Renewables you support-solar or wind.

[Derideo_Te]

The sad, inevitable results of the VC bubble and solar shakeout @ Rest in Peace: The List of Deceased Solar Companies : Greentech Media

President Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures @ President Obama's Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy Failures

Among a very few

So 10% of ventures fail? Sounds about normal given that the prior administration wrecked the economy. But it is hardly the "onerous" burden that you are pretending that it is. The war in Iraq cost more per month than all of those failures combined. And from the successes we get new jobs but the war in Iraq produced nothing of any value while harming the lives of some of our finest.

The onerous burden is that $BILLS was committed and WASTED by the govt to chase ridiculous ideas to make America more competitive in the Solar Biz. At this point, the tech is FULLY MATURE and gimmicks (like Solyndra) have no market value.. The ONLY thing that matters at this point is cost of production and quality control.. ALL American solar companies save 3 or 4 have failed. And the remainder of the zombies are only living off Govt welfare and massive subsidies..

$80b was allocated and so far less than 10% of those funds have been listed by your links as "failed" so unless you have another magic list somewhere you are just making this up as you go along!

 

[flacaltenn]

So 10% of ventures fail? Sounds about normal given that the prior administration wrecked the economy. But it is hardly the "onerous" burden that you are pretending that it is. The war in Iraq cost more per month than all of those failures combined. And from the successes we get new jobs but the war in Iraq produced nothing of any value while harming the lives of some of our finest.

The onerous burden is that $BILLS was committed and WASTED by the govt to chase ridiculous ideas to make America more competitive in the Solar Biz. At this point, the tech is FULLY MATURE and gimmicks (like Solyndra) have no market value.. The ONLY thing that matters at this point is cost of production and quality control.. ALL American solar companies save 3 or 4 have failed. And the remainder of the zombies are only living off Govt welfare and massive subsidies..

$80b was allocated and so far less than 10% of those funds have been listed by your links as "failed" so unless you have another magic list somewhere you are just making this up as you go along!

Not only do you require Remedial Tutoring on how Solar PV functions in the presence of weather --- but evidently, you also need refreshment on basic reading skills.

Don't CARE about some list of Govt renewable funding and their failures. My point was LIMITED to Solar Panel manufacturing and particularly its SUCCESS in the USA.. My comment was extremely correct.. Unless you can come up with MORE THAN 3 or 4 AMERICAN names on these lists..

List of photovoltaics companies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And of the 2 companies in the World top 10 producers, BOTH of them have severe financial issues..

SunPower: Twice As Bad As Solyndra, Twice As Bad For Obama

How did a failing California solar company, buffeted by short sellers and shareholder lawsuits, receive a $1.2 billion federal loan guarantee for a photovoltaic electricity ranch project-three weeks after it announced it was building new manufacturing plant in Mexicali, Mexico, to build the panels for the project.

The company, SunPower (SPWR-NASDAQ), now carries $820 million in debt, an amount $20 million greater than its market capitalization. If SunPower was a bank, the feds would shut it down. Instead, it received a lifeline twice the size of the money sent down the Solyndra drain.

This thread is about solar and wind --- not the entire renewable circus...

 

[flacaltenn]

Your word carries zero weight around here given your failure to substantiate your allegations.

The problem is Derideo -- that you NEED a lot of remedial tutorials to bring your common sense about solar PV effects up to date.

Electra is correct to assert that what you will get during a storm is close to zero.. Your eye is a bandlimited LOGARITHMIC detector --- whereas a PV panel is more linear and possibly (if you paid enough) wider band detector. Thus even TINY differences that your eye can barely detect will humble the output the output of a panel..

THIS ------ is a typical variation of a home installation due to weather conditions. MOST of the effect is not precipt, but simply cloud cover and shading from trees and chimneys and such..

The impact of clouds on your solar PV system | GreenEnergyNet.com

Here is a vid showing barely ANY output on a cloudy day.. Less than 10% of rated generation...

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReqmFfLvRKc"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReqmFfLvRKc[/ame]

Didn't even read your own link, did you?

domestic scale solar PV system...located in mid-Scotland

Of COURSE I read my own link.. Are you so brain-damaged that you believe that Solar Panels work DIFFERENTLY in Scotland??

They do not produce jack-shit on a cloudy day or during a storm. THAT'S gonna be on your quiz this Friday -- so learn it...
In the meantime -- pull yourself together and TRY to read that graph provided by a Green energy supplier.. It will explain to you why Solar is ONLY a peaker technology and is unreliable at even producing power 6 hours a day...

 

[Derideo_Te]

The onerous burden is that $BILLS was committed and WASTED by the govt to chase ridiculous ideas to make America more competitive in the Solar Biz. At this point, the tech is FULLY MATURE and gimmicks (like Solyndra) have no market value.. The ONLY thing that matters at this point is cost of production and quality control.. ALL American solar companies save 3 or 4 have failed. And the remainder of the zombies are only living off Govt welfare and massive subsidies..

$80b was allocated and so far less than 10% of those funds have been listed by your links as "failed" so unless you have another magic list somewhere you are just making this up as you go along!

Not only do you require Remedial Tutoring on how Solar PV functions in the presence of weather --- but evidently, you also need refreshment on basic reading skills.

Don't CARE about some list of Govt renewable funding and their failures. My point was LIMITED to Solar Panel manufacturing and particularly its SUCCESS in the USA.. My comment was extremely correct.. Unless you can come up with MORE THAN 3 or 4 AMERICAN names on these lists..

List of photovoltaics companies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And of the 2 companies in the World top 10 producers, BOTH of them have severe financial issues..

SunPower: Twice As Bad As Solyndra, Twice As Bad For Obama

How did a failing California solar company, buffeted by short sellers and shareholder lawsuits, receive a $1.2 billion federal loan guarantee for a photovoltaic electricity ranch project-three weeks after it announced it was building new manufacturing plant in Mexicali, Mexico, to build the panels for the project.

The company, SunPower (SPWR-NASDAQ), now carries $820 million in debt, an amount $20 million greater than its market capitalization. If SunPower was a bank, the feds would shut it down. Instead, it received a lifeline twice the size of the money sent down the Solyndra drain.

This thread is about solar and wind --- not the entire renewable circus...

Wall Street knows more about the profitability of SunPower than you do because it is rated as a "buy" stock.

SPWR stock quote - SunPower Corporation stock price - NASDAQ.com

 

[flacaltenn]

This is what coal does...Unregulated fucking coal.

Let's discuss what can be learned from this pic.. Assuming its mostly pollution and not weather.

The worlds LARGEST EVER centrally planned economy (the kind of govt you adore), gets tired of supporting a BILLION people who are mostly at subsidence poverty level.. They decide to leverage a modern economy by attracting capital and expertise from all over the world and capturing the MAJORITY of the world's labor and production output.

Fast forward to today where their middle class has EXPLODED from near zero to a substantial car-buying, mall-shopping, IPhone carrying populace. A nation that's virtually cornered the market in "renewable energy products". Tearing up miles of gorges to build out hydro, installing the world's LARGEST BASE of renewables and STILL --- we get that picture. Why is that?

1) The plan to move China to a world economy REQUIRED constant CHEAP AND RELIABLE energy.. That was on the Top 3 reasons for world manufacturers to come there.

2) The Central Planners placed no value on building BACKBONE generation with adequate or even state of the art scrubbing and pollution controls..

3) All the renewables they brought to bear were KNOWN not to have value to the CHEAP AND RELIABLE energy that they needed to succeed and impress their foreign investors.. In some cases, it was simply a ploy to build EXPERIENCE with these products that the rest of the world seemed to crave..

THAT should be stuff you learn from that picture... Fix the Central Planning and the RELIABILITY of renewables and things might change...

But in the meantime --- THEY ARE GAINING JOBS and wealth.. We are BLEEDING JOBS and WEALTH.. Go figure eh??

 

[flacaltenn]

$80b was allocated and so far less than 10% of those funds have been listed by your links as "failed" so unless you have another magic list somewhere you are just making this up as you go along!

Not only do you require Remedial Tutoring on how Solar PV functions in the presence of weather --- but evidently, you also need refreshment on basic reading skills.

Don't CARE about some list of Govt renewable funding and their failures. My point was LIMITED to Solar Panel manufacturing and particularly its SUCCESS in the USA.. My comment was extremely correct.. Unless you can come up with MORE THAN 3 or 4 AMERICAN names on these lists..

