or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Global warming vs our economy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Global warming vs our economy - Page 4

post #121 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post

Birth control will be the most effective technology to combat global warming, as well as ALL the rest of the world's ills. IMHO. Spline were you joking?



Yes mankind should just stop all that PP (pronounced Pee-Pee), AKA People Pollution!

To that end the UN will issue two types of "magic" pills (Ex-ter-min-ate™ (Dr. Who© & Daleks) and Ster-il-ize™ (Star Trek© & Nomad)), a spray product (Fu-mi-gate™ (under the Green Acres© brand name)) to be delivered in large canisters and dispensed from crop dusting airplanes, and two shampoo products (Final Solution™ and Adolph™ (under the Hogan's Heroes© brand name))!

And I'm going home.

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #122 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post

Birth control will be the most effective technology to combat global warming, as well as ALL the rest of the world's ills. IMHO. Spline were you joking?

Technically very true. But does anybody have the right to say who should have to take birth control and who shouldn't?
post #123 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

Technically very true. But does anybody have the right to say who should have to take birth control and who shouldn't?

Evolution? Could it be that people will loose the abilty to reproduce when the environment does not allow for any more individuals to be sustained?
post #124 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

Evolution? Could it be that people will loose the abilty to reproduce when the environment does not allow for any more individuals to be sustained?

No. That isn't how it works. Evolution functions at 10s to 100s of generations, humans can die off in 1 or 2...

The crash, as it were, will more than likely be disease related than resource related...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #125 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

Evolution? Could it be that people will loose the abilty to reproduce when the environment does not allow for any more individuals to be sustained?

Nature's birth control. But I don't think that will happen. It is very hard wired in all animals: Have sex and die. No kind of HUMAN evolution will stop over population, but disease from over population and being to crowded will kill of some people, other reproductive diseases like AIDS might be a big factor, natural disasters, and disasters we bring upon ourselves: Global Warming. Throughout history though, we have been working towards stopping more and more of nature's ways of killing us.
post #126 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

No. That isn't how it works. Evolution functions at 10s to 100s of generations, humans can die off in 1 or 2...

The crash, as it were, will more than likely be disease related than resource related...

Could it be that our brain allows us to instantly evolve? i.e. putting on clothes when cold = evolving fur over several generations. This instant evolving is needed to deal with rapid environmental changes, this could be the reason for the evolution of intelligence, mother nature needs beings to be able to instantly evolve or life is in jeopardy.
Unfortunately this intelligence has not been enough to completely eliminate instincts like greed.
post #127 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Distribution is not a problem, and underground power lines solve most of the reliability issues. Not only that, but maintenance on distributed systems is much higher than on central systems - storms that can rip down power lines can also rip pannels off your roof.

Distributed power generation will never be as efficient as central power generation, due to efficiencies of scale. Your solar pannels are much more expensive than a central nuclear power plant, and the voltage drop over the length of the electrical main is not enough to compensate.

If my panels come off my roof the entire roof is gone. The panels weigh nothing.

Underground distribution problems:
Taiwan earthquake: underground communication and powerlines are damaged and will take weeks to be repaired.....

Copper: People die to steal copper (those idiots who try and steal life copper wire). longest "hot" superconductor made of Yttrium, copper and oxigen is only 322 meters but at least a very good start.
post #128 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

If my panels come off my roof the entire roof is gone. The panels weigh nothing.

Underground distribution problems:
Taiwan earthquake: underground communication and powerlines are damaged and will take weeks to be repaired.....

Copper: People die to steal copper (those idiots who try and steal life copper wire). longest "hot" superconductor made of Yttrium, copper and oxigen is only 322 meters but at least a very good start.

Where I live I a solar-panel ripping hurricane is way more likely than an earthquake, and most power lines are aluminum now. You have battery maintenance, inverter maintenance, lower efficiency and higher cost - you would be better off just relying on the central power companies.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #129 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Where I live I a solar-panel ripping hurricane is way more likely than an earthquake, and most power lines are aluminum now. You have battery maintenance, inverter maintenance, lower efficiency and higher cost - you would be better off just relying on the central power companies.

The inverter does not need any maintenance. My system is grid tied with a no maintenance closed battery backup. I have to look at the terminals once a year, and check a gage which tells me if things are OK.

I am wondering why you are so much against energy that is completely free (as long as there is sunshine) and after my panels amortized will mostly likely make free juice for another 50 - 1000 years...?
You have not completely informed yourself in either solar or nuclear energy or energy distribution?
The future is now and all speculation as to how we will end up solving the problem is moot. I feel I am doing something already no matter what will happen. My 40 wind turbines keep me and my family in the money for many years to come and have cut CO2 emission by many tons since 1997.

You are lobbying only one solution with very shaky arguments, a very Republican thing to do.
What if you are forced from your property for a new powerline? Will you readily go in the name of progress?
post #130 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

The inverter does not need any maintenance. My system is grid tied with a no maintenance closed battery backup. I have to look at the terminals once a year, and check a gage which tells me if things are OK.

I am wondering why you are so much against energy that is completely free (as long as there is sunshine) and after my panels amortized will mostly likely make free juice for another 50 - 1000 years...?
You have not completely informed yourself in either solar or nuclear energy or energy distribution?
The future is now and all speculation as to how we will end up solving the problem is moot. I feel I am doing something already no matter what will happen. My 40 wind turbines keep me and my family in the money for many years to come and have cut CO2 emission by many tons since 1997.

