Double E Ticket

Planet Earth => Climate => Topic started by: NightmarePatrol on April 14, 2009, 05:40:30 PM



Title: More on climate change
Post by: NightmarePatrol on April 14, 2009, 05:40:30 PM
it's an interesting read, from what I would call a reputable source.

Check it out (http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=527650)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Puffin on April 15, 2009, 11:57:40 PM
Maybe I'm getting too cynical, but NM when I see one of those reports I wonder if its not just another scientist trolling for a nice Gov't research grant. Money, not science being the driving force.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 13, 2009, 09:07:50 AM
Here's an interesting article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm) published last Friday. It's food for thought at least.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 13, 2009, 11:46:37 AM
Thanks NP - I like to keep up on the subject. Especially when it's got potential impact on our household budgets.
 
Peak Oil theory is one thing. Man-made Global Warming is quite another. To justify cap and trade due to the latter just pisses me off. The former - well, conservation efforts are a damn good idea, though punitive conservation efforts don't necessarily work.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: TiFeMb on October 13, 2009, 12:24:17 PM
I knew they were in trouble when they changed thier cause from global warming to climate change.
 
Thanks for keeping us up to speed NP, I heard a snippet on NPR about this report but that was a lot of good info.
 
Does anyone else remember the global cooling scare from the mid 70's? They said that Lake Erie would be frozen over for 6 months out of the year and agriculture in the area would be decimated.
 
Then it warmed up....


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: TiFeMb on October 14, 2009, 12:19:47 PM
Gore: You wouldn't happen to have that copy stashed away anywhere, do you? It would be interesting to see the original article and artwork...


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: TiFeMb on October 14, 2009, 01:21:53 PM
Quote
Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive
[/]

nice quote  :confused:
 
Quote
climatologists suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as a result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth.
[/]

hilarious!  :rofl:
 
Quote
Warns Hare: "I don't believe that the world's present population is sustainable if there are more than three years like 1972 in a row."
[/]

Scientist = Chicken Little  ::)
 
Thanks Gore, I feel a bit vindicated now.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 10, 2010, 11:15:05 AM
Nice article on the validity problems with global Warming.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-great-global-warming-collapse/article1458206/ (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-great-global-warming-collapse/article1458206/)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 25, 2011, 10:20:00 AM
So - maybe CO2 isn't such a big causative factor after all.  (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15858603)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 25, 2011, 05:41:38 PM
I posted this (http://img.ibtimes.com/www/articles/20111010/228181_recurring-drop-in-solar-radiation-possible-reason-for-chilled-weather-solar-activity-possible-reason.htm) somewhere else, but can't remember if I put it here. Sorry if it's a duplicate.

In short here's a surmised quote:

Sun bright, warm. Sun dim - cold. Ogg - 55000 BC


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on January 28, 2012, 08:01:30 PM
So - maybe it's time to take the word incontrovertible out of the global warming equation.  (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html?mod=WSJ_article_comments#articleTabs%3Darticle)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Puffin on January 28, 2012, 10:20:51 PM
Better check the USDA hardiness map just published this week
2012 map
http://planthardiness.ars.usda.gov/PHZMWeb/images_ui/homepage_map.jpg (http://planthardiness.ars.usda.gov/PHZMWeb/images_ui/homepage_map.jpg)

compared to 1990
http://statebystategardening.com/images/uploads/article_uploads/2011_november_news_3-F2.jpg (http://statebystategardening.com/images/uploads/article_uploads/2011_november_news_3-F2.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on January 29, 2012, 12:04:43 AM
.... :D ....

....here's the initial hardiness map:

(http://media-1.web.britannica.com/eb-media/18/64918-004-1078906E.gif)

....is the global climate warming?

....duh!

....is it caused by humans?....

....the entire planet was covered in solid ice at least once in it's history....

....long before doofus liberals starting revising reality to fit their agendas....

....is the planet warming faster now?

....most definitely as the smaller ice gets,  the faster it appears to melt; tho, it's melting at basically the same rate and because it is smaller only looks to be melting faster....

....then too, the documented shrinking polar ice caps-

.....on Mars,

.....are Bush's fault, too....

....just a hunch-

....the new Martian hardeness map will be coming out, and-

....be sited as a beyond-a-doubt proven evidence of human-induced global warming :D ....





Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Puffin on January 29, 2012, 10:27:52 PM
loved that Gore ;D
I think it was melting on Europa who Bush is responsible for :o




Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 24, 2012, 07:29:53 AM
Global Warming . . . is there anything it CAN'T do?  (http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Lifetime on February 24, 2012, 08:52:05 AM
Hey I am still recommending that you read "Cold Sun" by John Casey. It fills in a lot of gaps and gives a very reasonable explaination without all the IT'S HUMANS FAULT!!!"
 
I am glad I didn't invest in Carbon Credits... Originally at your local convenience store for $7.40 per ton, now on the Bargain Shelf of Dollar Tree for $ .10 per ton.... GO GORE!!!!!
 


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 24, 2012, 11:21:00 AM
Here's an interesting article (http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover031307.htm) that is nearly five years old. Of course if you still are interested being a carbon credit mogul you can go here (http://www.carbonventures.net/) and find out all about it. Maybe if you call before midnight he'll double the offer too.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on April 30, 2012, 07:16:08 AM
The irony - it hurts . . . .  (http://zeenews.india.com/news/eco-news/wind-farms-may-cause-climate-change_772586.html)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: NightmarePatrol on April 30, 2012, 07:24:09 AM
I guess we should have looked for lite-green technology.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 25, 2013, 04:40:45 PM
20 things we know about Carbon Dioxide.  (http://principia-scientific.org/supportnews/latest-news/201-twenty-facts-about-carbon-dioxide.html)

Food for thought. Of all the independent variables that go into climate - to pinpoint ONE of those variables as THE culprit in climate change seems disingenuous at best.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Amidala on May 25, 2013, 04:52:43 PM
20 things we know about Carbon Dioxide.  ([url]http://principia-scientific.org/supportnews/latest-news/201-twenty-facts-about-carbon-dioxide.html[/url])

Food for thought. Of all the independent variables that go into climate - to pinpoint ONE of those variables as THE culprit in climate change seems disingenuous at best.




I read this and it brings a lot of questions to mind, that I would have to research and check out before accepting this person's claims (and with a name like Darko Butina, my first bit of research would be to research that person's credentials.) I have never taken Physical Chem, which is the subject some of his claims would fall under.


As I have a lot of time on my hands lately, I may look into some of the claims; if I do I will let you know. I also am short on a few RBC & Fe at the moment so that is a factor that will play into it. :)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 26, 2013, 11:28:37 AM
Real fellow - doing real science.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 12, 2013, 06:50:48 AM
Arctic Ice makes an unpredicted comeback.  (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/Global-cooling-Arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 08, 2018, 10:08:56 AM
....should be entertaining to say the least:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article203842084.html (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article203842084.html)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on March 08, 2018, 10:22:40 AM
So we globally could push for renewables and the high paying / high tech jobs it generates, or the US could pull back while other countries pass us by and they now have the cheaper energy options.  Worse case global warming is not real but we have all this clean air from the renewable energy push.  And BTW the renewable energy job market is the fastest growing in the US now.  Seems logical to me to push for jobs, clean air and cheap energy but yet some people want to debate to save a small group of jobs that are a fraction of the renewable job market growth.  Keep living in the past and you will be left behind.  The Republicans also told me the ban on incandescents is terrible and LEDs are too costly and will never work.  Now I can get LED bulbs for less than $1 and I use less electricity in my home and pay less per month compared to 10 years ago.   Let's stop using ice chests and move to a refrigerator, life will be much better. 


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 08, 2018, 12:34:41 PM
So we globally could push for renewables and the high paying / high tech jobs it generates, or the US could pull back while other countries pass us by and they now have the cheaper energy options. ...

....good to know

....appreciate the input.





.





.





.




.



.




.




.




.




(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4786/39983637174_203bed2630_z.jpg) 




Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 08, 2018, 12:35:43 PM
... The Republicans also told me the ban on incandescents is terrible and LEDs are too costly and will never work.  Now I can get LED bulbs for less than $1 and I use less electricity in my home and pay less per month compared to 10 years ago.  ...


 of course-




.





.






.





.





.




.




.





.....the bill including the mandating increased light bulb efficency passed in the Senate 86-8 on December 13, 2007. The House approved the final version 314-100 on December 18, and President Bush signed it the following day.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 08, 2018, 01:38:50 PM
....some people want to debate to save a small group of jobs that are a fraction of the renewable job market growth.  Keep living in the past and you will be left behind. ...

....U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Energy and Employment Report, March 24, 2016-


“...3.64 million Americans work in traditional energy industries, including production, transmission, distribution, and storage.

Of these, 600,000 employees contribute to the production of low-carbon electricity, including renewable energy, nuclear energy and low emission natural gas.

...the energy efficiency sector predicted hiring rates of 14 percent in 2016, or almost 260,000 new hires. Projected hiring rates were at 5 percent within the electric power generation and fuels sector, reflecting overall growth despite a loss of employment in 2015 in the oil and natural gas extraction sectors. Transmission, wholesale distribution, and storage firms anticipate 4 percent employment growth in 2016. Solar energy firms predicted 15 percent job growth over the next year.

Yet even as the report found the opportunity for job growth in many energy sectors, over 70 percent of all employers surveyed found it “difficult or very difficult” to hire new employees with needed skills.
...”



