# Green Energy



## PoliticalChic

What can President Obama do about the use of petroleum, natural gas and coal, and their replacement with alternative forms of energy?  

What are the choices for replacing these resources?  Hydropower? No, it floods lands.  Biomass? Nope, burns wood and  produces waste. Ethanol uses food crops. 
Heres what is left: geothermal, solar and wind.

If all the current and planned geothermal plants make it to production we would double geothermal energy production all the way up to two thirds of one percent of Americas usage!

The total amount of energy produced by all of the solar energy collection equipment produced since 1974 is about 0.8% of Americas energy use.

The combined power-generating capacity of every single windmill (and there are thousands), every photovoltaic solar cell on every rooftop, and every thermal solar energy plant across America equals 0.4 percent of Americas energy consumption.

On June 29, 1979, President Obama called for a national commitment to solar energy. He set a goal of producing 20 percent of the nations energy from various solar sources by the year 2000.  Oops! Did I say President Obama? I meant President Carter, but Im sure that you can see how easy it is to make that mistake.

Read the full article at The Green Energy Dream | theTrumpet.com


----------



## Meister

Don't forget nuclear power...but that too, would be a ...nope.  The enviromentilists would have a field day with all of it.  That's why we are dependent on foriegn sources.  Politicians aren't really dedicated to getting us off the foreign oil.  It's all just lip service.  Of coarse Pelosi, has the big lips.


----------



## Chris

The Danes already get 20% of their energy from wind power. The Israelis are building one solar power plant which will supply 5% of their energy needs. The Germans are building homes that are so well insulated that they don't require a furnace. It can be done. All that is requred is the political will. Are the Danes smarter than us?


----------



## Modbert

And one source that many forget about:

Cars that run on Compressed Air.


----------



## Chris

Modbert said:


> And one source that many forget about:
> 
> Cars that run on Compressed Air.



That's pretty cool, isn't it?

The India car company Tata is investing in that.

I think they are going to call the car, Bodacious.


----------



## Modbert

Chris said:


> That's pretty cool, isn't it?
> 
> The India car company Tata is investing in that.
> 
> I think they are going to call the car, Bodacious.



They are quite cool. They are also probably the reason why the gas companies are raising their prices now, one last hurrah because once 2010 comes; gasoline may become in many aspects extinct for motor vehicles.

Which is good. I personally can't wait to get one of those eventually.


----------



## Old Rocks

The University of Michigan is undertaking some experiments that may provide coastal states with a relitively cheap source of energy from offshore currents.

'Fish technology' draws renewable energy from slow water currents


----------



## PoliticalChic

Modbert said:


> And one source that many forget about:
> 
> Cars that run on Compressed Air.




Ah, we finally found subject about which you have some expertise!

There's no one who has more experience with compressed air.  

I almost forgot that it was Valentine's Day.  Don't you need that compressed air for your blow-up doll?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Chris said:


> The Danes already get 20% of their energy from wind power. The Israelis are building one solar power plant which will supply 5% of their energy needs. The Germans are building homes that are so well insulated that they don't require a furnace. It can be done. All that is requred is the political will. Are the Danes smarter than us?



Tree-hugger alert:



> The nation that leads the world in wind-farm development is going cool on the environmentally friendly source of power.
> 
> Since the boom year of 2000, when as many as 748 turbines were erected, the number being built in Denmark has steadily fallen. So far this year, only six new wind turbines have been put up.



Wind Watch: Danes go cold on wind farms


----------



## PoliticalChic

Chris said:


> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> And one source that many forget about:
> 
> Cars that run on Compressed Air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's pretty cool, isn't it?
> 
> The India car company Tata is investing in that.
> 
> I think they are going to call the car, Bodacious.
Click to expand...


NYTimes: Michael Walsh, a pollution consultant and former United States Environmental Protection Agency regulator, said that a car so cheap was likely to lack the complex technology to maintain its initial level of emissions and that without such technology cars could soon be producing four to five times their initial pollution level.

Geez, it's always something.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Modbert said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's pretty cool, isn't it?
> 
> The India car company Tata is investing in that.
> 
> I think they are going to call the car, Bodacious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are quite cool. They are also probably the reason why the gas companies are raising their prices now, one last hurrah because once 2010 comes; gasoline may become in many aspects extinct for motor vehicles.
> 
> Which is good. I personally can't wait to get one of those eventually.
Click to expand...


You mean you'd give up your Schwinn?


----------



## Chris

We have a wind corridor that runs from Texas to the Canadian border. We have a solar corridor in the American Southwest. Every new house in America should have fexible solar panels. We have the technology. It could be done very easily. 

What if the $800 billion we wasted in Iraq had been spent on clean energy? We would be well on our way to American energy independence.

Wind farm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## PoliticalChic

Chris said:


> We have a wind corridor that runs from Texas to the Canadian border. We have a solar corridor in the American Southwest. Every new house in America should have fexible solar panels. We have the technology. It could be done very easily.
> 
> What if the $800 billion we wasted in Iraq had been spent on clean energy? We would be well on our way to American energy independence.
> 
> Wind farm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




I think the wind corridor must extend through Virginai Beach.

You don't seem to realize that to convert to these alternative forms, TRILLIONS are needed:
 "If America wants a green energy economy, it is going to have to spend. And spend. And spend like never before. President Obamas plan to designate $15 billion a year over 10 years will barely scratch the surface of what is needed. If America wants an energy revolution, taxpayers are going to have to pay and pay and pay, because trillions of dollars worth of energy infrastructure in America will need to be phased out and replaced. "


----------



## Chris

PoliticalChic said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have a wind corridor that runs from Texas to the Canadian border. We have a solar corridor in the American Southwest. Every new house in America should have fexible solar panels. We have the technology. It could be done very easily.
> 
> What if the $800 billion we wasted in Iraq had been spent on clean energy? We would be well on our way to American energy independence.
> 
> Wind farm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the wind corridor must extend through Virginai Beach.
> 
> You don't seem to realize that to convert to these alternative forms, TRILLIONS are needed:
> "If America wants a green energy economy, it is going to have to spend. And spend. And spend like never before. President Obamas plan to designate $15 billion a year over 10 years will barely scratch the surface of what is needed. If America wants an energy revolution, taxpayers are going to have to pay and pay and pay, because trillions of dollars worth of energy infrastructure in America will need to be phased out and replaced. "
Click to expand...


So let's get started.


----------



## Meister

Chris said:


> We have a wind corridor that runs from Texas to the Canadian border. We have a solar corridor in the American Southwest. Every new house in America should have fexible solar panels. We have the technology. It could be done very easily.
> 
> What if the $800 billion we wasted in Iraq had been spent on clean energy? We would be well on our way to American energy independence.
> 
> Wind farm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Chris, your left wing socialist nut buddies would have all your answers to getting off foriegn oil in the courts for years to come.  You name it, their against it, and have highly paid lobbists to do their work.  Also, you have your left wing socialist nut buddies that are judges to make sure it doesn't happen.  Chris, and rockhead,  you want liberalism to run America?  Well here you are, welcome to the politics that you cherish.  
What we do need to do is start opening up areas to drill for oil.  We need to get rid of the regulations that say no more refineries.  We have enough here to make ourselves energy independent.  That and clean coal.  One thing to remember, we're going to need oil for a very long, long time, Chris.  That is a fact, but your ultra liberal buddies say no.  These are the people you worship Chris.  By the way Chris,  remember the "what if?"  It's kinda like "What if my Grandmother had balls."  Get rid of "what if" Chris, that's juvenile.


----------



## Chris

Meister said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have a wind corridor that runs from Texas to the Canadian border. We have a solar corridor in the American Southwest. Every new house in America should have fexible solar panels. We have the technology. It could be done very easily.
> 
> What if the $800 billion we wasted in Iraq had been spent on clean energy? We would be well on our way to American energy independence.
> 
> Wind farm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris, your left wing socialist nut buddies would have all your answers to getting off foriegn oil in the courts for years to come.  You name it, their against it, and have highly paid lobbists to do their work.  Also, you have your left wing socialist nut buddies that are judges to make sure it doesn't happen.  Chris, and rockhead,  you want liberalism to run America?  Well here you are, welcome to the politics that you cherish.
> What we do need to do is start opening up areas to drill for oil.  We need to get rid of the regulations that say no more refineries.  We have enough here to make ourselves energy independent.  That and clean coal.  One thing to remember, we're going to need oil for a very long, long time, Chris.  That is a fact, but your ultra liberal buddies say no.  These are the people you worship Chris.  By the way Chris,  remember the "what if?"  It's kinda like "What if my Grandmother had balls."  Get rid of "what if" Chris, that's juvenile.
Click to expand...


Blah, blah, blah, liberal bad, let's drill, ect.....

What we need to do is provide tax advantages for green energy. 

Green energy is made in America. Wind, solar, conservation, etc...are all American.


----------



## Meister

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have a wind corridor that runs from Texas to the Canadian border. We have a solar corridor in the American Southwest. Every new house in America should have fexible solar panels. We have the technology. It could be done very easily.
> 
> What if the $800 billion we wasted in Iraq had been spent on clean energy? We would be well on our way to American energy independence.
> 
> Wind farm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris, your left wing socialist nut buddies would have all your answers to getting off foriegn oil in the courts for years to come.  You name it, their against it, and have highly paid lobbists to do their work.  Also, you have your left wing socialist nut buddies that are judges to make sure it doesn't happen.  Chris, and rockhead,  you want liberalism to run America?  Well here you are, welcome to the politics that you cherish.
> What we do need to do is start opening up areas to drill for oil.  We need to get rid of the regulations that say no more refineries.  We have enough here to make ourselves energy independent.  That and clean coal.  One thing to remember, we're going to need oil for a very long, long time, Chris.  That is a fact, but your ultra liberal buddies say no.  These are the people you worship Chris.  By the way Chris,  remember the "what if?"  It's kinda like "What if my Grandmother had balls."  Get rid of "what if" Chris, that's juvenile.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Blah, blah, blah, liberal bad, let's drill, ect.....
> 
> What we need to do is provide tax advantages for green energy.
> 
> Green energy is made in America. Wind, solar, conservation, etc...are all American.
Click to expand...


