No Amount Of Incremental Wind And Solar Power Can Ever Provide Energy Independence

T. A. Gardner said:
Not totally true. Nixon created both OSHA and the EPA at a time when they were sorely needed. With OSHA, unions and employers alike really weren't taking worker safety seriously. Yea, all you union lovers, your union didn't give a shit about your safety. Anyway, there were over 100,000 serious injuries on the job in the US every year. Tens of thousands of people died in work related accidents.

The EPA was needed at a time when there were rivers catching fire, huge chemical dumps accumulating, and air pollution was like China's today.

What happened over time is these agencies saw a combination of bureaucrats and Leftists move in. The result of that was they've gotten a "zero tolerance" mentality now. That is, they think that unless something is 100% safe or pollution is at zero, they haven't done enough. Today they're exponentially driving up the cost of everything they regulate for near zero improvements on the stuff regulated.

So, good ideas with good intentions turned into evil ideas with destruction as their goal.
Click to expand...

Unions fought for contracts that stressed work safety. It had been one of their main fights since the 1930s. https://aflcio.org/issues/workplace-health-and-safety
 
Nordberg said:
This thread is an example the left changes their views according to facts and data. The right changes the facts and data to suit their views. Many countries are slashing nuke and fossil fuel power plants due to wind and solar. If the right has power, we will not.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

And what is creepy about the latter is most of them are just screaming that it is 'impossible' and trolling anyone whom dares to disagree.
Offering ZERO data to backup their ignorance.

Check out the OP?
A short story with nothing but anger, frustration and zero facts.

What he/most of them are getting so emotional about is beyond me.

They want to live on coal-fired power plants?
Go ahead.
Hey...why not move to China?
I hear they use LOTS of coal.
Fill your lungs with the lovely, sooty knowledge that you are living the life of the late 1800's.
The 'good' old days.
 
Primavera said:
For a good example of exactly that, check out Young v EPA.

https://junkscience.com/2021/10/preliminary-injunction-sought-in-young-v-epa/

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/10...r-illegally-stacking-science-advisory-panels/
Click to expand...

Ok. Anyone can file a lawsuit. Just because Young filed a suit doesn't mean it has merit.

I guess you should get caught up on the status of the lawsuit.
The court denied his request for an injunction.
https://law.justia.com/cases/federa...ct-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2021cv02623/236288/32/
 
McRocket said:
Actually, both are recyclable:
https://electrek.co/2021/05/17/wind-giant-vestas-says-it-can-now-fully-recycle-turbine-blades/
https://thecabinetrefinishing.com/is-lithium-battery-recyclable/

And the point of the batteries is to store excess energy from wind/sun/tidal/etc. sources.

I said nothing about whether it is doable now or 'suffering'.
I simply said we should take advantage of it as much as possible.
And I think - eventually - oil/gas/coal fired power plants will be a thing of the past.
Click to expand...

Blades being recycled is possible but not done often it is very difficult, and takes you guessed it energy to do so!
Batteries are shredded which uses you guessed it energy as some are then broken down further through chemicals and heat!
 
BartenderElite said:
Nothing about current & future solar/wind technology is ancient.
Click to expand...

Solar and wind have been around for centuries. That's a fact and indicates ancient technology. As I stated, you cannot run a modern economy on solar and wind energy. It isn't possible. No matter how much you flail or pound your tiny fists on the table, it isn't possible. ;)

BartenderElite said:
That's like saying we shouldn't invest in computers in the 1970's, and referencing Chinese bean counters from thousands of years ago.
Click to expand...

That's a dumb analogy and pure gibberish. ;)
 
Phantasmal said:
Yes, we know, there were also people who were called morons for believing the automobile was the future. Naysayers thought they would never replace horses. Naysayers were wrong, weren’t they, and the morons were right.
Click to expand...

I'm amused that you don't think you are a moron. This isn't about naysaying. Your analogy and lack of coherent argument are indicative of failure. :palm:
 
Lack of perfect knowledge only means we can't do it right now. We should be able to command not only our economy but also our environment, eventually.
 
danielpalos said:
Lack of perfect knowledge only means we can't do it right now. We should be able to command not only our economy but also our environment, eventually.
Click to expand...

So many retards, so little time.

Simple arithmetic shows that without massive energy storage no amount of building of wind and solar generators can make much difference in fossil fuel use for electricity production; and adequate energy storage devices to fill the gap do not even exist as a technical matter, let alone at remotely reasonable cost. Result: no matter what the grandees say, fossil fuel production and use in 2050 will be as high or higher than they are now
 
Last edited:
No Amount Of Incremental Wind And Solar Power Can Ever Provide Energy Independence
Click to expand...

Yes, it can. We just have to drastically reduce usage.

It will mean the end of many corporations that you prostrate yourself before, maggot. Tough titty.
Given the choice between your profits and the planet I'd like you removed from the equation as soon as possible.
 
Equal protection of our own laws and upgrading infrastructure can solve most of our problems. Upgrading infrastructure should factor for inflationary pressures.
 
Primavera said:
So many retards, so little time.

Simple arithmetic shows that without massive energy storage no amount of building of wind and solar generators can make much difference in fossil fuel use for electricity production; and adequate energy storage devices to fill the gap do not even exist as a technical matter, let alone at remotely reasonable cost. Result: no matter what the grandees say, fossil fuel production and use in 2050 will be as high or higher than they are now
Click to expand...
Fossil fuels for now and Nuclear Power in the energy of the future. Perhaps SMRs?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top