CDZ The American Republican Denial of Climate change.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Nonsense

Why the same old song and dance about nuclear being the only option. Nuclear fuel has proven itself one of the least favorable fuels. Its extremely hazardous to the environment and its CO2 intensive.

Renewables are the way to go. The ONLY way to go. Solar, in all its forms. Wind, tidal, we're swimming in more than enough energy to run this place without oil or nuclear.

Why are these multinational so focused on pushing Nuclear or fossil fuels ? Its simple, they make money on those fuels. Renewables can be produced at the point of consumption. There's no shipping, no huge production facilities involved, nothing for the multinationals to add their cut too.

Its simple

The fossil fuel industry is all about greed, they have no use in the best solution; they only see and will support the solutions that continue to support the status quo. All this nonsense about nuclear fuel is nothing more than fear tactics. There's a few other realities about nuclear that are less well known, Like finding the high grade fuel needed or the decommissioning costs on the plants that we already have and are running decades beyond their design limit.

Nuclear is a huge mistake and anyone who's looked into it knows it.

Its nothing more than a scar tactic to encourage the ignorant to continue supporting the multinationals cash cow. Oil.

Nuclear fuel has proven itself one of the least favorable fuels.

Why do you feel that?

and its CO2 intensive

Tell me more.

Why are these multinational so focused on pushing Nuclear or fossil fuels ? Its simple, they make money on those fuels.

You've found the secret. We must only use fuels that lose money. Now we know why you like "green energy".

All this nonsense about nuclear fuel is nothing more than fear tactics.

I agree, anti-nuke greens use nothing but fear.

 

[Boston1]

Your funny.

So who loses when I install solar panels ? Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ? ( feel free to work that one out for yourself, I payed less than $175 a ton for pellets last time around ) Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ? Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ? Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well. The only people who miss out is the energy companies.

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

Also do some of your own homework on nuclear. Look into decommissioning, fuel availability and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your funny.

So who loses when I install solar panels ? Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ? ( feel free to work that one out for yourself, I payed less than $175 a ton for pellets last time around ) Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ? Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ? Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well. The only people who miss out is the energy companies.

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

Also do some of your own homework on nuclear. Look into decommissioning, fuel availability and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

So who loses when I install solar panels ?

If the IRS gives you $10,000 to subsidize your panels, the rest of us lose.
If you want to use your own money, go for it. Many people make poor fiscal decisions every day.

Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ?

I can't see anyone losing in that scenario. Sounds like a fine example of capitalism.

Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ?

See above.

Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ?

Ditto.

Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

Ditto again.

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well.

If you're comfortable with your ROI for those things, good for you!

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

People who reach breakeven in 30 years, for example, but the system only lasts 20 years.
Utility companies that are forced to pay above market prices for "green energy" and their customers who are forced to do the same.
Taxpayers who subsidize uneconomical energy that would otherwise not be produced.

and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

I understand if you don't want to back up your original claim.

 

[PredFan]

At this point is there really any excuse to deny mankind has brought this on itself ?

No one is denying that the climate changes.

 

[Boston1]

Your funny.

So who loses when I install solar panels ? Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ? ( feel free to work that one out for yourself, I payed less than $175 a ton for pellets last time around ) Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ? Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ? Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well. The only people who miss out is the energy companies.

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

Also do some of your own homework on nuclear. Look into decommissioning, fuel availability and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

So who loses when I install solar panels ?

If the IRS gives you $10,000 to subsidize your panels, the rest of us lose.
If you want to use your own money, go for it. Many people make poor fiscal decisions every day.

Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ?

I can't see anyone losing in that scenario. Sounds like a fine example of capitalism.

Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ?

See above.

Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ?

Ditto.

Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

Ditto again.

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well.

If you're comfortable with your ROI for those things, good for you!

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

People who reach breakeven in 30 years, for example, but the system only lasts 20 years.
Utility companies that are forced to pay above market prices for "green energy" and their customers who are forced to do the same.
Taxpayers who subsidize uneconomical energy that would otherwise not be produced.

and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

I understand if you don't want to back up your original claim.

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Again I suggest you look into the issues I presented yourself so you can assure yourself its no off the cuff claim.

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ? There are incentives to the oil and gas industry as well, how idiotic is that.

Quote

Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Overview - Oil Change International

priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/ How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually, ... and gas production: the value of tax breaks and other incentives has increased along ... Taxpayers are paying a huge unaccounted-for price for oil imports, not to ...

End Quote

So whats the total subsidy for solar panels

Its about the same, but accurate numbers are really hard to come buy as the subsidies are spread out to individuals instead of concentrated on a few multinationals.

Personally I'd rather see people benefit from subsidies than multinationals any day

So here's what is available to people setting up solar panels

PACE and Net metering on the state level.

A 30% tax credit on installation costs on the fed level.

I don't get the Net metering on this next place because I don't feel like paying the $6000 connection fee. My return is less than four years ;--) because I split the system between solar and wind, and won't be paying the hook up fee. Wind being a lot cheaper all around. Pure solar systems generally take about 7~10 years to break even and I didn't like those odds.

My system on this next place will be smaller on the solar end and lager on the wind end. Wind is a lot cheaper, I broke the system down to 50/50 produced by each and have a small diesel genset which runs on biodiesel I make from vegetable oil I get free, costs me about $1 a gallon by the time its ready to burn.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

Subsidies go directly to the individual instead of being just more gravy for the multinational energy companies

Energy is produces at the point of use, which means no transmission losses

If you're smart enough to use multiple systems like I did and will on this next place the chances of a failure are reduced.

I started living off grid maybe 20 years ago and haven't once had an outage. The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense

 

[Boston1]

At this point is there really any excuse to deny mankind has brought this on itself ?

No one is denying that the climate changes.

Of course it does, however the rate and duration of the extreme change we are seeing today due to the changes in the atmospheric chemistry caused by the burning of fossil fuels is completely unique and virtually guaranteed to result in catastrophic consequences.

 

[2aguy]

At this point is there really any excuse to deny mankind has brought this on itself ?

You mean other than the facts, the truth and reality......? You mean besides those things?

 

[PredFan]

At this point is there really any excuse to deny mankind has brought this on itself ?

No one is denying that the climate changes.

Of course it does, however the rate and duration of the extreme change we are seeing today due to the changes in the atmospheric chemistry caused by the burning of fossil fuels is completely unique and virtually guaranteed to result in catastrophic consequences.

And there is absolutely no proof that what we are experiencing is in any way unique to this planet nor caused by man.

 

[Wyatt earp]

At this point is there really any excuse to deny mankind has brought this on itself ?

No one is denying that the climate changes.

Of course it does, however the rate and duration of the extreme change we are seeing today due to the changes in the atmospheric chemistry caused by the burning of fossil fuels is completely unique and virtually guaranteed to result in catastrophic consequences.

And there is absolutely no proof that what we are experiencing is in any way unique to this planet nor caused by man.

Yes their is they stopped driving cars and burning fossil fuels thousands of years ago when their city's were going underwater.

 

[Boston1]

At this point is there really any excuse to deny mankind has brought this on itself ?

No one is denying that the climate changes.

Of course it does, however the rate and duration of the extreme change we are seeing today due to the changes in the atmospheric chemistry caused by the burning of fossil fuels is completely unique and virtually guaranteed to result in catastrophic consequences.

And there is absolutely no proof that what we are experiencing is in any way unique to this planet nor caused by man.

Where in the world have you been, under a rock.

Let me ask you this, do you know what an isotope is ?

There is definitive proof that virtually ALL the excess CO2 seen in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution can be attributed to man AND there is clear evidence of the consequences of that additional CO2.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your funny.

So who loses when I install solar panels ? Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ? ( feel free to work that one out for yourself, I payed less than $175 a ton for pellets last time around ) Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ? Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ? Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well. The only people who miss out is the energy companies.

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

Also do some of your own homework on nuclear. Look into decommissioning, fuel availability and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

So who loses when I install solar panels ?

If the IRS gives you $10,000 to subsidize your panels, the rest of us lose.
If you want to use your own money, go for it. Many people make poor fiscal decisions every day.

Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ?

I can't see anyone losing in that scenario. Sounds like a fine example of capitalism.

Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ?

See above.

Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ?

Ditto.

Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

Ditto again.

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well.

If you're comfortable with your ROI for those things, good for you!

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

People who reach breakeven in 30 years, for example, but the system only lasts 20 years.
Utility companies that are forced to pay above market prices for "green energy" and their customers who are forced to do the same.
Taxpayers who subsidize uneconomical energy that would otherwise not be produced.

and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

I understand if you don't want to back up your original claim.

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Again I suggest you look into the issues I presented yourself so you can assure yourself its no off the cuff claim.

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ? There are incentives to the oil and gas industry as well, how idiotic is that.

Quote

Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Overview - Oil Change International

priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/ How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually, ... and gas production: the value of tax breaks and other incentives has increased along ... Taxpayers are paying a huge unaccounted-for price for oil imports, not to ...

End Quote

So whats the total subsidy for solar panels

Its about the same, but accurate numbers are really hard to come buy as the subsidies are spread out to individuals instead of concentrated on a few multinationals.

Personally I'd rather see people benefit from subsidies than multinationals any day

So here's what is available to people setting up solar panels

PACE and Net metering on the state level.

A 30% tax credit on installation costs on the fed level.

I don't get the Net metering on this next place because I don't feel like paying the $6000 connection fee. My return is less than four years ;--) because I split the system between solar and wind, and won't be paying the hook up fee. Wind being a lot cheaper all around. Pure solar systems generally take about 7~10 years to break even and I didn't like those odds.

My system on this next place will be smaller on the solar end and lager on the wind end. Wind is a lot cheaper, I broke the system down to 50/50 produced by each and have a small diesel genset which runs on biodiesel I make from vegetable oil I get free, costs me about $1 a gallon by the time its ready to burn.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

Subsidies go directly to the individual instead of being just more gravy for the multinational energy companies

Energy is produces at the point of use, which means no transmission losses

If you're smart enough to use multiple systems like I did and will on this next place the chances of a failure are reduced.

I started living off grid maybe 20 years ago and haven't once had an outage. The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Why would I do homework to back up your claim?

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ?

I guess not. But you can't pretend something is cheap, just because you stick someone else with the bill.

How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually

Allowing the oil, gas and coal industry to write off their business expenses is not a subsidy.
Writing you a check because you installed a solar panel is.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

If you can make it work on your own dime, more power to you.
If you're using tax dollars to do it, then you have no justifiable argument.

The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense.

I could explain the difference between one guy running his house off of renewables and the folly of trying to run a factory or a city off of wind or solar, but I get the feeling I'd be wasting my time.

 

[PredFan]

At this point is there really any excuse to deny mankind has brought this on itself ?

No one is denying that the climate changes.

Of course it does, however the rate and duration of the extreme change we are seeing today due to the changes in the atmospheric chemistry caused by the burning of fossil fuels is completely unique and virtually guaranteed to result in catastrophic consequences.

And there is absolutely no proof that what we are experiencing is in any way unique to this planet nor caused by man.

Where in the world have you been, under a rock.

Let me ask you this, do you know what an isotope is ?

There is definitive proof that virtually ALL the excess CO2 seen in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution can be attributed to man AND there is clear evidence of the consequences of that additional CO2.

So, that is your proof? You say it is?

Do you know what "proof" means?

 

[Boston1]

Your funny.

So who loses when I install solar panels ? Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ? ( feel free to work that one out for yourself, I payed less than $175 a ton for pellets last time around ) Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ? Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ? Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well. The only people who miss out is the energy companies.

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

Also do some of your own homework on nuclear. Look into decommissioning, fuel availability and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

So who loses when I install solar panels ?

If the IRS gives you $10,000 to subsidize your panels, the rest of us lose.
If you want to use your own money, go for it. Many people make poor fiscal decisions every day.

Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ?

I can't see anyone losing in that scenario. Sounds like a fine example of capitalism.

Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ?

See above.

Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ?

Ditto.

Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

Ditto again.

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well.

If you're comfortable with your ROI for those things, good for you!

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

People who reach breakeven in 30 years, for example, but the system only lasts 20 years.
Utility companies that are forced to pay above market prices for "green energy" and their customers who are forced to do the same.
Taxpayers who subsidize uneconomical energy that would otherwise not be produced.

and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

I understand if you don't want to back up your original claim.

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Again I suggest you look into the issues I presented yourself so you can assure yourself its no off the cuff claim.

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ? There are incentives to the oil and gas industry as well, how idiotic is that.

Quote

Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Overview - Oil Change International

priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/ How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually, ... and gas production: the value of tax breaks and other incentives has increased along ... Taxpayers are paying a huge unaccounted-for price for oil imports, not to ...

End Quote

So whats the total subsidy for solar panels

Its about the same, but accurate numbers are really hard to come buy as the subsidies are spread out to individuals instead of concentrated on a few multinationals.

Personally I'd rather see people benefit from subsidies than multinationals any day

So here's what is available to people setting up solar panels

PACE and Net metering on the state level.

A 30% tax credit on installation costs on the fed level.

I don't get the Net metering on this next place because I don't feel like paying the $6000 connection fee. My return is less than four years ;--) because I split the system between solar and wind, and won't be paying the hook up fee. Wind being a lot cheaper all around. Pure solar systems generally take about 7~10 years to break even and I didn't like those odds.

My system on this next place will be smaller on the solar end and lager on the wind end. Wind is a lot cheaper, I broke the system down to 50/50 produced by each and have a small diesel genset which runs on biodiesel I make from vegetable oil I get free, costs me about $1 a gallon by the time its ready to burn.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

Subsidies go directly to the individual instead of being just more gravy for the multinational energy companies

Energy is produces at the point of use, which means no transmission losses

If you're smart enough to use multiple systems like I did and will on this next place the chances of a failure are reduced.

I started living off grid maybe 20 years ago and haven't once had an outage. The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Why would I do homework to back up your claim?

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ?

I guess not. But you can't pretend something is cheap, just because you stick someone else with the bill.

How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually

Allowing the oil, gas and coal industry to write off their business expenses is not a subsidy.
Writing you a check because you installed a solar panel is.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

If you can make it work on your own dime, more power to you.
If you're using tax dollars to do it, then you have no justifiable argument.

The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense.

I could explain the difference between one guy running his house off of renewables and the folly of trying to run a factory or a city off of wind or solar, but I get the feeling I'd be wasting my time.

Because often people who cling to ideological beliefs refuse to listen to logic. Its far better if you can get them to research reality for themselves. Makes it generally more difficult for them to engage the cognitive dissonance that usually pervades their belief system.

Maybe you missed the fact that the oil and gas industry receives the lions share of all subsidies worldwide. Also in the US the subsidies for fossil fuels and solar are about the same. So why advocate those billions go to the multinational oil and gas companies rather than the individual consumer ?

PS
I'd be just as happy if they eliminate all subsidies, oil and gas or solar, it wouldn't make one difference on the efficiency of the system, and most people would simply adjust their system to compensate like I have to shorten the return time.

If you think the oil and gas industry isn't subsidized your nuts. It goes far beyond simple write offs.

Folly eh. Again, I call nonsense.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggcMAA&url=http://inhabitat.com/german-village-produces-321-more-energy-than-it-needs/wildpoldsried-germany/&usg=AFQjCNFjLPt4ocXgJF9SANiczGK64Iazdg&sig2=OhRZCup7NZNO02l2vj6fgg&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

and see

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggiMAE&url=http://www.zmescience.com/ecology/renewable-energy-ecology/german-village-renewable-energy-28102014/&usg=AFQjCNGh8eKmJE4GpXbszEQFameIq1sJNA&sig2=FVlSwU9i1YvYF4G9px4Z8w&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

also see

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggqMAI&url=http://ecowatch.com/2015/02/10/brlington-runs-on-100-percent-renewable-energy/&usg=AFQjCNH22Lf-33A8uD6-GzNVyokeiTU8Dw&sig2=6-WAc1j_dRT83NVbDFj_YA&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

So if Burlington VT can do it on 100% renewables I'm not real sure why we each can't manage it in our own homes ;--)

As I said, you really don't have a viable argument on this one

 

[2aguy]

At this point is there really any excuse to deny mankind has brought this on itself ?

No one is denying that the climate changes.

Of course it does, however the rate and duration of the extreme change we are seeing today due to the changes in the atmospheric chemistry caused by the burning of fossil fuels is completely unique and virtually guaranteed to result in catastrophic consequences.

And there is absolutely no proof that what we are experiencing is in any way unique to this planet nor caused by man.

Where in the world have you been, under a rock.

Let me ask you this, do you know what an isotope is ?

There is definitive proof that virtually ALL the excess CO2 seen in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution can be attributed to man AND there is clear evidence of the consequences of that additional CO2.

Wow...you really believe this crap......please, give up your money, your freedom and let them consider you foolish.....they will laugh all the way to the bank...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your funny.

So who loses when I install solar panels ? Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ? ( feel free to work that one out for yourself, I payed less than $175 a ton for pellets last time around ) Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ? Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ? Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well. The only people who miss out is the energy companies.

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

Also do some of your own homework on nuclear. Look into decommissioning, fuel availability and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

So who loses when I install solar panels ?

If the IRS gives you $10,000 to subsidize your panels, the rest of us lose.
If you want to use your own money, go for it. Many people make poor fiscal decisions every day.

Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ?

I can't see anyone losing in that scenario. Sounds like a fine example of capitalism.

Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ?

See above.

Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ?

Ditto.

Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

Ditto again.

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well.

If you're comfortable with your ROI for those things, good for you!

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

People who reach breakeven in 30 years, for example, but the system only lasts 20 years.
Utility companies that are forced to pay above market prices for "green energy" and their customers who are forced to do the same.
Taxpayers who subsidize uneconomical energy that would otherwise not be produced.

and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

I understand if you don't want to back up your original claim.

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Again I suggest you look into the issues I presented yourself so you can assure yourself its no off the cuff claim.

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ? There are incentives to the oil and gas industry as well, how idiotic is that.

Quote

Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Overview - Oil Change International

priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/ How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually, ... and gas production: the value of tax breaks and other incentives has increased along ... Taxpayers are paying a huge unaccounted-for price for oil imports, not to ...

End Quote

So whats the total subsidy for solar panels

Its about the same, but accurate numbers are really hard to come buy as the subsidies are spread out to individuals instead of concentrated on a few multinationals.

Personally I'd rather see people benefit from subsidies than multinationals any day

So here's what is available to people setting up solar panels

PACE and Net metering on the state level.

A 30% tax credit on installation costs on the fed level.

I don't get the Net metering on this next place because I don't feel like paying the $6000 connection fee. My return is less than four years ;--) because I split the system between solar and wind, and won't be paying the hook up fee. Wind being a lot cheaper all around. Pure solar systems generally take about 7~10 years to break even and I didn't like those odds.

My system on this next place will be smaller on the solar end and lager on the wind end. Wind is a lot cheaper, I broke the system down to 50/50 produced by each and have a small diesel genset which runs on biodiesel I make from vegetable oil I get free, costs me about $1 a gallon by the time its ready to burn.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

Subsidies go directly to the individual instead of being just more gravy for the multinational energy companies

Energy is produces at the point of use, which means no transmission losses

If you're smart enough to use multiple systems like I did and will on this next place the chances of a failure are reduced.

I started living off grid maybe 20 years ago and haven't once had an outage. The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Why would I do homework to back up your claim?

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ?

I guess not. But you can't pretend something is cheap, just because you stick someone else with the bill.

How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually

Allowing the oil, gas and coal industry to write off their business expenses is not a subsidy.
Writing you a check because you installed a solar panel is.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

If you can make it work on your own dime, more power to you.
If you're using tax dollars to do it, then you have no justifiable argument.

The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense.

I could explain the difference between one guy running his house off of renewables and the folly of trying to run a factory or a city off of wind or solar, but I get the feeling I'd be wasting my time.

Because often people who cling to ideological beliefs refuse to listen to logic. Its far better if you can get them to research reality for themselves. Makes it generally more difficult for them to engage the cognitive dissonance that usually pervades their belief system.

Maybe you missed the fact that the oil and gas industry receives the lions share of all subsidies worldwide. Also in the US the subsidies for fossil fuels and solar are about the same. So why advocate those billions go to the multinational oil and gas companies rather than the individual consumer ?

PS
I'd be just as happy if they eliminate all subsidies, oil and gas or solar, it wouldn't make one difference on the efficiency of the system, and most people would simply adjust their system to compensate like I have to shorten the return time.

If you think the oil and gas industry isn't subsidized your nuts. It goes far beyond simple write offs.

Folly eh. Again, I call nonsense.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggcMAA&url=http://inhabitat.com/german-village-produces-321-more-energy-than-it-needs/wildpoldsried-germany/&usg=AFQjCNFjLPt4ocXgJF9SANiczGK64Iazdg&sig2=OhRZCup7NZNO02l2vj6fgg&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

and see

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggiMAE&url=http://www.zmescience.com/ecology/renewable-energy-ecology/german-village-renewable-energy-28102014/&usg=AFQjCNGh8eKmJE4GpXbszEQFameIq1sJNA&sig2=FVlSwU9i1YvYF4G9px4Z8w&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

also see

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggqMAI&url=http://ecowatch.com/2015/02/10/brlington-runs-on-100-percent-renewable-energy/&usg=AFQjCNH22Lf-33A8uD6-GzNVyokeiTU8Dw&sig2=6-WAc1j_dRT83NVbDFj_YA&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

So if Burlington VT can do it on 100% renewables I'm not real sure why we each can't manage it in our own homes ;--)

As I said, you really don't have a viable argument on this one

Maybe you missed the fact that the oil and gas industry receives the lions share of all subsidies worldwide.

I don't care about worldwide, I care about the US.
Venezuela sells gasoline at something like 10 cents a gallon. I don't care.
Saudi Arabia and Iran do the same. So what?

The US allowing an oil company to write off drilling expenses, not a subsidy.

Also in the US the subsidies for fossil fuels and solar are about the same.

Allowing a profitable industry that provides a vital product to write off business expenses is not a subsidy.
Allowing a money losing industry that provides a tiny amount of unreliable power to suck off the taxpayer teat for billions a year, that's a subsidy.

So why advocate those billions go to the multinational oil and gas companies rather than the individual consumer ?

If the fossil fuel industry were getting actual taxpayer funds, I'd be against that as well.

So if Burlington VT can do it on 100% renewables

If you want to burn wood for power, that's fine.
Kind of goes back to the caveman days.
Do it without taxpayer subsidies and it's fine with me.
Try to power Chicago with wood and we're gonna need to cut down a lot more trees.

but now the village of Wildpoldsried is producing 321% more energy than it needs! The small agricultural village in the state of Bavaria is generating an impressive $5.7 million in annual revenue from renewable energy.

Wow, that's awesome. How long until they pay back their initial investment?

