Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Find me a death certificate any time in the last 100 years that has 'coal pollution' as the cause of death.Better then their children dying from coal plant pollution. When you include health and environmental costs coal costs 2 time more then green energy and green energy create 3 times more jobsYeah, thanks for protecting poor children from low energy prices. Now their parents can spend their money on "green energy" instead of nutritious food or medical care.
Just one.
Far better to put 100 families out into the cold or destroy their standard of living so you can get high off your self-righteous sanctimony.
I got your 'running for the hills' right here by the short and curleys, CookedGewse.Oh hell, now you went and brought verifiable FACTS into a debate with bripat. Crap, now he'll Cut & Run. And I had several other studies to verify the same thing, specifically in the counties where those plants were located!
Knew I shouldn't have sandbagged and waited for him to address a reasonable posts. Wadday expect from whackjobs?
Don't forget Daveman and Big Fitz.
I have a small point to all the 'facts' brought out.
They are all from op-eds, Environmentalist blogs, and non-profit activist groups who have a vested interest in pumping out these types of results. All non-scientific sources. I didn't see university data, government lab data... nothing in the 50 or so back links to sources that I went through. Oh I did find one possibly credible think tank that basically concluded Utilities pollute the most and there are larger costs related to health. File under "no shit sherlock", but a total non-sequiter to the discussion as a whole.
When I tried to backtrack the source from the numbers, I ended in an 'enviro-advocacy blog loop'. This means that nobody's talking about WHERE the numbers came from, but keep referencing them as if they are true and certifiably accurate.
So why should I trust a damn thing they say? We've already learned that the IPCC was tricked by advocates from the WWF to accept Himalayan glacial melt numbers from anecdotal evidence from a geography student interviewing ice climbing guides. Michael Mann and he EAUCRU were caught forcing temperature data and then destroying the raw data to protect the fraud. Don't forget that the tree ring study was selected from 3 particular trees In siberia that MATCHED THE THEORY while ignoring hundred of thousands of other trees in the same area with a similar life span.
So am I to really believe this incestuous logic and... ahem..."science" on face value?
I'd be a fool too. I need better data thank you. I'm done with GIGO.
You just proved what I posted earlier. I said that no matter what was posted that you would call it a lie unless it agreed with YOUR conclusion. I said it would be a waste of time and you showed I was 100% correct.
THANK YOU.
This post of your reminds me of the birthers. No matter what is said it's either a lie or a from some "liberal biased" group. You did not disappoint.
Now the only reason peakers are used is for pure economics. We had a couple of old units that were used for peaking (after deregulation) but then we decided to mothball them and build new natural gas units that did not have to be constantly manned yet could be used when the national megawatt price exceeded $50.
In other words, deregulation didn't change a thing: utilities still need peaking plants. The fact that it may make sense to replace one power plant with a new doesn't mean it makes sense to replace another.
(Nope, that's not what I said, was it? The reason peakers are built are for economic reasons. At times the price per megawatt climbs high enough that a company can make a little money by utilizing a peaker. But it is not counted as dependable revenue. It's purely considered an investment that carries risk. But they are certainly not needed.)
Simply put, it does not make good economic sense to use old, worn out power plants for peaking since they are off line much more than on, draw lots of power when they're off and need to be constantly manned and maintained.
IMO the power company execs had already planned to shut these units down. That's the only thing that makes sense.
Why should a power plant draw power when it's offline? Also, I'm sure they need to be manned during the summer months, but I doubt they need more than a skeleton crew the rest of the year.
It they weren't cost effective, then why did the utilities keep them online until the EPA imposed new regulations which require them to be upgraded? You are implying that the managers of these utilities are stupid. Somehow, I think they know a thing or two more than you know.
Why should a power plant draw power when it's offline? Also, I'm sure they need to be manned during the summer months, but I doubt they need more than a skeleton crew the rest of the year.
It they weren't cost effective, then why did the utilities keep them online until the EPA imposed new regulations which require them to be upgraded? You are implying that the managers of these utilities are stupid. Somehow, I think they know a thing or two more than you know.
Coal fired power plants draw TONS of power when off-line. There are still water pumps, air compressors, emergency back up systems, etc to run, not to mention a skeleton crew to maintain equipment. You don't need any of those things (save for an occasional employee to do checks and maintenance) on natural gas peaker units.
Holy shit! I'm damn near speechless at how goddamn stupid you are!I got your 'running for the hills' right here by the short and curleys, CookedGewse.Don't forget Daveman and Big Fitz.
I have a small point to all the 'facts' brought out.
They are all from op-eds, Environmentalist blogs, and non-profit activist groups who have a vested interest in pumping out these types of results. All non-scientific sources. I didn't see university data, government lab data... nothing in the 50 or so back links to sources that I went through. Oh I did find one possibly credible think tank that basically concluded Utilities pollute the most and there are larger costs related to health. File under "no shit sherlock", but a total non-sequiter to the discussion as a whole.
When I tried to backtrack the source from the numbers, I ended in an 'enviro-advocacy blog loop'. This means that nobody's talking about WHERE the numbers came from, but keep referencing them as if they are true and certifiably accurate.
So why should I trust a damn thing they say? We've already learned that the IPCC was tricked by advocates from the WWF to accept Himalayan glacial melt numbers from anecdotal evidence from a geography student interviewing ice climbing guides. Michael Mann and he EAUCRU were caught forcing temperature data and then destroying the raw data to protect the fraud. Don't forget that the tree ring study was selected from 3 particular trees In siberia that MATCHED THE THEORY while ignoring hundred of thousands of other trees in the same area with a similar life span.
So am I to really believe this incestuous logic and... ahem...
I'd be a fool too. I need better data thank you. I'm done with GIGO.
THANK YOU.
This post of your reminds me of the birthers. No matter what is said it's either a lie or a from some "liberal biased" group. You did not disappoint.
THANK YOU.
This post of your reminds me of the birthers. No matter what is said it's either a lie or a from some "liberal biased" group. You did not disappoint.
The guy posted a mountain of propaganda. There wasn't a shred of actual evidence supporting his claim in the whole vast stinking pile. Where is the actual scientific evidence that coal fired power plants make people sick?
Holy shit! I'm damn near speechless at how goddamn stupid you are!I got your 'running for the hills' right here by the short and curleys, CookedGewse.
I have a small point to all the 'facts' brought out.
They are all from op-eds, Environmentalist blogs, and non-profit activist groups who have a vested interest in pumping out these types of results. All non-scientific sources. I didn't see university data, government lab data... nothing in the 50 or so back links to sources that I went through. Oh I did find one possibly credible think tank that basically concluded Utilities pollute the most and there are larger costs related to health. File under "no shit sherlock", but a total non-sequiter to the discussion as a whole.
When I tried to backtrack the source from the numbers, I ended in an 'enviro-advocacy blog loop'. This means that nobody's talking about WHERE the numbers came from, but keep referencing them as if they are true and certifiably accurate.
So why should I trust a damn thing they say? We've already learned that the IPCC was tricked by advocates from the WWF to accept Himalayan glacial melt numbers from anecdotal evidence from a geography student interviewing ice climbing guides. Michael Mann and he EAUCRU were caught forcing temperature data and then destroying the raw data to protect the fraud. Don't forget that the tree ring study was selected from 3 particular trees In siberia that MATCHED THE THEORY while ignoring hundred of thousands of other trees in the same area with a similar life span.
So am I to really believe this incestuous logic and... ahem...
I'd be a fool too. I need better data thank you. I'm done with GIGO.
THANK YOU.
This post of your reminds me of the birthers. No matter what is said it's either a lie or a from some "liberal biased" group. You did not disappoint.
This i the equivalent of the "Tis a Crock of Shit and it Stinketh" joke! and you just delivered the punchline and meant it! I saw this first posted in an iron foundry. Seems you're a bit farther down the chain of command which could excuse your cluelessness to a point. But that could just be your inbreeding.
The Plan | Funny Shit
Starshit just handed us a ton of circular reasoning with numbers that smell like poo they were pulled so recently out of someone's ass and called it proof and science. Then they all quickly circle jerk each other off by referencing one another in the great leftist activist echo chamber and call it proof amongst thmselves because they WANT it to be proof, and send the emperor out buckass nekkid because they want to believe they are so advanced and elite and better than the rest of the world.
So when someone outside the ecofascisti gestalt process going on here says "Your emperor' buckass nekkid." You scream and howl that we are too dumm to see the truth. We go, yeah maybe, but you're buckass nekkid too, and the weather don't care what you believe contrary to that.
So I bid you a jolly 'fuck you fuckball.' and shall content myself in the understanding that I have once again exposed you for being a bullshit no talent partisan ass monkey who has a smaller mental capacity for logic and critical thinking than a protozoa, and beneath my pay grade to deal with anymore.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4Jv3AB_ZGo]kung fu hustle slap - YouTube[/ame]
IndependntLogic........"Actually, I find Big Fitz to be among the best posters here. He doesn't insult unless insulted first (that Ive seen)........"
Find me a death certificate any time in the last 100 years that has 'coal pollution' as the cause of death.Better then their children dying from coal plant pollution. When you include health and environmental costs coal costs 2 time more then green energy and green energy create 3 times more jobsYeah, thanks for protecting poor children from low energy prices. Now their parents can spend their money on "green energy" instead of nutritious food or medical care.
Just one.
Far better to put 100 families out into the cold or destroy their standard of living so you can get high off your self-righteous sanctimony.
Here's some reading for you but I can already tell that you'll simply say, "Those links don't prove a thing"!!
First Mercury, Air Toxics Standards Imposed on U.S. Power Plants
Listen....do you think I like the idea that my place of employment causes pollution that can make people sick? I would love to be able to say that all of the experts and scientists are "full of shit liberals" that are lying like you and Big Fitz seem to think. But I can't. I see what we put out, I read the instrumentation and can say that facts are facts.
The best thing I can do is help to make it as clean burning as possible.
Find me a death certificate any time in the last 100 years that has 'coal pollution' as the cause of death.Better then their children dying from coal plant pollution. When you include health and environmental costs coal costs 2 time more then green energy and green energy create 3 times more jobs
Just one.
Far better to put 100 families out into the cold or destroy their standard of living so you can get high off your self-righteous sanctimony.
Ever hear of black lung disease? It's otherwise known as Coalworker's pneumoconiosis.
Coalworker's pneumoconiosis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Find me a death certificate any time in the last 100 years that has 'coal pollution' as the cause of death.
Just one.
Far better to put 100 families out into the cold or destroy their standard of living so you can get high off your self-righteous sanctimony.
Ever hear of black lung disease? It's otherwise known as Coalworker's pneumoconiosis.
Coalworker's pneumoconiosis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
We are discussing sickness caused by coal fired power plants, not the diseases associated with mining coal.
So you're claiming a power plant technician knows more about power plants than a power plant engineer?And yet you somehow manage to not have a response to the engineer who says you're wrong, even though you asked for it.Even if that was all I did would be about 100% more than what you've ever done, right?
And by the way, these wdere NOT "perfectly good power plants". They were old, decrepit, run down plants that were only used for peaking.
You won't find any "perfectly good power plants" closing down.
Did I ask for a response from an engineer or another power plant technician? Hell, there are lots of engineers. I would not ask advice from say.... a highway engineer on what power plants should be shut down. And we shouldn't need one. If they are old an inefficient common sense would dictate that it's time to retire them
Oh hell, now you went and brought verifiable FACTS into a debate with bripat. Crap, now he'll Cut & Run. And I had several other studies to verify the same thing, specifically in the counties where those plants were located!
Knew I shouldn't have sandbagged and waited for him to address a reasonable posts. Wadday expect from whackjobs?
His "facts" have all been verified to be not true.
Once again, you made a fool of yourself by jumping in to support an obvious nutburger.
Leftist propaganda =/= facts.Actually 30,000 people a year die due to living near a coal plant
Life-cycle study: Accounting for total harm from coal would add "close to 17.8¢/kWh of electricity generated" | ThinkProgress
Electricity from solar/wind keeps refrigerates working and hospitals open the same as coal you thinking else wise is just more evidence to your vast ignorance.
Coal Does More Harm Than Good in Kentucky: $62 Million for Asthma Costs, $10 Billion for Lost Lives | ThinkProgress
^Another study finds that coal mining in Kentucky has a negative impact overall on the economy
Economists: Coal Is Incredibly Costly | ThinkProgress
^New study finds that Coal and Oil are more costly then renewable energy once health and environmental effects are included.
Life-cycle study: Accounting for total harm from coal would add "close to 17.8¢/kWh of electricity generated" | ThinkProgress
^New study fines that Coals negative effect on human health and the environmental cost the nation at least 125% more than the electricity generated from coal.
^Coal results in at least 30,000 American deaths each year.
Has shown above fossil fuels cost 2 times more then green energy.
And green energy create 3 times more jobs
The Economic Benefits of Investing in Clean Energy
Oh hell, now you went and brought verifiable FACTS into a debate with bripat. Crap, now he'll Cut & Run. And I had several other studies to verify the same thing, specifically in the counties where those plants were located!
Knew I shouldn't have sandbagged and waited for him to address a reasonable posts. Wadday expect from whackjobs?
Don't forget Daveman and Big Fitz.
And then you finally post something I can look at. At least your articles are better than the bullshit starshit posted.THANK YOU.
This post of your reminds me of the birthers. No matter what is said it's either a lie or a from some "liberal biased" group. You did not disappoint.
The guy posted a mountain of propaganda. There wasn't a shred of actual evidence supporting his claim in the whole vast stinking pile. Where is the actual scientific evidence that coal fired power plants make people sick?
Here's some reading for you but I can already tell that you'll simply say, "Those links don't prove a thing"!!
First Mercury, Air Toxics Standards Imposed on U.S. Power Plants
Science-Based Medicine » Mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants and autism: Is there a correlation?
http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/coal-fired-plant-hazards.pdf
Listen....do you think I like the idea that my place of employment causes pollution that can make people sick? I would love to be able to say that all of the experts and scientists are "full of shit liberals" that are lying like you and Big Fitz seem to think. But I can't. I see what we put out, I read the instrumentation and can say that facts are facts.
The best thing I can do is help to make it as clean burning as possible.
The new safeguards will prevent as many as 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks a year, according to the EPA. The standards will also prevent 130,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms and about 6,300 cases of acute bronchitis among children each year.
Abosolutely I know about it. Comes from Coal MINING... doesn't it?Find me a death certificate any time in the last 100 years that has 'coal pollution' as the cause of death.Better then their children dying from coal plant pollution. When you include health and environmental costs coal costs 2 time more then green energy and green energy create 3 times more jobs
Just one.
Far better to put 100 families out into the cold or destroy their standard of living so you can get high off your self-righteous sanctimony.
Ever hear of black lung disease? It's otherwise known as Coalworker's pneumoconiosis.
Coalworker's pneumoconiosis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shit, I was gonna correct him too. Stupid people are considered varmints. You don't need a license to shoot first there. You've been a varmint since day one.Holy shit! I'm damn near speechless at how goddamn stupid you are!THANK YOU.
This post of your reminds me of the birthers. No matter what is said it's either a lie or a from some "liberal biased" group. You did not disappoint.
This i the equivalent of the "Tis a Crock of Shit and it Stinketh" joke! and you just delivered the punchline and meant it! I saw this first posted in an iron foundry. Seems you're a bit farther down the chain of command which could excuse your cluelessness to a point. But that could just be your inbreeding.
The Plan | Funny Shit
Starshit just handed us a ton of circular reasoning with numbers that smell like poo they were pulled so recently out of someone's ass and called it proof and science. Then they all quickly circle jerk each other off by referencing one another in the great leftist activist echo chamber and call it proof amongst thmselves because they WANT it to be proof, and send the emperor out buckass nekkid because they want to believe they are so advanced and elite and better than the rest of the world.
So when someone outside the ecofascisti gestalt process going on here says "Your emperor' buckass nekkid." You scream and howl that we are too dumm to see the truth. We go, yeah maybe, but you're buckass nekkid too, and the weather don't care what you believe contrary to that.
So I bid you a jolly 'fuck you fuckball.' and shall content myself in the understanding that I have once again exposed you for being a bullshit no talent partisan ass monkey who has a smaller mental capacity for logic and critical thinking than a protozoa, and beneath my pay grade to deal with anymore.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4Jv3AB_ZGo"]kung fu hustle slap - YouTube[/ame]
Hey IndependntLogic, you sure you don't want to rephrase your earlier observation?
IndependntLogic........"Actually, I find Big Fitz to be among the best posters here. He doesn't insult unless insulted first (that Ive seen)........"
We are discussing sickness caused by coal fired power plants, not the diseases associated with mining coal.
LOL! You think coal is somehow purified when it's incinerated?
No no... trust me. I'm an ass at times. Doesn't make me any less right... except when I disagree with you. Right?Actually, Big Fitz has presented a pretty convincing case but then, he's not an azz. Does that mean he and I have to agree on everything to engage in civil discourse? Of course not. Some day when you grow up, you'll learn about this thing called "class". It's really cool!
