What a surprise another faggot comment from the head faggot, gay rey. If you cut his head open a lot of dicks would fall out. Originally Posted by i'va biggenThe truth about YOU hurts, huh EKIM ! Keep posting YOUR selfie EKIM. It ought to help YOU with that landslide winning 2017 DOTY poll that YOU so want to win and are campaigning hard for !
The truth about YOU hurts, huh EKIM ! Keep posting YOUR selfie EKIM. It ought to help YOU with that landslide winning 2017 DOTY poll that YOU so want to win and are campaigning hard for ! Originally Posted by Rey LenguaAnother stupid fag post from the head fag, gay rey. Do you get a notification when I post so you can run to the basement of your glory hole to stalk me?
Germany Opens Another New Coal PlantNothing other than night time unless you have a storage setup. The output drops as you go north or south from the equator. No one claimed it was going to replace power plants.. It's free after the initial equipment cost and renewable. The system converts DC to AC at a 80% rate. Home owners who have solar setups can feed back through their meter or some locals they will pay per kilo-watt hour you put back. In Austin. after rebates and credit that it took 4 to 8 years depending on number of panels, density of cells, and angles of the arrays to pay for equipment.
NOVEMBER 20, 2015
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.word...ew-coal-plant/
From the GWPF:
On Thursday in the Hamburg suburb of Moorburg, Hamburg’s mayor Olaf Scholz, a leading figure in Germany’s Social Democratic Party (SPD), stood alongside Magnus Hall, president of Swedish energy utility Vattenfall, and pushed a big button.
The button-pushing symbolized Vattenfall’s ceremonial opening of a 1,600 Megawatt (MW) coal-fired power plant that had been under construction for eight years – despite heated opposition from Germany’s greens, who want the country to exit from coal altogether....etc
What's wrong with solar...hahahahahahahahahaha Originally Posted by DSK
Great Barrier Reef Devastated by Bleaching
THE ABC has been panned by mining chiefs and Federal Environment Minister Greg Hunt for using a misleading photograph to highlight coverage of coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef.
The national broadcaster’s Triple J Hack website carried a report on damage to Queensland’s natural wonder on *Wednesday, but featured a dramatic composite image of dead coral that was taken at Flowerpot Rock in American Samoa.
It was the same picture that The Courier-Mail last weekend revealed environmental group Greenpeace had used in a tweet linking damage to the Great Barrier Reef with the coal industry.
Queensland Resources Council has made a formal complaint to the taxpayer-funded broadcaster over the latest instance.
“When The Courier-Mail revealed this Great Barrier Reef ruse last Saturday, Greenpeace themselves even admitted the photo in question was a fake,” QRC chief executive Michael Roche said.
“We would hope that this is just an ABC editorial faux pas and not a sign of their *willingness to deploy uncritical repetition of discredited propaganda.”
Mr Hunt said: “It’s disappointing to see that Triple J has also been tricked by Greenpeace’s deceptive campaign.”
eeehhbhhhrrrr, you was hoodwinked...More fraud from the " climate change " crowd ? Imagine THAT !
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/q...eda25aacfba166 Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB
Nothing other than night time unless you have a storage setup. The output drops as you go north or south from the equator. No one claimed it was going to replace power plants.. It's free after the initial equipment cost and renewable. The system converts DC to AC at a 80% rate. Home owners who have solar setups can feed back through their meter or some locals they will pay per kilo-watt hour you put back. In Austin. after rebates and credit that it took 4 to 8 years depending on number of panels, density of cells, and angles of the arrays to pay for equipment. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman
Solar energy is the latest example of every time the U.S. government picks winners and losers in the marketplace, the big loser is the American taxpayer.
By 2017 the federal crutch for the solar industry (tax credits) expires and according to many different sources the solar energy industry will collapse like a house of cards.
“Solar power’s value as a grid resource is limited because we simply can’t count on it to meet peak demand in the evenings,” Travis Fischer, economist at the Institute for Energy Research, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “In fact, solar power could cause major problems if implemented on a wide scale due to its daytime-only production profile.”
The Solar power industry has shown strong growth since Obama became president but but because the solar panels and their installation is so expensive, that growth has been been heavily supported by taxpayer supported government incentives.
The 30 percent investment tax credit for solar power will expire at the end of 2016, threatening the long term future of the industry. The solar industry has been expanding in the U.S. with installations up 30 percent on the year, according to The Wall Street Journal. But critics warn that much of this success is due to government efforts to pick winners and losers in energy and cast solar power as an updated and modern technology.
But here’s the rub, solar energy is not that new and modern:
“Advocates like to leave the impression that solar power is an exciting, new technology with a limitless future. In reality, solar power is not new–photovoltaic solar panels date back to 1883,” said Fischer.
Experts warn that ending the subsidy will devastate solar power and could cost the industry thousands of jobs. Bloomberg estimates a two-thirds drop in solar instillations in 2017 if the credit expires, reports The Wall Street Journal. According to Energy Information Administration data, rooftop instillations could plummet 94 percent while utility scale projects could drop by 100 percent.
And while the progressives like Obama keep talking about the “rich” needing to do their fair share, because of the expense of setting up solar panels those solar energy tax credits are going to wealthier families with larger houses. Gee that’s not very liberal of them.
And as it represents such a tiny amount of U.S. electricity, (0.004 of the total output) there is doubt to whether it will ever be an important part of the future U.S. energy source.
“Despite being heavily subsidized by handouts like the investment tax credit, solar power still makes up only a small fraction of the electricity we need to keep the lights on,” said Fischer.
Nothing other than night time unless you have a storage setup. The output drops as you go north or south from the equator. No one claimed it was going to replace power plants.. It's free after the initial equipment cost and renewable. The system converts DC to AC at a 80% rate. Home owners who have solar setups can feed back through their meter or some locals they will pay per kilo-watt hour you put back. In Austin. after rebates and credit that it took 4 to 8 years depending on number of panels, density of cells, and angles of the arrays to pay for equipment. Originally Posted by MunchmastermanI take issue with two of your points:
munkin you're a GASBAG...A renewable energy source.30, 250 watt solar panels at $200 a pop is $6000. Add a $1800 inverter.
http://lidblog.com/cheap-solar-energy-an-obama-fraud/#
Cheap Solar Energy: An Obama Fraud
by Jeff Dunetz | Nov 19, 2015 | Economy Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB
Total Costs $19,500I know what it says but it's gas-lighting SALES BULLSHIT, 0zombies... http://energyinformative.org/solar-panels-cost/
System $9,000
Solar Panels $6,500
Balance of System $2,500
Installation $7,500
Labor $3,000
Permits, Inspection Fees $4,500
Operational Costs $3,000
I take issue with two of your points:Home owner's insurance covers damage. Maintenance would be keeping the units clean. There are no moving parts. The inverter box may be sealed. Useful service life is between 10 and 20 years. I don't know what factors are determined to increase life, In Texas you recover your investment in @ 5 years
1. The amount they get paid back from the utility causes a loss for the utility that can buy wholesale electricity much cheaper, but they are forced to buy it back from the consumer, hence creating a subsidy. However, it is a pretty good idea in general, much cheaper than forcing everyone to buy batteries from Tesla to store their own power. I agree with the law but object to it being characterized as something in favor of solar. It is a law needed to prop up solar.
The utilities not making as much money is of no concern to me. The co-ops and LCRA have been raking in the cash as long as they've been here. You don't get money until you back your meter to a value less than a set point which might be monthly or quarterly etc, It doesn't prop up solar. Solar stands on it's own. If they removed buy backs you still get to zero your meter if you produce that much. If generating your own power isn't something in favor of solar then what is?
2. People always ignore the maintenance cost and lifetime of solar equipment. Who pays, for instance, and what price do they pay, ten years from now when the inevitable hailstorm in Texas takes out the panels that might be near the end of their useful life anyway? These are legitimate costs that detract from the unsubsidized viability of solar. Originally Posted by DSK
About double what you quoted, munkin... borrow the money and pay some interest on it over the next 10 years... OK, says the poor family in America... said never!There was a $9252 rebate you didn't mention.
I know what it says but it's gas-lighting SALES BULLSHIT, 0zombies... http://energyinformative.org/solar-panels-cost/
You watch!
Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB