Discussion:
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
(too old to reply)
gordo
2018-06-09 19:10:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs,
according to a new study by Bangor University.

According to the paper, a review of tidal range energy resource and
optimizationpublished in the academic journal Renewable Energy, 5792
MWh could be produced by tidal range power plants using lagoons and
barrages.

And the paper by researchers at Bangor’s School of Ocean Sciences,
estimates that 90% of the resource is distributed across just five
countries, including UK and France which possess a “significant share”
due to the nature of both countries’ Atlantic shelf.
https://utilityweek.co.uk/academics-predict-tidal-power-meet-one-third-world-needs/

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Byker
2018-06-09 19:32:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs, according
to a new study by Bangor University.
https://utilityweek.co.uk/academics-predict-tidal-power-meet-one-third-world-needs/

I was hearing about this back in the 1960s. How come it never got off square
one?
JTEM is right
2018-06-10 03:53:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global
electricity needs. It's yet another example
of you lunatics crowing over something that
has never-ever happened.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/174706945703
Paul Aubrin
2018-06-10 05:41:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-10 13:10:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy, seems like a prudent step to use it when the region has the proper geographical configuration.
Wally W.
2018-06-10 20:33:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 06:10:37 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source. It is a "conservative force," meaning
it will give back any increase in potential energy without dimunation
by gravity. Dimunation by friction is not gravity's fault.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_force

Which climastrologist in the "consensus" told you that gravity is an
energy source?

How far beyond being educable are posturing, gullible greenies?
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
seems like a prudent step to use it when the region has the proper geographical configuration.
... and greenies won't get in the way of using it, which is a handful
of places.

Won't someone *please* think of the dolphins?!
Paul Aubrin
2018-06-11 05:27:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
seems like a prudent step to use it when the region has the proper
geographical configuration.
... and greenies won't get in the way of using it, which is a handful of
places.
Won't someone *please* think of the dolphins?!
The Rance project, and its up to 14m tides, was never expanded because it
would have encompassed the Mount Saint Michael island where a medieval
monastery sits.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Mont_Saint-Michel

In the UK the Severn river project was similarly ditched each time it
resurfaced because environmentalists fight it fiercely. Last time was
2010 if I remember well.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-11 12:50:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 06:10:37 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not
Fake authoritative ramblings by wally the loser tries to make a point but fails he tried to use my words out of context, then incorrectly tries to interject his correction which was not needed.

He failed to refute my point which is that when the geographical conditions are proper it is prudent to harness the tidal energy. And yes, gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy as it moves the oceans, making the tidal changes.
Wally W.
2018-06-11 13:26:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 05:50:35 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 06:10:37 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not
Fake authoritative ramblings by wally the loser tries to make a point but fails he tried to use my words out of context, then incorrectly tries to interject his correction which was not needed.
Apparently, the correction is still needed.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
He failed to refute my point which is that when the geographical conditions are proper it is prudent to harness the tidal energy.
So you are okay with disregarding all objections from greenies when
someone wants to build a tidal-power plant?

Let's add ground halibut to the bird and bat carnage from windmills.

Let no endangered species stand in the way of a greenie brain fart
when there is a religious crusade to "save the planet."
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
And yes, gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy as it moves the oceans, making the tidal changes.
The energy is not from gravity, it is from a transfer of momentum. The
rotation of the Earth is slowing due to the transfer.

Slowing the rotation of the Earth is free to you, but it is not
*renewable* energy.
Paul Aubrin
2018-06-11 15:38:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
And yes, gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy as it
moves the oceans, making the tidal changes.
The energy is not from gravity, it is from a transfer of momentum. The
rotation of the Earth is slowing due to the transfer.
Correct.
Post by Wally W.
Slowing the rotation of the Earth is free to you, but it is not
*renewable* energy.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-12 04:52:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
And yes, gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy as it
moves the oceans, making the tidal changes.
The energy is not from gravity, it is from a transfer of momentum. The
rotation of the Earth is slowing due to the transfer.
Correct.
Wow, so you are going to explain planetary tidal dissipation without stating gravity?
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by Wally W.
Slowing the rotation of the Earth is free to you, but it is not
*renewable* energy.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-12 04:49:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 05:50:35 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 06:10:37 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not
Fake authoritative ramblings by wally the loser tries to make a point but fails he tried to use my words out of context, then incorrectly tries to interject his correction which was not needed.
Apparently, the correction is still needed.
Not really for without the one, the other would not exist so your whining is not relevant
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
He failed to refute my point which is that when the geographical conditions are proper it is prudent to harness the tidal energy.
So you are okay with disregarding all objections from greenies when
someone wants to build a tidal-power plant?
Im for studying how to mitigate human impact by understanding the ways for which we can make a stop or yeild sign that is understood by other species.
Post by Wally W.
Let's add ground halibut to the bird and bat carnage from windmills.
so when did you suddenly gain this concern?
Post by Wally W.
Let no endangered species stand in the way of a greenie brain fart
when there is a religious crusade to "save the planet."
Let no hyperbolic rhetoric go unspoken by wally\
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
And yes, gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy as it moves the oceans, making the tidal changes.
The energy is not from gravity, it is from a transfer of momentum. The
rotation of the Earth is slowing due to the transfer.
see above point, without gravity ...
Post by Wally W.
Slowing the rotation of the Earth is free to you, but it is not
*renewable* energy.
So when are you going to shoot the moon for slowing down the earth?
Wally W.
2018-06-12 11:16:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:49:31 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 05:50:35 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 06:10:37 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not
Fake authoritative ramblings by wally the loser tries to make a point but fails he tried to use my words out of context, then incorrectly tries to interject his correction which was not needed.
Apparently, the correction is still needed.
Not really for without the one, the other would not exist
By your logic, concrete is an energy source because some windmill
towers couldn't be installed without it.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
so your whining is not relevant
I didn't whine. I tried to correct your misunderstanding.

It isn't clear that it worked.

And you didn't say, "thank you."
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
He failed to refute my point which is that when the geographical conditions are proper it is prudent to harness the tidal energy.
So you are okay with disregarding all objections from greenies when
someone wants to build a tidal-power plant?
Im for studying how to mitigate human impact by understanding the ways for which we can make a stop or yeild sign that is understood by other species.
So you think humans should regulate the traffic patterns of fish? Why
do you want human impact in more areas?

You've apparently lost sight of a greenie goal: save the planet by
ridding it of *other* people.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
Let's add ground halibut to the bird and bat carnage from windmills.
so when did you suddenly gain this concern?
Post by Wally W.
Let no endangered species stand in the way of a greenie brain fart
when there is a religious crusade to "save the planet."
Let no hyperbolic rhetoric go unspoken by wally\
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
And yes, gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy as it moves the oceans, making the tidal changes.
The energy is not from gravity, it is from a transfer of momentum. The
rotation of the Earth is slowing due to the transfer.
see above point, without gravity ...
It was lame the first time.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
Slowing the rotation of the Earth is free to you, but it is not
*renewable* energy.
So when are you going to shoot the moon for slowing down the earth?
I am not going to do such a thing.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-12 12:23:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:49:31 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 05:50:35 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 06:10:37 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not
Fake authoritative ramblings by wally the loser tries to make a point but fails he tried to use my words out of context, then incorrectly tries to interject his correction which was not needed.
Apparently, the correction is still needed.
Not really for without the one, the other would not exist
By your logic, concrete is an energy source because some windmill
towers couldn't be installed without it.
According to you 1/d^2 is not relevant
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
so your whining is not relevant
I didn't whine. I tried to correct your misunderstanding.
sou are still whining
Post by Wally W.
It isn't clear that it worked.
And you didn't say, "thank you."
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
He failed to refute my point which is that when the geographical conditions are proper it is prudent to harness the tidal energy.
So you are okay with disregarding all objections from greenies when
someone wants to build a tidal-power plant?
Im for studying how to mitigate human impact by understanding the ways for which we can make a stop or yeild sign that is understood by other species.
So you think humans should regulate the traffic patterns of fish? Why
do you want human impact in more areas?
There ya go again, i oh my an underwater tower beacon is just too much for wally to understand and he goes to the extreme in his efforts to act like useless troll
Post by Wally W.
You've apparently lost sight of a greenie goal: save the planet by
ridding it of *other* people.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
Let's add ground halibut to the bird and bat carnage from windmills.
so when did you suddenly gain this concern?
Post by Wally W.
Let no endangered species stand in the way of a greenie brain fart
when there is a religious crusade to "save the planet."
Let no hyperbolic rhetoric go unspoken by wally\
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
And yes, gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy as it moves the oceans, making the tidal changes.
The energy is not from gravity, it is from a transfer of momentum. The
rotation of the Earth is slowing due to the transfer.
see above point, without gravity ...
It was lame the first time.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
Slowing the rotation of the Earth is free to you, but it is not
*renewable* energy.
So when are you going to shoot the moon for slowing down the earth?
I am not going to do such a thing.
Slowing the earth is now your concern, hey this is awesome no everybody jump at once and see if we can make it move
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-14 12:32:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 4:16:28 AM UTC-7, Wally W. wrote:

So previously you complained when i stated the system would return to the lowest energy state, now you provided an explanation as to how the system would return to the lowest energy state.

Two faced trolls like you want it both ways, you needed the correction as you did not correct yourself.

Now we see your true intentions never do you correct your own mistakes mark of a lazy hypocrite who has nothing better to do than whine as his religion of denialism has led him down a path where he lost his credibility and integrity.
Wally W.
2018-06-14 13:03:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 05:32:54 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
So previously you complained when i stated the system would return to the lowest energy state, now you provided an explanation as to how the system would return to the lowest energy state.
Two faced trolls like you want it both ways, you needed the correction as you did not correct yourself.
Now we see your true intentions never do you correct your own mistakes mark of a lazy hypocrite who has nothing better to do than whine as his religion of denialism has led him down a path where he lost his credibility and integrity.
New day, same game.

Does Accident think if he provokes me, I will play with him?
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-14 15:12:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 05:32:54 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
So previously you complained when i stated the system would return to the lowest energy state, now you provided an explanation as to how the system would return to the lowest energy state.
Two faced trolls like you want it both ways, you needed the correction as you did not correct yourself.
Now we see your true intentions never do you correct your own mistakes mark of a lazy hypocrite who has nothing better to do than whine as his religion of denialism has led him down a path where he lost his credibility and integrity.
New day, same game.
Does Accident think if he provokes me, I will play with him?
You lost, im just pointing to the scoreboard and rubbing your nose in it. Maybe you can pick up a game with your loser pals, or maybe if all of you join in together team up.. well nope, you will still lose.
Bret Cahill
2018-06-11 16:27:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?

<CIA>
Paul Aubrin
2018-06-11 18:46:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy
Try to determine who said: "Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides
the energy".
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-13 21:21:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy
Try to determine who said: "Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides
the energy".
try to determine who said "tidal dissipation".
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-12 04:54:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
wally tried failed again
Wally W.
2018-06-13 03:37:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:54:19 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
wally tried failed again
Failed how?

What energy is provided by a tidal power system that isn't extracted
from the kinetic energy of a heavenly body?
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-13 04:05:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:54:19 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
wally tried failed again
Failed how?
What energy is provided by a tidal power system that isn't extracted
from the kinetic energy of a heavenly body?
"Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy" did you misread for the word provides would seem to have thrown you into a bit of a tizzy.

Lets see, you freaked out trying to claim i stated gravity "is the specific energy source used for tidal power" or gravity freely provides the energy, for if one were to explore the equation it surely would show connect gravity to tidal dissipation.
Now specifically you got all spun up about angular momentum, then tried to imply kinetic energy from a heavenly body would not change based on positions of the heavenly bodies.

