10/2020: Solar is now ‘Cheapest Electricity in History’, confirms IEA

[Stann]

And what does oil do when used for fuel?

Stupid question again ! The days of wasting energy resources is over. We need to conserve some of the fossil fuels for future generations or burn them all up and destroy the planet completely. Good bye.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Stupid question again ! The days of wasting energy resources is over. We need to conserve some of the fossil fuels for future generations or burn them all up and destroy the planet completely. Good bye.

I heard that same speech back when Jimmy "the peanut" Carter had his odd and even days, that oil was going to run out in 10 years if nothing was done. Of course Jimmy lied, and we are sitting on more energy for the next 1000 years, but idiots like you dont want to have it because then people will be happy with cheap energy, and i know Marxists/Demofascists hate happy people, because everyone is supposed to be equal, equally poor and equally miserable...

 

[Stann]

I heard that same speech back when Jimmy "the peanut" Carter had his odd and even days, that oil was going to run out in 10 years if nothing was done. Of course Jimmy lied, and we are sitting on more energy for the next 1000 years, but idiots like you dont want to have it because then people will be happy with cheap energy, and i know Marxists/Demofascists hate happy people, because everyone is supposed to be equal, equally poor and equally miserable...

Actually they thought oil would last 100 years more back then. The oil clock countdown is ticking and with China and India now using more oil than we are the price is higher and the availability is dwindling now it's only 28 years away in 2052. Long before that time oil will become too expensive to use like we're using it today ,if it's even legal to burn it.

 

[jc456]

Nothing says kismet more than a solar field being taken out by a storm they are supposed to eliminate!! Hahaha

Solar farm pelted by giant hail as severe storm ripped through Nebraska

The 4.375 MWac solar farm was damaged June 23 by the same storm cell that tore through a Wyoming coal mine, leaving eight people injured.

www.renewableenergyworld.com

 

[Stann]

Nothing says kismet more than a solar field being taken out by a storm they are supposed to eliminate!! Hahaha

Solar farm pelted by giant hail as severe storm ripped through Nebraska

The 4.375 MWac solar farm was damaged June 23 by the same storm cell that tore through a Wyoming coal mine, leaving eight people injured.

www.renewableenergyworld.com

No kismet involved .The solar fields didn't cause that , the overuse of fossil fuels 20 years ago
Lead to the event. Yes , the effects aren't immediate. The evacuation of the barrier islands in Florida that's already occurring are a response to a time when we were using 1/ 3rd. the amount of fossil fuels than we are today. So much worst events will be coming out way until 20 years after we start reducing fossil fuels.consumption ( based on the world's usage , not just US ) . We will eventually learn but it's going to cost us even more than we could imagine. Once you set a firestorm in motion it's hard to put it out.

 

[Crick]

Stann is caught in a corner, a stupid corner

No he is not. Everyone watching this conversation has seen you dodge and weave and duck and lie. Don't you have any self respect?

 

[elektra]

I' m sure you could access the information if Pitiful Me can do it. You just choose to be ignorant. Home | U.S. Senate Committee On The Budget>press-Senator Whitehouse " We are subsidizing the fossil fuel industries. " In 2022 they hit a new high of 1 trillion dollars. The same year Big Oil made a record 4 trillion income.

???????

Your link does not say anything about Big Oil

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Actually they thought oil would last 100 years more back then. The oil clock countdown is ticking and with China and India now using more oil than we are the price is higher and the availability is dwindling now it's only 28 years away in 2052. Long before that time oil will become too expensive to use like we're using it today ,if it's even legal to burn it.

we are both wrong, it was 35 years predicted and we still have more energy to develop.

In 1977 Jimmy Carter Said We Should Have Run Out of Oil by Now • Gary DeMar

Like today’s Climate Change prognosticators, Jimmy Carter, using the science of his day in 1977, claimed that in 35 years the world would run out of oil.

garydemar.com

 

[Crick]

FOR POSTER ELEKTRA

What's the carbon footprint of a wind turbine? » Yale Climate Connections

Wind energy is remarkably climate-friendly.

yaleclimateconnections.org

Since you were unwilling to put your money where your mouth was, I've once again been forced to do it for you. Try to remember this one, eh.

This chart shows how much carbon dioxide, per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated, can be attributed to a wind turbine during its life from cradle to grave. If you’re wondering about those awkward-sounding “grams of carbon dioxide-equivalent,” or “CO2-eq,” that’s simply a unit that includes both carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases, such as methane.

You can see that the results vary by country, size of turbine, and onshore versus offshore configuration, but all fall within a range of about five to 26 grams of CO2-equivalent per kilowatt-hour.

To put those numbers in context, consider the two major fossil-fuel sources of electricity in the United States: natural gas and coal. Power plants that burn natural gas are responsible for 437 to 758 grams of CO2-equivalent per kilowatt-hour — far more than even the most carbon-intensive wind turbine listed above. Coal-fired power plants fare even more poorly in comparison to wind, with estimates ranging from 675 to 1,689 grams of CO2 per kilowatt-hour, depending on the exact technology in question.

There’s another crucial difference between fossil fuels and wind turbines. A coal or natural gas plant burns fuel — and releases carbon dioxide — every moment that it runs. By contrast, most of the carbon pollution generated during a wind turbine’s life occurs during manufacturing. Once it’s up and spinning, the turbine generates close to zero pollution.

What’s more, wind turbines often displace older, dirtier sources that supply power to the electricity grid. For example, after a new wind farm connects to the grid, the grid operator may be able to meet electricity demand without firing up a decades-old, highly polluting coal plant. The result? A cleaner, more climate-friendly electricity grid.

In fact, it’s possible to calculate a carbon “payback” time for a wind turbine: the length of time it takes a turbine to produce enough clean electricity to make up for the carbon pollution generated during manufacture. One study put that payback time at seven months — not bad considering the typical 20- to 25-year lifespan of a wind turbine. Bottom line: Wind turbines are far from a joke. For the climate, they’re a deal too good to pass up.

 

[Stann]

we are both wrong, it was 35 years predicted and we still have more energy to develop.

In 1977 Jimmy Carter Said We Should Have Run Out of Oil by Now • Gary DeMar

Like today’s Climate Change prognosticators, Jimmy Carter, using the science of his day in 1977, claimed that in 35 years the world would run out of oil.

garydemar.com

I never looked at the article. I simply asked the computer the question when Jimmie Carter was president how long did they say oil supplies would last before being gone forever. It said 100 years and have the update expected end date of 2052 based on current usage. Usage has kept increasing so I expect that it will happen sooner. 98 % of the planet, oceans and land surface that are know to be oil areas have been searched. That's only 15 % of the planet. Do there could be more reserves not yet explored but it's unlikely. When it's gone it will be gone for good.

 

[Stann]

???????

Your link does not say anything about Big Oil

Did you get to the real story about the senator and the subsidies to Big Oil ?

I heard that same speech back when Jimmy "the peanut" Carter had his odd and even days, that oil was going to run out in 10 years if nothing was done. Of course Jimmy lied, and we are sitting on more energy for the next 1000 years, but idiots like you dont want to have it because then people will be happy with cheap energy, and i know Marxists/Demofascists hate happy people, because everyone is supposed to be equal, equally poor and equally miserable...

Why in earth do you think all of the big three auto companies are going to stop making gasoline vehicles so soon. It won't be feasible to run vehicles in gasoline anymore. It will be cost prohibitive long before 2052.

 

[Crick]

Why in earth do you think all of the big three auto companies are going to stop making gasoline vehicles so soon. It won't be feasible to run vehicles in gasoline anymore. It will be cost prohibitive long before 2052.

And Mercedes and Volkswagen and Volvo and Nissan and Toyota and a half dozen Chinese car companies we've never heard of.

 

[Crick]

And Mercedes and Volkswagen and Volvo and Nissan and Toyota and a half dozen Chinese car companies we've never heard of.

Stann, why the thumbs down on post #489 above?

 

[Stann]

Stann, why the thumbs down on post #489 above?

Overtired , worked all night. About to go to sleep. My bad , I corrected it. Goodnight.

 

[Crick]

Overtired , worked all night. About to go to sleep. My bad , I corrected it. Goodnight.

Night.

 

[elektra]

Did you get to the real story about the senator and the subsidies to Big Oil ?

Why in earth do you think all of the big three auto companies are going to stop making gasoline vehicles so soon. It won't be feasible to run vehicles in gasoline anymore. It will be cost prohibitive long before 2052.

You are delusional, your link said nothing about subsidies going to big oil. I guess you are new here, cause the subsidy idea has long been proved as a lie.

 

[elektra]

FOR POSTER ELEKTRA

What's the carbon footprint of a wind turbine? » Yale Climate Connections

Wind energy is remarkably climate-friendly.

yaleclimateconnections.org

Since you were unwilling to put your money where your mouth was, I've once again been forced to do it for you. Try to remember this one, eh.

View attachment 880762
This chart shows how much carbon dioxide, per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated, can be attributed to a wind turbine during its life from cradle to grave. If you’re wondering about those awkward-sounding “grams of carbon dioxide-equivalent,” or “CO2-eq,” that’s simply a unit that includes both carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases, such as methane.

You can see that the results vary by country, size of turbine, and onshore versus offshore configuration, but all fall within a range of about five to 26 grams of CO2-equivalent per kilowatt-hour.

To put those numbers in context, consider the two major fossil-fuel sources of electricity in the United States: natural gas and coal. Power plants that burn natural gas are responsible for 437 to 758 grams of CO2-equivalent per kilowatt-hour — far more than even the most carbon-intensive wind turbine listed above. Coal-fired power plants fare even more poorly in comparison to wind, with estimates ranging from 675 to 1,689 grams of CO2 per kilowatt-hour, depending on the exact technology in question.

There’s another crucial difference between fossil fuels and wind turbines. A coal or natural gas plant burns fuel — and releases carbon dioxide — every moment that it runs. By contrast, most of the carbon pollution generated during a wind turbine’s life occurs during manufacturing. Once it’s up and spinning, the turbine generates close to zero pollution.

What’s more, wind turbines often displace older, dirtier sources that supply power to the electricity grid. For example, after a new wind farm connects to the grid, the grid operator may be able to meet electricity demand without firing up a decades-old, highly polluting coal plant. The result? A cleaner, more climate-friendly electricity grid.

In fact, it’s possible to calculate a carbon “payback” time for a wind turbine: the length of time it takes a turbine to produce enough clean electricity to make up for the carbon pollution generated during manufacture. One study put that payback time at seven months — not bad considering the typical 20- to 25-year lifespan of a wind turbine. Bottom line: Wind turbines are far from a joke. For the climate, they’re a deal too good to pass up.

coward, I asked and you refused to answer, you refuse to actually talk about co2 per turbine being manufactured.

Crick is a dirty filthy maggot liar, not even honest enough to reply to my comment, which would of notified me when crick posted. Crick is such a low life belly crawling worm that crick would not even tag me low life scum.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I never looked at the article. I simply asked the computer the question when Jimmie Carter was president how long did they say oil supplies would last before being gone forever. It said 100 years and have the update expected end date of 2052 based on current usage. Usage has kept increasing so I expect that it will happen sooner. 98 % of the planet, oceans and land surface that are know to be oil areas have been searched. That's only 15 % of the planet. Do there could be more reserves not yet explored but it's unlikely. When it's gone it will be gone for good.

So if energy is going to run out soon, does allowing millions of Illegals (who drive old gas guzzlers) into this country, help or hurt the cause?

 

[elektra]

FOR POSTER ELEKTRA

What's the carbon footprint of a wind turbine? » Yale Climate Connections

Wind energy is remarkably climate-friendly.

yaleclimateconnections.org

Since you were unwilling to put your money where your mouth was, I've once again been forced to do it for you. Try to remember this one, eh.

View attachment 880762

hahahahah, Science? Bull Shit! Carbon footprint? Last I checked it CO2, not carbon? The author of this editorial does not know the difference between elements and compounds.

Then the next glaring error is the CO2 per kwh, it is all over the board! The amount of CO2 should almost, exactly the same for each wind turbine, each country, each year, not wildly different.

The chart is meaningless, is it carbon or CO2, the author makes no distinction.
How can wind turbines produce 500% more CO2 than another?

Crick, you failed with your slobbering lies.

So, I ask a third time, how many wind turbines should we consider, being built on a daily basis, so that we can come up with how much CO2 is emitted everyday.

I say 25 a day, which is world wide estimate based on the amount of wind turbines installed

 

[elektra]

So if energy is going to run out soon, does allowing millions of Illegals (who drive old gas guzzlers) into this country, help or hurt the cause?

or, how does using more energy from fossil fuels to build giant inefficient wind turbines and solar panels, save energy?

It does not, you can not use fossil fuels building solar and wind, which are technically gas guzzlers, and save energy