Wow, yet another problem with windmills that I didn't know about.

[Toddsterpatriot]

What will archeologists think in 500 years?

We are doomed in 12 so nothing

Actually that is supposedly when it will be irreversible if we do nothing as we are now. Super duper...

Actually that is supposedly when it will be irreversible

Yeah, every time the planet warmed a few degrees.....it's irreversible and everything dies......moron. DURR

Sorry you don't like facts, super duper. It's the smart thing to do but we may be able to figure out something scientists haven't foreseen. I just don't know what is so horrible about doing away with pollution and perhaps saving the planet. Takes a good brainwash I guess.....

Sorry you don't like facts, super duper.

Show me one single fact that backs the claim, "in 12 years it will be irreversible if we do nothing as we are now"

I just don't know what is so horrible about doing away with pollution

CO2 isn't pollution.

 

[francoHFW]

Well clearly we should stop using fiberglass for anything we build......

I have nothing against a debate of the pluses and minuses of various forms of electrical generation, but we never have these.

Certainly I would prefer that wind turbines be entirely recyclable. But I would hold them to the same standards as I would hold every other industry.
What percentage of coal fired plants are 'recyclable'? Since basically what wind turbines do is replace coal plants- that is the comparison that would mean something other than you posting you found something else to confirm your bias against wind turbines.

For a energy system to be "green" it has to be less toxic than system it is replacing, and more efficient.

Solar and wind fail on both counts.

And how are wind mills more toxic than coal powered power plants?

Well for one thing, not a single coal burning power plant has been shut down because windmills replaced them.

Not even one.

So, you are basically saying we're going to keep all the pollution from our coal power plants.... AND pollute with windmills.

Since your method of pollution, does not replace any other.... its just another form of additional pollution.

Coal burning power plants have been shutting down because they are losing money.
Windpower is just one of the sources that has contributed to those closures.

No. That is factually incorrect. Coal burning power plants have been being replaced by natural gas. Not wind mills. There is not a single example anywhere.... ANYWHERE... that wind mill plants have replaced fossil fuel power plants, or nuclear.

And this isn't surprising either when you look at the power generation numbers.

The SMALLEST coal power plant in the entire state of Ohio, is 650 MW of power.
The largest wind farm in the entire state...... 4.5 MW.

You really want to try and argue that a tiny 4.5 MW wind farm, replaced even the smallest of coal power plants? Not even close. They might convert that coal power plant to nat.gas, or build a nuclear power plant, but no, the wind farm did nothing. It replaces nothing.

All of the wind farms across the entire state combined, barely produce 1% of the total power generated in the state. Now that should give you pause.... because if you are a thinking individual, you will notice that the total installed base of wind power capacity is supposedly around 500 MW of installed power... yet still is barely 1% of all power generated. How is that possible?

Answer... .because it's wind power. When the wind stops blowing, the power dies. So the number is completely irrelevant. And by the way, that is another reason that wind power can never replace conventional power.

Even if you combined all the wind farms across the state into a single massive power plant (which you can't. A wind farm in southern ohio, can't transmit power all the way to northern Ohio. You would have to produce enough power in THAT location, to replace a power plant in THAT location).

But let's live in a fantasy world where you could. You combine all the various wind farms into a single 500 MW farm. Great! Now you can shut down that coal burning power plant! Right???

No. You can't. If the power grid requires 500 MW of power, and is relying on that coal power plant.... and you put up a 500 MW wind farm... you still can't shut off that coal power plant. Because if the wind dies.... and the wind farm isn't producing enough power, you can damage the entire power grid. Which then means you have to shut off power to the entire grid until the wind farm starts producing again. That could be days.... even weeks.

You want to shut down our entire society for a day to a week, every time the wind dies down? Not happening.

So I'll say this again..... Wind power does not replace ANYTHING EVER. It never does. When Germany shut down their nuclear power plants, the first thing they did was bring online a bunch of coal power plants. Go read about it. Wind does not replaces anything. If you shut down one source of power, you don't turn on a wind mill. You turn on another conventional, reliable, consistent source of power.

Germany still constructing new coal power stations | Airclim

In fact, even in the mid-term, they contracts with France to get power. Why didn't they just put up more windmills, instead of nuclear power from France, and coal power plants being built in Germany?

Sorry, but the facts are what they are.

GOP propaganda as always super duper.

Renewable energy in Germany is mainly based on wind, solar and biomass. ... The share of renewable electricity rose from just 3.4% of gross electricity consumption in 1990 to exceed 10% by 2005, 20% by 2011 and 30% by 2015, reaching 36.2% of consumption by year end 2017.

Wikipedia › wiki › Renewable_ener...
Renewable energy in Germany - Wikipedia

 

[westwall]

they passed that hurdle yrs ago,,,the good ones produce far more than they take to make them,,,

Oh really? I admit it's been years since I read up on them...I'll check that out.

Thanks for the info!

this is just one of many links I found,,,

Solar Panels Produce Far More Energy Than They Consume | EarthTechling


I will say I think that solar is a great idea in many places but it will never be a full replacement,,why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

Why would expensive panels that take decades to pay for themselves....if you're lucky, be on every house in Phoenix?

you obviously are ignorant on the subject,,,

get back to me when you know something,,,

He is correct. Solar panels take at least 12 years to pay for themselves . Solar is best used off grid. I have a solar system I built almost 30 years ago. It took 24 years to pay for itself, but I live in the mountains so they are almost useless in the winter.

 

[francoHFW]

What will archeologists think in 500 years?

We are doomed in 12 so nothing

Actually that is supposedly when it will be irreversible if we do nothing as we are now. Super duper...

Actually that is supposedly when it will be irreversible

Yeah, every time the planet warmed a few degrees.....it's irreversible and everything dies......moron. DURR

Sorry you don't like facts, super duper. It's the smart thing to do but we may be able to figure out something scientists haven't foreseen. I just don't know what is so horrible about doing away with pollution and perhaps saving the planet. Takes a good brainwash I guess.....

Sorry you don't like facts, super duper.

Show me one single fact that backs the claim, "in 12 years it will be irreversible if we do nothing as we are now"

I just don't know what is so horrible about doing away with pollution

CO2 isn't pollution.

There is a hell of a lot of other crap that comes from coal runoff gas fracking refineries tankers cars and trucks and buses and planes. Conservatives are such a pain in the ass, forever. I caramba. How does it feel to be a big oil zombie?

 

[westwall]

For a energy system to be "green" it has to be less toxic than system it is replacing, and more efficient.

Solar and wind fail on both counts.

And how are wind mills more toxic than coal powered power plants?

Well for one thing, not a single coal burning power plant has been shut down because windmills replaced them.

Not even one.

So, you are basically saying we're going to keep all the pollution from our coal power plants.... AND pollute with windmills.

Since your method of pollution, does not replace any other.... its just another form of additional pollution.

Coal burning power plants have been shutting down because they are losing money.
Windpower is just one of the sources that has contributed to those closures.

No. That is factually incorrect. Coal burning power plants have been being replaced by natural gas. Not wind mills. There is not a single example anywhere.... ANYWHERE... that wind mill plants have replaced fossil fuel power plants, or nuclear.

And this isn't surprising either when you look at the power generation numbers.

The SMALLEST coal power plant in the entire state of Ohio, is 650 MW of power.
The largest wind farm in the entire state...... 4.5 MW.

You really want to try and argue that a tiny 4.5 MW wind farm, replaced even the smallest of coal power plants? Not even close. They might convert that coal power plant to nat.gas, or build a nuclear power plant, but no, the wind farm did nothing. It replaces nothing.

All of the wind farms across the entire state combined, barely produce 1% of the total power generated in the state. Now that should give you pause.... because if you are a thinking individual, you will notice that the total installed base of wind power capacity is supposedly around 500 MW of installed power... yet still is barely 1% of all power generated. How is that possible?

Answer... .because it's wind power. When the wind stops blowing, the power dies. So the number is completely irrelevant. And by the way, that is another reason that wind power can never replace conventional power.

Even if you combined all the wind farms across the state into a single massive power plant (which you can't. A wind farm in southern ohio, can't transmit power all the way to northern Ohio. You would have to produce enough power in THAT location, to replace a power plant in THAT location).

But let's live in a fantasy world where you could. You combine all the various wind farms into a single 500 MW farm. Great! Now you can shut down that coal burning power plant! Right???

No. You can't. If the power grid requires 500 MW of power, and is relying on that coal power plant.... and you put up a 500 MW wind farm... you still can't shut off that coal power plant. Because if the wind dies.... and the wind farm isn't producing enough power, you can damage the entire power grid. Which then means you have to shut off power to the entire grid until the wind farm starts producing again. That could be days.... even weeks.

You want to shut down our entire society for a day to a week, every time the wind dies down? Not happening.

So I'll say this again..... Wind power does not replace ANYTHING EVER. It never does. When Germany shut down their nuclear power plants, the first thing they did was bring online a bunch of coal power plants. Go read about it. Wind does not replaces anything. If you shut down one source of power, you don't turn on a wind mill. You turn on another conventional, reliable, consistent source of power.

Germany still constructing new coal power stations | Airclim

In fact, even in the mid-term, they contracts with France to get power. Why didn't they just put up more windmills, instead of nuclear power from France, and coal power plants being built in Germany?

Sorry, but the facts are what they are.

GOP propaganda as always super duper.

Renewable energy in Germany is mainly based on wind, solar and biomass. ... The share of renewable electricity rose from just 3.4% of gross electricity consumption in 1990 to exceed 10% by 2005, 20% by 2011 and 30% by 2015, reaching 36.2% of consumption by year end 2017.
View attachment 283245
Wikipedia › wiki › Renewable_ener...
Renewable energy in Germany - Wikipedia

And Germany is abandoning it you moronic twit. Too many Germans were freezing to death.

 

[progressive hunter]

they passed that hurdle yrs ago,,,the good ones produce far more than they take to make them,,,

Oh really? I admit it's been years since I read up on them...I'll check that out.

Thanks for the info!

this is just one of many links I found,,,

Solar Panels Produce Far More Energy Than They Consume | EarthTechling


I will say I think that solar is a great idea in many places but it will never be a full replacement,,why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

Why would expensive panels that take decades to pay for themselves....if you're lucky, be on every house in Phoenix?

you obviously are ignorant on the subject,,,

get back to me when you know something,,,

He is correct. Solar panels take at least 12 years to pay for themselves . Solar is best used off grid. I have a solar system I built almost 30 years ago. It took 24 years to pay for itself, but I live in the mountains so they are almost useless in the winter.

off grid is one of the best, but combined with a grid tie system they work great and depending on use and location they can pay for themselves in less than 10 yrs, and due to the advance in tech they can make you a profit,,,

I do think the solar farm idea is not the way to go,

 

[francoHFW]

Oh really? I admit it's been years since I read up on them...I'll check that out.

Thanks for the info!

this is just one of many links I found,,,

Solar Panels Produce Far More Energy Than They Consume | EarthTechling


I will say I think that solar is a great idea in many places but it will never be a full replacement,,why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

Why would expensive panels that take decades to pay for themselves....if you're lucky, be on every house in Phoenix?

you obviously are ignorant on the subject,,,

get back to me when you know something,,,

He is correct. Solar panels take at least 12 years to pay for themselves . Solar is best used off grid. I have a solar system I built almost 30 years ago. It took 24 years to pay for itself, but I live in the mountains so they are almost useless in the winter.

off grid is one of the best, but combined with a grid tie system they work great and depending on use and location they can pay for themselves in less than 10 yrs, and due to the advance in tech they can make you a profit,,,

I do think the solar farm idea is not the way to go,

You can basically get them for free with the tax write-offs, especially when Democrats are in power. How horrible!
You Can Qualify For Free Home Solar Panels
You can actually get solar panels installed on your home at absolutely no charge to you. But wait, that's not all, not only can you get solar panels installed for free you also get dramatically reduced monthly electricity bills with fixed rates for as long as 25 years.

mySolar Home Solar › free-ho...
Free Home Solar Panels - mySolar

 

[westwall]

Oh really? I admit it's been years since I read up on them...I'll check that out.

Thanks for the info!

this is just one of many links I found,,,

Solar Panels Produce Far More Energy Than They Consume | EarthTechling


I will say I think that solar is a great idea in many places but it will never be a full replacement,,why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

Why would expensive panels that take decades to pay for themselves....if you're lucky, be on every house in Phoenix?

you obviously are ignorant on the subject,,,

get back to me when you know something,,,

He is correct. Solar panels take at least 12 years to pay for themselves . Solar is best used off grid. I have a solar system I built almost 30 years ago. It took 24 years to pay for itself, but I live in the mountains so they are almost useless in the winter.

off grid is one of the best, but combined with a grid tie system they work great and depending on use and location they can pay for themselves in less than 10 yrs, and due to the advance in tech they can make you a profit,,,

I do think the solar farm idea is not the way to go,

The only way you can make a profit is via subsidy. I actually have one so my experience ain't theoretical.

 

[francoHFW]

this is just one of many links I found,,,

Solar Panels Produce Far More Energy Than They Consume | EarthTechling


I will say I think that solar is a great idea in many places but it will never be a full replacement,,why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

Why would expensive panels that take decades to pay for themselves....if you're lucky, be on every house in Phoenix?

you obviously are ignorant on the subject,,,

get back to me when you know something,,,

He is correct. Solar panels take at least 12 years to pay for themselves . Solar is best used off grid. I have a solar system I built almost 30 years ago. It took 24 years to pay for itself, but I live in the mountains so they are almost useless in the winter.

off grid is one of the best, but combined with a grid tie system they work great and depending on use and location they can pay for themselves in less than 10 yrs, and due to the advance in tech they can make you a profit,,,

I do think the solar farm idea is not the way to go,

The only way you can make a profit is via subsidy. I actually have one so my experience ain't theoretical.

Also not up to date.....
You Can Qualify For Free Home Solar Panels
You can actually get solar panels installed on your home at absolutely no charge to you. But wait, that's not all, not only can you get solar panels installed for free you also get dramatically reduced monthly electricity bills with fixed rates for as long as 25 years.

mySolar Home Solar › free-ho...
Free Home Solar Panels - mySolar

They also have much better cheaper solar panels now than they did 25 years ago....

 

[westwall]

why every house in phoenix doesnt have solar panels confuses me

Why would expensive panels that take decades to pay for themselves....if you're lucky, be on every house in Phoenix?

you obviously are ignorant on the subject,,,

get back to me when you know something,,,

He is correct. Solar panels take at least 12 years to pay for themselves . Solar is best used off grid. I have a solar system I built almost 30 years ago. It took 24 years to pay for itself, but I live in the mountains so they are almost useless in the winter.

off grid is one of the best, but combined with a grid tie system they work great and depending on use and location they can pay for themselves in less than 10 yrs, and due to the advance in tech they can make you a profit,,,

I do think the solar farm idea is not the way to go,

The only way you can make a profit is via subsidy. I actually have one so my experience ain't theoretical.

Also not up to date.....
You Can Qualify For Free Home Solar Panels
You can actually get solar panels installed on your home at absolutely no charge to you. But wait, that's not all, not only can you get solar panels installed for free you also get dramatically reduced monthly electricity bills with fixed rates for as long as 25 years.
View attachment 283263
mySolar Home Solar › free-ho...
Free Home Solar Panels - mySolar

They also have much better cheaper solar panels now than they did 25 years ago....

Where do you think the money comes for those "free" solar panels?

Good gosh but you're one stupid little hater dupe!

 

[francoHFW]

What will archeologists think in 500 years?

We are doomed in 12 so nothing

Actually that is supposedly when it will be irreversible if we do nothing as we are now. Super duper...

Actually that is supposedly when it will be irreversible

Yeah, every time the planet warmed a few degrees.....it's irreversible and everything dies......moron. DURR

Sorry you don't like facts, super duper. It's the smart thing to do but we may be able to figure out something scientists haven't foreseen. I just don't know what is so horrible about doing away with pollution and perhaps saving the planet. Takes a good brainwash I guess.....

Sorry you don't like facts, super duper.

Show me one single fact that backs the claim, "in 12 years it will be irreversible if we do nothing as we are now"

I just don't know what is so horrible about doing away with pollution

CO2 isn't pollution.

Ask the climatologist who came up with that theory. All I know is, the GOP is the only party in the world that denies global warming and if you can't notice it you are a brainwashed functional moron.