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on March 08, 2018, 03:37:40 PM
You take a snapshot of today to prove your point when I was talking the future.............  And no response to the main point - if global warming turns out not to be true we will still have clean air, good paying jobs and cheap power if we take the renewable path.
And China who we have the largest trade deficit with was not even on the chart.  Maybe it is because it is off the bottom of the chart at 4-4.5 cents.
Yes I appreciate your input......


So we globally could push for renewables and the high paying / high tech jobs it generates, or the US could pull back while other countries pass us by and they now have the cheaper energy options. ...

....good to know

....appreciate the input.





.





.





.




.



.




.




.




.




(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4786/39983637174_203bed2630_z.jpg) 





Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 08, 2018, 05:12:21 PM
You take a snapshot of today to prove your point when I was talking the future.............  And no response to the main point - if global warming turns out not to be true ....

....of course, the documented historical geological record is solid and absolutely factually clear-

....global climates are not static, and-

....the planets have clearly been historically warming over time for a multitude of variable reasons, which likewise remain, and will continue to remain, variable and not static.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on March 08, 2018, 07:52:57 PM
As I was saying on the Republican efforts to kill the bill, withhold funding on enforcement and delay advances in technology.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/201687-despite-gop-opposition-light-bulb-standards-to-phase-in-on-jan-1 (http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/201687-despite-gop-opposition-light-bulb-standards-to-phase-in-on-jan-1)


... The Republicans also told me the ban on incandescents is terrible and LEDs are too costly and will never work.  Now I can get LED bulbs for less than $1 and I use less electricity in my home and pay less per month compared to 10 years ago.  ...


 of course-




.





.






.





.





.




.




.





.....the bill including the mandating increased light bulb efficency passed in the Senate 86-8 on December 13, 2007. The House approved the final version 314-100 on December 18, and President Bush signed it the following day.



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on March 08, 2018, 07:54:36 PM
Clean air is a terrible thing I guess, everyone wants a coal fired power plant next door to their home I am sure.


You take a snapshot of today to prove your point when I was talking the future.............  And no response to the main point - if global warming turns out not to be true ....

....of course, the documented historical geological record is solid and absolutely factually clear-

....global climates are not static, and-

....the planets have clearly been historically warming over time for a multitude of variable reasons, which likewise remain, and will continue to remain, variable and not static.



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 08, 2018, 09:14:34 PM
Clean air is a terrible thing I guess, everyone wants a coal fired power plant next door to their home I am sure. ...

.





.




.





.




.



.




(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/647/32022123503_660dce1b59_t.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 09, 2018, 08:50:24 AM
Folks that lived in and around Pittsburgh in its steel making heyday can attest to what coal burning does to the air. I grew up in an Appalachian anthracite town in eastern PA. I can attest to what mining does to streams and landscapes. Anthracite was the energy that fueled the engine of the industrial revolution though. (Bituminous was a poor substitute - sorry West Virginia.)

Folks in ivory towers far away appreciated us dirty folks . . . kinda.

Tell you what though. "Nature" is an amazing thing. Shamokin's landscape was dominated by its massive black and smoking culm bank that loomed over the town. (I grew up in Mordor!) Some of that has been hauled off and burnt up in a culm plant a few miles up da road in da Heights. (Sorry accent slipped in there.) But even in the areas where the culm wasn't hauled off - trees, shrubs, and the color green have made a dramatic comeback over the 30-some years since the mine and colliery shut down.

The creek is a little less orange too.

Coal isn't going to make a comeback though. There are wildcat mines around, but they're not fueling any revolutions . . . just a few houses and small businesses that have coal furnaces. The big "industry" in the area now?

Corrections.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: The Wraith on March 11, 2018, 01:23:05 PM
I am only going to wade into this discussion by providing this link. Take it for what it is worth, and the source of it and the information being cited within it. These are not independent sources. I merely share this as my "meteorology" professor sounded the alarm bells and went on a 15 minute rant about this a few weeks ago.

Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/02/21/arctic-temperatures-soar-45-degrees-above-normal-flooded-by-extremely-mild-air-on-all-sides/?utm_term=.8a76206f36dc (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/02/21/arctic-temperatures-soar-45-degrees-above-normal-flooded-by-extremely-mild-air-on-all-sides/?utm_term=.8a76206f36dc)

Now, I only accept the facts provided by the data, not the blithering from people who clearly have some type of agenda...... more on that in a minute.

What I find amusing is that this planet is estimated to be over 4.5 BILLION years old. It is estimated that human beings in their current form may have developed just about 300,000 years ago. Of course, after a period of probably primal behavior and basically sitting in their own excrement for several thousand years, we can probably eliminate many thousands of those years.

So in essence, an "intelligent" human being with any kind of measuring instrument has been on this planet for probably at most 8018 years. The first recorded weather reports have been dated to 6000 BC in India. The first reported weather readings in North America is reported to have occurred around 1644, according to NOAA.

The point being that out of the 4.5 BILLION YEARS this planet has been around, human beings can only document around 8018 years of weather conditions on it. You do the math. (Hint: it looks like this .0001781777777777778) Would you make any kind of decision based on that percentage of knowledge?

Everything else is a human generated ASSUMPTION, which is exactly what a forecast is..... an assumption made on projected facts. Humans love to try and convince each other that they can predict the future instead of just concentrating on facts they currently have readily available and conditions that will be obvious over the short term. Projections beyond a certain point in time are about as reliable as you rolling the ball on the roulette table. The same can be said for when humans try to estimate what happened several hundred thousand years ago based on human generated fact patterns. How many times through the years have "scientists" had to walk back what they thought happened when actual facts came forth to prove what happened.

To further prove the point, humans have been continually making what they themselves consider "more accurate" recording devices in an attempt to fine tune the information they provide. So this could effectively throw into doubt the accuracy of measuring devices in the past as compared to the devices we have today, most notably with satellites and digital devices.

In addition, as stated in this thread previously, many of these studies and tests are done on government contracts and through competitive grants. That means that $$$$$$$$ has an undue influence on the outcomes. People who wish to push favor towards their beliefs will sponsor tests and research that favors their position, or trade. Such was demonstrated recently at the CPAC convention when this group appeared:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DWrl91xWAAAMx68.jpg)

Or the attempts by a certain political organization to influence public policy and laws to help further their financial benefits through a "cap and trade" policy - or the biggest fraud in the renewable energy industry known as "carbon credits." Those who would have benefited the most were the ones actually in power to enact the laws and influence the debate on the issue. Namely several former Presidential candidates, former actual Presidents, and one person who basically started this entire train of thought by making the assertion that the "planet has a fever." Look up the dealings with Shore Bank and who has been associated with it over the years. Don't get caught up in the political BS, stick to the facts uncovered.

It IS all about the money and both sides know it, and they want you arguing over it. Global warming and cooling is going to occur no matter if humans have contributed to it or not. We sit on a giant ball of molten material and rock, and if that giant ball decides to fart in a certain way - goodbye earthlings.

Earthlings attempting to predict the future of something unpredictable like the planet - or mother nature - is a continuing exercise in futility. I say this under the guise that an intelligent scientist has told me that the place I now sit was once under a mile high sheet of ice once........ so yes, climate does change.

End of rant..... LOL

 


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: The Wraith on March 11, 2018, 01:25:56 PM
As a side note, seeing as how this thread started around 2010, did anyone go back and see if the projections offered in the articles they cited actually were on target? I have not, but I may if I find the time.....

Just curious....



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 11, 2018, 09:07:52 PM
That would be interesting. Lots of predictions (or prognostications) can be from spot on way, way off.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: The Wraith on March 21, 2018, 06:05:43 PM
And for further consideration on the topic....... fudging temperature data? Say it ain't so....

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/5/climate-change-whistleblower-alleges-noaa-manipula/ (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/5/climate-change-whistleblower-alleges-noaa-manipula/)

(https://i0.wp.com/img.memecdn.com/when-you-give-your-wife-money-for-shopping_o_465108.gif)



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on March 23, 2018, 08:45:53 AM
One thing for sure is it created a lot of good paying jobs in the process regardless, that also outnumbered those lost in the coal industry.  It is one of the fastest growing job markets around.  So in reality who cares if the predictions are accurate or not if the job gains keep up and my electric costs are actually lower than 10 years ago.  Why do people want to fight a job growing high tech industry and improved efficiency is beyond me.

As a side note, seeing as how this thread started around 2010, did anyone go back and see if the projections offered in the articles they cited actually were on target? I have not, but I may if I find the time.....

Just curious....




Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 23, 2018, 10:09:47 AM
... So in reality who cares if the predictions are accurate or not if the job gains keep up and my electric costs are actually lower than 10 years ago... 

 (https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4786/40076215435_b982236282_c.jpg)

 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/818/40969884841_a9cd00bd75_z.jpg)



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on March 23, 2018, 10:47:16 AM
You did not account energy efficiency into my equation, appliances, LED light bulbs, LED TVs, AC etc.  My usage is 40% less as well over that time period, same house.  Add to it the legacy costs that were added to electric bills prior to transition to a free energy market have been removed.  All this does not and will not show up in your charts as this only looks at part of the bill, the pure electric portion.....
Looking at this link  it shows from 2008 to 2016 electric costs went up a whopping 5.5%, well below inflation over that time.  Also once again you add charts for something I was not talking about, I mentioned 10 years.  I guess Obama kept energy costs in check, Bush did not.  ;D 
https://www.statista.com/statistics/183700/us-average-retail-electricity-price-since-1990/ (https://www.statista.com/statistics/183700/us-average-retail-electricity-price-since-1990/)



... So in reality who cares if the predictions are accurate or not if the job gains keep up and my electric costs are actually lower than 10 years ago... 

 (https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4786/40076215435_b982236282_c.jpg)

 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/818/40969884841_a9cd00bd75_z.jpg)



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 23, 2018, 01:06:11 PM
Of course-

....still, the factually reality, as documented above, is the costs did not decrease-

....the costs have only continued to increase.

As admitted and ‘reported’ in the lives’  unattributed and unsourceable  graphic,  electricity cost have only continued to increase, with an admitted 5.5% increase in the cost in the referenced time frame.

What allegedly decreased was personal usage of electricity,-

.... resulting in an alleged lower payment for that alleged reduced usage of electricity.

An alleged self-proclaimed  40% reduction in usage of has no bearing on the cost of electricity, only what is paid for the amount of the continuing-to-increase-in-cost electricity.

And of course, an alleged 40% reduction in personal usage is quickly offset by both the increasing cost of electricity and the amount of money expended to implement the alleged reduction in personal use of electricity. It takes decades to even begin approaching the financial break even point of retro-fitting a structure, even with DIY-ers supplying the labor. And much longer for those lacking  reliable DIY-er abilities.

Tho, I’m confident somebody, somewhere might tend to be impressed with utilizing an utterly unsupported, alleged claim of a 40% reduction in personal electrical usage is a valid point in addressing the delusion of human-caused ‘global warming’.

In the last decade alone, while my electrical usage is down a documented 89% (same house, same number of residents in the household), and I am clearly paying far far less in monthly electrical bills than before, my average monthly billing has only been reduced 67% due to the continuing increasing price of electricity.

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/783/39162364560_ecb8e9864a_c.jpg)


On the financially plus side, I am most fortunate that I surpassed the financial break even point years back in terms of my personal costs of physical upgrades made to the house in  realizing my usage /economical reductions, and I am now benefiting financially as a result of those decisions made a quarter century back.

My situation is the rare exception, with most homeowners very likely throwing good  money after bad in their self-entitled, feel good, false delusion of the possibility of making a contribution to reducing ‘global warming’.
[/]


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 23, 2018, 01:22:17 PM
As a side note, seeing as how this thread started around 2010, did anyone go back and see if the projections offered in the articles they cited actually were on target? I have not, but I may if I find the time.....

Just curious....

...not hard to locate-

-12 years after Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” guilt/fear producing predictions on his way to the bank....

-inundating rising sea levels

- new ice age in Europe

- south Sahara drying up

-massive flooding in China and India

-the earth would be in a “true planetary emergencywithin a decade unless drastic action taken to reduce greenhouse gasses




Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on March 23, 2018, 01:37:23 PM
My total monthly cost I pay for my electricity bill is down compared to 10 years ago while my wages went up well over 50% over over that same time period.  Spin that however you like and if I am better off or not.  I say yes but somehow you will find a way to argue no. 

 
Of course-

....still, the factually reality, as documented above, is the costs did not decrease-

....the costs have only continued to increase.

As admitted and ‘reported’ in the lives’  unattributed and unsourceable  graphic,  electricity cost have only continued to increase, with an admitted 5.5% increase in the cost in the referenced time frame.

What allegedly decreased was personal usage of electricity,-

.... resulting in an alleged lower payment for that alleged reduced usage of electricity.

An alleged self-proclaimed  40% reduction in usage of has no bearing on the cost of electricity, only what is paid for the amount of the continuing-to-increase-in-cost electricity.

And of course, an alleged 40% reduction in personal usage is quickly offset by both the increasing cost of electricity and the amount of money expended to implement the alleged reduction in personal use of electricity. It takes decades to even begin approaching the financial break even point of retro-fitting a structure, even with DIY-ers supplying the labor. And much longer for those lacking  reliable DIY-er abilities.

Tho, I’m confident somebody, somewhere might tend to be impressed with utilizing an utterly unsupported, alleged claim of a 40% reduction in personal electrical usage is a valid point in addressing the delusion of human-caused ‘global warming’.

In the last decade alone, while my electrical usage is down a documented 89% (same house, same number of residents in the household), and I am clearly paying far far less in monthly electrical bills than before, my average monthly billing has only been reduced 67% due to the continuing increasing price of electricity.

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/783/39162364560_ecb8e9864a_c.jpg)


On the financially plus side, I am most fortunate that I surpassed the financial break even point years back in terms of my personal costs of physical upgrades made to the house in  realizing my usage /economical reductions, and I am now benefiting financially as a result of those decisions made a quarter century back.

My situation is the rare exception, with most homeowners very likely throwing good  money after bad in their self-entitled, feel good, false delusion of the possibility of making a contribution to reducing ‘global warming’.
[/]


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 23, 2018, 03:21:24 PM
...yes, dear.....

....do continue to make shit up with the personal attacks.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on March 23, 2018, 04:20:35 PM
So apparently you do not know how to READ as my original quote was "my electric costs are actually lower than 10 years ago".  You then had to go on a long dissertation on how that is incorrect and go comparing national electricity costs.    Please learn to READ, seriously.  Now who started this personal attack?

...yes, dear.....

....do continue to make shit up with the personal attacks.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 23, 2018, 04:24:58 PM
....of course, dear.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on March 24, 2018, 09:28:36 AM
Yes, your typical response when you are correctly called out.     ;D


....of course, dear.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on March 24, 2018, 10:26:53 AM
....yes, hon.

....flame away.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 06, 2018, 10:47:47 AM
Well hon everyone here knows your child-like qualities and tantrums when you are called out as being incorrect.  You can dish it out but you sure do have insecurity issues when someone responds in kind to report your omissions, selective reporting or lacking of accuracy.  And that insecurity will force a response by you.......
....yes, hon.

....flame away.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 06, 2018, 04:09:42 PM
Well hon everyone here knows your child-like qualities and tantrums when you are called out as being incorrect.  You can dish it out but you sure do have insecurity issues when someone responds in kind to report your omissions, selective reporting or lacking of accuracy.  And that insecurity will force a response by you.......
   . . .
.








.








.








.






.








.







.








.







.








.







.









.







.







.





.






....yes, dear...


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 08, 2018, 11:04:26 AM
Bingo, it did.


Well hon everyone here knows your child-like qualities and tantrums when you are called out as being incorrect.  You can dish it out but you sure do have insecurity issues when someone responds in kind to report your omissions, selective reporting or lacking of accuracy.  And that insecurity will force a response by you.......
   . . .
.








.








.








.






.








.







.








.







.








.







.









.







.







.





.






....yes, dear...


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 08, 2018, 11:10:51 AM
Should be interesting to see what happens with the supposed free market Republicans potentially pushing for a bailout based on a flawed investigation that said it is for grid security and robustness.  The argument about saving jobs really does not stand because we need this power to fill in the gap so that alternative will create jobs as well.  About the only good thing that could happen with this request to keep this higher cost fuel source in business against market competition is that all US taxpayers will foot the bill, instead of First Energy's original push to keep it tied to a couple states including PA.  So everyone across the country may be forced to pay for this bailout for "grid security" instead of those that consume the actual power.  Set a precedent with government interference then every coal plant that plans to close in the future with have their hand out as well with the US taxpayers.   I guess this is the new Republican direction with regard to business, use taxpayer bailouts to interfere with free markets.    Trump was a Democrat prior so I guess it should not be a surprise.

http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/382087-taxpayers-shouldnt-foot-the-8-billion-bill-to-bailout-a-failing (http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/382087-taxpayers-shouldnt-foot-the-8-billion-bill-to-bailout-a-failing)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: The Wraith on April 09, 2018, 05:42:59 PM
Lives...... Coal fired and nuclear power plants are going to be mothballed, at least in the near term. First Energy is going to be into the Compressed Natural Gas sector soon. Over here in Ohio we have a local Village already benefiting from the construction of two natural gas power plants.

There is also a move to utilize more gas producing sources from degradable organic waste, such as the stuff politicians spew and are full of. As the variety of wastes decompose, they produces methane which is then funneled into generators to produce power back into the grid. This is a renewable resource and should be a viable alternative to all these municipalities spending tax dollars laying and maintaining sewer lines all over creation. The solar market will not be capable of taking over the market as long as the govt. has to continue subsidizing most of it to prop it up. It will continue to be an "alternative market" until it can stand on its own with competitive costs. The markets will follow which technique produces at the lowest cost.

If First Energy, or the other power companies, wish to use any "bailout" to construct new plants, or to retool current plants, then is there much of a difference between them and the money being spent to prop up the solar or other sectors? First Energy and related companies already account for the infrastructure and maintenance of "the grid".

Feel free to research the emerging processes. Maybe one day your septic tank (if you have one) could power your house like a battery....

https://ofbf.org/2013/02/27/from-waste-to-energy/ (https://ofbf.org/2013/02/27/from-waste-to-energy/)

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jan/16/colorado-grand-junction-persigo-wastewater-treatment-plant-human-waste-renewable-energy (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jan/16/colorado-grand-junction-persigo-wastewater-treatment-plant-human-waste-renewable-energy)

http://www.dispatch.com/news/20171105/morrow-countys-renergy-turns-farm-food-waste-into-electric-power (http://www.dispatch.com/news/20171105/morrow-countys-renergy-turns-farm-food-waste-into-electric-power)

https://www.arcadis.com/en/united-states/news/latest-news/press-releases/2017/11/columbusohioengages-arcadis-for-waste-to-energy-improvements-at-wastewater-plant/ (https://www.arcadis.com/en/united-states/news/latest-news/press-releases/2017/11/columbusohioengages-arcadis-for-waste-to-energy-improvements-at-wastewater-plant/)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 09, 2018, 09:44:33 PM
Certainly you don't think solar is the only power source being subsidized, oil is as well to the tune of billions of dollars per year.    How much do companies pay for their land leases from the US government for mineral extraction as just one of many give aways......  Although the specific numbers to the oil industry can be debated endlessly it is a myth that renewables are the only power source that receives govt. support.  Solar is in fact cheaper than other power sources is many regions of the world now, unsubsidized contracts coming in at less than 3 cents / kwh globally, certainly much cheaper than I pay.  Add to it the huge growth in storage happening now with much cheaper battery banks that pushes solar energy availability 24/7.  Wind though is actually often cheaper than solar depending on region.  The world is changing and there is no going back.

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/10/6/16428458/us-energy-subsidies (https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/10/6/16428458/us-energy-subsidies)

https://thinkprogress.org/stunner-lowest-price-solar-power-f3b620d04010/ (https://thinkprogress.org/stunner-lowest-price-solar-power-f3b620d04010/)


Lives...... Coal fired and nuclear power plants are going to be mothballed, at least in the near term. First Energy is going to be into the Compressed Natural Gas sector soon. Over here in Ohio we have a local Village already benefiting from the construction of two natural gas power plants.

There is also a move to utilize more gas producing sources from degradable organic waste, such as the stuff politicians spew and are full of. As the variety of wastes decompose, they produces methane which is then funneled into generators to produce power back into the grid. This is a renewable resource and should be a viable alternative to all these municipalities spending tax dollars laying and maintaining sewer lines all over creation. The solar market will not be capable of taking over the market as long as the govt. has to continue subsidizing most of it to prop it up. It will continue to be an "alternative market" until it can stand on its own with competitive costs. The markets will follow which technique produces at the lowest cost.

If First Energy, or the other power companies, wish to use any "bailout" to construct new plants, or to retool current plants, then is there much of a difference between them and the money being spent to prop up the solar or other sectors? First Energy and related companies already account for the infrastructure and maintenance of "the grid".

Feel free to research the emerging processes. Maybe one day your septic tank (if you have one) could power your house like a battery....

[url]https://ofbf.org/2013/02/27/from-waste-to-energy/[/url] ([url]https://ofbf.org/2013/02/27/from-waste-to-energy/[/url])

[url]https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jan/16/colorado-grand-junction-persigo-wastewater-treatment-plant-human-waste-renewable-energy[/url] ([url]https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jan/16/colorado-grand-junction-persigo-wastewater-treatment-plant-human-waste-renewable-energy[/url])

[url]http://www.dispatch.com/news/20171105/morrow-countys-renergy-turns-farm-food-waste-into-electric-power[/url] ([url]http://www.dispatch.com/news/20171105/morrow-countys-renergy-turns-farm-food-waste-into-electric-power[/url])

[url]https://www.arcadis.com/en/united-states/news/latest-news/press-releases/2017/11/columbusohioengages-arcadis-for-waste-to-energy-improvements-at-wastewater-plant/[/url] ([url]https://www.arcadis.com/en/united-states/news/latest-news/press-releases/2017/11/columbusohioengages-arcadis-for-waste-to-energy-improvements-at-wastewater-plant/[/url])


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: The Wraith on April 11, 2018, 10:31:07 AM
I mentioned the other subsidized processes in my original post. Oil and coal will receive subsidies because they are the preferred sources for which the grid was established. The infrastructure is already in place, and it is interconnected with national security. So the country has a picunitary interest in subsidizing it.

All of the traditional renewable energy sector processes require batteries, and batteries haven't reached the point yet where they are capable of long term storage/discharge after a certain number of recharges. Their effectiveness begins to decline after so many, example is your cell phone needing replaced after a year. Batteries are not cheap. Oil and coal don't need batteries. The tech is getting better, but not to the point that it will replace combustion.

Other than the transmission line required to transport the electric, or the plant required to refine and then produce the power, the footprint of the current system is much less. With wind and solar power you need large structures or fields of solar panels to produce the same amount as combustion. And because nobody wants those types of structures in their back yards, where are they placed? Those are also dependent on atmospheric conditions to supply necessary energy to produce their energy.

Alternative energy sources at this point will be supplemental sources until the vast majority of people lose their thirst for reliable, on demand, and cheap fossile fuels. There will always be a segment of the population that will go the alternate route, but the majority still dictates the markets even if they are not as outspoken as someone trying to influence a change.

Tesla knew how to make electricity available to everyone, but there was no profit in it, so it was demonized. On a similar note, one will see the future of alternatives by the progress of the electric vehicles. If electric vehicles ever reach a point that they outsell combustion, then that may signal a shift. But the main reason that has not happened........ reliability and battery capability. Why hasn't the Tesla vehicle become a major player in the car industry? Simple, Cost. Your normal middle income citizen can't afford it which limits access to your market. People don't have the patience to drive a couple hundred miles and have to plug in their car. Hell, they might as well tie up their horse. Now, of course you can nudge people to make the change by making fuel prices sky rocket, or tell the car companies they are no longer allowed to produce combustion engines, but one would opine that pitchforks and torches would show up on your doorstep. But the govt. did do that with the incandescent bulb, and I am sure some suits in Washington made a lot of money along the way.

It is inevitable that in the future there will be something different, because technology is expanding exponentially. But oil, gas, and coal will always be the fall back when technology ultimately fails. You can post all the articles or studies from bias sources you like, but the bottom line still remains that the market follows cheap, plentiful, and reliable. And that trend is toward natural gas...... and that is where subsidies will flow, not because of some govt. influenced regulation, but because of demand.

You have wrapped yourself in "green energy" which is admirable, but at this point you are in the minority.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 11, 2018, 12:30:16 PM
Renewables and natural gas are our future.  Coal has been put out to pasture with hundreds of proposed plants cancelled in the US.  These coal plants cannot go on forever and as these age or become too costly they will be closed for good.  It is a matter of how long companies want to keep them operating with other lower cost alternatives available.  Just look at the cost curves over time for these renewables.  My guess is not long due to shareholder demands for profitability.
https://content.sierraclub.org/coal/environmentallaw/plant-map (https://content.sierraclub.org/coal/environmentallaw/plant-map)
To fully power the US with solar it would take 0.6% of our land, some of which like roof tops could be dual purpose and not consume anything additional.  Don't forget you don't need all the transportation and cost associated with it to get coal from one area of the country to these plants, nor the land to store the fuel or by-products plus the orange runoff into our streams that makes hundreds of miles of streams unuseable for wildlife / fishing.
http://blog.solarcity.com/how-much-land-would-it-take-to-power-the-u-s-with-solar-energy/ (http://blog.solarcity.com/how-much-land-would-it-take-to-power-the-u-s-with-solar-energy/)

And wow, look at this - the 4th largest economy in the world currently is using 36% renewable energy, briefly hitting 100% for the first time and the grid still works, amazing......
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/renewables-cover-about-100-german-power-use-first-time-ever (https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/renewables-cover-about-100-german-power-use-first-time-ever)
Local generation like renewables is actually better for the grid in times of peak power draw as the power does not have to be transported long distances.
If you think renewables WITH storage are too expensive some bids are coming in around 2-3 cents/kwh, again much cheaper than I pay now.  No these are not cell phone batteries they are using and with their power and temperature management build in they are expected to last for more than a decade.  Even small residential ones come with 10 year warranties, expected life is more.
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/record-low-solar-plus-storage-price-in-xcel-solicitation (https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/record-low-solar-plus-storage-price-in-xcel-solicitation)
It may be a while until coal is phased out but the trend is clear.  Last year 94% of net new capacity additions were renewables and 30 coal plants closed.
https://electrek.co/2018/01/12/94-percent-new-electricity-capacity-usa-from-renewables/ (https://electrek.co/2018/01/12/94-percent-new-electricity-capacity-usa-from-renewables/)
http://www.theenergycollective.com/energy-innovation-llc/2418633/utilities-closed-nearly-30-coal-plants-2017-economics-6-important (http://www.theenergycollective.com/energy-innovation-llc/2418633/utilities-closed-nearly-30-coal-plants-2017-economics-6-important)
You are going to be hard pressed to get the funding you need from banks, mutual funds or institutions to build another large scale coal power plant in the US and that is clearly due to economics and costs of the alternatives.  Coal is on it's death bed that I agree may take decades and it has nothing to do with the green movement but that certainly is a benefit.  The change though is only accellerating.

An electric car with 200+ mile range will most likely suit 90% of the population including myself.  If not there are hybrids that can double your gas mileage.  A large 7 passenger Toyota highlander hybrid gets 30mpg in the city, nearly double.  Yes it may cost $5k more but you are saving gas nearly cut in half and certainly that price differential will only go down as they have in the works over 100 electric options in the next 3 years. So instead of going to a gas station you cannot plug it in at night at home?  Come on.




I mentioned the other subsidized processes in my original post. Oil and coal will receive subsidies because they are the preferred sources for which the grid was established. The infrastructure is already in place, and it is interconnected with national security. So the country has a picunitary interest in subsidizing it.

All of the traditional renewable energy sector processes require batteries, and batteries haven't reached the point yet where they are capable of long term storage/discharge after a certain number of recharges. Their effectiveness begins to decline after so many, example is your cell phone needing replaced after a year. Batteries are not cheap. Oil and coal don't need batteries. The tech is getting better, but not to the point that it will replace combustion.

Other than the transmission line required to transport the electric, or the plant required to refine and then produce the power, the footprint of the current system is much less. With wind and solar power you need large structures or fields of solar panels to produce the same amount as combustion. And because nobody wants those types of structures in their back yards, where are they placed? Those are also dependent on atmospheric conditions to supply necessary energy to produce their energy.

Alternative energy sources at this point will be supplemental sources until the vast majority of people lose their thirst for reliable, on demand, and cheap fossile fuels. There will always be a segment of the population that will go the alternate route, but the majority still dictates the markets even if they are not as outspoken as someone trying to influence a change.

Tesla knew how to make electricity available to everyone, but there was no profit in it, so it was demonized. On a similar note, one will see the future of alternatives by the progress of the electric vehicles. If electric vehicles ever reach a point that they outsell combustion, then that may signal a shift. But the main reason that has not happened........ reliability and battery capability. Why hasn't the Tesla vehicle become a major player in the car industry? Simple, Cost. Your normal middle income citizen can't afford it which limits access to your market. People don't have the patience to drive a couple hundred miles and have to plug in their car. Hell, they might as well tie up their horse. Now, of course you can nudge people to make the change by making fuel prices sky rocket, or tell the car companies they are no longer allowed to produce combustion engines, but one would opine that pitchforks and torches would show up on your doorstep. But the govt. did do that with the incandescent bulb, and I am sure some suits in Washington made a lot of money along the way.

It is inevitable that in the future there will be something different, because technology is expanding exponentially. But oil, gas, and coal will always be the fall back when technology ultimately fails. You can post all the articles or studies from bias sources you like, but the bottom line still remains that the market follows cheap, plentiful, and reliable. And that trend is toward natural gas...... and that is where subsidies will flow, not because of some govt. influenced regulation, but because of demand.

You have wrapped yourself in "green energy" which is admirable, but at this point you are in the minority.



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 11, 2018, 01:05:04 PM
Renewables and natural gas are our future. 

    ...

  ....the bigotry is telling :D -





.





.





.




.





.






.






.
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/813/41348614692_df3ebd5eb0_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: The Wraith on April 11, 2018, 06:43:01 PM
Gore, that is probably pretty far off as they have not been able to control the reaction to the point of being able to harness the energy. Fusion is probably 15 years away, and that is a projection. The now is natural gas.

LIVES: I have not even spoken about COAL except in general.




Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 11, 2018, 07:52:30 PM
Yes, dear.


Renewables and natural gas are our future. 

    ...

  ....the bigotry is telling :D -





.





.





.




.





.






.






.
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/813/41348614692_df3ebd5eb0_c.jpg)



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 11, 2018, 09:24:35 PM
 
Renewables and natural gas are our future

 ...

Gore, that is probably pretty far off as they have not been able to control the reaction to the point of being able to harness the energy. Fusion is probably 15 years away, and that is a projection. The now is natural gas.
  ...
 


(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/789/40503711885_73fc9ed2a2_b.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/890/40503714745_5ee3c41fed_c.jpg)

[/]


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Lifetime on April 12, 2018, 11:09:03 AM
Fusion has been the "Philospher's Stone" for decades. Promises that if able to creat and SUSTAIN the reaction...we would all have FREE power. I think in 15 years... IF it happens... we will still be paying large power bills... Someone will always find a way to pee in yer tea!

'scuse me while I go pay my gas and electric bill  ;)


Renewables and natural gas are our future

 ...

Gore, that is probably pretty far off as they have not been able to control the reaction to the point of being able to harness the energy. Fusion is probably 15 years away, and that is a projection. The now is natural gas.
  ...
 


(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/789/40503711885_73fc9ed2a2_b.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/890/40503714745_5ee3c41fed_c.jpg)

[/]


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 12, 2018, 12:26:37 PM
   ...
 I think in 15 years... IF it happens... we will still be paying large power bills... Someone will always find a way to pee in yer tea!

'scuse me while I go pay my gas and electric bill  ;)


.... :D ....


....from the land of massive & mucho wind and solar farms down under -

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/883/41412428361_6cd06498f0_b.jpg)



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: bighair80s on April 12, 2018, 12:40:50 PM
Lifetime,


Mr Bh and I visited the Plasma Fusion Science Center at MIT about 10 years back.  The school was going to buy his Tooling and mr Bh donated it to the school instead.  We got invited for a fine tour of PSFC and it’s cool to think mr Bh Tooling  used there as a tiny part of making history. 

Time sure flies. 


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 12, 2018, 12:45:41 PM
Paying 44% more in electricity in real terms in the last 10 years, but efficiency gains have cut my actual household electric usage by about the same in the last 4.......  Call it even, not even counting the rise in my income.  ;D

 
   ...
 I think in 15 years... IF it happens... we will still be paying large power bills... Someone will always find a way to pee in yer tea!

'scuse me while I go pay my gas and electric bill  ;)


.... :D ....


....from the land of massive & mucho wind and solar farms down under -

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/883/41412428361_6cd06498f0_b.jpg)




Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 12, 2018, 12:58:53 PM
Paying 44% more in electricity in real terms in the last 10 years

  ...


.... :D ....


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 12, 2018, 02:14:05 PM
Yes, it does not count the efficiency gains and lower usage into that equation, if it goes up 44%, I use 44% less the net is a zero percent increase.  ;D    If my neighbor wants to pay more and not worry about efficiency it is his money, not mine.  Just today I paid 77 cents each for 60w LED lightbulbs at HD that a few years ago I was told would be too expensive for the average houshold, go figure.

Paying 44% more in electricity in real terms in the last 10 years

  ...


.... :D ....


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 12, 2018, 02:49:53 PM
   ...

If my neighbor wants to pay more and not worry about efficiency it is his money, not mine. 

   ...
.








.









.









.








(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/808/40196741244_358d517554_n.jpg)



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 12, 2018, 02:51:09 PM
....(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/899/41372346342_da963c9996_o.jpg) ....


[/]


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 12, 2018, 08:06:36 PM
To put this in simpler terms these "advocates", AKA lobbyists, want a taxpayer bailout to keep a higher cost plant open.

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2018/04/12/Advocates-urge-Congress-to-keep-large-western-coal-plant-open/5261523556563/ (https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2018/04/12/Advocates-urge-Congress-to-keep-large-western-coal-plant-open/5261523556563/)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 13, 2018, 12:11:43 AM
To put this in simpler terms these "advocates", AKA lobbyists, want a taxpayer bailout to keep a higher cost plant open.
   ...

....like Paul noted in his day-

....now...... the rest....of the story....

.....not quite the leftist sordid tale of big bad corporate profiteers screwing over the tax payer as implied above......not even close :D

Factually, the owners of the Navajo Generating Station, who are a conglomeration of the commercial electrical utilities selling/using the electricity generated at the plant,-

....voted to close the facility

.....due to the decreasing costing of natural gas used by competitors.

The owners lease the land from the Navajo-Hopi nation to operate the plant.

The non-Navajo-Hopi commercial utilities owing the Navajo Generating Station coal-fired power plant near Page, AZ  stated they are tired of overpaying to produce power at the plant, and voted in February of 2017 to  close the plant when their lease expires at the end of 2019.

Recent court rulings bar coal combustion at the plant after December 22, 2019, and retirement of the facility should then begin, to be completed by December 22, 2024.

The Yes to NGS coalition “lobbyist” are in fact members of the Navajo-Hopi nation who own the land where the Navajo Generating Station  sits, and also own the land where the coal mine is located which is the sole source of the coal used in the plant.

Of note, the coal is owned by the Navajo-Hopi nation and is transported to the plant on a dedicated electrified railway, also owned by the commercial non-Navajo-Hopi co-owners of the Navajo Generating Station. The electrified trains are solely powered by electricity generated by the plant to power. The coal-only trains operate the 78 miles between the mine and the plant. The single-purpose railroad is completely isolated from the national rail system and does not connect any other railroads. The locomotives were purchased used from Ferrocarriles Nacionales de México (N de M) railroad.

When the plant and coal mine close, aprx 800-900 Navajo-Hopi reservation residents will be out of work.

The Navajo-Hopi Yes to NGS coalition wants the federal government to support transitioning the plant to new owners in order to keep reservation residents employed.

On a political side note, the Department of the Interior, which has a responsibility to the Navajo and Hopi tribes, has received millions in mine royalties each year which support Navajo-Hopi tribal operations.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 17, 2018, 02:42:17 PM
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/819/27653617578_e21f815086_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 17, 2018, 02:42:49 PM
 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/877/27653622898_821b5226e8_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 17, 2018, 02:58:26 PM
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/851/39715539830_c46234683f_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: NightmarePatrol on April 17, 2018, 06:08:02 PM
I'm five miles off the ocean and 29' ASL so I'll be ocean front by then... but I'm not worried about that for me.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 17, 2018, 10:14:27 PM
 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/900/27653629558_3aace4a3ab_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 18, 2018, 08:56:38 AM
 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/840/27653634248_5d9d8d4b1b_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 18, 2018, 08:57:06 AM
 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/862/26654438387_80c730ac84_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 18, 2018, 08:58:01 AM
 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/900/26654443017_7081bff5f0_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 18, 2018, 08:58:46 AM
 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/867/26654447497_b3ca5a3505_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 18, 2018, 09:01:15 AM
....of course-

....no mention what so ever that New Orleans is currently actually SINKING into the soft sediment of the Mississippi delta :o


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 18, 2018, 09:01:35 AM
 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/929/26654452087_e6bbd085de_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Lifetime on April 19, 2018, 10:49:20 AM
Remember...a good part of NOLA is already under sea level" ...and the levees aren't all that safe..



