filed for Chapter 11 in Nov 2025, citing regulatory shifts and reduced incentives.
• Sunnova: Filed for Chapter 11 in June 2025 with over $10 billion in liabilities.
• SunPower: Filed for bankruptcy in 2024/2025, halting operations.
• Other Notable Failures: ADT Solar, Lumio, Titan Solar Power, Vision Solar, and PowerHome Solar (Pink Energy).
  Solar Power World +4

Reasons for the Downturn

• Policy & Regulatory Changes: The rollback of federal tax credits and unfavorable state-level net metering policies, such as California’s NEM 3.0, have drastically reduced project profitability.
• Financial Pressures: High-interest rates increased the cost of financing for both projects and customer loans, squeezing margins for installers and developers.
• Unsustainable Models: Many large residential installers expanded too quickly, relying on high debt levels and aggressive sales tactics, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance analysts.
  Cleary Gottlieb | Content Hub +4
  =========================================================================
  You are here: Home / Articles / The Complete List of Solar Bankruptcies and Business Closures
  
  

  ---

  Last Updated:
  
  January 20, 2026
  
  The solar industry experienced exponential growth over the last decade as costs fell and favorable policies helped drive mass adoption.
  
  However, 2024 has brought immense challenges, with higher interest rates, tighter financing, and adverse policy shifts in key states contributing to over 100 solar bankruptcies based on our industry data, a number unseen before in our almost 20 years in the solar sector.
  
  California was particularly hard hit due to new net metering rules under NEM 3.0 that radically reduced system economics.
  
  These adverse state policy impacts exacerbated financing shifts, triggering plummeting demand and an 80% decrease in rooftop solar installation volume. The California Solar & Storage Association reports that the fallout includes thousands of stalled projects, over 17,000 industry layoffs, and a wave of high-profile bankruptcies.
  
  While stronger players demonstrate some resilience, impacted homeowners and solar employees face prolonged uncertainty. The outright collapse of many once fast-growing solar firms provides a sobering case study on the potential unintended consequences of incentive transitions.
  

  Major Solar Contractors That Went Out of Business​

  Major Solar Bankruptcies as of January 2026 Include:
  
  • Sunnova – Multiple States
  • SunPower – Multiple States
  • Pink Energy – Multiple States
  • MC Solar – Modern Concepts – Florida
  • Harness Power – California
  • NM Solar Group – New Mexico
  • ASA – American Solar Advantage – California
  • Kuubix Energy – California
  • Erus Energy – Arizona
  • Infinity Energy – California
  • Suntuity Renewables – Per Sunova – NJ, CA , TX
  • ADT Solar – Multiple States
  • Vision Solar – Multiple States
  • Solcius – CA, NM, AZ, NV
  • Sunworks, Inc. – CA
  • Kayo Energy – AZ, CA, TX, FL
  • iSun – CT
  • Titan Solar Power – Multiple States
  • Lumio Solar – Utah
  • Expert Solar – Florida, Texas
  • Shine Solar – LA, AK
  • Posigen – Multiple States
  • Pure Light Power – Multiple States
  California Company Closures:
  
  • Altair Solar
  • ASA – American Solar Advantage – CA
  • Bratton Solar- CA
  • Canapoy Energy – CA
  • Charged Up Energy – CA
  • Enver Solar – CA
  • Harness Power – CA
  • GCI Solar – CA
  • Green Nrg – CA
  • Kuubix Energy – CA
  • Peak Power USA – CA
  • Penguin Home- CA
  • Polar Solar – CA
  • Professional Roofing and Solar – CA
  • Sigora Home Solar – CA
  • Solsun USA – CA
  • Solar 360
  • Solar Advantage – CA
  • Sullivan Solar Power – CA
  • Sungrade Solar – CA
  • SunPower – CA
  • Sunstor Solar – CA
  • RGS Energy – CA
  • Solar Spectrum – CA
  • Sunworks, Inc. – CA
  • Swell Energy – CA
  • United Solar Inc. – CA
  Texas Company Closures:
  
  • Alternative Solar
  • American Sun
  • Daybreak Solar Power
  • Cosmo Solaris – DBA WNK Associates , Under Investigation
  • Envirosolar
  • Hitech Solar
  • Integrity Solar
  • Next Energy
  • Nivo Solar
  • Speir Innovations
  • TES Home Solar
  • Texas Solar Broker LLC
  • Texas Solar Integrated LLC
  • Verisolar
  • Vulcan Solar
  Other States:
  
  • 3D Solar – Florida
  • AAA Certified Solar – Nevada
  • Accept Solar – MA
  • ACE Solar Systems – AZ
  • Arizona Solar Concepts – AZ
  • Brimma Solar – WA
  • Code Green Solar – NJ
  • EcoMark Solar – CO
  • Elan Solar – UT
  • Electriq Power – FL
  • Encor Solar – UT
  • Gulf South Solar – LA
  • Moxie Solar – IA
  • Refresh Energy Group – CO
  • Saveco Solar – UT
  • Solar Is Freedom – OH
  • Solar Direct – FL
  • Solar Titan USA – TN
  • SolarDot – FL
  • Solarworks – AZ
  • Solular, LLC – NJ
  • Utah Solar Group – UT
  • Voltage Solar Power – FL
  • Zenernet – AZ