18 Replies to “We Don’t Need No…”

  1. Renewible energy just anther rediculous idea coming from a bunch of tree huggers/granola munchers sitting in their tent/cave and coming up with these rediculous ideas while smoking wacky weed from their hookas

  2. Renewable energy is when Liberals get inspired, and run out to get other peoples money..

  3. I’ve often wondered why there is such a huge discrepancy about the price of green energy between pro and anti wind/solar advocates. The pro wind/solar side insist that costs are not only down but are competitive with fossil fuels. The anti side shows them as a grossly overpriced source of energy that is no where near the price of fossil fuel energy.
    Finally, I think I have an answer or, at least, a partial one. The pro side is using levelized costs and the anti side is using a cost-benefit analysis. The cost-benefit analysis comes from the Brooking Institution, a highly regarded liberal think tank. It shows nuclear and advanced natgas (combined cycle, I assume) as the best sources of no/low carbon sources. The Economist explains:
    ” Brookings Institution, a think-tank, uses a cost-benefit analysis to rank various forms of energy. The costs include those of building and running power plants, and those associated with particular technologies, such as balancing the electricity system when wind or solar plants go offline or disposing of spent nuclear-fuel rods. The benefits of renewable energy include the value of the fuel that would have been used if coal- or gas-fired plants had produced the same amount of electricity and the amount of carbon-dioxide emissions that they avoid. The table summarises these costs and benefits. It makes wind and solar power look far more expensive than they appear on the basis of levelised costs.”
    http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21608646-wind-and-solar-power-are-even-more-expensive-commonly-thought-sun-wind-and
    I wonder why mainstream journalists in NA somehow missed Brookings alternative pricing model. It seems important.
    So Europe, an early adopter of wind/solar, investment and subsidies are way down because they are running out of others people’s money *and* discovering that wind/solar are the most expensive way to reduce carbon *and* the political and social costs of expensive, unreliable energy are becoming too high.

  5. The Europeans need to invest less money in energy and more money in evicting muslims. There is more violence going on in Brussels as I write this.

  6. Next time someone says that Wind is the future, ask them why they want a power source that started to go out of fashion in 1780, and has had at least 1000 years of development and still can’t solve the problem of intermittent production.

  7. Well, it appears that the New Dictator Party (NDP) of Alberta and Just-in’s LIEberals new source of revenue is just about to start with their “Carbon Tax” on everything. EnviroMENTALists will be getting their way in Canada … since it doesn’t seem to work in Europe. (NOT to mention that Canada has the biggest “carbon sink” in the world … though the UN has not considered the forests and farm land into “carbon absorption formula” … Canada should be selling “carbon credits” to the States and China, and get billions from that, rather than pay a foreign country.)
    From 2004 to 2015 there was invested about $779.3 BILLION dollars and the temp has not changed. The New Dictator Party (NDP) of Albert are expecting to get over three billion dollars next year in “Carbon Taxes” … why would they give that up to support their voter base … the unions of Alberta. (NOTE: not one union job lost in Alberta since the New Dictator Party (NDP) of Albert was voted in.)

  8. Marxist leaders are about absolute power.
    If they must spout nonsense and construct
    worthless rent seeking projects to corral
    and buy the votes of idiots and simpletons
    they will do it. But never assume they lack
    understanding of what the outcome of their
    strategy will be.

  9. Finance Minister Morneau says review of federal tax breaks is coming.
    http://www.cfra.com/NationalCP/Article.aspx?id=505042
    Noticed this snippet: “Ending the very favourable tax treatment of stock options, which the Liberals have backed away from despite a campaign promise to roll back the break, would have been a good place to start, he said.
    I’m remembering how this PM Selfie smears small business owners as just tax evaders.
    Sunny Daze indeed.

  10. The lure of the trough and cosy little slush funds prove irresistible to the weak political mind.
    “Renewable” indeed.
    Strangely even Hawaii has found the bird blenders too expensive to maintain.
    So in an environment that is custom made for wind and solar, diesel wins.
    Funny how hard basic maths is, if the cost of creating a system is greater than the return you gain from that system, you lose.
    Wind and solar have yet to return the energy they consumed in their setup.
    A hydro electric plant,coal fired steam,Nuclear power these things return usable power in excess of the cost of the components, hence socialist parasites hate them.
    So what is clean? About energy systems that consume expensive materials,mostly gathered through mining, are assembled at great cost then produce no return?
    And then consume even more taxpayer money, when their rusting hulks must be hidden from an angry public.
    Definitely a wynn wynn socialist paradise.
    Of course the Liberals will embrace wind and solar, their well connected friends expect to make out like, politically well connected bandits.
    Until we start hanging abusers of the public purse, nothing will change.
    The Canadian Kleptocracy is so entrenched that they are;”Entitled to their entitlements”.

  11. oh no no no no no.
    the ‘green’ energy apparatus is SOOOOO robust and efficient and productive there’s no need for any new stuff. watch the powers-that-be sell THAT angle.

  12. Renewable? Biofuel? “Proven?” Whale oil! With a massive investment in breeding projects.

  13. I’ve done research in renewable energy for more than 20 years.
    The biggest problem is, as many have already noted, what do to when there’s not enough wind or sunlight. Batteries are usually used to store any excess energy that’s produced, though other methods, such as pumping water into a reservoir and using it to run a hydro turbine generator, have also been considered.
    When all else fails, there’s always auxiliary power, usually in the form of a diesel genset.
    Unfortunately, it’s going to be expensive. Batteries have a limited life and have to be replaced very few years. Gensets require fuel plus they need to be maintained after a certain length of cumulative operating time.
    As it is, renewable energy can work for small-scale systems, such as a small residential area. My research indicated, however, that it might not be practical for a large utility grid, particularly from an economic standpoint.
    I’m left with the impression that the governments that push renewable energy aren’t themselves entirely convinced that it’ll work. If they were, they would be encouraging and supporting research and development into alternate power generation whether it’s renewable systems or something like focused fusion. Unfortunately, I don’t see it.

  16. pumping water into a reservoir and using it to run a hydro turbine generator
    ..is about the only practical use of wind power (besides sailboats)and only if the wind turbine drives a pump directly.
    A hydro dam is still the best form of renewable energy.

  17. The applicability of wind turbines to power generation depends on distribution of wind speeds and a parameter known as the cut-in speed (i. e., the minimum required for the rotor to turn).
    That requires statistical analysis as there’s no point in installing a WTG as a main power source when the most of the wind speeds are below the cut-in value. If the wind speed is less than that for x% of the time, the WTG will, obviously, be idle.
    The time of day can be important as well. There is generally a time lag between peak sunlight and peak wind speed of about a few hours. In an open area, for example, while the greatest insolation will occur around mid-day, the maximum wind could be late in the afternoon. What that means, then, is that there may be certain times of the day during which a WTG will be ineffective.
    In addition, load demand will likely change throughout the day. That will determine how any energy that’s produced will be utilized, whether it goes to meeting that load demand or it’s stored if there’s any excess.
    Unfortunately, I get the impression that many renewable energy system are designed without taking these things into consideration.
    As for hydro dams, there are some legitimate concerns, particularly from an environmental standpoint, about using them. What many hydro power producers do is install their generators directly in the stream or river in question (referred to as run-of-river) to reduce any potential disruption. Doing so also reduces the cost as there’s no need to build a dam.
    Many dams were built in the past for purposes such as flood control. Power generation was often a secondary consideration and in some cases, such as the Hoover Dam, was used as a means to pay for them.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation