Feinstein Kills West's Largest Solar Projects

[AZGrizFan]

[

Agree....or better yet, pick many poisons....maybe a regional windfarm for residential subsidized with small hydro power for regional industry in conjunction with building houses with southerly direction using building materials to promote thermal mass heating of residential buildings....

Hmmm, sounds like someone understands what I was getting at... there's a kid I graduated who is working on this. He's currently secured funding and built the first "green" house that is entirely self sufficient and detached from "the grid." Some eco students at JMU are currently living in it and doing research. As Appa mentioned, I don't believe there will be one technology that will meet our needs... it may need to be a combination of what's best for each local. Hydro will be feasible in one place where a wind farm may be benificial in another where nuclear will be needed to meet the needs elsewhere... etc... etc... etc...

Great THEORY. However, when NOONE wants a dam, or a wind farm, or 12,000 acres of solar panels or a nuclear power plant in THEIR BACK YARD, the "local" combination theory goes to shit.

[JMU DJ]

Let me see if I've got the Donk argument straight:

1) You don't want us drilling offshore because it might spoil the wetlands, or the view, or damage some coral
2) You don't want us drilling in Alaska because it might harm the tundra and oil is a finite product and we need to develop alternative renewable energy sources; BUT:

1) You don't want to build Hydroelectric because it required damming rivers and the NIMBY effect.
2) You don't want to build Solar because it's inefficient and the NIMBY effect
3) You don't want to build Windmills because they're inefficient and there's no effective way to store excess electricity that's produced
4) You don't want to build nuclear because there's no safe way to store the waste

But you INSIST that we lessen our dependence on foreign oil. Care to share exactly HOW that's going to happen any time soon with your mindset? California passes a law REQUIRING that 20% of their energy needs be met by renewable energy sources, and their OWN FUCKING Democratic senator kills major projects that would go a long ways towards California meeting their own mandate.


You folks are pieces of work.

Never said anything about not drilling or nuclear sweetie

[AZGrizFan]

Let me see if I've got the Donk argument straight:

1) You don't want us drilling offshore because it might spoil the wetlands, or the view, or damage some coral
2) You don't want us drilling in Alaska because it might harm the tundra and oil is a finite product and we need to develop alternative renewable energy sources; BUT:

1) You don't want to build Hydroelectric because it required damming rivers and the NIMBY effect.
2) You don't want to build Solar because it's inefficient and the NIMBY effect
3) You don't want to build Windmills because they're inefficient and there's no effective way to store excess electricity that's produced
4) You don't want to build nuclear because there's no safe way to store the waste

But you INSIST that we lessen our dependence on foreign oil. Care to share exactly HOW that's going to happen any time soon with your mindset? California passes a law REQUIRING that 20% of their energy needs be met by renewable energy sources, and their OWN FUCKING Democratic senator kills major projects that would go a long ways towards California meeting their own mandate.

You folks are pieces of work.

Never said anything about not drilling or nuclear sweetie

Are you a donk?

[Appaholic]

Hmmm, sounds like someone understands what I was getting at... there's a kid I graduated who is working on this. He's currently secured funding and built the first "green" house that is entirely self sufficient and detached from "the grid." Some eco students at JMU are currently living in it and doing research. As Appa mentioned, I don't believe there will be one technology that will meet our needs... it may need to be a combination of what's best for each local. Hydro will be feasible in one place where a wind farm may be benificial in another where nuclear will be needed to meet the needs elsewhere... etc... etc... etc...

Great THEORY. However, when NOONE wants a dam, or a wind farm, or 12,000 acres of solar panels or a nuclear power plant in THEIR BACK YARD, the "local" combination theory goes to shit.

But I don't think that's it....the local combination goes to shit when none locals issue edicts (from Sacramento, Raleigh, DC, etc) forbidding the locals from developing responsible alt energy projects....

[AZGrizFan]

Great THEORY. However, when NOONE wants a dam, or a wind farm, or 12,000 acres of solar panels or a nuclear power plant in THEIR BACK YARD, the "local" combination theory goes to shit.

But I don't think that's it....the local combination goes to shit when none locals issue edicts (from Sacramento, Raleigh, DC, etc) forbidding the locals from developing responsible alt energy projects....

Or when idiots kill responsible energy projects in their OWN state.

Appa, it's very naive of you to believe that if a town just knew that all the power from that 12,000 acre solar farm was going to THEM, they'd be fine with it, or if all the power from that nuclear plant was going to THEM they'd be fine with it.

People want the POWER, but they don't want the eyesore, or the risk, etc., etc. And in a perfect world they'd have the power AND the jobs provided, but without the eyesore or the risk.

[kalm]

So, it's obvious from DJ's post that what we need to do is build more dams.

Nope, hydro power is only local. It can be a big aid, especially in tidal areas... but what does that do for you in the middle of the desert?

Don't live in the middle of a desert.

It's a little bit of everything. Greater efficiencey in generating power, construction, transportation etc. Why go to a grocery store to buy iceberg lettuce grown in Mexico when you can raise your own in your backyard? Why have a huge lawn that wastes water and petroleum based fertilzer when you can grow a garden and landscape it with draught resistant native plants?

Boxer is wrong on this one and Kennedy is a hypocrite.

And I too agree with t-man on voting all the bastards out. And it starts with campaign finance reform and corporate person-hood.

[JMU DJ]

Are you a donk?

I'm not sure what I am anymore

[AZGrizFan]

Nope, hydro power is only local. It can be a big aid, especially in tidal areas... but what does that do for you in the middle of the desert?

Don't live in the middle of a desert.

It's a little bit of everything. Greater efficiencey in generating power, construction, transportation etc. Why go to a grocery store to buy iceberg lettuce grown in Mexico when you can raise your own in your backyard? Why have a huge lawn that wastes water and petroleum based fertilzer when you can grow a garden and landscape it with draught resistant native plants?

Boxer is wrong on this one and Kennedy is a hypocrite.

And I too agree with t-man on voting all the bastards out. And it starts with campaign finance reform and corporate person-hood.

Because that head of lettuce you buy for 99 cents at the grocery store will cost you $8 in water, fertilizer, etc to grow in your back yard.

[JMU DJ]

Nope, hydro power is only local. It can be a big aid, especially in tidal areas... but what does that do for you in the middle of the desert?

Don't live in the middle of a dessert.

That's a shame, I'm knee deep in some chocolate pie right now.



Plus... that was more for Z living in the desert.

[Appaholic]

But I don't think that's it....the local combination goes to shit when none locals issue edicts (from Sacramento, Raleigh, DC, etc) forbidding the locals from developing responsible alt energy projects....

Or when idiots kill responsible energy projects in their OWN state.

Appa, it's very naive of you to believe that if a town just knew that all the power from that 12,000 acre solar farm was going to THEM, they'd be fine with it, or if all the power from that nuclear plant was going to THEM they'd be fine with it.

People want the POWER, but they don't want the eyesore, or the risk, etc., etc. And in a perfect world they'd have the power AND the jobs provided, but without the eyesore or the risk.

I'm not speaking towards the 12k acre in Cali (don't know the specifics) as much as I'm speaking about our own ban here in NC....

Push for wind farms in Western North Carolina renewed, scaled back
Legislators declined this summer to clear the way for North Carolina to tap the power of mountain winds. Next year, they could decide whether to allow a single, experimental ridgetop wind farm. Rep. Phil Frye said at a Wednesday wind-energy forum that he plans to propose allowing the state to issue one permit for building rows of wind turbines on a ridge - which he hopes would happen at a site overlooking his hometown of Spruce Pine.
ASHEVILLE - Legislators declined this summer to clear the way for North Carolina to tap the power of mountain winds. Next year, they could decide whether to allow a single, experimental ridgetop wind farm.

Rep. Phil Frye said at a Wednesday wind-energy forum that he plans to propose allowing the state to issue one permit for building rows of wind turbines on a ridge - which he hopes would happen at a site overlooking his hometown of Spruce Pine.

Acciona Energy wants to build dozens of turbines on the Mitchell County site.

People could "see a true wind farm actually positioned and operating, and make up our own minds if we want to see more," said Frye, a Republican.
http://www.windaction.org/news/24058

Wow dems....a Republican actually promoting not only a progressive source of energy, but even wanting the people to have the ability to decide for themselves.....what say you Dems?

[AZGrizFan]

Don't live in the middle of a dessert.

That's a shame, I'm knee deep in some chocolate pie right now.


Plus... that was more for Z living in the desert.

You wasted it on him. He didn't see the edit.

[kalm]

That's a shame, I'm knee deep in some chocolate pie right now.


Plus... that was more for Z living in the desert.

You wasted it on him. He didn't see the edit.

Damn, couldn't edit fast enough.

[mainejeff]

If people would stop breeding like GD rabbits.......we wouldn't need to keep increasing energy capacity at breakneck speed.

[ASUG8]

Next topic.

This would imply that in all your verbage that something was solved. Solar/wind are inefficient - got it. Now what?

Also, seems to me in reading the article that there were several groups of investors/entrepreneurs willing to invest in this venture and maybe saw some opportunities - I know T. Boone Pickens pulled out of his wind farm venture earlier this year after talking quite a lot about it. If it's so inefficient and expensive why would these groups be so gung-ho about the opportunity to proceed? Would there be some government subsidy to offset any losses generated?

[JMU DJ]

Next topic.

This would imply that in all your verbage that something was solved. Solar/wind are inefficient - got it. Now what?

Also, seems to me in reading the article that there were several groups of investors/entrepreneurs willing to invest in this venture and maybe saw some opportunities - I know T. Boone Pickens pulled out of his wind farm venture earlier this year after talking quite a lot about it. If it's so inefficient and expensive why would these groups be so gung-ho about the opportunity to proceed? Would there be some government subsidy to offset any losses generated?

Because those people make the money while you pay for it

[ASUG8]

This would imply that in all your verbage that something was solved. Solar/wind are inefficient - got it. Now what?

Also, seems to me in reading the article that there were several groups of investors/entrepreneurs willing to invest in this venture and maybe saw some opportunities - I know T. Boone Pickens pulled out of his wind farm venture earlier this year after talking quite a lot about it. If it's so inefficient and expensive why would these groups be so gung-ho about the opportunity to proceed? Would there be some government subsidy to offset any losses generated?

Because those people make the money while you pay for it

Pickens pulled out because he couldn't secure funding for the entire project, although he spent $60M of his own money to get it to this point (667 wind turbines). I know he doesn't need the money, but Pickens normally had less altruistic endeavors in mind with most of his investments, i.e. securely planted with the profit motive in mind. For a company like Goldman Sachs (as noted in the original article) they aren't going to provide funding without a sound business case with a demonstrated payback.

Edit: I'm not doubting your sources, DJ, it just seems the proponents of solar/wind are working with a different set of assumptions.

[JMU DJ]

Because those people make the money while you pay for it

Pickens pulled out because he couldn't secure funding for the entire project, although he spent $60M of his own money to get it to this point (667 wind turbines). I know he doesn't need the money, but Pickens normally had less altruistic endeavors in mind with most of his investments, i.e. securely planted with the profit motive in mind. For a company like Goldman Sachs (as noted in the original article) they aren't going to provide funding without a sound business case with a demonstrated payback.

Edit: I'm not doubting your sources, DJ, it just seems the proponents of solar/wind are working with a different set of assumptions.

No doubt, there is a payback to solar energy/wind energy... it just takes a lot longer to reap the payback. The initial cost of instillation + inefficiency of energy production = higher cost of energy in order to payback initial cost. Then you factor in that you can only put these in certain locations, only collect energy at certain times, inability to store energy/energy wasted and sometimes the cons outweigh the pros. The location in Cali seems like a good location for both, but again, I feel that these are just temporary solutions used as an inefficient attempt to show "hey, we're trying." Good for them, but their are better options at this time than wasting money on these current technologies. Money should be going towards R&D at this time, not instillation.

[AZGrizFan]

I feel that these are just temporary solutions used as an inefficient attempt to show "hey, we're trying." Good for them, but their are better options at this time than wasting money on these current technologies. Money should be going towards R&D at this time, not instillation.

You wanna rethink that statement? It makes NO sense....

[JMU DJ]

I feel that these are just temporary solutions used as an inefficient attempt to show "hey, we're trying." Good for them, but their are better options at this time than wasting money on these current technologies. Money should be going towards R&D at this time, not instillation.

You wanna rethink that statement? It makes NO sense....

My B, for using Their instead of There... but if you cant make sense of the fact that we currently have better/more efficient technology that could be used rather than spending a fortune on solar and wind farms for little return, then I'm miffed as to your connotation.

[AZGrizFan]

You wanna rethink that statement? It makes NO sense....

My B, for using Their instead of There... but if you cant make sense of the fact that we currently have better/more efficient technology that could be used rather than spending a fortune on solar and wind farms for little return, then I'm miffed as to your connotation.

No. You state there are better options at this time, than follow that up by saying rather "than wasting money on CURRENT technologies". Which is it?

And based on your graph from earlier, I don't see any BETTER options or techologies out there. If we want to get off the Middle East oil teet sooner rather than later, we NEED some stop-gap implementation in the next 15 years while we go through the R&D process...

[JMU DJ]

My B, for using Their instead of There... but if you cant make sense of the fact that we currently have better/more efficient technology that could be used rather than spending a fortune on solar and wind farms for little return, then I'm miffed as to your connotation.

No. You state there are better options at this time, than follow that up by saying rather "than wasting money on CURRENT technologies". Which is it?

And based on your graph from earlier, I don't see any BETTER options or techologies out there. If we want to get off the Middle East oil teet sooner rather than later, we NEED some stop-gap implementation in the next 15 years while we go through the R&D process...

Goodness Z, is that really that hard to get?

Why waste money on an energy source that isn't going to do anything to curb our use of foreign oil? There are better technologies out there, i.e. they produce energy more efficiently and are cheaper. Doesn't mean they are clean or new, but again, why waste your money on a new inefficient technology that isn't going to help in the end when we currently have better methods of energy production. Comprende?

[AZGrizFan]

There's more effiecent ways of generating "clean" electricity. Photovoltaic cells and Wind Turbines are very inefficient, it's just people like you and Tman are familiar with them so the idea sounds good. When the idea gets the kibosh, it begins the attack of "they don't care about finding clean energy." Look into the cost of current photovoltaic cells and wind farms versus the energy they produce, the current plans would be a waste of spending for such little return. But all you ever hear about it the "not in my backyard"/"Save the animals" stories... there is currently no technology that can replace our dependence on current fuel sources otherwise we would be using them already, any technology we have now would just be a drop in the bucket.

So, are you saying more coal fired plants?

[HI54UNI]

There's more effiecent ways of generating "clean" electricity. Photovoltaic cells and Wind Turbines are very inefficient, it's just people like you and Tman are familiar with them so the idea sounds good. When the idea gets the kibosh, it begins the attack of "they don't care about finding clean energy." Look into the cost of current photovoltaic cells and wind farms versus the energy they produce, the current plans would be a waste of spending for such little return. But all you ever hear about it the "not in my backyard"/"Save the animals" stories... there is currently no technology that can replace our dependence on current fuel sources otherwise we would be using them already, any technology we have now would just be a drop in the bucket.

So, are you saying more coal fired plants?

Yes! We have 300+ years worth of coal in this country. Coal power is cheap and reliable. New plants have all kinds of emission control equipment that have dramatically decreased pollution. This is the only way we are going to get off the oil teat any time in the foreseeable future.

[JMU DJ]

So, are you saying more coal fired plants?

At the moment, that's one... there are technologies available to make the burning of coal very clean... but then you run into the Appa/NIMBY argument involving the destruction of the environment during the collection of coal/disposal... which is what you run into with any energy source (i.e. using all the land to create solar/wind farms would be a detriment or the location would affect herding patterns). Same goes with nuclear, the energy is clean but you run into storage problems and NIMBY... but at this moment, better than solar.

There are also other forms of power plants that can be used to actually clean up the environment such as Trash burning power plants... it takes the trash that we produce, burns it, turns it into energy and leaves behind only 10% of the total mass. I believe Tampa has one in use... produces enough to power a significant portion of the city. I know, "Trash, really?" It's not solving the problem, but as you say Z, it helps reduce the dependence on fossil fuel burning plants, empties landfills, produces excess steam that can be used for other applications and the waste products can be sold while significantly reducing the amount of waste that enters landfills.


Yeah, "biomass"/trash and nuclear facilities are about the same efficiency as wind turbines... but you can't put a wind turbine anywhere (as seen in Cali, Mass and NC) while you can put one of these facilities virtually anywhere. As you say, using a combination of energy sounds like a pipe dream, but why should it be? Why waste money on technology that isn't efficient and can only go in certain locals? Solar panels are great on the roof of your house, not for mass energy production at the moment. Heck Z, you could buy your own personal wind turbine, then you can sell your unused energy back to the grid and live off of zero emissions (it's been done).



Are you saying solar panels and wind farms are the solution to end the mid east "teet" sucking? What's your solution Z? I see you've said nothing on the matter.

[HI54UNI]

Hey, myron, you can't have it both ways. You don't want to build solar or wind because they aren't "efficient", but you don't want to build hydro (the 90% efficiency method, from your OWN graph), because we'd have to kill some snail darters?

EVERY method of generating power has it's drawbacks. Pick your poison and quit acting like you're working for some pie-in-the-sky thinktank.

Agree....or better yet, pick many poisons....maybe a regional windfarm for residential subsidized with small hydro power for regional industry in conjunction with building houses with southerly direction using building materials to promote thermal mass heating of residential buildings....

In your idea of a local power supply is everyone going to have their own battery system in their house to provide backup? Because the wind isn't always blowing, sun not shining, equipment breaks, etc. Everything in the grid is connected. There are things like spinning reserves (generators spinning but producing at a minimum) that ramp up quickly if the load changes or another supply source is lost.

It's not as simple as hooking up a wind turbine and having the electrons flow to your house.