US in energy landmark as renewables produce more electricity than coal

[Bergslagstroll]

Yet you are too lazy to snip a quote or two that's relevant. That's a clear indication you don't really know the contents, but are just doing a copy and paste.

Seems rather foolish to me.

The information was in the first paragraph of the links if you had bother to click on the links.

"The fall in oil prices has provided an opportunity and incentive for energy pricing reform and brought the overall estimate for fossil-fuel subsidies down to $325 billion in 2015, from close to $500 billion in 2014. Subsidies to renewable energy rose in 2015 towards $150 billion, mostly in the power sector, and the effectiveness of the subsidies has also been increasing, with reductions in technology costs. Whether this shift continues depends on the resolve of governments to persist with pricing reform even once fossil-fuel prices start to rise; and on the speed at which renewable energy projects become economically competitive without any state support."

Energy snapshots: Estimates for global fossil-fuel consumption subsidies

"This paper updates estimates of fossil fuel subsidies, defined as fuel consumption times the gap between existing and efficient prices (i.e., prices warranted by supply costs, environmental costs, and revenue considerations), for 191 countries. Globally, subsidies remained large at $4.7 trillion (6.3 percent of global GDP) in 2015 and are projected at $5.2 trillion (6.5 percent of GDP) in 2017. The largest subsidizers in 2015 were China ($1.4 trillion), United States ($649 billion), Russia ($551 billion), European Union ($289 billion), and India ($209 billion). About three quarters of global subsidies are due to domestic factors—energy pricing reform thus remains largely in countries’ own national interest—while coal and petroleum together account for 85 percent of global subsidies. Efficient fossil fuel pricing in 2015 would have lowered global carbon emissions by 28 percent and fossil fuel air pollution deaths by 46 percent, and increased government revenue by 3.8 percent of GDP."

Global Fossil Fuel Subsidies Remain Large: An Update Based on Country-Level Estimates

Also you still havn't provided a single link of your own.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Republicans have never, ever scoffed at better ideas. Renewable energy is a great choice in limited usage right now. It will take a long time before it is a better choice for for most our needs.

Right now, it is a very bad choice to push for the expense that it brings. It still needs to come down more in price.

What links do you have for that renewables should be a very bad choices?

That you have many succesfully countries all over the world making great advancement in renewable energy.

As Wind Turned Down A Notch, Solar Soared -- 2018 Renewable Energy Report Denmark | CleanTechnica

Renewables Generated a Record 65 Percent of Germany’s Electricity Last Week - Yale E360

Guest post: Why German coal power is falling fast in 2019

 

[Lord of Planar]

The information was in the first paragraph of the links if you had bother to click on the links.

"The fall in oil prices has provided an opportunity and incentive for energy pricing reform and brought the overall estimate for fossil-fuel subsidies down to $325 billion in 2015, from close to $500 billion in 2014. Subsidies to renewable energy rose in 2015 towards $150 billion, mostly in the power sector, and the effectiveness of the subsidies has also been increasing, with reductions in technology costs. Whether this shift continues depends on the resolve of governments to persist with pricing reform even once fossil-fuel prices start to rise; and on the speed at which renewable energy projects become economically competitive without any state support."

Energy snapshots: Estimates for global fossil-fuel consumption subsidies

"This paper updates estimates of fossil fuel subsidies, defined as fuel consumption times the gap between existing and efficient prices (i.e., prices warranted by supply costs, environmental costs, and revenue considerations), for 191 countries. Globally, subsidies remained large at $4.7 trillion (6.3 percent of global GDP) in 2015 and are projected at $5.2 trillion (6.5 percent of GDP) in 2017. The largest subsidizers in 2015 were China ($1.4 trillion), United States ($649 billion), Russia ($551 billion), European Union ($289 billion), and India ($209 billion). About three quarters of global subsidies are due to domestic factors—energy pricing reform thus remains largely in countries’ own national interest—while coal and petroleum together account for 85 percent of global subsidies. Efficient fossil fuel pricing in 2015 would have lowered global carbon emissions by 28 percent and fossil fuel air pollution deaths by 46 percent, and increased government revenue by 3.8 percent of GDP."

Global Fossil Fuel Subsidies Remain Large: An Update Based on Country-Level Estimates

Also you still havn't provided a single link of your own.

Again, the term "subsidy" is being misused. It always is by liberal agenda media. I want a breakdown between cash handouts, and tax breaks.

Words have meaning, and you guys love your agenda driven indoctrinated ignorance.

It's pathetic.

 

[Lord of Planar]

What links do you have for that renewables should be a very bad choices?

That you have many succesfully countries all over the world making great advancement in renewable energy.

As Wind Turned Down A Notch, Solar Soared -- 2018 Renewable Energy Report Denmark | CleanTechnica

Renewables Generated a Record 65 Percent of Germany’s Electricity Last Week - Yale E360

Guest post: Why German coal power is falling fast in 2019

Yes, they make use of their regional natural resources. In many places in the USA, we did the same thing. In the Northwest, the Columbia River Watershed generates up to 36 Gigawatts on demand. Other river systems in the USA have impressive amounts of power as well, and this is all carbon free.

As for links I have?

Why are you so indoctrinated that you need some authority to tell you what to believe?

Just look at the costs and return. The numbers are simple.

 

[Media_Truth]

Again, the term "subsidy" is being misused. It always is by liberal agenda media. I want a breakdown between cash handouts, and tax breaks.

