Jump to content

An Example of "Green Energy's" Impact


Buffalo
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

For one thing I do not know of any average households that use less than 1500 Kwh per month anywhere.  Both my children live in Minnesota.

 

Dec 13, 2019

Green Energy May Raise Cost of Electricity ×11 in Minnesota

The moonbats ruling Minnesota plan for wind, solar, and battery storage to provide all of the state’s electricity by 2050. Minnesotans had better start saving now if they expect to have enough to pay their energy bills. Xcel Energy has calculated how much this will cost consumers.

Via Center of the American Experiment:

If we just use the wholesale cost of $1.60 per kilowatt hour and ignore the factors in the retail costs, electricity prices would be 11 times higher than the current price of electricity for residential customers Xcel Energy’s service territory. This means the average Minnesota household with Xcel as their energy provider using 648 kilowatt hours per month would see their average monthly bill increase from about $91.30 to $1,036.80, or more than $12,000 per year.

It is important to stress that the wholesale cost of electricity using wind, solar, and batteries would be 50 times more expensive than the electricity produced by the Sherburne County coal units, which Xcel Energy wants to shut down decades before the end of their useful lifetimes…

Good thing the resulting reduction in harmless carbon emissions will do nothing to prevent global warming. A little warming would do Minnesotans good, considering that their government plans to price heating out of reach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wallco1 said:

Anything that is so called green SUCKS, Cleaning products don't work, energy is weak, and electric cars pollute as much or more that any other car

Your are correct. And if somebody like me can figure that out, I wonder why others can't.  Oh, that's right, like little toonberg, they have been brainswashed. LOL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The subsidence of America as a nation is caused by fools who have decided to decide that they understand things that are far beyond their ken, and the people who will pat them on the back and encourage them to new heights of self-deception in order to sell them things and keep them wriggling on the hook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, splunch said:

The subsidence of America as a nation is caused by fools who have decided to decide that they understand things that are far beyond their ken, and the people who will pat them on the back and encourage them to new heights of self-deception in order to sell them things and keep them wriggling on the hook.

Speak for yourself little girl...The only reason America is sinking is because of moonbats like you with the socialist agenda you keep trying to pedal and I am not buying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buffalo said:
 

For one thing I do not know of any average households that use less than 1500 Kwh per month anywhere.  Both my children live in Minnesota.

 

Dec 13, 2019

Green Energy May Raise Cost of Electricity ×11 in Minnesota

The moonbats ruling Minnesota plan for wind, solar, and battery storage to provide all of the state’s electricity by 2050. Minnesotans had better start saving now if they expect to have enough to pay their energy bills. Xcel Energy has calculated how much this will cost consumers.

Via Center of the American Experiment:

If we just use the wholesale cost of $1.60 per kilowatt hour and ignore the factors in the retail costs, electricity prices would be 11 times higher than the current price of electricity for residential customers Xcel Energy’s service territory. This means the average Minnesota household with Xcel as their energy provider using 648 kilowatt hours per month would see their average monthly bill increase from about $91.30 to $1,036.80, or more than $12,000 per year.

It is important to stress that the wholesale cost of electricity using wind, solar, and batteries would be 50 times more expensive than the electricity produced by the Sherburne County coal units, which Xcel Energy wants to shut down decades before the end of their useful lifetimes…

Good thing the resulting reduction in harmless carbon emissions will do nothing to prevent global warming. A little warming would do Minnesotans good, considering that their government plans to price heating out of reach.

Ouch 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Buffalo said:
 

For one thing I do not know of any average households that use less than 1500 Kwh per month anywhere.  Both my children live in Minnesota.

 

Dec 13, 2019

Green Energy May Raise Cost of Electricity ×11 in Minnesota

The moonbats ruling Minnesota plan for wind, solar, and battery storage to provide all of the state’s electricity by 2050. Minnesotans had better start saving now if they expect to have enough to pay their energy bills. Xcel Energy has calculated how much this will cost consumers.

Via Center of the American Experiment:

If we just use the wholesale cost of $1.60 per kilowatt hour and ignore the factors in the retail costs, electricity prices would be 11 times higher than the current price of electricity for residential customers Xcel Energy’s service territory. This means the average Minnesota household with Xcel as their energy provider using 648 kilowatt hours per month would see their average monthly bill increase from about $91.30 to $1,036.80, or more than $12,000 per year.

It is important to stress that the wholesale cost of electricity using wind, solar, and batteries would be 50 times more expensive than the electricity produced by the Sherburne County coal units, which Xcel Energy wants to shut down decades before the end of their useful lifetimes…

Good thing the resulting reduction in harmless carbon emissions will do nothing to prevent global warming. A little warming would do Minnesotans good, considering that their government plans to price heating out of reach.

 

Moronic bullshyt cooked up by a fossil fuel energy company, suitable only for deceiving gullible retards like yourself, Buttfckalo, or fertilizing rose bushes.

 

In the real world.....