 

[francoHFW]

you obviously are ignorant on the subject,,,

get back to me when you know something,,,

He is correct. Solar panels take at least 12 years to pay for themselves . Solar is best used off grid. I have a solar system I built almost 30 years ago. It took 24 years to pay for itself, but I live in the mountains so they are almost useless in the winter.

off grid is one of the best, but combined with a grid tie system they work great and depending on use and location they can pay for themselves in less than 10 yrs, and due to the advance in tech they can make you a profit,,,

I do think the solar farm idea is not the way to go,

The only way you can make a profit is via subsidy. I actually have one so my experience ain't theoretical.

Also not up to date.....
You Can Qualify For Free Home Solar Panels
You can actually get solar panels installed on your home at absolutely no charge to you. But wait, that's not all, not only can you get solar panels installed for free you also get dramatically reduced monthly electricity bills with fixed rates for as long as 25 years.
View attachment 283263
mySolar Home Solar › free-ho...
Free Home Solar Panels - mySolar

They also have much better cheaper solar panels now than they did 25 years ago....

Where do you think the money comes for those "free" solar panels?

Good gosh but you're one stupid little hater dupe!

From higher taxes on your greedy idiot lying Rich Heroes?

 

[francoHFW]

you obviously are ignorant on the subject,,,

get back to me when you know something,,,

He is correct. Solar panels take at least 12 years to pay for themselves . Solar is best used off grid. I have a solar system I built almost 30 years ago. It took 24 years to pay for itself, but I live in the mountains so they are almost useless in the winter.

off grid is one of the best, but combined with a grid tie system they work great and depending on use and location they can pay for themselves in less than 10 yrs, and due to the advance in tech they can make you a profit,,,

I do think the solar farm idea is not the way to go,

The only way you can make a profit is via subsidy. I actually have one so my experience ain't theoretical.

Also not up to date.....
You Can Qualify For Free Home Solar Panels
You can actually get solar panels installed on your home at absolutely no charge to you. But wait, that's not all, not only can you get solar panels installed for free you also get dramatically reduced monthly electricity bills with fixed rates for as long as 25 years.
View attachment 283263
mySolar Home Solar › free-ho...
Free Home Solar Panels - mySolar

They also have much better cheaper solar panels now than they did 25 years ago....

Where do you think the money comes for those "free" solar panels?

Good gosh but you're one stupid little hater dupe!

good gosh but you are a brainwashed functional moron. You see how I use the political insult instead of a stupid personal insult, super duper? your propaganda machine is a disgrace and the biggest story in politics last 30 years. The silent majority is now the loudmouth brainwashed functional moron majority LOL and yes we will have to tax the rich more to make our Society Fair again.

 

[karpenter]

You could conceivably run cars on coal but they would be nothing like today's cars.

 

[cnm]

You could conceivably run cars on coal but they would be nothing like today's cars.

Todays electric cars ARE running on coal.
Because over half of our electricity is produced from burning coal.

27.4% in 2018

You should have thunk first.

 

[cnm]

Soooooooo, the windmills really suck at energy creation. but are great at filling landfills with toxic, non biodegradable fiberglass?

Jesus.

since fiberglass is “one of the most inert (Non-toxic)” materials disposed of at the landfill.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

For a energy system to be "green" it has to be less toxic than system it is replacing, and more efficient.

Solar and wind fail on both counts.

And how are wind mills more toxic than coal powered power plants?

Well for one thing, not a single coal burning power plant has been shut down because windmills replaced them.

Not even one.

So, you are basically saying we're going to keep all the pollution from our coal power plants.... AND pollute with windmills.

Since your method of pollution, does not replace any other.... its just another form of additional pollution.

Coal burning power plants have been shutting down because they are losing money.
Windpower is just one of the sources that has contributed to those closures.

No. That is factually incorrect. Coal burning power plants have been being replaced by natural gas. Not wind mills. There is not a single example anywhere.... ANYWHERE... that wind mill plants have replaced fossil fuel power plants, or nuclear.

And this isn't surprising either when you look at the power generation numbers.

