Why renewable energies fail, Part 2

Why renewable energies fail, Part 2

There are 41 comments on the Examiner.com story from Apr 28, 2013, titled Why renewable energies fail, Part 2. In it, Examiner.com reports that:

America's energy policy is to reduce U.S. dependency on fossil fuels, and to promote an "all the above" approach with "green" renewable energy .

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Examiner.com.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Solarman

Twentynine Palms, CA

#1 Apr 28, 2013
"Obama-favored renewable energy sources such as wind, solar and other unproven alternatives have received the lion's share of deficit-growing federal government subsidies while traditional petroleum, hydro-power, coal and nuclear sources that reliably provide 95% of American energy have been demonized by his administration."

Taylor, really, REALLY, wind and solar "unproven" alternatives? Coal and Nuclear have been "demonized" decades before the Obama Administration was in effect or even dreamed of. Things like three mile island and black lung have a way of staying on people's minds. The fossil fuel industry is about 150 years old. To this day the industry is still paying out for lobbyists and accepting government grants, loans, favorable lease agreements to develop more sources of energy. Some of that development money is spent in countries that are not our friends. After a 150 year run, the industry can't stand on its own? Taylor you have the gall to blow bad air at alternative energy that's been around for about 25 to 30 years? What's happened Taylor, your oil stocks take a hit?
Jerry

Singapore, Singapore

#2 May 3, 2013
I agree with Obama. Bioethanol from sugarcane'd be a real american source of energy. It's quite more than something to convert water + solar energy + waste lands into bioethanol.

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#3 May 4, 2013
A new study finds that solar and wind power generation complement each other better than previously thought, generating double the power in the same surface area.
More >> http://tinyurl.com/cldworu

Meanwhile, the price of solar energy is dropping, not by 6% as a few years ago, but by close to 20%!!
More >> http://bit.ly/138L8Bk

Image credit: Earth - The Operator's Manual
__________
"You can never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."
-- R. Buckminster Fuller

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#4 May 4, 2013
Solarman, "...while traditional petroleum, hydro-power, coal and nuclear sources that reliably provide 95% of American energy have been demonized by his administration." What shit are you smoking in your crack pipe,Solarman? Under Obama's energy policy the U S, became a net exporter of oil for the first time in 30 years. Big Oil has been making insanely huge profits on oil sales.“ Since I took office, our dependence on foreign oil has gone down every single year,” the President said in Cushing.“Last year, we imported one million fewer barrels per day than the year before.” Obama sounded, as he generally does, thoughtful and reasonable, and the figures that he cited were, for the most part, accurate. Indeed, as the Times reported last week, dependency on foreign oil has fallen dramatically in recent years." ..."What the country needs—and has always needed—is an energy policy that, instead of pandering to Americans’ sense of entitlement, would compel us finally to change our ways. In addition to a phased-in increase in the gas tax, it would include a comprehensive, economy-wide tax on carbon, or, alternatively, a cap-and-trade system. As it turns out, Mankiw isn’t the only senior person in a Republican campaign to see the importance of a new policy. When Romney was governor of Massachusetts, he presided over the introduction of one of the country’s first cap-and-trade programs, for the six largest power plants in the state. And in his book “No Apology” he wrote that “higher energy prices would encourage energy efficiency.”Check this out: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2012/04...

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#5 May 4, 2013
Ecologist and NYU Professor Julianne Warren wrote this beautiful letter to the President of her university, urging divestment from fossil fuels. Worth a read: http://bit.ly/18wSMVz
Solarman