How long will denialists insist on playing stupid word games?
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-13 04:05:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:54:19 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
wally tried failed again
Failed how?
What energy is provided by a tidal power system that isn't extracted
from the kinetic energy of a heavenly body?
Did you explain tidal dissipation without referencing gravity?
Wally W.
2018-06-13 04:11:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:05:44 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:54:19 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
wally tried failed again
Failed how?
What energy is provided by a tidal power system that isn't extracted
from the kinetic energy of a heavenly body?
Did you explain tidal dissipation without referencing gravity?
Did you explain greenie-ism without referencing bullshit?
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-13 04:26:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:05:44 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:54:19 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
wally tried failed again
Failed how?
What energy is provided by a tidal power system that isn't extracted
from the kinetic energy of a heavenly body?
Did you explain tidal dissipation without referencing gravity?
Did you explain greenie-ism without referencing bullshit?
Keep on track, you tried to imply that i was needed a correction yet now all the sudden you run from connecting tidal dissipation to gravity, what is that obfuscation by default on your part?

Come you can do it, you did try to play all authority like right?

So why change now, oh YEAH BECAUSE YOU ARE A TROLL!
Wally W.
2018-06-13 04:34:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:26:00 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:05:44 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:54:19 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
wally tried failed again
Failed how?
What energy is provided by a tidal power system that isn't extracted
from the kinetic energy of a heavenly body?
Did you explain tidal dissipation without referencing gravity?
Did you explain greenie-ism without referencing bullshit?
Keep on track, you tried to imply that i was needed a correction
I didn't "imply" it ... I *demonstrated* it.

Don't you have enough integrity to admit you were wrong?

How much integrity *is* there on the greenie side of the fence?
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
yet now all the sudden you run from connecting tidal dissipation to gravity, what is that obfuscation by default on your part?
Come you can do it, you did try to play all authority like right?
So why change now, oh YEAH BECAUSE YOU ARE A TROLL!
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-13 05:07:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:26:00 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:05:44 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:54:19 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
wally tried failed again
Failed how?
What energy is provided by a tidal power system that isn't extracted
from the kinetic energy of a heavenly body?
Did you explain tidal dissipation without referencing gravity?
Did you explain greenie-ism without referencing bullshit?
Keep on track, you tried to imply that i was needed a correction
I didn't "imply" it ... I *demonstrated* it.
All things being equal, one must conclude you need a correction as tidal dissipation is on topic and therefore to reference gravity in the manner i have as "freely providing the energy" one could logically conclude i was in fact correct and needed no such correction from a whiny punk troll like you
Post by Wally W.
Don't you have enough integrity to admit you were wrong?
Why would such a question gain back your lost credibility?
Post by Wally W.
How much integrity *is* there on the greenie side of the fence?
Greenie is a color reference, a specific place on the electromagnetic spectrum, and yet political hacks it has another meaning.
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
yet now all the sudden you run from connecting tidal dissipation to gravity, what is that obfuscation by default on your part?
Come you can do it, you did try to play all authority like right?
So why change now, oh YEAH BECAUSE YOU ARE A TROLL!
Wally W.
2018-06-13 12:58:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 22:07:48 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:26:00 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:05:44 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:54:19 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
wally tried failed again
Failed how?
What energy is provided by a tidal power system that isn't extracted
from the kinetic energy of a heavenly body?
Did you explain tidal dissipation without referencing gravity?
Did you explain greenie-ism without referencing bullshit?
Keep on track, you tried to imply that i was needed a correction
I didn't "imply" it ... I *demonstrated* it.
All things being equal, one must conclude you need a correction as tidal dissipation is on topic and therefore to reference gravity in the manner i have as "freely providing the energy" one could logically conclude i was in fact correct and needed no such correction from a whiny punk troll like you
Your spelling is better than Kymmie's, but your logic and presentation
may be no better than hillBillyBot's, Bret's, or Unum's.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
Don't you have enough integrity to admit you were wrong?
Why would such a question gain back your lost credibility?
Post by Wally W.
How much integrity *is* there on the greenie side of the fence?
Greenie is a color reference, a specific place on the electromagnetic spectrum, and yet political hacks it has another meaning.
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
yet now all the sudden you run from connecting tidal dissipation to gravity, what is that obfuscation by default on your part?
Come you can do it, you did try to play all authority like right?
So why change now, oh YEAH BECAUSE YOU ARE A TROLL!
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-13 20:50:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 22:07:48 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:26:00 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:05:44 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:54:19 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
wally tried failed again
Failed how?
What energy is provided by a tidal power system that isn't extracted
from the kinetic energy of a heavenly body?
Did you explain tidal dissipation without referencing gravity?
Did you explain greenie-ism without referencing bullshit?
Keep on track, you tried to imply that i was needed a correction
I didn't "imply" it ... I *demonstrated* it.
All things being equal, one must conclude you need a correction as tidal dissipation is on topic and therefore to reference gravity in the manner i have as "freely providing the energy" one could logically conclude i was in fact correct and needed no such correction from a whiny punk troll like you
Your spelling
Of course you run from your own words, as you overplayed your hand and now you are reduced to a spell checker, glad you decided your role as physics authority was a ruse, a lie, revealing your lack of integrity.
Post by Wally W.
is better than Kymmie's, but your logic and presentation
may be no better than hillBillyBot's, Bret's, or Unum's.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Wally W.
Don't you have enough integrity to admit you were wrong?
Why would such a question gain back your lost credibility?
Post by Wally W.
How much integrity *is* there on the greenie side of the fence?
Greenie is a color reference, a specific place on the electromagnetic spectrum, and yet political hacks it has another meaning.
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
yet now all the sudden you run from connecting tidal dissipation to gravity, what is that obfuscation by default on your part?
Come you can do it, you did try to play all authority like right?
So why change now, oh YEAH BECAUSE YOU ARE A TROLL!
Wally W.
2018-06-14 03:15:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:50:00 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Of course you run from your own words, as you overplayed your hand and now you are reduced to a spell checker, glad you decided your role as physics authority was a ruse, a lie, revealing your lack of integrity.
Does anyone actually pay you to write this crap?
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-14 03:35:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 13:50:00 -0700 (PDT),
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Of course you run from your own words, as you overplayed your hand and now you are reduced to a spell checker, glad you decided your role as physics authority was a ruse, a lie, revealing your lack of integrity.
Does
oh my another bs upcoming question from the loser who asks why something would return to a the lowest energy state, then provide an explanation later, which begs the question of what changed with you?
Post by Wally W.
anyone
You wrote the stuff, why blame anybody else?
Post by Wally W.
actually
Yes you actually contradicted yourself
Post by Wally W.
pay
Your integrity is at stake why would you need to be paid to correct your contradictions?
Post by Wally W.
you to write this crap?
Your fecal matter is not the topic, i noted tidal dissipation and you ran then slipped in your own pile of....
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-13 06:10:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Monday, June 11, 2018 at 6:26:18 AM UTC-7, Wally W. wrote:" The energy is not from gravity, it is from a transfer of momentum. The rotation of the Earth is slowing due to the transfer. Slowing the rotation of the Earth is free to you, but it is not *renewable* energy."

On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 8:37:05 PM UTC-7, Wally W. wrote:" What energy is provided by a tidal power system that isn't extracted from the kinetic energy of a heavenly body?"

On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 10:53:35 AM UTC-7, Wally W. wrote: "it will try to return to the lowest energy state" ... seriously?"
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.global-warming/0ACfrb0bwOc/5AMkxLfiAAAJ

So lets see, on one hand you claim that when i stated "return to the lower energy state" you took exception, yet here, you provide a mechanism as to how the earth would move to a lower energy state.

If memory serves me correctly, i noted how aubrins information on feedback was bs, as he was using the stable synchronized movements of planetary bodies as a dodge. I stated that the system after being perturbed would return to a lower energy state, and you freaked out. Now, it seems you just provided a clear mechanism as to how the system would return to the lower energy state.

Time and time again you dumb ass losers eventually contradict yourselves as you lack integrity and honesty in your trolling efforts.
Bret Cahill
2018-06-12 05:18:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
<CAP>
Wally W.
2018-06-12 11:25:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Look at your attributions (oh, that's right ... you don't use them)
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
<CAP>
If you weren't acting the denier, you would admit that Paul replied
with a clue.

If you checked attributions that were retained by other posters
(because you strip them for reasons that have been questioned in the
past), you should have been able to answer the question yourself. If
you lack that ability, your competence in posting here could be called
into question.

How is it that posters using tactics of lying weasels think they
deserve a hearing?
R Kym Horsell
2018-06-12 19:12:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
<CAP>
Did hillbillies gets da memo about energy not been able to be created
or destroyed -- hence dere is no energy sources (cept koal!)-- or did they
heared bout quanum flukkyashuns an da big bang yets?
--
Drought fears as Britain's reservoirs dry up - and forecasters predict
three MORE months of heatwaves with temperatures rocketing to 85F
until August
Jessica Green and Connor Boyd, Mail Online

Climate Change Could Lead to Major Crop Failures in World's Biggest
Corn Regions
Georgina Gustin, InsideClimate News

How universal basic income and rewilding could save the planet
Simon Lewis and Mark Maslin, The Guardian

Few Southeast Cities Have Climate Targets, but That's Slowly Changing
James Bruggers, InsideClimate News

The internet cable Australia stopped China building
ABC News, 13 Jun 2018
Australian and Solomon Islands officials will today sign up to the first
stage of a multi-million-dollar contract to sink an undersea high speed
internet link between the two nations.

[#idiocracy]
Boat crash at World Cup host city leaves 11 dead, injures five others
ABC News, 13 Jun 2018
Authorities say the captain of one of the vessels was drunk when the two
boats collided on the Volga River several hundred meters off the shoreline
of the city of Volgograd in southern Russia.

[#idiocracy]
WhatsApp video of fake kidnapping sparks hysteria in India as mob beats men
to death
ABC News, 13 Jun 2018
False rumours about child kidnapping gangs are spreading like wildfire over
social media in India, leading to the deaths of eight people, including a
musician and his friend who stopped in the state of Assam to ask for directions.

Dan Gocher @justdanfornow 12 Jun 2018 00:56Z
The carbon emissions intensity of Australian cars is 45% higher than Europe,
22% higher than the US - yet another #climate fail, @JoshFrydenberg
smh.com.au/business/the-e# pic.twitter.com/cT5lFQjoLS
<Loading Image...>
[Maybe apples & oranges. Australians have allays kept their cars more
and longer and driven them further per year than other countries; also check
the distance between capital cities].

CitizensClimateLobby @citizensclimate 12 Jun 2018 15:00Z
Good morning, Congress! Today, we'll have 500 meetings to build bipartisan
progress on #climate change and Carbon Fee and Dividend. #CCL2018
pic.twitter.com/8UgSYVOhZS
<Loading Image...:small>

Tesla Inc
NASDAQ: TSLA - 12 Jun., 3:05 pm GMT-4
342.28 USD +10.18 (3.07%) *** up 3.1% ***

Panasonic Corporation
TYO: 6752 - 12 Jun., 3:00 pm GMT+9
1,597 JPY +22 (1.36%) *** up 1.4% ***

Amazon.com, Inc.
NASDAQ: AMZN 0 12 Jun., 3:04 pm GMT-4
1,694.01 USD +4.89 (0.29%) up

Facebook, Inc. Common Stock
NASDAQ: FB - 12 Jun., 3:04 pm GMT-4
192.08 USD +0.54 (0.28%) up

Peabody Energy Corporation
NYSE: BTU - 12 Jun., 3:03 pm GMT-4
46.28 USD -0.27 (0.58%) down

Chevron Corporation
NYSE: CVX - 12 Jun., 3:03 pm GMT-4
126.66 USD -0.87 (0.68%) down

Exxon Mobil Corporation
NYSE: XOM - 12 Jun., 3:03 pm GMT-4
82.37 USD -0.74 (0.89%) down

Royal Dutch Shell Plc Class A
ETR: R6C - 12 Jun., 5:35 pm GMT+2
29.51 EUR -0.34 (1.16%) *** down 1.2% ***

Gazprom PAO
MCX: GAZP - 11 Jun., 6:47 pm GMT+3
142.28 RUB -1.80 (1.25%) *** down 1.3% ***

ConocoPhillips
NYSE: COP - 12 Jun., 3:03 pm GMT-4
69.42 USD -1.04 (1.48%) *** down 1.5% ***

BP plc (ADR)
NYSE: BP - 12 Jun., 3:05 pm GMT-4
46.04 USD -1.08 (2.30%) *** down 2.3% ***
Wally W.
2018-06-13 03:33:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R Kym Horsell
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
<CAP>
Did hillbillies gets da memo about energy not been able to be created
or destroyed -- hence dere is no energy sources (cept koal!)-- or did they
heared bout quanum flukkyashuns an da big bang yets?
Did greenies get da memo that a force is not energy?

Language in *real* science isn't as amorphous as it is in
climastrology, where shit made up by consensus becomes "true" through
repetition (no experiments required).
Wally W.
2018-06-13 03:49:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
Post by R Kym Horsell
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
<CAP>
Did hillbillies gets da memo about energy not been able to be created
or destroyed -- hence dere is no energy sources (cept koal!)-- or did they
heared bout quanum flukkyashuns an da big bang yets?
Did greenies get da memo that a force is not energy?
Language in *real* science isn't as amorphous as it is in
climastrology, where shit made up by consensus becomes "true" through
repetition (no experiments required).
Oh, and in *real* science proper spelling is preferred.

Misfits who insist on using their own language are often dismissed as
cranks.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2018-06-13 04:07:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Wally W.
Post by Wally W.
Post by R Kym Horsell
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Wally W.
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Post by Paul Aubrin
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs
So it doesn't supply one third of global electricity needs. It's yet
another example of you lunatics crowing over something that has
never-ever happened.
A 240MW tidal plant has been built in France in 1966. It has been working
fine since then. It was built in a very favourable location. No other
such plant has been built since then because even that one is only
marginally profitable. The plant provides 1/50th of the electrical power
of Brittany, a region which imports 90% of the electricity it uses.
Gravity from the sun and moon freely provides the energy,
Gravity is not an energy source.
Who said it was?
<CIA>
<CAP>
Did hillbillies gets da memo about energy not been able to be created
or destroyed -- hence dere is no energy sources (cept koal!)-- or did they
heared bout quanum flukkyashuns an da big bang yets?
Did greenies get da memo that a force is not energy?
Language in *real* science isn't as amorphous as it is in
climastrology, where shit made up by consensus becomes "true" through
repetition (no experiments required).
Oh, and in *real* science proper spelling is preferred.
Misfits who insist on using their own language are often dismissed as
cranks.
Idiots like you think your whining actually had a point, yet you failed to explain why you insist on creating your own hypotheticals based on your hyperbolic rhetoric
$27 TRILLION to PAY for KYOTO
2018-06-11 15:47:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Massive metal objects, just barely visible above the surface, surrounding coasts? Yeah, lets see the shipping carnage that costs. Not to mention, the maintenance costs would FAR exceed that of conventional power plants, as anyone who has ever put something to see can attest.
Bret Cahill
2018-06-11 16:26:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by $27 TRILLION to PAY for KYOTO
Massive metal objects, just barely visible above the surface, surrounding coasts? Yeah, lets see the shipping carnage that costs.
Stop drinking when you approach land.
Catoni
2018-06-11 20:06:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by gordo
Tidal power could supply one third of global electricity needs,
according to a new study by Bangor University.
According to the paper, a review of tidal range energy resource and
optimizationpublished in the academic journal Renewable Energy, 5792
MWh could be produced by tidal range power plants using lagoons and
barrages.
And the paper by researchers at Bangor’s School of Ocean Sciences,
estimates that 90% of the resource is distributed across just five
countries, including UK and France which possess a “significant share”
due to the nature of both countries’ Atlantic shelf.
https://utilityweek.co.uk/academics-predict-tidal-power-meet-one-third-world-needs/
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
How much sea life would the necessary turbines kill ? ? How about lobster migration patterns being disrupted ? ?
JTEM is right
2018-06-12 20:30:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Catoni
How much sea life would the necessary turbines
kill ? ? How about lobster migration patterns
being disrupted ? ?
Wait 'til they find out that whale oil is an
excellent fuel source, and it's what they like
to call "Carbon Neutral," because everything
that goes into making whale oil comes from the
environment.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/174827120878
Loading...