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

Why Tom's article is a fail whale. Selecting just two alternative sources could certainly fail, but why would we avoid hydro-electric, solar thermal, geo-thermal bio-fuel and new clean nuclear?

'No nukes' ring any bells?

LnBuZw


Remind me, what happened when a offshore wind farm was proposed near Hyannis Port?

Wind Farm? Not Off My Back Porch

March 30, 2007 — -- A major battle in the politics of alternative energy has moved to a final phase in Washington, and a senator named Kennedy with a waterfront view and a bone to pick awaits.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2995334&page=1

And more recently....


Group to file lawsuit Wednesday against wind farm planned for waters off Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/08/24/group-to-file-lawsuit-wednesday-against-wind-farm-planned-for-waters-off-marthas-vineyard/


Also the insane pronouncement that the entire country is both dark and totally calm at the same time is nuts.

Who said that, old pal?
 
That's like saying we shouldn't invest in computers in the 1970's, and referencing Chinese bean counters from thousands of years ago.

No, it's not.

What the left is saying is like 'someday everyone will have a palm-sized computing device that can access data on an invisible wireless information superhighway, so let's get ready by ditching calculators, slide rules, and books now'.
 
It is ironic that the same morons who think that man can change the planets climate also think that ancient solar and wind technology can power a modern society. Perhaps they want to return to cave man days where life expectancies were around 30 years of age?

I wish they would.

The fact that they won't tells you all you need to know about their sincerity.
 
As an example, the article in the OP talks about the availability of solar being an issue, at night or on overcast days. Problem solved. That was easy.

How do you propose to transmit electricity from outer space to the earth's electrical grid?
 
That must be why the ultra-leftist Dick Nixon created the EPA.

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.
 
Here's the latest insanity in solar power. Because solar is unreliable and battery storage grotesquely expensive, alternate solutions have been sought.

90


That's one of the latest insanities. It's a six-armed tower crane that lifts heavy concrete weights to height when there's excess solar power being made and then can release those weights to generate electrical power when solar isn't producing. Of course, one crane provides only a short-term miniscule amount of power using this method for relatively high cost, but what the hey? When you are committed to using the worst and most costly way to reliably generate electricity, you have to go to extremes to try and make it work, don't you?
 
'No nukes' ring any bells?

LnBuZw


Remind me, what happened when a offshore wind farm was proposed near Hyannis Port?

Wind Farm? Not Off My Back Porch

March 30, 2007 — -- A major battle in the politics of alternative energy has moved to a final phase in Washington, and a senator named Kennedy with a waterfront view and a bone to pick awaits.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2995334&page=1

And more recently....


Group to file lawsuit Wednesday against wind farm planned for waters off Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/08/24/group-to-file-lawsuit-wednesday-against-wind-farm-planned-for-waters-off-marthas-vineyard/




Who said that, old pal?
It is the premise of the OP.

Ask Tom about modern safe nukes.
 
Batteries do nothing but store energy, and most are not recyclable,
where does the energy come from to fuel the batteries? The blades from windmills are not recyclable, and must be buried!
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 am for developing clean energy to the point where it is sustainable it's not now and we should not suffer while it gets there. Solar panels are also very hard to recycle!
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.
 
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.

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/
 
I bring up computers a lot, but these same debates were going on in the '70's about computers ever having a practical use for individuals.

There really isn't a "can't" with technology. We can go back through all of human history. When we want to do something & we set our minds to it, it happens. And technological advancement is exponential.

Agreed.

It is the height of stupidity/intellectual insecurity when people stomp their feet and say: 'this technology can NEVER, EVER work. EVER!!!'

They are clearly clueless and hoping that if they scream it loud enough - it will somehow make it so.

I mean Wolverine replied to me with points and a relatively, open mind on the subject.
But most others are just screaming 'IT IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!'

And the less said about the OP's diatribe based on emotion, arrogance and zero facts...the better.
 
Back
Top