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.
There isn't a third party that I like, and I am not going to just join a random party because I want to feel good about voting third party.
I never suggested you should join anything.
Quote:
There is more than just energy policies for voting for a person. I disagree with Obama about that, but that doesn't mean I disagree with him on everything or even enough to vote against him, which I didn't I voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012, I didn't like either Republican candidate and had no interest in voting for any poorly formed third party candidate that couldn't do anything in office if they ever won the election.
Yes you agreed with him. Too bad he really didn't agree with you.
Yes you agreed with him. Too bad he really didn't agree with you.
Who says I need to agree with a politician 100% to vote for them or they have to reflect my opinions 100%? That is just insane ideology that will always fail you. I voted for Obama because I agree with him more than I disagree with him.
Who says I need to agree with a politician 100% to vote for them or they have to reflect my opinions 100%? That is just insane ideology that will always fail you. I voted for Obama because I agree with him more than I disagree with him.
And we both agree that green energy really isn't much more than a political issue for him.
Wrong Solar Panels can do a ROI in four years. The issue is that the utilities do not want people to put solar panels on their houses so they do not want people to connect the panels to the grid and have the solar panel electricity production deducted from the electricity bill. It's why the Koch bros and others have championed banning the installation of solar panels on homes because it would make the electric power companies obsolete because a lot of solar panel owners have found they generate enough power they no longer pay electric bills but the electric company pays them.
California, Hawaii the ROI seems to be four years or less. Other states it's seven or even ten years. The panels have a 20 year life span.
Again only for grid tied systems after the feds and state pay for half the installation and you add in the projected value of the renewable energy credit. This is both burden to the taxpayer and ratepayer. They will never pay for themselves if you had to foot the whole bill yourself.
As far as the utilities go if you are going to connect to the grid you should pay for it or do you expect the ratepayer to pick up the full tab for that too?
It's deep coal mining. Less environmental damaging then the strip mining which was being done. FYI the strip mining coal that coal mining companies want to do doesn't get them that much coal compared to the deep mining which is long term mining.
Underground mining is very expensive. The largest and most productive mines we have are surface mines, by a huge margin.
Again only for grid tied systems after the feds and state pay for half the installation and you add in the projected value of the renewable energy credit. This is both burden to the taxpayer and ratepayer. They will never pay for themselves if you had to foot the whole bill yourself.
As far as the utilities go if you are going to connect to the grid you should pay for it or do you expect the ratepayer to pick up the full tab for that too?
False. The systems were paying for themselves when people were getting any assist at all. It just took ten to twenty years with the older solar tech. The gov't assist is to make it faster and more attractive. Else why would power companies try to kill solar roof installation.
Oil companies receive billions in tax payer money despite being incredibly profitable and these oil companies cheat on their taxes. They shouldn't be receiving any subsidies at all.
No nuclear power plant would have ever been built if the federal gov't didn't foot the bill. Has nothing to do with regulations. The reason nuclear power plants are expensive it's because if you don't want them to emit dangerous levels of radiation a certain component has to be built. Said component cost over 250 million dollars each and only 20 of them are made each year causing quite the bottleneck hence why orders are taken in advance for this component 15-20 years before the plant even begins construction. Your typical nuclear power plant needs for of these components so a billion dollars just for one of the important parts of the complex. Add in the rest of the materials, labor, transport of said materials and it's no wonder a nuclear power plant typically costs about six billion dollars to build. Oh also the cost of destroying the nuclear power when it's decommissioned at the end of it's life span is also factored in and a good portion of the plant has to be hauled away as nuclear waste and stored. Yes even those 250 million dollar components that weight over 150 tons are nuclear waste after several decades of being blasted by radiation.
Underground mining is very expensive. The largest and most productive mines we have are surface mines, by a huge margin.
False. Short term yes long term no. Long term the underground mines produce far more coal because the surface mines only get a portion of the coal out.
Wrong Solar Panels can do a ROI in four years. The issue is that the utilities do not want people to put solar panels on their houses so they do not want people to connect the panels to the grid and have the solar panel electricity production deducted from the electricity bill. It's why the Koch bros and others have championed banning the installation of solar panels on homes because it would make the electric power companies obsolete because a lot of solar panel owners have found they generate enough power they no longer pay electric bills but the electric company pays them. .
The only time a third party had a chance was back in the days of the Bull Moose Party which also went by the name of the Progressive Party. They had a chance because Teddy Roosevelt a former President became one of them and the Bull Moose Party was the strongest third party in history. Know how well the Bull Moose did when 200 of it's candidates ran for seats in the house in 1912? Nine of them won. 21 ran for state gov. None won. 250 were elected to various local offices.
Know what happened when Teddy left? The bull moose party didn't win a single election.
Third parties are a joke vote. Out of a 1000 third party candidates not a single one will get more then a 100 votes in an election while their opponents will get hundreds of thousands of votes.
Do you ever post anything but lies?
2010 Facts:
Libertarians running for U.S. House receive over 1,073,000 votes.
Pamela Brown, running for California Lieutenant Governor against both a Republican and a Democrat, receives 574,640 votes.
38 Libertarians are elected or re-elected to public office.
There are 154 Libertarians holding elected office.
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.
