World's largest solar plant now online

600
 
This message is hidden because skookerasbil is on your ignore list. :thup:

is this possible? i was thinking the same damn thing! let me know, please.

no offense kooks, i've noted how i appreciate you and respect you before but your ideas bring a foul odor of strife and early hominid tribalism.
 
LMAO......if I'm on peoples IGNORE, that means I winning.


Oh.....ps...........2%

The poor dear has just about everyone on ignore but it's lib buddies...then they go around slapping each other on the ass with atta boys...
 
LMAO......if I'm on peoples IGNORE, that means I winning.


Oh.....ps...........2%

The poor dear has just about everyone on ignore but it's lib buddies...then they go around slapping each other on the ass with atta boys...



Indeed......there are a total of 3 absolute truths in life >>>


1) Death

2) Taxes

3) When a far lefty is getting pwned on facts, they go full blown mental OR walk away and ignore you. If I had a nickel for every instance............
 
2 BILLION dollars AND how much land? to supply=140 thousand homes

so come on people, lets give these geniuses more OUR MONEY
 
As long as we worship fossil fuels as the god given eternal flame, we can't even acknowledge what true scientific advancement this is. Capturing sun rays and making it cost-effective on this scale is a great stride in the right direction. Hmm, who knew there was value in supplying power whether or not there's a drop of oil or a mountain to be blown to bits...

We don't know if it's cost effective until all government subsidies are removed.

But it certainly ruined the landscape.
 
As long as we worship fossil fuels as the god given eternal flame, we can't even acknowledge what true scientific advancement this is. Capturing sun rays and making it cost-effective on this scale is a great stride in the right direction. Hmm, who knew there was value in supplying power whether or not there's a drop of oil or a mountain to be blown to bits...

We don't know if it's cost effective until all government subsidies are removed.

But it certainly ruined the landscape.

You're right. Good point.

Now as far as ruining the landscape, I disagree. You can dismantle the solar field and you'd have pretty much the same landscape.

As for coal, oil and natural gas, well, we know they like to blow up mountains and unintentionally leak between 2-17% of their annual output. Not to mention the spoiling of watersheds and ground water.

We don't calculate these sorts of things called natural capital, when it comes to fossil fuels or anything. Why? Because we've bowed before economics and agree that life and biodiversity are externalities, not essential. Last time I checked the Earth was not external to our needs but hey, go figure.

So you're right, we simply won't know the true cost and how to compare it until we calculate natural capital and remove consumer and company subsidies from both solar and fossil fuels.

Read more about natural capital here:
Natural capital - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

This is why you need to be put on ignore.

You prefer to be a Roman Barbarian than a Greek Philosopher. Your contributions are not information but rather wishes to remain in the year 1999. Change is evil to you but believe it or not change brings advancement to civilization. Without advancement there is only a stagnate idea to vanquish other humans.
 
But they found 11 dead birds at the solar plant in one month! Eleven! Therefore, all birds will be going extinct! The massacre of the birds ... nearly approaches that of a single office building, but it's still reason to put on a fake panic act!
 
As long as we worship fossil fuels as the god given eternal flame, we can't even acknowledge what true scientific advancement this is. Capturing sun rays and making it cost-effective on this scale is a great stride in the right direction. Hmm, who knew there was value in supplying power whether or not there's a drop of oil or a mountain to be blown to bits...

We don't know if it's cost effective until all government subsidies are removed.

But it certainly ruined the landscape.

You're right. Good point.

Now as far as ruining the landscape, I disagree. You can dismantle the solar field and you'd have pretty much the same landscape.

As for coal, oil and natural gas, well, we know they like to blow up mountains and unintentionally leak between 2-17% of their annual output. Not to mention the spoiling of watersheds and ground water.

We don't calculate these sorts of things called natural capital, when it comes to fossil fuels or anything. Why? Because we've bowed before economics and agree that life and biodiversity are externalities, not essential. Last time I checked the Earth was not external to our needs but hey, go figure.

So you're right, we simply won't know the true cost and how to compare it until we calculate natural capital and remove consumer and company subsidies from both solar and fossil fuels.

Read more about natural capital here:
Natural capital - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sierra Club, NRDC Sue Feds To Stop Big California Solar Power Project

Sierra Club, NRDC Sue Feds To Stop Big California Solar Power Project - Forbes

Also is this cost figured into the price as well?
 
As long as we worship fossil fuels as the god given eternal flame, we can't even acknowledge what true scientific advancement this is. Capturing sun rays and making it cost-effective on this scale is a great stride in the right direction. Hmm, who knew there was value in supplying power whether or not there's a drop of oil or a mountain to be blown to bits...

We don't know if it's cost effective until all government subsidies are removed.

But it certainly ruined the landscape.

You're right. Good point.

Now as far as ruining the landscape, I disagree. You can dismantle the solar field and you'd have pretty much the same landscape.

As for coal, oil and natural gas, well, we know they like to blow up mountains and unintentionally leak between 2-17% of their annual output. Not to mention the spoiling of watersheds and ground water.

We don't calculate these sorts of things called natural capital, when it comes to fossil fuels or anything. Why? Because we've bowed before economics and agree that life and biodiversity are externalities, not essential. Last time I checked the Earth was not external to our needs but hey, go figure.

So you're right, we simply won't know the true cost and how to compare it until we calculate natural capital and remove consumer and company subsidies from both solar and fossil fuels.

Read more about natural capital here:
Natural capital - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You must worship Fossil Fuel to produce the World's Largest Electrical Solar Plant that produces the least amount of electricity for its size. You see, to build something that is the world's largest, somehow that takes the LARGEST AMOUNT OF FOSSIL FUEL and NATURAL RESOURCES.

If us who are against this Solar Power Plant, who are you that does not even recognize that this SOLAR power plant has a Natural gas fired boiler at its center. This Solar Power plant can not operate without Natural Gas.

Further the natural gas is pumped with diesel powered pumps. Yes that is right, its a Diesel Powered/Natural Gas powered Solar plant.

Who is it that worships fossil fuel, you who is championing the increase use of Fossil Fuels by "Renewable" energy.

Renewable Energy sources increase the burden of use on Fossil Fuels while the supporters of Renewable Energy are completely ignorant of this fact.

This Solar Plant is a a NATURAL GAS POWERED FOSSIL ENERGY PLANT
 

Forum List

Back
Top