It’s worked out so well Germany is now building 25 new “clean” coal plants to make up for power shortages from Solar and shutting down their nuclear plants….http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Energy-Voices/2013/0716/The-dirty-coal-behind-Germany-s-clean-energy.And, when electricity becomes a luxury good then the inmates are running the insane asylum..http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/high-costs-and-errors-of-german-transition-to-renewable-energy-a-920288.html
DF -It is that type of attitude that prevents us from going forward technologically (and socially) in this country. Why use gas lamps when candles work just fine? Why use electric lights when gas lamps work just fine? Why move to wind or solar or any other energy source if coal works just fine?Every new technology needs time to develop and be perfected. Yes, moving towards solar or wind completely too soon can cost more money than staying with coal and oil, but not allowing companies to develop and perfect these technologies will cost more money in the long run. What happens when the accessible coal and oil are gone? Suppose your neighborhood is discovered to have coal or natural gas under it – do you move, or allow a company to put a mine in your backyard? Do you want to live in the same neighborhood as a coal mine or refinery?Solar and wind power are renewable sources that, when perfected, will eventually be able to handle most of our energy needs. At that point, people like you will complain and belittle those who are trying to make it more efficient, or cheaper, or perhaps those developing orbiting ion collection sails to transfer energy back to earth.
Did you pay full price for that installation or was it subsidized by the government?That also doesn’t work out to a very efficent install in terms of kW produced for the length of time being installed..And yes, I know an Enoki is a tasty Japanese mushroom.
Let me start by rebutting the “…subsidizing BIG OIL…” argument, which by the way is a red herring and tu Quoque logical fallacy. That is it tries to redirect the argument to another industry receiving government special treatment and claim “…they get it too!” status, the classic tu quoque logical fallacy..But, that aside the oil industry primarily gets “subsidized” the same way most industry does: Through tax treatment of various sorts..http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2012/04/25/the-surprising-reason-that-oil-subsidies-persist-even-liberals-love-them/.http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/01/02/oil-gas-tax-provisions-are-not-subsidies-for-big-oil/.Even the Leftie environmentalists admit it grudgingly..http://cleantechnica.com/2013/02/07/oil-subsidies-natural-gas-subsidies/.Essentially, a good 90% of the “subsidies” are just standard tax accounting practice for any industry while the rest are not subsidies for “BIG OIL” but government programs that the oil companies don’t have any input into.
Enoki,The laws of physics were no different now than they were in 1813, but technology HAS changed. Yes I agree, nuclear power is attainable now, hydrogen power in the near future, but they too were impossible less than a century ago. What I am saying is you are discounting what may become a viable option for energy resources, even as a supplemental resource, just because you either a) do not know how to make this energy source viable and efficient yourself, or b) do not see an immediate profit from it. Allow people with the knowledge and vision to make it work achieve their goals instead of deriding them for every failure. How many failures did Edison, or Bell, or any of the early auto manufacturers like Ford or Benz have before creating a viable product? I would much rather have people working on making solar or wind power efficient now before it becomes an absolute necessity that we use it, and make the transition from fossil fuels smoothly rather than abruptly. Imagine you’re alternate scenario, with nuclear and hydrogen providing infrastructure power while wind and solar provide local supplemental power. That would free us from the chaos of the international oil trade, allowing more money to be spent on infrastructure development and social development. Actually, that sounds EXACTLY like what was happening when I lived in Germany and Finland. We are falling behind the rest of the industrialized world because too many people here have been convinced these alternatives don’t (and won’t ) work by the people who make the money from oil and coal.
Odon Premium Member over 10 years ago
You keep us smiling.
Enoki over 10 years ago
How’s that solar and wind power working out in Germany these days…?
Motivemagus over 10 years ago
And it started as OUR technology, until Ronnie Reagan cut the legs out from under it. We could be the industry leader, instead of Germany and Japan…
Enoki over 10 years ago
It’s worked out so well Germany is now building 25 new “clean” coal plants to make up for power shortages from Solar and shutting down their nuclear plants….http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Energy-Voices/2013/0716/The-dirty-coal-behind-Germany-s-clean-energy.And, when electricity becomes a luxury good then the inmates are running the insane asylum..http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/high-costs-and-errors-of-german-transition-to-renewable-energy-a-920288.html
Fourcrows over 10 years ago
DF -It is that type of attitude that prevents us from going forward technologically (and socially) in this country. Why use gas lamps when candles work just fine? Why use electric lights when gas lamps work just fine? Why move to wind or solar or any other energy source if coal works just fine?Every new technology needs time to develop and be perfected. Yes, moving towards solar or wind completely too soon can cost more money than staying with coal and oil, but not allowing companies to develop and perfect these technologies will cost more money in the long run. What happens when the accessible coal and oil are gone? Suppose your neighborhood is discovered to have coal or natural gas under it – do you move, or allow a company to put a mine in your backyard? Do you want to live in the same neighborhood as a coal mine or refinery?Solar and wind power are renewable sources that, when perfected, will eventually be able to handle most of our energy needs. At that point, people like you will complain and belittle those who are trying to make it more efficient, or cheaper, or perhaps those developing orbiting ion collection sails to transfer energy back to earth.
warjoski Premium Member over 10 years ago
Didn’t you just make a comment on another thread about how you were going to try to step back from the ‘troll black hole’ or some such?
Enoki over 10 years ago
Did you pay full price for that installation or was it subsidized by the government?That also doesn’t work out to a very efficent install in terms of kW produced for the length of time being installed..And yes, I know an Enoki is a tasty Japanese mushroom.
Enoki over 10 years ago
Let me start by rebutting the “…subsidizing BIG OIL…” argument, which by the way is a red herring and tu Quoque logical fallacy. That is it tries to redirect the argument to another industry receiving government special treatment and claim “…they get it too!” status, the classic tu quoque logical fallacy..But, that aside the oil industry primarily gets “subsidized” the same way most industry does: Through tax treatment of various sorts..http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2012/04/25/the-surprising-reason-that-oil-subsidies-persist-even-liberals-love-them/.http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/01/02/oil-gas-tax-provisions-are-not-subsidies-for-big-oil/.Even the Leftie environmentalists admit it grudgingly..http://cleantechnica.com/2013/02/07/oil-subsidies-natural-gas-subsidies/.Essentially, a good 90% of the “subsidies” are just standard tax accounting practice for any industry while the rest are not subsidies for “BIG OIL” but government programs that the oil companies don’t have any input into.
Odon Premium Member over 10 years ago
Fulton’s Folly ring a bell?
Fourcrows over 10 years ago
Enoki,The laws of physics were no different now than they were in 1813, but technology HAS changed. Yes I agree, nuclear power is attainable now, hydrogen power in the near future, but they too were impossible less than a century ago. What I am saying is you are discounting what may become a viable option for energy resources, even as a supplemental resource, just because you either a) do not know how to make this energy source viable and efficient yourself, or b) do not see an immediate profit from it. Allow people with the knowledge and vision to make it work achieve their goals instead of deriding them for every failure. How many failures did Edison, or Bell, or any of the early auto manufacturers like Ford or Benz have before creating a viable product? I would much rather have people working on making solar or wind power efficient now before it becomes an absolute necessity that we use it, and make the transition from fossil fuels smoothly rather than abruptly. Imagine you’re alternate scenario, with nuclear and hydrogen providing infrastructure power while wind and solar provide local supplemental power. That would free us from the chaos of the international oil trade, allowing more money to be spent on infrastructure development and social development. Actually, that sounds EXACTLY like what was happening when I lived in Germany and Finland. We are falling behind the rest of the industrialized world because too many people here have been convinced these alternatives don’t (and won’t ) work by the people who make the money from oil and coal.