New York State mandates all electric buildings

[T. A. Gardner]

I am curious as to what heating system you know of for high rise buildings that doesn't require electricity to work. Could you enlighten us since you are so knowledgeable about this heating system that requires no fans or pumps.

They generally don't generate their heat from electrical sources and that's big energy draw on those systems. Fans and pumps are nothing in terms of the energy they require compared to simply heating masses of air.

Inefficient Building Electrification Risks Prolonging Fossil Fuels

Decarbonization pathways should incorporate more efficient electric heating technologies and renewable energy sources to lessen strain on the US electric grid during winter peaks in electricity usage.

www.bu.edu

Using water and natural gas to generate hot water or steam is far, far more efficient than electricity. The same goes for cooling the building.

 

[QP!]

Texas Senate passes anti-solar, wind bill​

The bill exclusively places permit restrictions, fees and new regulatory requirements for solar and wind projects.

Texas Senate passes anti-solar, wind bill

The bill exclusively places permit restrictions, fees and new regulatory requirements for solar and wind projects.

pv-magazine-usa.com

Texans will pay higher power bills as clean energy development slows because of tax credit cuts, economists say

The One Big Beautiful Bill drastically shortens the timeline for wind and solar projects to qualify for tax credits. This will impact even Texas, where wind and solar power have boomed and power demand is rising.

www.texastribune.org

New Research Shows Texas Has the Highest Electricity Costs in the Nation​

New Research Shows Texas Has the Highest Electricity Costs in the Nation

Texas leads the nation in high electricity prices, a trend amplified by the growth of renewable energy and recent policy shifts under the Biden administration. With wholesale prices spiking 208% in the past three years, Texans face unique challenges in balancing the benefits of renewables with...

www.texaspolicyresearch.com

https://lifepowered.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/2025-02-LP-Cost-of-Wind-and-Solar-ReedBennett.pdf

How Wind and Solar Variability Drives Up Texas Electricity Prices​

How Wind and Solar Variability Drives Up Texas Electricity Prices - Texas Public Policy Foundation

Many Texans have been led to believe that adding more wind and solar to the electric grid is the cheapest way to meet the state’s rising energy demand. However, this belief overlooks a crucial reality: the hidden costs of managing the variability of these resources. While wind and solar have low...

www.texaspolicy.com

Does not change the FACT that what i posted above is going forward and Texas will continue to lead even in this environment where politics is trying to slow and/or stop it.

Two things can be true at once Terry. It is possible gov't could try to slow something but also that thing could still be growing in a leading way.

Do you understand that? That a gov't could impose new fees etc on AI development but the US could continue to be a world leader in it regardless?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Does not change the FACT that what i posted above is going forward and Texas will continue to lead even in this environment where politics is trying to slow and/or stop it.

Two things can be true at once Terry. It is possible gov't could try to slow something but also that thing could still be growing in a leading way.

Do you understand that? That a gov't could impose new fees etc on AI development but the US could continue to be a world leader in it regardless?

Texas will lead in failure and high costs to consumers. It's fully possible for the feds (Biden administration) to be financing failure while individual states are trying to stop it (Texas legislature).

All the world leaders in solar and wind have some of the highest per kwh costs and least stable grids today and will have them into the future. Solar and wind are utter and complete losers in reliable, low cost, energy production.

 

[Kurmugeon]

Texas will lead in failure and high costs to consumers. It's fully possible for the feds (Biden administration) to be financing failure while individual states are trying to stop it (Texas legislature).

All the world leaders in solar and wind have some of the highest per kwh costs and least stable grids today and will have them into the future. Solar and wind are utter and complete losers in reliable, low cost, energy production.

But we WILL run out of Fossil Fuels, and in the big picture, Soon.


Natural Gas - 60 Years at best.

Oil - 90 years, and that is including burning all the high sulfur content stuff, and lots of destructive fracking.

Coal - 120 years


And whatever the good replacement to Fossil Fuels is, probably Thorium-Ion Nuclear, and eventually, He3 Fusion, driving Atmosphere C02 based synthetic Gasoline and Diesel... It will take 40 years to build the infrastructure to run such an Energy-Economy.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/primary-energy-source

It is all about Energy-Gain of the Various Systems. Some typical Values for Energy-Gain:

Solar Voltaic - 0.3
Wind (site dependent) - 12-24
Solar Thermal with LN2 overnight Co-generation - 28
Tidal - 20k
Hydroelectric - 50K
Natural Gas Turbine - 200k
Clean Coal - 400K
Dirty Coal - 600k
Old style Rickover Pile Uranium - 1.1M
New Tech Uranium Ion - 1.3M
Thorium Ion - 1.4M
He3 Fusion - 1.6M ( With DU breeding )
Du-T Fusion in Pulsed Magnetic Confinement - 1.8M


Solar Voltaic is so bad, it has never hit Unity Energy Gain. Additionally, since almost all solar array manufacture occurs in China, and they use mostly dirty coal, Solar Voltaic, is simply time and location displaced Dirty Coal Power.

Wind can work, but its Energy Gain is so low, that it is extremely expensive and unreliable. And it kills enormous numbers of birds.

Of all the "Renewables", only Hydro-electric is actually practical.

-

 

[Kurmugeon]

Here are a few sites projecting how much time we have left for fossil fuels:

Years of fossil fuel reserves left

Years of global coal, oil and natural gas left, reported as the reserves-to-product (R/P) ratio which measures the number of years of production left based on known reserves and present annual production levels. Note that these values can change with time based on the discovery of new reserves...

ourworldindata.org

https://greenbusinessbarbados.com/how-long-will-fossil-fuels-be-available-to-us.html

When will fossil fuels run out? (2025)

In this article, we will inspect how long fossil fuels will last. Natural gas, coal, and oil are non-renewable sources of energy, and our reserves are constantly getting emptier. What is the solution? Is building more nuclear power plants inevitable or can we go green in the next decades? Fossil...

breznikar.com

Fossil fuels

Fossil fuels were key to industrialization and rising prosperity, but their impact on health and the climate means that we should transition away from them.

ourworldindata.org

-

 

[QP!]

Texas will lead in failure and high costs to consumers. It's fully possible for the feds (Biden administration) to be financing failure while individual states are trying to stop it (Texas legislature).

All the world leaders in solar and wind have some of the highest per kwh costs and least stable grids today and will have them into the future. Solar and wind are utter and complete losers in reliable, low cost, energy production.

So says Terry.

But all around the world jurisdictions and corporations and financiers are pouring billions and billions into green energy both as investment and to diversify their grids and because they believe it will provide much of the energy of the future.


Terry will keep repeating 'i know more than all of them and they are wrong. Believe me and not them.

Look up the word hubris Terry and understand how and why you always look stupid due to it.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

They generally don't generate their heat from electrical sources and that's big energy draw on those systems. Fans and pumps are nothing in terms of the energy they require compared to simply heating masses of air.

Except this was about a complete blackout. How does a fan or pump work when there is no electricity?

Inefficient Building Electrification Risks Prolonging Fossil Fuels

Decarbonization pathways should incorporate more efficient electric heating technologies and renewable energy sources to lessen strain on the US electric grid during winter peaks in electricity usage.

www.bu.edu

Using water and natural gas to generate hot water or steam is far, far more efficient than electricity. The same goes for cooling the building.

Cooling the building with steam?

I guess you didn't actually read your article but only looked that title.

A new study indicates that decarbonization pathways should incorporate more efficient electric heating technologies and more renewable energy sources to minimize strain on the US electric grid during peaks in electricity usage from heating in the winter.​

Yet, Magavi says, this research clearly does indicate that, “Using a strategic combination of heat pump technologies (air-source, ground-source, and networked), as well as long-term energy storage, will help us electrify buildings more efficiently, economically, and equitably. The Falcon curve shows us a faster path to a clean, healthy energy future.”

 

[T. A. Gardner]

But we WILL run out of Fossil Fuels, and in the big picture, Soon.


Natural Gas - 60 Years at best.

Oil - 90 years, and that is including burning all the high sulfur content stuff, and lots of destructive fracking.

Coal - 120 years

No, we won't. We keep finding more oil and if that's not the case down the road, we can just make it ourselves. Natural gas is easy to generate. Even the deeper ocean floor is littered generously with frozen methane (that's a major source of new oil--yes it is renewable).

And whatever the good replacement to Fossil Fuels is, probably Thorium-Ion Nuclear, and eventually, He3 Fusion, driving Atmosphere C02 based synthetic Gasoline and Diesel... It will take 40 years to build the infrastructure to run such an Energy-Economy.

Thorium as a breeder fuel will last us at current energy use levels a couple of millennia. Once fusion is working, that's pretty much limitless power.

Solar Voltaic is so bad, it has never hit Unity Energy Gain. Additionally, since almost all solar array manufacture occurs in China, and they use mostly dirty coal, Solar Voltaic, is simply time and location displaced Dirty Coal Power.

Don't forget that large solar arrays create urban heat island effects and destabilize local weather patterns.

Wind can work, but its Energy Gain is so low, that it is extremely expensive and unreliable. And it kills enormous numbers of birds.

Wind also takes energy out of the atmosphere (it has to as it's not a perpetual motion machine like the radical Leftist environmentalists claim in calling it "renewable"). That results in decreasing wind and air stagnation. The result of that is an increase in regional temperatures of the atmosphere. So, wind actually contributes to global warming...

Of all the "Renewables", only Hydro-electric is actually practical.

Nuclear is quite practial, the problem is people have been indoctrinated to be terrified of it.

 

[QP!]

@T.A. Gardner reads the below and sees it is not just Texas, as the biggest fossil fuel producer, and the massive companies there who profit off that, pushing green energy growth and investments, but now he also sees it is the worlds biggest energy producers all across the ME, who profit the most from fossil fuels.


Each of them has determined this is the future and putting their money, investor money and efforts to it.

A New Energy Landscape: The Middle East’s Shift Towards Renewable Energy​

$75.6 Billion Surge in (ME) Renewable Energy Investments​

How Middle East’s SWFs are driving the green energy transition​

​

​

Terry reads above and replies, 'I know better than all of them. Trust me instead. Green energy is bad for business for them and society as i understand the future best and have crunched the numbers and understand the science better.

The rest of us laugh at Terry and his constant stupidity as he proclaims reliably each and every new technology being developed will fail and only what exists in the past and present will exist in the future with all else failing.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

So says Terry.

But all around the world jurisdictions and corporations and financiers are pouring billions and billions into green energy both as investment and to diversify their grids and because they believe it will provide much of the energy of the future.

When government subsidies something you get more of it. When government bans something, you get less of it. If government is banning coal use while subsidizing wind and solar, you get more wind and solar.

But it's the results that count. Wind and solar, worldwide, have rapidly driven up energy costs to a point in many of the leading nations using it where it's an unaffordable luxury for the average person now. Utilities don't care. They're making more money than ever off that.

Terry will keep repeating 'i know more than all of them and they are wrong. Believe me and not them.

They're wrong. They're doing what's politically expedient.

 

[Kurmugeon]

The lobbyists who are pushing the adoption of Wind and Solar are getting their funding from the Chinese Communists.

The Build-Up of the Chinese military is being funded by China's large manufacturing base. If America moves back into Manufacturing, as Trump has been attempting to achieve, then it will cut off the near unlimited budgets available to the Chinese Military.

So, the Chinese have been funding the push for America to move to ONLY Solar and Wind Power, because it will keep America from ever becoming a major manufacturer again.

There are many reasons that the Chinese benefit from America being high-cost electrical power locked out of returning to Mass Manufacturing, but the chief among them is the impact on Chinese military budgets.

The Chinese pushing for Wind and Solar for America, is a piece of the Chinese cold war strategies to limit the U.S. Militarily.

The Chinese agents are also funding the push for open borders and giving huge amounts of expensive benefits to Illegals, for similar reasons.

The Chinese agents operating in America, seek to Bankrupt our nation.

-

 

[Kurmugeon]

No, we won't. We keep finding more oil and if that's not the case down the road, we can just make it ourselves. Natural gas is easy to generate. Even the deeper ocean floor is littered generously with frozen methane (that's a major source of new oil--yes it is renewable).

I have personally worked on prototype projects to attempt to harvest undersea methane deposits. It can be done, but the equipment needed is fragile, complex, and requires almost as much energy to field, as the energy content in the methane that it harvests.

If we had ships with the equipment to convert the Methane into Gasoline or Diesel, out at sea, it would be allot more viable, since the energy density of those fuels is so much higher, it makes the transportation costs worth while. But we don't have such ships, and they would need to be nuclear powered, so it is unlikely that non-government endeavors will ever have them.

It is allot like trying to use wind power. It takes so much energy to manufacture, maintain, and remediate the Wind Turbines, that the energy yield is just a factor of ten or so above the energy investment.

IAW, the Energy Gain is too small to make the approach viable as a primary energy source.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

I have personally worked on prototype projects to attempt to harvest undersea methane deposits. It can be done, but the equipment needed is fragile, complex, and requires almost as much energy to field, as the energy content in the methane that it harvests.

If we had ships with the equipment to convert the Methane into Gasoline or Diesel, out at sea, it would be allot more viable, since the energy density of those fuels is so much higher, it makes the transportation costs worth while. But we don't have such ships, and they would need to be nuclear powered, so it is unlikely that non-government endeavors will ever have them.

It is allot like trying to use wind power. It takes so much energy to manufacture, maintain, and remediate the Wind Turbines, that the energy yield is just a factor of ten or so above the energy investment.

IAW, the Energy Gain is too small to make the approach viable as a primary energy source.

I was simply making the point that methane is easy to produce, quickly accumulates naturally, and is abundant and renewable.

 

[QP!]

When government subsidies something you get more of it. When government bans something, you get less of it. If government is banning coal use while subsidizing wind and solar, you get more wind and solar.

But it's the results that count. Wind and solar, worldwide, have rapidly driven up energy costs to a point in many of the leading nations using it where it's an unaffordable luxury for the average person now. Utilities don't care. They're making more money than ever off that.

And yet i can show you (and have shown you) that fossil fuels have been the most directly and indirectly subsidized industries in the history of this planet, especially if you add in the direct and indirect subsidies for ICE vehicles and you will hand wave it all away and deny it. the industries do not deny it. THey put it in their financial models and reports when specking out costs, but Terry says 'nope... not happening' as that ruins his narrative that renewables need to be advantaged by subsidies when the FACT and TRUTH is, renewables are only making up a small amount of the advantage going to and embedded in fossil fuels.

They're wrong. They're doing what's politically expedient.

See ^^^ why we all laugh at Terry's stupidity. He alone knows it. These private massive Investment funds, these fossil fuels companies, and the ME and China none of whom can be forced to do anything with green energy if they choose not, in Terry mind all have done their analysis, chosen to do it, and all have it wrong. Terry knows better and they are wrong thinking this is the future and he is right.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

And yet i can show you (and have shown you) that fossil fuels have been the most directly and indirectly subsidized industries in the history of this planet, especially if you add in the direct and indirect subsidies for ICE vehicles and you will hand wave it all away and deny it. the industries do not deny it. THey put it in their financial models and reports when specking out costs, but Terry says 'nope... not happening' as that ruins his narrative that renewables need to be advantaged by subsidies when the FACT and TRUTH is, renewables are only making up a small amount of the advantage going to and embedded in fossil fuels.

No you keep trotting out that list of nonsense mostly comprised of accounting tricks and other non-subsidies that the Left made up.

Solar and wind are expensive losers based on actual results and use.

 

[QP!]

The lobbyists who are pushing the adoption of Wind and Solar are getting their funding from the Chinese Communists.

The Build-Up of the Chinese military is being funded by China's large manufacturing base. If America moves back into Manufacturing, as Trump has been attempting to achieve, then it will cut off the near unlimited budgets available to the Chinese Military.

So, the Chinese have been funding the push for America to move to ONLY Solar and Wind Power, because it will keep America from ever becoming a major manufacturer again.

There are many reasons that the Chinese benefit from America being high-cost electrical power locked out of returning to Mass Manufacturing, but the chief among them is the impact on Chinese military budgets.

The Chinese pushing for Wind and Solar for America, is a piece of the Chinese cold war strategies to limit the U.S. Militarily.

The Chinese agents are also funding the push for open borders and giving huge amounts of expensive benefits to Illegals, for similar reasons.

The Chinese agents operating in America, seek to Bankrupt our nation.

-

Wow that almost sounds smart until you realize then that means China is actively sabotaging itself to a higher extent.

China leads the world in green energy, particularly in renewable energy capacity and investment. China's renewable energy sector is growing rapidly, and the country is a major manufacturer and exporter of green technologies like solar panels and wind turbines.

cite

And there is no push in America to go solely with renewables while dropping all other forms. Only some one as stupid as Terry argues that diversifying the grid, so it does not have a single failure point, and instead adding more forms of energy, so you have redundancy leads to failures.

 

[Yakuda]

So, everybody will sit in the dark and freeze. Glad I don't live in NY.

Not everybody. I doubt stalin ever stood in line for toilet paper or potatoes. Remember during covid lockdowns piglosi telling everyone to stay home as she stood in front of her $30,000 freezers.

 

[Based Chad]

Bill is not as stringent as your climate denier source implies, and a similar law has been in effect in NYC for years now. And by the way, electrify rail has been in place in NYC for over a century now

Love how NY gets southern and middle America all worked up, especially since the overwhelming majority of them have never been to the State and particularly the City

do you love how NYC sucks ass?

 

[QP!]

No you keep trotting out that list of nonsense mostly comprised of accounting tricks and other non-subsidies that the Left made up.

Solar and wind are expensive losers based on actual results and use.

Ok.

I want everyone to see what Terry says above. He is holding the line that Oil and Gas has never got a single legit subsidy and it is all just 'tricks of the left' to call them that.

I could cite countless Oil and Gas industry documents detailing the subsidies, that they call subsidies when explaining to investors and shareholders why certain projects will cost less then the full sticker due to subsidies and Terry will refuse to agree. He will push that those executives are just lying and he knows better, and those are not subsidies. to save you all the length i will just post one and note Terry will say this was not a subsidy despite what you see Republicans and the industry calling it...


-----------------------------------------

Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) introduces the Repeal Big Oil Tax Subsidies Act, which would end $2.4 billion in tax breaks for the big five oil companies. Obama challenges Congress to “eliminate this oil industry giveaway right away.” Unable to get filibuster-proof support, it dies. Mitt Romney says oil subsidies go “largely to small companies, to drilling operators and so forth.” He says he’d consider cutting them—if tax rates were slashed first. The American Petroleum Institute launches a $3 million postelection media blitz, including ads that warn seven Democratic senators up for reelection in 2014 against touching the industry’s tax breaks: “American energy—not higher taxes on energy—will create jobs.”

[td]2012[/td]

Cite

-------------------------------------------


There simply is nothing Terry will admit is a subsidy in fossil fuels. he will say gov't, corporate executives and bankers a like are just lying leftists.

 

[Based Chad]

Wow that almost sounds smart until you realize then that means China is actively sabotaging itself to a higher extent.



And there is no push in America to go solely with renewables while dropping all other forms. Only some one as stupid as Terry argues that diversifying the grid, so it does not have a single failure point, and instead adding more forms of energy, so you have redundancy leads to failures.

no.

because China knows this Climate Change bullshit is just something sold to western idiots by their corrupt china loving leadership.



China has cornered the market on battery minerals and western collaborators are traitors to their own nations in facilitating this grand swindle.