There are also unforeseen problems. Despite using more and more renewable energy, Germany’s carbon emissions have actually went up in the past couple of years. The problem is that renewable energy still needs to be complemented with fossil fuel energy – preferably modern, low emission natural gas plants. But with the lower demand for natural gas in Germany, many plants have shut down and their place has been taken by opportunistic coal plants, which are cheaper and easier to manage – and also pollute much more. Renewable energy may be the main provider of energy in Germany, but the second place was taken by lignite coal at 26.3 percent – one of the dirtiest forms of energy available – definitely something Germany wasn’t banking on.

Lignite. How green. LOL!

 

[Boston1]

At this point is there really any excuse to deny mankind has brought this on itself ?

No one is denying that the climate changes.

Of course it does, however the rate and duration of the extreme change we are seeing today due to the changes in the atmospheric chemistry caused by the burning of fossil fuels is completely unique and virtually guaranteed to result in catastrophic consequences.

And there is absolutely no proof that what we are experiencing is in any way unique to this planet nor caused by man.

Where in the world have you been, under a rock.

Let me ask you this, do you know what an isotope is ?

There is definitive proof that virtually ALL the excess CO2 seen in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution can be attributed to man AND there is clear evidence of the consequences of that additional CO2.

Wow...you really believe this crap......please, give up your money, your freedom and let them consider you foolish.....they will laugh all the way to the bank...

Again an argument based of denial and ideology rather than logic and reason.

The science is irrefutable. Climate shift is happening and it is caused by mans burning of fossil fuels.

Why all the kicking and screaming over giving up a wasteful and more expensive fuel source I'll never know but my own home uses roughly 1/2 the energy of a typical home. My new home is being purpose designed and will likely use only 1/4 the energy of a typical home; and its going to cost a lot less to build.

For instance. 12K on a geodetic foundation rather than the typical hole in the ground filled with concrete. Saves me roughly 60% on the foundation and is miles better for the environment. Does require a variance as these are typically only found on unstable or frozen soils.

Or not spending the 6k on electric hook up fees. Assuming I don't need an additional pole, those are about another 10K. I'll use that 6K and buy an awesome house bank along with the rest of the renewable elec system and be laughing all the way to the bank. I also didn't have to worry about how close utilities were to the property or needing any extra electric poles or gods forbid deal with the cost of blasting a trench to the house.

Pellet furnace with heat exchanging flue. Costs about 40% more than a typical gas furnace but I didn't spend another 1k on a water heater and all the associated stuff. Ends up I break even on the system and pay less per BTU on a carbon neutral fuel.

Sorry but again the argument against going green in response to climate shift is just non existent

 

[Boston1]

Your funny.

So who loses when I install solar panels ? Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ? ( feel free to work that one out for yourself, I payed less than $175 a ton for pellets last time around ) Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ? Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ? Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well. The only people who miss out is the energy companies.

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

Also do some of your own homework on nuclear. Look into decommissioning, fuel availability and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

So who loses when I install solar panels ?

If the IRS gives you $10,000 to subsidize your panels, the rest of us lose.
If you want to use your own money, go for it. Many people make poor fiscal decisions every day.

Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ?

I can't see anyone losing in that scenario. Sounds like a fine example of capitalism.

Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ?

See above.

Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ?

Ditto.

Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

Ditto again.

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well.

If you're comfortable with your ROI for those things, good for you!

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

People who reach breakeven in 30 years, for example, but the system only lasts 20 years.
Utility companies that are forced to pay above market prices for "green energy" and their customers who are forced to do the same.
Taxpayers who subsidize uneconomical energy that would otherwise not be produced.

and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

I understand if you don't want to back up your original claim.

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Again I suggest you look into the issues I presented yourself so you can assure yourself its no off the cuff claim.

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ? There are incentives to the oil and gas industry as well, how idiotic is that.

Quote

Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Overview - Oil Change International

priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/ How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually, ... and gas production: the value of tax breaks and other incentives has increased along ... Taxpayers are paying a huge unaccounted-for price for oil imports, not to ...

End Quote

So whats the total subsidy for solar panels

Its about the same, but accurate numbers are really hard to come buy as the subsidies are spread out to individuals instead of concentrated on a few multinationals.

Personally I'd rather see people benefit from subsidies than multinationals any day

So here's what is available to people setting up solar panels

PACE and Net metering on the state level.

A 30% tax credit on installation costs on the fed level.

I don't get the Net metering on this next place because I don't feel like paying the $6000 connection fee. My return is less than four years ;--) because I split the system between solar and wind, and won't be paying the hook up fee. Wind being a lot cheaper all around. Pure solar systems generally take about 7~10 years to break even and I didn't like those odds.

My system on this next place will be smaller on the solar end and lager on the wind end. Wind is a lot cheaper, I broke the system down to 50/50 produced by each and have a small diesel genset which runs on biodiesel I make from vegetable oil I get free, costs me about $1 a gallon by the time its ready to burn.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

Subsidies go directly to the individual instead of being just more gravy for the multinational energy companies

Energy is produces at the point of use, which means no transmission losses

If you're smart enough to use multiple systems like I did and will on this next place the chances of a failure are reduced.

I started living off grid maybe 20 years ago and haven't once had an outage. The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Why would I do homework to back up your claim?

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ?

I guess not. But you can't pretend something is cheap, just because you stick someone else with the bill.

How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually

Allowing the oil, gas and coal industry to write off their business expenses is not a subsidy.
Writing you a check because you installed a solar panel is.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

If you can make it work on your own dime, more power to you.
If you're using tax dollars to do it, then you have no justifiable argument.

The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense.

I could explain the difference between one guy running his house off of renewables and the folly of trying to run a factory or a city off of wind or solar, but I get the feeling I'd be wasting my time.

Because often people who cling to ideological beliefs refuse to listen to logic. Its far better if you can get them to research reality for themselves. Makes it generally more difficult for them to engage the cognitive dissonance that usually pervades their belief system.

Maybe you missed the fact that the oil and gas industry receives the lions share of all subsidies worldwide. Also in the US the subsidies for fossil fuels and solar are about the same. So why advocate those billions go to the multinational oil and gas companies rather than the individual consumer ?

PS
I'd be just as happy if they eliminate all subsidies, oil and gas or solar, it wouldn't make one difference on the efficiency of the system, and most people would simply adjust their system to compensate like I have to shorten the return time.

If you think the oil and gas industry isn't subsidized your nuts. It goes far beyond simple write offs.

Folly eh. Again, I call nonsense.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggcMAA&url=http://inhabitat.com/german-village-produces-321-more-energy-than-it-needs/wildpoldsried-germany/&usg=AFQjCNFjLPt4ocXgJF9SANiczGK64Iazdg&sig2=OhRZCup7NZNO02l2vj6fgg&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

and see

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggiMAE&url=http://www.zmescience.com/ecology/renewable-energy-ecology/german-village-renewable-energy-28102014/&usg=AFQjCNGh8eKmJE4GpXbszEQFameIq1sJNA&sig2=FVlSwU9i1YvYF4G9px4Z8w&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

also see

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggqMAI&url=http://ecowatch.com/2015/02/10/brlington-runs-on-100-percent-renewable-energy/&usg=AFQjCNH22Lf-33A8uD6-GzNVyokeiTU8Dw&sig2=6-WAc1j_dRT83NVbDFj_YA&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

So if Burlington VT can do it on 100% renewables I'm not real sure why we each can't manage it in our own homes ;--)

As I said, you really don't have a viable argument on this one

Maybe you missed the fact that the oil and gas industry receives the lions share of all subsidies worldwide.

I don't care about worldwide, I care about the US.
Venezuela sells gasoline at something like 10 cents a gallon. I don't care.
Saudi Arabia and Iran do the same. So what?

The US allowing an oil company to write off drilling expenses, not a subsidy.

Also in the US the subsidies for fossil fuels and solar are about the same.

Allowing a profitable industry that provides a vital product to write off business expenses is not a subsidy.
Allowing a money losing industry that provides a tiny amount of unreliable power to suck off the taxpayer teat for billions a year, that's a subsidy.

So why advocate those billions go to the multinational oil and gas companies rather than the individual consumer ?

If the fossil fuel industry were getting actual taxpayer funds, I'd be against that as well.

So if Burlington VT can do it on 100% renewables

If you want to burn wood for power, that's fine.
Kind of goes back to the caveman days.
Do it without taxpayer subsidies and it's fine with me.
Try to power Chicago with wood and we're gonna need to cut down a lot more trees.

but now the village of Wildpoldsried is producing 321% more energy than it needs! The small agricultural village in the state of Bavaria is generating an impressive $5.7 million in annual revenue from renewable energy.

Wow, that's awesome. How long until they pay back their initial investment?

There are also unforeseen problems. Despite using more and more renewable energy, Germany’s carbon emissions have actually went up in the past couple of years. The problem is that renewable energy still needs to be complemented with fossil fuel energy – preferably modern, low emission natural gas plants. But with the lower demand for natural gas in Germany, many plants have shut down and their place has been taken by opportunistic coal plants, which are cheaper and easier to manage – and also pollute much more. Renewable energy may be the main provider of energy in Germany, but the second place was taken by lignite coal at 26.3 percent – one of the dirtiest forms of energy available – definitely something Germany wasn’t banking on.


Lignite. How green. LOL!

Thats funny, so you want to call my tax break a subsidy but you don't want to admit the oil and gas industries tax breaks are also subsidies.

Very interesting.

Do you work for an oil and gas company ?

So you agree that allowing a profitable industry like the green energy sector a tax break is a good idea. We seem to be making progress ;--)

The fossil fuels industry costs the US gov about the same as the green energy sector does with the difference being that with the oil and gas industry the money only benefits a few billionaire executives. The green energy subsidies directly benefit the taxpayer.

Chicago is in a great place for both wind and solar, if Germany can do it, so can they.

Oh and if you're going to make wild claims about the Germany's emissions going up, you need to provide some links. Otherwise they're just more oil and gas industry agnotology

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So who loses when I install solar panels ?

If the IRS gives you $10,000 to subsidize your panels, the rest of us lose.
If you want to use your own money, go for it. Many people make poor fiscal decisions every day.

Who loses when I buy pellets from the local producer at the lowest cost of any BTU out there ?

I can't see anyone losing in that scenario. Sounds like a fine example of capitalism.

Who loses when I buy custom high end windows from my local glass supplier ?

See above.

Who loses when I buy foam insulation from the plant right here in town ?

Ditto.

Who loses when I use recycled auto generators in my VAWT system ?

Ditto again.

I save money right and left not only in building costs but long term as well.

If you're comfortable with your ROI for those things, good for you!

So do tell, who is losing money on renewable energies ?

People who reach breakeven in 30 years, for example, but the system only lasts 20 years.
Utility companies that are forced to pay above market prices for "green energy" and their customers who are forced to do the same.
Taxpayers who subsidize uneconomical energy that would otherwise not be produced.

and the CO2 intensive building materials and get back to us.

I understand if you don't want to back up your original claim.

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Again I suggest you look into the issues I presented yourself so you can assure yourself its no off the cuff claim.

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ? There are incentives to the oil and gas industry as well, how idiotic is that.

Quote

Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Overview - Oil Change International

priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/ How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually, ... and gas production: the value of tax breaks and other incentives has increased along ... Taxpayers are paying a huge unaccounted-for price for oil imports, not to ...

End Quote

So whats the total subsidy for solar panels

Its about the same, but accurate numbers are really hard to come buy as the subsidies are spread out to individuals instead of concentrated on a few multinationals.

Personally I'd rather see people benefit from subsidies than multinationals any day

So here's what is available to people setting up solar panels

PACE and Net metering on the state level.

A 30% tax credit on installation costs on the fed level.

I don't get the Net metering on this next place because I don't feel like paying the $6000 connection fee. My return is less than four years ;--) because I split the system between solar and wind, and won't be paying the hook up fee. Wind being a lot cheaper all around. Pure solar systems generally take about 7~10 years to break even and I didn't like those odds.

My system on this next place will be smaller on the solar end and lager on the wind end. Wind is a lot cheaper, I broke the system down to 50/50 produced by each and have a small diesel genset which runs on biodiesel I make from vegetable oil I get free, costs me about $1 a gallon by the time its ready to burn.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

Subsidies go directly to the individual instead of being just more gravy for the multinational energy companies

Energy is produces at the point of use, which means no transmission losses

If you're smart enough to use multiple systems like I did and will on this next place the chances of a failure are reduced.

I started living off grid maybe 20 years ago and haven't once had an outage. The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense

Not backing up the claim and seeing if you're willing to do your own homework are two different things.

Why would I do homework to back up your claim?

There are incentives for solar, nothing wrong with taking advantage of government stupidity is there ?

I guess not. But you can't pretend something is cheap, just because you stick someone else with the bill.

How much money do governments provide to support the oil, gas, and coal ... the total value of U.S. subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at $37.5 billion annually

Allowing the oil, gas and coal industry to write off their business expenses is not a subsidy.
Writing you a check because you installed a solar panel is.

You really don't have a justifiable argument on this one. Renewables are hands down the way to go.

If you can make it work on your own dime, more power to you.
If you're using tax dollars to do it, then you have no justifiable argument.

The myth of renewables not being dependable is pure nonsense.

I could explain the difference between one guy running his house off of renewables and the folly of trying to run a factory or a city off of wind or solar, but I get the feeling I'd be wasting my time.

Because often people who cling to ideological beliefs refuse to listen to logic. Its far better if you can get them to research reality for themselves. Makes it generally more difficult for them to engage the cognitive dissonance that usually pervades their belief system.

Maybe you missed the fact that the oil and gas industry receives the lions share of all subsidies worldwide. Also in the US the subsidies for fossil fuels and solar are about the same. So why advocate those billions go to the multinational oil and gas companies rather than the individual consumer ?

PS
I'd be just as happy if they eliminate all subsidies, oil and gas or solar, it wouldn't make one difference on the efficiency of the system, and most people would simply adjust their system to compensate like I have to shorten the return time.

If you think the oil and gas industry isn't subsidized your nuts. It goes far beyond simple write offs.

Folly eh. Again, I call nonsense.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggcMAA&url=http://inhabitat.com/german-village-produces-321-more-energy-than-it-needs/wildpoldsried-germany/&usg=AFQjCNFjLPt4ocXgJF9SANiczGK64Iazdg&sig2=OhRZCup7NZNO02l2vj6fgg&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

and see

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggiMAE&url=http://www.zmescience.com/ecology/renewable-energy-ecology/german-village-renewable-energy-28102014/&usg=AFQjCNGh8eKmJE4GpXbszEQFameIq1sJNA&sig2=FVlSwU9i1YvYF4G9px4Z8w&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

also see

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0ahUKEwiq5bmgxvPLAhUpvoMKHSPgDJMQFggqMAI&url=http://ecowatch.com/2015/02/10/brlington-runs-on-100-percent-renewable-energy/&usg=AFQjCNH22Lf-33A8uD6-GzNVyokeiTU8Dw&sig2=6-WAc1j_dRT83NVbDFj_YA&bvm=bv.118443451,d.amc

So if Burlington VT can do it on 100% renewables I'm not real sure why we each can't manage it in our own homes ;--)

As I said, you really don't have a viable argument on this one

Maybe you missed the fact that the oil and gas industry receives the lions share of all subsidies worldwide.

I don't care about worldwide, I care about the US.
Venezuela sells gasoline at something like 10 cents a gallon. I don't care.
Saudi Arabia and Iran do the same. So what?

The US allowing an oil company to write off drilling expenses, not a subsidy.

Also in the US the subsidies for fossil fuels and solar are about the same.

Allowing a profitable industry that provides a vital product to write off business expenses is not a subsidy.
Allowing a money losing industry that provides a tiny amount of unreliable power to suck off the taxpayer teat for billions a year, that's a subsidy.

So why advocate those billions go to the multinational oil and gas companies rather than the individual consumer ?

If the fossil fuel industry were getting actual taxpayer funds, I'd be against that as well.

So if Burlington VT can do it on 100% renewables

If you want to burn wood for power, that's fine.
Kind of goes back to the caveman days.
Do it without taxpayer subsidies and it's fine with me.
Try to power Chicago with wood and we're gonna need to cut down a lot more trees.

but now the village of Wildpoldsried is producing 321% more energy than it needs! The small agricultural village in the state of Bavaria is generating an impressive $5.7 million in annual revenue from renewable energy.

Wow, that's awesome. How long until they pay back their initial investment?

There are also unforeseen problems. Despite using more and more renewable energy, Germany’s carbon emissions have actually went up in the past couple of years. The problem is that renewable energy still needs to be complemented with fossil fuel energy – preferably modern, low emission natural gas plants. But with the lower demand for natural gas in Germany, many plants have shut down and their place has been taken by opportunistic coal plants, which are cheaper and easier to manage – and also pollute much more. Renewable energy may be the main provider of energy in Germany, but the second place was taken by lignite coal at 26.3 percent – one of the dirtiest forms of energy available – definitely something Germany wasn’t banking on.


Lignite. How green. LOL!

Thats funny, so you want to call my tax break a subsidy but you don't want to admit the oil and gas industries tax breaks are also subsidies.

Very interesting.

Do you work for an oil and gas company ?

So you agree that allowing a profitable industry like the green energy sector a tax break is a good idea. We seem to be making progress ;--)

The fossil fuels industry costs the US gov about the same as the green energy sector does with the difference being that with the oil and gas industry the money only benefits a few billionaire executives. The green energy subsidies directly benefit the taxpayer.

Chicago is in a great place for both wind and solar, if Germany can do it, so can they.

Oh and if you're going to make wild claims about the Germany's emissions going up, you need to provide some links. Otherwise they're just more oil and gas industry agnotology

Thats funny, so you want to call my tax break a subsidy but you don't want to admit the oil and gas industries tax breaks are also subsidies.

Yes, the Treasury handing you $10,000 to install solar is a subsidy.
The Treasury not charging an oil company $10,000 in taxes, because they spent $28,571 on equipment to drill a well, is not a subsidy, it's a business expense.

Do you work for an oil and gas company ?

No, I just enjoy pointing out faulty logic when I see it.

So you agree that allowing a profitable industry like the green energy sector a tax break is a good idea.

When has it been profitable?

The fossil fuels industry costs the US gov about the same as the green energy sector does with the difference being that with the oil and gas industry the money only benefits a few billionaire executives.

You left out the more than 300 million Americans who benefit from cheap, reliable fossil fuel energy.
And the shareholders who benefit from nice dividends.

Chicago is in a great place for both wind and solar

And if you think 3 million Chicagoans could survive the winter on wind and solar energy, you're dumber than I first thought.

Oh and if you're going to make wild claims about the Germany's emissions going up, you need to provide some links.

Ummm.....I got that from your link.

German village goes off the grid with 100% renewable energy from wind, sun and pig manure

Durr.

 

[2aguy]

No one is denying that the climate changes.

Of course it does, however the rate and duration of the extreme change we are seeing today due to the changes in the atmospheric chemistry caused by the burning of fossil fuels is completely unique and virtually guaranteed to result in catastrophic consequences.

And there is absolutely no proof that what we are experiencing is in any way unique to this planet nor caused by man.

Where in the world have you been, under a rock.

Let me ask you this, do you know what an isotope is ?

There is definitive proof that virtually ALL the excess CO2 seen in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution can be attributed to man AND there is clear evidence of the consequences of that additional CO2.

Wow...you really believe this crap......please, give up your money, your freedom and let them consider you foolish.....they will laugh all the way to the bank...

Again an argument based of denial and ideology rather than logic and reason.

The science is irrefutable. Climate shift is happening and it is caused by mans burning of fossil fuels.

Why all the kicking and screaming over giving up a wasteful and more expensive fuel source I'll never know but my own home uses roughly 1/2 the energy of a typical home. My new home is being purpose designed and will likely use only 1/4 the energy of a typical home; and its going to cost a lot less to build.

For instance. 12K on a geodetic foundation rather than the typical hole in the ground filled with concrete. Saves me roughly 60% on the foundation and is miles better for the environment. Does require a variance as these are typically only found on unstable or frozen soils.

Or not spending the 6k on electric hook up fees. Assuming I don't need an additional pole, those are about another 10K. I'll use that 6K and buy an awesome house bank along with the rest of the renewable elec system and be laughing all the way to the bank. I also didn't have to worry about how close utilities were to the property or needing any extra electric poles or gods forbid deal with the cost of blasting a trench to the house.

Pellet furnace with heat exchanging flue. Costs about 40% more than a typical gas furnace but I didn't spend another 1k on a water heater and all the associated stuff. Ends up I break even on the system and pay less per BTU on a carbon neutral fuel.

Sorry but again the argument against going green in response to climate shift is just non existent

Wrong.....green energy is unreliable and not cost efficient...I remember a story over the winter of Windmills icing up and having to use hot water...heated by coal and oil....to defrost them so they could turn.......

 

[2aguy]

Energy in Germany is a luxury item?

Germany's Energy Poverty: How Electricity Became a Luxury Good - SPIEGEL ONLINE

Altmaier and others are on a mission to help people save money on their electricity bills, because they're about to receive some bad news. The government predicts that the renewable energy surcharge added to every consumer's electricity bill will increase from 5.3 cents today to between 6.2 and 6.5 cents per kilowatt hour -- a 20-percent price hike.

German consumers already pay the highest electricity prices in Europe. But because the government is failing to get the costs of its new energypolicy under control, rising prices are already on the horizon.

Electricity is becoming a luxury good in Germany, and one of the country's most important future-oriented projects is acutely at risk.

---------

Paying Big for Nothing

For society as a whole, the costs have reached levels comparable only to the euro-zone bailouts. This year, German consumers will be forced to pay €20 billion ($26 billion) for electricity from solar, wind and biogas plants -- electricity with a market price of just over €3 billion. Even the figure of €20 billion is disputable if you include all the unintended costs and collateral damage associated with the project. Solar panels and wind turbines at times generate huge amounts of electricity, and sometimes none at all. Depending on the weather and the time of day, the country can face absurd states of energy surplus or deficit.

If there is too much power coming from the grid, wind turbines have to be shut down. Nevertheless, consumers are still paying for the "phantom electricity" the turbines are theoretically generating. Occasionally, Germany has to pay fees to dump already subsidized green energy, creating what experts refer to as "negative electricity prices."

Yes...we are from the German Government and we are here to help....

I think I see what they are trying to do....you allow the poor to freeze to death in the winter....because they can't afford the energy prices that have increased because of green energy...then you have fewer people using the energy.....and thus renewables actually work....

Hmmmm...Germany sure has an odd way of cutting costs.........didn't they try this in the 30s?