Indio, CA

#7 May 4, 2013
frontporchreactionary wrote:
Solarman, "...while traditional petroleum, hydro-power, coal and nuclear sources that reliably provide 95% of American energy have been demonized by his administration." What shit are you smoking in your crack pipe,Solarman? Under Obama's energy policy the U S, became a net exporter of oil for the first time in 30 years. Big Oil has been making insanely huge profits on oil sales.“ Since I took office, our dependence on foreign oil has gone down every single year,” the President said in Cushing.“Last year, we imported one million fewer barrels per day than the year before.” Obama sounded, as he generally does, thoughtful and reasonable, and the figures that he cited were, for the most part, accurate. Indeed, as the Times reported last week, dependency on foreign oil has fallen dramatically in recent years." ..."What the country needs—and has always needed—is an energy policy that, instead of pandering to Americans’ sense of entitlement, would compel us finally to change our ways. In addition to a phased-in increase in the gas tax, it would include a comprehensive, economy-wide tax on carbon, or, alternatively, a cap-and-trade system. As it turns out, Mankiw isn’t the only senior person in a Republican campaign to see the importance of a new policy. When Romney was governor of Massachusetts, he presided over the introduction of one of the country’s first cap-and-trade programs, for the six largest power plants in the state. And in his book “No Apology” he wrote that “higher energy prices would encourage energy efficiency.”Check this out: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2012/04...
So, you didn't READ much less comprehend the article at all, dumbass. "The U.S. has 'became'..." What kind of shit are YOU smoking? What energy efficiency measures have YOU implemented in YOUR life? You bloviate real good B.S. about Obama did this, Obama did that, Romney did this, Romney did that. What have YOU DONE, to take responsibility for YOUR energy usage? Christ, you're a moron!!

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#8 May 4, 2013
Solarman, "The U.S. has 'became'..."(It's the past tense. Obama has been in office now for four and a half years--enough time for his energy policy to show positive results. Yes, Solarman, try and practice your grammatical tenses more carefully and someday you'll be able to read and understand the New Yorker article that I posted a link for you too.
Solarman

Indio, CA

#9 May 5, 2013
Solarman wrote:
<quoted text>So, you didn't READ much less comprehend the article at all, dumbass. "The U.S. has 'became'..." What kind of shit are YOU smoking? What energy efficiency measures have YOU implemented in YOUR life? You bloviate real good B.S. about Obama did this, Obama did that, Romney did this, Romney did that. What have YOU DONE, to take responsibility for YOUR energy usage? Christ, you're a moron!!
Once again, read the post in its entirety before you goose step off on another idiot post. The first part of the post was from the article written by a man named Taylor, the second part of the post was MY response to Taylor's assertion in HIS article. ONCE again what kind of shit are YOU smoking? Moron!

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#10 May 5, 2013
Solarman, "Once again, read the post in its entirety ..) Read your own post over again before you have another hissy fit on me for trying to correct some of yours and Taylor's allusions.(Taylor)"tradit ional petroleum, hydro-power, coal and nuclear sources that reliably provide 95% of American energy have been demonized by his administration."
"Coal and Nuclear have been "demonized" decades before the Obama Administration" I take issue with you because I believed that you ought to know better that there has never been a 'demonization of traditional oil or nuclear resources by any American Administration; except Warren Buffet and Wall Street's turning away from George W Bush's idea to jump start a nuclear energy renaissance with a massive spending of U S tax payer money and Obama's mere consideration to include 'clean coal and some nukes into his mix of renewable energy alternative development plan. Also, Solarman, your false statement here, "alternative energy that's been around for about 25 to 30 years?" What 'alternative energy are you talking about? Biofuels and biomass fuels maybe yes have only been around for a couple decades, but solar, wind , and geothermal have been around for centuries and many peoples of the Earth in history have successfully used those non-carbon natural resources for human needs . My essential question is why can't we do it?
Solarman

