Exxon accurately predicted GW in the 70s but kept casting doubt for decades

[Dagosa]

Your question is immaterial.

And there's more evidence you're a moron.

So, you now deny that both fossil fuels and solar cells can be compared in efficiency by the net production in KWH of electricity of each ?

 

[Dagosa]

Yeah, Dagosa is a moron.

You can’t seem to answer any questions yourself.
So, do know what a kWh is ?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Just burning wood produces without processing it from any bio mass is much less efficient. The managed trees use for other uses easily converts more CO2 to 02 then the processed wood by products produce CO2 when burning.
That’s why the EPA has declared pellet burning stoves as carbon neutral from bio mass

Just burning wood produces without processing it from any bio mass is much less efficient.

Shipping wood across the Atlantic to achieve a "green" target is inefficient, expensive and stupid.

Show how wood byproducts left on the ground would release more CO2 than burning it.

Use your best stoichiometry.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You are embarrassing yourself with your low IQ trolling

He has a very low IQ.
What is the proper way to troll him?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So, you now deny that both fossil fuels and solar cells can be compared in efficiency by the net production in KWH of electricity of each ?

If you want to claim they are "cheaper, more available and more reliable then any fossil fuel or nuclear power plant", you should be able to discuss nameplate capacity versus actual output.

 

[Dagosa]

Shipping wood across the Atlantic to achieve a "green" target is inefficient, expensive and stupid.

So now you’re just making up shit ?
Biomass use for electric generation is obviously used in states with high natural wood content.

Show how wood byproducts left on the ground would release more CO2 then burning it.

Burning it as processed fuel from a managed tree source, dufus, not just burning it The EPA has already approved it

 

[Dagosa]

If you want to claim they are "cheaper, more available and more reliable then any fossil fuel or nuclear power plant", you should be able to discuss nameplate capacity versus actual output.

Answer the question. Are both fossil fuels and solar energy used to produced electric ? Yes or no.

 

[Billy_Bob]

WattsUpWithThat

WattsUpWithThat

WattsUpWithThat


WattsUpWithThat

WattsUpWithThat

WattsUpWithThat

The Guardian

WattsUpWithThat

Impressive sources

Attacking the persons and not what science they present... How not original... You call sources inadequate simply due to where they are published. Is your position so weak you must belittle where they are published? Come on Crick, put on your big boy underwear and lose the panties... Time to grow up.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So now you’re just making up shit ?
Biomass use for electric generation is obviously used in states with high natural wood content.

Burning it as processed fuel from a managed tree source, dufus, not just burning it The EPA has already approved it

So now you’re just making up shit ?

No. It's actually inefficient, expensive and stupid.

Burning it as processed fuel from a managed tree source

Show how burning it as processed fuel from a managed tree source would release less CO2 then leaving it on the ground .

Use your best stoichiometry.

 

[Dagosa]

Your question is immaterial.

And there's more evidence you're a moron.

And you’re incapable of asking a question correctly.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Guy, that’s not where the vast majority of renewables come from. Now, it’s only carbon neutral renewable if you burn wood byproducts that if left on the ground would release more co2 then burning it.
. That’s saw dust and wood chips and using pellet stoves. So the only reasonable way to be carbon neutral is to burn blowdowns

hilarious denial on your part. There is more energy hitting earth from the sun in the form of photons in an hour then is needed by the entire earth for a year. It’s free, no moving parts to convert it to electricity. Not only that, but the break even point with fossil fuel was passed a few years back and it’s CHEAPER per btu. So really you’re FOS when it comes to these renewables.

You keep making false claims and spinning them when you get caught in an outright lie.

Everything on this planet is renewable. It might take a million or so years, but everything will renew. Moron..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Answer the question. Are both fossil fuels and solar energy used to produced electric ? Yes or no.

Are both fossil fuels and solar energy used to produced electric ?

Yes. Obviously.

Now what is the nameplate capacity versus actual output for solar?

 

[Billy_Bob]

It’s too bad so much real science disagrees with you. There are no science related fields in any gov, university or related corporation that agrees with you. Solar energy is cheaper, more available and more reliable then any fossil fuel or nuclear power plant. It’s technology is in its infancy and it’s already cheaper and inexhaustible.

Another worthless appeal to authorities... While having no clue about how it works or why. The term 'useful idiot' applies to you...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So the attention begging right wing troll doesn't understand a proclamation scientists made.

That must be because the scientists are stupid. But not because the attention begging right wing troll doesn't know what he is talking about.

Gotta be.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And you’re incapable of asking a question correctly.

There is no question, you're a moron.

 

[Dagosa]

Show how burning it as processed fuel from a managed tree source would release less CO2 then leaving it on the ground .

Did already. The EPA approves it. You obviously xont know shit about an a stable program. “Managed tree growth” means replanting the trees which then process CO2 into O2 dufus. It’s not just comparing rotting wood methane to CO2 during combustion. This is getting over your head isn’t it. Hilarious.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Here it is, wood burning in the form of pellets from wood byproducts from Yale.

Carbon Loophole: Why Is Wood Burning Counted as Green Energy?

A loophole in carbon-accounting rules is spurring a boom in burning wood pellets in European power plants. The result has been a surge in logging, particularly in the U.S. South, and new doubts about whether Europe can meet its commitments under the Paris accord.

e360.yale.edu

Did you even read your link?

In September, some 200 scientists wrote to the EU insisting that “bioenergy [from forest biomass] is not carbon-neutral” and calling for tighter rules to protect forests and their carbon.

DURR

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Did already. The EPA approves it. You obviously xont know shit about an a stable program. “Managed tree growth” means replanting the trees which then process CO2 into O2 dufus. It’s not just comparing rotting wood methane to CO2 during combustion. This is getting over your head isn’t it. Hilarious.

Did already.

In what post?

The EPA approves it.

Did their "approval" support your math? Post it.

“Managed tree growth” means replanting the trees which then process CO2 into O2 dufus.

So what? Twat.

This is getting over your head isn’t it. Hilarious.

Yes, your inablity to support your claim is hilarious.

 

[Dagosa]

What's solar nameplate capacity versus actual output?

That’s hilarious. You really don’t know what your asking. That’s the rating under ideal conditions. its just a temporary operational measure. No plant operates under ideal conditions. Long term kWh is the only valid way to compare. Solar energy is cheaper then fossil fuels, nuclear energy etc.

Did already.

In what post?

The EPA approves it.

Did their "approval" support your math? Post it.

“Managed tree growth” means replanting the trees which then process CO2 into O2 dufus.

So what? Twat.

This is getting over your head isn’t it. Hilarious.

Yes, your inablity to support your claim is hilarious.

Your inability to know anything about the topic is hilarious.

 

[Dagosa]

Another worthless appeal to authorities... While having no clue about how it works or why. The term 'useful idiot' applies to you...

And you don’t ? Hilarious.
The difference is your authority is composed of few nut jobs, while ours is what ? Every university in the world. You like depending upon the stupid few in favor of the educated many.