- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 4, 2012 at 12:37 am #753580
kootchmanMemberWhen and if solar is ready for prime time.. produces power efficiently AND can be stored efficiently ( no talks about the battery technology and the toxicity and disposal costs) go for it… in the meantime.. we exploit what we have. It’s nuts… I have to go to Canada to buy my shower heads, toilets and now lightbulbs..
April 4, 2012 at 1:53 am #753581
Genesee HillParticipantMr. Kootchman,
You must have a lot to dump in your toilet. My American-Standard and Gerber, USA spec. toilets work fine, for our family. ROFL.
You are quite the tool, dude. Quite the tool, indeed. Perhaps if you increase your sewer size to fifty feet diameter, you will have a bit less problem… hehe
April 4, 2012 at 2:03 am #753582
Genesee HillParticipantThough, I agree you may need a Canadian made fire-hose to shampoo your big head…hehe
April 4, 2012 at 2:04 am #753583
Genesee HillParticipantOver, and out, ’til this summer…
April 4, 2012 at 8:44 pm #753584
JVMemberAnd for today’s green scam. You can’t make this stuff up.
one turbine that cost the city $21,000 to install saved the city $4 on its energy bill. Overall, $416,000 worth of turbines have netted the city $2,800 in energy savings.
Even with my math skills, I can tell you that their payoff date may be slightly further out than the 2080 Olympics.
See the link below.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/mar/30/nv-energy-windmill-program-generates-rebates-littl/
Like Kootch said, I can’t wait until the technology catches up with their desire to make it look like they are doing a good deed (with somebody else’s money)
April 4, 2012 at 11:22 pm #753585
redblackParticipanti don’t understand why conservatives think that we on the left want to replace oil and other fossil fuels immediately. sometimes i wonder if you guys are paid by the fossil fuels lobbies.
the idea is to use less and less over time as the technology for alternate sources improves. to do that effectively, companies need help with R&D money, especially during a recession.
reducing demand – and thereby reducing cost – is not an all-or-nothing strategy.
rome wasn’t built in a day, and neither was our energy grid. as it ages and fossil fuels become more scarce and more expensive, we as a country have to adapt.
April 4, 2012 at 11:56 pm #753586
DBPMemberCongrats, JV! You’ve just proven that government programs can be wasteful. What you have yet to prove is that wind power is not (and never will be) viable.
But if you’re looking for government programs to debunk, I’ve got an even bigger scoop for you than wind turbines. How’s this for a headline:
U.S. Democracy Project in Iraq and Afghanistan Costs Billions, Nets Nothing
I guess that proves democracy doesn’t work after all . . . huh?
April 5, 2012 at 12:38 am #753587
oddrealityParticipantKootch, get a Toto toilet! They can handle anything!
April 5, 2012 at 2:48 am #753588
hooper1961Membernuclear even after Japan situation is the likely long term answer. fossel fuels (you are seeing it already at the pump) will price themselves to a point where alternatives make sense. people who buy gas guzzling suv’s will pay the price for that choice
April 5, 2012 at 3:50 am #753589
jamminjMember“i don’t understand why conservatives think that we on the left want to replace oil and other fossil fuels immediately. sometimes i wonder if you guys are paid by the fossil fuels lobbies.”
because there motive is the next election cycle, not what is best for the country. drill baby drill is not a realistic approach by anybody, but it makes for a nice political slogan. During bush, the president has no say on oil prices, now Obama is the sole responsibility on international oil prices.
This is not about finding a solution, but just another way to find a political foothold.
April 5, 2012 at 1:25 pm #753590
redblackParticipantjamminj: oh i understand the big mouths on tee vee and why they say that crap. what i don’t understand is average people who believe that their neighbors are snarling bolsheviks salivating for our chance to replace every gas station with a wind farm, leaving hundreds of millions of cars stalled and idle – while 4 lanes of buses chug everyone downtown running on nothing more than chicken fat.
the mentality that i’ve noticed presenting itself among conservatives in political forums lately is, “well, i’m for [x], therefore you must be against [x] and for [y] and [z]. and everyone knows that [y] and [z] are stupid.”
so, as a ilberal, i’m left defending something i may or may not believe – but no matter to the questioner: because i’m a liberal, i must be the polar opposite to a conservative.
like i’ve said before, it’s an incurious football game mentality that doesn’t allow for nuance or exceptions.
April 5, 2012 at 5:50 pm #753591
kootchmanMemberDBP.. it’s not viable. One, it costs more. It’s viable only because the cost per kwh is rolled into your rates and “averaged”. If it were not for government subsidy, it wouldn’t exist. Take away the government subsidy (corporate welfare) and the forced mandates to bu the power and see how many wind farms are built… none. Second, it is an eco disaster. The damn things are a visual insult. So much for the ability to seek our solitude. I wonder what the Beaufort scale has as historical readings on Walden Pond. The blades generate vibrations that have decimated populations of burrowing animals… you can buy gopher repellents.. that are nothing but little windmills to create harmonic disturbance. One square mile of nuclear plant facility produces 1 million megawatts per year.
““Let’s put this into perspective,” says Alexander, “we could line 300 miles of mountaintops from Chattanooga, Tenn., to Bristol, Va., with wind turbines and still produce only one-quarter the electricity we get from one reactor on one square mile at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Watts Bar Nuclear Plant.”
Sage Grouse abandoned nesting habitat in Wyoming. Bird strikes are killing thousands of birds per day… some, migratory birds which by federal law and international treaty are protected, and not one utility has faced federal prosecution. Raptors need the mamallian and avian ground species as prey to sustain their populations… both populations plummet in wind farms. Over half the migratory bird species fly primarily at night, using celestial aids and magnetic fields …they cannot see the blades and are chopped into political pillow stuffing. Over 80 confirmed golden eagle deaths in California alone… you or I killing one? $10,000 fine up to 5 years in prison.
Enjoy the video….. political hypocrisy …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEersoJLtRw&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLE37D1FDB6B4BD6F6
“
Ah the cause celebe’ too.. remember when transmission lines were hooted and hollered by the eco community? Every single wind farm has to go to the grid… more transmission lines… so if they deliver wind generated electricity … you’ll take two of em?
April 5, 2012 at 6:07 pm #753592
kootchmanMemberKeystone was delayed by the Messiah… supposedly for enviornmental concerns… but we will toss those overboard in a second if “the base” likes windmills. Green means the entire eco system is evaluated. And it has not. We are fast tracking wind to appease urban green voters whose idea of wildlife is 4 AM bar closings…. where are the environmental impact surverys?
“While these recent advances point towards a better regulated and more responsive wind industry, many projects that may still be very risky for birds are being fast-tracked. For example, several projects in the Great Plains states of North and South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas are going ahead without provisions to protect endangered Whooping Cranes. Cranes are well known to be at risk from collisions with electricity transmission lines, and thousands of turbines now being erected along the cranes’ migration route could provide an additional, serious hazard at a time when the population is already at a critically low level.”
The current energy plan for the United States calls for 350,000 megawatts of power generation capacity from wind energy by 2030, which is predicted to require building wind farms to cover a total of 19,000 square miles of countryside—approximately the combined areas of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Jersey. The effects on birds and bird habitats could be significant, and require close attention and mitigation
April 5, 2012 at 10:49 pm #753593
redblackParticipantkootch:
what is your major malfunction regarding keystone?
that pipeline moves canadian oil to global markets.
it has nothing to do with america beyond gaining rights-of-way for foreign corporations and providing a few one-time construction jobs. all maintencance will be done by the owners – who are not american.
i’m sure you’ll find a way to deny this truth, though:
the u.s. has produced more oil since the messiah was elected than at any time since oil became america’s heroin.
what are you so chagrined about? obama has basically pissed off the greens by drilling here and now – which is what the right has wrongly been bashing him for. the messiah is doing exactly what you have been demanding… except somehow he isn’t. WTF?
can you please pick a policy position and stick to it?
April 6, 2012 at 12:07 am #753594
JanSParticipanthere’s something about Keystone from the end of Feb. It’s not what people think it is , at times..
http://www.npr.org/2012/02/26/147451538/what-happens-if-the-keystone-xl-pipeline-isnt-built
April 6, 2012 at 2:33 am #753595
kootchmanMemberWhat is is about global supply and demand that you can’t grasp? It’s not that hard redblack..The greater the supply, the lower the cost. Even if we do export oil… and we don’t. Mostly we sell refined products, made in Amercian plants, by American workers, who reduce of trade deficits. Obama has not drilled…. not where he has authority to drill… production has increased on private lands, actual production on federally leased lands had dropped 18 per cent. Funny he is over trying to get the Saudis to increase output… WTF do you read ANYTHING? while choking off domestic supply. All that increased production has come off PRIVATE lease holdings. Where the Messiah can’t do reign imperial. Obama hasn’t done a damn thing to increase oil extraction. Stop listening to his kindergarten talking points and do some fact checking…. even if you don’t agree with it. Ya wanna keep defense spending down? How about pulling two surface battle groups out of the Gulf region that are there to defend our oil imports.
April 6, 2012 at 2:47 am #753596
kootchmanMemberBut leave it to redblack… ignore all the data and the critique of the enviromental impact of windmill farms. …. we are rushing to construction without environmental review. Political hypocrites.. the very same people who cite “reputable” scientists as being in “complete agreement”..in global warning. will gladly ignore reputable scientists who say wind farms are wholesale slaughter of keystone species of raptors, migratory birds.. not one single comment on that… but do focus on the Keystone pipeline. Here’s a thing for ya … redblack… know why Brent and Texas intermediate are 10-15 per barrel apart in price? Because refineries are built to maximize their source product conversions. Our current costs are about 10 per barrel less than Europe.. because they are fine tuned to refine domestic production. Even if we were exporting crude oil …saying we are exporting oil as a bad thing is like saying exporting Boeing jets, US made cars, soybeans, beef, or apples…are bad things…. that is revenue dude… taxable revenue. We export commodities everyday…. it’s a good thing. I missed Luddite economics.
April 6, 2012 at 9:11 am #753597
kootchmanMemberAsk every school district in the states that the pipeline rund through… ask about the dedicated revenues. The same way Washington State sells off timber resources to pay some of our school bills. The port of Galveston fees..,, the oil and chemical workers who produce the fuels. lubricants, plastics. medical devices etc. etc. etc…. we aren;rt funding government R&D in university centers… we are making grants and loans to Obama campaign donors. Government bureaucrats even thinking they can outsmart private equity…. zero return on that effort.
April 6, 2012 at 12:56 pm #753598
redblackParticipantLOL. you have got to be freaking kidding, right? dude, if you’re going to talk about tar sands oil, don’t even pretend to be concerned about the environment.
that crap takes a lot more energy to extract and refine, and it lies under about 750,000 acres of carbon-sequestering forest land in alberta. dust bowl, anyone?
wind turbines kill birds? yet you don’t have any problem with boeing selling more planes, do you?
and as far as drilling goes, “drill here, drill now” is only subject to wherever conservatives say we should drill, huh? the fact that the gulf of mexico is producing record amounts of oil isn’t good enough for you?
just to be clear: are you for any alternative or renewable forms of energy? (and nuclear is not renewable.)
and evidently you were an A student in luddite economics. which is why you’re clinging to fossil fuels and the things that rely on them, like the internal combustion engine. sure it’s great when we export cars. but why aren’t we exporting smarter, non-CO-emitting cars?
April 7, 2012 at 2:57 am #753599
kootchmanMemberPoint well made redblack. More CO2 is released from rotting vegetation than fuels could ever duplicate. I am for any energy source that is market viable, and does not require a federal subsidy.
The point was, and is… we are in glut of feel goodism about energy generation that has not passed the scrutiny of comparing the costs. We have done this before.. we destroyed cultures, economies, for hydro generation… and ecosystems that make 760K acres look like peanuts… we destroyed the eco balance of continental size drainage basins. So your rational is.. because Boeing destroys bird life.. it’s ok to double down, and destroy their food sources, nesting grounds, food sources, and the birds themselves…. if Boeing does it… it’s ok for windmills to destroy more and compound the problem? Yea, I would say that should a well blow out occur… as witnessed by the BP spill, it’s easier to control How many months did it take to bring Deepwater Horizon under control…5 months… and another 4 months to declare it sealed.. about 9 months…. proof? The Iraqis blew 600 wells in Kuwait,,, Boots and Coots, Red Adair, Wild Well Controls.. put em all out an capped all 600 in ten months. The demand for oil is rising..it will happen for the next 50 years. Instead of expanding the distribution of natural gas… the EPA is blocking development. CO2 is not a poisonous gas dude.. it’s the base stock of life itself…. from CO2 cometh cellulose and sugars… you are a CO2 compilation dude. Alberta has a cover and reclamation program… the land is not let to fo fallow. Unlike the real dustbowl. You should be delighted we have land surface extraction resources in lieu of deep water drilling, Keeps those big deep blue water tankers at a minmum too. Would you rather transit oil by pipeline, on land, or wait until a Chinese supertanker runs aground in Puget Sound?
April 7, 2012 at 2:58 pm #753600
redblackParticipantI am for any energy source that is market viable, and does not require a federal subsidy.
so you’re against more oil drilling and you want higher efficiency standards?
i think it violates the rules of debate to take both sides of an issue.
April 7, 2012 at 4:26 pm #753601
kootchmanMemberThere’s no conflict. I am for more oil drilling, lots of it. As one of the highest paying, taxed industries, I would think your Messiah would to. Somebody has to pay for the 5 Trillion in debt we just passed. It’s oil that is subsidizing, or trying to, fund Obamanomics. We aren’t exporting non polluting cars because we aren’t making them … they don’t pass the hurdle of being cost effective. The Chevy Volt, which relies on coal fired generation plants to charge, have price tag of about 60K… where ya gonna export those? We can’t give a 10K tax break for every unit sold, even if it is UAW workers.. another Solyndra gambit. Oil is a calorie dense, market viable, fuel source ….. and the federal government has given nary a dime of taxpayer money to oil companies. They expense actual costs of doing business…just like any other manufacturing company. Obama is calling expenses a taxpayer subsidy. But we will see… at $4.00 per gallon… I see the job report yesterday..120K new jobs? Dropped more than 50%… I am going to guess that gas prices had much to do with it. So will the inflation of your groceries…. loving Obamanomics now? Sucking every dollar of discretionary income out of your wallet. Since 2010 the price of the dollar has fallen over 30 per cent…. or, we are paying for stimulus 1, 2, with a hidden “tax” … inflation. With 120K new jobs, sure is no pressure to increase wages, and with no productivity gains… well .. you know the rest of the story. I would love to see demand go down with lower prices… not because demand slacks because the economy isn;t growing. Drill for it, fracture for it… but increase the supply and prices will fall. We drill in the gulf because that is where the leases are let. Dropping those rigs is 20 times more expensive than land drilling. We will see what $ 5.00 gallon and a stalled recovery does for the 2012 elections. You may yet get your wish… with empty factories, laid off workers, no cubicles to heat, no commuters, CO2 emissions will go down.
April 7, 2012 at 4:37 pm #753602
redblackParticipantOil is a calorie dense, market viable, fuel source ….. and the federal government has given nary a dime of taxpayer money to oil companies.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/29/politics/oil-subsidies/index.html
I would love to see demand go down with lower prices.
and i’d like to see demand go down because we’re not burning oil to make electricity or run all of our cars, trucks, and trains. airplanes consume a lot, too. and so does having a huge military on the exact opposite side of the planet.
you’re also completely ignoring global demand. suddenly, the country that consumes 20% of the world’s oil has another junkie living on its street.
April 7, 2012 at 4:44 pm #753603
kootchmanMemberAll the more reason to drill for more… INCLUDING natural gas, where we happen to have the largest proven reserves in the world. Imagine… having a favorable balance of trade with China and they losing jobs to us because of energy costs. Open up the federal lands and get the EPA off the ass of natural gas producers to satisfy Obama loonies. You do know that we have restricted Aleyeska exports are part of the North Slope deal? We could do the same on federal lands as a compromise… and let private lands sell as much as they want to whatever customers they want.
April 7, 2012 at 5:24 pm #753604
redblackParticipant -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.