Alternative energy alone won't meet US needs (solar, oil, costs)
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.
A good thing that the renewable energy standard is only going to be 20-25 %. How naive can one get?
Fail
No part of the Democrats plan focuses on anything but renewables. For that matter as it's written right now Hydro or Nuclear won't even fall within the mandates.
No part of the Democrats plan focuses on anything but renewables. For that matter as it's written right now Hydro or Nuclear won't even fall within the mandates.
Good. Hydro is about maxed for locations.
Nukes are about the most expensive boondoggle option there could be.
The article even looks like The Onion type comedy. Starts with . . . .
"A GOP senator from the nation's leading coal-producing state contends . . . "
Right up front, you know nothing but BS will follow.
No part of the Democrats plan focuses on anything but renewables. For that matter as it's written right now Hydro or Nuclear won't even fall within the mandates.
Conservation is a major focus for the Administration and Chu even says he's going to fund some coal research. There's billions in subsidies already queued up for nuclear from the 2005 Act. Nobody wants to build one.
But the OP implied that the democrats were going to try to achieve 100% renewables. That either stupidly naive of just a typical RW lie. 20-25% renewable electrical power is what people are discussing.
What fails are the pitiful attempts to spin the argument.
What fails are the pitiful attempts to spin the argument.
Correct. And again the Democrats plan focuses almost solely on renewable energy. The only one spinning anything would be you.
Quote:
Good. Hydro is about maxed for locations.
Nukes are about the most expensive boondoggle option there could be.
The 20 or 25% that rlchurch is referring too will be mandated, existing hydro or nuclear plants which produce no CO2 will not count towards the percentage as the bill is written right now. So if your electric percentage is heavily reliant on hydro or nuclear power you're still in the same boat as someone who's power is 100% fossil fuel.
Currently about 3% of the generation falls under the bill, the 20-25% will have have to be made up entirely by new generation through wind, solar or geo-thermal. If you're electric company fiails to meet the mandate it will get fined ultimately costing you the consumer.
Currently about 3% of the generation falls under the bill, the 20-25% will have have to be made up entirely by new generation through wind, solar or geo-thermal. If you're electric company fiails to meet the mandate it will get fined ultimately costing you the consumer.
Which is why my electrical coop's officers are throughly against cap-and-tax.
Thread closed - duplicate thread was posted in another forum. See TOS.
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.
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.
