Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo

Well the palisades fire was arson. How many homes were destroyed and how many permits have been issued to date to the homeowners there to rebuild?

Originally Posted by Tailhookah

Mostly true. But most of those “great” wind turbines froze up. In Texas! Can you believe it?

Originally Posted by CBreezy

That's what I don't understand about the renewables are evil crowd. It's going to take a long time to achieve anything resembling 100% renewable power so their solution is, eff it why bother?! Meanwhile, fossil fuel sources will continue to become more scarce which will drive up electric prices. It's not not AI data centers aren't going to gobble up an exponential amount of resources or anything, right?

Also, every day, economies of scale mean installing wind or solar is becoming even cheaper than the day prior. Economics hounds should understand this. The US has the advantage of being a developed industrial and technological 1st world country. Both left and right would be all in on developing, adopting and exporting green technologies. But no, every time we have the opportunity, people like HK start shouting "IT'S A FAILURE! DRILL BABY DRILL."

Originally Posted by CBreezy

Wind turbines operate daily in the Arctic. Does it get cold there? Or just Texas

Originally Posted by OOfff

an interesting statement from the person refusing to back up their assertion that wind power generators never recover their manufacturing energy cost.

Originally Posted by CBreezy

Wind turbines operate daily in the Arctic. Does it get cold there? Or just Texas

Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo

We're not renewables evil. We are are stating that it's not viable for the majority supplier of energy to the grid. It should be but a small percentage with nat gas, coal and nuke handling the lions share of supply.

Originally Posted by SideStickMonkey

Well China is leaning heavy into renewables. No one is claiming renewables are cheap, just renewable.

Nuclear is a great option (as I've been advocating for) but also very expensive to build. While microreactors are coming, they aren't here yet and really are only a good idea in remote areas. Besides that the traditional plant makes sense but those take name and money while not even discussing nimbyism. You're obviously a Navy guy so you've been around nuclear power. There's still drawbacks but the goods outweigh the negatives.

We had solar panels on my house in Florida in the 1980s. California is putting solar farms over aqueducts which provide a double win: no extra land required and the microclimate from the cool water helps keep the cells more efficient.

And no matter how you burn coal, it's not clean, has nasty by products. The entire world has moved on from coal. China has even realized they need to move on from coal.

Originally Posted by CBreezy

Wind turbines operate daily in the Arctic. Does it get cold there? Or just Texas

Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo

I recently went to visit Plymouth Rock. I have ancestors that came over on the Mayflower. It was a fun trip. I also noticed that the plymouth rock at high tide wasn't under water. Heck the water barely touches the base of it. So if there is a warming and melting of ice caps, shouldn't the sea also be rising? I read about this all the time yet here is this rock, circa like 1620 or so, and it's not underwater at high tide (it was a king tide too). The water barely touched the base of it. Locals said it's been like that for as long as they can remember for generations.

Originally Posted by Tailhookah

Mostly true. But most of those “great” wind turbines froze up. In Texas! Can you believe it?

Originally Posted by Tailhookah

Denmark-56% from wind.