Started By
Message

re: California is set to hit its green-energy goals a decade early

Posted on 12/27/17 at 12:45 am to
Posted by Jay Quest
Once removed from Massachusetts
Member since Nov 2009
9800 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 12:45 am to
There's nothing wrong with have alternative sources of energy developed and ready to go when cheap energy is depleted.

But stay with the cheap stuff until it's all gone.
Posted by olddawg26
Member since Jan 2013
24580 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 12:48 am to
Fair enough, it’s just odd that there’s a portion of the right leaning guys on here that understand it’s a hybrid of human and natural causes, and there’s another portion who think Jesus is coming back anyday and there’s no way we could affect the earth. Most of them have all their ‘gotcha’ questions ready to go that they learned from somewhere. The problem I see is that neither of these groups on the board ever are in the same thread. I see them separately always.
Posted by beerJeep
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2016
35002 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 12:54 am to
quote:

it’s just odd that there’s a portion of the right leaning guys on here that understand it’s a hybrid of human and natural causes, and there’s another portion who think Jesus is coming back anyday and there’s no way we could affect the earth.


There are idiots on both sides. Right and left.

quote:

Most of them have all their ‘gotcha’ questions ready to go that they learned from somewhere.


Both sides do this. Especially on this topic as neither side can be proven right or wrong.
quote:

The problem I see is that neither of these groups on the board ever are in the same thread. I see them separately always.
That's because climate change threads, like religious threads, are always shite shows. So more level headed people try to stay away. It's pointless arguing over something no one can prove either way.
Posted by crewdepoo
Hogwarts
Member since Jan 2015
9585 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 12:55 am to
quote:

Did I say it's a huge impact on their populations? Causing them to go extinct? Nope. Just said they kill birds... Which they do.

Yes you did actually :
quote:

Wind farms kill off endangered birds.
Posted by moneyg
Member since Jun 2006
56454 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 12:56 am to
quote:

So you are saying the Oil and Gas industry never benefitted from any government subsidies or perks?


Are you saying that the current market position of Oil and Gas are primarily related to government subsidies or perks?
Posted by beerJeep
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2016
35002 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 1:02 am to
Ohhhh I see. I wasn't meaning they make them go extinct. Just that they kill endangered birds. Which they do.

Sorry I misspoke. You caught me.

Wind farms kill a bunch of birds. Including endangered species. Is that better?
Posted by texag7
College Station
Member since Apr 2014
37513 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 1:20 am to
Accounting slight of hand. Just like Georgetown "100% renewable" Texas
Posted by blackandgolddude
San Diego
Member since Apr 2012
2869 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 1:28 am to
Is this why my SDG&E bill goes up around 14% every year, even though I sparingly use my AC or heater?
Posted by olddawg26
Member since Jan 2013
24580 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 1:31 am to
Well there’s one of them
Posted by TennesseeFan25
Honolulu
Member since May 2016
8391 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 5:15 am to
quote:

That article reads a lot like they’re out of money and looking for new investors. Maybe that’s just me.




Certainly has an agenda, electricity is expensive here, no way around it and this tries to pretend it’s not.

We have PG&E for the record
Posted by Oilfieldbiology
Member since Nov 2016
37483 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 5:45 am to
Do you’re saying you care about the environment?

Do you care about heavy metal pollution from processing and strip mining of the metals required to make the solar panels?

Do you care about the 1,000’s of hawks and eagles killed every year due to wind mills?

Do you care that it takes 1.2 gallons of diesel to produce one gallon of ethanol, which is only 3/4 as efficient as gas?

Probably not. You probably just want to do what “feels” good for the environment.
Posted by Bison
Truth or Consequences
Member since Dec 2016
1235 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 6:30 am to
quote:

Do you care about heavy metal pollution from processing and strip mining of the metals required to make the solar panels?


Metal will always be required by humans which is why it important to recycle metal and which it what frequently happens

quote:

Do you care about the 1,000’s of hawks and eagles killed every year due to wind mills?


This always makes me laugh
quote:

Wind turbines kill between 214,000 and 368,000 birds annually — a small fraction compared with the estimated 6.8 million fatalities from collisions with cell and radio towers and the 1.4 billion to 3.7 billion deaths from cats, according to the peer-reviewed study by two federal scientists and the environmental consulting firm West Inc.


This post was edited on 12/27/17 at 6:31 am
Posted by mtntiger
Asheville, NC
Member since Oct 2003
26629 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 6:43 am to
Accidental downvote.

Fat thumbed it on my phone.

Carry on.
Posted by Gaspergou202
Metairie, LA
Member since Jun 2016
13494 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 7:09 am to
quote:

So I am assuming you are against mortgage interest deductions and long-term capital gains tax too? Because that is essentially the government choosing winners and trying to spur economic growth artificially?

No, this is government choosing survivors from the public that it is killing with its hugeness. Reduce government = reduced taxes = reduced deductions.

Talk about the kill-you-dead pollution created in the cheap production of Chinese solar panels that are actually reducing costs of not-so-green energy

Also, if we capture solar energy instead of letting it reflect back into space, are we not warming the globe?

Finally, the narrative that government subsidized the oil, coal, and natural gas industry is complete bull-shite. They were created and expanded without government influence. Sometimes to strategically stimulate them, their taxes were lowered. But they were NEVER subsidize like the kabillion dollar boondoggle of California’s Solyndra . Solyndra, another “green” success story where government picked winners (green investors and DNC donors) over losers (American tax payers).

Edit: Often downvoted seldom refuted.
This post was edited on 12/27/17 at 10:23 am
Posted by Sidicous
Middle of Nowhere
Member since Aug 2015
17129 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 7:44 am to
quote:

quote:
So let's reduce the earth's population to that of 100 years ago.



What does that have to do with anything? Still would have the same problems.


As long as he's the 1st in line for euthanasia ....every little bit helps!
Posted by Homesick Tiger
Greenbrier, AR
Member since Nov 2006
54207 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 7:44 am to
quote:

This board gets upset when something is good in clean energy and cheers when Tesla doesn’t make money. Can anyone explain that?


I just find it a little ironic how the left doesn't want drilling because it threatens the environment around it. They say drilling sights are an eyesore of our natural landscape and those landscape should remain pristine in nature and should be protected at all costs.

But lo and behold, let's remove the eyesore and threat of polluting the land by erecting thousands of windmills to coordinate with our pastoral scenes of natural American beauty.

There's more ways to pollute the scenic beauty of this country than by spilling some oil on it.
Posted by Jcorye1
Tom Brady = GoAT
Member since Dec 2007
71365 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 8:03 am to
I like the idea of renewable energy, but the costs are just too high right now, especially for the poorer members of our society.
Posted by 14&Counting
Eugene, OR
Member since Jul 2012
37609 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 8:09 am to
quote:

Let green energy come naturally through the market.

Let consumers decide when they want to switch to green energy.

It isn't right to prop up ANY industry that consumers do not vote for with their wallets.




This...all of it......
Posted by Dale51
Member since Oct 2016
32378 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 8:26 am to
quote:

The price of solar power has dropped to under $30 in 2016 from around $136 per megawatt-hour in 2008, while wind power prices have fallen to $51 in 2015 from $97 per megawatt-hour in 2007, per the report.


Are we comparing apples to oranges?
How do those prices compare to fossil fuel or hydro generated electricity? How many tax dollars went to those jobs or subsidize the consumer bills?

quote:

Over the same period, the state has seen greenhouse-gas emissions from electricity generation decrease nearly every year.


So what?
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
56302 posts
Posted on 12/27/17 at 8:39 am to
quote:

Can anyone explain that?
You're not from an O&G state.
quote:

This board gets upset when something is good in clean energy and cheers when Tesla doesn’t make money.
The O&G and auto-industry stooges and stupid baws who want dem overpaid jobs irrationally lose their shite, but the rest of us realize that while there is a promising future for renewables, they are simply not cost effective for the average consumer at this time.

What should happen is that alternative energy companies should compete and innovate to become more appealing to mainstream consumers. If the energy prices were merely competitive, it would be hugely popular. The only real motivation is financial, and when the government floats companies like it has been doing, they don't have the pressure of failure to motivate them.
Jump to page
Page 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 12Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram