Gulf of Maine warming

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by JohnR

It's not a Right wing talking point - it's math & physics.

Solar generates about 3% or US power (Guv hopes to get it to 20% in 25-30 years.)
Wind generates 9%
Hydro 6%
All other renewables 1%
So about 20%

Coal is 22%
Gas is 38%
Nuclear is 20%

If you are honest about power generation, you are not going to replace 60% of the US Power Generation with Solar and Wind.

And ^^^^ THIS is just to replace CURRENT energy generation. Before a mile is put on a car.









Let's have some lifetime Guv bureaucrats come up with the solutiuoin - that'll work.

If everyone didn't hit the nuclear panic button after 3 Mile Island, the US could be producing much more nuclear generated power. It was the solution. The incident at 3 Mile Island showed that safeguards worked. The release of a minimal amount of steam killed the future of the nuclear power industry. I lived about 10 miles south of Pilgrim, and it was the least of my worries.

Here, almost half of our power comes from nuclear and hydro. Only about 4.5% from natural gas, 3% from coal, and the latter is being phased out. We actually burn wood for power, too, about 13% of it comes from wood. Power plants also provide steam for municipal heating in winter.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by piemma

INSANE! Almost $600 for electric!

Yes, and that was several years ago. My wife is home full time with 3 kids, they like to keep the AC cranking and they like the pool water warm. Not sure why the house has to be a meat locker while the pool has to be a jacuzzi. But the solar panels helped quite a bit.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I was referring to this part of what you said "I am happy that all of those screaming climate change from the rafters are insisting that people making minimum wage should just buy a 50K electric car powered by wind or solar."

Who is insisting that people making minimum wage should just buy a 50k electric car? I can see why the faux types would say that as it gets nutters wound up.

And you don't want the guv bureaucrats to come up with the solution, but is it ok they already stacked it in favor of the problematic side. One is ok to some people and the other isn't. That is why we are where we are. It's all about money and picking teams. Ironically, demand and therefore consumption and therefore prices and would be a lot lower if it weren't from the ff industry grip on politicians, particulary the nutters.

"Who is insisting that people making minimum wage should just buy a 50k electric car? I can see why the faux types would say that as it gets nutters wound up. "

Pete Buttigieg, the transportation secretary, that's who. He said if you have a problem with paying $4.50 for a gallon of gas, the solution was to go buy an electric car. That's a stupid and elitist thing to say for many reasons, but that's what he said.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by beamie

.

I think the fact that you did this is great.

But I am more a realist.
18k / 18 years. A grand a year this costs you. What is you normal juice bill 150 a month. 1800 a year? So you save 800/ yr.

That’s not a head turner.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Our bill was 190-220 a month. Also, you have to add in the difference from inflation and other ways the electric company will stick it to people for those 18 years. Plus that money can be on the market or other investments. Not chump change in any way. Your math wasn't exactly right. Break even in 7 years. They last 25 years. At saving $200 a month after break even is $2400 a year or about about 43K saved in energy bills over 18 years. Reality is probably closer to 60k with inflation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I was referring to this part of what you said "I am happy that all of those screaming climate change from the rafters are insisting that people making minimum wage should just buy a 50K electric car powered by wind or solar."

Who is insisting that people making minimum wage should just buy a 50k electric car? I can see why the faux types would say that as it gets nutters wound up.

And you don't want the guv bureaucrats to come up with the solution, but is it ok they already stacked it in favor of the problematic side. One is ok to some people and the other isn't. That is why we are where we are. It's all about money and picking teams. Ironically, demand and therefore consumption and therefore prices and would be a lot lower if it weren't from the ff industry grip on politicians, particulary the nutters.

You can't BUY a $15,000 Corolla. Whether on minimum wage or not.

Most of us here are not minimum wage and can grumpily withstand $4/gal fuel more easily than new parents or those starting out.

We have two problems, immediate supply and pricing of fuels that is hampered by Biden Admin, and long term converting where applicable from fossil fuels to more safe power generation" Nuke, some NatGas, and renewables.

And it really means squat if we do all this work and China, India, and others do not. We are sure AF cleaner drilling for oil, extracting it, and processing it than just about anyone else.



And yes, the GUV bureaucrats can't outline a plan that will get us from where we are to where we need to be. If they did you would have seen some. Instead we'll have stupid unimplementable requirements like those in the Green New Deal. But sure, right wing talking points.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by Mike P

If everyone didn't hit the nuclear panic button after 3 Mile Island, the US could be producing much more nuclear generated power. It was the solution. The incident at 3 Mile Island showed that safeguards worked. The release of a minimal amount of steam killed the future of the nuclear power industry. I lived about 10 miles south of Pilgrim, and it was the least of my worries.

Here, almost half of our power comes from nuclear and hydro. Only about 4.5% from natural gas, 3% from coal, and the latter is being phased out. We actually burn wood for power, too, about 13% of it comes from wood. Power plants also provide steam for municipal heating in winter.

Yes, and the systems they are coming out with now both are not breeder reactors - so they do not generate weapons grade materials in output, and the newest designs being engineered can even use nuclear waste or easy to find materials as fuel.

It is also the only SERIOUS way to power this country if one intends to stop using fossil fuels. Any other plan is absolutely absurd, foolish, and won't work.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by JohnR

You can't BUY a $15,000 Corolla. Whether on minimum wage or not.

Most of us here are not minimum wage and can grumpily withstand $4/gal fuel more easily than new parents or those starting out.

We have two problems, immediate supply and pricing of fuels that is hampered by Biden Admin, and long term converting where applicable from fossil fuels to more safe power generation" Nuke, some NatGas, and renewables.

And it really means squat if we do all this work and China, India, and others do not. We are sure AF cleaner drilling for oil, extracting it, and processing it than just about anyone else.



And yes, the GUV bureaucrats can't outline a plan that will get us from where we are to where we need to be. If they did you would have seen some. Instead we'll have stupid unimplementable requirements like those in the Green New Deal. But sure, right wing talking points.

You keep ignoring the point, but I guess no one really is insisting people on minimum wage but a 50K electric car. If it isn't a right wing talking point, I don't know where you got it. They do keep spewing that nonsense.

The Biden gas price thing is also right wing b.s. Prior to Ukraine, we were producing domestic oil at levels in the range of or higher at times than 2016 to 2020. Opec cut production during the pandemic and never raised it once demand increased. Increased global demand coupled with limited global supply caused the squeeze. It is a lie or just ignorance to pin it on Biden and the pundits and nutters in office know it, but it helps them get elected.

Oh yeah, and nuclear is so expensive. Big part of why we don't build new plants to go along with people in power are put there by coal and oil industries.

[JFigliuolo]

You two... off to the political forum!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by zimmy

You keep ignoring the point, but I guess no one really is insisting people on minimum wage but a 50K electric car. If it isn't a right wing talking point, I don't know where you got it. They do keep spewing that nonsense.

The Biden gas price thing is also right wing b.s. Prior to Ukraine, we were producing domestic oil at levels in the range of or higher at times than 2016 to 2020. Opec cut production during the pandemic and never raised it once demand increased. Increased global demand coupled with limited global supply caused the squeeze. It is a lie or just ignorance to pin it on Biden and the pundits and nutters in office know it, but it helps them get elected.

Oh yeah, and nuclear is so expensive. Big part of why we don't build new plants to go along with people in power are put there by coal and oil industries.

https://twitter.com/greg_price11/sta...92374435061761

BIDEN: "A typical driver will save about $80 a month from not having to pay gas at the pump" if they just buy an electric car.

Out of deference to JoeyFig, wanna move this to the Political Forum?

Originally Posted by JFigliuolo

You two... off to the political forum!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Okay ; )

[wdmso]

Only the far right thinks Green energy is a scam and the far left think the world can exist oil free.

While normal humans see the benefit of a multiple prong approach to energy..

Imagine if the wheel was never adopted because people thought it was a hoax or was more worried it was going to put the horse out of business..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Guppy]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Only the far right thinks Green energy is a scam and the far left think the world can exist oil free.

While normal humans see the benefit of a multiple prong approach to energy..

Imagine if the wheel was never adopted because people thought it was a hoax or was more worried it was going to put the horse out of business..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Meanwhile back in CCB, the waters not warm enough, skunk on the flatties today….

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by JohnR

https://twitter.com/greg_price11/sta...92374435061761



Out of deference to JoeyFig, wanna move this to the Political Forum?

Okay ; )

I don't go in that cesspool of humanity anymore . Woulda been best if I ignored this thread, too. As a last word before I go catch the bottom of the drop, all of these but the Tesla's (which don't qualify) are between about 23-31k after incentives under normal market conditions. https://www.autotrader.com/best-cars/10-cheapest-evs

So... he is right and nobody is screaming for 50k cars for minimum wage earners Transition has started whether Exxon or Tucker C want it or not.

[hq2]

Yes it has. And it will pick up speed over the next few years. Wind is growing steadily, while solar is growing almost exponentially; it will be about 5% of the total this year, and nearly 20 in MA. I see no reason why wind and solar could not be at least 40% of the total by the end of the decade, and maybe more.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

this article was written by Michael Shellenberger, who the New York Times called “a hero of the environment”.

he has a different take on wind and solar. i don’t know if he’s right, or if those who say wind and solar are obviously the answer, are right. i do know that he raises many points that the environmentalists never, ever speak about. Either he’s lying, or the environmentalists are being very misleading.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/quillet...he-planet/amp/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[hq2]

No, renewables alone cannot do it. The other part has to come from a commitment to conservation; using telecommuting, retrofitting homes, putting in LED lights, cutting back on jet air travel; these are all a large part of the solution.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by hq2

No, renewables alone cannot do it. The other part has to come from a commitment to conservation; using telecommuting, retrofitting homes, putting in LED lights, cutting back on jet air travel; these are all a large part of the solution.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

but switching to EVs means we need a lot more electricity.

oil or nuclear generated electricity will play a big role. has to, unless a new technology emerges which is possible.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[hq2]

Maybe; depends on how much we conserve elsewhere.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

I think wind and solar play a part, but if they double it won't be close to enough.




Zimmy - you can't get them even IF you had the money.