Words have meaning, and you guys love your agenda driven indoctrinated ignorance.

It's pathetic.

Call it a susidy or call it what you want. Bottom line - government is spending boatloads of money on fossil fuels. And this goes back generations.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Call it a susidy or call it what you want. Bottom line - government is spending boatloads of money on fossil fuels. And this goes back generations.

Government is not spending money when it's a tax break.

I guess you could say the government subsidizes you for you solar panels, wind mill, and electric car. These were not subsidies, they were tax breaks.

Agree or not?

Did the government pay you to put them in?

If you net taxes were zero before the energy tax breaks you qualified for, would the government had paid you money?

 

[Media_Truth]

Government is not spending money when it's a tax break.

I guess you could say the government subsidizes you for you solar panels, wind mill, and electric car. These were not subsidies, they were tax breaks.

Agree or not?

Did the government pay you to put them in?

If you net taxes were zero before the energy tax breaks you qualified for, would the government had paid you money?

Your argument, the way I read it, is anti-fossil-fuel.

 

[flogger]

Call it a susidy or call it what you want. Bottom line - government is spending boatloads of money on fossil fuels. And this goes back generations.

As a proportion of KwH power generated that subsidy is but a tiny percentage compared with that currently given to renewables. Why else do you think they cost at least three times more ?

Prove me wrong ?

 

[Media_Truth]

As a proportion of KwH power generated that subsidy is but a tiny percentage compared with that currently given to renewables. Why else do you think they cost at least three times more ?

Prove me wrong ?

Not when you consider that it's been occurring since the industrial revolution.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Again, the term "subsidy" is being misused. It always is by liberal agenda media. I want a breakdown between cash handouts, and tax breaks.

Words have meaning, and you guys love your agenda driven indoctrinated ignorance.

It's pathetic.

You still have not been able to provide a single source on your own. Also even Fox Business acknowledge the huge economic and social cost of Trump's support of coal. But maybe you believe that they also are "liberal agenda media".

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Yes, they make use of their regional natural resources. In many places in the USA, we did the same thing. In the Northwest, the Columbia River Watershed generates up to 36 Gigawatts on demand. Other river systems in the USA have impressive amounts of power as well, and this is all carbon free.

As for links I have?

Why are you so indoctrinated that you need some authority to tell you what to believe?

Just look at the costs and return. The numbers are simple.

Renewables are starting to outcompete fossil fuels on price.

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/electricity_generation.pdf

India Coal Power Is About To Crash: 65% Of Existing Coal Costs More Than New Wind And Solar

While you also have not been able to provide a single link to the data or even the numbers you have used to come to that conclusion..

 

[Lord of Planar]

You still have not been able to provide a single source on your own. Also even Fox Business acknowledge the huge economic and social cost of Trump's support of coal. But maybe you believe that they also are "liberal agenda media".

I have shown time and again that the liberal pundits are being intellectually deceitful in the usage of "subsidy" and that liberal consumers of information are being ignorant to the truth.

I'm not going to waste my time to back this up with a link, every time you and others forget what I have in the past.

That's your failure. Not mine.

Enjoy your ignorance. They say "ignorance is bliss."

I pity you, and other like you.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Renewables are starting to outcompete fossil fuels on price.

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/electricity_generation.pdf

India Coal Power Is About To Crash: 65% Of Existing Coal Costs More Than New Wind And Solar

While you also have not been able to provide a single link to the data or even the numbers you have used to come to that conclusion..

These numbers are doctored. They assume impacts of fossil fuels that don't exist. and ignore impacts of renewable that do.

If you ever find an unbiased link, I would love to see it.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

These numbers are doctored. They assume impacts of fossil fuels that don't exist. and ignore impacts of renewable that do.

If you ever find an unbiased link, I would love to see it.

So, still no links from you...

 

[Jack Hays]

[FONT=&quot]wind power[/FONT]
[h=1]Witnesses say broken wind turbine caused several hundred acre fire[/h][FONT=&quot]From KEPRTV by Megan Magensky Sunday, July 21st 2019 KLICKITAT COUNTY, Wash. — KLICKITAT COUNTY, Wash. — The Juniper Fire is now 40 percent contained, according to a press release. The fire is mostly burning in the Pine Creek Drainage area south of Bickleton, WA. As of Sunday evening, the fire has burned 242 acres.…
[/FONT]

 

[Lord of Planar]

[FONT="][URL="https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/22/witnesses-say-broken-wind-turbine-caused-several-hundred-acre-fire/"]

[/URL]wind power[/FONT]
[h=1]Witnesses say broken wind turbine caused several hundred acre fire[/h][FONT="]From KEPRTV by Megan Magensky Sunday, July 21st 2019 KLICKITAT COUNTY, Wash. — KLICKITAT COUNTY, Wash. — The Juniper Fire is now 40 percent contained, according to a press release. The fire is mostly burning in the Pine Creek Drainage area south of Bickleton, WA. As of Sunday evening, the fire has burned 242 acres.…
[/FONT]

I wonder what type of poisons are emitted? What is burning anyway? There is only a limited amount of grease and/or oil to burn. Is it a fiberglass or plastic shroud on top?

I wonder what the pollutants per gigawatt-hour are for all the windmills that have burned vs. a natural gas power plant?

These windmills have to go.

They kill birds.

They have killed more people per power output than any other type of power generation.

They are noise.

They are very expensive to maintain past 10 or 20 years. Maybe 5 years.

Many wind farms have been left to rot, not even the money to disassemble them.