Obama-Backed Solar Plant Could Be Shut Down For Not Producing Enough Energy

evince said:
you can see the ads right on his site


I saw Kathleen Harris on TV yesterday praising solar.


You are now supposed to be prosolar idiot


didnt you get he current meme memo?
Click to expand...

You said he was selling solar. That is different than having ads for solar. Do you know the difference?
 
Thing1 said:
Like I said - these aren't huge budget dollars. Private investment tends to follow public investment. We all have an interest in seeing domestic energy sources develop more quickly.
Click to expand...

First of all the "these aren't huge budget dollars" is how you end up with $100 trillion in unfunded mandates and $20 trillion in debt.

Your second sentence shows a complete lack of understanding of business. The reason these companies go to the gobblement is because there is NO private investment. If there was really money to be made in these alternative energy sources money would be pouring in from private sources. That is a financial fact.

Your last sentence I agree with which is why I support utilizing all energy sources in this country like oil, gas, coal and nuclear
 
I Love America said:
First of all the "these aren't huge budget dollars" is how you end up with $100 trillion in unfunded mandates and $20 trillion in debt.

Your second sentence shows a complete lack of understanding of business. The reason these companies go to the gobblement is because there is NO private investment. If there was really money to be made in these alternative energy sources money would be pouring in from private sources. That is a financial fact.

Your last sentence I agree with which is why I support utilizing all energy sources in this country like oil, gas, coal and nuclear
Click to expand...

The fact that private funding was low is exactly why there are fed dollars. Like I said - private investment follows public. It's a small investment of our tax dollars, and will accelerate the development of viable alternatives. Who could be against that?

I support domestic drilling & utilizing domestic traditional energy sources, as well.
 
Thing1 said:
The fact that private funding was low is exactly why there are fed dollars. Like I said - private investment follows public. It's a small investment of our tax dollars, and will accelerate the development of viable alternatives. Who could be against that?

I support domestic drilling & utilizing domestic traditional energy sources, as well.
Click to expand...

The feds have been "investing" for generations and it has gotten to the sad state of this project. Private investment comes from promise. Solar shows none. But companies are happy to take tax dollars.
 
Celticguy said:
The feds have been "investing" for generations and it has gotten to the sad state of this project. Private investment comes from promise. Solar shows none. But companies are happy to take tax dollars.
Click to expand...

This is a total mischaracterization, on several levels. Solar isn't viable as any kind of replacement for fossil fuels yet, but to suggest that it shows no promise is ridiculous.
 
Thing1 said:
This is a total mischaracterization, on several levels. Solar isn't viable as any kind of replacement for fossil fuels yet, but to suggest that it shows no promise is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

How many more decades does it take for you to accept it's not going anywhere ?
 
Celticguy said:
How many more decades does it take for you to accept it's not going anywhere ?
Click to expand...

Please. They said the exact same thing about TV and computers.

Solar is making huge strides. It's what happens when you keep trying things. The idea that mankind can't harness the ridiculous amounts of energy coming from the sun for widespread use completely ignores what we've done in other areas.

Check this out, just as an example:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...technology-may-be-the-future-of-solar-energy/
 
Thing1 said:
Please. They said the exact same thing about TV and computers.

Solar is making huge strides. It's what happens when you keep trying things. The idea that mankind can't harness the ridiculous amounts of energy coming from the sun for widespread use completely ignores what we've done in other areas.

Check this out, just as an example:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...technology-may-be-the-future-of-solar-energy/
Click to expand...

No. It highlights that solar hasn't potential as did the others.
 
Celticguy said:
No. It highlights that solar hasn't potential as did the others.
Click to expand...

Solar is already being used on a fairly widespread basis. Technology development is exponential. We sent guys to the moon - we'll figure out a way to make the most abundant source of energy we know of more accessible & viable.

You shouldn't look at alternatives as a "liberal" cause. There are conservative think tanks who advocate for renewables as a direct national security issue. All we do is gain by having more sources of energy domestically. It creates jobs and gets us further off of foreign oil.
 
Thing1 said:
Please. They said the exact same thing about TV and computers.

Solar is making huge strides. It's what happens when you keep trying things. The idea that mankind can't harness the ridiculous amounts of energy coming from the sun for widespread use completely ignores what we've done in other areas.

Check this out, just as an example:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...technology-may-be-the-future-of-solar-energy/
Click to expand...

So what about the fact that the solar plant in question is responsible for frying thousands upon thousands of birds? If that was a nuclear power station, you'd have the likes of Taichiliberal and Daesh going apeshit about it and demanding that they shut it down. The damned thing cost over 2 billion and can't even produce anywhere near its heralded output of 300 MW. Frankly that is just pathetic, how many gas turbine power stations can you build for that money. All the world needs is some stop gap technologies until 4th gen nuclear comes on stream in the next 20 years.

http://ossfoundation.us/projects/energy/nuclear
 
Last edited:
I Love America said:
Thinking it will shows a complete lack of understanding about thermodynamics
Click to expand...

The laws of thermodynamics dictate that solar has no promise?

When you're against something, you really put blinders on. Again - this is not a "liberal" issue. Developing alternative sources of energy makes sense for national security and for the economy.
 
Thing1 said:
Solar is already being used on a fairly widespread basis. Technology development is exponential. We sent guys to the moon - we'll figure out a way to make the most abundant source of energy we know of more accessible & viable.

You shouldn't look at alternatives as a "liberal" cause. There are conservative think tanks who advocate for renewables as a direct national security issue. All we do is gain by having more sources of energy domestically. It creates jobs and gets us further off of foreign oil.
Click to expand...

What is a reasonable time frame for such discovery ?

The state if solar may be much improved from when I was a kid (it started then on any real way) but it remains miles and miles away from viable. Yes sunshine is free but if a state of the art project in the best spot in the country can't get it done after 50 years of development you have to at least consider the possibility that it's just not in the cards.

Meanwhile other possibilities including ones that are working beautifully else where get ignored. (Geothermal for one).

It would be best to get govt out of the game and let a free economy work it out. Picking winners isn't even gambling.
 
Celticguy said:
What is a reasonable time frame for such discovery ?

The state if solar may be much improved from when I was a kid (it started then on any real way) but it remains miles and miles away from viable. Yes sunshine is free but if a state of the art project in the best spot in the country can't get it done after 50 years of development you have to at least consider the possibility that it's just not in the cards.

Meanwhile other possibilities including ones that are working beautifully else where get ignored. (Geothermal for one).

It would be best to get govt out of the game and let a free economy work it out. Picking winners isn't even gambling.
Click to expand...

Most of our current technology has its roots in government leading the way in terms of funding & investment.
 
Celticguy said:
That's nice but doesnt offer your opinion regarding my question.
Click to expand...

It's not like there hasn't been progress. Solar is being utilized on a pretty widespread level even today. It's not yet viable as a replacement for anything, but it's not like it's the same as it was a decade ago.

In terms of a reasonable timeframe, I think you have to gauge both the progress until now, and the prospects for the future. If it CAN fill in for a significant portion of our needs within a few decades, it's certainly worth the fairly paltry investment we're making right now.
 
Thing1 said:
The laws of thermodynamics dictate that solar has no promise?

When you're against something, you really put blinders on. Again - this is not a "liberal" issue. Developing alternative sources of energy makes sense for national security and for the economy.
Click to expand...

Yes. The laws of thermodynamics dictates that solar is not an option for providing cost effectiveness, reliable energy on a large scale.

I don't have blinders on. I just understand science and business. You obviously do not.

We don't need alternative sources. We have enough fossil fuels to be a net exporter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top