Twentynine Palms, CA

#11 May 5, 2013
frontporchreactionary wrote:
Solarman, "Once again, read the post in its entirety ..) Read your own post over again before you have another hissy fit on me for trying to correct some of yours and Taylor's allusions.(Taylor)"tradit ional petroleum, hydro-power, coal and nuclear sources that reliably provide 95% of American energy have been demonized by his administration."
"Coal and Nuclear have been "demonized" decades before the Obama Administration" I take issue with you because I believed that you ought to know better that there has never been a 'demonization of traditional oil or nuclear resources by any American Administration; except Warren Buffet and Wall Street's turning away from George W Bush's idea to jump start a nuclear energy renaissance with a massive spending of U S tax payer money and Obama's mere consideration to include 'clean coal and some nukes into his mix of renewable energy alternative development plan. Also, Solarman, your false statement here, "alternative energy that's been around for about 25 to 30 years?" What 'alternative energy are you talking about? Biofuels and biomass fuels maybe yes have only been around for a couple decades, but solar, wind , and geothermal have been around for centuries and many peoples of the Earth in history have successfully used those non-carbon natural resources for human needs . My essential question is why can't we do it?
Nice job of cherry picking. You forgot the part about three mile island and black lung. You also can't seem to answer the question, What have you DONE or what are YOU DOING to take responsibility for YOUR energy usage? NO, alternative energy as a business model has a relatively short life so far. NASA developed the solar PV cell and fuel cell in the 1950's. These devices were not readily available to the public until the 1980's right up to now. Wind was often used as a mechanical device not an electrical generation device, once electric motors were common place someone decided to connect one to a windmill and create some power. As for George Bush, look at the design and build of his home in Texas, sometimes referred to as the western white house.'WE' can do it and we can do it now. I use alternative energy and it works quite well for me.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#12 May 5, 2013
frontporchreactionary wrote:
“ Since I took office, our dependence on foreign oil has gone down every single year,” the President said in Cushing.“Last year, we imported one million fewer barrels per day than the year before.”
That is what happens when you bring on a "recession" (aka depression), people stop buying things like oil. When 10% fewer people have jobs to go to, there is ~10% less travel to jobs and oil usage goes down. This is NOT a good thing.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#13 May 5, 2013
Solarman wrote:
<quoted text>Nice job of cherry picking. You forgot the part about three mile island ...
Do tell. What part about "Three Mile Island?
Solarman

Twentynine Palms, CA

#15 May 5, 2013
KitemanSA wrote:
<quoted text> Do tell. What part about "Three Mile Island?
The little troll jerkov completely passes over the problems with nuclear and its use. The three mile island incident started a movement against nuclear, although no one was injured or died from the incident. That was when nuclear began the long journey to demonization. Since the SALTII treaty was signed, we have been unable to use the "spent" fuel rods and recycle the units into new fuel rods. So, now we are storing nuclear waste at 100 or so plants waiting for Yucca Mountain or some other remedy. Are you O.K. with the reference to black lung? I remember the promise of nuclear power, "Too cheap to meter." We haven't begun to see the total cost of nuclear power. But it is looking like we will get a taste of the long term cost when the San Onofre plant's problems are solved or the plant is shutdown and dismantled.

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#16 May 5, 2013
Solarman,'alternative energy as a business model has a relatively short life so far. NASA developed the solar PV cell and fuel cell in the 1950's.' That's a lot longer than your previous assertion 'alternative energy that's been around for about 25 to 30 years' "Although a few attempts were made in the 1950s to use silicon cells in commercial applications such as rural telecommunications, it was the new space program that gave the technology its first major application. In 1958, the U.S. Vanguard space satellite carried a small array of PV cells to power its radio. The cells worked so well that PV technology has been part of the space program ever since. " Also, here, you assert, "These devices were not readily available to the public until the 1980's right up to now." Not true. "Rising energy prices in the mid-70s, sparked by a world oil crisis, renewed interest in PV technology. In the 1970s and '80s several projects were initiated all over the world and worldwide PV production exceeded 21.3 MW, and sales exceeded $250 million. "Check this out: http://www.climate.org/topics/clean-energy/so...

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#17 May 5, 2013
You're a dope KitemanSA, "That is what happens when you bring on a "recession" (aka depression), people stop buying things like oil" “ Since I took office, our dependence on foreign oil has gone down every single year,” the President said in Cushing.“Last year, we imported one million fewer barrels per day than the year before.” Under Obama's energy policies, people stopped buying oil because they didn't need to buy it --they were driving more fuel efficient and hybrid /electric vehicles;U S oil companies had more surplus supply to export to other countries thus improving our own balance of trade. Under the Obama EPA stricter greenhouse gas emissions reduction guidelines , u s power plants produced electrical energy more efficiently with less pollution and less burning of fossil fuels, reducing greenhouse gas emissions slows global warming and makes climate change less catastrophic.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#18 May 5, 2013
FPR: Sorry, the numbers don't compute. There aren't enough hybrids and EVs to make that change. It is the loss of jobs and incomes that explain the drop.

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#19 May 5, 2013
KitemanSA, " It is the loss of jobs and incomes that explain the drop."Since Obama, there are over 1.3 million Americans now working in the renewable energy markets.
Solarman

Twentynine Palms, CA

#20 May 5, 2013
frontporchreactionary wrote:
Solarman,'alternative energy as a business model has a relatively short life so far. NASA developed the solar PV cell and fuel cell in the 1950's.' That's a lot longer than your previous assertion 'alternative energy that's been around for about 25 to 30 years' "Although a few attempts were made in the 1950s to use silicon cells in commercial applications such as rural telecommunications, it was the new space program that gave the technology its first major application. In 1958, the U.S. Vanguard space satellite carried a small array of PV cells to power its radio. The cells worked so well that PV technology has been part of the space program ever since. " Also, here, you assert, "These devices were not readily available to the public until the 1980's right up to now." Not true. "Rising energy prices in the mid-70s, sparked by a world oil crisis, renewed interest in PV technology. In the 1970s and '80s several projects were initiated all over the world and worldwide PV production exceeded 21.3 MW, and sales exceeded $250 million. "Check this out: http://www.climate.org/topics/clean-energy/so...
IF YOU had read the report, you would have found that the author agrees that solar PV was too expensive to use at the time. The article was not specific as to what the 21.3MW of solar installed entailed. I'm talking about what the average homeowner can do today with the installation of solar PV and solar hot water on their homes. Yeah, there were some early adopters of solar PV that spent somewhere around 1K for a 50W ARCO solar panel back in the 1970's, but the technology was not available to the public at large like it is today and at the price it is today. In the early days of solar PV it was used to power telemetry in remote areas where power was not available. In 1985 I installed such a system on a remote Domestic water reservoir for the telemetry system. It is still online today. It has the same panels and wiring in place since 1985, and has had many battery changes over the last few decades. All of these shiny links to someone else's opinion piece, what have YOU DONE to take responsibility for your energy usage?

“Come Home America!”

Since: Nov 11

Claymont, Delaware 19809

#21 May 6, 2013
Solarman, "YOU DONE to take responsibility for your energy usage? "Interesting isn't it how defensive you get and go 'off-topic' when you're being corrected on some of your errors? You'd do a lot better stating your case if you avoid flying off the handle and senselessly accusing others commitment to lowering their own carbon footprint. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." -- From Hamlet (III, ii, 239), William Shakespeare

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#22 May 6, 2013
frontporchreactionary wrote:
KitemanSA, " It is the loss of jobs and incomes that explain the drop."Since Obama, there are over 1.3 million Americans now working in the renewable energy markets.
Large numbers of jobs in the "renewable energy market" are actually a bad sign. Something like energy should be provided with as little effort tied into it as possible since it is so basic to all other things. It is not beneficial to any subsequent product to have large expenses like numerous jobs built into it so early in the creation cycle. The best energy is the CHEAPEST energy.

Many energy jobs mean many FEWER better jobs elsewhere in the economy.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Biomass Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Zero Carbon or Bust Jul '15 KitemanSA 9
News Nation's renewable energy consumption highest s... Jul '15 Solarman 1
News US announces plans to reduce agricultural carbo... Apr '15 Sterkfontein Swar... 11
News Investors Chip In as Renewables Rise Towards Re... Apr '15 Solarman 1
News UK's a 46 billion bid for EIB nuclear loan (Dec '14) Dec '14 Clear Dharma 1
News Willow trees are cost-efficient cleaners of con... (Dec '14) Dec '14 Stephany McDowell 1
News VIASPACE and Tibbar Energy USVI Report Progress... (Oct '14) Oct '14 Laura 1
More from around the web