Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, May 31, 2014

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, The Telegraph: Here is a story to cheer us all up. Wuxi Suntech Power expects the cost of electricity from solar modules match to coal-powered stations in China as soon as 2016. If so, we are entering a dramatically different world. The company

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

rstybeach11

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

An example of the solar technology that is fueling the advancements in China:

Transparent low cost CdTe PV solar panels from Advanced Solar Power (Hangzhou) at Intersolar 2013 - San Francisco.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

China is running away with this technology. The West's dependence on profiting from fossil fuel has dimmed our perceived need for technological advancement. China has had its back up against the wall for the past few decades. They needed to find an alternative. They invested appropriately and it's now going to pay off. Couldn't come at a better time for that country, as young children in urban areas suffer from lung cancer attributed to the smog. Not going to be a cure-all, but they are far ahead of the curve. Funny, that's what the U.S. used to pride itself on. We were in the driver seat.

Now we're the backseat driver.

#1 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-05-31 05:56 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

"China is running away with this technology."

Yeah, they are because we aren't allowed to subsidize business while their government does it all the time. When we had the Solyndra debacle I kept trying to tell those who will never listen that China undermined Solyndra with cheap solar panels that could not be produced at that price without government subsidies but it was way more fun bashing Obama for trying to boost the solar cell industry in America. Partisan fun comes back to bite America in the ass.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2014-05-31 06:51 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

yea, we had our chance. Head in the sand, just worry about next year. That's the way we like it.

#3 | Posted by mad_as_hell at 2014-05-31 09:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's great. Now, what do we do at night?

#4 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-05-31 09:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Guess no one here has any idea who many coal fired plants China has and is building and BIP makes money transporting coal over their railway from the Australian mines to the shipping port. Great conservative long term investment [its a Limited Partnership] in this Canadian based company.

#5 | Posted by MSgt at 2014-05-31 09:13 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

That's great. Now, what do we do at night?

#4 | Posted by Sniper

Break out your whale oil lamp.

#6 | Posted by patron at 2014-05-31 09:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Not if we can help it"

-David Koch

#7 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-05-31 09:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

yea, we had our chance. Head in the sand, just worry about next year. That's the way we like it.

#3 | Posted by mad_as_hell

You're mostly describing one party. Unfortunately they have the ability to block the other party from doing anything productive.

#8 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-05-31 09:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's great. Now, what do we do at night?

#4 | POSTED BY SNIPER

There are these things that were invented years ago..they are called "batteries". They're neat...they store electricity for when you need it.

#9 | Posted by Lohocla at 2014-05-31 10:05 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 6 | Newsworthy 1

There are these things that were invented years ago..they are called "batteries". They're neat...they store electricity for when you need it.

Those toxic lead filled devices?
Or the alkaline with few cycles?
Or the very expensive per amp hour NiCads?
Or the nickel metal-hydride with the short shelf discharge life?
Or the hard to maintain molten salt types?
Or any of the other expensive ones with their own set of environmental problems in manufacturing and disposing?

Which type of batter did you have in mind for such a wide spread application?

#10 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-31 10:19 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Does the video show that the technology is progressively moving along as expected?

#11 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-05-31 10:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

I wonder how long it's going to be till part of the Yangtze catches fire?

#12 | Posted by Tor at 2014-05-31 10:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's one thing that China has a lot of - arid, sunny desert. I expect China has also invested highly in the battery technology that will truly solidify the practicality of solar (and wind). It's only a matter of time. China's done well so far.

#13 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-05-31 10:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

#10 | Posted by goatman

Or we could store the energy as hydrogen.

www.futurity.org

#14 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2014-05-31 10:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

There are these things that were invented years ago..they are called "batteries". They're neat...they store electricity for when you need it.

I don't believe that batteries are the answer for large scale power distribution. However, it is probably ok on a residential basis. A combination of solar and gas for large scale power generation is probably the best solution.

#15 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2014-05-31 10:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

#14 | POSTED BY WHATSLEFT

The Hydrogen House Project seems to be similar:

hydrogenhouseproject.org

#16 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-05-31 10:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Or we could store the energy as hydrogen.

Or maybe even the relatively new mega-farad technology.

Those in electronics know that capacitors are usually measured in pico (billionths), micros, or really big ones in milli farads, a coke can sized one maybe about 4,000 mfarads or 4 farads.

However, I saw a demonstration about a year ago at AKA industries Charlottetown, PEI of a half a megafarad capacitor about the size of a car battery. I didn't believe it when I heard of it, but it was true.

This paper reports the successful creation of a new ultracapacitor structure that offers a capacitance density on the order of 100 to 200 Farads per cubic centimeter; versus the current state of the art capacitance density of 1 F/cm3.
ieeexplore.ieee.org

I'm not familiar with anything else about the technology, (environmental issues, cost, etc.) but that makes energy storage in a capacitor a very real possibility. Of course capacitance storage has many advantages, one of which is near instant charging (given the right charger) making it a nominee for energy storage in automobiles.

#17 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-31 11:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

#17 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

Awesome! Thanks for posting that. Never heard of it before.

Learning a lot from this thread.

#18 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-05-31 11:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

GOAT -

Found this on the goodles: www.businesswire.com

#19 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-05-31 11:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

Found this on the goodles: www.businesswire.com

#19 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

Thanks! I'm off to read it

#20 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-31 11:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

Still no word what ultra-capacitors cost per farad, but still, the technology is amazing. Like everything else I'm sure the cost of them will come down as manufacturing of them gets on a full roll.

#21 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-31 11:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

#10 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

"shrug" just responding to a stupid question with a stupid answer.

#22 | Posted by Lohocla at 2014-06-01 01:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

The West's dependence on profiting from fossil fuel has dimmed our perceived need for technological advancement

Yeah, the petrodollar is definitely a double-edged sword.

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-06-01 02:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

Provided they match after BOTH are adjusted for zero government support, to include ability to provide power at night, then it would be a very very very good thing.

The 'power at night' is basically a function of battery technology, but is also absolutely part of the 'cost' of using solar (cost of battery installation, cost of upkeep, and cost of periodic replacement, to include disposal....).

#24 | Posted by USAF242 at 2014-06-01 03:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

Our local utility pumps water into a generator storage-lake in off-peak hours...might be an option..except off-peak happens mostly at night...

#25 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2014-06-01 03:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

Break out your whale oil lamp.

#6 | Posted by patron

Damn, I just sold my last one at a yard sale.

#26 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-01 10:01 AM | Reply | Flag:

'cost of battery installation, cost of upkeep, and cost of periodic replacement, to include disposal....)."

That is true but it should be compared to the actual costs of fossil fuels which should include the effects of the pollution created, the costs of protecting oil tankers and coal hauling vessels at sea, the damage to aquifers created by fracking, etc. If you added in all the real costs of fossil fuels solar would look fairly economical I think.

#27 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-01 10:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

ddan, let's not forget about the haz material batteries are made, not to mention what pertoleum is needed to make all the plastic involved.

Do you have any idea what processes are involved in making solar panels. It is quite a chemical process that takes a huge amount of electricity.

You ain't gettin away from fossil fuels.

#28 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-01 11:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Now we're the backseat driver."

What did you expect. Our "leader" told us he leads from behind, didn't he? Or did he say he leads WITH his behind. I forget....

#29 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-01 01:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

How many policies will it take to make the USA a third world nation?

#31 | Posted by nutcase at 2014-06-01 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

not to mention what pertoleum is needed to make all the plastic involved.

www.eia.gov

In the United States, plastics are made from liquid petroleum gases (LPG), natural gas liquids (NGL), and natural gas. LPG are by-products of petroleum refining, and NGL are removed from natural gas before it enters transmission pipelines.

In 20101, about 191 million barrels of LPG and NGL were used in the United States to make plastic products in the plastic materials and resins industry, equal to about 2.7% of total U.S. petroleum consumption. Of those 191 million barrels, 190 million barrels were used as feedstock and 1 million barrels were consumed as fuel

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-06-01 02:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

She actually believes we'll reach prosperity by taxing, borrowing and spending.
#30 | Posted by jestgettinalong

As opposed to Republicans who think we'll reach prosperity by cutting taxes, borrowing and spending?

At least she understands enough to keep a clean balance sheet.

#33 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-06-01 02:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

As opposed to Republicans who think we'll reach prosperity by cutting taxes, borrowing and spending?

#33 | Posted by snoofy a

Well to be fair, the rich will prosper that way, and that's how republicans measure prosperity.

#34 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-01 02:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

How many policies will it take to make the USA a third world nation?

#31 | Posted by nutcase

More comming out on coal fired powerplants Monday. Stay tuned.

#35 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-01 02:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

As opposed to Republicans who think we'll reach prosperity by cutting taxes, borrowing and spending?

At least she understands enough to keep a clean balance sheet.

#33 | Posted by snoofy

Wrong............ leave off the borrowing and spending and add reduce regulations then we can talk.

#36 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-01 02:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

Wrong............ leave off the borrowing and spending and add reduce regulations then we can talk.

#36 | Posted by Sniper

Even a global economic crash caused by "reduced regulations" won't make you stop cheering for them eh?

#37 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-01 03:00 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

It's always about economics. When someone can master the efficiency of solar cells and battery power, we can all get excited. If DANNI want's to spend more of the public's money to subsidize this research, I'm in - just get rid of some other programs - let's start with school lunches. Certainly saving the planet is as important as something that has NOTHING to do with education.

#38 | Posted by e_pluribus_unum at 2014-06-01 03:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

What did you expect. Our "leader" told us he leads from behind, didn't he? Or did he say he leads WITH his behind. I forget....
#29 | POSTED BY JESTGETTINALONG

If you think our lack of perceived need to advance these technologies at home is solely based upon B. Hussein Obama and his policies, I pity you and insistence upon partisan hackery.

#39 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-01 03:28 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

just get rid of some other programs - let's start with school lunches

Why are you against feeding kids in public schools?

#40 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-01 03:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why are you against feeding kids in public schools?

#40 | Posted by rstybeach11

Because repubs don't care about issues that don't affect them directly. If THEY don't have a poor kid in public school, then those kids shouldn't be supported.

#41 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-01 03:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

#28 | Posted by Sniper

Did you completely ignore discussion of other methods of storing energy that were mentioned on this thread so that you could continue to complain?

#42 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2014-06-01 03:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why are you against feeding kids in public schools?

#40 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-01 03:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

What does that have to do with education? What do you have against parents getting their asses up in the morning and making their kids lunch?

Because repubs don't care about issues that don't affect them directly. If THEY don't have a poor kid in public school, then those kids shouldn't be supported.

#41 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-01 03:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

It "affects" me directly - affects my taxes.

Dems don't really care about the kids - otherwise they would be holding the parents' feet to the fire to step up and take care of them - LOL like that will ever happen.

#43 | Posted by e_pluribus_unum at 2014-06-01 04:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

It "affects" me directly - affects my taxes.

#43 | Posted by e_pluribus_unum

Hungry kids can't learn. Uneducated kids become criminals. How does crime affect you and your taxes?

#44 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-01 04:36 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

What do you have against parents getting their asses up in the morning and making their kids lunch?

Some don't have the money for three meals a day (let alone one). Poverty is a -----, sir.

It "affects" me directly - affects my taxes.
#43 | POSTED BY E_PLURIBUS_UNUM

Exactly right. The public school system has a specific interest to ensure the children it educates are able to learn in the most proficient manner possible (as that is the most cost effective method). Studies show that children who have nutrients in their system (even crappy food) learn better than those who do not. Considering success in the classroom is directly related to the potential for future criminal behavior, we as tax payers have a direct interest in ensuring the children within the public school system are able to learn in the most proficient manner possible. A significant method of doing that is feeding them. Why are you against that?

#45 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-01 04:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

On topic, I believe we have a specific interest in supporting this technology. And not simply suggesting that "We should consider it when it's actually viable."

I don't think that's a successful approach. Getting people excited about this technology is important. It creates demand. It may not be the cure-all answer for our issues (especially considering the amount of electricity it requires to produces this tech. and the environmental hazards it creates), but it's a step in the right direction. I'm not ecstatic about China running away with this tech., but I'm happy SOMEBODY is taking it seriously. We will most likely depend on China for this tech., but at least we will benefit from it and experience the truly beneficial backend of the subsequent generations of the tech.

We are entering a very fun and exciting age in technology in general.

#46 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-01 04:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

Capacitors are used in the power industry as voltage control devices, not a way to store usable power. The worlds largest battery system is in Alaska, 44 Megawatts for 7 minutes. Just enough time to fire the diesel generators before a total blackout. Think about this, the northeast sector controlled by a company called PJM has a typical summer weekday load of 140,000 megawatts during the peak. How is solar and wind supposed cover that. When it is hot the wind is not usually blowing, and during cloud cover or night solar provides nothing.
The way things work, large coal, hydro, combustion turbines (jet engines), and nuclear are the answer.
Solar works only if every household has enough panels and battery capacity to supply their own needs. Tell me who wants to spend $60,000 for a 10-kW solar system. Which includes solar panels, inverters, and a battery system. Only available to people like Ed Begly Jr.

#47 | Posted by Crossphase at 2014-06-01 07:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

The only viable means to store electric energy is in pump storage.

en.wikipedia.org

Castaic Lake in Los Angeles.
Bath County Pumped Storage Station in Virginian(USA's largest)
Bad Creek and Jocassee in South Carolina.
All the talk of capacitors and batteries is bogus and full of false information.

#48 | Posted by Crossphase at 2014-06-01 07:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'll believe it when I see it.

Don't get me wrong, the prospect of capturing energy from the sun in a way that can match or exceed the demand that is currently met by coal is exciting as hell. But, until that notion gets much closer to being a tangible reality I will remain skeptical.

#49 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-01 09:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Don't get me wrong, the prospect of capturing energy from the sun in a way that can match or exceed the demand that is currently met by coal is exciting as hell. But, until that notion gets much closer to being a tangible reality I will remain skeptical.

#49 | Posted by JeffJ

That notion is inevitable. The real question is how long will pollution profiteers successfully stand in the way?

#50 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-06-01 09:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

#51 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-01 09:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

But, until that notion gets much closer to being a tangible reality I will remain skeptical.
#49 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

See, that's what I'm talking about. The notion IS much closer to being a tangible reality. So much so that within 2 years (3 tops), it will match that of coal in China. IMO, it is conservative attitudes like the one you display here that has held back U.S. interests in advancing this technology. See #46 for more context.

#52 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-01 09:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

When this stuff becomes truly competitive it will be done. Even if the oil giants (stupidly) refuse, others will not.

Once it is competitive it BECOMES a money pump for those that sell it.

As said above, more than anything, this is a battery issue.

I do expect to see solar beating oil and coal in my lifetime, but I also know that jumping the gun is worse than useless.

#53 | Posted by USAF242 at 2014-06-01 10:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Define "jumping the gun."

#54 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-01 10:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

See, that's what I'm talking about. The notion IS much closer to being a tangible reality. So much so that within 2 years (3 tops), it will match that of coal in China. IMO, it is conservative attitudes like the one you display here that has held back U.S. interests in advancing this technology. See #46 for more context.

#52 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11

When I see boondoggles and outright scams like ethanol and wind peddled as the future of our energy production, I am extremely skeptical of other "break-throughs" (solar panels have been around for decades) against what is proven to work.

Given the amount of energy that is emitted from the sun, I think the ability to capture some of it has a tremendous up-side in terms of potential. Wake me up when solar technology approaches real viability on anything other than an extremely limited, niche scale.

#55 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-02 12:40 AM | Reply | Flag:

I've seen a number of comments up-thread insinuating that fossil-fuel producers will never allow this to happen.

What is ironic about that sentiment is that the biggest impediment to going "off-grid" is our own government.

If I could slap a few panels on my roof for a modest initial outlay, and in an aesthetic manner and not have to worry about dealing with a utility to heat and power my home....sign me up!

If it's truly viable, the market (if it is allowed to exist) will create a demand for it. The steam engine was killed by diesel. Coal providers had tons of political clout when it happened, but the market prevailed.

I don't know if that could happen today.

#56 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-02 12:46 AM | Reply | Flag:

Capacitors are used in the power industry as voltage control devices, not a way to store usable power.

That is true now, but these new ultracapacitors are being eyed as places to store power, not its 1/2πfC capacitive reactance properties.

#57 | Posted by goatman at 2014-06-02 12:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Wake me up when solar technology approaches real viability on anything other than an extremely limited, niche scale."

Jeff....time to wake up!

"In the first quarter of 2014, renewable energy sources met a record 27 percent of the country's electricity demand, thanks to additional installations and favorable weather."

thinkprogress.org

#58 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-02 06:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

How much of that is hydro-electric, Danni?

#59 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-02 06:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

How much of that is the un-mitigated disaster known as ethanol?

#60 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-02 06:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

"How much of that is the un-mitigated disaster known as ethanol?"

The answer is right there in the link I supplied Jeff and fyi hydro supplies less than wind, less than boifuels, less than solar.

So Germany gets 27% of their electricity using non-fossil fuels, America, greatly influenced by rich oil billionaires, gets 13%. Gee, wonder why the German economy is doing so well? Perhaps because they operate economically as a nation should instead of the "free market" nonsense we have over here. All lobbyists should be run out of Washington, they make a mockery of democracy.

#61 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-02 08:01 AM | Reply | Flag:

Germany is now importing much of their energy from Russia, Danni.

Why? Because these green 'technologies', as they currently exist, suck balls.

I will gladly embrace an alternative to fossil fuels once a replacement becomes viable.

#62 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-02 09:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

just get rid of some other programs - let's start with school lunches

Why are you against feeding kids in public schools?

#40 | Posted by rstybeach11

Under lady obummer's guidance on lunches, kids are throwing them away (they don't like them). Why do you like to put good in the local landfill?

#63 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-02 09:22 AM | Reply | Flag:

Did you completely ignore discussion of other methods of storing energy that were mentioned on this thread so that you could continue to complain?

#42 | Posted by Whatsleft

Did you completely ignore the billions little o has given to solar companies that have gone out of business? I guess you think that is great.

Did you miss post # 10? Great storage devices.

#64 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-02 09:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Hungry kids can't learn. Uneducated kids become criminals. How does crime affect you and your taxes?

#44 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

WOW! They become criminals if you don't give them free food!!!!!!!!!!!!

#65 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-02 09:29 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

Capacitors are used in the power industry as voltage control devices, not a way to store usable power. The worlds largest battery system is in Alaska, 44 Megawatts for 7 minutes. Just enough time to fire the diesel generators before a total blackout.

#47 | Posted by Crossphase

Did you read this wha? That seems to work good.

I have helped install thoes devices. I know how well they work. Damn things run on diesel fuel or natural gas. One place I was at, they had one diesel generator spinning all the time because they didn't have enough room for the batteries to keep the place running long enough to cold start the engines. That seemed to work too.

#66 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-02 09:35 AM | Reply | Flag:

It just came to me.............. little o is going to raise the cost of a coal fired power plant just to make solar and wind look good. That is so simple I completely overlooked it.

#67 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-02 12:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

"In the first quarter of 2014, renewable energy sources met a record 27 percent of the country's electricity demand, thanks to additional installations and favorable weather."

thinkprogress.org

#58 | Posted by danni

Did you read the article or were you impressed with the ppicture? What country is that?

#68 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-02 12:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

congrats china! We educate your engineers and scientists in our universities, you steal our technology, and now will build massive amounts solar panels using American dollars that you got selling us your cheap, toxic, crappy made products that we have no choice but to buy because we can't afford anything else because stagnant wages due unending legal and illegal immigration. Thank BJ CLinton for allowing China into the WTO and supporting NAFTA.

#69 | Posted by danv at 2014-06-02 01:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Did you read the article or were you impressed with the ppicture? What country is that?"

Yes, I read the article. I could have posted this paragraph but it seemed to sensational to quote numbers not applicable to the entire 24 hour cycle.

"On Sunday, Germany's impressive streak of renewable energy milestones continued, with renewable energy generation surging to a record portion -- nearly 75 percent -- of the country's overall electricity demand by midday. With wind and solar in particular filling such a huge portion of the country's power demand, electricity prices actually dipped into the negative for much of the afternoon, according to Renewables International."

So I posted this instead:

"Germany's 27 percent is double the approximately 13 percent of U.S. electricity supply powered by renewables as of November 2013."

#70 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-02 01:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Thank BJ CLinton for allowing China into the WTO and supporting NAFTA."

He deserves his share of the blame but we have a Congress today that could do something about it but won't.

#71 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-02 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

"On Sunday, Germany's impressive streak of renewable energy milestones continued, with renewable energy generation surging to a record portion -- nearly 75 percent -- of the country's overall electricity demand by midday - danni

That statement is highly misleading. On one particular day, when Germany had highly favorable weather and low electrical consumption (it was Sunday) they generated 75% of their countries electrical needs FOR THAT DAY. I assume many businesses and manufacturers were not fully operational.

Solar is nice as secondary electrical source, but it is not the answer.

P.S. Germany is the worlds 4rd largest consumer of coal

www.treehugger.com

#72 | Posted by danv at 2014-06-02 02:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

He deserves his share of the blame but we have a Congress today that could do something about it but won't.
#71 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-02 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag

Yeah, it is too bad the democrats have never had a couple of years of complete control of congress and the white house. :)

#73 | Posted by danv at 2014-06-02 02:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why do you like to put good in the local landfill?
#63 | POSTED BY SNIPER

Try again, SNIPPY. The point wasn't a criticism of Mooochelle's travesty of a lunch overhaul. The point is about whether to provide children in public schools lunch at all.

Why do you enjoy hungry children?

#74 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-02 02:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

It just came to me.............. little o is going to raise the cost of a coal fired power plant just to make solar and wind look good.

Took you a little while, eh? Figures.

#75 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-02 02:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Solar is nice as secondary electrical source, but it is not the answer.

Who is claiming that it is "the answer"?

Nice straw man.

#76 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-02 02:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

"#10 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

"shrug" just responding to a stupid question with a stupid answer.
#22 | Posted by Lohocla"

Hey, hey, hey - that's my turf. Find your own schtick.

Goatman

#77 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2014-06-02 04:55 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

2017? Highly unlikely. Possibly/maybe 2077.

#78 | Posted by MSgt at 2014-06-02 05:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Here in Arizona we have the 2nd largest solar farm in the USA. Unlike older farms that generate electricity only when the sun shines, this one has tanks that a filled with millions of pounds of salt that heat -up during the day. At night the heat from the salt creates steam to generate electricity 24/7

#79 | Posted by SammyAZ_RI at 2014-06-02 07:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

"That's just not viable, Sammy."

#80 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-02 07:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

#78 | POSTED BY MSGT

What makes you so skeptical about the claim made by the Chinese?

#81 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-02 07:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who is claiming that it is "the answer"?

Nice straw man.

#76 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-02 02:51 PM | Reply | Flag

so-called environmentalist do when they reject nuclear fission and fusion, the only true answers to our long term electrical needs

#82 | Posted by danv at 2014-06-02 08:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

the only true answers to our long term electrical needs
#82 | POSTED BY DANV

With China's latest actions, they seem to disagree with you. But what do they know, right?

#83 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-02 08:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort