Discussion:
One way to save the planet: Build more nuclear plants
Add Reply
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-13 19:07:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The NYT has published a steady drumbeat of pro-nuke advocacy over the
last few years.

***

'About 30 miles north of Manhattan, the Indian Point Energy Center looms
over the banks of the Hudson. It produces 11 percent of the electricity
consumed in New York state and a quarter of the power used in the New
York City area. And that power is completely free of the carbon-dioxide
emissions associated with fossil fuels."

https://nypost.com/2019/04/13/one-way-to-save-the-planet-build-more-nuclear-plants/
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2019-04-13 20:17:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
The NYT has published a steady drumbeat of pro-nuke advocacy over the
last few years.
***
'About 30 miles north of Manhattan, the Indian Point Energy Center looms
over the banks of the Hudson. It produces 11 percent of the electricity
consumed in New York state and a quarter of the power used in the New
York City area. And that power is completely free of the carbon-dioxide
emissions associated with fossil fuels."
https://nypost.com/2019/04/13/one-way-to-save-the-planet-build-more-nuclear-plants/
Just one, lots of u.s. tax payer money being shelled out to sway public opinion in support of nuclear, and you have only one solution, how pathetic
Bret Cahill
2019-04-13 20:48:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
The NYT has published a steady drumbeat of pro-nuke advocacy over the
last few years.
Then pervide a link to a NY Times arrical.
R Kym Horsell
2019-04-13 21:59:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Chom Noamsky
The NYT has published a steady drumbeat of pro-nuke advocacy over the
last few years.
Then pervide a link to a NY Times arrical.
I spec "someone" had confuzed the Post and the Times.
--
Global warming is over, shut the hell up with your doom and gloom crap.
-- jimp, 25 May 2012 00:53:17 -0000
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-13 22:47:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Chom Noamsky
The NYT has published a steady drumbeat of pro-nuke advocacy over the
last few years.
Then pervide a link to a NY Times arrical.
Nuclear Power Can Save the World

Expanding the technology is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas
emissions and decarbonize the economy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/06/opinion/sunday/climate-change-nuclear-power.html
Unum
2019-04-13 20:53:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The NYT has published a steady drumbeat of pro-nuke advocacy over the last few
years.
***
'About 30 miles north of Manhattan, the Indian Point Energy Center looms over
the banks of the Hudson. It produces 11 percent of the electricity consumed in
New York state and a quarter of the power used in the New York City area. And
that power is completely free of the carbon-dioxide emissions associated with
fossil fuels."
https://nypost.com/2019/04/13/one-way-to-save-the-planet-build-more-nuclear-plants/
Lol, an expert opinion!
James B. Meigs is the co-host of the “How Do We Fix It?” podcast and the
former editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics


https://theintercept.com/2019/02/06/south-caroline-green-new-deal-south-carolina-nuclear-energy/

South Carolina, in a bid to expand its generation of nuclear power in recent
years, dropped $9 billion on a single project — and has nothing to show for
it.
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-13 22:45:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
The NYT has published a steady drumbeat of pro-nuke advocacy over the
last few years.
***
'About 30 miles north of Manhattan, the Indian Point Energy Center
looms over the banks of the Hudson. It produces 11 percent of the
electricity consumed in New York state and a quarter of the power used
in the New York City area. And that power is completely free of the
carbon-dioxide emissions associated with fossil fuels."
https://nypost.com/2019/04/13/one-way-to-save-the-planet-build-more-nuclear-plants/
Lol, an expert opinion!
James B. Meigs is the co-host of the “How Do We Fix It?” podcast and the
former editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics
https://theintercept.com/2019/02/06/south-caroline-green-new-deal-south-carolina-nuclear-energy/
South Carolina, in a bid to expand its generation of nuclear power in recent
years, dropped $9 billion on a single project — and has nothing to show for
it.
Yer saying the world's top climate scientist is full of shit?

"Nuclear Power Must Make a Comeback for Climate's Sake"

James Hansen, former NASA climate scientist, and three other prominent
climate scientists are calling for an enlarged focus on nuclear energy
in the ongoing Paris climate negotiations.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nuclear-power-must-make-a-comeback-for-climate-s-sake/
Unum
2019-04-13 23:30:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
The NYT has published a steady drumbeat of pro-nuke advocacy over the last
few years.
***
'About 30 miles north of Manhattan, the Indian Point Energy Center looms
over the banks of the Hudson. It produces 11 percent of the electricity
consumed in New York state and a quarter of the power used in the New York
City area. And that power is completely free of the carbon-dioxide
emissions associated with fossil fuels."
https://nypost.com/2019/04/13/one-way-to-save-the-planet-build-more-nuclear-plants/
Lol, an expert opinion!
James B. Meigs is the co-host of the “How Do We Fix It?” podcast and the
former editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics
https://theintercept.com/2019/02/06/south-caroline-green-new-deal-south-carolina-nuclear-energy/
South Carolina, in a bid to expand its generation of nuclear power in recent
years, dropped $9 billion on a single project — and has nothing to show for
it.
Yer saying the world's top climate scientist is full of shit?
"Nuclear Power Must Make a Comeback for Climate's Sake"
James Hansen, former NASA climate scientist, and three other prominent climate
scientists are calling for an enlarged focus on nuclear energy in the ongoing
Paris climate negotiations.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nuclear-power-must-make-a-comeback-for-climate-s-sake/
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/06/19/calling-global-carbon-tax-james-hansen-says-were-failing-miserably-tackling-climate

"Emissions aren't going to go down if the cost of fossil fuels isn't honest.
Economists are very clear on this," Hansen argued. "We need a steadily
increasing fee that is then distributed to the public."
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-14 00:20:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.

But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?

***



https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Unum
2019-04-14 02:27:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes. Right, lil yippy?

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/21/hinkley-point-c-dreadful-deal-behind-worlds-most-expensive-power-plant

At present, the estimated total bill for Hinkley Point C is £20.3bn, more than
twice the London Olympics.

“The maths doesn’t work,” says Tom Burke, former environmental policy adviser
to BP and visiting professor at both Imperial and University Colleges.
“Nuclear simply doesn’t make sense any more.”

The government estimates that the Hinkley top-up payments will cost consumers
around £30bn over the course of the 35-year contract. One of the few figures
on a comparable scale is the Brexit divorce bill.
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-14 06:41:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario. Tearing up the contracts will
more than pay for some new reactors.
Unum
2019-04-14 17:37:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the contracts will more
than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-14 18:49:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the contracts
will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.

When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh that
wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.

In Ontario, the public got mad enough to reduce the UN-fellating,
pro-renewables Liberal Party to a minivan party, i.e., the whole party
can now fit in a minivan.
Unum
2019-04-14 22:20:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the contracts will
more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh that
wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?

https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-15 21:41:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the contracts
will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh
that wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?

Loading Image...
Unum
2019-04-15 23:01:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the contracts will
more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh that
wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?

Loading Image...
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-16 00:37:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the
contracts will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh
that wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?
So consumers pay wholesale?

What a desperate little twat.
Unum
2019-04-16 01:01:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the contracts
will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh that
wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?
So consumers pay wholesale?
chumpsky admits his chart doesn't show the price of the actual electricity.
Post by Chom Noamsky
What a desperate little twat.
chumpsky is so consistently full of shit.

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/e/e0/Share_of_taxes_and_levies_paid_by_household_consumers_for_the_electricity%2C_first_half_2018_%28%25%29.png
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-16 08:10:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the
contracts will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh
that wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/e/e0/Share_of_taxes_and_levies_paid_by_household_consumers_for_the_electricity%2C_first_half_2018_%28%25%29.png
What about it?

Nothing you posted refutes the fact that people pay more for electricity
in nations with more solar and wind.

All you've done is CONFIRM that taxes and levies are ALSO HIGHER in
these nations.

Yer suckin' wind with yer arse, twat boy.
Unum
2019-04-16 14:33:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the contracts
will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh that
wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/e/e0/Share_of_taxes_and_levies_paid_by_household_consumers_for_the_electricity%2C_first_half_2018_%28%25%29.png
What about it?
So, chumpsky completely full of shit as usual.
Post by Chom Noamsky
Nothing you posted refutes the fact that people pay more for electricity in
nations with more solar and wind.
Nothing you posted shows that they do. Keep running!
Post by Chom Noamsky
All you've done is CONFIRM that taxes and levies are ALSO HIGHER in these
nations.
Yer suckin' wind with yer arse, twat boy.
chumpsky gets nasty when he loses. The price of the actual electricity in
Germany and Denmark is directly in line with the rest of Europe. Ireland
and Spain pay the highest prices.

Loading Image...
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-16 17:54:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the
contracts will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a
kWh that wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/e/e0/Share_of_taxes_and_levies_paid_by_household_consumers_for_the_electricity%2C_first_half_2018_%28%25%29.png
What about it?
So, chumpsky completely full of shit as usual.
Post by Chom Noamsky
Nothing you posted refutes the fact that people pay more for
electricity in nations with more solar and wind.
Nothing you posted shows that they do. Keep running!
Post by Chom Noamsky
All you've done is CONFIRM that taxes and levies are ALSO HIGHER in
these nations.
Yer suckin' wind with yer arse, twat boy.
chumpsky gets nasty when he loses. The price of the actual electricity in
Germany and Denmark is directly in line with the rest of Europe. Ireland
and Spain pay the highest prices.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/c/c0/Electricity_prices_for_household_consumers%2C_first_half_2018_%28EUR_per_kWh%29.png
Q: Should renewable levies and taxes be included in the price of
renewable power?

A: ______________________________________________________________
Unum
2019-04-16 23:10:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the contracts
will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh
that wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/e/e0/Share_of_taxes_and_levies_paid_by_household_consumers_for_the_electricity%2C_first_half_2018_%28%25%29.png
What about it?
So, chumpsky completely full of shit as usual.
Post by Chom Noamsky
Nothing you posted refutes the fact that people pay more for electricity in
nations with more solar and wind.
Nothing you posted shows that they do. Keep running!
Post by Chom Noamsky
All you've done is CONFIRM that taxes and levies are ALSO HIGHER in these
nations.
Yer suckin' wind with yer arse, twat boy.
chumpsky gets nasty when he loses. The price of the actual electricity in
Germany and Denmark is directly in line with the rest of Europe. Ireland
and Spain pay the highest prices.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/c/c0/Electricity_prices_for_household_consumers%2C_first_half_2018_%28EUR_per_kWh%29.png
Q: Should renewable levies and taxes be included in the price of renewable power?
Now that chumpsky got his ass kicked about the price of renewable energy
he will try to whine about subsidies.

IMF Pegs Canada's Fossil Fuel Subsidies at $34 Billion
https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2014/05/15/Canadas-34-Billion-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies/
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-17 16:26:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the
contracts will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is
a representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a
kWh that wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/e/e0/Share_of_taxes_and_levies_paid_by_household_consumers_for_the_electricity%2C_first_half_2018_%28%25%29.png
What about it?
So, chumpsky completely full of shit as usual.
Post by Chom Noamsky
Nothing you posted refutes the fact that people pay more for
electricity in nations with more solar and wind.
Nothing you posted shows that they do. Keep running!
Post by Chom Noamsky
All you've done is CONFIRM that taxes and levies are ALSO HIGHER in
these nations.
Yer suckin' wind with yer arse, twat boy.
chumpsky gets nasty when he loses. The price of the actual
electricity in
Germany and Denmark is directly in line with the rest of Europe. Ireland
and Spain pay the highest prices.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/c/c0/Electricity_prices_for_household_consumers%2C_first_half_2018_%28EUR_per_kWh%29.png
Q: Should renewable levies and taxes be included in the price of renewable power?
Now that chumpsky got his ass kicked about the price of renewable energy
he will try to whine about subsidies.
Try again: Should renewable levies and taxes be included in the price of
renewable power?

A: __________________________________________________
Unum
2019-04-17 19:23:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the contracts
will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh
that wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/e/e0/Share_of_taxes_and_levies_paid_by_household_consumers_for_the_electricity%2C_first_half_2018_%28%25%29.png
What about it?
So, chumpsky completely full of shit as usual.
Post by Chom Noamsky
Nothing you posted refutes the fact that people pay more for electricity
in nations with more solar and wind.
Nothing you posted shows that they do. Keep running!
Post by Chom Noamsky
All you've done is CONFIRM that taxes and levies are ALSO HIGHER in these
nations.
Yer suckin' wind with yer arse, twat boy.
chumpsky gets nasty when he loses. The price of the actual electricity in
Germany and Denmark is directly in line with the rest of Europe. Ireland
and Spain pay the highest prices.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/c/c0/Electricity_prices_for_household_consumers%2C_first_half_2018_%28EUR_per_kWh%29.png
Q: Should renewable levies and taxes be included in the price of renewable power?
Now that chumpsky got his ass kicked about the price of renewable energy
he will try to whine about subsidies.
Try again: Should renewable levies and taxes be included in the price of
renewable power?
Only as long as there are gigantic subsidies for dirty energy.

"Yer suckin' wind with yer arse, twat boy."

IMF Pegs Canada's Fossil Fuel Subsidies at $34 Billion
https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2014/05/15/Canadas-34-Billion-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies/
JTEM is Remarkably Flexible
2019-04-17 19:36:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
IMF Pegs Canada's Fossil Fuel Subsidies at $34 Billion
https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2014/05/15/Canadas-34-Billion-Fossil-Fuel-Subsidies/
Your "Cite" is a crock of shit:

: Natural gas consumption also enjoys billions in subsidies in Canada. The
: IMF estimates that un-priced carbon emissions from burning natural gas
: added up to $7.3 billion per year.

"Unpriced."

They're saying that NOT taxing the air is actually a subsidy!

That's the subsidy: "We didn't slap a hugely regressive tax on you, which
is exactly like giving you money!"

What other taxes haven't they charged i.e. subsidized you with?

There's no breathing tax, right? So they're subsidizing breathing for
billions & billions of dollars every year....

Is there a urine tax?

What about a skin tax, for people who have skin?

NOT taxing these things is exactly the same as handing people money,
so it's a subsidy... according to you and your "cite."




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/184253846713
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-18 00:21:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the
contracts will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario
is a representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for
a kWh that wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/e/e0/Share_of_taxes_and_levies_paid_by_household_consumers_for_the_electricity%2C_first_half_2018_%28%25%29.png
What about it?
So, chumpsky completely full of shit as usual.
Post by Chom Noamsky
Nothing you posted refutes the fact that people pay more for
electricity in nations with more solar and wind.
Nothing you posted shows that they do. Keep running!
Post by Chom Noamsky
All you've done is CONFIRM that taxes and levies are ALSO HIGHER
in these nations.
Yer suckin' wind with yer arse, twat boy.
chumpsky gets nasty when he loses. The price of the actual
electricity in
Germany and Denmark is directly in line with the rest of Europe. Ireland
and Spain pay the highest prices.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/c/c0/Electricity_prices_for_household_consumers%2C_first_half_2018_%28EUR_per_kWh%29.png
Q: Should renewable levies and taxes be included in the price of renewable power?
Now that chumpsky got his ass kicked about the price of renewable energy
he will try to whine about subsidies.
Try again: Should renewable levies and taxes be included in the price of
renewable power?
Only as long as there are gigantic subsidies for dirty energy.
Renewable subsidies are 25-250x more per unit of energy produced.

So end them all!

The RE industry will quickly collapse, while conventional energy might
go up a fraction of a percent.
Unum
2019-04-18 04:36:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the
contracts will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
Nope, it isn't.
Post by Chom Noamsky
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh
that wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
Why did chumpsky lie?
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-and-levelized-cost-of-storage-2018/
"The low end levelized cost of onshore wind-generated energy is $29/MWh"
So how come price goes up with more wind and solar?
What makes you think it does.
Post by Chom Noamsky
https://s3.amazonaws.com/jo.nova/graph/energy/renewables/cost/europe-cost-electricity-renewables-2015.gif
Chart including taxes and levies doesn't show the price of the actual
electricity. Why did chumpsky lie?
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/e/e0/Share_of_taxes_and_levies_paid_by_household_consumers_for_the_electricity%2C_first_half_2018_%28%25%29.png
What about it?
So, chumpsky completely full of shit as usual.
Post by Chom Noamsky
Nothing you posted refutes the fact that people pay more for
electricity in nations with more solar and wind.
Nothing you posted shows that they do. Keep running!
Post by Chom Noamsky
All you've done is CONFIRM that taxes and levies are ALSO HIGHER in
these nations.
Yer suckin' wind with yer arse, twat boy.
chumpsky gets nasty when he loses. The price of the actual electricity in
Germany and Denmark is directly in line with the rest of Europe. Ireland
and Spain pay the highest prices.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/c/c0/Electricity_prices_for_household_consumers%2C_first_half_2018_%28EUR_per_kWh%29.png
Q: Should renewable levies and taxes be included in the price of renewable power?
Now that chumpsky got his ass kicked about the price of renewable energy
he will try to whine about subsidies.
Try again: Should renewable levies and taxes be included in the price of
renewable power?
Only as long as there are gigantic subsidies for dirty energy.
Renewable subsidies are 25-250x more per unit of energy produced.
NMot interested in some nutjob's personal opinion.
Post by Chom Noamsky
So end them all!
The RE industry will quickly collapse, while conventional energy might go up a
fraction of a percent.
More than 40 percent of world coal plants are already unprofitable. Without
subsidies it would be every single one.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-coal/more-than-40-percent-of-world-coal-plants-are-unprofitable-report-idUSKCN1NZ00B
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-18 05:53:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
More than 40 percent of world coal plants are already unprofitable. Without
subsidies it would be every single one.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-coal/more-than-40-percent-of-world-coal-plants-are-unprofitable-report-idUSKCN1NZ00B
So unprofitable coal market's share hasn't changed in 20 years, in spite
of MASSIVE subsidies for renewables?
Unum
2019-04-18 15:03:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
More than 40 percent of world coal plants are already unprofitable. Without
subsidies it would be every single one.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-coal/more-than-40-percent-of-world-coal-plants-are-unprofitable-report-idUSKCN1NZ00B
So unprofitable coal market's share hasn't changed in 20 years, in spite of
MASSIVE subsidies for renewables?
Backflipping to yet another discredited talking point? Coal wasn't
unprofitable 20 years ago, lil yippy. Only became a money-loser
recently due to cheaper electricity from wind and solar as the
price continues to fall year after year.
Chom Noamsky
2019-04-19 21:47:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
More than 40 percent of world coal plants are already unprofitable. Without
subsidies it would be every single one.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-coal/more-than-40-percent-of-world-coal-plants-are-unprofitable-report-idUSKCN1NZ00B
So unprofitable coal market's share hasn't changed in 20 years, in
spite of MASSIVE subsidies for renewables?
Backflipping to yet another discredited talking point? Coal wasn't
unprofitable 20 years ago, lil yippy. Only became a money-loser
recently due to cheaper electricity from wind and solar as the
price continues to fall year after year.
So how come power bills are higher where coal has been phased out in
favour of wind and solar?

columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2019-04-15 21:47:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
Post by Unum
Post by Chom Noamsky
Post by Unum
That was 4 years ago. Now Hansen advocates for a carbon tax.
Hansen was advocating for nuke last week.
But April 4th is so last week, eh squealy girl?
***
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-needs-nuclear-power-11554420097
Maybe he could pay for it with carbon taxes.
Wind revenues are 90% subsidy in Ontario.  Tearing up the contracts
will more than pay for some new reactors.
So now 'saving the planet' is all about Ontario?
Wind power revenues are subsidized around the planet, Ontario is a
representative example.
When the public finds out it's getting bilked 23-80 cents for a kWh that
wholesales for 3 cents, it gets mad, very very mad.
In Ontario, the public got mad enough to reduce the UN-fellating,
pro-renewables Liberal Party to a minivan party, i.e., the whole party
can now fit in a minivan.
so why keep the real expenses of nuke plant construction hidden, nuke plant operating costs buried, fukushima cleanup costs under the carpet, oh yeah thats right chompers is for a "sunshine policy" for the data (laughing)
Bret Cahill
2019-04-16 23:45:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In behind-the-scenes projections, some experts predict that if such a critical meltdown of infrastructure expands beyond regional containment, anywhere from 60 to 90 per cent of the US population will be dead within roughly the first 11 months. While that prediction might appear extreme, it could conceivably be optimistic. In his 2008 testimony to the US House of Representatives on the threat posed by an EMP attack, Graham summarised the calculation, stating:

We don’t have experience with losing the infrastructure in a country with 300 million people, most of whom don’t live in a way that provides for their own food and other needs. We can go back to an era when people did live like that…10 per cent would be 30 million people, and that is probably the range where we could survive as a basically rural economy.

https://aeon.co/ideas/an-electrical-meltdown-looms-how-can-we-avert-disaster
R Kym Horsell
2019-04-17 00:42:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
We don't have experience with losing the infrastructure in a country with 300 million people, most of whom don't live in a way that provides for their own food and other needs. We can go back to an era when people did live like that...10 per cent would be 30 million people, and that is probably the range where we could survive as a basically rural economy.
https://aeon.co/ideas/an-electrical-meltdown-looms-how-can-we-avert-disaster
A good mental model for the next century.
--
The geophysical algorithms specifically designed for use with the
Nimbus-7 SMMR for obtaining sea surface temperatures, near-surface
winds, atmospheric water vapour, cloud liquid water, rain rates, snow
cover, sea-ice concentration, multiyear ice fraction, and ice
temperature are summarised in Gloerson et al (1984).
...
In the Arctic, the presence of a perennial ice cover further
complicates the problem of determining sea-ice concentration. The
presence of sea ice ranging in age from newly formed thin ice to thick
multiyear ice results in ambiguous microwave signals, which pose
additional difficulties in accurately calculating sea-ice
concentration. The problem of determining ice concentration in the
presence of a mixture of radiometrically different ice types is
essentially the problem of determine the ice-type distribution. Some
attempts in differentiating first-year and multiyear ice cover in the
Arctic using the single-channel ESMR-5 data have met with only limited
success (Carsey 1981; Campbell et al 1983). The accuracy of computing
sea-ice concentration when two radiometrically different ice types are
present and when significant spatial and temporal variations in ice
temperature occur has been improved with the use of multispectral
radiances from the SMMR.
[Goes on to describe an algorithm to process Nimbus-7 SMMR data and
determine concentration of sea-ice and multiyear fraction -- the
amount of ice that has survived at least 1 summer.]
-- Barry Saltzman (ed), Advances in Geophysics, Vol 27
Loading...