[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.




>"take those solar panels off the roof the of the white house, we don't need 'em"
what were americans unironically thinking then? was it the lead?
>>
>>13524373
I FUCKING LOVE FOSSIL FUELS
>>
>>13524373
Heads of state are always idiots.
>>
>>13524373
He was 100% right. Solar is a dead end meme technology that is monstrously ineffective as well as expensive and destructive to the natural habit.

Only absolute retards think solar energy is "green" or viable and it is dangerous for the head of state to suggest otherwise.
>>
>>13524382
^this. Carter put them there as a cheesy attempt at virtue signalling.
>>
>>13524375
>Heads of state are always idiots
As opposed to the high IQ amerimutts KEK
>>
>>13524382
based, the only effective alternative energy source is nuclear but faggots fell for half truth memes about it dooming everybody to retarded forms of "green" energy or gas
>>
>>13524382
>destructive to the natural habit.
It really isn't that destructive.

>Only absolute retards think solar energy is "green" or viable
It's goign to contribute more and more to our power generation due to how effective it generally is.

>>13524406
>the only effective alternative energy source is nuclear
You just can't magic nuclear plant sallover the place retard. that's wannabe technocrats never get.
>>
>>13524406
That too. Captain Peanut also passed a moratorium on construction of nuclear reactors after the Three Mile Island accident. He was the first president to suck up had to the enviroleninist lobby.
>>
>>13524408
And Nuclear isn't viable in most places because surprise surprise energy markets and pricing vary allover the place.
>>
>>13524406
>half truth
not even half true, there have been exactly two disasters in the history of humanity, compare that to the millions dead from fumes

it's the same "cars are safer than planes" fallacy, there are millions of low level car crashes nobody cares about, then ONE plane goes down and it's all over the news, so planes are evil, despite cars statistically being much less safe
>>
>>13524406
Nuclear is costly to build anon and that's in states that push for it or have regulatory capture by Nuclear interests.
>>
>>13524415
NTA, but I'm pretty sure new reactors are being designed with proper fail-safes in mind to ensure a disaster like Chernobyl can never happen again. I'm pretty sure the people in Japan who built the reactor in Okuma were warned that the land it was built was a particularly a dangerous spot.
>>13524420
But that doesn't mean it isn't safe or effective. We can very easily pay for it, but I guess boomers would rather pocket the extra $4,000 each year so they can buy TVs and consumer electronics. Same goes universal health care.
>>
Yeah nuclear is great and all, but why did he remove the already produced, already installed, perfectly functional solar panels?
>>
>>13524434
>NTA
?
>>
>>13524434
>We can very easily pay for it
and it's expensive because it requires a lot of expertise as well as being reliant on conduction costs and material pricing. There's also how some markets have access to gas or oil to factor in.
>>
>>13524443
Not that anon. I'm not the guy you are responding to.
>>
>>13524409
>enviroleninist
There is truly no end to your ignorance of history.
>>
File: 1605201878927.png (1.71 MB, 1800x1200)
1.71 MB
1.71 MB PNG
>>13524408
>It really isn't that destructive.
Wrong, you must be completely ignorant on the subject because everything from the metal extraction required to make them to the actual end of lifespan for solar panels makes them outrageously more costly to the environment than just about every other source of energy.

>>13524408
>It's goign to contribute more and more to our power generation due to how effective it generally is.
It's not effective, it's a disaster even in places like California because of the way the electric grid actually works, solar panels requires battery storage and all kinds of specialized connections and exchanges with the grid because surprise surprise, the sun isn't always up and energy consumption varies wildly by time.

>You just can't magic nuclear plant sallover the place retard. that's wannabe technocrats never get.
The irony of this statement is staggering, considering how few nuclear plants would be required to power the entire continental US and how outrageously specialized the location must be for solar panels to be remotely acceptable as an investment, they have them in the fucking desert in Vegas and it isn't even clear the cost/benefit is positive.

Nuclear energy is the best option by miles, which is precisely why it has been poisoned in the mind of the public through endless propaganda because cheap safe and clean energy isn't in the interest of the corporate political class.
>>
>>13524434
Pretty much everywhere in Japan is a shit place for a nuclear reactor, the entire country is one big tsunami zone, all it takes is one divine wind and they'll be coming up with anime we can't even fathom currently
>>
>>13524447
Are those costs not worth accruing if it means we can generate energy without fucking up the environment?
>>
>>13524458
No.
t. 80 y/o oil magnate
>>
>>13524442
>why would a political undergo a symbolic political action instead of leaving these ugly as fuck pieces of shit on the white house as tacit endorsement for retarded policies?
You've really got me stumped there anon.
>>
why doesn't some permanent desert african country invest in solar
hell better yet why doesn't france build it for them, more resources to harvest and good will on behalf of their neo-colonies
>>
>>13524408
>You just can't magic nuclear plant sallover the place retard. that's wannabe technocrats never get.
solar power are literally totally inviable for the majority of the western hemisphere
>>
>>13524373
Renewable energy is a meme.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-yALPEpV4w

Solar is for retards. Wind is for retards.

>>13524406
/thread.
>>
>>13524452
You are a communist subhuman who should be executed
>>
>>13524382
>>13524453
>Lets just let people live near nuclear bombs!
Retards
>>
File: meanwhile in reality.jpg (174 KB, 1920x1080)
174 KB
174 KB JPG
>>13524408
>It really isn't that destructive.
solar energy requires by far the largest amount of materials and land commitment to produce, it isn't even close

also keep in mind this 'other category' consists of rare and often toxic metals like cadmium and chromium which require large mining operations to extract
>>
>>13524484
Go look up the numbers, more people have died from wind turbine complications than from nuclear in the last 50 years. Modern nuclear power plants are completely fail proof, there's no way to have a meltdown.
>>
>>13524480
I should be executed for knowing what the nuclear policy of leninist states are?
>>
>>13524382
Absolutely correct. Solar is probably <1% of total supply for the electricity grid.
>>
>>13524493
You can thank Richard Nixon for fucking over America's nuclear program.
>do we build zero risk Thorium reactors which cost a bit more and take more time...or do we just go with plutonium which requires massive pressures and constant danger
>well obviously the 2nd one
Republicans were a mistake.
>>
>>13524534
Thorium sounds like too good to be true meme tech to me. Like ok whatever evil tricky dick wanted more nukes so he didn't build them but that doesn't explain why Europe or Japan or China or the Soviet Union never tried.
>>
>>13524490
>land commitment to produce
But solar can be implemented in multi-use areas, such as for shade structures, on roofing, or pastureland. The potential of distributed electricity opens up a ton of possibilities and added resilience to the grid, but solar is almost never installed this way. The battery tech also needs to catch up.

