You May Not Have Electricity This Winter

[FA_Q2]

I don't care what he does, until removed from office by impeachment he's the President. And that rates respect in forms of address. If not a veteran you can say whatever you want, if a veteran or active duty military you swore an oath. Can't fall back on being a veteran if your oath means nothing.

Bullshit. Being a veteran does not take away your rights of free speech and there is NOTHING more central to the very fabric of American than open disagreement with the political powers in this nation. NOTHING.

The very thought that someone should hold their tongue because such and such is disrespectful to the constitution - far more central than the one supposedly executing it at the time. You may not be able to do certain things while in uniform as a representative of the US military but being a veteran is NOT even close to the same thing.

 

[Jarlaxle]

This thread is like listening to a bunch of carbon addicts withdrawing in a rehab center.

These addicts are heavily invested in mining coal, oil and uranium and they don't want to wind up like the horse whip, harness and buggy makers at the turn of the last century. It's that simple.

Even when you tell them "hey, use one of those cogeneration solar thermal/natural gas outfits like in Florida and other places...or geothermal/natural gas or biodiesel from pond scum oils and have to buy cheaper or free fuel but charge the same prices!" They still curl up in the fetal position. Why? Because they have to make the terrible terrible decision to shift their assets over to a more profitable situation for themselves that doesn't cause as much global climate change or other types of lethal pollution.

Only an addict could become upset at the idea of living better and cleaner with simply a change in mindset...

Energy is like heroin? I suppose food is also like heroin.

That gets the stupid metaphor of the day award. Don't get too excited. The day is still young and rdean is posting.

.

Dude, Silly retired that award years ago. She is a two-note troll and basically a human spambot.

 

[hipeter924]

Coal plants are shutting down all over the country because of back door policies of the EPA via the Oval office. They couldn't pass Cap and Trade so they are doing by interpreting old laws any way they see fit. In other words, they are by passing Congress who shot down the new regs saying the courts now write the regulations and laws.

We have a 200 year supply of coal. It's cheap energy, and with the new scrubbers and emissions systems the damage to the environment is really BS. But the Mean Green Enviro wack machine wants wind and solar. Since they are not cost effective they attack fossil fuels to try to bring those prices up to try and make their corporate sponsors viable............The end result is higher prices.

To the grid.............it's old and wasn't designed to handle the increased capacities.........So the transmission lines may very well fold if we have a harsh winter.

We have a much longer supply of sunshine and geothermal resources. So why not use their free energy as much as possible? Because your profit margin will increase? [Unless your profit derives solely from mining and refining coal, oil and uranium and not power generation]

The products needed to make that energy are not free............I've done the math on putting in a grid here. It's doesn't have the bang for the buck..............It's pure economics...............Supply and demand, and coal is cheap with a delivery system in place.

Uranium and Natural Gas are non renewable sources far superior for energy generation than oil and coal, and with a lot less pollution. Coal demand is on the decline, so it is no surprise coal producers want the USA to fill its skies with toxic coal dust or worse.

 

[Moonglow]

NG is cheaper than coal to produce electricity, no wonder the old coal plants are being replaced by new plants....

 

[eagle1462010]

NG is cheaper than coal to produce electricity, no wonder the old coal plants are being replaced by new plants....

Only in the mindset of you can build the new ones for free................

I haven't seen them built for free yet.

 

[Moonglow]

NG is cheaper than coal to produce electricity, no wonder the old coal plants are being replaced by new plants....

Only in the mindset of you can build the new ones for free................

I haven't seen them built for free yet.

Who says they are free?
Except you?
The COOP I belong to went to gas two years ago.. SWEPCO has not. The coal cars run through town day and night.. The transportation of coal is not free either..NG can be delivered cheaper by gas pipe...

 

[eagle1462010]

NG is cheaper than coal to produce electricity, no wonder the old coal plants are being replaced by new plants....

Only in the mindset of you can build the new ones for free................

I haven't seen them built for free yet.

Who says they are free?
Except you?
The COOP I belong to went to gas two years ago.. SWEPCO has not. The coal cars run through town day and night.. The transportation of coal is not free either..NG can be delivered cheaper by gas pipe...

In other words you don't see the cost of building those pipe lines or the fact that many coal burners being shut down could run another 30 years. Not to mention that Gas Turbine plants cost a lot of money to install.

Thank you.

 

[Jarlaxle]

...except when the NIMBY idiots won't let said pipes be built!

 

[eagle1462010]

...except when the NIMBY idiots won't let said pipes be built!

Exactly. Them types don't like anything.

 

[Silhouette]

Uranium and Natural Gas are non renewable sources far superior for energy generation than oil and coal, and with a lot less pollution. Coal demand is on the decline, so it is no surprise coal producers want the USA to fill its skies with toxic coal dust or worse.

Yes, no pollution with uranium. Just the most expensive form of energy we have to mine, refine and deal with the waste that kills every living thing near it for 240,000 years.

Natural gas on the other hand can be a source of backup fuel for any solar thermal or geothermal plant, or even solar photovoltaic or wind plant.

My point is that if you are getting free energy for "x" days a year from solar thermal, geothermal, solar photovoltaics or wind, why would you not build a cogeneration plant? P.S. If you tell me it isn't financially feasible, I'll laugh you off the board. Charging the same rates while getting free energy for part of the year is definitely feasible.

 

[Moonglow]

Only in the mindset of you can build the new ones for free................

I haven't seen them built for free yet.

Who says they are free?
Except you?
The COOP I belong to went to gas two years ago.. SWEPCO has not. The coal cars run through town day and night.. The transportation of coal is not free either..NG can be delivered cheaper by gas pipe...

In other words you don't see the cost of building those pipe lines or the fact that many coal burners being shut down could run another 30 years. Not to mention that Gas Turbine plants cost a lot of money to install.

Thank you.

Cost is the reason for the change, gas offers a lower capital cost versus coal which is higher. Even though cost of fuel is lower with coal...

 

[eagle1462010]

Who says they are free?
Except you?
The COOP I belong to went to gas two years ago.. SWEPCO has not. The coal cars run through town day and night.. The transportation of coal is not free either..NG can be delivered cheaper by gas pipe...

In other words you don't see the cost of building those pipe lines or the fact that many coal burners being shut down could run another 30 years. Not to mention that Gas Turbine plants cost a lot of money to install.

Thank you.

Cost is the reason for the change, gas offers a lower capital cost versus coal which is higher. Even though cost of fuel is lower with coal...

Again you ignore the construction costs.................Which are causing the prices to go up already.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Uranium and Natural Gas are non renewable sources far superior for energy generation than oil and coal, and with a lot less pollution. Coal demand is on the decline, so it is no surprise coal producers want the USA to fill its skies with toxic coal dust or worse.

Yes, no pollution with uranium. Just the most expensive form of energy we have to mine, refine and deal with the waste that kills every living thing near it for 240,000 years.

Natural gas on the other hand can be a source of backup fuel for any solar thermal or geothermal plant, or even solar photovoltaic or wind plant.

My point is that if you are getting free energy for "x" days a year from solar thermal, geothermal, solar photovoltaics or wind, why would you not build a cogeneration plant? P.S. If you tell me it isn't financially feasible, I'll laugh you off the board. Charging the same rates while getting free energy for part of the year is definitely feasible.

Yet again, Silly, for at least the tenth time: solar thermal is a bottomless money pit. By numbers YOU HAVE POSTED, it is a financial loser, every time!

And once again, for at least the tenth time: a "backup" steam plant MUST BE KEPT RUNNING ALL THE TIME even when not needed! It takes time for them to start up (can take 24 hours or more, from dead-cold), because they have to heat water enough to make super-heated steam, and use that steam to spin up turbines, all before generating one watt of power!

 

[HenryBHough]

It's President Obama. You're a veteran apparently and swore a sacred oath to respect your chain of command just as I did. I dson't like him either, but refer to the office he occupies with respect.

Presidents are elected when they run according to the rules. We currently lack one. As for respect for the office, taken literally, that was abandoned when Clinton turned it into a brothel.

Yes, I do know the differences between "office" and "office" so save your smarm for someone who might care.

 

[Silhouette]

Again you ignore the construction costs.................Which are causing the prices to go up already.

Would you rather we use nuclear which is so expensive that it makes no profit at all without taxpayer subsidies in the untold $zillions?

Would you rather burn coal, oil or natural gas in an exclusive power plant/water boiler or would you like a boiling system that runs off of free energy every day the sun shines or near a geothermal source 24/7 in tandem with existing carbon boilers?

You saying that constructing different ways of boiling water on the same real estate [co-generation] is "cost prohibitive" is the lame crying of a spoiled baby on the verge of having his pacifier taken away. The savings in 5 years time or less of free energy for most of the year would more than mitigate the costs of tacking on a solar thermal array onto any existing carbon boiler plant.. Free energy for most of the year, same fees charged = massive profit.

Why anyone is resisting this is either 1. Insanity or 2. Vested interest in coal, oil or uranium mining and refining.

 

[HenryBHough]

A true AGW CULTIST would have no concern about the possibility of not having electricity. They'd merely count their deprivation as proof of their sincerity.

Rotsa Ruck wif dat!

 

[Erand7899]

Coal plants are shutting down all over the country because of back door policies of the EPA via the Oval office. They couldn't pass Cap and Trade so they are doing by interpreting old laws any way they see fit. In other words, they are by passing Congress who shot down the new regs saying the courts now write the regulations and laws.

We have a 200 year supply of coal. It's cheap energy, and with the new scrubbers and emissions systems the damage to the environment is really BS. But the Mean Green Enviro wack machine wants wind and solar. Since they are not cost effective they attack fossil fuels to try to bring those prices up to try and make their corporate sponsors viable............The end result is higher prices.

To the grid.............it's old and wasn't designed to handle the increased capacities.........So the transmission lines may very well fold if we have a harsh winter.

We have a much longer supply of sunshine and geothermal resources. So why not use their free energy as much as possible? Because your profit margin will increase? [Unless your profit derives solely from mining and refining coal, oil and uranium and not power generation]

The energy from solar, geothermal, and/or wind is not free, except to sunbathers and rattlesnakes. The initial costs of converting this energy into electricity is very expensive, and the on going maintenance is also expensive. Someone has to pay the bill, and you environmental extremists are fine with that, as long is it is not you.

Liberal/socialists are so worried that someone may make money off of providing them a valuable service, that it filters into every argument they make. Hundreds of thousands of Americans profit from mining, and refining coal, oil, and uranium. It is called employment, and boils down to good paychecks and the ability to feed, house and clothe their families.

The cost of energy affects everything we do in America, and when that cost goes up, the cost of everything in our lives goes up. The people hit the hardest when energy prices rise, are those on the cusp of the economic ladder, the working poor. But, why should you give a crap about them, when you can feel good about improving the environment.

 

[Care4all]

Coal plants are shutting down all over the country because of back door policies of the EPA via the Oval office. They couldn't pass Cap and Trade so they are doing by interpreting old laws any way they see fit. In other words, they are by passing Congress who shot down the new regs saying the courts now write the regulations and laws.

We have a 200 year supply of coal. It's cheap energy, and with the new scrubbers and emissions systems the damage to the environment is really BS. But the Mean Green Enviro wack machine wants wind and solar. Since they are not cost effective they attack fossil fuels to try to bring those prices up to try and make their corporate sponsors viable............The end result is higher prices.

To the grid.............it's old and wasn't designed to handle the increased capacities.........So the transmission lines may very well fold if we have a harsh winter.

Regarding the bold part of your post:

If the coal plants have the new scrubbers and emissions systems then they ARE NOT SHUTTING DOWN....they meet the epa REQUIREMENTS....

it is those coal plants who do NOT have the new scrubbers and emission controls that are not meeting the EPA requirements, that are having the problems and perhaps will shut down....

right?

 

[Silhouette]

The energy from solar, geothermal, and/or wind is not free, except to sunbathers and rattlesnakes. The initial costs of converting this energy into electricity is very expensive, and the on going maintenance is also expensive. Someone has to pay the bill, and you environmental extremists are fine with that, as long is it is not you...

.

So you build an array of parabolic mirrors [in contrast to mining trucks, fuel, explosives, transportation, refining, waste mitigation, environmental damage] that concentrate the sun on a hermetically-sealed oil filled tube that circulates 300 C fluid past common heat exchangers to boil water to run turbines [like all conventional power plants do] and somehow that free sunshine on that fixed system already installed is "too expensive to harvest"?

If you have the sun shining down on your parabolic tandem cogeneration array to any given power plant already in existence, a simple and cheap adjunct to install rapidly anywhere, let's say for 200 days a year average, somehow were' supposed to believe that producing energy from that plant on any given year will be more expensive using free energy 200 days a year than having to purchase refined coal or oil for those 200 days to burn instead?

Don't become a used car salesman anytime soon. You'll starve to death.

For more on how 'expensive, difficult and time consuming' installing tandem cogeneration with solar thermal can be, view the video in the link below:

 

[Redfish]

The energy from solar, geothermal, and/or wind is not free, except to sunbathers and rattlesnakes. The initial costs of converting this energy into electricity is very expensive, and the on going maintenance is also expensive. Someone has to pay the bill, and you environmental extremists are fine with that, as long is it is not you...

.

So you build an array of parabolic mirrors [in contrast to mining trucks, fuel, explosives, transportation, refining, waste mitigation, environmental damage] that concentrate the sun on a hermetically-sealed oil filled tube that circulates 300 C fluid past common heat exchangers to boil water to run turbines [like all conventional power plants do] and somehow that free sunshine on that fixed system already installed is "too expensive to harvest"?

If you have the sun shining down on your parabolic tandem cogeneration array to any given power plant already in existence, a simple and cheap adjunct to install rapidly anywhere, let's say for 200 days a year average, somehow were' supposed to believe that producing energy from that plant on any given year will be more expensive using free energy 200 days a year than having to purchase refined coal or oil for those 200 days to burn instead?

Don't become a used car salesman anytime soon. You'll starve to death.

For more on how 'expensive, difficult and time consuming' installing tandem cogeneration with solar thermal can be, view the video in the link below:

all of those mirrors require a lot of glass and plastics. How are glass and plastic made? What are the raw materials? how much energy is required?

you need to look at the entire cost, those panels don't just pop up ready to use. They are very expensive to build--------------can you say, SOLYNDRA?