Members banned from this thread: Cypress, evince, moon, domer76, Nomad, CharacterAssassin, Jade Dragon, guno and reagansghost


Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 96

Thread: The Physical Impossibility of Renewable Energy Meeting the Paris Accord Goals

  1. #76 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    12,938
    Thanks
    2,624
    Thanked 3,305 Times in 2,879 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 141 Times in 137 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
    Quite the meltdown. Because you are completely wrong. An idiot in fact. As expected, it is all you have.
    Psychoquackery. Bulverism fallacy. Insult fallacy. Argument of the stone fallacy.

  2. #77 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    12,938
    Thanks
    2,624
    Thanked 3,305 Times in 2,879 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 141 Times in 137 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
    I was hoping you were going to be that stupid. And sure enough you provided "Mr. Physics". Do you honestly think that tides are regional and not global? Are you really that fucking stupid? Do you think the sun and the moon selectively pick only an area at a time to cause tides? Once again, not globally? Seriously. Shut the fuck up. The only "physics" you know are what you google. The sad thing is you have no idea what it means.
    to have tides?
    They are regional. A high tide only covers two regions, on opposite sides of the Earth. A low tide covers only two regions, on opposite sides of the Earth. There is no such thing as a 'global' tide.

  3. #78 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    12,938
    Thanks
    2,624
    Thanked 3,305 Times in 2,879 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 141 Times in 137 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
    Fell silent real quickly there Into the Night. Hmmmm. Well "Mr. Physics", hope your ass does not hurt too much. Here is a hint for you though in the future. Never argue with a Master Mariner about anything to do with the oceans. You fucking landlubbing puke.
    No, that would be you. Inversion fallacy.

  4. #79 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    12,938
    Thanks
    2,624
    Thanked 3,305 Times in 2,879 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 141 Times in 137 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    I think it could well happen in the future but it would require far less expensive delivery systems. There is also the issues of what frequencies do you use, that won't interfere with existing microwave based systems like cellphones etc. A huge issue as well is maintenance and replacement, space is an extremely harsh environment and equipment would wear out far quicker than on Earth.
    Light isn't electrons, protons, or neutrons. It is not ionizing until you get up into X rays and gamma rays. Microwaves are not ionizing.

    The big problem if one decides to beam power to Earth using microwaves is simply one of the EM wave affect of any nearby electronics. Such a strong radio wave will tend to act like an EM pulse from a nuclear detonation. Like a microwave oven, a wandering beam will cook anything it touches.

    Communications use low power microwaves on very tight beams and keep those beams above the normal level people or animals are located. I have known some microwave comm techs cooking their lunches by simply holding them in front of the transmitting dish on a stick.
    Solar power transmission by microwaves would be far more dangerous.

  5. #80 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    27,188
    Thanks
    8,923
    Thanked 16,376 Times in 11,334 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 401 Times in 388 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    They are regional. A high tide only covers two regions, on opposite sides of the Earth. A low tide covers only two regions, on opposite sides of the Earth. There is no such thing as a 'global' tide.
    In other words, globally. Once again you dumb fuck, shut the fuck up. Take your fake knowledge and try it on Democrats.
    Consider the Oyster.

    C-4 is just angry playdoh.

  6. #81 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    12,938
    Thanks
    2,624
    Thanked 3,305 Times in 2,879 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 141 Times in 137 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
    In other words, globally. Once again you dumb fuck, shut the fuck up. Take your fake knowledge and try it on Democrats.
    No. They are regional. A high tide only covers two regions, on opposite sides of the Earth. A low tide covers only two regions, on opposite sides of the Earth. There is no such thing as a 'global' tide.

  7. #82 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    84,508
    Thanks
    38,232
    Thanked 25,659 Times in 19,610 Posts
    Groans
    30,165
    Groaned 3,847 Times in 3,667 Posts
    Blog Entries
    39

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    Light isn't electrons, protons, or neutrons. It is not ionizing until you get up into X rays and gamma rays. Microwaves are not ionizing.

    The big problem if one decides to beam power to Earth using microwaves is simply one of the EM wave affect of any nearby electronics. Such a strong radio wave will tend to act like an EM pulse from a nuclear detonation. Like a microwave oven, a wandering beam will cook anything it touches.

    Communications use low power microwaves on very tight beams and keep those beams above the normal level people or animals are located. I have known some microwave comm techs cooking their lunches by simply holding them in front of the transmitting dish on a stick.
    Solar power transmission by microwaves would be far more dangerous.
    The beam energy densities would presumably be below the threshold deemed harmful to humans but would require huge receiving antennas and vast tracts of land. Microwaves are non-ionising that's true but some parts of the UV spectrum are ionising. Maybe the antennae would have to be at sea like oil production platforms only much bigger?
    Last edited by Grajonca; 11-14-2019 at 09:16 PM.
    .

    80,000 Americans died and 900,000 were hospitalised just two years ago from flu including the most virulent Type A version of H3N2, so why didn't you arseholes call for the total destruction of the world's economic system then? I hope you have plenty of time to ponder over that when you all lose your houses, jobs and relationships!

  8. #83 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    12,938
    Thanks
    2,624
    Thanked 3,305 Times in 2,879 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 141 Times in 137 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Havana Moon View Post
    The beam energy densities would presumably be below the threshold deemed harmful to humans but would require huge receiving antennas and vast tracts of land. Microwaves are non-ionising that's true but some parts of the UV spectrum are ionising. Maybe the antennae would have to be at sea like oil production platforms only much bigger?
    The frequencies possible to use would have to be within the very narrow range of radio frequencies that can make it into space or back to Earth from a satellite. This range of frequencies, called the 'space window' are used for all spacecraft communications. It's a very narrow range. Sending power down on these frequencies mean that much less available for communications. None of them are ionizing frequencies.

    The only exception is when the frequencies get high enough to reach that of infrared or even visible light. Ow. Again, all it would take is for a single control failure to allow such a high powered beam to wander across the planet. Put the antenna at sea? That means you have to transmit power from that platform to land, where it could be used.

    The beam power is directly proportional to the amount of power deliverable by the system. It must be greater than what is delivered, due to losses. Yes, that means power at the RECEIVING antenna. The power at the transmitter must be even higher.
    Last edited by Into the Night; 11-14-2019 at 10:45 PM.

  9. #84 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    84,508
    Thanks
    38,232
    Thanked 25,659 Times in 19,610 Posts
    Groans
    30,165
    Groaned 3,847 Times in 3,667 Posts
    Blog Entries
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    The frequencies possible to use would have to be within the very narrow range of radio frequencies that can make it into space or back to Earth from a satellite. This range of frequencies, called the 'space window' are used for all spacecraft communications. It's a very narrow range. Sending power down on these frequencies mean that much less available for communications. None of them are ionizing frequencies.

    The only exception is when the frequencies get high enough to reach that of infrared or even visible light. Ow. Again, all it would take is for a single control failure to allow such a high powered beam to wander across the planet. Put the antenna at sea? That means you have to transmit power from that platform to land, where it could be used.

    The beam power is directly proportional to the amount of power deliverable by the system. It must be greater than what is delivered, due to losses. Yes, that means power at the RECEIVING antenna. The power at the transmitter must be even higher.
    .
    .

    80,000 Americans died and 900,000 were hospitalised just two years ago from flu including the most virulent Type A version of H3N2, so why didn't you arseholes call for the total destruction of the world's economic system then? I hope you have plenty of time to ponder over that when you all lose your houses, jobs and relationships!

  10. #85 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    27,188
    Thanks
    8,923
    Thanked 16,376 Times in 11,334 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 401 Times in 388 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    No. They are regional. A high tide only covers two regions, on opposite sides of the Earth. A low tide covers only two regions, on opposite sides of the Earth. There is no such thing as a 'global' tide.
    Seriously. Just shut the fuck up. You are a fake, a fraud and you cannot google shit you do not understand quick enough. Are you Domer's sock? He is about this stupid.
    Consider the Oyster.

    C-4 is just angry playdoh.

  11. #86 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    12,938
    Thanks
    2,624
    Thanked 3,305 Times in 2,879 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 141 Times in 137 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
    Seriously. Just shut the fuck up. You are a fake, a fraud and you cannot google shit you do not understand quick enough. Are you Domer's sock? He is about this stupid.
    YALSA. YALIFNAP. False authority fallacy. You don't get to order people around. You are not the king.

  12. #87 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    23,371
    Thanks
    3,595
    Thanked 10,237 Times in 7,110 Posts
    Groans
    94
    Groaned 2,320 Times in 2,127 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Nobody cares about your lies about science.

  13. #88 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    27,188
    Thanks
    8,923
    Thanked 16,376 Times in 11,334 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 401 Times in 388 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    YALSA. YALIFNAP. False authority fallacy. You don't get to order people around. You are not the king.
    Of course I am not a King. Just correct. And you are wrong. So.....................shut the fuck up.
    Consider the Oyster.

    C-4 is just angry playdoh.

  14. #89 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    12,938
    Thanks
    2,624
    Thanked 3,305 Times in 2,879 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 141 Times in 137 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
    Of course I am not a King. Just correct. And you are wrong. So.....................shut the fuck up.
    YALIFNAP. You don't get to order people around. You are not the king.

  15. #90 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    27,188
    Thanks
    8,923
    Thanked 16,376 Times in 11,334 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 401 Times in 388 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    YALIFNAP. You don't get to order people around. You are not the king.
    A sure sign you lost. No surprise there for me. You may go now.
    Consider the Oyster.

    C-4 is just angry playdoh.

Similar Threads

  1. Apparently, Fat Ass Might Not Quit the Paris Climate Accord
    By Cypress in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 09-17-2017, 10:15 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-17-2017, 09:18 PM
  3. Replies: 33
    Last Post: 06-02-2017, 09:34 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-29-2016, 07:57 AM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-29-2016, 07:22 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •