Renewable energy

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,248
Reaction score
8,305
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
Burlington Vermont is completely running on renewable energy. The first and hopefully not the last.
 
OP
sealybobo

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,248
Reaction score
8,305
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
Solar hydro wind and they had this smokestack with water vapor coming out.
 

Tom Sweetnam

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
3,780
Reaction score
983
Points
955
Location
8000' up in the san juan mountain foothills
Small wonder the OP provided no links. Wind provided a small fraction of renewable energy for the city. They also depend on hydroelectric, nuclear, methane capture, wood burning, and other methods that produce carbon particulates and other noxious greenhouse pollutants into the atmosphere.

Go 100 Renewable Energy Burlington VT - 100 Renewable Public Power
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
137,709
Reaction score
28,873
Points
2,180
Oregon is 70% renewables
Hydro
Wind
Solar
Geothermal

We only have one coal plant left. ;)

Wind is back up to 5gw per year!!!
Solar is kicking ass!
It's mostly hydro. It has been since WW II. That isn't an accomplishment that other states can match.
 

greyviper

Rookie
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
26
Reaction score
1
Points
1
Other states really need to catch up then in terms of renewable energy development and utilization. It may not be that cheap of course but consider it charge to pay for the planet's long term and sustainable path towards abandonment of fossil fuel use.
 
OP
sealybobo

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,248
Reaction score
8,305
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
Small wonder the OP provided no links. Wind provided a small fraction of renewable energy for the city. They also depend on hydroelectric, nuclear, methane capture, wood burning, and other methods that produce carbon particulates and other noxious greenhouse pollutants into the atmosphere.

Go 100 Renewable Energy Burlington VT - 100 Renewable Public Power
I watched a lbs news piece on it.

They said they aren't 100% there yet but still a great start.

Hater
 
OP
sealybobo

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,248
Reaction score
8,305
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
Other states really need to catch up then in terms of renewable energy development and utilization. It may not be that cheap of course but consider it charge to pay for the planet's long term and sustainable path towards abandonment of fossil fuel use.
They said Vermont's bills haven't gone up
 

Tom Sweetnam

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
3,780
Reaction score
983
Points
955
Location
8000' up in the san juan mountain foothills
CNN has become the biggest joke. they post the dumbest shit especially if it can put a down anyone Republican. I'd read the National Enquire and get more news from it.
Small wonder the OP provided no links. Wind provided a small fraction of renewable energy for the city. They also depend on hydroelectric, nuclear, methane capture, wood burning, and other methods that produce carbon particulates and other noxious greenhouse pollutants into the atmosphere.

Go 100 Renewable Energy Burlington VT - 100 Renewable Public Power
I watched a lbs news piece on it.

They said they aren't 100% there yet but still a great start.

Hater
Right. Empirical science has long been a "hate group" to morons like you.
 

greyviper

Rookie
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
26
Reaction score
1
Points
1
Other states really need to catch up then in terms of renewable energy development and utilization. It may not be that cheap of course but consider it charge to pay for the planet's long term and sustainable path towards abandonment of fossil fuel use.
They said Vermont's bills haven't gone up
When we implement alternative energy sources, there is really some cost involved. An example is when you decide to install solar gathering capabilities in your home. You need to pay for the panels, the inverter, battery and everything. It does have a high initial cost. In the long run, if the system is stable and sustainable enough, then you could recover that cost in the form of electric utility savings.

I cannot say exactly how the cost is increase on a scaled up system such as a state's renewable energy development plans.
 

Billy_Bob

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
25,512
Reaction score
12,476
Points
1,430
Location
Top Of The Great Divide
Other states really need to catch up then in terms of renewable energy development and utilization. It may not be that cheap of course but consider it charge to pay for the planet's long term and sustainable path towards abandonment of fossil fuel use.
They said Vermont's bills haven't gone up
When we implement alternative energy sources, there is really some cost involved. An example is when you decide to install solar gathering capabilities in your home. You need to pay for the panels, the inverter, battery and everything. It does have a high initial cost. In the long run, if the system is stable and sustainable enough, then you could recover that cost in the form of electric utility savings.

I cannot say exactly how the cost is increase on a scaled up system such as a state's renewable energy development plans.
30 to 50 years to recoup the cost vs coal fired generation. The panels degrade in 20 years and batteries in 5-9 years needing replacement. Your cost analysis is flawed and inaccurate as all systems to date fail long before they reach pay off and are high maintenance. As someone who has done primary and emergency back up systems for communications repeaters I have first hand knowledge.
 

greyviper

Rookie
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
26
Reaction score
1
Points
1
Other states really need to catch up then in terms of renewable energy development and utilization. It may not be that cheap of course but consider it charge to pay for the planet's long term and sustainable path towards abandonment of fossil fuel use.
They said Vermont's bills haven't gone up
When we implement alternative energy sources, there is really some cost involved. An example is when you decide to install solar gathering capabilities in your home. You need to pay for the panels, the inverter, battery and everything. It does have a high initial cost. In the long run, if the system is stable and sustainable enough, then you could recover that cost in the form of electric utility savings.

I cannot say exactly how the cost is increase on a scaled up system such as a state's renewable energy development plans.
30 to 50 years to recoup the cost vs coal fired generation. and the panels degrade in 20 years needing replacement. Your cost analysis is flawed and inaccurate as all systems to date fail long before they reach pay off and are high maintenance. As someone who has done primary and emergency back up systems for communications repeaters I have first hand knowledge.
So you are giving up on renewable in favor of the cheaper yet environmentally damaging coal fired option. What's the use of technology if current renewable energy generation systems are not developed? Using fossil fuels is one evidence that we as a civilization has really a long way to go in efficient utilization of our planet's real and true energy potential.

It takes millions of years to form the fossil fuels we are using nowadays, yet only a short time to combust it and generate that much needed energy for our daily needs.
 

Billy_Bob

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
25,512
Reaction score
12,476
Points
1,430
Location
Top Of The Great Divide
So you are giving up on renewable in favor of the cheaper yet environmentally damaging coal fired option. What's the use of technology if current renewable energy generation systems are not developed? Using fossil fuels is one evidence that we as a civilization has really a long way to go in efficient utilization of our planet's real and true energy potential.

It takes millions of years to form the fossil fuels we are using nowadays, yet only a short time to combust it and generate that much needed energy for our daily needs.
First and foremost the batteries needed to make these systems reliable create more damage to the environment than 60 years of coal fired plant output. there is far less damage from coal fired generation using our current cleaning of outputs than renewables will ever reduce too using our current technologies. We already make EPA cleanup sites of every home with CFL's now we want to add damage to ground water due to batteries and their leakage and waste disposals.
 

greyviper

Rookie
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
26
Reaction score
1
Points
1
So you are giving up on renewable in favor of the cheaper yet environmentally damaging coal fired option. What's the use of technology if current renewable energy generation systems are not developed? Using fossil fuels is one evidence that we as a civilization has really a long way to go in efficient utilization of our planet's real and true energy potential.

It takes millions of years to form the fossil fuels we are using nowadays, yet only a short time to combust it and generate that much needed energy for our daily needs.
First and foremost the batteries needed to make these systems reliable create more damage to the environment than 60 years of coal fired plant output. there is far less damage from coal fired generation using our current cleaning of outputs than renewables will ever reduce too using our current technologies. We already make EPA cleanup sites of every home with CFL's now we want to add damage to ground water due to batteries and their leakage and waste disposals.
That's gonna be true if current battery systems are not improved. Why would anybody who design a system with the goal of less environmental impact deliberately not consider such points as leakage and waste disposal. If you are a good engineer things need to be viewed on different perspectives. I can see you are more inclined to keeping the status quo. That is your view too and I am not going to argue any further.
 
OP
sealybobo

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,248
Reaction score
8,305
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
So you are giving up on renewable in favor of the cheaper yet environmentally damaging coal fired option. What's the use of technology if current renewable energy generation systems are not developed? Using fossil fuels is one evidence that we as a civilization has really a long way to go in efficient utilization of our planet's real and true energy potential.

It takes millions of years to form the fossil fuels we are using nowadays, yet only a short time to combust it and generate that much needed energy for our daily needs.
First and foremost the batteries needed to make these systems reliable create more damage to the environment than 60 years of coal fired plant output. there is far less damage from coal fired generation using our current cleaning of outputs than renewables will ever reduce too using our current technologies. We already make EPA cleanup sites of every home with CFL's now we want to add damage to ground water due to batteries and their leakage and waste disposals.
We will figure it out. Teslas car was $100k now its only $70k.
 

Billy_Bob

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
25,512
Reaction score
12,476
Points
1,430
Location
Top Of The Great Divide
So you are giving up on renewable in favor of the cheaper yet environmentally damaging coal fired option. What's the use of technology if current renewable energy generation systems are not developed? Using fossil fuels is one evidence that we as a civilization has really a long way to go in efficient utilization of our planet's real and true energy potential.

It takes millions of years to form the fossil fuels we are using nowadays, yet only a short time to combust it and generate that much needed energy for our daily needs.
First and foremost the batteries needed to make these systems reliable create more damage to the environment than 60 years of coal fired plant output. there is far less damage from coal fired generation using our current cleaning of outputs than renewables will ever reduce too using our current technologies. We already make EPA cleanup sites of every home with CFL's now we want to add damage to ground water due to batteries and their leakage and waste disposals.
We will figure it out. Teslas car was $100k now its only $70k.
30 thousand dollars taken from others to give to you.... redistribution is wrong on any level...
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
70,535
Reaction score
25,328
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
Burlington Vermont is completely running on renewable energy. The first and hopefully not the last.





Weeeelllll, not entirely. They are bloody close though, and good for them. They purchased a hydroelectric plant that pushed them over the top. They get 35% of their energy from a biomass plant though, and that uses a ton of fossil fuels just getting the wood chips (which honestly could be better used in composting) to the plant. Add into that the fact that coal energy is far more concentrated so if they were using coal they would actually produce more energy, for less, but yes, they are nearly there. And good for them!

The more cities who can get off the grid, the better.
 

Billy_Bob

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2014
Messages
25,512
Reaction score
12,476
Points
1,430
Location
Top Of The Great Divide
So you are giving up on renewable in favor of the cheaper yet environmentally damaging coal fired option. What's the use of technology if current renewable energy generation systems are not developed? Using fossil fuels is one evidence that we as a civilization has really a long way to go in efficient utilization of our planet's real and true energy potential.

It takes millions of years to form the fossil fuels we are using nowadays, yet only a short time to combust it and generate that much needed energy for our daily needs.
First and foremost the batteries needed to make these systems reliable create more damage to the environment than 60 years of coal fired plant output. there is far less damage from coal fired generation using our current cleaning of outputs than renewables will ever reduce too using our current technologies. We already make EPA cleanup sites of every home with CFL's now we want to add damage to ground water due to batteries and their leakage and waste disposals.
That's gonna be true if current battery systems are not improved. Why would anybody who design a system with the goal of less environmental impact deliberately not consider such points as leakage and waste disposal. If you are a good engineer things need to be viewed on different perspectives. I can see you are more inclined to keeping the status quo. That is your view too and I am not going to argue any further.
Your do it my way by force is antifree market and socialist command and control which will fail like history has shown us over and over again. your kind doesn't give a dam if millions freeze to death or starve just as long as you can feel good... Its this stupidity that makes me mad as hell..
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top