The SMALLEST coal power plant in the entire state of Ohio, is 650 MW of power.
The largest wind farm in the entire state...... 4.5 MW.

You really want to try and argue that a tiny 4.5 MW wind farm, replaced even the smallest of coal power plants? Not even close. They might convert that coal power plant to nat.gas, or build a nuclear power plant, but no, the wind farm did nothing. It replaces nothing.

All of the wind farms across the entire state combined, barely produce 1% of the total power generated in the state. Now that should give you pause.... because if you are a thinking individual, you will notice that the total installed base of wind power capacity is supposedly around 500 MW of installed power... yet still is barely 1% of all power generated. How is that possible?

Answer... .because it's wind power. When the wind stops blowing, the power dies. So the number is completely irrelevant. And by the way, that is another reason that wind power can never replace conventional power.

Even if you combined all the wind farms across the state into a single massive power plant (which you can't. A wind farm in southern ohio, can't transmit power all the way to northern Ohio. You would have to produce enough power in THAT location, to replace a power plant in THAT location).

But let's live in a fantasy world where you could. You combine all the various wind farms into a single 500 MW farm. Great! Now you can shut down that coal burning power plant! Right???

No. You can't. If the power grid requires 500 MW of power, and is relying on that coal power plant.... and you put up a 500 MW wind farm... you still can't shut off that coal power plant. Because if the wind dies.... and the wind farm isn't producing enough power, you can damage the entire power grid. Which then means you have to shut off power to the entire grid until the wind farm starts producing again. That could be days.... even weeks.

You want to shut down our entire society for a day to a week, every time the wind dies down? Not happening.

So I'll say this again..... Wind power does not replace ANYTHING EVER. It never does. When Germany shut down their nuclear power plants, the first thing they did was bring online a bunch of coal power plants. Go read about it. Wind does not replaces anything. If you shut down one source of power, you don't turn on a wind mill. You turn on another conventional, reliable, consistent source of power.

Germany still constructing new coal power stations | Airclim

In fact, even in the mid-term, they contracts with France to get power. Why didn't they just put up more windmills, instead of nuclear power from France, and coal power plants being built in Germany?

Sorry, but the facts are what they are.

GOP propaganda as always super duper.

Renewable energy in Germany is mainly based on wind, solar and biomass. ... The share of renewable electricity rose from just 3.4% of gross electricity consumption in 1990 to exceed 10% by 2005, 20% by 2011 and 30% by 2015, reaching 36.2% of consumption by year end 2017.
View attachment 283245
Wikipedia › wiki › Renewable_ener...
Renewable energy in Germany - Wikipedia

The share of renewable electricity rose from just 3.4% of gross electricity consumption in 1990 to exceed 10% by 2005, 20% by 2011 and 30% by 2015, reaching 36.2% of consumption by year end 2017.

Yup. And they pay triple the rates we do. Moron.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We are doomed in 12 so nothing

Actually that is supposedly when it will be irreversible if we do nothing as we are now. Super duper...

Actually that is supposedly when it will be irreversible

Yeah, every time the planet warmed a few degrees.....it's irreversible and everything dies......moron. DURR

Sorry you don't like facts, super duper. It's the smart thing to do but we may be able to figure out something scientists haven't foreseen. I just don't know what is so horrible about doing away with pollution and perhaps saving the planet. Takes a good brainwash I guess.....

Sorry you don't like facts, super duper.

Show me one single fact that backs the claim, "in 12 years it will be irreversible if we do nothing as we are now"

I just don't know what is so horrible about doing away with pollution

CO2 isn't pollution.

There is a hell of a lot of other crap that comes from coal runoff gas fracking refineries tankers cars and trucks and buses and planes. Conservatives are such a pain in the ass, forever. I caramba. How does it feel to be a big oil zombie?

And CO2 isn't pollution, envirotwat whiner.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We are doomed in 12 so nothing

Actually that is supposedly when it will be irreversible if we do nothing as we are now. Super duper...

Actually that is supposedly when it will be irreversible

Yeah, every time the planet warmed a few degrees.....it's irreversible and everything dies......moron. DURR

Sorry you don't like facts, super duper. It's the smart thing to do but we may be able to figure out something scientists haven't foreseen. I just don't know what is so horrible about doing away with pollution and perhaps saving the planet. Takes a good brainwash I guess.....

Sorry you don't like facts, super duper.

Show me one single fact that backs the claim, "in 12 years it will be irreversible if we do nothing as we are now"

I just don't know what is so horrible about doing away with pollution

CO2 isn't pollution.

Ask the climatologist who came up with that theory. All I know is, the GOP is the only party in the world that denies global warming and if you can't notice it you are a brainwashed functional moron.

Ask the climatologist who came up with that theory.

AOC and Greta are morons, they aren't climatologists.

Which climatologist moron came up with that theory?

 

[francoHFW]

And how are wind mills more toxic than coal powered power plants?

Well for one thing, not a single coal burning power plant has been shut down because windmills replaced them.

Not even one.

So, you are basically saying we're going to keep all the pollution from our coal power plants.... AND pollute with windmills.

Since your method of pollution, does not replace any other.... its just another form of additional pollution.

Coal burning power plants have been shutting down because they are losing money.
Windpower is just one of the sources that has contributed to those closures.

No. That is factually incorrect. Coal burning power plants have been being replaced by natural gas. Not wind mills. There is not a single example anywhere.... ANYWHERE... that wind mill plants have replaced fossil fuel power plants, or nuclear.

And this isn't surprising either when you look at the power generation numbers.

The SMALLEST coal power plant in the entire state of Ohio, is 650 MW of power.
The largest wind farm in the entire state...... 4.5 MW.

You really want to try and argue that a tiny 4.5 MW wind farm, replaced even the smallest of coal power plants? Not even close. They might convert that coal power plant to nat.gas, or build a nuclear power plant, but no, the wind farm did nothing. It replaces nothing.

All of the wind farms across the entire state combined, barely produce 1% of the total power generated in the state. Now that should give you pause.... because if you are a thinking individual, you will notice that the total installed base of wind power capacity is supposedly around 500 MW of installed power... yet still is barely 1% of all power generated. How is that possible?

Answer... .because it's wind power. When the wind stops blowing, the power dies. So the number is completely irrelevant. And by the way, that is another reason that wind power can never replace conventional power.

Even if you combined all the wind farms across the state into a single massive power plant (which you can't. A wind farm in southern ohio, can't transmit power all the way to northern Ohio. You would have to produce enough power in THAT location, to replace a power plant in THAT location).

But let's live in a fantasy world where you could. You combine all the various wind farms into a single 500 MW farm. Great! Now you can shut down that coal burning power plant! Right???

No. You can't. If the power grid requires 500 MW of power, and is relying on that coal power plant.... and you put up a 500 MW wind farm... you still can't shut off that coal power plant. Because if the wind dies.... and the wind farm isn't producing enough power, you can damage the entire power grid. Which then means you have to shut off power to the entire grid until the wind farm starts producing again. That could be days.... even weeks.

You want to shut down our entire society for a day to a week, every time the wind dies down? Not happening.

So I'll say this again..... Wind power does not replace ANYTHING EVER. It never does. When Germany shut down their nuclear power plants, the first thing they did was bring online a bunch of coal power plants. Go read about it. Wind does not replaces anything. If you shut down one source of power, you don't turn on a wind mill. You turn on another conventional, reliable, consistent source of power.

Germany still constructing new coal power stations | Airclim

In fact, even in the mid-term, they contracts with France to get power. Why didn't they just put up more windmills, instead of nuclear power from France, and coal power plants being built in Germany?

Sorry, but the facts are what they are.

GOP propaganda as always super duper.

Renewable energy in Germany is mainly based on wind, solar and biomass. ... The share of renewable electricity rose from just 3.4% of gross electricity consumption in 1990 to exceed 10% by 2005, 20% by 2011 and 30% by 2015, reaching 36.2% of consumption by year end 2017.
View attachment 283245
Wikipedia › wiki › Renewable_ener...
Renewable energy in Germany - Wikipedia

The share of renewable electricity rose from just 3.4% of gross electricity consumption in 1990 to exceed 10% by 2005, 20% by 2011 and 30% by 2015, reaching 36.2% of consumption by year end 2017.

Yup. And they pay triple the rates we do. Moron.

Link to your garbage BS?