List of photovoltaics companies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And of the 2 companies in the World top 10 producers, BOTH of them have severe financial issues..

SunPower: Twice As Bad As Solyndra, Twice As Bad For Obama

How did a failing California solar company, buffeted by short sellers and shareholder lawsuits, receive a $1.2 billion federal loan guarantee for a photovoltaic electricity ranch project-three weeks after it announced it was building new manufacturing plant in Mexicali, Mexico, to build the panels for the project.

The company, SunPower (SPWR-NASDAQ), now carries $820 million in debt, an amount $20 million greater than its market capitalization. If SunPower was a bank, the feds would shut it down. Instead, it received a lifeline twice the size of the money sent down the Solyndra drain.

This thread is about solar and wind --- not the entire renewable circus...

Wall Street knows more about the profitability of SunPower than you do because it is rated as a "buy" stock.

SPWR stock quote - SunPower Corporation stock price - NASDAQ.com

Let's see. First you needed technical remediation.. Then you required reading comprehension refresher. AND NOW we gotta add financial common sense??
Wow man --- This list is getting truely long....

Why of course kiddo --- DIVE RIGHT IN.. If you like going opposite of the general marketplace..

But before you get your wallet out --- I'm obligated to tell you to read your own link..

52 Week High /Low: $ 35.39 / $ 4.51

Read more: SPWR stock quote - SunPower Corporation stock price - NASDAQ.com

Over ONE YEAR? A stock that varied from $4.50 to $35.00 and peaked a week ago and is headed back down?? By all means --- go all in...

 

[westwall]

Your word carries zero weight around here given your failure to substantiate your allegations.

The problem is Derideo -- that you NEED a lot of remedial tutorials to bring your common sense about solar PV effects up to date.

Electra is correct to assert that what you will get during a storm is close to zero.. Your eye is a bandlimited LOGARITHMIC detector --- whereas a PV panel is more linear and possibly (if you paid enough) wider band detector. Thus even TINY differences that your eye can barely detect will humble the output the output of a panel..

THIS ------ is a typical variation of a home installation due to weather conditions. MOST of the effect is not precipt, but simply cloud cover and shading from trees and chimneys and such..

The impact of clouds on your solar PV system | GreenEnergyNet.com

Here is a vid showing barely ANY output on a cloudy day.. Less than 10% of rated generation...

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReqmFfLvRKc"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReqmFfLvRKc[/ame]

Didn't even read your own link, did you?

domestic scale solar PV system...located in mid-Scotland

Are you being intentionally stupid? The video is presented to show what happens when a cloud occults a solar module.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The problem is Derideo -- that you NEED a lot of remedial tutorials to bring your common sense about solar PV effects up to date.

Electra is correct to assert that what you will get during a storm is close to zero.. Your eye is a bandlimited LOGARITHMIC detector --- whereas a PV panel is more linear and possibly (if you paid enough) wider band detector. Thus even TINY differences that your eye can barely detect will humble the output the output of a panel..

THIS ------ is a typical variation of a home installation due to weather conditions. MOST of the effect is not precipt, but simply cloud cover and shading from trees and chimneys and such..

The impact of clouds on your solar PV system | GreenEnergyNet.com

Here is a vid showing barely ANY output on a cloudy day.. Less than 10% of rated generation...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReqmFfLvRKc

Didn't even read your own link, did you?

domestic scale solar PV system...located in mid-Scotland

Are you being intentionally stupid? The video is presented to show what happens when a cloud occults a solar module.

The fixation on clouds by the extreme right says volumes about their desperation. Solar works and it is moving into the mainstream. Utilities are investing in solar farms for the simple reason that they know that the cost of fossil fuels will outstrip the cost of solar long before the panels need to be replaced. They have done the math and figured out that the return from wind power is cost effective too. Every new technology has successes and failures. The extreme right would be whining every time a steam train boiler blew up or derailed and claiming that it will never be viable. They would have had fits about the Model T and pointed at every traffic accident as a reason why no one would ever buy them.

Reality is in the math. Renewable energy sources have become cost effective and are being implemented both nationwide and worldwide. The extreme right doomsayers will continue to rant and rave but they cannot stop the march of progress.

 

[westwall]

Didn't even read your own link, did you?

Are you being intentionally stupid? The video is presented to show what happens when a cloud occults a solar module.

The fixation on clouds by the extreme right says volumes about their desperation. Solar works and it is moving into the mainstream. Utilities are investing in solar farms for the simple reason that they know that the cost of fossil fuels will outstrip the cost of solar long before the panels need to be replaced. They have done the math and figured out that the return from wind power is cost effective too. Every new technology has successes and failures. The extreme right would be whining every time a steam train boiler blew up or derailed and claiming that it will never be viable. They would have had fits about the Model T and pointed at every traffic accident as a reason why no one would ever buy them.

Reality is in the math. Renewable energy sources have become cost effective and are being implemented both nationwide and worldwide. The extreme right doomsayers will continue to rant and rave but they cannot stop the march of progress.

Desperation? We're not the desperate ones silly person. You are witnessing the wholesale failure of an entire division of science called "climatology". So long as theirs was the only message renewables were growing.

Now that our voice is finally being heard, the total failure of the renewable systems is becoming known and the support for them is likewise failing.

Keep dancing, but your time is coming to a end...and soon.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Are you being intentionally stupid? The video is presented to show what happens when a cloud occults a solar module.

The fixation on clouds by the extreme right says volumes about their desperation. Solar works and it is moving into the mainstream. Utilities are investing in solar farms for the simple reason that they know that the cost of fossil fuels will outstrip the cost of solar long before the panels need to be replaced. They have done the math and figured out that the return from wind power is cost effective too. Every new technology has successes and failures. The extreme right would be whining every time a steam train boiler blew up or derailed and claiming that it will never be viable. They would have had fits about the Model T and pointed at every traffic accident as a reason why no one would ever buy them.

Reality is in the math. Renewable energy sources have become cost effective and are being implemented both nationwide and worldwide. The extreme right doomsayers will continue to rant and rave but they cannot stop the march of progress.

Desperation? We're not the desperate ones silly person. You are witnessing the wholesale failure of an entire division of science called "climatology". So long as theirs was the only message renewables were growing.

Now that our voice is finally being heard, the total failure of the renewable systems is becoming known and the support for them is likewise failing.

Keep dancing, but your time is coming to a end...and soon.

 

[flacaltenn]

Didn't even read your own link, did you?

Are you being intentionally stupid? The video is presented to show what happens when a cloud occults a solar module.

The fixation on clouds by the extreme right says volumes about their desperation. Solar works and it is moving into the mainstream. Utilities are investing in solar farms for the simple reason that they know that the cost of fossil fuels will outstrip the cost of solar long before the panels need to be replaced. They have done the math and figured out that the return from wind power is cost effective too. Every new technology has successes and failures. The extreme right would be whining every time a steam train boiler blew up or derailed and claiming that it will never be viable. They would have had fits about the Model T and pointed at every traffic accident as a reason why no one would ever buy them.

Reality is in the math. Renewable energy sources have become cost effective and are being implemented both nationwide and worldwide. The extreme right doomsayers will continue to rant and rave but they cannot stop the march of progress.

...extreme right.... ... extreme right... ... extreme right doomsayers...

Been trying to tell ya WestWall ---- if you're gonna insist on being a lefty, you're gonna have to renounce logic, science, and reason...



So if ya think your solar panels are working great on a cloudy day --- it's just because you're a liberal....

ROFLing over the sad state of our country.....

 

[jon_berzerk]

This is what coal does...Unregulated fucking coal.

Let's discuss what can be learned from this pic.. Assuming its mostly pollution and not weather.

The worlds LARGEST EVER centrally planned economy (the kind of govt you adore), gets tired of supporting a BILLION people who are mostly at subsidence poverty level.. They decide to leverage a modern economy by attracting capital and expertise from all over the world and capturing the MAJORITY of the world's labor and production output.

Fast forward to today where their middle class has EXPLODED from near zero to a substantial car-buying, mall-shopping, IPhone carrying populace. A nation that's virtually cornered the market in "renewable energy products". Tearing up miles of gorges to build out hydro, installing the world's LARGEST BASE of renewables and STILL --- we get that picture. Why is that?

1) The plan to move China to a world economy REQUIRED constant CHEAP AND RELIABLE energy.. That was on the Top 3 reasons for world manufacturers to come there.

2) The Central Planners placed no value on building BACKBONE generation with adequate or even state of the art scrubbing and pollution controls..

3) All the renewables they brought to bear were KNOWN not to have value to the CHEAP AND RELIABLE energy that they needed to succeed and impress their foreign investors.. In some cases, it was simply a ploy to build EXPERIENCE with these products that the rest of the world seemed to crave..

THAT should be stuff you learn from that picture... Fix the Central Planning and the RELIABILITY of renewables and things might change...

But in the meantime --- THEY ARE GAINING JOBS and wealth.. We are BLEEDING JOBS and WEALTH.. Go figure eh??

obama once wondered aloud

"why cant we be more like china"...."why"

 

[westwall]

The fixation on clouds by the extreme right says volumes about their desperation. Solar works and it is moving into the mainstream. Utilities are investing in solar farms for the simple reason that they know that the cost of fossil fuels will outstrip the cost of solar long before the panels need to be replaced. They have done the math and figured out that the return from wind power is cost effective too. Every new technology has successes and failures. The extreme right would be whining every time a steam train boiler blew up or derailed and claiming that it will never be viable. They would have had fits about the Model T and pointed at every traffic accident as a reason why no one would ever buy them.

Reality is in the math. Renewable energy sources have become cost effective and are being implemented both nationwide and worldwide. The extreme right doomsayers will continue to rant and rave but they cannot stop the march of progress.

Desperation? We're not the desperate ones silly person. You are witnessing the wholesale failure of an entire division of science called "climatology". So long as theirs was the only message renewables were growing.

Now that our voice is finally being heard, the total failure of the renewable systems is becoming known and the support for them is likewise failing.

Keep dancing, but your time is coming to a end...and soon.

Yes, you clowns bleat that all of the time. For over 2,000 years fools like you have been wearing the sandwich boards, yours is just the latest incarnation. How many "tipping points" have you asshats warned us about? For 30 years now?

The unwashed loons wearing the sandwich boards are YOU! And here is one of your high priests to reinforce my argument... Oh yes he now showers less to prevent climate change....how's that for loony?



"One of the world's leading climate scientists has outlined a radical plan to hold temperatures to a 2C rise, the threshold that governments have agreed to limit rises to – but he accepts it may cause consternation among the very rich.


Kevin Anderson, professor of energy and climate change at the University of Manchester and deputy head of the Tyndall Centre, has argued previously that industrialised countries may need to go into recession to reduce emissions enough to ensure temperatures do not rise over 2C.


But as a 4C rise, which is looking increasingly realistic, would be "catastrophic" and must be avoided at all costs, he now says that political and personal efforts should be concentrated on changing the consumption patterns of the very few who emit the most – and that includes most of the people at the climate talks currently underway in Warsaw.


"We think it is still possible to avoid 2C rise. It's feasible, but only just. We think that there are economic but not financial benefits," he told a side meeting at the UN talks.


"Annex 1 [industrialised] countries need a 70% reduction in emissions consumption in 10 years to give us an outside chance of holding temperatures to a 2C rise. They need to cut emissions by 10% annually. We need to be fully de-carbonised in the 2020-30s, and that means planes, fridges, everything [must emit far less] to give a bit of an opportunity for poorer parts of the world to develop."




Make the rich change their ways to avoid a 2C rise, says top scientist | Environment | theguardian.com

 

[elektra]

$80b was allocated and so far less than 10% of those funds have been listed by your links as "failed" so unless you have another magic list somewhere you are just making this up as you go along!

Not only do you require Remedial Tutoring on how Solar PV functions in the presence of weather --- but evidently, you also need refreshment on basic reading skills.

Don't CARE about some list of Govt renewable funding and their failures. My point was LIMITED to Solar Panel manufacturing and particularly its SUCCESS in the USA.. My comment was extremely correct.. Unless you can come up with MORE THAN 3 or 4 AMERICAN names on these lists..

List of photovoltaics companies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And of the 2 companies in the World top 10 producers, BOTH of them have severe financial issues..

SunPower: Twice As Bad As Solyndra, Twice As Bad For Obama

How did a failing California solar company, buffeted by short sellers and shareholder lawsuits, receive a $1.2 billion federal loan guarantee for a photovoltaic electricity ranch project-three weeks after it announced it was building new manufacturing plant in Mexicali, Mexico, to build the panels for the project.

The company, SunPower (SPWR-NASDAQ), now carries $820 million in debt, an amount $20 million greater than its market capitalization. If SunPower was a bank, the feds would shut it down. Instead, it received a lifeline twice the size of the money sent down the Solyndra drain.

This thread is about solar and wind --- not the entire renewable circus...

Wall Street knows more about the profitability of SunPower than you do because it is rated as a "buy" stock.

SPWR stock quote - SunPower Corporation stock price - NASDAQ.com

Wall Street is known to make short term gains selling stocks, today they say buy, tomorrow may be a shock.

 

[elektra]

Didn't even read your own link, did you?

Are you being intentionally stupid? The video is presented to show what happens when a cloud occults a solar module.

The fixation on clouds by the extreme right says volumes about their desperation. Solar works and it is moving into the mainstream. Utilities are investing in solar farms for the simple reason that they know that the cost of fossil fuels will outstrip the cost of solar long before the panels need to be replaced. They have done the math and figured out that the return from wind power is cost effective too. Every new technology has successes and failures. The extreme right would be whining every time a steam train boiler blew up or derailed and claiming that it will never be viable. They would have had fits about the Model T and pointed at every traffic accident as a reason why no one would ever buy them.

Reality is in the math. Renewable energy sources have become cost effective and are being implemented both nationwide and worldwide. The extreme right doomsayers will continue to rant and rave but they cannot stop the march of progress.

Actually utilities are investing in Solar because they have a monopoly in local markets protected by Liberal Government rules and regulations. State law in California is being changed to allow the utilities to raise electrical rates to pay for expensive Solar, the customers have no choice, we are literally serfs doing as a tyrannical government dictates.

Government mandated profits for Utilities companies is pushing the investment in Solar. Not to mention Cap and Trade on CO2 via AB32 here in California.

Do the math, bull? Read the Assembly bills, read the laws, and read how government is mandating what a customer must buy.

 

[Bern80]

At the moment I can't really support either other than on a small scale. For indiviudual use it's good, but trying to do it on a scale to provide power to a large community you're really just trading one environmental problem for another. Sure you might be making a rather miniscule impact in improving air quality, but what about the habitable land you're taking up to do that? And I'm not talking about habitable land for humans, but animals too. You have to see the irony in environmentalists, who are supposed to be for protecting nature and all its creatures, pushing technology these mass wind farm, solar plants. Ethanol as a fuel source, etc.

The production of ethanol is turning into one of the greatest ecological disasters ever. The ecological problems it causes far, far outway the detriment of their non-use. From the dead zones in the gulf created by fertilizer coming from the Mississippi which has increased because of more corn production to the loss of habitat for many animals for the corn. I live in southern Minnesota where most of the country side is corn crops. This is also true of the Dakotas. It wasn't always covered in corn fields though. Millions and millions of acres used to be CRP land. CRP was land farmers owned and the government subsidized them for to NOT plant on to preserve the natural environment. Then Obama, in another one of his moments of infinite wisdom, decided to have all these ethanol fuel mandates and subsidize production of ethanol. All of a sudden it simply became too lucrative to farmers to not plant corn. Now it's nothing but corn fields here and the population of pheasants is at a ten year low.

Again I don't see a problem with using wind and solar on an individual basis. But the simple fact is as far as providing power for whole communities you simply can't match the energy you can get out of square acre of land from wind or solar to what you can get out of fossil fuels. They have a vastly smaller impact on the environment in terms of sqare acerage required to produce it.

 

[Derideo_Te]

At the moment I can't really support either other than on a small scale. For indiviudual use it's good, but trying to do it on a scale to provide power to a large community you're really just trading one environmental problem for another. Sure you might be making a rather miniscule impact in improving air quality, but what about the habitable land you're taking up to do that? And I'm not talking about habitable land for humans, but animals too. You have to see the irony in environmentalists, who are supposed to be for protecting nature and all its creatures, pushing technology these mass wind farm, solar plants. Ethanol as a fuel source, etc.

The production of ethanol is turning into one of the greatest ecological disasters ever. The ecological problems it causes far, far outway the detriment of their non-use. From the dead zones in the gulf created by fertilizer coming from the Mississippi which has increased because of more corn production to the loss of habitat for many animals for the corn. I live in southern Minnesota where most of the country side is corn crops. This is also true of the Dakotas. It wasn't always covered in corn fields though. Millions and millions of acres used to be CRP land. CRP was land farmers owned and the government subsidized them for to NOT plant on to preserve the natural environment. Then Obama, in another one of his moments of infinite wisdom, decided to have all these ethanol fuel mandates and subsidize production of ethanol. All of a sudden it simply became too lucrative to farmers to not plant corn. Now it's nothing but corn fields here and the population of pheasants is at a ten year low.

Again I don't see a problem with using wind and solar on an individual basis. But the simple fact is as far as providing power for whole communities you simply can't match the energy you can get out of square acre of land from wind or solar to what you can get out of fossil fuels. They have a vastly smaller impact on the environment in terms of sqare acerage required to produce it.

You get dual use from land with wind turbines. The land can still be farmed at the same time as producing energy. The fallacy about ethanol was using corn instead of sawgrass. It was more of a boondoggle subsidy for the Farming Industrial Complex than a genuine green energy alternative.

 

[flacaltenn]

At the moment I can't really support either other than on a small scale. For indiviudual use it's good, but trying to do it on a scale to provide power to a large community you're really just trading one environmental problem for another. Sure you might be making a rather miniscule impact in improving air quality, but what about the habitable land you're taking up to do that? And I'm not talking about habitable land for humans, but animals too. You have to see the irony in environmentalists, who are supposed to be for protecting nature and all its creatures, pushing technology these mass wind farm, solar plants. Ethanol as a fuel source, etc.

The production of ethanol is turning into one of the greatest ecological disasters ever. The ecological problems it causes far, far outway the detriment of their non-use. From the dead zones in the gulf created by fertilizer coming from the Mississippi which has increased because of more corn production to the loss of habitat for many animals for the corn. I live in southern Minnesota where most of the country side is corn crops. This is also true of the Dakotas. It wasn't always covered in corn fields though. Millions and millions of acres used to be CRP land. CRP was land farmers owned and the government subsidized them for to NOT plant on to preserve the natural environment. Then Obama, in another one of his moments of infinite wisdom, decided to have all these ethanol fuel mandates and subsidize production of ethanol. All of a sudden it simply became too lucrative to farmers to not plant corn. Now it's nothing but corn fields here and the population of pheasants is at a ten year low.

Again I don't see a problem with using wind and solar on an individual basis. But the simple fact is as far as providing power for whole communities you simply can't match the energy you can get out of square acre of land from wind or solar to what you can get out of fossil fuels. They have a vastly smaller impact on the environment in terms of sqare acerage required to produce it.

You get dual use from land with wind turbines. The land can still be farmed at the same time as producing energy. The fallacy about ethanol was using corn instead of sawgrass. It was more of a boondoggle subsidy for the Farming Industrial Complex than a genuine green energy alternative.

Just like your argument, the use of corn created valuable byproducts that can STILL be used for cattlefeed and other purposes. And it's more efficient for ethanol production anyway.

The dual land argument is kinda getting panned in reality. Late in the day when the sun shadows the turbines, it drives both humans and cattle crazy with the giant moving shadows. That and the noise from multiple turbines is awfully dam loud..

 

[Derideo_Te]

At the moment I can't really support either other than on a small scale. For indiviudual use it's good, but trying to do it on a scale to provide power to a large community you're really just trading one environmental problem for another. Sure you might be making a rather miniscule impact in improving air quality, but what about the habitable land you're taking up to do that? And I'm not talking about habitable land for humans, but animals too. You have to see the irony in environmentalists, who are supposed to be for protecting nature and all its creatures, pushing technology these mass wind farm, solar plants. Ethanol as a fuel source, etc.

The production of ethanol is turning into one of the greatest ecological disasters ever. The ecological problems it causes far, far outway the detriment of their non-use. From the dead zones in the gulf created by fertilizer coming from the Mississippi which has increased because of more corn production to the loss of habitat for many animals for the corn. I live in southern Minnesota where most of the country side is corn crops. This is also true of the Dakotas. It wasn't always covered in corn fields though. Millions and millions of acres used to be CRP land. CRP was land farmers owned and the government subsidized them for to NOT plant on to preserve the natural environment. Then Obama, in another one of his moments of infinite wisdom, decided to have all these ethanol fuel mandates and subsidize production of ethanol. All of a sudden it simply became too lucrative to farmers to not plant corn. Now it's nothing but corn fields here and the population of pheasants is at a ten year low.

Again I don't see a problem with using wind and solar on an individual basis. But the simple fact is as far as providing power for whole communities you simply can't match the energy you can get out of square acre of land from wind or solar to what you can get out of fossil fuels. They have a vastly smaller impact on the environment in terms of sqare acerage required to produce it.

You get dual use from land with wind turbines. The land can still be farmed at the same time as producing energy. The fallacy about ethanol was using corn instead of sawgrass. It was more of a boondoggle subsidy for the Farming Industrial Complex than a genuine green energy alternative.

Just like your argument, the use of corn created valuable byproducts that can STILL be used for cattlefeed and other purposes. And it's more efficient for ethanol production anyway.

Facts NOT in evidence!

Switchgrass is a perennial grass that grows naturally on roadsides and the edges of fields. In the new study, published Wednesday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers from the University of Nebraska and the U.S. Department of Agriculture teamed with paid farmers on 10 farms in Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota and Minnesota. The farmers planted switchgrass in fields ranging in size from about seven to 23 acres and grew it as a crop. They recorded all of the resources that they used in the planting and harvesting, from seeds to tractor fuel to pesticides to fertilizer, as well as the amount of switchgrass they harvested.

The researchers then used that information, together with a model that calculates the amount of ethanol that can be produced per kilogram of switchgrass, and found that the switchgrass could provide 540 percent more energy than went into producing it.

The dual land argument is kinda getting panned in reality. Late in the day when the sun shadows the turbines, it drives both humans and cattle crazy with the giant moving shadows. That and the noise from multiple turbines is awfully dam loud..

That you have to resort to imaginary "noises" and "shadows" demonstrates just how weak your position has become.

 

[Bern80]

At the moment I can't really support either other than on a small scale. For indiviudual use it's good, but trying to do it on a scale to provide power to a large community you're really just trading one environmental problem for another. Sure you might be making a rather miniscule impact in improving air quality, but what about the habitable land you're taking up to do that? And I'm not talking about habitable land for humans, but animals too. You have to see the irony in environmentalists, who are supposed to be for protecting nature and all its creatures, pushing technology these mass wind farm, solar plants. Ethanol as a fuel source, etc.

The production of ethanol is turning into one of the greatest ecological disasters ever. The ecological problems it causes far, far outway the detriment of their non-use. From the dead zones in the gulf created by fertilizer coming from the Mississippi which has increased because of more corn production to the loss of habitat for many animals for the corn. I live in southern Minnesota where most of the country side is corn crops. This is also true of the Dakotas. It wasn't always covered in corn fields though. Millions and millions of acres used to be CRP land. CRP was land farmers owned and the government subsidized them for to NOT plant on to preserve the natural environment. Then Obama, in another one of his moments of infinite wisdom, decided to have all these ethanol fuel mandates and subsidize production of ethanol. All of a sudden it simply became too lucrative to farmers to not plant corn. Now it's nothing but corn fields here and the population of pheasants is at a ten year low.

Again I don't see a problem with using wind and solar on an individual basis. But the simple fact is as far as providing power for whole communities you simply can't match the energy you can get out of square acre of land from wind or solar to what you can get out of fossil fuels. They have a vastly smaller impact on the environment in terms of sqare acerage required to produce it.

You get dual use from land with wind turbines. The land can still be farmed at the same time as producing energy. The fallacy about ethanol was using corn instead of sawgrass. It was more of a boondoggle subsidy for the Farming Industrial Complex than a genuine green energy alternative.

Tell that to the geese here that are getting chopped up by the wind farms. And duel purpose? Have you ever actually seen a wind farm? No farmer is going to want to try to harvest that land.