Your an IDIOT!!!!  It won't happen because of your liberal buddies.. They have your "green" in the courts you idiot!!! You didn't even read what i wrote, and you attacked me.  What a slime.  By the way, show me that we spent 800 billion in Iraq.  It's less than half that, you moron.
PS what do you think will run and lube the engines that make the parts for your "green"?  What will be part of the chemical compositions of your "green parts?"  Think about it for a second, if you get this far down on my post.  It will be oil, Chris....oil.  We're going to need it.


----------



## Chris

Meister said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chris, your left wing socialist nut buddies would have all your answers to getting off foriegn oil in the courts for years to come.  You name it, their against it, and have highly paid lobbists to do their work.  Also, you have your left wing socialist nut buddies that are judges to make sure it doesn't happen.  Chris, and rockhead,  you want liberalism to run America?  Well here you are, welcome to the politics that you cherish.
> What we do need to do is start opening up areas to drill for oil.  We need to get rid of the regulations that say no more refineries.  We have enough here to make ourselves energy independent.  That and clean coal.  One thing to remember, we're going to need oil for a very long, long time, Chris.  That is a fact, but your ultra liberal buddies say no.  These are the people you worship Chris.  By the way Chris,  remember the "what if?"  It's kinda like "What if my Grandmother had balls."  Get rid of "what if" Chris, that's juvenile.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blah, blah, blah, liberal bad, let's drill, ect.....
> 
> What we need to do is provide tax advantages for green energy.
> 
> Green energy is made in America. Wind, solar, conservation, etc...are all American.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your an IDIOT!!!!  It won't happen because of your liberal buddies.. They have your "green" in the courts you idiot!!! You didn't even read what i wrote, and you attacked me.  What a slime.  By the way, show me that we spent 800 billion in Iraq.  It's less than half that, you moron.
> PS what do you think will run and lube the engines that make the parts for your "green"?  What will be part of the chemical compositions of your "green parts?"  Think about it for a second, if you get this far down on my post.  It will be oil, Chris....oil.  We're going to need it.
Click to expand...


The ultimate cost of the Iraq war will run over a trillion dollars.

Green energy will be the most important industry of the 21st century. 

Why not be the leader in it?


----------



## Meister

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blah, blah, blah, liberal bad, let's drill, ect.....
> 
> What we need to do is provide tax advantages for green energy.
> 
> Green energy is made in America. Wind, solar, conservation, etc...are all American.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your an IDIOT!!!!  It won't happen because of your liberal buddies.. They have your "green" in the courts you idiot!!! You didn't even read what i wrote, and you attacked me.  What a slime.  By the way, show me that we spent 800 billion in Iraq.  It's less than half that, you moron.
> PS what do you think will run and lube the engines that make the parts for your "green"?  What will be part of the chemical compositions of your "green parts?"  Think about it for a second, if you get this far down on my post.  It will be oil, Chris....oil.  We're going to need it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The ultimate cost of the Iraq war will run over a trillion dollars.
> 
> Green energy will be the most important industry of the 21st century.
> 
> Why not be the leader in it?
Click to expand...


Because it will be in the fucking courts for years and years, you Moron!!!  I've stated it twice before in this thread!!  You aren't reading what I'm posting you asshole!!!  It's your side that will be holding up the process.  Chris, quit trying to get your socialist issues out in a post, and at least address what I've posted.  PS...so then the Iraq war hasn't cost us 800 billion, and your just speculating on future costs....I get it..I think?  PSS. Green is going to be very expensive if it ever does come to pass, and most Americans aren't going to be to able afford it..  Did you ever look at the price of a hybrid car..I couldn't afford most.  You know those light bulbs that GE puts out..you know the ones with the high concentrations of mercury..yeah those..pretty damn expensive.  Not to mention new taxes that will be imposed on us to recoup the loss of revenue from OIL!


----------



## Chris

I saw this great report on NBC Nightly News about this company that makes flexible solar roofing. 

Their income doubled in the last year. Their name is United Solar Ovonic.

 Here's a link to their website....

United Solar Ovonic


----------



## Chris

Here's an article about the German houses with no furnace....

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/27/world/europe/27house.html


----------



## Meister

Chris said:


> I saw this great report on NBC Nightly News about this company that makes flexible solar roofing.
> 
> Their income doubled in the last year. Their name is United Solar Ovonic.
> 
> Here's a link to their website....
> 
> United Solar Ovonic



Chris I give up..again you wore me out.  You ignored what I was saying..I'm not going to repeat it any longer.  You want to put a solar panel on your roof, and make that your issue..go ahead.  You don't get it, you won't get it.  Just keep sticking your head in the sand...life will go on without you.


----------



## driveby

Chris said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have a wind corridor that runs from Texas to the Canadian border. We have a solar corridor in the American Southwest. Every new house in America should have fexible solar panels. We have the technology. It could be done very easily.
> 
> What if the $800 billion we wasted in Iraq had been spent on clean energy? We would be well on our way to American energy independence.
> 
> Wind farm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the wind corridor must extend through Virginai Beach.
> 
> You don't seem to realize that to convert to these alternative forms, TRILLIONS are needed:
> "If America wants a green energy economy, it is going to have to spend. And spend. And spend like never before. President Obamas plan to designate $15 billion a year over 10 years will barely scratch the surface of what is needed. If America wants an energy revolution, taxpayers are going to have to pay and pay and pay, because trillions of dollars worth of energy infrastructure in America will need to be phased out and replaced. "
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So let's get started.
Click to expand...



They had a big project like that planned in the New England states, what happened to it ? .....


----------



## Chris

driveby said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the wind corridor must extend through Virginai Beach.
> 
> You don't seem to realize that to convert to these alternative forms, TRILLIONS are needed:
> "If America wants a green energy economy, it is going to have to spend. And spend. And spend like never before. President Obamas plan to designate $15 billion a year over 10 years will barely scratch the surface of what is needed. If America wants an energy revolution, taxpayers are going to have to pay and pay and pay, because trillions of dollars worth of energy infrastructure in America will need to be phased out and replaced. "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So let's get started.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> They had a big project like that planned in the New England states, what happened to it ? .....
Click to expand...


That fat idiot Ted Kennedy opposed it.


----------



## driveby

Chris said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> So let's get started.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They had a big project like that planned in the New England states, what happened to it ? .....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That fat idiot Ted Kennedy opposed it.
Click to expand...




It didn't get done because ONE guy opposed it ?  

Isn't he a liberal lion and a champion of the democratic party ?


----------



## Chris

driveby said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> driveby said:
> 
> 
> 
> They had a big project like that planned in the New England states, what happened to it ? .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That fat idiot Ted Kennedy opposed it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It didn't get done because ONE guy opposed it ?
> 
> Isn't he a liberal lion and a champion of the democratic party ?
Click to expand...


He's an idiot.

I always say if I lived in Mass., I'd be a Republican.

Va. Democrats are much better.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Chris said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have a wind corridor that runs from Texas to the Canadian border. We have a solar corridor in the American Southwest. Every new house in America should have fexible solar panels. We have the technology. It could be done very easily.
> 
> What if the $800 billion we wasted in Iraq had been spent on clean energy? We would be well on our way to American energy independence.
> 
> Wind farm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the wind corridor must extend through Virginai Beach.
> 
> You don't seem to realize that to convert to these alternative forms, TRILLIONS are needed:
> "If America wants a green energy economy, it is going to have to spend. And spend. And spend like never before. President Obamas plan to designate $15 billion a year over 10 years will barely scratch the surface of what is needed. If America wants an energy revolution, taxpayers are going to have to pay and pay and pay, because trillions of dollars worth of energy infrastructure in America will need to be phased out and replaced. "
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So let's get started.
Click to expand...


First, let's consider the Law of Unintended Consequences.  What do you think every other country in the world would be doing while we wasted TRILLIONS on your green fantasy? Is there a GDP in your universe?  Is thinking optional?

It's so easy to be a liberal.


----------



## auditor0007

Modbert said:


> And one source that many forget about:
> 
> Cars that run on Compressed Air.



I was one of those on television.  The idea is just one of many that may show promise for the future.


----------



## auditor0007

PoliticalChic said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Danes already get 20% of their energy from wind power. The Israelis are building one solar power plant which will supply 5% of their energy needs. The Germans are building homes that are so well insulated that they don't require a furnace. It can be done. All that is requred is the political will. Are the Danes smarter than us?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tree-hugger alert:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The nation that leads the world in wind-farm development is going cool on the environmentally friendly source of power.
> 
> Since the boom year of 2000, when as many as 748 turbines were erected, the number being built in Denmark has steadily fallen. So far this year, only six new wind turbines have been put up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wind Watch: Danes go cold on wind farms
Click to expand...


I am a big supporter of altenative energy, but we're not going to go green overnight.  In fact, much of the technology needed to go green is not there yet, so it's just not possible.  The reason the Danes have stopped looking at wind power, for the time being, is that the energy it produces fluctuates too much.

We currently have no means by which to store electicity.  Electricity must be provided as it is being used.  On a hot summer day, when everyone is using their air conditioners, the usage can nearly double versus the night time.  The grid can only put out so much electricity at a given time.  On the flipside, the grid can only handle so much energy at any given time.  Wind power is generated when the wind is blowing.  The stronger it blows, the more energy that is produced.  If all electricity was provided by wind power, there would be times when there wasn't nearly enough and others when so much was produced that it would blow the grid.

In time, as battery technology advances, that will all change.  Homes, businesses, every building will be equipped with power storing batteries that can be accessed when output is below normal and charged when the output is above normal.  Buildings will most likely be equipped with their own wind turbines (much smaller than the industrial types) and solar panels.  The technology on solar panels continues to get better and will continue to do so.

Both wind and solar are our most likely future, but that future is 100 to 200 years away.  We're not talking about just a new way of providing electricity.  Every building will have to be changed to accept the way electricity is delivered and stored.  This is not something that can happen in twenty years or even fifty.  

In the meantime, if we want to become energy efficient, we will continue to look at new ways of providing that energy, and there will be new developments.  But we will also continue to rely on good old oil, gas, and clean burning coal for a long time to come.  Our immediate concern should be in developing the technology to extract oil from shale.  Research is still in progress in the Green River Basin to do just that.  We have an estimated 1.5 trillion barrels of extractable oil there, and 75% of the land is owned by the federal government.  Our biggest concern is that the federal government doesn't just give this oil to the oil companies without fair compensation.  The oil companies are the ones developing the technology, but we need to make sure they don't get a free handout to this oil.  We should really consider that this oil, once the technology is developed, only be sold within the US, and not used for export.  

There has been a great deal of discussion that the US could become the world's largest exporter of oil once the technology is developed to extract this oil.  We need to keep that oil here for our own use.  The longer we can be energy independent with our own fossil fuels, the more time we will have to develop the alternative sources of energy that will drive our long term future.


----------



## auditor0007

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have a wind corridor that runs from Texas to the Canadian border. We have a solar corridor in the American Southwest. Every new house in America should have fexible solar panels. We have the technology. It could be done very easily.
> 
> What if the $800 billion we wasted in Iraq had been spent on clean energy? We would be well on our way to American energy independence.
> 
> Wind farm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris, your left wing socialist nut buddies would have all your answers to getting off foriegn oil in the courts for years to come.  You name it, their against it, and have highly paid lobbists to do their work.  Also, you have your left wing socialist nut buddies that are judges to make sure it doesn't happen.  Chris, and rockhead,  you want liberalism to run America?  Well here you are, welcome to the politics that you cherish.
> What we do need to do is start opening up areas to drill for oil.  We need to get rid of the regulations that say no more refineries.  We have enough here to make ourselves energy independent.  That and clean coal.  One thing to remember, we're going to need oil for a very long, long time, Chris.  That is a fact, but your ultra liberal buddies say no.  These are the people you worship Chris.  By the way Chris,  remember the "what if?"  It's kinda like "What if my Grandmother had balls."  Get rid of "what if" Chris, that's juvenile.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Blah, blah, blah, liberal bad, let's drill, ect.....
> 
> What we need to do is provide tax advantages for green energy.
> 
> Green energy is made in America. Wind, solar, conservation, etc...are all American.
Click to expand...


Chris, another problem with both wind and solar energy; if you produce large amounts of it in one part of the country, how do you move it to other parts of the country?  The further you move electricity from it's place of origin, the more you lose.  Eventually, you have nothing left.  By the time electicity produced in Arizona gets to the midwest, there is nothing left.  You have to use it where it is produced and if you overproduce, you have to store it, which we lack the technology to do at the moment.  We're just not there yet to use wind and solar as the bulk of our energy needs.  But, we will be one day.


----------



## alan1

There is always this,
Anything Into Oil | Alternative Energy | DISCOVER Magazine

But then, that isn't considered "green" by most liberals.
It's actually probably quite the conundrum for them, a method that deals with garbage, but since it produces evil petroleum they don't know which way to turn.


----------



## hansom

We've had the technology for more than 100 years.  So why haven't we used it yet?  It doesn't make sense.  I STILL hear firsthand accounts of major corporations quashing research into these areas


----------



## manu1959

Chris said:


> The Danes already get 20% of their energy from wind power. The Israelis are building one solar power plant which will supply 5% of their energy needs. The Germans are building homes that are so well insulated that they don't require a furnace. It can be done. All that is requred is the political will. Are the Danes smarter than us?



i have lived in danmark and seen the wind farms......you do know how big danmark is and how big their windfarm is.....

i tell you what obama could do....he could give every owner occupied homeowner 30k to put solar panels on their roof.....that would take all those homes off the grid saving tons of carbon based energy and create a bunch of jobs, saving the homeowners thousands etc.....

the down side is a bunch of carbon based companies would loose a bunch of money and lay off a bunch of people.....

bummer....


----------



## Chris

manu1959 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Danes already get 20% of their energy from wind power. The Israelis are building one solar power plant which will supply 5% of their energy needs. The Germans are building homes that are so well insulated that they don't require a furnace. It can be done. All that is requred is the political will. Are the Danes smarter than us?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i have lived in danmark and seen the wind farms......you do know how big danmark is and how big their windframe is.....
> 
> i tell you what obama could do....he could give every owner occupied homeowner 30k to put solar panels on their roof.....that would take all those homes off the grid saving tons of carbon based energy and create a bunch of jobs, saving the homeowners thousands etc.....
> 
> the down side is a bunch of carbon based companies would loose a bunch of money and lay off a bunch of people.....
> 
> bummer....
Click to expand...


Good one....


----------



## hansom

I read the car companies will be required to produce at least some percentage of their products to meet 0% emission standards, so expect to see green style energy vehicles within 2-3 years!


----------



## krotchdog

Renewable energy, wind power is not renewable and is one of the most polluting energies that exsist

Same goes for geothermal, even more polluting than wind.

Solar I have not researched much other than the amount of land needed does not exsist.


----------



## Chris

krotchdog said:


> Renewable energy, wind power is not renewable and is one of the most polluting energies that exsist
> 
> Same goes for geothermal, even more polluting than wind.
> 
> Solar I have not researched much other than the amount of land needed does not exsist.



Nice bit of lying.

I feel bad for you.


----------



## Seraega

manu1959 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Danes already get 20% of their energy from wind power. The Israelis are building one solar power plant which will supply 5% of their energy needs. The Germans are building homes that are so well insulated that they don't require a furnace. It can be done. All that is requred is the political will. Are the Danes smarter than us?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i have lived in danmark and seen the wind farms......you do know how big danmark is and how big their windfarm is.....
> 
> i tell you what obama could do....he could give every owner occupied homeowner 30k to put solar panels on their roof.....that would take all those homes off the grid saving tons of carbon based energy and create a bunch of jobs, saving the homeowners thousands etc.....
> 
> the down side is a bunch of carbon based companies would loose a bunch of money and lay off a bunch of people.....
> 
> bummer....
Click to expand...


It wouldn't even cost $30k for the average home.   As far as people losing their job because of new technology go read some Ayn Rand.... it's about the only good point she makes.  You can't stand in the way of progress just because of potential job loss. 

As far as renewable energy, it only makes sense.  I've done the math myself, a roof top wind turbine installed will set me back about $12000.  That cost is recovered in 4-5 years because I wont have an electric bill anymore.  It's an investment.  After the recovery time I'm ahead every month.  Even as energy cost inflates in the future, I will be saving money.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Seraega said:


> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Danes already get 20% of their energy from wind power. The Israelis are building one solar power plant which will supply 5% of their energy needs. The Germans are building homes that are so well insulated that they don't require a furnace. It can be done. All that is requred is the political will. Are the Danes smarter than us?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i have lived in danmark and seen the wind farms......you do know how big danmark is and how big their windfarm is.....
> 
> i tell you what obama could do....he could give every owner occupied homeowner 30k to put solar panels on their roof.....that would take all those homes off the grid saving tons of carbon based energy and create a bunch of jobs, saving the homeowners thousands etc.....
> 
> the down side is a bunch of carbon based companies would loose a bunch of money and lay off a bunch of people.....
> 
> bummer....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It wouldn't even cost $30k for the average home.   As far as people losing their job because of new technology go read some Ayn Rand.... it's about the only good point she makes.  You can't stand in the way of progress just because of potential job loss.
> 
> As far as renewable energy, it only makes sense.  I've done the math myself, a roof top wind turbine installed will set me back about $12000.  That cost is recovered in 4-5 years because I wont have an electric bill anymore.  It's an investment.  After the recovery time I'm ahead every month.  Even as energy cost inflates in the future, I will be saving money.
Click to expand...


So, your electric bill is about $3000/ year?

And what happens when that 90 mph wind rips the turbine and roof off the house?

And what is the lifetime of the turbine?

Get back to me after you try it.


----------



## Seraega

PoliticalChic said:


> Seraega said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> manu1959 said:
> 
> 
> 
> i have lived in danmark and seen the wind farms......you do know how big danmark is and how big their windfarm is.....
> 
> i tell you what obama could do....he could give every owner occupied homeowner 30k to put solar panels on their roof.....that would take all those homes off the grid saving tons of carbon based energy and create a bunch of jobs, saving the homeowners thousands etc.....
> 
> the down side is a bunch of carbon based companies would loose a bunch of money and lay off a bunch of people.....
> 
> bummer....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It wouldn't even cost $30k for the average home.   As far as people losing their job because of new technology go read some Ayn Rand.... it's about the only good point she makes.  You can't stand in the way of progress just because of potential job loss.
> 
> As far as renewable energy, it only makes sense.  I've done the math myself, a roof top wind turbine installed will set me back about $12000.  That cost is recovered in 4-5 years because I wont have an electric bill anymore.  It's an investment.  After the recovery time I'm ahead every month.  Even as energy cost inflates in the future, I will be saving money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, your electric bill is about $3000/ year?
> 
> And what happens when that 90 mph wind rips the turbine and roof off the house?
> 
> And what is the lifetime of the turbine?
> 
> Get back to me after you try it.
Click to expand...


Yea around that.  I have a lot of extras that consume power like running a hot tub throughout the winter, and AC in the summer...  The cost is part of what makes going off the grid a good option for my home, plus I live on a lake that gets a strong wind virtually every day of the year. 

Turbines are equipped with a break for exactly the type of wind gusts you're referring too, it's no more vulnerable than a tree, or satellite dish, or flag pole... besides that the one cost to this "free" energy is additional home owners insurance.  Adding a line to your policy for an extra $15-20k in coverage is only a couple bucks a month. 

Turbines are designed to last 20-30 years.  As with any other investment, you make your profit when you buy... which is why I'm spending considerable time learning and shopping around.  I want this to be profitable for my family, and to be an asset should I ever want to sell the house.


----------



## krotchdog

Chris, why would you assume I lied. I feel bad for you. I feel bad for myself because its the idiots who listen to the television and believe what is said. First, only a moron would call someone a liar without thinking about what is said. 

People think because the wind blows its clean, and it is, but what is that wind blowing against. First it hinds the blades of the turbine, still clean right, but what are those blades made of? Fiberglass, do you realize the toxic fumes that are produced during the production of Fiberglass. Tons of chemicals are needed and and a whole shit load of electricity, so much electricity that to make fiberglass you need a source capable of producing more electricity than a windmill farm produces. So to produce the fiberglass to produce the windmill you need power, currently that is coming from COAL. Do you understand the pollution that a coal plant produces. Its a waste of that power to use it to produce windmills for a windmill cannot reproduce itself, the power it generates is to weak. Further windmills do have a limited life, than the get thrown away as garbage, currently I know no process that recycles fiberglass so now you have created the toxic fumes from fiberglass production, you have created the toxic waste from burning coal. Waste from coal converted to electricity is radioactive, stuff like Cobalt 60, Cesium, and a whole bunch of other unregulated pollutants released into the air. 

Windmills are anything but clean or renewable.

Fiberglass production, ever look into the details of that, Chris has not, Chris's knee-jerk reaction is to call anyone who tells Chris something a liar. Currently fiberglass demand exceed supply, meaning price goes up, raising the cost of your electricity, how fat is your wallet. Do you live rich, if not you wont because now you will pay more for a basic need because people like Chris do not think, they just call people liars if they dont agree. Fiberglass production requires PROPENE, that only comes from oil. Propene demand exceeds supply so we must produce and refine more oil so that we can have more PROPENE so we can make more windmills. 

Windmills thus are less renewable than oil and pollute as much oil because you cant make a windmill without making oil.

What about Boron, is that needed. Or Titanium, Nickel, Copper, Plastic, Lead, what does it take to produce these basic products needed in the industry that is needed to produce windmills.

Here is a news flash, you just dont go to the hardware store and buy a windmill, they dont come from outer space nor do they grow on trees.

So Chris, if you like I can educate you much more when I have time and I dont mind but if you dismiss people as a liar merely because they present you with an idea that is contrary to your opinion than you can suffer the consequences, in this case you will pay a fortune in electricity and be enslaved to the government that has passed the regulations and laws that enslave you to windmills and the power behind windmills, the power being government supporting CORPORATIONS.

Geothermal is nasty dirty polluting resource wasting energy.


----------



## Skull Pilot

Modbert said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's pretty cool, isn't it?
> 
> The India car company Tata is investing in that.
> 
> I think they are going to call the car, Bodacious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are quite cool. They are also probably the reason why the gas companies are raising their prices now, one last hurrah because once 2010 comes; gasoline may become in many aspects extinct for motor vehicles.
> 
> Which is good. I personally can't wait to get one of those eventually.
Click to expand...


An Air-Powered Car by 2009? Don&#8217;t Hold Your Breath - Wheels Blog - NYTimes.com


----------



## PoliticalChic

Seraega said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seraega said:
> 
> 
> 
> It wouldn't even cost $30k for the average home.   As far as people losing their job because of new technology go read some Ayn Rand.... it's about the only good point she makes.  You can't stand in the way of progress just because of potential job loss.
> 
> As far as renewable energy, it only makes sense.  I've done the math myself, a roof top wind turbine installed will set me back about $12000.  That cost is recovered in 4-5 years because I wont have an electric bill anymore.  It's an investment.  After the recovery time I'm ahead every month.  Even as energy cost inflates in the future, I will be saving money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, your electric bill is about $3000/ year?
> 
> And what happens when that 90 mph wind rips the turbine and roof off the house?
> 
> And what is the lifetime of the turbine?
> 
> Get back to me after you try it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea around that.  I have a lot of extras that consume power like running a hot tub throughout the winter, and AC in the summer...  The cost is part of what makes going off the grid a good option for my home, plus I live on a lake that gets a strong wind virtually every day of the year.
> 
> Turbines are equipped with a break for exactly the type of wind gusts you're referring too, it's no more vulnerable than a tree, or satellite dish, or flag pole... besides that the one cost to this "free" energy is additional home owners insurance.  Adding a line to your policy for an extra $15-20k in coverage is only a couple bucks a month.
> 
> Turbines are designed to last 20-30 years.  As with any other investment, you make your profit when you buy... which is why I'm spending considerable time learning and shopping around.  I want this to be profitable for my family, and to be an asset should I ever want to sell the house.
Click to expand...


That is a monster electric bill!  Is you stove and heating also electric?

Upstate- can you use wood-burning?

Just seems to me that nature defeats "the best laid plans."  is there a history for those turbines?  I s there a gvt rebate?

For me, living in the Peoples Republic of NYC, my electic is expensive, but a fraction of yours, and I'm afraid of the vibrations removing my roof.

BTW, are you familiar with Geoger Friedman, of Stratfor? In his new book, he states that
within 50 years the USA will be to electric power what Saudi Arabia is to oil.  He bases this on the premise that we will have collectors in space that will convert solar energy to microwaves which can be sent back to earth. 

Who knows.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Skull Pilot said:


> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's pretty cool, isn't it?
> 
> The India car company Tata is investing in that.
> 
> I think they are going to call the car, Bodacious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are quite cool. They are also probably the reason why the gas companies are raising their prices now, one last hurrah because once 2010 comes; gasoline may become in many aspects extinct for motor vehicles.
> 
> Which is good. I personally can't wait to get one of those eventually.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> An Air-Powered Car by 2009? Don&#8217;t Hold Your Breath - Wheels Blog - NYTimes.com
Click to expand...


When I see the discussion between those two guys, that you quote above, I can't help but think of Lenny and George, in Steinbeck's "Of Mice and Men,"  where Lenny says

         "tell me about the rabbits, George."


----------



## krotchdog

> They are quite cool. They are also probably the reason why the gas companies are raising their prices now, one last hurrah because once 2010 comes; gasoline may become in many aspects extinct for motor vehicles.



If gas is not used in cars, what will you do with it. A certain percentage of a barrel of oil will always be gas, its not just made, its seperated out of oil due according to its specific gravity. We will still need Propene to produce fiberglass to produce windmills so will still need oil, gasoline and diesel will now become toxic waste and the only safe thing you can do with this type of waste is burn it. Oil is here for a long time. The only thing we can do is go 100% nuke for electricity, develop our resources as best we can, use the money of the growing economy that will result, use the money for research.

To think we can just quit using gas and oil by-products is not realistic. Maybe in the future but in the future technology will advance so that oil produces even less pollution. 

I dont see us running out. Even the term in the news is "peak oil production". That is kind of revealing, what do they mean, its impossible to produce more. Brazil is finding new oil fields. The USA is not producing in known fields. Peak production simply means we can produce as much as we need for the foreseeable future.


----------



## Gunny

krotchdog said:


> Chris, why would you assume I lied. I feel bad for you. I feel bad for myself because its the idiots who listen to the television and believe what is said. First, only a moron would call someone a liar without thinking about what is said.
> 
> People think because the wind blows its clean, and it is, but what is that wind blowing against. First it hinds the blades of the turbine, still clean right, but what are those blades made of? Fiberglass, do you realize the toxic fumes that are produced during the production of Fiberglass. Tons of chemicals are needed and and a whole shit load of electricity, so much electricity that to make fiberglass you need a source capable of producing more electricity than a windmill farm produces. So to produce the fiberglass to produce the windmill you need power, currently that is coming from COAL. Do you understand the pollution that a coal plant produces. Its a waste of that power to use it to produce windmills for a windmill cannot reproduce itself, the power it generates is to weak. Further windmills do have a limited life, than the get thrown away as garbage, currently I know no process that recycles fiberglass so now you have created the toxic fumes from fiberglass production, you have created the toxic waste from burning coal. Waste from coal converted to electricity is radioactive, stuff like Cobalt 60, Cesium, and a whole bunch of other unregulated pollutants released into the air.
> 
> Windmills are anything but clean or renewable.
> 
> Fiberglass production, ever look into the details of that, Chris has not, Chris's knee-jerk reaction is to call anyone who tells Chris something a liar. Currently fiberglass demand exceed supply, meaning price goes up, raising the cost of your electricity, how fat is your wallet. Do you live rich, if not you wont because now you will pay more for a basic need because people like Chris do not think, they just call people liars if they dont agree. Fiberglass production requires PROPENE, that only comes from oil. Propene demand exceeds supply so we must produce and refine more oil so that we can have more PROPENE so we can make more windmills.
> 
> Windmills thus are less renewable than oil and pollute as much oil because you cant make a windmill without making oil.
> 
> What about Boron, is that needed. Or Titanium, Nickel, Copper, Plastic, Lead, what does it take to produce these basic products needed in the industry that is needed to produce windmills.
> 
> Here is a news flash, you just dont go to the hardware store and buy a windmill, they dont come from outer space nor do they grow on trees.
> 
> *So Chris, if you like I can educate you much more when I have time and I dont mind but if you dismiss people as a liar merely because they present you with an idea that is contrary to your opinion than you can suffer the consequences, in this case you will pay a fortune in electricity and be enslaved to the government that has passed the regulations and laws that enslave you to windmills and the power behind windmills, the power being government supporting CORPORATIONS.*
> 
> Geothermal is nasty dirty polluting resource wasting energy.



Well, you just described Chris.  He wants to be a slave just so long as he's provided for cradle to grave.  He believes what he's sold and no amount of facts will change his mind.  He'll just call you a liar, quit the thread, and go start a new one.


----------



## Seraega

PoliticalChic said:


> Seraega said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, your electric bill is about $3000/ year?
> 
> And what happens when that 90 mph wind rips the turbine and roof off the house?
> 
> And what is the lifetime of the turbine?
> 
> Get back to me after you try it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea around that.  I have a lot of extras that consume power like running a hot tub throughout the winter, and AC in the summer...  The cost is part of what makes going off the grid a good option for my home, plus I live on a lake that gets a strong wind virtually every day of the year.
> 
> Turbines are equipped with a break for exactly the type of wind gusts you're referring too, it's no more vulnerable than a tree, or satellite dish, or flag pole... besides that the one cost to this "free" energy is additional home owners insurance.  Adding a line to your policy for an extra $15-20k in coverage is only a couple bucks a month.
> 
> Turbines are designed to last 20-30 years.  As with any other investment, you make your profit when you buy... which is why I'm spending considerable time learning and shopping around.  I want this to be profitable for my family, and to be an asset should I ever want to sell the house.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is a monster electric bill!  Is you stove and heating also electric?
> 
> Upstate- can you use wood-burning?
> 
> Just seems to me that nature defeats "the best laid plans."  is there a history for those turbines?  I s there a gvt rebate?
> 
> For me, living in the Peoples Republic of NYC, my electic is expensive, but a fraction of yours, and I'm afraid of the vibrations removing my roof.
> 
> BTW, are you familiar with Geoger Friedman, of Stratfor? In his new book, he states that
> within 50 years the USA will be to electric power what Saudi Arabia is to oil.  He bases this on the premise that we will have collectors in space that will convert solar energy to microwaves which can be sent back to earth.
> 
> Who knows.
Click to expand...


It's not that high of a bill.  I've lived here my whole life and can attest that for this area it's normal.  The worst part is that I live within 5 miles of 3 nuke plants, and we get ZERO of the energy.  It all goes downstate.  We get all the risk of radiation if something goes wrong... they get all the cheap power. 

I've not read his book, but if we get wind power setup throughout the midwest we'll be sitting pretty well into the future.  The difference between wind/solar and carbon based energy sources is that once you pay the start up costs it's essentially free forever, and doesn't run out.  Some minor maintenance costs are far better than having to find a new place to drill every couple years. 

That's excluding the environmental factors....


----------



## catzmeow

PoliticalChic said:


> You don't seem to realize that to convert to these alternative forms, TRILLIONS are needed:
> "If America wants a green energy economy, it is going to have to spend. And spend. And spend like never before. President Obama&#8217;s plan to designate $15 billion a year over 10 years will barely scratch the surface of what is needed. If America wants an energy revolution, taxpayers are going to have to pay and pay and pay, because trillions of dollars&#8217; worth of energy infrastructure in America will need to be phased out and replaced. "



Actually, part of it is simply raising awareness on the part of consumers.  Many power companies around the U.S. offer incentives to customers to use sustainable power sources, such as solar water heaters, because it is less expensive to pay inventives than to build the infrastructure required to keep pace with rising consumer demand.

Solar panels are an expensive initial investment.  However, these panels last for about 40 years.  Most consumers can pay them off with a low-interest energy efficient loan within ten.  That means 30 YEARS OF FREE POWER.

Solar is an extremely viable option for many Americans, if they knew more about it.  The use of solar keeps increasing, as does the technology every year.  

Only a short-sighted idiot wouldn't want us to decrease our reliance on foreign oil and fossil fuels.

I seriously cannot imagine why the conservatives aren't all over this shit.


----------



## editec

Modbert said:


> And one source that many forget about:
> 
> Cars that run on Compressed Air.


 
That's not a power source, that's a storage system for power. One actually LOSES power in the process.

As is the case with hydrogen, FYI.


----------



## editec

Nuclear power is cheap as long as the power plants get SUBSIDIES from the government.

The moment they have to pay their OWN INSURANCE, they are out of business because no insurance company in the world is willing to take the risk of insuring one.

Now if nucelar power is so safe, what are the insurance companies afraid of?

Making a lot of money taking no risk?

I don't think so, folks.


----------



## editec

Krotch you so don't know what you're talking about.

Do you really imagine that the carbon footprint of a turbine blade exceeds the amount of energy a modern windmill produces?

Learn some math dude.


----------



## catzmeow

editec said:


> Krotch you so don't know what you're talking about.
> 
> Do you really imagine that the carbon footprint of a turbine blade exceeds the amount of energy a modern windmill produces?
> 
> Learn some math dude.



Stop it, Eddy.  He's perfectly happy with his head down in that hole.


----------



## auditor0007

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have a wind corridor that runs from Texas to the Canadian border. We have a solar corridor in the American Southwest. Every new house in America should have fexible solar panels. We have the technology. It could be done very easily.
> 
> What if the $800 billion we wasted in Iraq had been spent on clean energy? We would be well on our way to American energy independence.
> 
> Wind farm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris, your left wing socialist nut buddies would have all your answers to getting off foriegn oil in the courts for years to come.  You name it, their against it, and have highly paid lobbists to do their work.  Also, you have your left wing socialist nut buddies that are judges to make sure it doesn't happen.  Chris, and rockhead,  you want liberalism to run America?  Well here you are, welcome to the politics that you cherish.
> What we do need to do is start opening up areas to drill for oil.  We need to get rid of the regulations that say no more refineries.  We have enough here to make ourselves energy independent.  That and clean coal.  One thing to remember, we're going to need oil for a very long, long time, Chris.  That is a fact, but your ultra liberal buddies say no.  These are the people you worship Chris.  By the way Chris,  remember the "what if?"  It's kinda like "What if my Grandmother had balls."  Get rid of "what if" Chris, that's juvenile.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Blah, blah, blah, liberal bad, let's drill, ect.....
> 
> What we need to do is provide tax advantages for green energy.
> 
> Green energy is made in America. Wind, solar, conservation, etc...are all American.
Click to expand...


I'm all for wind and solar energy, and one day, that will be our main source.  But it's not likely to work the way you are talking about.  Great, lets build huge wind and solar plants in the middle of the country and in the Southwest.  How will that help those in the Northeast?  You can't transport that energy.  Did you not realize that?  

To keep it efficient, you have to use it close to the source of production.  Secondly, we have no current way of storing energy which will be an absolute necessity if we are to rely on wind and solar.  You can't make the sun shine or the wind blow just because it's 105 degrees outside and everyone is using they're AC.  At the same time, you can't overproduce and flood the grid with electricity unless you are planning on blowing the entire grid.  This is the reason the Danes have cut back on their wind production.  It is only good for around 20% of their needs.  After that point, it becomes too unreliable to provide the energy when needed.


----------



## krotchdog

Yes I do, its called massive amounts of fiberglass production, fiberglass production creates millions of tons of toxic waste. Look at Chinise fiberglass production.mat product is produced on a single high-speed fiberglass 

mat line. ... cost of a batch is of raw materials is 

typically about $60 per ton (&#8220;Advanced Heating .... This 

estimate of about 16000000 kWh per year for oxygen plant

boron carbide requires 9.4 Mwh per ton 

http://www.etimaden.gov.tr/common/d...ry/Boron Chemicals Prefeasibility Summary.pdf

This is a little crude, real crude but you should get the idea that I am putting together a more concise post. 

I expect you guys to get pissed when what you were taught to think for all these years are challenged. You got to get over it. My career is in Energy so I know what I am talking about. There is no way you can power the glass furnace with wind power, further much of the process uses LP. I believe electrial usage is small but in comparison. 

The EPRI report I site is old and it refers to total usage of polymer fiber composites (fiberglass).

You guys really are just posting the opinion that this sounds great without thinking it through. I got tons of information I must sort through and organize. 

Just do a bit of googling on polymer fiber kwh and you will then get the idea of how huge this industry is. They move the componets by ship, you think you can build a ship with a windmill.

They need boron, are boron mines run by a windmill.

How about that glass furnace operating at 1700 degrees, you think your windmill is going to power that. Not a chance. 

Than at the end of its life you throw it away 100.000,000 tons of fiberglass waste from all those old windmills.

Right now I am just talking one part, the fiberglass, care to speculate at the other materials involved. This is about the rich getting richer, you think the rich give a shit about green, where are all those evil conservative businessmen, why are they not up in arms, actually most capitalist in charge of big business are democrats, got to remember the democrats are the actual filthy rich, so why are they not screaming.

You show me one place they use green energy to make the raw materials.

do a search on fiberglass demand, boron demand, propene demand (which only comes from oil) and you will see demand skyrocketing, whatch the commodities market for the essential raw materials.

You tell me you thought about all of this.

ITS YOU THAT HAS HIS HEAD IN A HOLE.

Tell me you researched all of this or even considered it.

Lets talk about  batteries, how many do you throw away a year, they use tons of nickel, where will we get all that nickel, no problem, lets have a war where there is the most nickel in the world, already did that, ITS KOSOVO, THNAKS MR CLINTON.

Any how, its foolish for me to point this all out because my career will benifit from this, I got me a high paying job in the energy sector, I wont like the extra high electric bills but I will make up for it with all the overtime and a huge bonus as my company profits from this.

Check your wallet, think you got enough money, you aint goint to make more, you will spend more because all the industry is overseas, the profit will be made overseas and you guys will foot the bill.

Seriously, I got to thank you, You pay for my nice new shiny 4x4 V8 four door full size truck.

I am the one laughing, all the way to the bank.

Sure I am against them for the simple reason that I want to raise my family in the USA, but the more energy needed the better.

I am currently working in Madrid for the largest Spanish energy service company, we have people from China with us, Bulgaria, Slovania, that is where the growth is.

Windmills cannot supply industry so you will see more job loss, they can power your house, with a battery that gets dumped as toxic trash, in your backyard, think about all those batteries you buy a year now imagine all the new batteries we will need on a scale that makes the energizer bunny look like a toy.

Yep, you guys thought it through and I got my head in hole.

ha, ha.


----------



## krotchdog

editic, so how much is that subsidy, which plants are dangerous. Last time I checked we have had no problems in this century with nukes, hell, THREE MILE ISLAND IS STILL RUNNING.

Catzmeow


> these panels last for about 40 years



And then you throw them in a landfill, a land fill that will be 500 miles long. The biggest solar plant in the world will be built in arizona, its 3 miles long, it will take a 100 miles of solar panels to equal the Palo Verde Nuclear Power plant. We have a 100 nuclear plants in the USA, think solar panels from one side of america to the next. I actually have this written out better but my shift is almost over and I got to go.

What about the pollution from solar cell production, 100,000,000 tons. Real green, real cost effective.

Hey, guess whos in Obama's cabinet, who are his advisors, I will did it up, I got my info a bit scattered but its all people from the richest companies in the world.

Here is bit of information about solar panel pollution, thanks catzmeow, your green good feeling is poisoning the kittens.



> In March 2008, the Washington Post reported that at least one plant in China&#8217;s Henan province is regularly dumping extremely toxic silicon tetrachloride (a corrosive and toxic waste product of polysilicon manufacturing) on nearby farmland. [...] Silicon tetrachloride makes the soil too acidic for plants, causes severe irritation to living tissues, and is highly toxic when ingested of inhaled.
> 
> Solar cell production linked to toxic waste
> Tech industry watchdog calls for responsible recycling from vendors
> Written by AARON BRUNER
> Published January 22, 2009
> Solar energy tantalizes most green-friendly consumers as an easy way to cut energy costs and consumption of fossil fuels, but a new report suggests the industry isn't as clean as some thought.
> 
> Released last week by green technology watchdog Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, the report details the toxic nature of photovoltaic cell production and proposes that solar vendors take back spent panels for clean recycling.
> 
> Over the past five years, the number of solar cells produced globally has increased sevenfold, according to the report, while in 2007 alone the industry grew by 62 percent, earning $17.2 billion in global revenues. Increased production allows a higher potential for toxic waste, if handled improperly.
> 
> Many materials used to produce photovoltaic (PV) panels, primarily silicon, are similar to those of the microelectronics industry and have the potential to create a wave of electronic waste after approximately 20 to 25 years of use, the coalition claims.
> 
> Other toxic PV cell components abound - lead, brominated flame retardants, cadmium and chromium - which require the safe recycling of small amounts of valuable but potentially dangerous material.
> 
> Particularly dangerous is the manufacturing of crystalline silicon PV cells from polysilicon feedstock (highly refined silicon), which produces the toxic waste product silicon tetrachloride.
> 
> When released into the environment, silicon tetrachloride acidifies soil so it is inhospitable for effective plant growth, causes severe irritation to living tissues and is highly toxic when ingested or inhaled.
> 
> With foresight to the potential risks of a growing solar industry, SVTC hopes that mistakes of the microelectronics industry will not be repeated.
> 
> "The electronics industry's lack of environmental planning and oversight resulted in widespread toxic chemical pollution that caused death and injury to workers and people living in nearby communities," the report said.
> 
> Though much of the toxic polysilicon manufacturing for PV cells and electronics takes place outside the U.S., American technology producers generated more than 2.6 million tons of electronic waste in 2005, according to EPA estimates.


----------



## xotoxi

krotchdog said:


> Last time I checked we have had no problems in this century with nukes, hell, THREE MILE ISLAND IS STILL RUNNING...it will take a 100 miles of solar panels to equal the Palo Verde Nuclear Power plant.


 
What do you plan to do with the spent nuclear rods?


----------



## catzmeow

krotchdog said:


> *And then you throw them in a landfill, a land fill that will be 500 miles long*. The biggest solar plant in the world will be built in arizona, its 3 miles long, it will take a 100 miles of solar panels to equal the Palo Verde Nuclear Power plant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Released last week by green technology watchdog Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, the report details the toxic nature of photovoltaic cell production and proposes that *solar vendors take back spent panels for clean recycling*.
Click to expand...


I know this is going to shock you, but green power proponents are also RABID RECYCLERS.  You should see my house and my recycling bins.  We throw away very little trash.  If it is compostable, it's composted.  If it's recyclable, it's recycled.  We don't get a paper newspaper.  We don't drink bottled water.  We recycle all plastics, paper, glass, and metal.

Welcome to the future.

The silicone that is being used today to produce solar cells should be reused to produce solar cells in the future.  

Why is this so hard for you?


----------



## stekim

The fact people throw out materials that can be recycled or improperly handle toxic materials is a separate issue from whether green energy is good and/or viable.


----------



## catzmeow

stekim said:


> The fact people throw out materials that can be recycled or improperly handle toxic materials is a separate issue from whether green energy is good and/or viable.



Are you saying that the fact that China doesn't really impose enviromental controls on ANY of their manufacturing processes is not a commentary on solar power?

Shocking.


----------



## catzmeow

xotoxi said:


> What do you plan to do with the spent nuclear rods?



He's going to create a new master race of glow in the dark beings with six eyes, tails and flippers.


----------



## stekim

Catzmeow said:
			
		

> Are you saying that the fact that China doesn't really impose enviromental controls on ANY of their manufacturing processes is not a commentary on solar power?




Sort of like the auto industry back in the day.  The fact you could light the Detroit River on fire is not a commentary on the evils of the car.   If silicon tetrachloride acidifies soil so it is inhospitable for effective plant growth and causes severe irritation to living tissues and is highly toxic when ingested or inhaled, then here's a thought:  Let's solve the problem by not putting it in the soil, not injest it and not inhale.  Goddamn am I a genius.


----------



## catzmeow

stekim said:


> Goddamn am I a genius.



I've always said so.


----------



## krotchdog

xoxtxi, spent nuke rods, have you ever seen one, I have, I have looked down at the entire core of a reactor, I have looked directly at the spent nuke rods, you know they give off an incredible, fluorescent or phosphorecent light. I have cut/pasted a technical defintion so that I can educate you. So I am not to worried about what scares you, for I have seen your fear with my own eyes. So what to do with the spent fuel, recycle it. Thats all, very simple, drop it in a breeder reactor and create more energy than you use. That is renewable energy.



> Cerenkov Radiation: This effect occurs when a high energy beta emitter is submerged in a dense medium such water. High energy beta particles are able to pass through water at a speed greater than light can pass through water - although not greater than the normal speed of light in a vacuum. As the beta particles pass through the water they alter the magnetic field and displace electrons in the water. The electrons realign themselves back to the ground state as a beta particle passes. In doing so a photon is emitted from each electron. Normally these photons tend to cancel each other out and no light is seen, but when the beta particles exceed the speed of light the photons are emitted with a slight lag, allowing them to escape without interfering with each other. Most Cerenkov radiation is in the ultraviolet spectrum, but part of the energy is visible light and can be seen as a blue glow. Normally this is only visible when there is very intense radiation, such as an operating pool reactor, or a large amount of a powerful beta emitted.



STEKIM states


> The fact you could light the Detroit River on fire



That is a lie, you could never ever light the Detroit river on fire. You may be thinking of the Rouge River that flows from Fords Dearborn plant into the Detroit, and even than the Rouge river was never flammable. Cleveland's Cuyahoga River caught fire in 1969, so you amply demonstrate that you speak of what you feel, not what you know. 

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/01/cuyahoga-catches-fire.php

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-06/cwru-msc061704.php



> Myths surrounding Cuyahoga River fire 35 years ago
> CLEVELAND--Once upon a time, June 22, 1969, a river started on fire. So begins the historical event that has turned into the fable of the Cuyahoga River burning.
> Fable? Yes, according to Jonathan H. Adler, Case Western Reserve University law pro fessor and director of the Environmental Law Center at the Case Law School, because the river portrayed as so polluted it would burn was, in fact, well on the way to improving its water quality.
> 
> And fish, a bellwether of good water quality, were reported again swimming in the river at the time of the fire.
> 
> As the 35th anniversary of the Cuyahoga River fire approaches, Adler reflects and revisits his research article, "Fables of the Cuyahoga: Reconstructing a History of Environmental Protection."
> 
> In his 57-page paper for the Fordham Environmental Law Journal in 2002, he puts to rest many of the misconceptions that have kept Clevelanders blushing over the national embarrassment of their river burning. He also sets the stage and describes what the federal government was doing at the time to clean up the environment.
> 
> "The earlier, more intense fires are symbolic of the fact that the Cuyahoga--and other industrial rivers--were at greater risk of fires in the previous decades," stated Adler.
> 
> According to the Case environmental law professor, national funding was inadequate at the time. Also hampering the clean-up process were state laws--and inaction to enforce them for decades--enabling certain industries to continue to pollute with immunity against prosecution and the less civic-minded continued to dump waste into the waterway.
> 
> Cleveland's hands had been tied where state laws overrode local authority and did not allow the city to take action against the polluters. The federal government had the River and Harbors Act of 1899 to grapple with pollution, but the general focus of the law was to keep waterways navigable for river traffic. The law barred disposal of wastes but not all liquid wastes, which comprised most of the water's pollutants.
> 
> "Revisiting the context and history of the legendary Cuyahoga River fire reveals a complex story about the causes and consequences of various institutions' choices in environmental law," writes Adler.
> 
> The fact is that the Cuyahoga River caught fire from debris that collected in the crooked river's bend. The short-lived fire was out before the local press reached the scene to record images of its blaze. But it was a fire that followed ones in 1868, 1883, 1887, 1912, 1922, 1936, 1941, 1948 and the most devastating of all--the 1952 blaze that resulted in nearly $1.5 millions in damage.
> 
> Nor was the Cuyahoga River the only fire to burn during that era. Pollutants fueled fires on a river into the Baltimore Harbor, the Buffalo River in upstate New York and the Rouge River in Michigan.
> 
> What set the Cuyahoga apart from other fires is that the nation's attention had begun to focus on the environment, and the Cleveland fire fueled the symbolism of the earth's need for repair and the necessary federal regulation to do so, said Adler. The fire led to the passage of the Clean Water Act of 1972.
> 
> Adler also laid the historical groundwork of how Cleveland had passed a $100-million bond issue in 1968 to clean up the water (the federal government spent less than $160 million for environmental clean-ups throughout the nation), established the Cuyahoga River Basin Water Quality Committee in 1963 to deal with pollution, enlisted local industries to voluntarily curtail pollution and in early 1969 established the Clean Water Task Force to periodically sweep the river and to collect oil and debris. Cleveland also had spent $30 million to build new sewage treatment facilities from 1967-70.
> 
> "Cleveland made significant strides toward environmental improvements in 1968 and 1969," writes Adler.
> 
> Despite the Cleveland area's efforts, a 1968 federal report listed the Cuyahoga River as one of the most polluted rivers in the nation, said Adler.
> 
> Adler concludes that like all good fables, this one contains some "useful truths" that "can inform an unending search for more perfect institutions of environmental protection."



Look, its simple, I am not being an asshole but seriously, so many people hear are speaking thier emotions derived from being brainwashed by the television, the constant bombardment of propaganda.

This is what enslaves the people to the government. I am not advocating Republican is better than Democrat for both parties are getting rich from the corporations. This is all propaganda. Nothing is green, nothing is green, nothing is green.

I lived through the years of pollution, you have no idea, the Detroit river was dead, no fish, all dead, the Rouge river flows into the Detroit, killing all the fish, the Detroit flows into Lake Erie killing all the fish. That was the 70's, its been fixed, our laws started under NIXON changed all this. Now you can fish and swim in Lake Erie, we have changed, but not the corporations, they are in China destroying the land, that will come back to haunt us. 

the corporations are creating more waste going "green", its all a big scam, more minerals and oil are needed to go green, more power plants for a newly created industry, a giant industry as the world has never known, Obama says he will change the world and he is telling the truth, you just have no idea the magnitude of his ideas. The pay off for Obama is seen by looking at Bill Clintons payoff, over a 100.000,000 paid to Clinton in speaking fees by huge corporations, democratic corpotations, corporations ran by democrats, executives who worked at these corporations who are now working on obama's staff.

This is about Obama, when Bush was in office, all the same bullshit was happening, Bush did not build any nukes, Bush is quiet, why, so he can get the same payoff as Clinton


----------



## Old Rocks

PoliticalChic said:


> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> And one source that many forget about:
> 
> Cars that run on Compressed Air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, we finally found subject about which you have some expertise!
> 
> There's no one who has more experience with compressed air.
> 
> I almost forgot that it was Valentine's Day.  Don't you need that compressed air for your blow-up doll?
Click to expand...


Now aren't you the sweetest little bitch.


----------



## Old Rocks

PoliticalChic said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Danes already get 20% of their energy from wind power. The Israelis are building one solar power plant which will supply 5% of their energy needs. The Germans are building homes that are so well insulated that they don't require a furnace. It can be done. All that is requred is the political will. Are the Danes smarter than us?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tree-hugger alert:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The nation that leads the world in wind-farm development is going cool on the environmentally friendly source of power.
> 
> Since the boom year of 2000, when as many as 748 turbines were erected, the number being built in Denmark has steadily fallen. So far this year, only six new wind turbines have been put up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wind Watch: Danes go cold on wind farms
Click to expand...


World Wind Energy Association - Home

Highlights of the World Wind Energy Report 2008: 

· Worldwide capacity reaches 121188 MW, out of which 27261 MW were added in 2008. 
· Wind energy continued its growth in 2008 at an increased rate of 29 %.
· All wind turbines installed by the end of 2008 worldwide are generating 260 TWh per annum, equalling more than 1,5 % of the global electricity consumption.
· The wind sector became a global job generator and has created 440000 jobs worldwide.
· The wind sector represented in 2008 a turnover of 40 billion .
· For the first time in more than a decade, the USA took over the number one position from Germany in terms of total installations.
· China continues its role as the most dynamic wind market in the year 2008, more than doubling the installations for the third time in a row, with today more than 12 GW of wind turbines installed.
· North America and Asia catch up in terms of new installations with Europe which shows stagnation.
· Based on accelerated development and further improved policies, a global capacity of more than 1500000 MW is possible by the year 2020. 

Downdload pdf version of World Wind Energy Report 2008: 

English 1.15 Mb, Chinese 904.29 Kb, French 1.11 Mb, (more in French: www.thewindpower.net), German 1.10 Mb, Russian 883.34 Kb, Spanish 1.07 Mb

Read more...  


*29% annual growth rate. Hardly shows a decrease interest in wind.*


----------



## elvis

Old Rocks said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Modbert said:
> 
> 
> 
> And one source that many forget about:
> 
> Cars that run on Compressed Air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, we finally found subject about which you have some expertise!
> 
> There's no one who has more experience with compressed air.
> 
> I almost forgot that it was Valentine's Day.  Don't you need that compressed air for your blow-up doll?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now aren't you the sweetest little bitch.
Click to expand...


you're just pissed off because a republican said it to a democrat.


----------



## krotchdog

Old Rocks, 12 gwh of wind in china, how much total power does china produce? How much more energy does china need each year?


----------



## Seraega

krotchdog said:


> Old Rocks, 12 gwh of wind in china, how much total power does china produce? How much more energy does china need each year?



Why bother... it's going to be soooo hard.  It's impossible.  waaah waah waah. 

Most people never could imagine the interstate highway system either, or sending a man to the moon, or the internet.  Please leave solutions to people with foresight.  Naysayers never accomplish anything.


----------



## KittenKoder

xotoxi said:


> krotchdog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Last time I checked we have had no problems in this century with nukes, hell, THREE MILE ISLAND IS STILL RUNNING...it will take a 100 miles of solar panels to equal the Palo Verde Nuclear Power plant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you plan to do with the spent nuclear rods?
Click to expand...


There is a facility in the US built and maintained, and updated, far from any civilization and so deep NOTHING can "leak" out, it costs us a fortune to make and operate. It's almost flawless, but ignored. We have a plan in place is we use it.


----------



## krotchdog

Seraega said:


> krotchdog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks, 12 gwh of wind in china, how much total power does china produce? How much more energy does china need each year?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why bother... it's going to be soooo hard.  It's impossible.  waaah waah waah.
> 
> Most people never could imagine the interstate highway system either, or sending a man to the moon, or the internet.  Please leave solutions to people with foresight.  Naysayers never accomplish anything.
Click to expand...




Seraega said:


> krotchdog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks, 12 gwh of wind in china, how much total power does china produce? How much more energy does china need each year?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why bother... it's going to be soooo hard.  It's impossible.  waaah waah waah.
> 
> Most people never could imagine the interstate highway system either, or sending a man to the moon, or the internet.  Please leave solutions to people with foresight.  Naysayers never accomplish anything.
Click to expand...


I am not a naysayer, if you do not look at this intelligently than whats that say about you. You have resorted to poking fun and denigrating me. To me that means you do not care about the truth. Try to answer the question, it is very, very, hard. I want you to be right and teach me, so I will wait for your answer. You will either try which proves what you have said is true or you will come back as you have with rhetoric, hate, and name calling. I do want to be proved wrong, so do it.

On the spent fuel rod subject all the spent fuel produced in the USA, that is all the waste from the very first reactor started up and all the ones running today, if you took all that spent fuel it would fit inside one football field, not the stadium, the football field.

Unit One and San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station was shut down after 30 years of operation. Units One's fuel is sitting in casks, right on the beach within the confines of the owner controlled area. I have walked by it and worked within 30 feet of 30 years of spent fuel, total time spent next to the fuel, 2,000 hours. 

Every plant in the USA was designed to store 20 years of spent fuel, our plants have been so good, are inspections done so well, our quaility control standards so high our plants are going to last 40 years. So thats the problem with the fuel, the plants are just not meeting the worst case scenario so we keep running them.


----------



## Seraega

krotchdog said:


> Seraega said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> krotchdog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks, 12 gwh of wind in china, how much total power does china produce? How much more energy does china need each year?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why bother... it's going to be soooo hard.  It's impossible.  waaah waah waah.
> 
> Most people never could imagine the interstate highway system either, or sending a man to the moon, or the internet.  Please leave solutions to people with foresight.  Naysayers never accomplish anything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not a naysayer, if you do not look at this intelligently than whats that say about you. You have resorted to poking fun and denigrating me. To me that means you do not care about the truth. Try to answer the question, it is very, very, hard. I want you to be right and teach me, so I will wait for your answer. You will either try which proves what you have said is true or you will come back as you have with rhetoric, hate, and name calling. I do want to be proved wrong, so do it.
> 
> On the spent fuel rod subject all the spent fuel produced in the USA, that is all the waste from the very first reactor started up and all the ones running today, if you took all that spent fuel it would fit inside one football field, not the stadium, the football field.
> 
> Unit One and San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station was shut down after 30 years of operation. Units One's fuel is sitting in casks, right on the beach within the confines of the owner controlled area. I have walked by it and worked within 30 feet of 30 years of spent fuel, total time spent next to the fuel, 2,000 hours.
> 
> Every plant in the USA was designed to store 20 years of spent fuel, our plants have been so good, are inspections done so well, our quaility control standards so high our plants are going to last 40 years. So thats the problem with the fuel, the plants are just not meeting the worst case scenario so we keep running them.
Click to expand...

I certainly do care about the truth.  Please take a look at the other 2 threads where we're debating this same issue.  Either you're a liar, or you're ignorantly copy and pasting your figures from someone else who is a liar.  The numbers just don't add up and the talking points you're trying to push have long since been debunked.


----------



## krotchdog

Sareaga, if its right there why did you not post it here as well, you have not debunked a thing I have posted and now you refuse a simple challenge, my conversation has started here, you have refused simply because you will not be able to substantiate the claims. Point out exactly what is debunked in what I post. Dont tell me to go chase my tail, put your money where your mouth is and this is where your mouth is.


----------



## Seraega

krotchdog said:


> Sareaga, if its right there why did you not post it here as well, you have not debunked a thing I have posted and now you refuse a simple challenge, my conversation has started here, you have refused simply because you will not be able to substantiate the claims. Point out exactly what is debunked in what I post. Dont tell me to go chase my tail, put your money where your mouth is and this is where your mouth is.



Your claim that renewables cannot generate enough power to produce themselves is bunk.  The pay back period on a solar cell is less than 2 years out of an average 30 year life span.   Will you accept the dept. of energy as a credible source: 

Solar Energy Technologies Program: Learning About PV: The Myths of Solar Electricity



> The energy payback period is also dropping rapidly. For example, it takes today's typical crystalline silicon module about 4 years to generate more energy than went into making the module in the first place. The next generation of silicon modules, which will employ a different grade of silicon and use thinner layers of semiconductor material, will have an energy payback of about 2 years. And thin-film modules will soon bring the payback down to one year or less. This means that these modules will produce "free" and clean energy for the remaining 29 years of their expected life.



Add that to my australian source on the other thread.  Both are in agreement that your argument doesn't hold water. 

Besides that my initial reply to you was about your defeatism.  You envision the problem as so big that it can have no solution.  You seem to have already convinced yourself there is no way out.  So tell us what happens when the coal and oil runs out?   If there is no solution, that's a pretty bleak future you've painted for us.


----------



## krotchdog

yes and further, ruf, ruf, arr, ruf ruf urf ar ruf bark arh r r ruf r sniff scratch ruf ruf

(I dont care who you are, thats just plain old funny flaming). 

Seriously though, I am going to give you such an indepth, technical response you will think a dog ripped the rear end of your britches off. 

Check that there other thread, I will post a bit, my responses do take hours despite the information I have accumlated so be patient.

What about the toxic waste, what about the petro-chemicals, I am going to the great length in the other thread we are bickering in to give you the information first hand so please if I ask for a minor specific, please save me much time. I will check your source. Still can you give me a break down of the elements that goes into silicon manufacturing, what are the elements as in from the periodic table, what is the by-product and its toxicity (that one is easy its in one of my posts), who owns the mines these elements are mined from.

Dont go to the trouble. These are in depth technical questions you have not researched, these are questions you have not thought of, I will check your link but off the top of my head I know for a fact your link will talk about the elements that are used, where they are mined, how rare they are, how they are transported, what is the enviromental damage of the mine, what is the start-up cost of the mine, how long will it take to offset the carbon foot print of the mine, how much energy is produced by other sources if said elements are used in other sources of energy. 

See, this aint as simple as the link you posted and my vast, incredible intellect allows me to state this first, before I check the link. 

See ya, its fun, I have spent hours on my other response to you and its only about 5% of the way finished. Fear not though, I will post it in parts.

Seriously though, my questions are important and I am attempting to answer them, my thread would be so much cooler if I won you over to my side and we worked together on this. I have spent hours on this question and I am putting a response together so perfect nobody can argue with it.

so come, luke, turn away from the darkside of the force, come, come. work with me..........

this is an edit, checked the link, sniffed around, scratch, took a dump, no technical data.

Help me, that link did suck, it tells me what to think, I posted a study, I will find it, repost it, it may be in this thread, I am just busy as a dog in heat, got to go, post, post, post, no time for dead ends.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

stekim said:


> Catzmeow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that the fact that China doesn't really impose enviromental controls on ANY of their manufacturing processes is not a commentary on solar power?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sort of like the auto industry back in the day.  The fact you could light the Detroit River on fire is not a commentary on the evils of the car.   If silicon tetrachloride acidifies soil so it is inhospitable for effective plant growth and causes severe irritation to living tissues and is highly toxic when ingested or inhaled, then here's a thought:  Let's solve the problem by not putting it in the soil, not injest it and not inhale.  Goddamn am I a genius.
Click to expand...


ROFLMNAO...  Yeah, that's on par with the genius you demonstrated where you 'guessed the odds of probability of 50/50'...

What ya are sis, is an idiot... but no more so than any other Advocate of Social Science...


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Seraega said:


> krotchdog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks, 12 gwh of wind in china, how much total power does china produce? How much more energy does china need each year?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why bother... it's going to be soooo hard.  It's impossible.  waaah waah waah.
> 
> Most people never could imagine the interstate highway system either, or sending a man to the moon, or the internet.  Please leave solutions to people with foresight.  Naysayers never accomplish anything.
Click to expand...


ROFLMNAO...

Wind power is absurd... can one convert the energy stored in wind to electricity?  Sure... it's just that the process of doing so is highly inefficient...  and it's never going to be efficient; at least not within the scope of our present understanding of generation.

Solar has far more potential... and we're generations of design away from making that practical. 

There is no state in the US which has done more damage to its own economy through the absurd pursuit of alternative energy than California; where the fruits and nuts find themselves in a contast battle between the pursuit of alternative energy systems which do not have to be actually be constructed on the ground and have absolutely NO impact on any other aspect of the environment...

They're idiots... all crying for impossible solutions and decrying the naysers who simply point out the fatal flaws in their reasoning.

What makes petroleum such a winner is the potential energy which is possesses.  Solar and wind have infinitesimal values of potential energy stores...

Sure if you wrap the planet in solar panels or dot the entire midwest with wind-generators you could realize a fair amount of generated power... but piss little in exchange for the unspeakable offense which doing so would provide in every facet of human existance.


----------



## krotchdog

> There is no state in the US which has done more damage to its own economy through the absurd pursuit of alternative energy than California; where the fruits and nuts find themselves in a contast battle between the pursuit of alternative energy systems which do not have to be actually be constructed on the ground and have absolutely NO impact on any other aspect of the environment...



I just read an article in the Monterey times that supports this comment. The farmers in the central valley of California, where tons of produce is farmed, where tons of beef is farmed, are not going to get water because they are diverting water for fish and because of drought. Seems unrelated, the farms besides getting water from the Aquedect have wells. They can use the wells but its too expensive to buy the electricity. Green Energy is now directly responsible for the increase in the price of food. Lack of inforcing our borders has allowed 32,000,000 illegal aliens in the country, many on food stamps, higher food prices means higher amounts paid to illegals for food stamps. The entire nation will pay for the water and electricity shortage in California, California lead the nation in polluting, non-renewable so-called Green energy.

I am in Madrid Spain, butter costs about 1.60 a pound here, California supermarkets 4.50 a pound. A French bread in Spain is 65 cents, California 2.00$

It is nothing less than to be a complete moron to support a windmill, a solar farm or geothermal energy.

Southern California Edison just announced they are raising the rates they charge. 

Greenies are meanies, we got I work with, she is from Washington, she always tells me how terrible the people on earth are, how we destroy everything, how there should much less people, she could eliminate herself from the equation but its everyone else that is the problem, not her.

See the Green folk are all good, they care so they hurt nothing. Every person who is for green energy posting is a hypocrite, thats right, I called you all hypocrites, I will do it again, watch, HYPOCRITES. If you are posting you are creating carbon, how do you justify creating carbon by posting on the internet. Its because the greenies believe they are better than everyone else and thus deserve life, in thier eyes earth would be better without everyone except themselves. Take a look at the titles of the books they read, "what would earth be like without man". Point out the pollution they will create makeing windmills and thats good, it will kill the unwanted people and the greenie meanies will live on a better earth, because they know so.


----------



## PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic said:


> What can President Obama do about the use of petroleum, natural gas and coal, and their replacement with alternative forms of energy?
> 
> What are the choices for replacing these resources?  Hydropower? No, it floods lands.  Biomass? Nope, burns wood and  produces waste. Ethanol uses food crops.
> Heres what is left: geothermal, solar and wind.
> 
> If all the current and planned geothermal plants make it to production we would double geothermal energy production all the way up to two thirds of one percent of Americas usage!
> 
> The total amount of energy produced by all of the solar energy collection equipment produced since 1974 is about 0.8% of Americas energy use.
> 
> The combined power-generating capacity of every single windmill (and there are thousands), every photovoltaic solar cell on every rooftop, and every thermal solar energy plant across America equals 0.4 percent of Americas energy consumption.
> 
> On June 29, 1979, President Obama called for a national commitment to solar energy. He set a goal of producing 20 percent of the nations energy from various solar sources by the year 2000.  Oops! Did I say President Obama? I meant President Carter, but Im sure that you can see how easy it is to make that mistake.
> 
> Read the full article at The Green Energy Dream | theTrumpet.com





Liberals.....one great idea after another.

Now....about wind power................

"Energy Prices in Europe Hit Records After Wind Stops Blowing​Heavy reliance on wind power, coupled with a shortage of natural gas, has led to a spike in energy prices​Natural gas and electricity markets were already surging in Europe when a fresh catalyst emerged: The wind in the stormy North Sea stopped blowing.

The sudden slowdown in wind-driven electricity production off the coast of the U.K. in recent weeks whipsawed through regional energy markets. Gas and coal-fired electricity plants were called in to make up the shortfall from wind.

Natural-gas prices, already boosted by the pandemic recovery and a lack of fuel in storage caverns and tanks, hit all-time highs. Thermal coal, long shunned for its carbon emissions, has emerged from a long price slump as utilities are forced to turn on backup power sources.
The episode underscored the precarious state the region’s energy markets......."


			https://www.wsj.coim/articles/energy-prices-in-europe-hit-records-after-wind-stops-blowing-11631528258
		



Brilliant ideas from Democrats.

Kinda goes with Biden, huh?


----------



## Unkotare

Isn't green energy what made the Hulk?


----------



## elektra

There is no such thing as Green Energy


----------



## PoliticalChic

elektra said:


> There is no such thing as Green Energy


----------



## Ringo

The candidate for Chancellor of Germany from the green party of Annalena Berbak accused Russia that it "is manipulating the price of gas", delaying gas supply.
It is surprising that it was the "greens" who most of all screamed that Russia's share in the European gas market is too large and it needs to be reduced.  Bingo!


----------



## Dekster

Oh we will never be 100% green energy in our lifetimes.  Some of the technology though is worth embracing as the costs come down.  If a farmer can get $2500 an acre per year with annual inflation adjustments to rent some of his land to a solar company or a a battery farm and keep the land in the family he should do it whether he believes in climate change or not.  It is just good business sense since renting that land to another farmer might fetch 1/10th of that (using my state's numbers).  That's $50K a year in revenue per 20 acres for doing nothing plus they pay the real estate taxes.  It basically pays for the land.


----------



## Old Rocks

Dekster said:


> Oh we will never be 100% green energy in our lifetimes.  Some of the technology though is worth embracing as the costs come down.  If a farmer can get $2500 an acre per year with annual inflation adjustments to rent some of his land to a solar company or a a battery farm and keep the land in the family he should do it whether he believes in climate change or not.  It is just good business sense since renting that land to another farmer might fetch 1/10th of that (using my state's numbers).  That's $50K a year in revenue per 20 acres for doing nothing plus they pay the real estate taxes.  It basically pays for the land.


Actually, there is a better way that increase his yield, decreases his water use, and gives him a year round income.


----------



## elektra

Old Crock is an idiot and the entire Green Clean Renewable energy movement is full of nuts. Now we will study growing food in the shade? Green nut jobs will attempt to convince us through propaganda that they can increase crop yields by growing in the shade? 

Of course, they will hide the fact that the increased yield will not be a comparison of normal farming but a comparison of farming in the shade with the panels three feet from the ground vs ten feet from the ground. 

But like all things green and clean, it is all lies and will hurt the world more than it will help. Farmers will be encouraged to ruin valuable farm land for a modest subsidy for solar.


----------



## Mindful




----------



## PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic said:


> Liberals.....one great idea after another.
> 
> Now....about wind power................
> 
> "Energy Prices in Europe Hit Records After Wind Stops Blowing​Heavy reliance on wind power, coupled with a shortage of natural gas, has led to a spike in energy prices​Natural gas and electricity markets were already surging in Europe when a fresh catalyst emerged: The wind in the stormy North Sea stopped blowing.
> 
> The sudden slowdown in wind-driven electricity production off the coast of the U.K. in recent weeks whipsawed through regional energy markets. Gas and coal-fired electricity plants were called in to make up the shortfall from wind.
> 
> Natural-gas prices, already boosted by the pandemic recovery and a lack of fuel in storage caverns and tanks, hit all-time highs. Thermal coal, long shunned for its carbon emissions, has emerged from a long price slump as utilities are forced to turn on backup power sources.
> The episode underscored the precarious state the region’s energy markets......."
> 
> 
> https://www.wsj.coim/articles/energy-prices-in-europe-hit-records-after-wind-stops-blowing-11631528258
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brilliant ideas from Democrats.
> 
> Kinda goes with Biden, huh?


----------



## PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic said:


> What can President Obama do about the use of petroleum, natural gas and coal, and their replacement with alternative forms of energy?
> 
> What are the choices for replacing these resources?  Hydropower? No, it floods lands.  Biomass? Nope, burns wood and  produces waste. Ethanol uses food crops.
> Heres what is left: geothermal, solar and wind.
> 
> If all the current and planned geothermal plants make it to production we would double geothermal energy production all the way up to two thirds of one percent of Americas usage!
> 
> The total amount of energy produced by all of the solar energy collection equipment produced since 1974 is about 0.8% of Americas energy use.
> 
> The combined power-generating capacity of every single windmill (and there are thousands), every photovoltaic solar cell on every rooftop, and every thermal solar energy plant across America equals 0.4 percent of Americas energy consumption.
> 
> On June 29, 1979, President Obama called for a national commitment to solar energy. He set a goal of producing 20 percent of the nations energy from various solar sources by the year 2000.  Oops! Did I say President Obama? I meant President Carter, but Im sure that you can see how easy it is to make that mistake.
> 
> Read the full article at The Green Energy Dream | theTrumpet.com


----------

