Yet, your talking points and climate change no scientific response is straight out of Fox News. You aren’t fooling anyone.
Yet, your talking points and climate change no scientific response is straight out of Fox News. You aren’t fooling anyone.I don’t watch television news any more. It’s nothing but bias.
Shill for Biden with blue hair? Check.
I obviously meant he is such a chicken that he pretends not to be right-wing hack he is known as the chicken sucker Watching the hen house of logic.careful I've gotten reported for that.. so lets call him the Fox KOOL-AID drinking sucker!
Shill for Biden with blue hair? Check.
Uh, have you uh, looked at the size and total power output of California, the fifth largest economy in the world, third largest state in sq. Miles and most populous state statistics? You are deluded.I’ll leave you with one more link since that’s what you need to believe anything. Here’s the price of electricity by state.
2022 Average U.S. Electricity Prices
Above is the latest version of our annual U.S. electricity price map. Using the most recent full year of data available from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, our map gives insight into what electricity costs across the country. As always, the map shows that there are stark differences...www.globalenergyinstitute.org
If solar and batteries are so great, why wouldn’t Californian have the lowest price in the country? They’ve supposedly got the most. It would stand to reason it’s an energy paradise…
NY coming hot on their heels. Take a look at what their energy policies look like. No nuclear. Retiring existing plants. Forcing electrification through laws. Importing electricity from outside their state generated with, you guessed it, fossil fuels. This is a failing experiment and you’re in denial.
$30B and it will take 20 years to come online - if at all. In the meantime, you could build out a lot of wind and solar that has immediate return.Nope. Largest battery in the US produces 1,400mwh of power and cost $550 million. The new nukes mentioned above cost $30 billion but produce 17,200,000 mwh of power. Battery can’t touch nuclear. Not by a long shot.
We need more prime movers and less sunshine and unicorn farts powering our grid. Stop believing the propaganda the green lobby and the media is feeding you.
Sources:
LolAll of it. And stop being disingenuous by posting half the equation with numbers that are projections from 2019 onward. Here’s the full picture for energy generation which is what we’re discussing.
Which is why that’s where the money should have been going for the past 15 years and why I’m pissed off at politicians across the board but especially democrats who will not listen to reason the subject. Here’s hoping there’s a break through in fusion.$30B and it will take 20 years to come online - if at all. In the meantime, you could build out a lot of wind and solar that has immediate return.
I love nuclear. I'd love to see molten salt reactors and recycled nuclear material. But practically speaking, there's almost a snowball's chance in hell of nuclear taking off again.
You are already captured if you are quoting Koch funded sitesI don’t watch television news any more. It’s nothing but bias.
Dude. IER is a fossil fuel think tank that gets funding from the Koch network. Maybe try and find a non biased source if you want to continue this line of discussion.All of it. And stop being disingenuous by posting half the equation with numbers that are projections from 2019 onward. Here’s the full picture for energy generation which is what we’re discussing.
Show me a blue one then that shows the statistic. Prove it wrong.You are already captured if you are quoting Koch funded sites
Fox News is too progressive for him. Online "news sources" such as OAN and Newsmax are where it's at.Yet, your talking points and climate change no scientific response is straight out of Fox News. You aren’t fooling anyone.
Yep, he has hijacked this thread with his koch habit while sitting on fox pelt of ignorance.You are already captured if you are quoting Koch funded sites
$0.12-$0.14 per kWh for 100% wind.So you’ve spent $10k on a generator. It’ll be another $20k on solar panels. And you’ll still be connected to the grid. Ok.
What’s the price per kWh where you’re at?
$0.12-$0.14 per kWh for 100% wind.
The point isn’t necessarily to save money (although over it’s life panels should pay for themselves), it’s to provide fault tolerance to loss of power when the climate is arguably dangerous.
My in-laws helped with the cost of the generator so during another long duration power outage they’ll stay with us. For their house they did what you suggested, a small generator with a hookup and a mechanical interlock on the panel that allows them to safely power their fridge and freezer and potentially furnace.
That should be sufficient unless you’re preparing for the apocalypse. I’m of the opinion if it comes to that, not worth living through it. Sweet embrace of the void will be fine.$0.12-$0.14 per kWh for 100% wind.
The point isn’t necessarily to save money (although over it’s life panels should pay for themselves), it’s to provide fault tolerance to loss of power when the climate is arguably dangerous.
My in-laws helped with the cost of the generator so during another long duration power outage they’ll stay with us. For their house they did what you suggested, a small generator with a hookup and a mechanical interlock on the panel that allows them to safely power their fridge and freezer and potentially furnace.
When did nuclear begin? Hmmm. Yes. Much better proven technology. But no let’s roll the dice on unproven technology. That was the choice you’ve made for all of us. It hasn’t panned out and we’re tired of paying for your copium. Step aside and let the engineers build the solutions that have been here all along.Uh, have you uh, looked at the size and total power output of California, the fifth largest economy in the world, third largest state in sq. Miles and most populous state statistics? You are deluded.
also, you never addressed the rebuttals earlier in thread. Clear sign you are clueless. Also, when did fossil fuels begin and when did serious battery, wind and solar? Hmmmm, it is almost like new technologies are new 🤔
Two cookies in one day, you're on a roll!When did nuclear begin? Hmmm. Yes. Much better proven technology. But no let’s roll the dice on unproven technology. That was the choice you’ve made for all of us. It hasn’t panned out and we’re tired of paying for your copium. Step aside and let the engineers build the solutions that have been here all along.
You think nuclear is a Fox talking point but apparently you only see the world in terms of MSM affiliation. Team Fox, team NBC, go team CNN! You should be embarrassed. Read some Slashdot or Arstechnica on the subjects.Yep, he has hijacked this thread with his koch habit while sitting on fox pelt of ignorance.
I look at what France is doing to achieve their own energy independence in Europe and ask why hasn’t the US done the same?
And we subsidize the hell out of the solar industry. And it’s all going off shore to China.LOL! "Look at France!" has been an argument since the 1970s. The French subsidize the bajeebus out of their nuclear power industry. French adoption of nuclear power has nothing to do with economics or engineering.
Oil bro. So either we make oil cheaper or we build oil independent nuclear generators. What’s not to understand?What fuel does the US import for our electricity supply besides some LNG for the northeast due to Jones Act issues?