What is your definition of Energy Independence

[I]

I hope you don't believe what you wrote. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

There was "hope" on the Titanic that the sales-pitch was correct.

You promised to furnish a specific definition, then ghosted the thread. Originally Posted by lustylad

I did not Ghost the thread.

I had already posted what it was. Where? Show us the post!

It is actually so obvious what the actual definition is.... Originally Posted by WTF

If it's so obvious, then why do you have so much trouble articulating it?

We're still waiting!

Please explain what your definition is and how that will keep our oil prices under control here in this country.

The last thread exposed a bunch nativity or flat out arrogance and ignorance. Originally Posted by WTF

If it's so obvious, then why do you have so much trouble articulating it?

We're still waiting! Originally Posted by lustylad

I've already posted this once. Feel free to ask me any part of the article you may be having trouble with.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier...y-independent/


.

...Feel free to ask me any part of the article you may be having trouble with.nnn. Originally Posted by WTF

The part where you tell us your interpretation of what it means is still entirely murky. Boil it down for us.

I've already posted this once.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier...y-independent/ Originally Posted by WTF

No, you didn't.

I gave you the benefit of a doubt and searched. Your post above (#438) is the first time anyone has posted this Forbes article in eccie.

Why do you have to lie?

At least you're finally barking up the right tree. Rapier has written numerous articles on this subject for Forbes. Why didn't you start this thread with one of them, instead of going around in circles and wasting everyone's time for 437 posts?

No, you didn't.

I gave you the benefit of a doubt and searched. Your post above (#438) is the first time anyone has posted this Forbes article in eccie.

Why do you have to lie?

At least you're finally barking up the right tree. Rapier has written numerous articles on this subject for Forbes. Why didn't you start this thread with one of them, instead of going around in circles and wasting everyone's time for 437 posts? Originally Posted by lustylad

Wasting time?

How about folks like you who were crying about energy independence who seem not to understand that we've been energy independent under Biden.

Plus...I'm pretty sure you need to search a tad harder. And even if that particular one wasn't posted...plenty enough like it. I had posted we all agreed on the definition.

You disagreed.

Are you now agreeing with me on this definition?

Wasting time? Originally Posted by WTF

Yes, wasting everyone's time!

I'll ask again... try to answer like a real man instead of a weasel this time.

Robert Rapier has written numerous articles on this subject for Forbes. Why didn't you start this thread with one of them, instead of going around in circles and wasting everyone's time for 437 posts?

The part where you tell us your interpretation of what it means is still entirely murky. Boil it down for us. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Look, it shouldn't be difficult. Here's an elegant, yet simplistic, example you could use as a template perhaps:

Q) “How do we get to a solution for [gas prices]?”

A) “Well first of all we’ve been, um, you know, understanding that it is a real issue, um, what we have done is we’ve actually released some of the reserves, the petroleum reserves to bring down the cost of gas prices. And we are also dealing with – the cost of gas is just part of the issue of the cost of living, right? It’s too expensive for too many people.”

See? Easy-peasy.
Simple question: What is your definition of Energy Independence?
Go!

Yes, wasting everyone's time!

I'll ask again... try to answer like a real man instead of a weasel this time.

Robert Rapier has written numerous articles on this subject for Forbes. Why didn't you start this thread with one of them, instead of going around in circles and wasting everyone's time for 437 posts? Originally Posted by lustylad

Well son let me tell you....it could be argued that this whole forum is a waste of time. Especially economic arguments made by you. Now please release Tiny from your Voodoo economic captivity!

But I'll tell you why I did not lead with what you suggested. Because of the jems some (say the Wacko Kid) dropped.

When I have a bunch of time to waste... I'll go back and mine those gems to poke fun at my Trump loving followers.

Simple question: What is your definition of Energy Independence?
Go! Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

For me personally ESS. That and an EV Truck. But they are not cost efficient vs the current market...which is why I think energy companies that pay good to great dividends are a great buy for the next 5 years or so...


https://www.elpasotimes.com/story/sp...ns/3287734001/


.

For me personally ESS. That and an EV Truck. But they are not cost efficient vs the current market...which is why I think energy companies that pay good to great dividends are a great buy for the next 5 years or so...
https://www.elpasotimes.com/story/sp...ns/3287734001/ Originally Posted by WTF

Seems like you disagree with the answer that I posted on gas prices and Imma guessing you would disagree with this motivation speaker talking about the future of energy price impacts:

“I would say first of all thank you for being a fighter, for knowing that we have reason to have faith in what is possible but we have to work to make it achievable and that includes what folks did to get out and vote in 2020 because that led to – I think of it like this – people put in their order and said this is what I want.”

To me Energy Storage Systems (ESS), aka batteries, are about as earth unfriendly as most everything and costly, notwithstanding expensive (price). Same would go for that $80K+ truck you mentioned. There are some substantial drawbacks in the price and cost categories. Where you said cost, I interpret as price, as in price to acquire. Where I say cost is the production of and resulting dependencies and depletion the manufacture produces.

Here's an interesting tidbit I ran across recently: It you take all of the existing ESSes in the world today, you would have enough energy to power the world for 8 minutes - best case scenario. Obviously the ESSes are not interconnected, so there is that. Basically, it is a simple math of total MW stored and consumed currently.

In the case of the EV truck: Let's say it has a range of 300 miles and you want to go from El Paso to Beaumont, roughly 740 miles, for a three-four day holiday weekend with your family. You can even assume it is not during a blizzard that closes down the highway and leaves you stranded for a day or so. (but that scenario could happen). How does that work? Or are you expecting there are battery operated passenger planes as the motivational, aka aspirational speaker above seems to imply? Just vote and viola! Miracles happen.

In a capitalistic society, looking forward on where to invest is prudent. So I'm a little surprised you would be looking forward yet keeping the old technology in your field of vision. I'm not saying it's entirely hypocritical, but it sure seems odd to vote for the future while making bank on believing the past is still the viable future. Pardon my confusion.

P.S. Be honest here; that article is pretty typical of the greenie-weinie deal ilk, though it has some reasonable info in it - like defining ESS. Amirite?

....it could be argued that this whole forum is a waste of time. Especially economic arguments made by you. Now please release Tiny from your Voodoo economic captivity! Originally Posted by WTF

You always say that after you lose an argument. Aww, it doesn't matter, it's just a hooker board. Or else you take an imaginary victory lap like Baghdad Bob. Despite your frequent bans, you have almost 3x as many eccie posts as I do. You sure like to waste your time here, dontcha? I think you have a strong masochistic streak. You keep coming back for the sheer humiliation.

Plus you have delusions of grandeur when it comes to economics. You know deep down you'll never be able to converse on the same level as Tiny, CaptainMidnight or me. It bothers the fuck out of you. You look at us and you have penis envy. You need to get over it. Just do you. Stick to what you know best, dick sucking and homo insults. Don't try to be someone you're not. Stop trying to prove you can strut around on the same level as we can. You can't. You only make yourself look stupid in trying.

It's plain and obvious you don't know whether supply/demand curves slope up or down, let alone why. But that's ok. Just accept your limitations. Be wise enough to know what you don't know. Admit there are vast areas of knowledge you are and will forever be ignorant of. I really don't take pleasure in exposing you as a fraud all the time. Well, maybe I do occasionally, but it's a pleasure I would gladly do without.

Plus you have delusions of grandeur .... Originally Posted by lustylad

The rest is trimmings.

.

Plus you have delusions of grandeur when it comes to economics. You know deep down you'll never be able to converse on the same level as Tiny, CaptainMidnight or me. Originally Posted by lustylad

Well one out of three isn't bad for you.

Let me make clear for you and any other person rationally challenged.

I'm not saying that I'm an economist, economic expert or financial genius.

I'm saying that you are not.

I'm an expert at shifting out frauds....and maybe fraud is not the right word. A partisan hack that does not understand Realpolitik.

I look at results. I think your side of the aisle worse than the liberal economic slant because you delusional fucks fancy yourselves conseratives...yet your cut taxes mantra has been one of the reasons for this huge explosion of deficits and debt.

Now get off this crap about me losing an argument....I've just let this thread get way to long and it is a huge pain in the ass to go back and document the nonsense, you ,Tiny and Eacko have said about this subject.

Jesus...there actually have been a few replies spot on.

In a capitalistic society, looking forward on where to invest is prudent. So I'm a little surprised you would be looking forward yet keeping the old technology in your field of vision. I'm not saying it's entirely hypocritical, but it sure seems odd to vote for the future while making bank on believing the past is still the viable future. Pardon my confusion.

P.S. Be honest here; that article is pretty typical of the greenie-weinie deal ilk, though it has some reasonable info in it - like defining ESS. Amirite? Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

I do not remember what you posted and I'm not in the mood to look it....I doubt if it is as ridiculous as Wacko, Tiny and their guru lustylad.


May I ask just what it is you think hypocritical? Because I've looked into green energy, EV's and the like and concluded it is not on par with carbon? That the bridge is much longer than advertised? That Amercians will not stand for high high gas prices?...and then me investing accordingly.

How is that hypocrisy?

Tell ya what open both your hands and let folks that drive Trucks and SUV's shit in one and let the greenies fill your other hand with hope and tell me which one fills up fastest.

Lastly the reason I posted the article was the definition of ESS. I wanted an energy independent house that could recharge an EV truck at night.

You can hardly find a soul that can get you straight answers on cost, efficiency, how many kilowatts on average you can use/harness.


Frustrating to say the least. This was in Nov/Dec....in mid December I decided to buy 50k shares of a certain energy stock.

I had decided this EV crap was not economical. My ex has a Tesla that I love but it at best broke even in total costs associated with a conventional car and her EV.