• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Most of The World Could Be 100% Powered With Renewables by 2050

[h=2]Australia is worst casualty of Paris: Big hit to GDP, wages, dollar, trade balance for nothing[/h]
[h=3]Australia Wins The Global Patsy Award 2019[/h]The Brookings Institute released a report that claims everyone is better off economically by sticking to Paris, but check out the devastating graphs. Economically, everyone is a loser, but the three biggest losers are Australia, Russia and OPEC.
Australia is doing more, paying more, suffering more and yet will make almost no difference to the global emissions tally in anything other than a purely symbolic impress-your-dinner–guests kind of way.
If Australia left the Paris Agreement, even the left leaning Brookings Institute can’t find much difference in total global man-made emissions. Australia is forcing the renewables transformation faster than anywhere else, it will lose GDP, wages, jobs, investment, and the dollar will fall. All that, and no one could even tell the difference between Paris with Australia, and Paris without.
Clearly Australian negotiators at the UN are incompetent on a whole new scale. If they had Australian’s interests at heart, even a little bit, they would have done this study themselves, and gone to Paris with some realistic comparative data to argue that we are cutting too fast and paying too much. Finalists for most useless Global Negotiator of the Decade are Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Julie Bishop. Wayne Swan, treasurer of the year, deserves a mention.
Australians basically walked in to Paris and said “hit me”. . . .
 
OK, here it is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Indiana#Coal-Fired

So what, I grabbed the wrong link. I had the right one in the first place when I looked it up saying it was less that 25%. Not my fault you were too lazy to verify what you posted to begin with.

The link is for all of Indiana not just Northern Indiana Public Service Company and from Wikipedia. While also the data is from 2009 and doesn't state how much of the capacity that is actually used. While I have provide a direct link to Northern Indiana Public Service Company there it states that they will reduce carbon emission with more than 90 percent.

https://www.nipsco.com/your-energy
 
Last edited:
[h=2]Australia is worst casualty of Paris: Big hit to GDP, wages, dollar, trade balance for nothing[/h]
[h=3]Australia Wins The Global Patsy Award 2019[/h]The Brookings Institute released a report that claims everyone is better off economically by sticking to Paris, but check out the devastating graphs. Economically, everyone is a loser, but the three biggest losers are Australia, Russia and OPEC.
Australia is doing more, paying more, suffering more and yet will make almost no difference to the global emissions tally in anything other than a purely symbolic impress-your-dinner–guests kind of way.
If Australia left the Paris Agreement, even the left leaning Brookings Institute can’t find much difference in total global man-made emissions. Australia is forcing the renewables transformation faster than anywhere else, it will lose GDP, wages, jobs, investment, and the dollar will fall. All that, and no one could even tell the difference between Paris with Australia, and Paris without.
Clearly Australian negotiators at the UN are incompetent on a whole new scale. If they had Australian’s interests at heart, even a little bit, they would have done this study themselves, and gone to Paris with some realistic comparative data to argue that we are cutting too fast and paying too much. Finalists for most useless Global Negotiator of the Decade are Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Julie Bishop. Wayne Swan, treasurer of the year, deserves a mention.
Australians basically walked in to Paris and said “hit me”. . . .

Here is a link about how renewables are making electricity cheaper in Australia.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/the...limate-policy-csrio-says-20181221-p50nnq.html

You also have UK that have drastically reduced it's coal consumption and will close its last coal plant in 2025.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/05/uk-coal-fired-power-plants-close-2025

While Denmark got 43 percent of their electricity from wind power in 2017 and also plan to get 80 percent of electricity from renewables in 2020.

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/06/44-wind-denmark-smashed-already-huge-wind-energy-records-2017/

There all three countries ranks higher than US on Forbes best country for business list.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/the...limate-policy-csrio-says-20181221-p50nnq.html
 
The link is for all of Indiana not just Northern Indiana Public Service Company and from Wikipedia. While also the data is from 2009 and doesn't state how much of the capacity that is actually used. While I have provide a direct link to Northern Indiana Public Service Company there it states that they will reduce carbon emission with more than 90 percent.

https://www.nipsco.com/your-energy

The original claim was the state. Stop moving the goal line. You said "Even Republican coal states like Indiana are replacing coal with renewable energy." One energu company is only a part of their power. As long as they can buy power from other utilities, it's nothing but a PR scam.

You lefties fall for PR scams so easily.

And I must have grabbed the wrong state at first. Indiana has more than double the generation I first stated which puts the new renewable you champion at under 12%.
 
The link is for all of Indiana not just Northern Indiana Public Service Company and from Wikipedia. While also the data is from 2009 and doesn't state how much of the capacity that is actually used. While I have provide a direct link to Northern Indiana Public Service Company there it states that they will reduce carbon emission with more than 90 percent.

https://www.nipsco.com/your-energy

It's easy for some places to reduce carbon emissions, and hard for others. You have to look at the whole picture and stop cherry picking.
 
Here is a link about how renewables are making electricity cheaper in Australia.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/the...limate-policy-csrio-says-20181221-p50nnq.html

You also have UK that have drastically reduced it's coal consumption and will close its last coal plant in 2025.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/05/uk-coal-fired-power-plants-close-2025

While Denmark got 43 percent of their electricity from wind power in 2017 and also plan to get 80 percent of electricity from renewables in 2020.

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/06/44-wind-denmark-smashed-already-huge-wind-energy-records-2017/

There all three countries ranks higher than US on Forbes best country for business list.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/the...limate-policy-csrio-says-20181221-p50nnq.html

The link in #2151 is about economic damage, not electricity cost.
 
[FONT=&quot]wind power[/FONT]
[h=1]Wind turbines are neither clean nor green and they provide zero global energy[/h][FONT=&quot]From The Spectator We urgently need to stop the ecological posturing and invest in gas and nuclear Matt Ridley The Global Wind Energy Council recently released its latest report, excitedly boasting that ‘the proliferation of wind energy into the global power market continues at a furious pace, after it was revealed that more than 54…
[/FONT]
 
[FONT="][URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/10/wind-turbines-are-neither-clean-nor-green-and-they-provide-zero-global-energy/"]
pexels-photo-532192-220x126.jpeg
[/URL]wind power[/FONT]

[h=1]Wind turbines are neither clean nor green and they provide zero global energy[/h][FONT="][FONT=inherit]From The Spectator We urgently need to stop the ecological posturing and invest in gas and nuclear Matt Ridley The Global Wind Energy Council recently released its latest report, excitedly boasting that ‘the proliferation of wind energy into the global power market continues at a furious pace, after it was revealed that more than 54…[/FONT]
[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Such numbers are not hard to find, but they don’t figure prominently in reports on energy derived from the [B]unreliables [/B]lobby (solar and wind). [/QUOTE]

[COLOR="#000080"]Like the definition.
 
[FONT="][URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/10/wind-turbines-are-neither-clean-nor-green-and-they-provide-zero-global-energy/"]
pexels-photo-532192-220x126.jpeg
[/URL]wind power[/FONT]

[h=1]Wind turbines are neither clean nor green and they provide zero global energy[/h][FONT="]From The Spectator We urgently need to stop the ecological posturing and invest in gas and nuclear Matt Ridley The Global Wind Energy Council recently released its latest report, excitedly boasting that ‘the proliferation of wind energy into the global power market continues at a furious pace, after it was revealed that more than 54…
[/FONT]

What gets me is how do people think they can take energy out of the climate, and not change it?
 
What gets me is how do people think they can take energy out of the climate, and not change it?

The proportion of human energy use to what hapens in nature is microscopic. The level at which such things can be measured is very small and still I don't think you would find any practicle changes.
 
The proportion of human energy use to what hapens in nature is microscopic. The level at which such things can be measured is very small and still I don't think you would find any practicle changes.

What we take out of the wind with wind power is notable.
 
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]Massive Government Cash Giveaways Needed to Defeat Climate Change[/h][FONT=&quot]Guest essay by Eric Worrall Despite billions already invested in renewables, and wild claims that renewables are now “cheaper than coal”, more government subsidy money is required. Climate change: focusing on how individuals can help is very convenient for corporations January 10, 2019 10.06pm AEDT Morten Fibieger Byskov Postdoctoral Researcher in International Politics, University of…
Continue reading →
[/FONT]
 
[FONT=&quot]Climate Economics[/FONT]
[h=1]Funding the Climate-Industrial Complex[/h][FONT=&quot]Why Big Green energy investors rely on the man-made global warming myth Tom D. Tamarkin Supposedly “green” or “renewable” energy has become a trillion-dollar-plus annual industry that has spawned tens of thousands of new businesses worldwide. The total Climate-Industrial Complex is a $2-trillion-per-year business. Major fossil fuel companies like Shell Energy now have green energy…
[/FONT]
 
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]China says no to wind and solar tech unless it can compete with coal on price[/h][FONT=&quot]China has said it will not approve wind and solar power projects unless they can compete with coal power prices. Beijing pulled the plug on support for large solar projects, which had been receiving a per kWh payment, in late May. That news came immediately after the country’s largest solar industry event and caught everyone by surprise. Officials are…
Continue reading →
[/FONT]
 
[FONT="][URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/11/china-says-no-to-wind-and-solar-tech-unless-it-can-compete-with-coal-on-price/"]
energy-plugged-in-coal.jpg
[/URL][/FONT]

[h=1]China says no to wind and solar tech unless it can compete with coal on price[/h][FONT="][FONT=inherit]China has said it will not approve wind and solar power projects unless they can compete with coal power prices. Beijing pulled the plug on support for large solar projects, which had been receiving a per kWh payment, in late May. That news came immediately after the country’s largest solar industry event and caught everyone by surprise. Officials are…[/FONT]
[FONT=inherit][URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/11/china-says-no-to-wind-and-solar-tech-unless-it-can-compete-with-coal-on-price/"]Continue reading →[/URL][/FONT]
[/FONT]

The propaganda for renewables in most countries seems to be hitting that wall hard.
 
The original claim was the state. Stop moving the goal line. You said "Even Republican coal states like Indiana are replacing coal with renewable energy." One energu company is only a part of their power. As long as they can buy power from other utilities, it's nothing but a PR scam.

You lefties fall for PR scams so easily.

And I must have grabbed the wrong state at first. Indiana has more than double the generation I first stated which puts the new renewable you champion at under 12%.


All my links said that it was Northern Indiana Public Service Company. While yes it could have been better if I written “that even Northern Indiana Public Service Company in Republican Indiana are replacing coal with renewables”. You have also offer no proofs to refute the claim that they will reduce their carbon emission with more than 90 percent or their plan to get only a small percent of energy from other areas.

Also and many coal plants have closed since 2019 while also a lot of other energy companies in republican states are investing in renewables.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshua...n-leaders-love-renewable-energy/#631e530f3da7
 
It's easy for some places to reduce carbon emissions, and hard for others. You have to look at the whole picture and stop cherry picking.

US have a lot of great opportunites for renewable energy. For example that the US have deserts and other very sunny places for solar power. While also have windy areas for example along the coast lines and the Great Lakes areas. US is also a lot less densely populated than for example Denmark so it can be a lot more suitable places for wind power. US also have bot domestic hydropower and hydropower from Canada there the regulatore function can be increased by adding pump storage capacity.

US also have more than double the electricity consumption than many other developed countries so it can be greater opportunity for energy effiency measures.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.ELEC.KH.PC
 
All my links said that it was Northern Indiana Public Service Company. While yes it could have been better if I written “that even Northern Indiana Public Service Company in Republican Indiana are replacing coal with renewables”. You have also offer no proofs to refute the claim that they will reduce their carbon emission with more than 90 percent or their plan to get only a small percent of energy from other areas.

Also and many coal plants have closed since 2019 while also a lot of other energy companies in republican states are investing in renewables.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshua...n-leaders-love-renewable-energy/#631e530f3da7

Well, don't expect me to read all of any link provided. I seek the information they claim. I don't have the time to waste like you do. I have a life.

So F'n what. One utility company from the whole state.

Cherry pick much?
 
US have a lot of great opportunites for renewable energy. For example that the US have deserts and other very sunny places for solar power. While also have windy areas for example along the coast lines and the Great Lakes areas. US is also a lot less densely populated than for example Denmark so it can be a lot more suitable places for wind power. US also have bot domestic hydropower and hydropower from Canada there the regulatore function can be increased by adding pump storage capacity.

US also have more than double the electricity consumption than many other developed countries so it can be greater opportunity for energy effiency measures.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.ELEC.KH.PC

I agree we can do better, but at what cost? Now if you and like minded lefties want to create a foundation, and fund such projects, go right ahead. Just stay out of the tax dollars that are needed for other things, especially as lonk as we are running deficits.

I would like to see Death Valley flooded. It would change the regional climate in positive ways around it. It could be a salt sea with a large pipe bringing in water from the Gulf. Gravity would do the rest.
 
I agree we can do better, but at what cost? Now if you and like minded lefties want to create a foundation, and fund such projects, go right ahead. Just stay out of the tax dollars that are needed for other things, especially as lonk as we are running deficits.

I would like to see Death Valley flooded. It would change the regional climate in positive ways around it. It could be a salt sea with a large pipe bringing in water from the Gulf. Gravity would do the rest.

At times, I've wanted to see northern New Jersey flooded.
 
Back
Top Bottom