>toxic metals like cadmium
There are like a dozen different panel chemistries. Some of them are based on rare metals like cadmium, but the super-majority are based on the super-common silicon.

>>13524505
It's actually about 3% of the US grid, and growing.
>>
>>13524534
>MUH THORIUM REACTORS
If they were as good as claimed someone else would've done it already
>Yeah but uh muh /sci/ gif from 2005 said...
>>
>>13524560
>But solar can be implemented in multi-use areas, such as for shade structures, on roofing, or pastureland
They tried to do this with solar highways and it was very inefficient:
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/solar-roadways-are-expensive-and-inefficient

Plastering your city with solar panels doesn't magically produce free energy since they don't face the sun directly the entire day.
>>
File: file.png (98 KB, 500x282)
98 KB
98 KB PNG
>>13524589
it's not magic, it's science, BITCH
>>
>>13524406
why isnt china nuclear
do you think they would give a shit about that
russia definitely didn't give a shit about safety and they're still below 20% nuclear
>>
>>13524560
Solar on a small scale as opposed to solar farms also costs twice as much.
https://energypost.eu/why-promote-rooftop-solar-when-the-grid-is-so-much-cheaper/
>There are like a dozen different panel chemistries. Some of them are based on rare metals like cadmium, but the super-majority are based on the super-common silicon.
>hurr durr they're not all poison!, only a little
There's still enough in each panel that makes it a significant factor both for extracting the elements and then disposing of them, which is something you fags never mention. What happens after the estimated 20-25 year lifespan of the panel? There is zero protocol for recycling these hunks of shit.

>>13524560
>It's actually about 3% of the US grid, and growing.
Yes and it's also more expensive and REQUIRES other forms of energy like coal to deal with all of the many shortcomings. Look at Germany, they installed significantly more solar panels in recent years and generated significantly LESS electricity with them because it wasn't sunny for long periods of time in 2016 and 2017.
>>
>>13524601
>dude just make them move
I swear to god, /his/ is the most dunning-kruger board even worse than /pol/.

Good luck with finding always flat surfaces, and deal with efficiency going down due to overheating and higher costs of motorization and maintainence.
>>
>>13524648
I'm sure rotating the panels will be enough to generate power at night or during bad weather.
>>
>>13524495
Yes. Not being completely ignorant is a threat to our system which is the best and the only possible one.
God bless america.
>>
>>13524589
>solar highways
they wanted to drive over the fucking solar pannels
using this retarded bs as an example is disingenuous
>>
>>13524659
It's not even bad weather, even in sunny environment overheating panels will decrease their efficiency as well.
>>
>>13524688
In sunny weather the panels tend to produce too much electricity which is actually a problem for the grid, and battery storage functionally doesn't exist and is too expensive.
>>
>>13524589
Solar Freaking Roadways were a dumb Facebook meme and no one who knew anything about solar took them seriously. That is why Green Tech Media, who was a huge advocate for solar energy, wrote an article debunking it. Maybe you could try reading some of their other articles, since they talked about solar a great deal, including the roadblocks to wide scale implementation.

>they don't face the sun directly the entire day
Solar panels don't need to face the sun directly to produce electricity, as solar panels also generate off of diffuse sunlight. That's why systems are typically fixed tilt that face the equator, and not trackers that follow the sun. Panel tilt is accounted for in every energy model for solar.

>>13524688
Yes, increasing temperature decreases panel efficiency. This is accounted for in every energy model for solar. It's also a dumb argument, because pretty much everything in life has an optimum operating range, but never operates there 100% of the time. By your logic, we shouldn't have any commercial trucking in the summer because they are more fuel efficient when it is cooler.

>>13524643
>There's still enough in each panel that makes it a significant factor both for extracting the elements and then disposing of them
How much, and what elements, for the most common panels is "enough"? How does it compare to semiconductor manufacturing, vehicle manufacturing, and every other electricity production method and industrial process? Do you scrutinize them at the same level?

>Yes and it's also more expensive
Do know what LCOE is? What is the LCOE of solar vs. coal, or natural gas? I think the numbers will surprise you.

>Look at Germany
Germany is also retarded. Solar isn't some magic bullet electricity solution, which is also why sane people aren't advocating for it to replace the entire grid, just wider implementation. The potential for a distributed grid has a lot of resiliency and security upside.
>>
>>13524382
Solar is good when you go off the grid but yeah on mass scale it's dumb
>>
Solar is a great way to supplement the energy grid during peak hours in the day, but it's not a total solution on its own.
Diversification through multiple different forms of renewable energy is the most important step. Solar, Wind, Hydro, Nuclear.
>>
>>13525615
you'd literally be better off with a water wheel lel
>>
>>13524490
>land commitment
>on a roof
you're right, we should demolish the white house and let nature heal
>>
File: Solar-farm-640x421.jpg (186 KB, 640x421)
186 KB
186 KB JPG
>>13525656
most solar energy comes from solar farms which take up massive amounts of space, produce fuck all electricity for the cost, and displace all wildlife that was there before while also murdering huge amounts of birds with their glare many of which are endangered :)
>>
>>13524373
Those were 1970s solar panels, they were inefficient.
>>
>>13525681
>massive amounts of space

in the desert

>produce fuck all electricity for the cost

Not true, it helps alleviate peak hour energy usage.

>murdering huge amounts of birds

who the fuck gives a shit about birds? oil rigs have destroyed entire natural habitats.
>>
>>13524406
France seems to understand
>>
File: 4dumbnigger.png (57 KB, 489x376)
57 KB
57 KB PNG
>>13525696
>in the desert
pic related, 1 of these is in the desert lol

>Not true, it helps alleviate peak hour energy usage.
it is true, go look up the costs faggot don't just scream "NMUH UH" over and over, it's an established fact solar energy isn't cost effective
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/04/23/if-solar-and-wind-are-so-cheap-why-are-they-making-electricity-more-expensive/

>who the fuck gives a shit about birds?
sane people, birds are essential to maintaining the ecosystem

>oil rigs have destroyed entire natural habitats.
they also power the entire world retard , your solar panels don't do shit except make masturbatory leftist schizos feel good about themselves while having the exact opposite effect of what they think they do
>>
>>13524373
it's like what Bill Parcels did
This wasn't really about the panels. It was about the culture. Sometimes you gotta rip out the old carpet and put in a different carpet to signal a culture change.
>>
>>13525696
>that spacing
>>
>>13524462
>free energy from the sky is retarded
Yeah nigga let's let's back to coal
>>
>>13525722
>https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/04/23/if-solar-and-wind-are-so-cheap-why-are-they-making-electricity-more-expensive/

Funny that this article doesn't mention the untold hundreds of billions governments around the world have used to create oil infrastructure the last 150 years. Of course oil and gas is more energy efficient when all the infrastructure already exists, imagine marketing yourself as a respectable magazine and being this bad faith.
>>
>>13525681
>shifting goalposts when you lose
Wew lad
>>
>>13524534
>gets utterly btfo by nuclear anon
>b-but muh republikkkans
par for the course
>>
>>13525696
>who the fuck gives a shit about birds?
finally one of the leftoids on here admits "she" is arguing in bad faith and doesnt actually give a fuck about the enviornment and animals, just wants to hamstring the economy when muh republikkanz be in charge or something
>>
>>13525696
>who the fuck gives a shit about birds?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/04/09/eagle-turbine-deaths-settlement/
https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-are-bats-affected-wind-turbines#:~:text=Dead%20bats%20are%20found%20beneath,clear%20why%20this%20is%20happening.

Together wind and solar kill millions of animals like bats and eagles which are extremely important for the function of ecosystems. To put this in a way you godless monsters can understand or care about, the loss of these animals results in billions in damages for crop and lumber industries while also leading to population explosions of undesirable species that eat crops or are just faggots like mosquitos, which in turn would cause another shift in ecosystem populations and etc. It's a domino effect.
>>
File: pepe-popcorn.gif (1.13 MB, 498x498)
1.13 MB
1.13 MB GIF
>>13524611
Just imagine
>liveleak logo
>some chinaman driving through carnage and flying tires
>then it happens
>a bright flash
>dude turns so hard he flips onto a family of four
>their lunch barks and runs off
>a mob of people enter the field of view just as the shockwave eviscerates them and sends them 20 feet in the air
the content would be too much. Then some faggot would be torn between using it as an example of >nuclear bad while also listening to his CCP masters who say it was just a Sudden Spontaneous Subterranean Eruption which happen all over the world, mostly in the ocean, and to not be so racist.
>>
>>13525885
>doesnt actually give a fuck about the enviornment and animals

Oh I do give a fuck, the question is why people like you are using this as an argument against solar when you don't give a rat's ass about the same thing when it comes to oil and gas.
>>
>>13524382
>>13524395
>>13524505
>>13524643
Solar panel recycling is a major issue but as >>13525610 points out, recycling dangerous metals and producing every other bit of energy tech also comes with those concerns. Singling out solar to naysay it because it has the same recycling concerns is absolutely disingenuous.
As far as the efficiency of solar panels, big solar farms at the utility scale are *cheaper*, but there are other benefits of smaller solar photovoltaic (PV) systems. The benefits of solar on the grid - reduced ramp-up and ramp-down - never touch the grid with utility-scale PV farms, the only thing you get is peak-demand relief.
The best application of solar panels has proven itself to be residential and commercial rooftop applications and powering small, light-duty vehicles. Again, as >>13525610 mentioned, attempting to replace your entire grid with solar is stupid. However, a 50% offset of residential, and 30-40% offset of commercial, consumption with roof-mounted photovoltaic (PV) systems is a fantastic way to address energy shortages and make the existing grid more robust, as well as reduce CO2 emissions drastically. This is exactly why major corporations like Walmart and Amazon are installing SVE systems on rooftops, building covered parking for more SVE space, etc.
None of that addresses that the technology is improving constantly. LCOE of PV kWh was around $0.30 in 2010 but is just $0.06 today. At the utility-scale, solar is literally the second-cheapest per kW generated, behind only gas combustion turbines. This holds true at the small-end side of things, too (gas and solar are cheaper to power homes and businesses; gasoline/diesel generators, battery back-ups, etc. are outrageously expensive).

Source: I'm a mathematician/engineer that researches this stuff for a living
>>
>>13525681
>produce fuck all electricity for the cost
Second cheapest utility-scale kW's.
>>
>>13526034
since when was grid stability a problem. The only reason grid stability became a problem is because people started pushing alternative energies.
>>
>>13526040
yes we've all heard the agitprop
now look at the real electricity costs relative to
solar panel adoption, look at Germany or California
reality refutes you
>>
>>13526043
See Texas 2 years ago
>>
>>13526043
>since when was grid stability a problem
Since the grid was literally invented, goofball. Brownouts and blackouts have been going on longer than you've been alive, even in fully-developed countries, long before what you'd consider a commercial-grade alternative energy was widely available (unless you're going to suggest the nearly 100 year-old Hoover Damn electrical system isn't an alternative energy source that helped offset peak-demand and solve instability in the 1940's).
None of that even addresses the modern reality of grid instability and failure to meet peak demands that's been going on since the 1980's, well before any significant amount of whatever you consider alternative energies went online.

>>13525945
Because they aren't arguing in good faith. They're just trying to hit you with whataboutisms to win the argument, and nothing else. They don't care about any of the points they are making, which is why they conveniently ignore that solar energy is less damaging than any other major energy solution, besides nuclear (which they only bring up to try to stifle discussion on green energy, largely because they know no one is going to adopt nuclear on a wide-scale any time soon).

>>13526058
>agitprop
Ahh, yes - it's obviously just all propaganda backing renewables and green energy. The oil and gas industries getting caught dozens upon dozens of times hiding the effects and real costs of those energy sources, across the last century, never happened.
>reality refutes you
Except it doesn't. The numbers aren't based off estimates - they are based off actual costs currently being paid in places like Germany and California. Second cheapest utility-scale kWs. You need to come back to reality with the rest of us instead of pretending the hole in the sand you've got your head in is the entire world.
>>
>>13526060
Also from Texas, 2 years ago: gas producers intentionally withheld supply and hiked prices to make a profit while thousands of people died.

These are the companies they are, for some reason, simping for instead of installing a roof-mounted PV and a batter array. I guarantee you they'd rant and rave about personal independence and market realities if the subject were right, but if you bring up the independence provided by alternative energy, or the market robustness created by competition against fossil fuels, they'll just screech about how you're wrong by trying to use examples of how alternative/green energies are actually bad (while continuing to ignore that fossil fuels do the same shit, just much, much worse).
>>
>>13524382
It works for small scale residential for whoever wants to buy it, but as for being reserve power and maintaining grid frequency, it isn't very good.

Also I think Carter-Reagan's panels were just for hot water.
>>
>>13526034
>I'm a mathematician/engineer that researches this stuff for a living
>>
>>13526060
Texas' grid stability problem was caused by wind turbines being substituted for natural gas and coal plants.

>>13526084
>Brownouts and blackouts have been going on longer than you've been alive
Which are caused by corrupt leftist bureaucracies preventing the creation of new power plants, or in specific cases like California, purposefully driving energy companies out of business by siphoning all their revenue which would be used to strengthen the grid
>>
>>13525945
lmfao you literally said, and I quote "who gives a fuck about birds?" So I'm confused, which one is it, you keep contradicting yourself and sending mixed signals depending on which is more convenient for the sake of the individual post lol
>>
>>13526043
guess you don't live in Texas.
>>
>>13526256
>durr what is load following
>>
>>13526308
>durr hurr texas
>The only reason grid stability became a problem is because people started pushing alternative energies.
>Texas' grid stability problem was caused by wind turbines being substituted for natural gas and coal plants.
And?
>>13526256
>>
>>13526314
Yeah those static wind turbines and solar panels sure are capable of changing their output on demand
>>
>>13524382
>>13526145
It worked pretty good for me.energy bill went from 9000 reais to 150. Idk how good it is in american climate though.
>>
>>13526333
how much did you pay for everything though
>>
File: us power grid.jpg (28 KB, 420x295)
28 KB
28 KB JPG
>>13526316
>The only reason grid stability became a problem is because people started pushing alternative energies.
>Texas' grid stability problem was caused by wind turbines being substituted for natural gas and coal plants.
that is 100% false. the reason the power grid failed is because our grid is independent of the rest of the US, which was done deliberately to avoid federal regulations regarding interstate commerce. This meant that the Texas grid is significantly weaker and when there's high demand or when several plants shut down because of extreme weather, you can't fill that gap with energy from say New Mexico.
pic related.
I lived through that shitshow last year, not you.
>>
>>13526349
>federal regulations are so shit on energy companies that they would sever themselves from the national grid
>somehow this is an argument for more regulations
Liberals...
>>
>>13526340
Around 100-150k i think bit my bank agreed to make pay 7000 a month until its paid so its still cheaper than the energy bill (alsp brasil is going throught a energy crisis and the bill might raise another 60% in the coming months)
>>
>>13526355
People are advocating for a more diversified energy sector, not "more federal energy regulation". Brianlet
>>
>>13526356
Also i live in one of the hotter regions in this country
>>
>>13526364
>diversified energy sector
>hacking at existing energy companies legs with an axe
yeah that sure will encourage more people to join such a volatile and competitive industry
>>
>>13526355
>federal regulations are so shit on energy companies that they would sever themselves from the national grid
No, this was a decision made by the state government about 80 years ago cause Texas has an independence streak. This wasn't a decision made by the free market.
>>
>>13526380
>>hacking at existing energy companies legs with an axe
AKA not using the federal government as corporate welfare and siphoning off gibsmedat subsidies
>>
>>13526318
>durr what is load following
>>
>>13526388
>states making their own decisions isn't free market
uh, pretty close
>>
>>13526388
>>13526364
You guys really need to find new sources of energy ameribros dont let it happen to you what happened to brasil
>lets make more than 50% of the energy producrion into hidro eletrics
>it stops raining
>hilarity ensues
>>
>>13526394
The only reason liberals hate energy companies is because their voting bloc are all welfare recipients and one of their main expenses is electricity
>>
>>13526399
>state government setting regulations instead of federal is free market
anon... this isn't ancapistan
>>
>>13526421
>if you want to bust the energy company monopoly on a critically important utility than you're a poor, jealous, libtard!

There's literally nothing inherently "progressive" or "pozzed" or "bluepilled" about green/alternative energy. You're just getting caught up in culture war nonsense
>>
>>13526473
Stop being retarded, there's only 4 things that a politician can do to identify with minorities in the US, without pulling the race card. Since a majority of them are on some sort welfare or live with somebody who is they only realistically have 4 expenses in their lives not overtly covered by welfare. These things all have the potential to be political lynchpins.

1.) Electricity prices
2.) Rent costs
3.) Public transportation expenses
4.) Water quality/price

There's a reason why all of these things are leftist-liberal platform cornerstones, because they're the only tangible things that matter in life to minorities and welfare recipients.

As a bonus energy companies tend to be right of center due to their connection to the oil and gas industry. This means attacking energy companies not only makes politicians look good to their welfare voter base, but also weakens enemy donors. Like when California blamed Pacific Gas and Electric for two wildfires and made them go bankrupt through fines
>>
>>13526537
Sounds like you don't actually care about any actual policy, just doing the opposite of whatever flavor-of-the-month cause progressives have. Even if green energy is mostly championed by leftists and progressives, doesn't mean that it's being done for the sole benefit of minorities, or to spite le based right wing oil companies
>>
>>13526570
It certainly is. You don't understand national level politics. Oil and Gas and the Banking sector are two national forces in every single country in the world. Since oil and gas donates to conservative politicians they're one of the leftist-liberal's arch enemies.
>>
>>13526586
>Since oil and gas donates to conservative politicians they're one of the leftist-liberal's arch enemies.

So you're unconditionally supporting them because you think leftists are attacking them for purely ideological reason? Sounds like low-IQ red team blue team nonsense
>>
>>13526537
>These things all have the potential to be political lynchpins.
None of them, save rent, is normally a political lynchpin (especially at the national level), and high rents are a problem that affects substantial segments of populations living in cities, and by inflating cost of living, are driving migration patterns and social pathology throughout the country.
>There's a reason why all of these things are leftist-liberal platform cornerstones
Anyone who wanted to be relevant in urban areas would have to at least pretend to address the problems of urban areas. There's not symmetry with rural areas; rurals are won through culture war and metatribalism.
>>
>>13526604
I think everything a leftist does needs to be examined since broad generalizations about the evil nature of energy companies is a cornerstone of leftist propaganda. They're not above pushing alternative energy JUST to piss off the energy sector, and they're certainly not above keeping their own energy sectors teetering on the edge of bankruptcy if they think it reduces conservative's hold over them
>>
>>13525798
>shifting the argument from the white house to solar farms as if they are the same thing isn't shifting goalposts
>can't even defend himself without resorting to slurs and name calling
Take the L with grace and you might be surprised at how much better your worldview becomes, anon
>>
>>13526681
>leftist leftists leftists
Lmao you brain damaged corporate cocksucker
>>
>>13526684
>reply chain CLEARLY expanded past the white house discussion about 10 replies earlier in the chain to the post in question
>hur dur goal posts moving
For your own sake I sincerely hope you are pretending to be retarded, otherwise you might want to try some hooked on phonics until you can read at least on a 5th grade level anon. It worked for my mentally disabled cousin, it can work for you.
>>
>>13526666
>None of them, save rent, is normally a political lynchpin
Fare prices are a huge thing in cities like NYC
Water is also a huge thing, remember the Flint water crisis?

Here's an article flipping out about electricity prices in cities much the same as rent
https://gothamist.com/news/the-electric-bill-is-too-damn-high-heres-why-and-what-you-can-do-about-it
>>
>>13526709
None of them are regular major political issues (especially nationally), and when they do rise to the fore, the spectrum of the public concerned is far greater than "minorities on welfare." Median rents in Manhattan are 4000 USD/month; that's a decent chunk out of most people's income.
>Water is also a huge thing, remember the Flint water crisis?
Flint being memorable precisely because water issues don't normally make the front pages. And again, aging infrastructure affects everyone.
>Here's an article flipping out about electricity prices
caused by a rise in natural gas prices; increase s in energy prices are a global problem currently.
>>
>>13526758
If you read the article you can see the state of hysteria that leftists foment
>AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH PRICE INCREASE IN ENERGY AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH
>WHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
>WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL US THERE WAS GOING TO BE A PRICE SPIKE WHHHHHHHHHHHHHHYYYYYYYYY
>FUCK YOU YOU FUCKING STUPID CON ED
>FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU YOU STUPID FUCKING ELECTRIC COMPANY
>FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK
>electric company: uh guys, we also need more money so like... the grid doesn't collapse?
>WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY YOU ANY MONEY
>WE'RE JUST GOING TO STOP PAYING OUR BILLS
>electric company: you already don't pay your bills
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>electric company: well I guess we can put up more wind turbines which don't do anything
>leftist politicians: *wringing hands* yeeeessss
>>
>>13525681
>and displace all wildlife that was there before
im sure mountaintop removal coal mines are better :)
>>
>>13526814
That's a very...uncharitable reading of that article.
The threatening not to pay doesn't happen; they're reporting factually on people who are or will become behind on bills.
The article even notes that
>Con Ed in particular has long been a favorite scapegoat for public officials, and so far that has not changed.
and that
>But again, Con Ed can't control the price of power generation, so as long as electricity is reliant on fossil fuels, the price of energy will be tied to the price of gas and oil.
and that
>A healthy portion of the utility bill is also made up of state-imposed taxes and fees, and it's unlikely Albany would roll back any of those.
And again, everyone's unhappy with energy price dynamics in 2022.
>>
>>13525681
This is what, Texas sharpshooting? Where you declare your goal ad hoc and post hoc based upon whatever seems to offer the best fit. Though the number of Audubons renewable energy seems to uncover never ceases to amaze and amuse.
>>
>>13526884
>threatening not to pay doesn't happen
Anon.... my brother. My motherfucking brother. Retards in cities not paying their utilities are one of the main reasons why utility providers run out of money and start providing shittier service
>>
>>13526355
>Places with regulations manage to endure blizzards every winter
>Texas gets hit with a snow fleck and the whole state collapses
No comment
>>
>>13527165
Remember in 2007 when Obama said he was going to put all coal power plants out of business? Guess who had a lot of coal power plants
>>
>>13527186
Coal was in decline before Obama and nothing Trump did could reverse the trend, all he could do was make welfare queens out of them
>>
>>13524373
Chronic lead exposure and circumcision both cause brain damage. Also, nuclear, solar and hydro are the best forms of energy.
>>
>>13527288
okay that has nothing to do with Obama taking fat shits on the texas power grid
>>
>>13527364
It means Texas’s electric grid was shitting the bed before Obama
>>
>strips federal support for mental health institutions. “The states can handle that”
>crazy homeless people living in tent cities all across the country
What a fucking moron
>>
>>13527535
no, that sounds like cope
>>
>>13526604
>the libs hate oil tycoons bribing conservative politicians therefore I must hate green energy purely out of spite
Actual brainlet take
>>
>>13524373
Are you retarded? Do you expect all non-americans to be retarded on a constant basis?
>>
>>13525703
We won't for much longer sadly
>>
>>13527589
There's no such thing as green technology, there's alternative energy, which is less efficient in almost every category in some way
>>
VVIND POVVER
SOLAR POVVER
Combustioncucks on suicide watch
>>
>>13526316
Also, alternative energy wasn't the cause of the Texas blackouts. Natural gas plants (most of the power produced in Texas) largely failed due to the cold. A fraction of the wind plants failed, but this was a miniscule amount of the power produced compared too the chunk lost due to natural gas plants failing.

Wonder why Texas has had problems with this for years even prior to any wind joining the grid. Perhaps it is because they've never prepared for the cold, due to the cost of maintaining insulation and heat trace.

Other states in much colder conditions never have these problems.
>>
>>13527690
>levelized
>showing rates of electricity ignoring the investment and subsidies for wind and solar
liberals....
>>
>>13527690
Right. Very good. Then you end up burning the coal and paying the toll to Russia.
>>
>>13527691
>Natural gas plants (most of the power produced in Texas) largely failed due to the cold
this is false, what happened was all the wind turbines went down causing power outages and tripping emergency power consumption failsafes and the head electric dood didn't realize the power glut and failsafes had shut down all the supply likes to the power plants
>>
File: grphx_lcoe-02-02.jpg (1.08 MB, 2000x1218)
1.08 MB
1.08 MB JPG
>>13527709
>muh soobsidies
Sorry gascuck, but you're gonna have to try harder than that
>>
>>13524408
Google “france” retard, maybe you’ve heard of it? They’re mostly nuclear and it worked fine for them.
>>
>>13527735
God liberals are so disingenuous
>the lifetime average of already established wind grids in the most efficient areas are cheap

That's a far cry from establishing a new grid in a less efficient area
>>
>>13527720
That makes no fucking sense. Wind power was well within predicted margins for the storm, they had a weather report and knew the efficiency of them would go down. They were using gas plants to replace them but too many weren't winterized (mostly the issue was pipes freezing due to ineffective heating systems) and those were the unexpected failure that caused the grid to shit itself.
I mean really, do you expect us to believe they didn't know about the weather forecast?
>>
>>13527750
>disingenuous
Nobody in this thread--no, this board--has ever said anything genuine. Don't expect it, it will never happen
>>
>>13527760
gas lines can't freeze, the gas lines failed because the wind turbines failed and flipped a failsafe system which turned the gas lines off
>>
>>13527720
>>13527769
>source: just trust me bro
>>
>>13527769
but anon, they did freeze
https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/investigates/texas-oil-gas-companies-made-billions-feb-21-freeze-contributed-millions-politicians-avoided-winterization-regulation-could-the-lights-go-out-again/287-46a09b4c-efde-421a-b103-bb0eaf231b35
>>
>>13527773
gas freezes at liquid nitrogen temperatures which don't exist on the planet
>>
>>13527781
And the failsafe scenario you described? What about a source for that?
>>
>>13527778
They're using "freeze" as a figure of speech
the gas lines failed because the wind turbines failed which shut down the power plants
>>
>>13527788
typical power grid failsafe, when power supply isn't adequate only emergency facilities like hospitals get their lights turned on
>>
>>13527789
>>13527791
How is this scenario not the result of a colossal fuckup by the designers of the grid? Why would wind power failing cause the regular power plants to shut off? Makes no sense
>>
>>13527800
because they were forced to incorporate wind turbines which caused the powergrid to fail
>>
>>13527807
Why would wind power failing cause the regular power plants to shut off? Shouldn't they have just kept on working?
>which caused the powergrid to fail
How?
>>
>>13527813
because when you force somebody to change something unnaturally there will be oversights, and when you're forcing them to do something that has more potential for failure you're really just setting them up for failure
>>
>>13524382
So it's not as efficient as we would like obviously, but why not have them in a location where nothing else is going to be regardless? Put them in wasted space, and use it for energy generation so we have more energy overall, and more robust grid.

Legit want to know why people hate on solar and wind. Like I get it's not Nuclear levels of generation, but it feels like meme culture war levels of hate since nobody ever justifies it with any factual information.
>>
>>13527815
So it was caused by the gross incompetence of the fine Texans who implemented the change in the power grid? And they've been coping and sneething ever since? Got it
>>
>>13527826
no it was caused by federal regulations forcing texas to rely on wind power
>>
>>13527807
They weren't forced to do anything, wind power is dirt-cheap in the Great Plains region. Still has nothing to do with the gas plants failing because they didn't winterize their plants after the 2011 storm when they realized this could be a problem.
>>
>>13527833
>Doctor orders you to take vitamins
>Devour a whole bottle and get sent to the hospital
>"OMG doctors are trying to kill me!!"
If you are required to do something, failures in it's execution cannot be blamed on it being "forced". That's just a cop-out.
>>
>>13527833
And the Texans botched their federal duty (like always) and then blamed it on everyone but themselves (like always).
>>
>>13527844
>>13527846
>>13527850
>They weren't forced
in 2008 it was Obama and Biden's goal to "completely destroy coal by replacing it with wind" in Texas.
>>
>>13527861
I didn't say they weren't forced. Read my post please.
>>
>>13527867
Read my post here
>>13527815
>>
>>13527869
Yes, I had read it, and my point remains.
Using "I was forced" as an excuse for failure on something is a cop-out excuse.
>>
>>13527861
>>13527815
>obummer FORCED us to create shitty infrastructure that would lead to the deaths of thousands of Texans
>create good infrastructure to meet federal regulations? Why would we do that?
Can't wait for you retards to secede, bye!
>>
>>13527833
do you have proofs? cause like we already established Texas was avoiding federal energy regulations by having their own independent power grid so this doesn't pass the smell test.
>>
>>13527873
>Obama forces you to take a chainsaw to your power grid
>power grid fails
>woops looks like that wasn't Obama's fault lol
lol okay
>>
I want somebody to reply to >>13527824 please
I have yet to hear any good arguments for WHY we shouldn't use them outside of them being less efficient. I would also like some sources for any wild claims thank you.
>>
>>13527880
>Forces you to take a chainsaw
What was the actual demands? Because it sounds like it was to replace some coal fired systems with wind. Nobody was saying to fuck up the building of the wind turbines, nobody was saying to destroy the coal plants before other stuff was in place, and if they were then it's a stupid demand. If they were not then It's Texas' fault for piss poor execution.
>>
>>13527884
wind turbines are not financially viable, they're loud, annoying, drive anybody that lives near them mad, kill birds and have ridiculously bright lights that light up 5 square miles around them at night and don't provide steady amounts of electricity not to mention are far less efficient and the numbers they use for efficiency on them to sell them are already inflated
>>
>>13527880
Intentionally fucking up the job and then blaming the result on the feds """forcing""" them to build bad infra is classic Texan cope
>>
>>13527895
yeah I'm sure they intentionally destroyed their state and it wasn't Obama
>>
>>13527898
>Mom tells me I have to clean my room or I'll stop receiving federal tendies
>make an even bigger mess, just to show her how mad I am
>oops I tripped on the result of my spite, now I've fallen and injured myself in the mess
>Clearly this is Mom's fault
>>
>>13527913
yes federal regulations destroying power grids are like your mom telling you to take a shower because you stink like shit. Great observation
>>
>>13527880
>Making a texan accept responsibility for anything
Nightmare difficulty challenge
>>
>>13527918
Obama's fault
>>
>>13527915
Your grid stinks like shit, and it still stinks like shit. Gonna fix it Pablo? How many more white citizens of Texas have to die before you accept responsibility?
>>
>>13527924
Keep saying that, maybe one day someone will believe it
>>
>>13527925
yeah obama forcing electric companies to build shitty wind turbines is exactly like you never brushing your teeth and having cysts on your unwashed asshole
>>
>cut your power grid off from neighboring states because le epic independence
>snowstorm happens
>hundreds freeze to death, energy companies price gouge
>M-MUH BARFSACK OCRUMBO'S FAULT, MUH EBIL WIND POWER
Thank Allah that T*xas will become uninhabitable within the century
>>
>>13527893
Compensate people who have to live near them? It's going to be maybe like 3 households since they're mainly in the countryside.
And again the argument is mainly around the efficiency of them, which I would love to see actual numbers of how long it takes for one single turbine to pay for it's own production costs/materials. Of course it will vary given price changes over time, but in theory how many years until it pays for itself? Because I've put up solar panels on my own home personally, and have actually gotten to the point that I'm not paying utility bills on sunny days lol. They've actually paid for themselves in less than a year.
>>
>>13527933
And you'd rather leave it like that than fix it, because then you wouldn't have anyone to blame anymore besides yourself
>>
>>13527938
>pay people to live near things that assure they wont sleep at night and goes WOOOOOSH WOOOOSH WOOOOSH WOOOOSH WOOOOOSH WOOOOOSH WOOOSH all day
>>
>>13527947
I feel like you've never actually been near them. There are no houses directly underneath, and you don't even hear them unless you're underneath or it's a VERY windy day. Even then you have to be living close enough for it to fall on your house if it was torn down.
>>
>>13524373
Reagan was a dick but those solar panels on the roof were garbage. They were expensive to manage and they ONLY heated water and didn't generate a single ounce of power
>>
>>13527951
>you don't even hear them
https://youtu.be/f7DQ3SgSg0c?t=173
>>
>>13524373
what were those solar panels supposed to do on the white house, aside from signaling to people to put solar panels on their own houses (which doesnt even make break even until 15 years, and will save you like $20 a month)
>>
>solar panels you see on homes and businesses are made of a bunch of solar cells (or photovoltaic cells)
>By far, the most prevalent bulk material for solar cells is crystalline silicon
>Crystalline silicon has a high cost in energy because silicon is produced by the reduction of high-grade quartz sand in an electric furnace. The electricity generated for this process may produce greenhouse gas emissions. This coke-fired smelting process occurs at high temperatures of more than 1000 °C and is very energy intensive, using about 11 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per kilogram of silicon.[8] The energy requirements of this process per unit of silicon metal produced may be relatively inelastic.
>>
>>13526333
>>13526356
That's a pretty good deal. Are many of your neighbors doing the same?
>>
>>13524464
Hard to transport power far enough for it to be worth it. Maybe if Africa developed for 30 more years
>>
>>13524373
Americans are not capable of long-term planning. They would happily raze every last tree on the planet if it meant they had more toilet paper on hand to clean up their sharts.
>>
>>13528033
Your point being?
>>
>>13527955
Amazing how they managed to heat water without producing power, someone should send them to area 51 for study
>>
>>13524395
He did try some actual policy stuff, he just wasn't skilled enough to accomplish much besides virtue signaling
>>
>>13528192
>long term planning
>investing in major infrastructure that only lasts 20 years
>>
>>13524374
Reddit hates fossil fuels. Always do the opposite of Reddit or you are a faggot cuck.
>>
>>13528271
Thankfully, nothing ever has to be replaced in a natural gas power plant
>>
File: 1578764287815.jpg (27 KB, 641x523)
27 KB
27 KB JPG
>>13527884
>>13527824
Because it drives up electricity costs and rapes the environment. The more you depend on solar the more you need other sources like coal to cover their downtimes which are basically random (I'm not talking about night time here) and this is on top of it being more expensive to begin/implement and on top of this panels only have about a 20 year lifespan and need replacement and aren't recyclable.

For the record, deserts aren't empty. Every solar farm displaces huge amounts of wild life for basically no net gain.

https://youtu.be/ciStnd9Y2ak?t=282

Pretty good talk on why renewables are garbage in general and just a form of propaganda by petroleum and coal companies.
>>
>>13528884
>The more you depend on solar the more you need other sources like coal to cover their downtimes
And keep in mind, because of the way the electric grid works this means these sources also become more expensive since you're investing in solar and not them. Germany is the greenest country in the EU, they pay France out the ass to import their electricity.
>>
>>13526699
What reply chain? The one that doesn't exist because you got butthurt and deleted it all?

: 3
>>
>>13527750
>investment is bad because it doesn't immediately break all previous records
The only disingenous one here is you anon
>>
>>13527750
I had an argument the other day with my leftycuck friend. He doesn't believe me that electric cars have a higher carbon footprint for the first few years of ownership, he honest to god thinks the batteries just magically appear and aren't a huge or expensive industrial process that results in pollution. This is the same person who asked me to pick him up after his car died 50 miles out of Vegas, the retard tried to drive from Nevada to California in his gay Tesla. I think he has a hybrid now.
>>
>>13528884
>Because it drives up electricity costs and rapes the environment. The more you depend on solar the more you need other sources like coal to cover their downtimes
Bought a 6.6kw system and 12kwh battery for 20k and havent pa8d for power since I installed it 1.5 yrs ago. Every month i get a credit from the power company which goes into my bank.
>inb4 b-but I don't have 20k to invest in my house I'll live in the rest of my life
Keep crying poorfag
>>
>>13524457
holy kek
>>
>>13528884
>rapes the environment
Is the implication that other electricity sources don't rape the environment? I maintain solar's impact is less than you seem to think

>The more you depend on solar the more you need other sources like coal to cover their downtimes
If you didn't have the solar, you'd still need to cover the demand with coal anyways.
>inb4 ramping up
Don't overextend like California.

>this is on top of it being more expensive to begin/implement
Solar has a LCOE lower than most fossil fuels

>on top of this panels only have about a 20 year lifespan
Panels last longer than 20 years, but that's when the warranties expire. The rule of thumb is 1% degredation/year, so after 20 years the panels will still output around 80% of their original capacity. For a large scale system with a contract with the utility, they would probably replace the modules, yes, but infrastructure like the racking they mount on would likely be good still. I would estimate there's still less part replacement, manpower, and resource use for solar than for a traditional power plant with moving parts, constant manpower, and active input and output streams.

>aren't recyclable
Panels are actually fairly recyclable
>>
>>13528914
there's no saving those kinds of people, the only way is for them to physically succumb to their own stupidity, which is difficult when talking about shit like carbon footprints. But what can you do
>>
>>13524406
Nuclear can only work when it's handled by people who respect procedure and have some basic common sense, when it's managed by absolute chimpanzees like slav(e)s it can potentially become into a fucking disaster.
Regrettably people tend to be on the latter side of the bell curve.
>>
>>13529044
>Europe currently going through a massive energy crisis because of their dependence on Russian gas
This kind of shit really makes you wonder if Chernobyl wasn't one giant psyop to prevent Europe from becoming energy independent via scaremongering.
>>
>>13529048
Might as well be, German boomers literally lobbied through all of Europe to stop any Nuclear development
>>
>>13524565
India is currently constructing one, but from my understanding Thorium isn't fissile and needs to be turned into uranium 233 before it will go critical.
That and the half life of the waste is 10, 20 times longer than the half life of plutonium.
>>
>>13529095
>from my understanding
So none then. Good talk, kid
>>
>>13528914
>electric cars have a higher carbon footprint for the first few years of ownership,
So what?
>>
>>13529095
>India is currently constructing one
I think one Chernobyl was enough
>>
>>13529196
So they have a higher carbon footprint for the first few years of ownership, retard.
>>
>>13529206
Do cars explode after a few years?
>>
>>13529206
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XMJTWD2mzs
(kill yourself)
>>
>>13524382
your brain on lead
>>
>>13529247
You have to back with those references
>>
>>13529284
Your brain on strudel
>>
>>13524406
Reminder that anti-nuclear energy campaigns are funded by corporations like Shell and Exxon Mobil.
>>
>>13530917
>The anti-nuclear movement is a social movement that opposes various nuclear technologies. Some direct action groups, environmental movements, and professional organisations have identified themselves with the movement at the local, national, or international level.[2][3] Major anti-nuclear groups include Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Peace Action and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service.
Nah, it's hippies that think making uranium boil water means we're going to blow up pakis in their desert hovels
>>
>>13525722
>pic related, 1 of these is in the desert lol
thats just murricans being retarded because "there is a lot of space anyway lol"
>>
>>13531817
>Germany is the biggest user of solar and wind in all of Europe
>pays twice what France does for electricity as it imports it from France
>currently telling its citizens to not shower, run air conditioning or indoor heat because of current gas crisis
Yeah, Americans sure are dumb.
>>
File: 1653145195633.jpg (47 KB, 399x399)
47 KB
47 KB JPG
Why do Americans think every project needs immediate dividends out the ass to justify it?

Are they so buck broken by Wall Street types that they cannot even imagine investing for the future rather than immediate gratification?
>>
>>13533515
Nigga I voted for the California high speed rail 14 fucking years ago and we still don't have it
>>
>>13533515
>muh mericans
So this is the new overt way to thought police now huh. Everything normgroids touch turns to shit.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.