Power Plant Closures

[OnePercenter]

'Truth be told'

You're really big on three or four word bon mots I've noticed. Is that a lot of effort for you?

I questioned, you answered. Simple.

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

'Truth be told'

You're really big on three or four word bon mots I've noticed. Is that a lot of effort for you?

I questioned, you answered. Simple.

Five words! Congratulations. You're making real progress.

 

[Bfgrn]

When the price of electric power triples just wait for the environmental wackos to blame it on "corporate greed."

Power Plant Closures

Impact of EPA’s Regulatory Assault on Power Plants: New Regulations to Take More than 72 GW of Electricity Generation Offline and the Plant Closing Announcements Keep Coming…​

The Institute for Energy Research (IER), founded in 1989 from a predecessor non-profit organization registered by Charles G. Koch and Robert L. Bradley Jr., advocates positions on environmental issues including deregulation of utilities, climate change denial, and claims that conventional energy sources are virtually limitless.

It is a member of the Sustainable Development Network. The IER's President was formerly Director of Public Relations Policy at Enron

 

[elektra]

When the price of electric power triples just wait for the environmental wackos to blame it on "corporate greed."

Power Plant Closures

Impact of EPA’s Regulatory Assault on Power Plants: New Regulations to Take More than 72 GW of Electricity Generation Offline and the Plant Closing Announcements Keep Coming…​

The Institute for Energy Research (IER), founded in 1989 from a predecessor non-profit organization registered by Charles G. Koch and Robert L. Bradley Jr., advocates positions on environmental issues including deregulation of utilities, climate change denial, and claims that conventional energy sources are virtually limitless.

It is a member of the Sustainable Development Network. The IER's President was formerly Director of Public Relations Policy at Enron

Why did you not include EPRI?

 

[Bfgrn]

Too funny. We need more nuclear power plants. The improvements in nuclear plant design are nothing short of amazing. Nuclear is 24/7 production and carbon-free. Take a look at molten salt reactors:

Molten Salt Reactors

Technology revolution in nuclear power could slash costs below coal - Telegraph

THORIUM MOLTEN-SALT The Best Reactor You 8217 ve Never Heard Of Raw Science

Sadly many people will refuse to discuss clean coal burning options that presently exist simply because the fuel is coal. The same is true of nuclear. If it's not solar, wind or wave it can't be considered. Tragic that the well-meaning are so close-minded.

.

Got some beach front property in Japan for sell , cheap?


Weird how the 'free market' can't provide for nuclear without the Gov't backing it up?

It can, but government also obstructs nuclear power. Eco-Nazis like you are constantly suing to prevent the construction of nuclear power plants, thereby driving the price up to the point where it's not economical.

Nazis kill people, just like mercury and all of the hazardous air pollutants such as arsenic, cadmium and nickel spewed by burning power power plants who had 10 years to follow the law.

 

[Freewill]

I never mentioned China and Solar? Oh, you think that we only invested 36.7$ billion, my statement still stands, go read the original post and get back to me.

China does not give a hoot about Solar, China invests in Nuclear Power, over 20 reactors under construction as we speak, they also built the Heavy Industry to make the actual Reactor, a incredible feet.

Solar is pure stupidity that has failed the world, as Spain and Germany have reported.

500$ billion in 2 years with zero return.

Weird, YOU keep positing $500 billion spent in 2 years WITHOUT giving a credible source, almost like you were a Faux 'News' host or hate talk radio guy?

So you have zero idea of the cost, you have yet to offer any figure, of the total cost, what is the total cost of Solar, you are defending Solar, ranting how Solar is cheap and great, but that is a simple platitude, you have zero idea, the figure is not there, as you obviously have found out.

We are not allowed to know the costs, the Green/Renewable energy supporters do not know the costs.

Nothing but pure propane a and rubbish.

Again, you prove my point, you can not account nor grasp the costs.

Got it, only YOU know the costs, everyone else are idiots. Weird you should be able to source YOUR $500 billion figure right? lol

And you enviro nazis do not care what the costs are. In fact, the moment something new comes along, your minions are right there protesting.
You people may believe you are protesters, but you're not. You are a bunch of annoying whiners.
You people bitch and moan about everything.
Here's an example The Southern Environmental Law Center. Sounds real nice, right. They care....Or do they?
If one looks at their mission statement, there is nothing NOTHING about protecting the environment as a priority. In fact this organization prides itself on one thing, Stopping projects IT deems to be an enemy of the environment. These people have nothing better to do with themselves than run around filing lawsuits.
The interesting part is while they win a lot of battles, they end up losing most of the wars. The end result is projects are delayed costing taxpayers and investors billions. And do these people care? Hell no. They just get to add another stopped pr delayed project to their website.
The SELC is pretty much a bunch of wealthy attorneys whose job it is to make themselves even more wealthy off the misery of others.

Thanks, so ANOTHER conservative who can't provide ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history on in the US

Everything else you posit is just noise

Right wingers have myths, distortions and lies in their toolbox, nothing else!

name one that the liberals have ever been right on.

You crow about the EPA, that was Nixon, you claiming him as a liberal?

You crow about clean water. The first clean water act was Nixon, you claiming him as a liberal?

I'll just bet if it were not for Watergate you would claim him because he did something you think was good and we damn well know, according to your world view, nothing good comes from anywhere other then the DNC.

Conservatives don't want contaminated water but we do want logical environmental law based on science and not what some liberal thinks.

Here are some more from another post:

From the beginning:
Formed to end the democrat party practice of slavery, successful.
Supported EVERY equal rights act from the reformation to today, very unlike the democrat party.
Women's right to vote
Construction of the Panama Canal
Construction of the Hoover Dam
Jessie Owens wins four gold medals in the Olympics, FDR and Truman snub him Eisenhower makes him Ambassador of Sports
Jackie Robinson becomes the first black American to play in the Major Leagues
Desegregating schools
The First Asian-American U.S. Senator
The Reagan tax cuts
Collapse of the Soviet Union
The Gulf War
Welfare reform
A Republican Congress balances the budget (1998-2001):
Retaliation in Afghanistan
Response to 9/11
Condi Rice becomes Secretary of State
The interstate transportation system under Eisenhower.
The EPA, under Nixon
The First Clean Water Act
Earned income credit, under Reagan
MLK's Birthday, under Reagan
No child left behind.
Prescription drug plan
Bush tax cuts

 

[Freewill]

Too funny. We need more nuclear power plants. The improvements in nuclear plant design are nothing short of amazing. Nuclear is 24/7 production and carbon-free. Take a look at molten salt reactors:

Molten Salt Reactors

Technology revolution in nuclear power could slash costs below coal - Telegraph

THORIUM MOLTEN-SALT The Best Reactor You 8217 ve Never Heard Of Raw Science

Sadly many people will refuse to discuss clean coal burning options that presently exist simply because the fuel is coal. The same is true of nuclear. If it's not solar, wind or wave it can't be considered. Tragic that the well-meaning are so close-minded.

.

Got some beach front property in Japan for sell , cheap?


Weird how the 'free market' can't provide for nuclear without the Gov't backing it up?

It can, but government also obstructs nuclear power. Eco-Nazis like you are constantly suing to prevent the construction of nuclear power plants, thereby driving the price up to the point where it's not economical.

Nazis kill people, just like mercury and all of the hazardous air pollutants such as arsenic, cadmium and nickel spewed by burning power power plants who had 10 years to follow the law.

Got it, you want free electricity and you want it now at no risk. Unicorns on tread mills should do the job, except I think they create waste.

 

[Freewill]

Spoon -

Ten years ago you might have been right about renewables, but the funny thing is that in dozens of other developed countries, the transition from coal to renewables has been relatively straightforward and not particularly controversial.

There are quite a few countries now that generate 20%+ of their electricity from renewables, and that is set to rise significantly as the newer tidal and solar-thermal stations come online.

The days in which you could dismiss something like solar as being ineffective or too expensive passed by several years ago.

Except for in Spain where the government with the support of the universities gave declared solar a failure and reversed there policy.

Fukkking liar

THE FACTS

As highlighted in previous analyses, the underlying problem that legislators in Spain are trying to address is the rapid growth of the electricity system deficit, which now stands at €26 billion.

This deficit has been created over the last fifteen years as the costs of generating electricity have risen faster than what utilities can lawfully recover from rates. The root cause of this is ultimately that Spain limits the amount by which electricity prices can increase.

While most commentators have attributed the deficit to the growth of renewable energy, the origins of the tariff deficit pre-date the rise of renewable energy in Spain.

Second, despite countless articles and commentaries to the contrary, the problems in Spain’s electricity system are not caused solely by its feed-in tariff (FIT) policy.

To understand why, an analogy is instructive: to attribute Spain’s electricity system deficit to its FIT is similar to blaming an airline’s bankruptcy on its latest purchase of airplanes. A firm’s bankruptcy is always and everywhere driven by the failure to keep revenues ahead of costs. Buying planes is fine, as long as you have customers to fill them.

In Spain’s case, it is not the investment in wind turbines and solar power that represent the root of the problem: like many of its European partners, Spain encouraged private investment in wind and solar power partly to meet binding EU climate and energy targets, partly to improve its energy security, and partly to encourage the development of new economic sectors.

Moreover, numerous studies from major research institutes and think tanks around the world continue to find that FITs are the most cost-effective means of accelerating investment in renewable energy.

The problem is therefore not with wind and solar per se, nor with the policy that encouraged investment in them (though Spain’s FIT policy had a number of important design flaws): it is that the government, through regulations dating back decades, prevented utilities from recovering the true costs of the electricity system through rates.

In other words, Spain tried to have it both ways: it set out to transform its electricity system, but failed to establish a credible mechanism to pay for it.

The Lesson in Renewable Energy Development from Spain

Sounds like what Spain did is what we did with Obamacare.

 

[Freewill]

So you WILL not provide a link because you are full of shit. Got it. YOUR posit was simple, $500 billion in 2 years, you then implied it was in the US. With ZERO in return

Fukkking retarded conservatives hold onto ideology about honesty or logic

Yes, someone spends $500 billion and gets ZERO in return, lol. NOT Solar that will give US 30+ years of energy. Or Wind, or hydro, etc..

My figure is in your link, my post was fact.

You are a simple fool, nothing more

SO AGAIN, No the US NEVER spent $500 billion in 2 years with zero to show for it

After spending 500 billion. Why do we need to spend trillions more forever into the future.

Face it, SAR is a world wide failure.

China can attest to that fact, 20 USA designed and constructed nuclear power plants are the proof.

Yes, the US never spent trillions on oil, gas or unsafe, unreliable nukes!

Yep, for once you are right, our current Nuclear power industry did not cost us Trillions, our Nuclear reactors are safe and reliable.

Our Nuclear Plants run 500 days straight without needing to be shutdown.

That can not be said for Solar or Wind.

Great point dad2three, so glad I straightened you out.

Granted that the on line times of nuclear are quite impressive but that is also why they need regulated by the NRC to ensure maintenance is done properly and on time. The drive to stay on line caused the David Bessie incident, we can't let that happen again. But on the same side if nuclear doesn't have long run times it becomes an expense not a money maker. I think the nuclear industry has done well in increasing on line times while maintaining safety. But, as the utility companies decide to hike the price by shutting plants the pressure to stay on line will increase at nuclear stations, which could lead to really bad results.

 

[Freewill]

Our utility has jacked up our residential rates by 40% in the six years Obama has been in power and they're talking another 17% increase next year. I'm gradually going solar. I have no choice. Of course the 1200 watt power supply here in my gamer, and all the 200 watt bulbs I use everywhere, probably won't get me many alligator tears from the eco crowd. ; - )

Not that we don't believe you, but who is your power provider?

Whose "we"? You keep referring to yourself with collective pronouns, especially in the third person, and people are going to think you're schizophrenic...or that you're a queen...or something.

OK, truth be known, our rates have been so high because of a longstanding and very expensive legal battle between Xcel Energy and hedge fund billionaire, Louis Bacon. Bacon bought Malcolm Forbes' old family ranch down here near where I live, in the Sangre de Cristo Range of the Rocky Mountains. It consists of more than 100,000 acres of magnificent wilderness. He then bought another 90,000 acres adjacent, for a total of nearly 200,000 acres.

Meanwhile, Xcel Energy, power provider for the San Luis Valley, decided they wanted to build a new power grid across Bacon's property. That's when the legal battle started, and that's when we all started paying for it. I was on Bacon's side. Anyway, when the dust settled, Xcel gave up their suit, and Bacon donated 88,000 acres of land to a permanent environmental trust. The story had a happy ending. We're all still paying through the wazoo for power though.[/QUOTE]

How in any world is that considered a happy ending?

 

[Bfgrn]

Too funny. We need more nuclear power plants. The improvements in nuclear plant design are nothing short of amazing. Nuclear is 24/7 production and carbon-free. Take a look at molten salt reactors:

Molten Salt Reactors

Technology revolution in nuclear power could slash costs below coal - Telegraph

THORIUM MOLTEN-SALT The Best Reactor You 8217 ve Never Heard Of Raw Science

Sadly many people will refuse to discuss clean coal burning options that presently exist simply because the fuel is coal. The same is true of nuclear. If it's not solar, wind or wave it can't be considered. Tragic that the well-meaning are so close-minded.

.

Got some beach front property in Japan for sell , cheap?


Weird how the 'free market' can't provide for nuclear without the Gov't backing it up?

It can, but government also obstructs nuclear power. Eco-Nazis like you are constantly suing to prevent the construction of nuclear power plants, thereby driving the price up to the point where it's not economical.

Nazis kill people, just like mercury and all of the hazardous air pollutants such as arsenic, cadmium and nickel spewed by burning power power plants who had 10 years to follow the law.

Got it, you want free electricity and you want it now at no risk. Unicorns on tread mills should do the job, except I think they create waste.

You've 'got' nothing. Many coal burning power plants made the investments to update their plants to be in compliance with the law. WHY should we cater to scum bags that refuse pea brain?

 

[Freewill]

Too funny. We need more nuclear power plants. The improvements in nuclear plant design are nothing short of amazing. Nuclear is 24/7 production and carbon-free. Take a look at molten salt reactors:

Molten Salt Reactors

Technology revolution in nuclear power could slash costs below coal - Telegraph

THORIUM MOLTEN-SALT The Best Reactor You 8217 ve Never Heard Of Raw Science

Sadly many people will refuse to discuss clean coal burning options that presently exist simply because the fuel is coal. The same is true of nuclear. If it's not solar, wind or wave it can't be considered. Tragic that the well-meaning are so close-minded.

.

Got some beach front property in Japan for sell , cheap?


Weird how the 'free market' can't provide for nuclear without the Gov't backing it up?

It can, but government also obstructs nuclear power. Eco-Nazis like you are constantly suing to prevent the construction of nuclear power plants, thereby driving the price up to the point where it's not economical.

Nazis kill people, just like mercury and all of the hazardous air pollutants such as arsenic, cadmium and nickel spewed by burning power power plants who had 10 years to follow the law.

Got it, you want free electricity and you want it now at no risk. Unicorns on tread mills should do the job, except I think they create waste.

You've 'got' nothing. Many coal burning power plants made the investments to update their plants to be in compliance with the law. WHY should we cater to scum bags that refuse pea brain?

If you knew anything you would know that the power companies don't WANT to accommodate them. They are more then happy to shut down inefficient plants and blame environmental regulations. They are MORE then HAPPY to charge folks like you much more for the same electricity. Who wouldn't? Why have all the excess capacity when they can sell the same amount of electricity for much more?

I assume you don't go to work on a strickly volunteer basis. Electric utilities do not exist to make electricity and give it too you.

Now if you don't believe me, ask your Mom and Dad how much their electric bill has increased in the last couple of years. And do them a favor, when you go upstairs turn out the basement lights.

 

[elektra]

When the price of electric power triples just wait for the environmental wackos to blame it on "corporate greed."

Power Plant Closures

Impact of EPA’s Regulatory Assault on Power Plants: New Regulations to Take More than 72 GW of Electricity Generation Offline and the Plant Closing Announcements Keep Coming…​

The Institute for Energy Research (IER), founded in 1989 from a predecessor non-profit organization registered by Charles G. Koch and Robert L. Bradley Jr., advocates positions on environmental issues including deregulation of utilities, climate change denial, and claims that conventional energy sources are virtually limitless.

It is a member of the Sustainable Development Network. The IER's President was formerly Director of Public Relations Policy at Enron

My figure is in your link, my post was fact.

You are a simple fool, nothing more

SO AGAIN, No the US NEVER spent $500 billion in 2 years with zero to show for it

After spending 500 billion. Why do we need to spend trillions more forever into the future.

Face it, SAR is a world wide failure.

China can attest to that fact, 20 USA designed and constructed nuclear power plants are the proof.

Yes, the US never spent trillions on oil, gas or unsafe, unreliable nukes!

Yep, for once you are right, our current Nuclear power industry did not cost us Trillions, our Nuclear reactors are safe and reliable.

Our Nuclear Plants run 500 days straight without needing to be shutdown.

That can not be said for Solar or Wind.

Great point dad2three, so glad I straightened you out.

Granted that the on line times of nuclear are quite impressive but that is also why they need regulated by the NRC to ensure maintenance is done properly and on time. The drive to stay on line caused the David Bessie incident, we can't let that happen again. But on the same side if nuclear doesn't have long run times it becomes an expense not a money maker. I think the nuclear industry has done well in increasing on line times while maintaining safety. But, as the utility companies decide to hike the price by shutting plants the pressure to stay on line will increase at nuclear stations, which could lead to really bad results.

Davis Besse, I am intimately familiar with Davis Besse, and its Besse, not "Bessie".

Davis Besse had two problems, neither ever a danger to the plants safe operation.

I am one of the few people in the USA as well as the World who is certified to conduct the inspection on either the Reactor head as well as the Steam Generators.

Davis Besse had to replace its Reactor Head, I was not personally involved in the Reactor Head inspection at Davis Bessie but I did analyze data from three baseline inspections of reactor heads for other plants.

Inspectors at Davis Bessie discovered corrosion during a Refueling. Outage, the plant had operated non-stop for over a year, without incident. Maybe less, I forget.

Either way, the plant operated safely until scheduled maintenance which during a Refueling outage.

Way back in the day, I called my first leaker in a SG, kind of nice it was an OTSG.

Another nice fact about Davis Besse is its one of the few B&W plants in the world, another one close by is the still Operating Three Mile Island.

 

[Bfgrn]

Got some beach front property in Japan for sell , cheap?


Weird how the 'free market' can't provide for nuclear without the Gov't backing it up?

It can, but government also obstructs nuclear power. Eco-Nazis like you are constantly suing to prevent the construction of nuclear power plants, thereby driving the price up to the point where it's not economical.

Nazis kill people, just like mercury and all of the hazardous air pollutants such as arsenic, cadmium and nickel spewed by burning power power plants who had 10 years to follow the law.

Got it, you want free electricity and you want it now at no risk. Unicorns on tread mills should do the job, except I think they create waste.

You've 'got' nothing. Many coal burning power plants made the investments to update their plants to be in compliance with the law. WHY should we cater to scum bags that refuse pea brain?

If you knew anything you would know that the power companies don't WANT to accommodate them. They are more then happy to shut down inefficient plants and blame environmental regulations. They are MORE then HAPPY to charge folks like you much more for the same electricity. Who wouldn't? Why have all the excess capacity when they can sell the same amount of electricity for much more?

I assume you don't go to work on a strickly volunteer basis. Electric utilities do not exist to make electricity and give it too you.

Now if you don't believe me, ask your Mom and Dad how much their electric bill has increased in the last couple of years. And do them a favor, when you go upstairs turn out the basement lights.

So you finally admit to be a member of this 'ILK" (Enron asshole licker division) of subservient and mindless turds...LOL

Coal is in dire straits for several reasons: natural gas has become cheap and abundant since hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, made vast reserves available in the late 2000s; the prices of wind and solar power have fallen (solar panels cost 80 percent less now than they did in 2008; the cost of operating a wind farm is down 38 percent in the same period); and President Barack Obama is in the midst of cracking down on carbon emissions. Quite simply, coal has become a bad investment. The Boston-based think tank Synapse recently released a study showing that power companies could make more money by retiring 73 percent of existing coal plants and building gas plants instead; Synapse also reports that “utilities have decided to reject, cancel or significantly delay more than 60 proposed coal power plant projects in just the past two years,” largely for economic reasons.

 

[Bfgrn]

Conservatives don't want contaminated water but we do want logical environmental law based on science and not what some liberal thinks.

BULLSHIT!

Warning: Drinking Tea Party Rhetoric May Cause Cancer

Jeff Schweitzer Scientist and former White House Senior Policy Analyst; Ph.D. in marine biology/neurophysiology

That the Grand Old Party is hostile to environmental regulation is no grand revelation. But the most recent assault on the EPA is, even for Republicans and Tea Party enthusiasts, an unusually reckless and irresponsible attack on reasonable attempts to clean our air. We are talking coal ash. Nothing like taking in some lead, cadmium and mercury with each breath and every sip of water to brighten one's day. That is just the price we must pay to reduce government interference into our private affairs.

But coal is particularly nasty. Yes, the attraction to coal is powerful and obvious because the United States sits on a reserve of nearly 250 billion tons of coal, 112 billion of which are high-quality bituminous and anthracite coals; the remainder mainly being lower-energy and dirtier lignite. With such abundance the siren song of energy independence is difficult to resist. However, burning even the highest quality anthracite is dirty business. One 500 MW power plant generates about 3 million tons of carbon dioxide every year. Other toxic byproducts include fine-grain particulates, heavy metals like mercury, lead, chromium and nickel, trace elements such as arsenic and selenium, and various organics like dichloroethane, benzene, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, and trichloroethylene. Oxides of nitrogen and sulfur are common pollutants from coal, and are found at higher levels in anthracite than in bituminous coal. The known health consequences of this toxic brew of air and water pollution are many, and include nervous system problems in infants and children, asthma, chronic bronchitis, lung cancer, a suite of cardiovascular problems and kidney disease. The environmental impacts are well documented, and not pretty.

But all of those inconvenient truths are just part of a liberal conspiracy if you believe the GOP. Republicans in the House of Representatives have voted 169 times to weaken environmental laws on the notion that such regulations slow economic growth. The argument is that regulatory compliance is too costly to industry. What is forgotten in that logic is that exposing our children to toxic chemicals in our water and air cost the United States $76.6 billion in health expenses in 2008 (the number is certainly bigger now). And that figure does not include economic losses resulting from workers taking sick leave due to illnesses caused directly from exposure to pollutants. Nor do these figures take into account the positive impact on job creation when investing in clean water and air. Even without those adjustments, by any measure the economic impact of pollution greatly exceeds the total estimate annual cost of complying with environmental regulations: about $25 billion. To put these numbers in perspective, Exxon earned a profit of $10.7 billion in the second quarter of this year. The Clean Air Act Amendments (1990) are estimated to create $2 trillion (with a "t") in economic benefits in the 30 years following passage; compared to the total cost of complying with those amendments over that same period coming in around $65 billion. That is a cost/benefit ratio of 1:30. Any good businessman would look at that balance sheet and draw the obvious conclusion.

The GOP's assault on the EPA is an ideological attack with no foundation in fact, a political temper tantrum. Take away the theatrics, and the idea that growth suffers under environmental regulation is dangerously misguided in the short term and tragic when seen decades out. The idea is wrong because history has shown clearly enough that environmental regulations do not cost a net loss of jobs; and that the lack of such regulations leads to unrecoverable losses, costly clean ups and irreversible health consequences

 

[Dad2three]

Weird, YOU keep positing $500 billion spent in 2 years WITHOUT giving a credible source, almost like you were a Faux 'News' host or hate talk radio guy?

So you have zero idea of the cost, you have yet to offer any figure, of the total cost, what is the total cost of Solar, you are defending Solar, ranting how Solar is cheap and great, but that is a simple platitude, you have zero idea, the figure is not there, as you obviously have found out.

We are not allowed to know the costs, the Green/Renewable energy supporters do not know the costs.

Nothing but pure propane a and rubbish.

Again, you prove my point, you can not account nor grasp the costs.

Got it, only YOU know the costs, everyone else are idiots. Weird you should be able to source YOUR $500 billion figure right? lol

And you enviro nazis do not care what the costs are. In fact, the moment something new comes along, your minions are right there protesting.
You people may believe you are protesters, but you're not. You are a bunch of annoying whiners.
You people bitch and moan about everything.
Here's an example The Southern Environmental Law Center. Sounds real nice, right. They care....Or do they?
If one looks at their mission statement, there is nothing NOTHING about protecting the environment as a priority. In fact this organization prides itself on one thing, Stopping projects IT deems to be an enemy of the environment. These people have nothing better to do with themselves than run around filing lawsuits.
The interesting part is while they win a lot of battles, they end up losing most of the wars. The end result is projects are delayed costing taxpayers and investors billions. And do these people care? Hell no. They just get to add another stopped pr delayed project to their website.
The SELC is pretty much a bunch of wealthy attorneys whose job it is to make themselves even more wealthy off the misery of others.

Thanks, so ANOTHER conservative who can't provide ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history on in the US

Everything else you posit is just noise

Right wingers have myths, distortions and lies in their toolbox, nothing else!

name one that the liberals have ever been right on.

You crow about the EPA, that was Nixon, you claiming him as a liberal?

You crow about clean water. The first clean water act was Nixon, you claiming him as a liberal?

I'll just bet if it were not for Watergate you would claim him because he did something you think was good and we damn well know, according to your world view, nothing good comes from anywhere other then the DNC.

Conservatives don't want contaminated water but we do want logical environmental law based on science and not what some liberal thinks.

Here are some more from another post:

From the beginning:
Formed to end the democrat party practice of slavery, successful.
Supported EVERY equal rights act from the reformation to today, very unlike the democrat party.
Women's right to vote
Construction of the Panama Canal
Construction of the Hoover Dam
Jessie Owens wins four gold medals in the Olympics, FDR and Truman snub him Eisenhower makes him Ambassador of Sports
Jackie Robinson becomes the first black American to play in the Major Leagues
Desegregating schools
The First Asian-American U.S. Senator
The Reagan tax cuts
Collapse of the Soviet Union
The Gulf War
Welfare reform
A Republican Congress balances the budget (1998-2001):
Retaliation in Afghanistan
Response to 9/11
Condi Rice becomes Secretary of State
The interstate transportation system under Eisenhower.
The EPA, under Nixon
The First Clean Water Act
Earned income credit, under Reagan
MLK's Birthday, under Reagan
No child left behind.
Prescription drug plan
Bush tax cuts

Weird you conflate liberal with the Dems and conservatives with the GOP? I asked foir CONSERVATIVES.

Liberal fought the slavery dummy, it was conservatives, todays GOP base from the Southern states who supported it

Conservatives fought EVERYTHING that helped create the US, they were against laws that gave US union rights, labor laws, SS, equal rights, civil rights, etc

Weird you don't know the Republicans and Dems switched places a couple of times the past 150 years, almost like you are being intellectually deceitful?


Yes, conservatives fought for tax cuts like Ronnie had when he ramped up spending and cut revenues and then Dubya's when he cut it even more while going nuts on spending, even though he took US to 1950's levels of revenues


Yes, conservatives AND the current GOPers LOVE wars, especially if they don't have to fund them

CONSERVATIVES FOUGHT MLK'S BIRTHDAY, yes even Ronnie opposed it on 'cost concerns', lol

How many SOUTHERN states (and GOP heavy) states refused to honor it? lol

Prescription drug plan? Oh right that thing the GOPers pushed down our throats in the middle of the night to try to win in 2004, that was 100% UNFUNDED and according to CBO costs as much as Obamacares this decade, that is funded?


AGAIN, THOSE THINGS YOU NAME, ALL OPPOSED BY CONSERVATIVES, EVERY SINGLE ONE (except those starve the beast ones like UNFUNDED wars and UNFUNDED tax cuts)


TRY to understand what a POLICY is versus the drivel you posit. Thanks

AND YES, THE CURRENT GOPers ARE FARRRR RIGHT OF NIXON, HE'S BE A RINO TODAY!

 

[HenryBHough]

Imagine how many coal fired power plants are running on overtime to allow Daddy Zero to post his hugely long screeds!

 

[Saigon]

Elektra -

Rather than just posting incoherent off-topic rants, why not address the topic?

You asked why billions needed to be spent on electricity production, and I explained that all infrastructure needs to be replaced at some point, and nuclear, hydro, solar thermal and coal all require massive investment to be built.

Do you understand that, or are you going to dispute it?

 

[g5000]

Drawing attention to closing power plants is pointing to only a small part of the total picture. A disingenuous tactic, at best.



Rebuilding boom coming at Michigan power plants

Efforts to battle global warming and climate change by limiting carbon dioxide emissions are likely to produce a massive building boom at Michigan power plants in years to come, potentially creating thousands of jobs.

The change promises a wave of new construction jobs as power utilities across the state invest in new power plants and clean air technologies. And depending on how state government works to boost alternative energy with incentives, Michigan's renewable energy industry also could explode with new jobs and investment.

Out with the old, in with the new.

Here is the status of new power plants in California: Status of All Projects

Here is a web site devoted to new power plants being constructed in North America: New power plant projects for power plant construction and upgrades in the power industry. Power Engineering

 

[Freewill]

So you have zero idea of the cost, you have yet to offer any figure, of the total cost, what is the total cost of Solar, you are defending Solar, ranting how Solar is cheap and great, but that is a simple platitude, you have zero idea, the figure is not there, as you obviously have found out.

We are not allowed to know the costs, the Green/Renewable energy supporters do not know the costs.

Nothing but pure propane a and rubbish.

Again, you prove my point, you can not account nor grasp the costs.

Got it, only YOU know the costs, everyone else are idiots. Weird you should be able to source YOUR $500 billion figure right? lol

And you enviro nazis do not care what the costs are. In fact, the moment something new comes along, your minions are right there protesting.
You people may believe you are protesters, but you're not. You are a bunch of annoying whiners.
You people bitch and moan about everything.
Here's an example The Southern Environmental Law Center. Sounds real nice, right. They care....Or do they?
If one looks at their mission statement, there is nothing NOTHING about protecting the environment as a priority. In fact this organization prides itself on one thing, Stopping projects IT deems to be an enemy of the environment. These people have nothing better to do with themselves than run around filing lawsuits.
The interesting part is while they win a lot of battles, they end up losing most of the wars. The end result is projects are delayed costing taxpayers and investors billions. And do these people care? Hell no. They just get to add another stopped pr delayed project to their website.
The SELC is pretty much a bunch of wealthy attorneys whose job it is to make themselves even more wealthy off the misery of others.

Thanks, so ANOTHER conservative who can't provide ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history on in the US

Everything else you posit is just noise

Right wingers have myths, distortions and lies in their toolbox, nothing else!

name one that the liberals have ever been right on.

You crow about the EPA, that was Nixon, you claiming him as a liberal?

You crow about clean water. The first clean water act was Nixon, you claiming him as a liberal?

I'll just bet if it were not for Watergate you would claim him because he did something you think was good and we damn well know, according to your world view, nothing good comes from anywhere other then the DNC.

Conservatives don't want contaminated water but we do want logical environmental law based on science and not what some liberal thinks.

Here are some more from another post:

From the beginning:
Formed to end the democrat party practice of slavery, successful.
Supported EVERY equal rights act from the reformation to today, very unlike the democrat party.
Women's right to vote
Construction of the Panama Canal
Construction of the Hoover Dam
Jessie Owens wins four gold medals in the Olympics, FDR and Truman snub him Eisenhower makes him Ambassador of Sports
Jackie Robinson becomes the first black American to play in the Major Leagues
Desegregating schools
The First Asian-American U.S. Senator
The Reagan tax cuts
Collapse of the Soviet Union
The Gulf War
Welfare reform
A Republican Congress balances the budget (1998-2001):
Retaliation in Afghanistan
Response to 9/11
Condi Rice becomes Secretary of State
The interstate transportation system under Eisenhower.
The EPA, under Nixon
The First Clean Water Act
Earned income credit, under Reagan
MLK's Birthday, under Reagan
No child left behind.
Prescription drug plan
Bush tax cuts

Weird you conflate liberal with the Dems and conservatives with the GOP? I asked foir CONSERVATIVES.

Liberal fought the slavery dummy, it was conservatives, todays GOP base from the Southern states who supported it

Conservatives fought EVERYTHING that helped create the US, they were against laws that gave US union rights, labor laws, SS, equal rights, civil rights, etc

Weird you don't know the Republicans and Dems switched places a couple of times the past 150 years, almost like you are being intellectually deceitful?


Yes, conservatives fought for tax cuts like Ronnie had when he ramped up spending and cut revenues and then Dubya's when he cut it even more while going nuts on spending, even though he took US to 1950's levels of revenues


Yes, conservatives AND the current GOPers LOVE wars, especially if they don't have to fund them

CONSERVATIVES FOUGHT MLK'S BIRTHDAY, yes even Ronnie opposed it on 'cost concerns', lol

How many SOUTHERN states (and GOP heavy) states refused to honor it? lol

Prescription drug plan? Oh right that thing the GOPers pushed down our throats in the middle of the night to try to win in 2004, that was 100% UNFUNDED and according to CBO costs as much as Obamacares this decade, that is funded?


AGAIN, THOSE THINGS YOU NAME, ALL OPPOSED BY CONSERVATIVES, EVERY SINGLE ONE (except those starve the beast ones like UNFUNDED wars and UNFUNDED tax cuts)


TRY to understand what a POLICY is versus the drivel you posit. Thanks

AND YES, THE CURRENT GOPers ARE FARRRR RIGHT OF NIXON, HE'S BE A RINO TODAY!

No, you are the one being dishonest. Do you claim Nixon as a liberal or not? Do you claim Eisenhower? How about Reagan? Or Bush? Which ones do you think are liberals? Ha, no what you want people to believe is that anything you perceive as good was done by liberals anything bad by conservatives. How moronic is that but I don't blame you because the liberal record is so dismal you have to try and steal history. Yes liberals have won on the abortion issue and you can sodomize your friend and even marry him because of liberal democrats but big deal neither put a dime in your pocket. Lincoln was a dead fast conservative.

You can say whatever comes into your little mind about who opposed what but conservative presidents did all those listed even if there was some opposition, THEY got it done.