Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Half of Germany's Electricity in June Provided by Solar


  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#13 heel31ok

heel31ok

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 31-January 14
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,567
  • Reputation: 523
  • LocationEasley, SC
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 07:49 AM

What is the point of this post other than to move the goalpost back another 10 yards?


Sent from my iPhone using Carolina

when you are out of FG range to begin with it doesn't make a dfference.



#14 Captroop

Captroop

    Pronounced, "Cat Poop"

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,141
  • Reputation: 1,810
  • LocationNot Telling... CatofWar might find me.
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 07:52 AM

The point is....that even though Solar Power has come a long way, there are still major issues (that the article convenientlydoes not mention) with being able to consistenly generate the levels of energy needed as well as the major need to store energy to cover those periods where solar cannot generate the levels needed.

 

In short, the issue is that (as usual) those pesky little things called "facts" completely escape you.

 

Carry on

 

Ever heard of "weaning?"

 

We're never gonna get off the oil companies' *** if we don't start gradually transitioning to alternative forms of energy. No one is saying, "100% solar energy now!" But if a country is capable of generating half it's energy demand for any amount of time without using fossil fuels, then it's a victory.

 

Jeez, it's such a common trope in the Tinderbox. Literally half the issues on here, the negative position is "If we can't fix everything at once, let's do nothing."

 

Gun debate - "We can't stop gun crimes, so let's do nothing."

Redskins name - "Native Americans have lots of other problems they should be worried about, so let's do nothing."

Solar energy - "You can't completely replace fossil fuels at once, so let's do nothing."

Gay marriage - "This is still a Christian country and I believe in traditional marriage, so let's do nothing."

 

People try so hard to keep things the way they are; rationalizing the status quo. It's like they fail to realize that change is the nature of all things. Even the universe is expanding.



#15 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • Joined: 30-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 20,340
  • Reputation: 5,885
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 07:56 AM

Ever heard of "weaning?"

 

We're never gonna get off the oil companies' *** if we don't start gradually transitioning to alternative forms of energy. No one is saying, "100% solar energy now!" But if a country is capable of generating half it's energy demand for any amount of time without using fossil fuels, then it's a victory.

 

Jeez, it's such a common trope in the Tinderbox. Literally half the issues on here, the negative position is "If we can't fix everything at once, let's do nothing."

 

Gun debate - "We can't stop gun crimes, so let's do nothing."

Redskins name - "Native Americans have lots of other problems they should be worried about, so let's do nothing."

Solar energy - "You can't completely replace fossil fuels at once, so let's do nothing."

Gay marriage - "This is still a Christian country and I believe in traditional marriage, so let's do nothing."

 

People try so hard to keep things the way they are; rationalizing the status quo. It's like they fail to realize that change is the nature of all things. Even the universe is expanding.

 

I am not advocating that should not be a part of our energy strategy...it absolutely should.  We MUST wean ourselves off fossil fules....or at least significantly reduce our reliance on them. 

 

I see a healthy energy strategy as one that still utilizes fossil fuels....but incorporates solar, wind, nuclear, etc on a much larger scale.

 

Just pointing out that the article is a little misleading and thre are still issues that need to be worked out for solar to become a major energy player.



#16 heel31ok

heel31ok

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 31-January 14
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,567
  • Reputation: 523
  • LocationEasley, SC
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:01 AM

Ever heard of "weaning?"

 

We're never gonna get off the oil companies' *** if we don't start gradually transitioning to alternative forms of energy. No one is saying, "100% solar energy now!" But if a country is capable of generating half it's energy demand for any amount of time without using fossil fuels, then it's a victory.

 

Jeez, it's such a common trope in the Tinderbox. Literally half the issues on here, the negative position is "If we can't fix everything at once, let's do nothing."

 

Gun debate - "We can't stop gun crimes, so let's do nothing."

Redskins name - "Native Americans have lots of other problems they should be worried about, so let's do nothing."

Solar energy - "You can't completely replace fossil fuels at once, so let's do nothing."

Gay marriage - "This is still a Christian country and I believe in traditional marriage, so let's do nothing."

 

People try so hard to keep things the way they are; rationalizing the status quo. It's like they fail to realize that change is the nature of all things. Even the universe is expanding.

there is no gun debate as  long as the 2nd ammendment exists.

Redskins- that's a joke

 

solar energy is less reliable than a local weatherman.

Gay marriage, of course you do nothing if you don't believe in it...duh!


Edited by heel31ok, 20 June 2014 - 08:02 AM.


#17 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • Joined: 20-May 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,051
  • Reputation: 1,484
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:12 AM

I think that's fantastic. I keep hearing that solar is to the point now that it's worth the investment in the equipment. Maybe we'll get there.

 

 

I was looking into going solar a few months ago.  Energy companies are fighting hard against it. Right now they pay some money for the energy solar users put back into the grid but they are working to start charging these solar users fees up to $100 a month and of course they have the backing of many republican politicians.  I'm looking for the article i found, if i find it i'll post. 


Edited by Cat, 20 June 2014 - 08:14 AM.


#18 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 34,980
  • Reputation: 9,083
  • LocationWilmington, NC
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:16 AM

Well we all know Duke owns McCrory and his ilk so I'm not surprised.

 

I know there are pros and cons to solar energy, not the least of which is the manufacture and cost of the panels, but poo, solar energy is the biggest source of free energy in the solar system... we need to utilize it.


  • Cat PIE'd this

#19 heel31ok

heel31ok

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 31-January 14
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,567
  • Reputation: 523
  • LocationEasley, SC
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:22 AM

Well we all know Duke owns McCrory and his ilk so I'm not surprised.

 

I know there are pros and cons to solar energy, not the least of which is the manufacture and cost of the panels, but poo, solar energy is the biggest source of free energy in the solar system... we need to utilize it.

high cost pretty much cancels the free part.



#20 Captroop

Captroop

    Pronounced, "Cat Poop"

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,141
  • Reputation: 1,810
  • LocationNot Telling... CatofWar might find me.
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:24 AM

I am not advocating that should not be a part of our energy strategy...it absolutely should.  We MUST wean ourselves off fossil fules....or at least significantly reduce our reliance on them. 

 

I see a healthy energy strategy as one that still utilizes fossil fuels....but incorporates solar, wind, nuclear, etc on a much larger scale.

 

Just pointing out that the article is a little misleading and thre are still issues that need to be worked out for solar to become a major energy player.

 

Yeah, I didn't mean to single you out. Just was frustrated by the general sense of negativity and cynicism that was pervasive in the thread.



#21 heel31ok

heel31ok

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 31-January 14
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,567
  • Reputation: 523
  • LocationEasley, SC
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:26 AM

i see no rason to worry about it , one of the biggest reasons given for this is to s crew the oil companies which is ridiculous.We are not even close to running out of oil and we still have an efficient option in nuclear.even in trying to kill the coal industry we could convert coal to oil and be better off.



#22 Captroop

Captroop

    Pronounced, "Cat Poop"

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,141
  • Reputation: 1,810
  • LocationNot Telling... CatofWar might find me.
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:27 AM

high cost pretty much cancels the free part.

 

Paying for something now that saves you money in the long run, or provides a financial return is called an "investment."



#23 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 34,980
  • Reputation: 9,083
  • LocationWilmington, NC
HUDDLER

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:34 AM

high cost pretty much cancels the free part.

 

 

Why don't you do some research on it and report back to us since you're obviously so concerned.



#24 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,795
  • Reputation: 2,493
Moderators

Posted 20 June 2014 - 09:07 AM

"Solar power is a pipe dream, you could never get any significant amount of energy from it!"

/Germany does just that.

"Solar power is a pipe dream, you could never get all your energy from it!"




Sent from my iPhone using Carolina


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users