# On May 8th, Germany had so much renewable energy...



## NYcarbineer

...it had to pay people to use electricity.

*"On Sunday, May 8, Germany hit a new high in renewable energy generation. Thanks to a sunny and windy day, at one point around 1pm the country’s solar, wind, hydro and biomass plants were supplying about 55 GW of the 63 GW being consumed, or 87%.

Power prices actually went negative for several hours, meaning commercial customers were being paid to consume electricity."
*
While conservatives stonewall progress in this country, with lame excuses, nitpicking imperfections, and simply lying,

 the rest of the world is moving ahead.

Germany had so much renewable energy on Sunday that it had to pay people to use electricity


----------



## martybegan

Now if you could only get a 24 hour sunny day with 20 MPH winds, everything would be unicorn farts and pixie queefs.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

One day huh?
So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?


----------



## martybegan

HereWeGoAgain said:


> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?



Actually it was "around 1PM" on one day.


----------



## NYcarbineer

martybegan said:


> Now if you could only get a 24 hour sunny day with 20 MPH winds, everything would be unicorn farts and pixie queefs.



See what I mean?


----------



## NYcarbineer

HereWeGoAgain said:


> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?



Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.

What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?


----------



## Muhammed

NYcarbineer said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
Click to expand...


I challenge you to name a few people who oppose renewable energy development.


----------



## NYcarbineer

Muhammed said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I challenge you to name a few people who oppose renewable energy development.
Click to expand...


The snarky folks in this thread.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

NYcarbineer said:


> ...it had to pay people to use electricity.
> 
> *"On Sunday, May 8, Germany hit a new high in renewable energy generation. Thanks to a sunny and windy day, at one point around 1pm the country’s solar, wind, hydro and biomass plants were supplying about 55 GW of the 63 GW being consumed, or 87%.
> 
> Power prices actually went negative for several hours, meaning commercial customers were being paid to consume electricity."
> *
> While conservatives stonewall progress in this country, with lame excuses, nitpicking imperfections, and simply lying,
> 
> the rest of the world is moving ahead.
> 
> Germany had so much renewable energy on Sunday that it had to pay people to use electricity



Is that why their electricity rates are nearly 4 times US rates? Derp!


----------



## martybegan

NYcarbineer said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now if you could only get a 24 hour sunny day with 20 MPH winds, everything would be unicorn farts and pixie queefs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See what I mean?
Click to expand...


What stonewalling? its a critique of your making something that is a blip seem like pure awesomeness.


----------



## Muhammed

NYcarbineer said:


> Muhammed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I challenge you to name a few people who oppose renewable energy development.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The snarky folks in this thread.
Click to expand...

Bullshit.


----------



## martybegan

NYcarbineer said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
Click to expand...


it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW. 

If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.


----------



## martybegan

NYcarbineer said:


> Muhammed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I challenge you to name a few people who oppose renewable energy development.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The snarky folks in this thread.
Click to expand...


it's opposition to the false viability advocated by idiots like you, without considering things like base load.


----------



## DGS49

Germans pay THREE TIMES as much for electricity as we do in the U.S.

Average electricity prices around the world: $/kWh | OVO Energy

With their (1) ill-advised decision to abandon nuclear power, (B) unfortunate reliance on Russia for most of their natural gas, and (iii) unwillingness to consider fracking, the Germans have backed themselves into an expensive corner with respect to electricity generation.  Accordingly, they have pursued "renewable" sources with reckless abandon, as anyone driving the Autobahns and seeing the thousands of windmills and solar panel arrays can attest.

There are few countries where the population would tolerate the high cost and make the sacrifices that the Germans will endure to "go green," and the U.S. is not one of them.  Particularly when their horrific electricity rates are ENTIRELY the result of stupid decision-making.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

NYcarbineer said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
Click to expand...


   If they can do it consistently and at a reasonable cost I have no problem with it.


----------



## Old Yeller

Not yet. Payback too long. You put solar you get illegals pounding nails into your roof. Leaks, shoddy work. 20 yrs later you may near "break-even" in hot location.Then u need new panels and roof. Tile, shake, woodshingles? No way. Wind and solar kill birds cost 6X, huge footprint. Nicetry.


----------



## BULLDOG

martybegan said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
Click to expand...



If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies


----------



## BuckToothMoron

NYcarbineer said:


> ...it had to pay people to use electricity.
> 
> *"On Sunday, May 8, Germany hit a new high in renewable energy generation. Thanks to a sunny and windy day, at one point around 1pm the country’s solar, wind, hydro and biomass plants were supplying about 55 GW of the 63 GW being consumed, or 87%.
> 
> Power prices actually went negative for several hours, meaning commercial customers were being paid to consume electricity."
> *
> While conservatives stonewall progress in this country, with lame excuses, nitpicking imperfections, and simply lying,
> 
> the rest of the world is moving ahead.
> 
> Germany had so much renewable energy on Sunday that it had to pay people to use electricity



That is impressive and encouraging for the future of renewables. However it also highlights the biggest hurdle facing renewables- Storage! Too bad that couldn't save all those electrons for a rainy, dark day.


----------



## martybegan

BULLDOG said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
Click to expand...


basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.


----------



## BuckToothMoron

NYcarbineer said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now if you could only get a 24 hour sunny day with 20 MPH winds, everything would be unicorn farts and pixie queefs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See what I mean?
Click to expand...


Do you mean reality bites?


----------



## Muhammed

BULLDOG said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source.
Click to expand...

That is a very ignorant statement.


----------



## BuckToothMoron

martybegan said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
Click to expand...


Hey Marty, don't come in here with all your fancy shmancy oil and gas accounting crap. This is a feel good post about saving the planet from money hungry multinational oil giants. Why do you have to piss on it with a bunch of facts that only people in the real world care about?


----------



## NYcarbineer

BuckToothMoron said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now if you could only get a 24 hour sunny day with 20 MPH winds, everything would be unicorn farts and pixie queefs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See what I mean?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you mean reality bites?
Click to expand...


I said above that the anti-energy independence conservatives nitpick the imperfections as part of their propaganda,

and voila!  right on cue one of them chimes in.


----------



## NYcarbineer

BuckToothMoron said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...it had to pay people to use electricity.
> 
> *"On Sunday, May 8, Germany hit a new high in renewable energy generation. Thanks to a sunny and windy day, at one point around 1pm the country’s solar, wind, hydro and biomass plants were supplying about 55 GW of the 63 GW being consumed, or 87%.
> 
> Power prices actually went negative for several hours, meaning commercial customers were being paid to consume electricity."
> *
> While conservatives stonewall progress in this country, with lame excuses, nitpicking imperfections, and simply lying,
> 
> the rest of the world is moving ahead.
> 
> Germany had so much renewable energy on Sunday that it had to pay people to use electricity
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is impressive and encouraging for the future of renewables. However it also highlights the biggest hurdle facing renewables- Storage! Too bad that couldn't save all those electrons for a rainy, dark day.
Click to expand...


That's why you run a mix of energy sources.


----------



## BULLDOG

martybegan said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
Click to expand...



1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."


----------



## BULLDOG

Muhammed said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a very ignorant statement.
Click to expand...



It's a very true statement.


----------



## martybegan

BULLDOG said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
Click to expand...


So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...

Scandalous....


----------



## Muhammed

BULLDOG said:


> Muhammed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a very ignorant statement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's a very true statement.
Click to expand...

Prove it.

You need to hit the library and learn some history.


----------



## BULLDOG

martybegan said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...
> 
> Scandalous....
Click to expand...



I thought you RWNJs were against giving away federal money for no good reason.


----------



## NYcarbineer

At any given moment, there is always somewhere the wind is blowing, the sun is shining, and water is flowing.

All produce energy, and always will.  Why people want to discourage using that energy and would rather drill 2 miles deep in the ocean in a desperate attempt to find more oil is anyone's guess.


----------



## NYcarbineer

BULLDOG said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...
> 
> Scandalous....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you RWNJs were against giving away federal money for no good reason.
Click to expand...


The most amount of money they've given away is the money gone to protect the oil market in the Middle East.


----------



## martybegan

BULLDOG said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...
> 
> Scandalous....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you RWNJs were against giving away federal money for no good reason.
Click to expand...


Allowing tax deductions is not giving away money. giving away money is giving away money (i.e. a payout).


----------



## martybegan

NYcarbineer said:


> At any given moment, there is always somewhere the wind is blowing, the sun is shining, and water is flowing.
> 
> All produce energy, and always will.  Why people want to discourage using that energy and would rather drill 2 miles deep in the ocean in a desperate attempt to find more oil is anyone's guess.



When you can make the wind farms and solar arrays mobile enough to meet your above situation, then you can talk.


----------



## martybegan

NYcarbineer said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...
> 
> Scandalous....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you RWNJs were against giving away federal money for no good reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The most amount of money they've given away is the money gone to protect the oil market in the Middle East.
Click to expand...


We protect our interests there and abroad. are you advocating isolationism?


----------



## NYcarbineer

martybegan said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...
> 
> Scandalous....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you RWNJs were against giving away federal money for no good reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The most amount of money they've given away is the money gone to protect the oil market in the Middle East.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We protect our interests there and abroad. are you advocating isolationism?
Click to expand...


Yes.  I think the 2 trillion we spent on the Iraq wars for oil could have been better spent on domestic energy investment.


----------



## martybegan

NYcarbineer said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...
> 
> Scandalous....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you RWNJs were against giving away federal money for no good reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The most amount of money they've given away is the money gone to protect the oil market in the Middle East.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We protect our interests there and abroad. are you advocating isolationism?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes.  I think the 2 trillion we spent on the Iraq wars for oil could have been better spent on domestic energy investment.
Click to expand...


back to the old BOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSHHHHH lines, eh?


----------



## BULLDOG

Muhammed said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muhammed said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a very ignorant statement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It's a very true statement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> You need to hit the library and learn some history.
Click to expand...



One of us does.


----------



## BuckToothMoron

martybegan said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...
> 
> Scandalous....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you RWNJs were against giving away federal money for no good reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Allowing tax deductions is not giving away money. giving away money is giving away money (i.e. a payout).
Click to expand...


Some people have been in business, and understand accounting, some people have not and don't understand accounting, and still others understand accounting but choose to lie and twist the truth. Allowing tax deductions for a depleting asset is not a subsidy, it is in the tax code for all businesses in all industries who use depleting assets.


----------



## BULLDOG

NYcarbineer said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...
> 
> Scandalous....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you RWNJs were against giving away federal money for no good reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The most amount of money they've given away is the money gone to protect the oil market in the Middle East.
Click to expand...



There is no shortage of giveaways to oil companies in all areas.


----------



## Granny

Sounds like a terrific deal to me ... or should I say a "terrorific" deal?
Germany's Energy Poverty: How Electricity Became a Luxury Good - SPIEGEL ONLINE


----------



## BULLDOG

martybegan said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...
> 
> Scandalous....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you RWNJs were against giving away federal money for no good reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Allowing tax deductions is not giving away money. giving away money is giving away money (i.e. a payout).
Click to expand...



Don;t be silly.


----------



## martybegan

BULLDOG said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> basically you are complaining about depreciation in a specific industry. Depreciation is used in other industries as a write off as well. What the depletion allowance did was give it a quantifiable measurement for drilling and well operations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1926    Congress approves the "depletion allowance," which lets oil producers deduct more than a quarter of their gross revenues. Texas Sen. Tom Connally, who sponsored the break, later admits, "We could have taken a 5 or 10 percent figure, but we grabbed 27.5 percent because we were not only hogs but the odd figure made it appear as though it was scientifically arrived at."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So companies in the business of making money went with an offer to make more money...
> 
> Scandalous....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you RWNJs were against giving away federal money for no good reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Allowing tax deductions is not giving away money. giving away money is giving away money (i.e. a payout).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Don;t be silly.
Click to expand...


Tax deductions are only "giving away money" if you are of the belief that government owns all our money anyway, and they generously "give" some of it to us as a sign of their benevolence.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot

BULLDOG said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
Click to expand...


*If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks,*

Deducting typical business expenses isn't a tax break or subsidy.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Toddsterpatriot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks,*
> 
> Deducting typical business expenses isn't a tax break or subsidy.
Click to expand...


  Not only that the government makes more on a gallon of gas than the oil companies do.


----------



## BULLDOG

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it's opposing forcing technology that hasn't matured yet at the expense of proven technology in the name of all holy AGW.
> 
> If the technology was able to stand on its own, without subsides and at a lower cost and higher reliability then non renewable sources, most of us wouldn't have an issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks, it would have never become a viable energy source. Over the past century, the federal government has pumped more than  $470 Billion into the oil and gas industry in the form of generous, never ending tax breaks.
> There will be subsidies: A brief history of tax breaks for oil companies
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *If oil hadn't received massive tax breaks,*
> 
> Deducting typical business expenses isn't a tax break or subsidy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not only that the government makes more on a gallon of gas than the oil companies do.
Click to expand...



Link?


----------



## Old Rocks

*Well, here we go again. The 'Conservatives' either oblivious to what the technology is doing, or just plain lying to protect their ideology concerning coal and oil. 

Tesla now has grid scale batteries for sale at $250 per kw/hr, in 500 kw/hr to 10 mw/hr packages. Eos has $160 kw/hr for large orders, $200 kw/hr for smaller ones. *

*Eos Energy Storage introduces grid-scale battery system at $160/kWh*
*22 January 2015*
Eos Energy Storage announced the commercial availability of its MW-scale Aurora system for deliveries starting in 2016. Eos’s standard Aurora 1000|4000 product, a containerized 1 MW DC battery system providing four continuous hours of discharge, offers a cost-effective energy storage solution competitive with gas peaking generation and utility distribution infrastructure. The Aurora 1000|4000 will be sold at a price of $160/kWh in volume.

The Aurora product employs Eos’s patented Znyth battery technology that uses a safe aqueous electrolyte and a novel zinc-hybrid cathode to enable extremely low-cost electricity storage and long life. Eos’s grid-scale product is designed to reliably integrate renewable energy, improve grid efficiency and resiliency, and reduce costs for utilities and consumers

Green Car Congress: Eos Energy Storage introduces grid-scale battery system at $160/kWh

As expected, Musk also announced a second battery product for the grid – the PowerPack. While there appears to be little detail yet compared to the PowerWall, Musk confirmed that the PowerPack will be a 100 kWh battery that can be stacked to scale up to a gigawatt-class system. Musk said these utility and industrial-scale batteries cost $250 per kilowatt-hour — meaning the 100 kWh PowerPack is ostensibly priced at $25,000.

All you need to know about Tesla's big battery announcement

*How Can Batteries Enhance the Power Grid?*

Power demand in Texas is uneven. Because most Texans power down when they go to sleep at night, demand drops considerably, and power plants can sit idle. During the day, demand increases so greatly that its potential to outstrip capacity–resulting in the occasional power outage–is an ongoing threat. Power generation is uneven, as well, as Texas gets a growing amount of its energy from alternative sources, like solar and wind power. It’s clean and green, but unfortunately these sources can be intermittent. Sometimes the sun shines and the wind blows, and sometimes, not so much.

With their ability to store a surplus of energy and then feed it back into the grid when necessary, utility-scale batteries can solve the problems of both intermittent supply and cyclical demand. Power plants can operate on a more smoothed-out schedule of 24 hours, instead of cranking frantically in the daytime and foundering listlessly at night. Solar arrays and wind farms, such as Duke Power’s Notrees wind farm, with its 36-megawatt battery facility, can store power generated at peak weather to help ease demand on the grid even in non-ideal conditions, such as those hot summer days with nary a breeze to alleviate a jump in air-conditioning use.

One of the main supporting factors behind Oncor’s push to get batteries into the grid is that the cost for the batteries is forecast to be lower by 2018 than previously projected. Electric car manufacturer Tesla, with whom Oncor is in talks, will be producing industrial-sized batteries at its new “Gigafactory” battery production facility in Nebraska, scheduled to open in 2017. A study conducted by The Brattle Group estimates that the lower outlay of costs, along with the ability to bring in revenue by renting storage space on the batteries and a reduction in power prices, would likely result in a savings for power customers of 34 cents per month off the average bill. Consumers would benefit both from a more consistent and reliable source of energy and a small reduction in their utility expenses.

Oncor is responsible for transmitting power to most North Texas including the Dallas and Fort Worth areas.

Oncor Proposes Battery Storage for Texas Electricity Grid

*Obviously we can make wind and solar 24/7. And we can do it in a way that will cost the consumer less. In the meantime, you go ahead and chant, 'We can't do it, it is too hard'. The hell with you, we will do it because it is hard, and we are Americans. That is how we met the challenge to go to the moon.*


----------



## bripat9643

NYcarbineer said:


> ...it had to pay people to use electricity.
> 
> *"On Sunday, May 8, Germany hit a new high in renewable energy generation. Thanks to a sunny and windy day, at one point around 1pm the country’s solar, wind, hydro and biomass plants were supplying about 55 GW of the 63 GW being consumed, or 87%.
> 
> Power prices actually went negative for several hours, meaning commercial customers were being paid to consume electricity."
> *
> While conservatives stonewall progress in this country, with lame excuses, nitpicking imperfections, and simply lying,
> 
> the rest of the world is moving ahead.
> 
> Germany had so much renewable energy on Sunday that it had to pay people to use electricity



Later that night solar, wind, hydro and biomass plants were supplying were supplying 0% of the power.  Germany had to pay 300% the market rate for imported coal fired power from Poland.


----------



## bripat9643

NYcarbineer said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> One day huh?
> So what are ya gonna do about the other 364 days?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germany's at 33% average renewable energy and going higher all the time.  Let me ask you this.
> 
> What is the POINT of opposing renewable energy development?
Click to expand...


Their utility bills are 3 times what we pay.  That's the point, moron.


----------



## hauke

you have to either have a  very good storage  , to store the exess energy of extreme high days for extreme low days, or you just build a cappacity which is enough for average days,and have a grid so if theres no wind in new york the huricane in florida compensates, or the super sunny day in arizona. + maybe some facilities to convert seawater to Hydrogen and oxygen so rocketfuel gets real cheap.

these ignorant argument that you don t have sunnydays with wind in your little county is so stupid considering that the technology is available to build Continental electric Grids... oops they allready exist.


----------



## hauke

Their utility bills are 3 times what we pay.  That's the point, moron.[/QUOTE]

your utility bills don t include the Bill your paying for the global climate catastrophe, your medical bills because of your health problems from the exausts from coal, oil and gas powerplants, nor are the utilities paying for the storage of the nuclear waste in the next 1 million years... think about that


----------



## hauke

and last but not least having electricity 3x as expensive as in the USA makes German manufacturers produce machines and goods which are much more energy efficent. they use manufacturing processes which are much more energy efficent.

in fact energy in germany has been more expensive then in the USA for the last 100 years.

which is the reason that german products are hightec super efficent.

and world sellers. and why american manufacturing is so down.

because the energy is so cheap in america, american products suck. nobody wants them, they want the shiny hightech made in germany. energy efficent and great quality. plus that germany produces windenergy powerplants for export, and solarcellls, and sollar cell production technology.

why where german exporting more then they import again ?

hows the trade defficit of the USA ?


----------