You are lobbying only one solution with very shaky arguments, a very Republican thing to do.
What if you are forced from your property for a new powerline? Will you readily go in the name of progress?



Battery maintenance INCLUDES replacement, no? How often do you clean your solar panels? Are you 100% off the existing power grid? Have you EVER had to make due with less than 100% of your power needs/wants? You do have an energy efficent home, at what cost delta versus conventional stick built?

Demand and storage requirements for solar/wind are big issues, since when you want/need to use power may not be the times it is available.

In your last 3 sentences do the following, replace very with extremely, replace Republican with tree hugging liberal, replace powerline with solar/wind farm. GET IT!!!

Please show me ONE UNBIASED source/study showing a TRUE cost benefit analysis over say a 30-year (i. e. same time period as you're 30-year fixed rate mortgage for your typical home financing) of existing stick built/power grid versus solar/wind power/efficient built? Please, because all these things you advocate are up front costs amortized over some lifetime, yes?

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #131 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

The inverter does not need any maintenance. My system is grid tied with a no maintenance closed battery backup. I have to look at the terminals once a year, and check a gage which tells me if things are OK.

I am wondering why you are so much against energy that is completely free (as long as there is sunshine) and after my panels amortized will mostly likely make free juice for another 50 - 1000 years...?
You have not completely informed yourself in either solar or nuclear energy or energy distribution?
The future is now and all speculation as to how we will end up solving the problem is moot. I feel I am doing something already no matter what will happen. My 40 wind turbines keep me and my family in the money for many years to come and have cut CO2 emission by many tons since 1997.

You are lobbying only one solution with very shaky arguments, a very Republican thing to do.
What if you are forced from your property for a new powerline? Will you readily go in the name of progress?

Without battery backup your system makes even less sense - your hypothetical earthquake would have just as much effect on you as anyone else, because you have no storage facility or way to feed the electricy back to the utility.

It does not matter how long your equipment lasts, you will never earn your money back (it would have been much better to invest the money in treasury bills).
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #132 of 135
Thread Starter 
But he does have a battery backup......

And actually- if you eliminate your electricity bill because you 100% generate your own electricity, and if you eliminate a $100 a month bill- and after rebate it costs 17k to install.... then of course you'll have earned your money back at some point. And since you don't have to worry about energy price spikes, you might make you money back quicker if you take that into account. Saudi Arabia's oil fields rumored to collapse next January? Well, you won't have to worry about that news in regards to your electricity bill.

And if there is a major earthquake- he'll have power. that means refrigerator, music, TV... until the infrastructure is repaired.

you make a no brainer win win choice seem like it has no merit...when that seems to stem from your lack of knowledge on the subject.

And show me a treasury bill that's put $1700 a year back in your pocket off a $17k investment with no tax considerations, or broker fees as well. You couldn't! Most people can't even invest in stocks with that kind of return. (FYI- these numbers pulled from an estimate of a typical california home given as an example)

It's a shame you're holding onto misinformation so tightly, you might get some real eye opening information if you give it a chance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Without battery backup your system makes even less sense - your hypothetical earthquake would have just as much effect on you as anyone else, because you have no storage facility or way to feed the electricy back to the utility.

It does not matter how long your equipment lasts, you will never earn your money back (it would have been much better to invest the money in treasury bills).
post #133 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRR View Post

And show me a treasury bill that's put $1700 a year back in your pocket off a $17k investment with no tax considerations, or broker fees as well.

He isn't getting that kind of return, as I showed in a previous post. He would need to be generating 28000 kWh/year to get
$1700, and he is only generating 6392 (= $447/year).

[edit - make that $800, not $447 - I didn't realise how badly Californians get ripped off with $0.11/kWh electrical prices, so his return is 5.7%]
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #134 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

Without battery backup your system makes even less sense - your hypothetical earthquake would have just as much effect on you as anyone else, because you have no storage facility or way to feed the electricy back to the utility.

It does not matter how long your equipment lasts, you will never earn your money back (it would have been much better to invest the money in treasury bills).

You don't read too well do you?

How many tons of CO2 have you taken out of the atmosphere in the last 10 years with your investments...?

Battery replacement is scheduled every 7 years. They of course are completely recyclable.
How much money have youmade with supplying energy to people. Well I invested 1.2 mill into wind energy and it's making me 123,000.- /year (+- energy price adjustments) one more year and I will have recouped my investment and from then on it's 123,000/year income without me bending a finger. Show me a fund that will do that. Oh BTW I also still own the 40 wind turbines....worth still about 25k each.

You guys are communists. You are trying to tell me what's better for me and don't know at all what you are talking about a very typical thing for communists indeed.
post #135 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

YWell I invested 1.2 mill into wind energy and it's making me 123,000.- /year (+- energy price adjustments) one more year and I will have recouped my investment and from then on it's 123,000/year income without me bending a finger.

Very nice, makes much more sense than your solar panel investment, which was a financially boneheaded move. You still have not made your investments back on the windmills, though, once you count opportunity costs and inflation.

The only reason that you are doing so well is the screwed up nature of California. If you had better centralized power stations, then the price of power would drop down to the same as mine (0.06/kWh) and your $123K would drop to $60K.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Global warming vs our economy