More record temps

[Trakar]

Your alternative sources are heavily subsidized. Yet you don't oppose that.

Did you have a point?

Actually, I do oppose the government subsidization of any private profit-making venture; that practice undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures. I consider short-term start-up assistance to be a bit more palatable but only barely so, and would prefer that ventures do their own financing rather than progressing to the point of having their record breaking profits being underwritten by the dole of taxpayer monies.

Then you acknowledge that your alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government.

And you want to do away with coal in favor of these?

Please indicate anywhere that I indicated or implied that "alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government."

What I said is that government subsidies of private ventures designed to generate private profits "undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures."

Not making the coal industry pay the public costs of its product's environmental damages, are also demonstrative of inefficiencies and market failures.

In a free and functional market, there would be no government subsidization of any company's profits, and all participants in the market would be obligated to cover all of the the costs (private and public) of their services and products before they earn profits on those services and products.

There are multiple clean energy alternatives (including nuclear, IMO) which could be viable and competitive with fossil fuels under viable and functional free market conditions.

 

[daveman]

Actually, I do oppose the government subsidization of any private profit-making venture; that practice undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures. I consider short-term start-up assistance to be a bit more palatable but only barely so, and would prefer that ventures do their own financing rather than progressing to the point of having their record breaking profits being underwritten by the dole of taxpayer monies.

Then you acknowledge that your alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government.

And you want to do away with coal in favor of these?

Please indicate anywhere that I indicated or implied that "alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government."

What I said is that government subsidies of private ventures designed to generate private profits "undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures."

Not making the coal industry pay the public costs of its product's environmental damages, are also demonstrative of inefficiencies and market failures.

In a free and functional market, there would be no government subsidization of any company's profits, and all participants in the market would be obligated to cover all of the the costs (private and public) of their services and products before they earn profits on those services and products.

There are multiple clean energy alternatives (including nuclear, IMO) which could be viable and competitive with fossil fuels under viable and functional free market conditions.

If alternative sources could stand on their own, they would.

But they can't. They have to be propped up with tax dollars.

Do you dispute this?

 

[gslack]

Actually, I do oppose the government subsidization of any private profit-making venture; that practice undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures. I consider short-term start-up assistance to be a bit more palatable but only barely so, and would prefer that ventures do their own financing rather than progressing to the point of having their record breaking profits being underwritten by the dole of taxpayer monies.

Then you acknowledge that your alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government.

And you want to do away with coal in favor of these?

Please indicate anywhere that I indicated or implied that "alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government."

What I said is that government subsidies of private ventures designed to generate private profits "undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures."

Not making the coal industry pay the public costs of its product's environmental damages, are also demonstrative of inefficiencies and market failures.

In a free and functional market, there would be no government subsidization of any company's profits, and all participants in the market would be obligated to cover all of the the costs (private and public) of their services and products before they earn profits on those services and products.

There are multiple clean energy alternatives (including nuclear, IMO) which could be viable and competitive with fossil fuels under viable and functional free market conditions.

LOL everytime you get called on being a bullshitter you try this... You ask people to point to where you said or did this or that, or what part or where in something they do not get or you were wrong. When they do that you either ignore the post altogether or you keep on talking like they didn't do it...

You are now officially ridiculous and a posturing idiot...

 

[Chris]

Record Events for Mon Aug 15, 2011 through Sun Aug 21, 2011
Total Records: 1841
Rainfall: 486
High Temperatures: 581
Low Temperatures: 93
Lowest Max Temperatures: 79
Highest Min Temperatures: 602

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View

 

[skookerasbil]

Record Events for Mon Aug 15, 2011 through Sun Aug 21, 2011
Total Records: 1841
Rainfall: 486
High Temperatures: 581
Low Temperatures: 93
Lowest Max Temperatures: 79
Highest Min Temperatures: 602

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View

Keep teeing it up for me s0n....................

 

[Old Rocks]

Then you acknowledge that your alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government.

And you want to do away with coal in favor of these?

Please indicate anywhere that I indicated or implied that "alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government."

What I said is that government subsidies of private ventures designed to generate private profits "undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures."

Not making the coal industry pay the public costs of its product's environmental damages, are also demonstrative of inefficiencies and market failures.

In a free and functional market, there would be no government subsidization of any company's profits, and all participants in the market would be obligated to cover all of the the costs (private and public) of their services and products before they earn profits on those services and products.

There are multiple clean energy alternatives (including nuclear, IMO) which could be viable and competitive with fossil fuels under viable and functional free market conditions.

If alternative sources could stand on their own, they would.

But they can't. They have to be propped up with tax dollars.

Do you dispute this?

And why are we subsidizing oil and coal to the tune of billions of dollars?

And, yes, I dispute that contention. Wind is already cheaper than dirty coal, even when there are no penelties on the coal for the evironmental damage associated with the mining and burning of coal.

Solar will soon be cheaper than coal as well. Geothermal, the same. As world wide demand for oil rises, electrical vehicles, hybrid and pure, will become more and more economically feasable. Especially for those individuals that are producing their own power.

Fossil fuels are where the horse was in 1910. Still in use, but the future is pretty clear.

 

[daveman]

Please indicate anywhere that I indicated or implied that "alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government."

What I said is that government subsidies of private ventures designed to generate private profits "undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures."

Not making the coal industry pay the public costs of its product's environmental damages, are also demonstrative of inefficiencies and market failures.

In a free and functional market, there would be no government subsidization of any company's profits, and all participants in the market would be obligated to cover all of the the costs (private and public) of their services and products before they earn profits on those services and products.

There are multiple clean energy alternatives (including nuclear, IMO) which could be viable and competitive with fossil fuels under viable and functional free market conditions.

If alternative sources could stand on their own, they would.

But they can't. They have to be propped up with tax dollars.

Do you dispute this?

And why are we subsidizing oil and coal to the tune of billions of dollars?

And, yes, I dispute that contention. Wind is already cheaper than dirty coal, even when there are no penelties on the coal for the evironmental damage associated with the mining and burning of coal.

Solar will soon be cheaper than coal as well. Geothermal, the same. As world wide demand for oil rises, electrical vehicles, hybrid and pure, will become more and more economically feasable. Especially for those individuals that are producing their own power.

Fossil fuels are where the horse was in 1910. Still in use, but the future is pretty clear.

Then you dispute reality.

Good luck getting your alternative sources to replace half the power generated in this nation.

 

[Old Rocks]

At present, alternative energy is 48% of new generation being added. And that is almost all wind. As solar and geothermal come into play, that percentage will increase very rapidly.

From 1999 to 2010, an increase in generating capacity for wind from 2 GW to over 40 GW. And rapidly increasing as we post.

 

[gslack]

Please indicate anywhere that I indicated or implied that "alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government."

What I said is that government subsidies of private ventures designed to generate private profits "undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures."

Not making the coal industry pay the public costs of its product's environmental damages, are also demonstrative of inefficiencies and market failures.

In a free and functional market, there would be no government subsidization of any company's profits, and all participants in the market would be obligated to cover all of the the costs (private and public) of their services and products before they earn profits on those services and products.

There are multiple clean energy alternatives (including nuclear, IMO) which could be viable and competitive with fossil fuels under viable and functional free market conditions.

If alternative sources could stand on their own, they would.

But they can't. They have to be propped up with tax dollars.

Do you dispute this?

And why are we subsidizing oil and coal to the tune of billions of dollars?

And, yes, I dispute that contention. Wind is already cheaper than dirty coal, even when there are no penelties on the coal for the evironmental damage associated with the mining and burning of coal.

Solar will soon be cheaper than coal as well. Geothermal, the same. As world wide demand for oil rises, electrical vehicles, hybrid and pure, will become more and more economically feasable. Especially for those individuals that are producing their own power.

Fossil fuels are where the horse was in 1910. Still in use, but the future is pretty clear.

Coal subsidizing is done so to compensate coal industries who have coal to use, have access to coal to mine and produce but do not do so to allow for those alternative fuel sources you cry for...

You know this just as well as I do. Now stop being a buffoon about it. You can't pull this shit as yourself or your alter-egos, so get over it.

Africa has a massive amount of coal they are paid NOT to use by the UN's World Bank. You freaking idiotic algorians beg for alternative fuel sources and a fair chance for them to work, forcing the subsidization of coal and then have the unmitigated Gaul to try and point to coal subsidies as a cost prohibitive for coal use....

You people have no shame at all.....

 

[Old Rocks]

The coal industry should and must be shut down, period. The environmental damage, and the damage to the health of the citizens of this nation mandate that. All the value of that industry should now go to ameliorating the damage that it has done in this nation.

Coals time is done.

 

[gslack]

The coal industry should and must be shut down, period. The environmental damage, and the damage to the health of the citizens of this nation mandate that. All the value of that industry should now go to ameliorating the damage that it has done in this nation.

Coals time is done.

Careful GreenPeace, you let your agenda show again...

Okay then lets stop subsidizing coal then and let them make as much of it as they want and lets see how well your BS alternatives do shall we?

 

[Chris]

Record Events for Wed Aug 17, 2011 through Tue Aug 23, 2011
Total Records: 1862
Rainfall: 343
High Temperatures: 665
Low Temperatures: 53
Lowest Max Temperatures: 44
Highest Min Temperatures: 757

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View

 

[daveman]

The coal industry should and must be shut down, period. The environmental damage, and the damage to the health of the citizens of this nation mandate that. All the value of that industry should now go to ameliorating the damage that it has done in this nation.

Coals time is done.

Go to your breaker box and turn off every other one.

There. Your house represents the United States. The breakers you shut off represent the half of our power that comes from coal. Now turn on a Mini Maglite. That AA-powered flashlight represents alternative sources.

Now, try to continue your life that way.

Remember: You want that for the entire nation.

When are you going to get it through your thick skull that your alternative sources simply can't replace coal?

History suggests "never".

 

[Chris]

Record Events for Fri Aug 19, 2011 through Thu Aug 25, 2011
Total Records: 2692
Rainfall: 426
High Temperatures: 1145
Low Temperatures: 28
Lowest Max Temperatures: 52
Highest Min Temperatures: 1041

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View

 

[FactFinder]

More record temps

Damn glad I don't live in one of those places. Wher are those places anyways?

Oh yeah, the elusive ones where GW is present. Good thing it is not a global phenomena.

 

[Old Rocks]

UAH Global Temperature Update July, 2011: +0.37 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

And the Arctic Ice minimum for 2011 is now in second place to that of 2007. And may well be lower than that of 2007 in a couple of weeks.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.arctic.png

 

[Chris]

Record Events for Sat Aug 20, 2011 through Fri Aug 26, 2011

High Temperatures: 1208
Low Temperatures: 27
Lowest Max Temperatures: 50
Highest Min Temperatures: 1112

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View

 

[Wicked Jester]

More record temps

Damn glad I don't live in one of those places. Wher are those places anyways?

Oh yeah, the elusive ones where GW is present. Good thing it is not a global phenomena.

It's called summer time.

 

[Trakar]

Your house represents the United States. The breakers you shut off represent the half of our power that comes from coal. Now turn on a Mini Maglite. That AA-powered flashlight represents alternative sources.

Now, try to continue your life that way....

Seriously? All the breakers for your house represent coal powered electrical generation and a AA flashlight represents alternative sources?

As I look at the Electric Power Monthly - Table 1.1. Net Generation by Energy Source it looks like coal provides 45% of the electricity in the US annually, while alternative, non-carbon emitting sources (nuclear, hydro, Wind, solar, geothermal, etc.,) provide 30% of the electricity in the US. If you could power your whole house with a handful of AA batteries, why do you need breakers?

 

[Trakar]

Then you acknowledge that your alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government.

And you want to do away with coal in favor of these?

Please indicate anywhere that I indicated or implied that "alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government."

What I said is that government subsidies of private ventures designed to generate private profits "undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures."

Not making the coal industry pay the public costs of its product's environmental damages, are also demonstrative of inefficiencies and market failures.

In a free and functional market, there would be no government subsidization of any company's profits, and all participants in the market would be obligated to cover all of the the costs (private and public) of their services and products before they earn profits on those services and products.

There are multiple clean energy alternatives (including nuclear, IMO) which could be viable and competitive with fossil fuels under viable and functional free market conditions.

If alternative sources could stand on their own, they would.

But they can't. They have to be propped up with tax dollars.

Do you dispute this?

What I dispute is the fact that we don't know if they can compete in a level market situation due to government subsidies for existent coal and oil energy systems. I believe that all systems should be made to compete equally within the market place. I don't think any profit making enterprise should be entitled to tax-payer subsidies. Either you believe in free markets with even handed regulation, or you don't.