(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/867/26654447497_b3ca5a3505_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 19, 2018, 10:54:12 AM
....and it is my fault, and yours, that the planet is warming and New Orleans is flooding  :D


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 19, 2018, 10:55:36 AM
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/827/41538625671_e104ecce04_z.jpg)

-the current coast line is depicted seen on the graphic below, as contrasted and compared to the projected future  coast line when global warming melts the planet’s ice sheets, with Memphis depicted as a coastal city.

The original North American landmass coast prior to the global warming melting of the planet’s ice sheets is outlined by the red line; over half of the Floridian land mass is currently flooded due to global warming.....just a hunch-

.....GOP’s/Bushs’/Trump’s fault  :D





.








.







.





.





(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/906/26654456767_6f85d4158f_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Amidala on April 19, 2018, 09:35:01 PM
I worry more about a lack of water in the west/southwest in 100 years +/- resulting in migration back to the Northeast, or even Canada. Drought is deadly, and it will happen when water becomes  prohibitively expensive for businesses. We're really fortunate to live in a natural wetland area, in spite of the rain and snow. Water is plentiful and inexpensive compared to the southwest. My two cents, total hypothesis.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 19, 2018, 11:23:37 PM
...it's not the lack of water which is th e major issue as rain/snowfall moisture is historically widely variable year to year. It's the uncontrolled  regional population explosion and resulting demand for limited desert water resources-

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/935/41531461122_dc3c980a3f_o.jpg)

 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/810/41531464232_30635159fd_o.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: NightmarePatrol on April 20, 2018, 08:06:48 AM
The west has dealt with water issues since it was first settled (invaded and conquered really) in the 1800's. Water is scarce and the Colorado has been the "Giving Tree" for a large chunk of the west for a very long time. Even here in the swamp we have some major water issues to go along with the massive invasion of people. About 6 miles south of us there are two (2) subdivisions under construction that when completed will have 8,000 houses between them. It's a problem for the water supply and environment as a whole. I for one am happy we're on a well. At least for now.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 20, 2018, 11:44:26 AM
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hsbc-stop-financing-most-coal-130150086.html

The more and more the big banks do this the more expensive funding will be to add to the economics or lack there of justification.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 20, 2018, 12:29:46 PM
...
The more and more the big banks do this the more expensive funding will be to add to the economics or lack there of justification.

.....good to know it will add to the ecomomics or lack there of.









.








.







.







.








.






.







.






.





(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/829/41583439671_26c6d2d9c2_b.jpg)



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 20, 2018, 06:36:23 PM
Clearly that does not tell the whole picture.  Just look at the trend, China is building less than half what it was10 years ago.  The trend is clear.  Also these plants have lower emissions requirements of the rest of the world by far.  China can't just stop replacing their retiring plants overnight, but they are investing hundreds of billions of dollars right now in renewables.


https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/5/15/15634538/china-coal-cleaner (https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/5/15/15634538/china-coal-cleaner)

(https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8518421/cap_china_coal_standards.png)

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/world/asia/china-renewable-energy-investment.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/world/asia/china-renewable-energy-investment.html)

https://endcoal.org/global-coal-plant-tracker/summary-statistics/ (https://endcoal.org/global-coal-plant-tracker/summary-statistics/)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CKsjpMg1dUaQyAszkAocVKMYJWIB1c8dAPUtLCmylAo/edit#gid=0 (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CKsjpMg1dUaQyAszkAocVKMYJWIB1c8dAPUtLCmylAo/edit#gid=0)




 
...
The more and more the big banks do this the more expensive funding will be to add to the economics or lack there of justification.

.....good to know it will add to the ecomomics or lack there of.









.








.







.







.








.






.







.






.





(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/829/41583439671_26c6d2d9c2_b.jpg)




Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 20, 2018, 07:12:32 PM
Clearly that does not tell the whole picture.
  ...

 ....  :D  ....

  1600





.





.




.










.





.




.




new





.





.




.










.





.




.




coal fired power plants





.





.




.










.





.




.




in 62 countries





.





.




.










.





.




.





INCREASING






.





.




.










.





.




global coal-fired capacity by





.





.




.










.





.




.







43 PERCENT





Quote
....the more expensive funding will be to add to the economics or lack there of justification ...




 :rofl:


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Amidala on April 20, 2018, 08:41:54 PM
People seem to think they have a god-given right to sunny skies and warm days, so they move to warmer/ hotter climates, drawing on the limited water supply. Either way, regardless of causation, we are setting up future generations for water crises. And I wonder when the rich Arab oil countries will become desert ghost towns. Water can be a great equalizer, necessary for survival. Remember, those areas were once great rainforests, the source of their oil riches.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 21, 2018, 10:28:17 PM
And the UK grid survived, go figure.

https://www.cnet.com/au/news/uk-goes-55-hours-without-coal-power-breaks-historical-record/ (https://www.cnet.com/au/news/uk-goes-55-hours-without-coal-power-breaks-historical-record/)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 21, 2018, 10:39:08 PM
  So where did you find that fake news.  Claiming a 43% increase yet global coal usage is flat or declining despite a global population that is growing.  Again you give part of the story without supporting facts, clearly the countries outside of these "62" you claim are closing them at the same pace as these "62" are opening them and you seemed to forget to mention that.  For someone that claims to have so many facts you seem to omit the ones that don't support your case, dear.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-coal-iea/growth-in-global-coal-demand-subdued-over-next-five-years-iea-idUSKBN1EC0PP (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-coal-iea/growth-in-global-coal-demand-subdued-over-next-five-years-iea-idUSKBN1EC0PP)

According to a report published yesterday (https://endcoal.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/BoomAndBust_2018_r4.pdf)  (pdf) by Greenpeace, CoalSwarm, and the Sierra Club, the number of new  coal plants being developed around the world continued to decline  between 2015 and 2017. As of January, the world had seen a 29%  year-on-year drop in construction starts, and a 73% drop in them in the  past two years, according to the report (p. 4). Meanwhile, the number of  newly completed coal plants fell 28% year-on-year in 2017.
“With declining deployment and high levels of retirement, coal power  capacity is now caught in a squeeze: if current trends continue, by 2022  yearly retirements will exceed new capacity and the global coal fleet  will begin to shrink,” notes the report (https://endcoal.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/BoomAndBust_2018_r4.pdf) (pdf, p. 3).


https://qz.com/1235125/the-number-of-coal-plants-worldwide-is-shrinking-but-nowhere-near-enough/ (https://qz.com/1235125/the-number-of-coal-plants-worldwide-is-shrinking-but-nowhere-near-enough/)


Clearly that does not tell the whole picture.
  ...

 ....  :D  ....

  1600





.





.




.










.





.




.




new





.





.




.










.





.




.




coal fired power plants





.





.




.










.





.




.




in 62 countries





.





.




.










.





.




.





INCREASING






.





.




.










.





.




global coal-fired capacity by





.





.




.










.





.




.







43 PERCENT





Quote
....the more expensive funding will be to add to the economics or lack there of justification ...




 :rofl:



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 22, 2018, 01:25:34 AM
So where did you find that fake news
 ...
Claiming a 43% increase
 ...
of these "62" you claim
 ...

.









.








.









.








.








.






.











....always telling when they insist on documenting their poor reading comprehension and failure to pay attention to detail, forcing them to just make crap up in lieu of a demonstrated ability to address the clearly posted and obviously cited points. :D


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Janetplanet on April 22, 2018, 12:11:14 PM
Go Michael Bloomberg.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 22, 2018, 02:34:06 PM
Looks like a tsunami of change in just a few years, the future looks bright for clean energy, and not for coal.  In PA you can switch to 100% renewable energy from First Energy for the same cost as coal with a 2 year contract.  www.papowerswitch.com (http://www.papowerswitch.com)


https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2018/04/22/google-amazon-push-power-companies-solar-and-wind-blow-coal/438020002/ (https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2018/04/22/google-amazon-push-power-companies-solar-and-wind-blow-coal/438020002/)

"The smart ones are seeing it as a competitive advantage,"  the dumb ones, well they just complain about it.....


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 25, 2018, 12:22:52 PM
Times are changing even in countries like India.  Renewables today are cheaper than many of their own coal fired plants so this transition they are working on will save them money as well.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/01/30/india-coal-power-is-about-to-crash-65-of-existing-coal-costs-more-than-new-wind-and-solar/#5438c7a34c0f (https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/01/30/india-coal-power-is-about-to-crash-65-of-existing-coal-costs-more-than-new-wind-and-solar/#5438c7a34c0f)
India’s 2027 renewable energy target requires 57% of installed capacity to come from non-thermal energy, necessitating 21-22 GW annual renewable installations. CEA expects 317 GW peak national power demand in 2026-2027, 20.7% lower than its previous estimate, thus requiring no new coal capacity beyond the 50 GW of coal currently under construction.
Because power demand has risen slower than expected and renewable energy has come online faster than expected, national coal-fired power plant capacity factors (how often a plant runs) fell from 77.5% in 2010 to 56.7% in 2016-2017.Two-thirds of existing Indian coal generation is now more expensive than solar or wind generation , and keeping these power plants running costs India billions every year,according to Greenpeace research  comparing CEA 2015-2016 coal power generation data to new renewable energy project bids. At least 65% of India’s current coal power generation (94 GW of installed capacity) is being sold to distribution utilities at rates higher than the cost of new solar and wind. Roughly 30 GW of this total is more than 20 years old, and ran at a 53% average capacity factor in 2016.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 25, 2018, 01:30:12 PM
INDIA saves money
   ...
this transition they are working on will save them money as well.
   ...
 

....good to know...

....always nice to save money

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/953/27830571998_008fa7dae2_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 25, 2018, 04:19:45 PM
Of course as you know India does not pay everyone's electric bill so this has nothing to do with India's national debt, it is the individual families that would save if given the lower cost renewable alternative as their electric supplier.  You knew that but posted it anyway to prove I am not sure what.


INDIA saves money
   ...
this transition they are working on will save them money as well.
   ...
 

....good to know...

....always nice to save money

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/953/27830571998_008fa7dae2_c.jpg)



Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 25, 2018, 06:17:48 PM
Of course as you know India does not pay everyone's electric bill so this has nothing to do with India's national debt, it is the individual families that would save if given the lower cost renewable alternative as their electric supplier.  You knew that but posted it anyway to prove I am not sure what.
   ...

....it's always telling when they have to make crap up which was never stated and endeavor to put in the mouth's of those that never stated such to argue with themselves ....


(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/851/27678875888_763afbae64_m.jpg)




Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 25, 2018, 10:07:44 PM
....it’s settled-
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/825/26817375247_d2678fb9db_z.jpg)









.






.




.




.









.






.




.




.







.






.




.




.



(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/957/26817379557_2f303ddc92_b.jpg)

[/]


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Lifetime on April 26, 2018, 07:27:28 AM
I went to the site to check the cost of RENEWABLE electricity... ALL that were 100% able cost a lot more or were only within pennies, than what I presently pay. I live in Western PA. So much for savings. In the past I have changed suppliers on my energy but... after the "lock-in" period...the price jumped up a lot higher than if I had just stayed with my original supplier. It is a PITA to change out and eventually back.

And I am NOT a proponent of "MAN MADE" global warming. I do think we DO have Climate Change and the Earth has been doing that long before the first factory blackened the sky or internal combustion engine fired up. Where I live there is a State Park/lake called "Moraine State Park". It was formed by sediment and earth gouging caused by a glacier. This glacier came/and left (melted) this area... 20,000 years ago.  :o . We now enjoy the park as well as can see the round stones that were formed as the Glacier moved over the stones. Weather changes, why can't climate...due almost exclusively .... to the whims of "Mother Nature".


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 26, 2018, 08:52:28 AM
In the past when you changed electric suppliers it was much more difficult than it is today to get out of it.  Today they are required to give you 2 notices before the expiration of the contract.  I get them in the mail and call when I do so that it does not extend beyond the fixed price.  I only renew for fixed contracts that are 2 years or so so I don't need to change that often.  I won't get rich with the savings but in my case I support renewable energy so it is worth the phone call every 2 years.  Once my roof gets replaced I hope to add the solar panels directly to lower my bill that way and by then they may cost even less than today.  I say you can believe in global warming or not, but the reality is renewable energy has lower pollution overall and that is a good thing for the air we breath regardless of your thoughts on global warming.  Most I know would not want a coal fired power plant to be built next door for that reason even if they "support" coal.


I went to the site to check the cost of RENEWABLE electricity... ALL that were 100% able cost a lot more or were only within pennies, than what I presently pay. I live in Western PA. So much for savings. In the past I have changed suppliers on my energy but... after the "lock-in" period...the price jumped up a lot higher than if I had just stayed with my original supplier. It is a PITA to change out and eventually back.

And I am NOT a proponent of "MAN MADE" global warming. I do think we DO have Climate Change and the Earth has been doing that long before the first factory blackened the sky or internal combustion engine fired up. Where I live there is a State Park/lake called "Moraine State Park". It was formed by sediment and earth gouging caused by a glacier. This glacier came/and left (melted) this area... 20,000 years ago.  :o . We now enjoy the park as well as can see the round stones that were formed as the Glacier moved over the stones. Weather changes, why can't climate...due almost exclusively .... to the whims of "Mother Nature".


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Amidala on April 26, 2018, 11:21:00 AM
Some food for thought regarding the environment. FWIW (which I know is not much to this crowd!)

https://sojo.net/articles/margaret-atwood-christianity-handmaid-s-tale-and-what-faithful-activism-looks-today


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Lifetime on April 26, 2018, 12:14:51 PM
I had to go to the VA Clinic for an appointment a while back. One of the Veterans I was conversing with started on me about all the vehicles parked in the lot and their use of liquid fuel. I said, most people I know drive vehicles like that to include myself. He shined up and smiled and said "I don't". So I asked if he walked to the clinic and he told me hhe drove his car. Oh really. Seems he was a proud owner of a Tesla. I went out with him to look at it. He said..I don't burn carbon fuels. I agreed, that HE didn't but the manufacturers involved in it's creation did and also increased the volume of harmful metals. He looked quizzically and I asked about the metal, rubber and then the question about those batteries... He said he charges them at home...( Probably from Coal/Oil/NG fired plants ). I basically said that yes be proud you didn't/don't crap in your own yard but have no qualms about crapping in someone else's... He had no idea what new batteries would cost and what they have to do with the old ones... Sometimes we get on the train and have no thought of how we get to our destination, as long as we get there. Shades of Al Gore whose home(s) and planes/vehicles burn more fuels than any 50 of my friends and yet he spews that we shouldn't do what we do... and he is just ONE of the MANY who play the same game.

Amidala's link stated .."Pick a thing that's small enough that you can actually accomplish it." I buy fuel efficient vehicles..sometimes.... use LED bulbs, and sometimes even separate recyclables... Enough for me... small and accomplished... someone else's turn. ;) I am not going to make a lifestyle out of it.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 26, 2018, 12:36:03 PM
There is more to an electric car than meets the eye, sure electric is generated partially from fossil fuels, but don't forget electric motors are > 90% efficient and overall electric cars use less than half the "fuel" however it may be generated.
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/03/10/electric-car-myth-buster-efficiency/ (https://cleantechnica.com/2018/03/10/electric-car-myth-buster-efficiency/)

I have kids so I think of their future and that of my potential grandkids etc.  As a farmer knows you take care of the land and it will take care of you.  A farmer knows he can't expect to continue reaping the rewards from his land year after year without putting something back into it.  I view this the same, we can only continue doing what we are doing for so long.  I would prefer to do something about that prior to finding out what those consequences might be even if they do not occur in my lifetime.  And the reality is that "something" is in many cases cheaper than the current alternative, and it creates jobs as well, one of the fastest growing industry for jobs in the US is solar, 17 times the growth of the US economy.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/24/news/economy/solar-jobs-us-coal/index.html (http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/24/news/economy/solar-jobs-us-coal/index.html)

In 2017 167 gigawatts of clean energy was installed globally in just one year.  That alone is half what India consumes annually, a population of 1.3 billion people.  That is a pretty impressive installation globally in just one year.


I had to go to the VA Clinic for an appointment a while back. One of the Veterans I was conversing with started on me about all the vehicles parked in the lot and their use of liquid fuel. I said, most people I know drive vehicles like that to include myself. He shined up and smiled and said "I don't". So I asked if he walked to the clinic and he told me hhe drove his car. Oh really. Seems he was a proud owner of a Tesla. I went out with him to look at it. He said..I don't burn carbon fuels. I agreed, that HE didn't but the manufacturers involved in it's creation did and also increased the volume of harmful metals. He looked quizzically and I asked about the metal, rubber and then the question about those batteries... He said he charges them at home...( Probably from Coal/Oil/NG fired plants ). I basically said that yes be proud you didn't/don't crap in your own yard but have no qualms about crapping in someone else's... He had no idea what new batteries would cost and what they have to do with the old ones... Sometimes we get on the train and have no thought of how we get to our destination, as long as we get there. Shades of Al Gore whose home(s) and planes/vehicles burn more fuels than any 50 of my friends and yet he spews that we shouldn't do what we do... and he is just ONE of the MANY who play the same game.

Amidala's link stated .."Pick a thing that's small enough that you can actually accomplish it." I buy fuel efficient vehicles..sometimes.... use LED bulbs, and sometimes even separate recyclables... Enough for me... small and accomplished... someone else's turn. ;) I am not going to make a lifestyle out of it.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 26, 2018, 12:45:16 PM
Some food for thought regarding the environment. FWIW (which I know is not much to this crowd!)

https://sojo.net/articles/margaret-atwood-christianity-handmaid-s-tale-and-what-faithful-activism-looks-today (https://sojo.net/articles/margaret-atwood-christianity-handmaid-s-tale-and-what-faithful-activism-looks-today)


.





.




.




(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/952/40820589675_7e659f76b5_c.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 26, 2018, 02:52:06 PM
Others passing us by......
https://thinkprogress.org/china-renewable-energy-push-f7d2305dc4b9/ (https://thinkprogress.org/china-renewable-energy-push-f7d2305dc4b9/)

China passed the United States in renewable energy investment in 2009 by a mere $14 billion; in the time since, that gap has increased dramatically. In 2017, more than half of global renewable energy investment (nearly $280 billion) came from China. To put that into context, for every $1 the United States put into renewable energy last year, China spent $3.
Much of that investment went into solar power, followed by wind energy. According to Quartz, 26 percent of all national electric production came from renewables, as opposed to the global average of 12 percent.
Developing countries more broadly are proving key to driving investment in renewables. Brazil and India joined China to account for 63 percent of all investment (around $143.5 billion) in renewable energy across the world in 2017. That’s in stark contrast to Western nations: the United States and Europe account for more than 40 percent of all post-industrial era emissions, but collectively invested only a little over $80 billion in renewable energy in 2017, according to a 2018 U.N. report. China alone invested $126.6 billion.




Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 26, 2018, 10:22:38 PM
One here might still deny it but.....

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a20076490/renewable-power-plants-are-dominating-2018/ (https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a20076490/renewable-power-plants-are-dominating-2018/)

A new report from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (https://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/2018/feb-energy-infrastructure.pdf) finds that of all new electricity generation built in the first two months of 2018, a full 98 percent is renewable.

According to the FERC’s Energy Infrastructure Update for February (https://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/2018/feb-energy-infrastructure.pdf),  the United States added a total of 2,173 megawatts of electricity  generation in January and February combined. Of that, 1,568 megawatts  come from new wind farms and 565 megawatts come from new solar  installations. Only 40 megawatts come from new natural gas plants, and  none come from coal.

On the other side, coal power has a rough road ahead, as the FERC report  predicts that 15,000 megawatts worth of coal plants will close between  now and 2021. By then, new wind power additions will add nearly as much  power as new natural gas plants, and it’s likely within a few years  nearly all new power will come from renewable sources.


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 27, 2018, 11:19:35 AM
One here might still deny it but.....

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a20076490/renewable-power-plants-are-dominating-2018/ (https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a20076490/renewable-power-plants-are-dominating-2018/)

A new report from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission finds that of all new electricity generation built in the first two months of 2018, a full 98 percent is renewable.

According to the FERC’s Energy Infrastructure Update for February, the United States added a total of 2,173 megawatts of electricity generation in January and February combined. Of that, 1,568 megawatts  come from new wind farms and 565 megawatts come from new solar  installations. Only 40 megawatts come from new natural gas plants, and none come from coal.

On the other side, coal power has a rough road ahead, as the FERC report  predicts that 15,000 megawatts worth of coal plants will close between  now and 2021.
   ...

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/946/41738985361_644e15066e_q.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/826/26870751517_b4ee8dec47_c.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/826/26870763877_a71b954a20_b.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/944/26870773677_c6e4bf00bd_b.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/868/27869968668_5c34abb859_b.jpg)

.....as it takes eight to ten years start to finish to have a new coal-fired power plant on line, and as since the last newly completely coal fire power went on line in 2013, and as since coal-power energy generation has been in notable decline for years-

....it always delightfully telling to watch oblivious rocket surgeons beating their the-earth-is-dying political penises  :D


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 27, 2018, 06:42:38 PM
It seems the only "political penis" is here, showing graphs that contradict his claim.  Coal is dying, nothing new is being build in the US and as your graph shows a large portion of the current plants are aging.  Down, down, down we go where it stops, I am sure GORE will tell you he knows.   ;D




One here might still deny it but.....

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a20076490/renewable-power-plants-are-dominating-2018/ (https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a20076490/renewable-power-plants-are-dominating-2018/)

A new report from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission finds that of all new electricity generation built in the first two months of 2018, a full 98 percent is renewable.

According to the FERC’s Energy Infrastructure Update for February, the United States added a total of 2,173 megawatts of electricity generation in January and February combined. Of that, 1,568 megawatts  come from new wind farms and 565 megawatts come from new solar  installations. Only 40 megawatts come from new natural gas plants, and none come from coal.

On the other side, coal power has a rough road ahead, as the FERC report  predicts that 15,000 megawatts worth of coal plants will close between  now and 2021.
   ...

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/946/41738985361_644e15066e_q.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/826/26870751517_b4ee8dec47_c.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/826/26870763877_a71b954a20_b.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/944/26870773677_c6e4bf00bd_b.jpg)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/868/27869968668_5c34abb859_b.jpg)

.....as it takes eight to ten years start to finish to have a new coal-fired power plant on line, and as since the last newly completely coal fire power went on line in 2013, and as since coal-power energy generation has been in notable decline for years-

....it always delightfully telling to watch oblivious rocket surgeons beating their the-earth-is-dying political penises  :D


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 27, 2018, 07:57:45 PM
  It seems the only "political penis" is here, showing graphs that contradict his claim.  Coal is dying, nothing new is being build in the US and as your graph shows a large portion of the current plants are aging.  Down, down, down we go where it stops, I am sure GORE will tell you he knows.  ;D


   ...
.....as it takes eight to ten years start to finish to have a new coal-fired power plant on line, and as since the last newly completely coal fire power went on line in 2013, and as since coal-power energy generation has been in notable decline for years-
   ...






.





.






.




.






.







.





.






.




.






.





(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/965/39939635450_44c650419c_z.jpg)






.





.






.




.






.




....its a free country-

....folks are free to make stuff up to argue with themselves....

....folks who make stuff up are called liars for a reason....

.






.






.




.






.






.



....priceless  [/]
  :D


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: Lifetime on April 29, 2018, 03:33:02 PM
Does that "START to FINISH" represent the FIRST brick or is it including the pile of paperwork needed prior to the first brick?


  It seems the only "political penis" is here, showing graphs that contradict his claim.  Coal is dying, nothing new is being build in the US and as your graph shows a large portion of the current plants are aging.  Down, down, down we go where it stops, I am sure GORE will tell you he knows.  ;D


   ...
.....as it takes eight to ten years start to finish to have a new coal-fired power plant on line, and as since the last newly completely coal fire power went on line in 2013, and as since coal-power energy generation has been in notable decline for years-
   ...






.





.






.




.






.







.





.






.




.






.





(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/965/39939635450_44c650419c_z.jpg)






.





.






.




.






.




....its a free country-

....folks are free to make stuff up to argue with themselves....

....folks who make stuff up are called liars for a reason....

.






.






.




.






.






.



....priceless  [/]
  :D


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on April 30, 2018, 12:42:39 PM
Inflation adjusted cost of electricity.  The actual cost of the electricity is going down, delivery costs are not but the inflation adjusted costs have not changed much from 2006 to 2016.
(https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/960x0/https%3A%2F%2Fblogs-images.forbes.com%2Fjoshuarhodes%2Ffiles%2F2018%2F04%2FFIG2_v2-1200x675.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on April 30, 2018, 02:22:46 PM

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/825/41766026412_8688299f51_b.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on May 01, 2018, 01:44:52 PM
There you go, changing the time period again. 
Looks like food had quite a bit of inflation as well using YOUR same time period, so what is your point?  And look I used the same time period as a comparison, unlike you do when you try and prove a point......   ;D

https://www.officialdata.org/Food/price-inflation (https://www.officialdata.org/Food/price-inflation)

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/825/41766026412_8688299f51_b.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on May 01, 2018, 06:17:21 PM
....uh huh




(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/861/41574882672_4608e8d64b_t.jpg)




Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on May 02, 2018, 10:57:14 AM
A narcissist, just like our President.  Not that it is a suprise to anyone here or from their past relationships.  Some people can get along with others, some cannot.......

https://www.quora.com/Do-Narcissists-like-to-have-the-last-word-in-any-conversation (https://www.quora.com/Do-Narcissists-like-to-have-the-last-word-in-any-conversation)

....uh huh




(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/861/41574882672_4608e8d64b_t.jpg)





Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on May 02, 2018, 11:21:21 AM
A narcissist...

....yes dear

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/945/40951766405_a99a03549a_m.jpg)


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on May 06, 2018, 07:17:24 AM
....once again-




....the sky is falling-

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/979/41207583514_52f13bddd0_k.jpg)

....and those party-of-Lincoln-REPUBLICANs







.








.







.





DON’T WANT TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT!!!!







.




.




.




.



....only makes sense it has to be the fault of the misogynistic, sexist, racist, homophobic, climate-change denial party-of-Lincoln-Republicans that Florida will soon be under water....

....couldn’t be any thing else....






.









.








.












.





.






....other than the fault of the misogynistic, sexist, racist, homophobic, climate-change denial  party-of-Lincoln-Republicans....






.






.





.















(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/982/41881281102_f484f3b132.jpg)





....write your checks now to stop global warming and  now to save Florida from being inundated by rising sea waters....

....you have to do something.......with ‘something’ being paying money to those who declare the sky is falling and its the fault of the misogynistic, sexist, racist, homophobic, climate-change denial party-of-Lincoln-Republicans....

....yea verily ;D ....


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: IC2ITUC on May 06, 2018, 09:17:34 PM
WELL. Thank God for the Climate Change this Late Winter and Early Spring of SNOW storms in your area because there was still some big areas of SNOW on the Alpine and Wagner Slopes at 7 Springs this weekend ! We had our semi annual Condo Meeting this morning at the Lodge and the sight of the Snow WARMED my heart ! Soon, with all the rain, it will be gone and I will just have to wait until this coming Winter for the return of my Cold Love !


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: clp_lives on May 09, 2018, 10:12:38 PM
Coal is going down, down down in the US.......  Projections of up to 1/3 of the plant capacity closing in the next decade is astonishing.  Recent projections have been too conservative and they are closing faster, even under Trump.

https://thinkprogress.org/the-economics-of-coal-have-gotten-worse-under-trump-bca9a7841fea/


Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on May 09, 2018, 11:56:42 PM
….THINK PROGRESS…."the economics of coal have gotten worse under Trump



….(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/945/40951766405_a99a03549a_m.jpg)





.






(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/909/42009192091_2609b86731_z.jpg)
 (https://flic.kr/p/271d6en)



.




.




.



(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/850/41575088562_32aaac5929_m.jpg)





Title: Re: More on climate change
Post by: gore range on May 12, 2018, 03:14:38 PM
.... the classics never get old;  a BBC golden oldie classic from 2007-

 (https://farm1.staticflickr.com/912/27193941767_97fb2fe261_b.jpg)


....the determined good old days....





.







.







.







.






....nothing like the cold reality of modern stuff-



.





.




.

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/948/27193946957_27b8182b1f_b.jpg)