Page 6 of 20 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 192

Thread: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

  1. #51
    Sage
    poweRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    34,870

    Re: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

    I'm so blown away with conservatives' nonstop rants about how they hate Hugo Chavez and Muslim's then in the next sentence tell us how we should always be for massive tax-breaks to big oil and not funnel any money towards what could truly give us energy independence from the very people they say they hate.

    What a totally broken and baffling ideology.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    The sad fact is that having a pedophile win is better than having a Democrat in office. I'm all for a solution where a Republican gets in that isn't Moore.

  2. #52
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

    Quote Originally Posted by Billy the Kid View Post
    I'm a simple person. Even the "experts" have differing opinions.

    Alternative Energy - ProCon.org

    Pro

    "Arjun Makhijani, PhD, President of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, stated the following in his Aug. 2007 article "Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free," in Science for Democratic Action:

    “[A] zero-CO2 U.S. economy can be achieved within the next thirty to fifty years without the use of nuclear power...

    The U.S. renewable energy resource base is vast and practically untapped. Available wind energy resources in 12 Midwestern and Rocky Mountain states equal about 2.5 times the entire electricity production of the United States... Solar energy resources on just one percent of the area of the United States are about three times as large as wind energy, if production is focused in the high insolation areas [strong sunlight] in the Southwest and West…

    With the right combination of technologies, it is likely that even the use of coal can be phased out, along with nuclear electricity.

    Complete elimination of CO2 could occur as early as 2040. Elimination of nuclear power could also occur in that time frame.”

    Con

    Tad W. Patzek, PhD, Chairman of the Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering Department at the University of Texas at Austin, and David Pimentel, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at Cornell University stated the following in their Mar. 14, 2005 article “Thermodynamics of Energy Production from Biomass,” published in Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences:

    "We want to be very clear: solar cells, wind turbines, and biomass-for-energy plantations can never replace even a small fraction of the highly reliable, 24-hours-a-day, 365-days-a-year, nuclear, fossil, and hydroelectric power stations. Claims to the contrary are popular, but irresponsible...

    We live in a hydrocarbon-limited world, generate too much CO2, and major hydropower opportunities have been exhausted worldwide..."
    I disagree with each side for different reasons. It's damned difficult to get 24/7, 365 days a year energy from wind and solar. The intermittency problem comes in. So they need to be augmented by power sources that are "clean-er" that will not go down due to the vagaries of weather. So that leaves us with nuclear and natural gas (NG). I would prefer to phase out NG too, but in this time of transition it can help us maintain "normalcy" until fusion is finally worked out. Additionally, wave power is often overlooked. I don't know why. It's an AE that will work 24/7. Hydropower via turbines in rivers is another way to get power 24/7. Again, I don't know why this is always forgotten.

    I have no idea why anyone would want to eliminate Hydro-electric systems. They are a fabulous power source that works 24/7. There's no reason at all to shut them down. I disagree with using crops for energy. That amounts to 1 unit of effort to get 2 units of power, leaving you with only 1 energy unit profit. This is hideously inefficient. It's not worth burning up our food. If energy from algae can be made profitable, then that looks promising, but we need to get going on a test plant to see if it can be made profitable before we put too much into it.
    Last edited by EagleAye; 04-06-12 at 08:47 PM.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  3. #53
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,514

    Re: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    I disagree with each side for different reasons. It's damned difficult to get 24/7, 365 days a year energy from wind and solar. The intermittency problem comes in. So they need to be augmented by power sources that are "clean-er" that will not go down due to the vagaries of weather. So that leaves us with nuclear and natural gas (NG). I would prefer to phase out NG too, but in this time of transition it can help us maintain "normalcy" until fusion is finally worked out. Additionally, wave power is often overlooked. I don't know why. It's an AE that will work 24/7. Hydropower via turbines in rivers is another way to get power 24/7. Again, I don't know why this is always forgotten.

    I have no idea why anyone would want to eliminate Hydro-electric systems. They are a fabulous power source that works 24/7. There's no reason at all to shut them down. I disagree with using crops for energy. That amounts to 1 unit of effort to get 2 units of power, leaving you with only 1 energy unit profit. This is hideously inefficient. It's not worth burning up our food. If energy from algae can be made profitable, then that looks promising, but we need to get going on a test plant to see if it can be made profitable before we put too much into it.


    I don't know why anyone
    Hydroelectric works when there is plenty of hydro to run the electric. Rivers tend to run pretty full in the spring, particularly after a heavy snow year, but not so much in the fall. Like solar and wind, it is a power source that doesn't require fuel, but also like wind and solar, it doesn't work all of the time.

    The other thing about hydro is that systems are already in place on most of the rivers in the US. Unless mother nature gives us a few more rivers, which seems sort of unlikely, we have about exhausted that source of power.

    The great thing about solar in a hot climate is that it works best exactly when the demand for electricity is highest, when the AC units are pumping.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  4. #54
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    The great thing about solar in a hot climate is that it works best exactly when the demand for electricity is highest, when the AC units are pumping.
    Very true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Hydroelectric works when there is plenty of hydro to run the electric. Rivers tend to run pretty full in the spring, particularly after a heavy snow year, but not so much in the fall. Like solar and wind, it is a power source that doesn't require fuel, but also like wind and solar, it doesn't work all of the time.

    The other thing about hydro is that systems are already in place on most of the rivers in the US. Unless mother nature gives us a few more rivers, which seems sort of unlikely, we have about exhausted that source of power.
    When speaking about hydro-electric, we need to be careful about what we mean. A "Dam" works 24/7. Water is constantly flowing through it. This is one kind of Hydro-electric. Another way of getting hydro-electric is to place turbines in rivers. This requires no damming. There are, of course, rivers and streams that periodically do dry up, so they wouldn't be appropriate. Rivers like the Colorado, Mississippi, and the Ohio, maybe even New York's East River would be excellent sources for hydro-electric stations using turbines. They never dry up. These systems would run all day and night. They could use "helical turbines" which I really like because their design doesn't spin fast enough to harm any river wildlife. Environmentalists would have little to complain about.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  5. #55
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    We're, Um, currently getting 45% of our oil from foreign sources. And that's after "drill baby drill" that's brought us the highest domestic oil production of the decade
    Drilling on private lands has brought us the highest domestic oil production. How much would we need from outside if we could tap into all the rest that the government is preventing?

    Would it not be better to get 99% of the oil from our own lands while we let technology advance for wind and solar?

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    Ask an environmentalist to pick between oil/coal and nuclear/solar/wind, and they will pick the latter 100% of the time.
    Yeah, that's why they are protesting that relatively small solar plan in California. All this doesn't even mention hydro electric and the blocking of building new dams while they take down old ones.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  6. #56
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Putting solar panels on the roofs of buildings takes not one acre of farm land. Putting arrays in desert areas where there isn't enough water to grow crops doesn't either. Solar energy is about the only form of energy that doesn't degrade the environment in one way or another. Why would environmentalists fight that?
    Environmentalists Sue Feds To Stop Big California Solar Power Project (Forbes)

  7. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

    Quote Originally Posted by poweRob View Post
    I'm so blown away with conservatives' nonstop rants about how they hate Hugo Chavez and Muslim's then in the next sentence tell us how we should always be for massive tax-breaks to big oil and not funnel any money towards what could truly give us energy independence from the very people they say they hate.

    What a totally broken and baffling ideology.
    Oil companys get the exact same tax breaks I do with my sawmill and small loigging operation, no more no less.

  8. #58
    Professor
    Billy the Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 02:29 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,449

    Re: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

    Quote Originally Posted by poweRob View Post
    Because, as you've already been told in this thread, that conservative "free market" that we are tied into with the WTO and NAFTA and all that garbage... for some reason means we abide by free market while China subsidizes the crap out of their products to illegally dump their subsidized products into our market to destroy competition all while they tariff our goods coming into their country.

    That is why.

    You know, I've been pretty nice thus far. I've been asking questions and researching material. I don't need attitude, nor being told "That is why", since I've been really interested in this discussion. And I do want to know both sides, since it seems no one has the "right" answers. Even the experts, as I posted pros and cons, don't agree.

    So back off.

  9. #59
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    Drilling on private lands has brought us the highest domestic oil production. How much would we need from outside if we could tap into all the rest that the government is preventing?

    Would it not be better to get 99% of the oil from our own lands while we let technology advance for wind and solar?
    It would be better and it would create domestic jobs. But consider this: to date the strategy has been to consume the other guy's oil rather than our own. When oil didn't result in a massive geo-political hassle, then this was a great strategy. But now our need for oil is gargantuan. We have to fight wars on multiple fronts just to insure the oil flows freely. Ask Hitler how well that method worked out.

    The fact is, we need oil for a lot more than just burning it. Plastics comes to mind immediately. I'm typing on plastics and reading on plastics and later will call and receive calls on devices made with plastics. We'll need oil for a lot of very good reasons in the century to come. So let's not waste it by burning up to 85% of it up in cars when we can make cars that don't need oil at all. Then we can rely on strictly domestic oil for the plastics and other uses for many many years to come. And we don't have to support terrorism to do it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    Yeah, that's why they are protesting that relatively small solar plan in California. All this doesn't even mention hydro electric and the blocking of building new dams while they take down old ones.
    Don't confuse me with environmentalists. I'm interested primarily in the energy security of the USA. If we don't have the power to save ourselves, we'll never have the power to save our animals either. So we make sure WE aren't ****ed up and then we'll have the time to be sure our wildlife isn't ****ed up either. Environmentalists will have to wait until we get our energy squared away and then we can work on their concerns too. One thing at a time.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  10. #60
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: Solar company bankrupt despite 'win-win' DOE loan

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    Oil companys get the exact same tax breaks I do with my sawmill and small loigging operation, no more no less.
    That would be in-correct. There are many tax breaks that support the petroleum inductry and only the petroleum industry. On top of that, there are other tax breaks where there is an overlap with your industry.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

Page 6 of 20 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •