Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wind & solar are only cheaper if you ignore the cost of back-up. Not only does the back-up power source make the process more expensive, but doesn't lead to any savings in "carbon frootprint," either.
So, what's the point of alternatives except as a political maneuver to subjugate the masses?
It's wrong. All generation requires backup. No new backup has been built for wind or solar because there is more than enough on all systems already. Engineers know these things.
I wouldn't consider 35 cents per kWh winning. The only way that is winning hand is stacked deck.
No kidding! In my neck of the woods we are paying less than 7 cents per kWh for the electricity itself, and even with delivery charges it is below 16 cents per kWh.
It's wrong. All generation requires backup. No new backup has been built for wind or solar because there is more than enough on all systems already. Engineers know these things.
You still gotta pay for the fuel for back-up and add that to the cost of building & maintaining your alternative sites, and that fuel is still producing co2.
Perhaps your stocking cap of ideology is pulled too far down over your eyes to see the whole picture.
You still gotta pay for the fuel for back-up and add that to the cost of building & maintaining your alternative sites, and that fuel is still producing co2.
Perhaps your stocking cap of ideology is pulled too far down over your eyes to see the whole picture.
Um, OP, you keep completely ignoring any post that doesn't support what YOU see as the "truth."
Hmmm ...
(And for the record, I have no horse in this race, but it would be nice if we could do without the hyperbole and the ignorance.)
And this is what I got back ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever
I forgive your ignorance. You aren't a member of the community. For your education look up the Washington State Energy Independence Act.
Remember, while there are two sides to every story, one of them is wrong. Coal fired generation in this country is already down by over 50% this century.
Ooooooooh, didn't realize there was a "community" that I didn't belong to (do you have a secret handshake too?).
I'm "just" a consumer. Just before I bought my current house, I seriously considered getting solar panels installed at the back of my house (basically a perfect Southern exposure and a TON of sun), given the HUGE federal and state subsidies going on at the time. But even WITH those subsidies (which IIRC were something like $10,000), it didn't make financial sense. (I started a thread about it here: https://www.city-data.com/forum/house...ar-panels.html .)
So as much as I would LIKE to support "green living" when I can, sometimes it simply makes no financial sense.
And more to the point of this thread, coal seems to STILL be quite viable in certain areas of the country.
But the point of my earlier post was to ask why the OP simply ignored every post that didn't support his point of view? LOTS of people are knowledgeable about this stuff, you know. So why the arrogance?
You have every right to participate. Consumers can be as well informed as those who pull a paycheck from ANY of the industries currently being discussed on this thread.
Ooooooooh, didn't realize there was a "community" that I didn't belong to (do you have a secret handshake too?).
I'm "just" a consumer. Just before I bought my current house, I seriously considered getting solar panels installed at the back of my house (basically a perfect Southern exposure and a TON of sun), given the HUGE federal and state subsidies going on at the time. But even WITH those subsidies (which IIRC were something like $10,000), it didn't make financial sense. (I started a thread about it here: https://www.city-data.com/forum/house...ar-panels.html .)
So as much as I would LIKE to support "green living" when I can, sometimes it simply makes no financial sense.
And more to the point of this thread, coal seems to STILL be quite viable in certain areas of the country.
But the point of my earlier post was to ask why the OP simply ignored every post that didn't support his point of view? LOTS of people are knowledgeable about this stuff, you know. So why the arrogance?
The fact that you go to the doctor for treatment doesn't mean that you know the foggiest thing about medicine. I sincerely doubt you understand either the technical or the financial side of things. That's not your fault you are as you say just a consumer. Your understanding of how it happens stops at the wall switch -- up and the lights go on, down and they go off.
I don't ignore the posts that "don't support my point of view". I dismiss the posts that are based upon bad science, bad engineering and bad finance. I'm qualified to make those judgements. There are two sides to all argument. The side that says coal-fired electrical generation in the United States is a viable business are supporting the side of the argument that is wrong. That may offend you. That isn't a major concern.
It's wrong. All generation requires backup. No new backup has been built for wind or solar because there is more than enough on all systems already. Engineers know these things.
:How does your conscience let you sleep at night???? Projects are being built all over the country to firm up wind......SMART wind developers actually plan to install NG plants alongside their wind farms to firm up sales.... Sheesh can you really stand behind what you say????
Last edited by my54ford; 03-31-2019 at 01:29 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.