Scientific American, Mann hockey stick graph

[Chris]

The "technologies" (a misnomer if there ever was one) need scores of billions of dollars in subsidies because they're inherently inefficient.

If they were economically viable, they'd sell themselves.

Not if the Congress is controlled by the oil and coal lobbyists, which it is.

Conservation is not "inherently inefficient."

 

[Oddball]

Irrelevant non sequitur.

If your "technology" can't recoup the energy output it takes to build and maintain it, then you're conserving nothing.

 

[Chris]

Irrelevant non sequitur.

If your "technology" can't recoup the energy output it takes to build and maintain it, then you're conserving nothing.

Keep living in a fantasy world.

 

[Oddball]

Keep ignoring even the most basic of economic and business models, Josef.

 

[Chris]

Keep ignoring even the most basic of economic and business models, Josef.

Saving money is the most basic business model.

Keep trying....

 

[Oddball]

Like Old Rocksinthhead, you're a fool on purpose.

You wouldn't know a cost/benefit analysis if it ran you over.

 

[Chris]

Like Old Rocksinthhead, you're a fool on purpose.

You wouldn't know a cost/benefit analysis if it ran you over.

And what is the benefit of giving $100 billion dollars a year to oil producers overseas?

 

[Oddball]

If I explained it to you, you'd refuse to understand because it interferes with your politically biased cognitive dissonance.

Go take some basic courses in economics and business accounting before you embarrass yourself any more.

 

[Chris]

If I explained it to you, you'd refuse to understand because it interferes with your politically biased cognitive dissonance.

Go take some basic courses in economics and business accounting before you embarrass yourself any more.

I made the Dean's List in college and I made A's in economics.

Driving fuel efficient cars saves money.

And then there's this....

In Israel, solar power that won’t need subsidies | csmonitor.com

 

[Oddball]

I highly doubt that claim. You've demonstrated nothing but sheer ignorance of basic economic models every time you get anywhere near them.

And if Israel has such a hot deal going, maybe it'd be best that you pack your bags and start walking the walk you talk so poorly.

 

[mdn2000]

None of which has anything to do with green energy.

The technology is here.

All it takes is the political will to put it into practice.

That political will is called Marxism, the governor of michigan says they will remake michigan energy, that is Marxism, dictating what industry will be hence forcing workers to do jobs they do not want to do, reeducating everyone at the same time, Marxism, Marxist dictate the jobs, the industry, what type of energy we will use, who gets how much, Marxism

Horseshit.

No one is taking over energy companies.

Why do you want America weakened by a dependence on foreign oil?

The only thing making the USA weak is fools and morons, along with chrissy (chris) and old crock.

You look at everything we have from your computer, to the military, to great hospitals, to universities, that is all built on oil, so you hear the news state that Middle East oil makes us weak, that is about the biggest joke there is.

What is making us weak is windmills and solar, you cannot build a damned thing with a windmill or with solar.

So far when challenged the fools simply start new threads and ignore the facts. The only person actually making an effort at debate is Old Crock and his argument is mostly posting "press releases".

Oil made us the strongest nation in the world, now the Marxist tell us we must give up the oil, here use a windmill, let your enemies take all the oil, let china have the oil.

Actually I got to thank you, militarily we need the oil to be strong, give it up now, without thinking about what we are doing, under the leadership of Obama/Marxism and we will be weak and dependent on China.

 

[Sinatra]

That political will is called Marxism, the governor of michigan says they will remake michigan energy, that is Marxism, dictating what industry will be hence forcing workers to do jobs they do not want to do, reeducating everyone at the same time, Marxism, Marxist dictate the jobs, the industry, what type of energy we will use, who gets how much, Marxism

Horseshit.

No one is taking over energy companies.

Why do you want America weakened by a dependence on foreign oil?

The only thing making the USA weak is fools and morons, along with chrissy (chris) and old crock.

You look at everything we have from your computer, to the military, to great hospitals, to universities, that is all built on oil, so you hear the news state that Middle East oil makes us weak, that is about the biggest joke there is.

What is making us weak is windmills and solar, you cannot build a damned thing with a windmill or with solar.

So far when challenged the fools simply start new threads and ignore the facts. The only person actually making an effort at debate is Old Crock and his argument is mostly posting "press releases".

Oil made us the strongest nation in the world, now the Marxist tell us we must give up the oil, here use a windmill, let your enemies take all the oil, let china have the oil.

Actually I got to thank you, militarily we need the oil to be strong, give it up now, without thinking about what we are doing, under the leadership of Obama/Marxism and we will be weak and dependent on China.

You just kicked some Chris ass right there.

That's easy to do - but good job anyways...

 

[mdn2000]

Like Old Rocksinthhead, you're a fool on purpose.

You wouldn't know a cost/benefit analysis if it ran you over.

And what is the benefit of giving $100 billion dollars a year to oil producers overseas?

This is funny, how about driving your car, building a computer, flu vaccines, universities, progress, food production.

Give, its called trade dumbass, we trade money for oil, the oil is used in Europe moslty, we keep some for us, being that is so profitable to produce being a SWEET CRUDE, that profit is than used for research, charity, salaries.

 

[Old Rocks]

Atmospheric CO2 has almost doubled in the last 200 years.

The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is at its highest level in 600,000 years.

The Sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years, and yet the ice cap and the glaciers continue to melt.

We continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

These are the facts.

No these are not facts, these are unsubstantiated statements.

C02 is harmless at levels a million times greater than present levels.

Present levels are all estimates, all guesses, they have no way of measuring the amount of C02 in the atmosphere, everything is a wild guess based on incomplete data. These dumb asses admit they dont have enough data so they assume what that data must be and than use those numbers. Go read the article, it states this.

Morons repeat guesses as fact.

Sure, Mdn, sure. And you would be perfectly happy living on Venus, correct?

OK, dingbat, you state that they have no way of measuring CO2 in the atmosphere?

What an absolute idiot you are, we have a small instument about double the size of a Blackberry that not only measures CO2, but about a dozen other gases, including oxygen, to a tenth of a percent, that we are required to lower into a confined space before we enter it.

 

[Old Rocks]

The "technologies" (a misnomer if there ever was one) need scores of billions of dollars in subsidies because they're inherently inefficient.

If they were economically viable, they'd sell themselves.

Well, ol' Doooodeee..... the Dumb, the oil, gas, and coal companies get billions of dollars in subsidies. So what is their problem?

 

[Oddball]

Sorry...."They're doing it toooo" didn't work on your mother and it won't work here.

In any case, were all subsidies removed the so-called "alternatives" still couldn't compete.

Alchemy is as big a myth as that of the free lunch.

 

[Old Rocks]

Sorry...."They're doing it toooo" didn't work on your mother and it won't work here.

In any case, were all subsidies removed the so-called "alternatives" still couldn't compete.

Alchemy is as big a myth as that of the free lunch.

They are competing right now. And with the advent of the really cheap solar, most of the fossil fuel plants will be out of business in a decade or so.

 

[Oddball]

No, they're not competing....They need subsidies over and beyond those given to traditional energy producers to produce what the public doesn't want.

I've been hearing the "coal, oil and gas industries are dead" mantra since I was in grade school, and it's no more factual today than it was back then.

 

[Charles Stucker]

I highly doubt that claim. You've demonstrated nothing but sheer ignorance of basic economic models every time you get anywhere near them.

And if Israel has such a hot deal going, maybe it'd be best that you pack your bags and start walking the walk you talk so poorly.

Dude, much as it pains me to support anything Chris posts, that link to the Israeli solar looked like they could be onto something.
Not replacing oil, which is kind of a pipe dream right now, but increasing solar to the point it is economically viable in sunny areas. It really appears to be the sort of ingenious solution that makes you sit back and go "duh, why didn't I think of that."

Frankly if I could put an inexpensive solar panel in place and save enough money on my electric bills I would. So would you.
Right now the economics aren't there, but future tech holds hope yet.

Ooh hope and change in one post, am I turning into an Obama supporter?
God I hope not, I like having a positive IQ.

 

[Oddball]

They're in the damn desert...Of course solar is going to work better for them.

What are you supposed to to in more moist and temperate climates and/or places where it can snow two feet at a time?