 

Mar 25, 2019 · In all, 74% of coal plants cost more to run than building new wind or solar, analysts found. ... and southwest parts of the state, areas that now have almost no solar power development.
 
Dec 3, 2018 · New analysis shows renewable energy is beating coal on cost cross the U.S.: The price to build new wind and solar has fallen below the cost of running existing coal-fired power plants in Red ...
 
Sep 20, 2019 · There is a trope among politicians on the right that wind and solar power are too expensive, that it would be a fool's errand to pursue renewable energy sources because they could never be ...
 
Mar 25, 2019 · Renewables Cheaper Than 75 Percent of U.S. Coal Fleet, Report Finds. ... By 2025, enough wind and solar power will be generated at low enough prices in the U.S. that it could theoretically replace 86 percent of the U.S. coal fleet with lower-cost electricity, The Guardian reported.
 
Mar 25, 2019 · Around three-quarters of US coal production is now more expensive than solar and wind energy in providing electricity to American households, according to a new study. “Even without major ...
 
Jun 4, 2019 · The energy landscape changes so fast, even experts have trouble keeping up. Prices for renewable power are plummeting, technologies for storage are becoming more cost-effective and ...
 
Mar 25, 2019 · Ohio. Analysis: New wind, solar cheaper than operating most existing coal plants ... “ Regulators need to start thinking now about how to start replacing all that coal generation,” said report co- author ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Buffalo said:

Speak for yourself little girl...The only reason America is sinking is because of moonbats like you with the socialist agenda you keep trying to pedal and I am not buying it.

Used to be your ilk knew to keep to things you understood:  football scores, the bowling league, scoring your farts at the picnic.  Now we have the Internet and you can cruise YouTube for videos of people agreeing with every psychotic fantasy you've ever had, and you just spun off out of control.

 

Now every dipsh!t thinks he's part of some club that's got it all figured out.

 

You need to pipe down and get back to your Miller Light and posturing for the rest of your herd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, splunch said:

Used to be your ilk knew to keep to things you understood:  football scores, the bowling league, scoring your farts at the picnic.  Now we have the Internet and you can cruise YouTube for videos of people agreeing with every psychotic fantasy you've ever had, and you just spun off out of control.

 

Now every dipsh!t thinks he's part of some club that's got it all figured out.

 

You need to pipe down and get back to your Miller Light and posturing for the rest of your herd.

Heed your own pontifications and advice, bitch! Because you sure goddamn ain't got figured out...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, ConConfounder said:

 

Moronic bullshyt cooked up by a fossil fuel energy company, suitable only for deceiving gullible retards like yourself, Buttfckalo, or fertilizing rose bushes.

 

In the real world.....

 

Mar 25, 2019 · In all, 74% of coal plants cost more to run than building new wind or solar, analysts found. ... and southwest parts of the state, areas that now have almost no solar power development.
 
Dec 3, 2018 · New analysis shows renewable energy is beating coal on cost cross the U.S.: The price to build new wind and solar has fallen below the cost of running existing coal-fired power plants in Red ...
 
Sep 20, 2019 · There is a trope among politicians on the right that wind and solar power are too expensive, that it would be a fool's errand to pursue renewable energy sources because they could never be ...
 
Mar 25, 2019 · Renewables Cheaper Than 75 Percent of U.S. Coal Fleet, Report Finds. ... By 2025, enough wind and solar power will be generated at low enough prices in the U.S. that it could theoretically replace 86 percent of the U.S. coal fleet with lower-cost electricity, The Guardian reported.
 
Mar 25, 2019 · Around three-quarters of US coal production is now more expensive than solar and wind energy in providing electricity to American households, according to a new study. “Even without major ...
 
Jun 4, 2019 · The energy landscape changes so fast, even experts have trouble keeping up. Prices for renewable power are plummeting, technologies for storage are becoming more cost-effective and ...
 
Mar 25, 2019 · Ohio. Analysis: New wind, solar cheaper than operating most existing coal plants ... “ Regulators need to start thinking now about how to start replacing all that coal generation,” said report co- author ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bullsh!t, confounded! It is not just the cost operate them. It is also the cost of building them and the land mass required that makes them unfeasible. 

 

Keeping a well-functioning grid that provides every American with power on demand requires substantial base-load power capacity. While intermittent renewables like wind and solar can make good supplements, they cannot provide for the energy needs of modern society alone.

 

http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2016/08/20/why-renewables-alone-cannot-meet-our-energy-needs/

 

Is 100 percent renewables an unscientific fantasy?

If you think wind and solar alone will provide 100 percent of America’s energy needs then yes, it is a fantasy with no scientific basis.

The scientific community essentially agreed in June when 21 prominent scientists issued a sharp critique to Mark Jacobson of Stanford, who said America could easily become 100 percent wind and solar by mid-century. But he refused to acknowledge sound scientific principles in his research and refused to correct obvious scientific errors. And then he played politics.

 

https://www.wind-watch.org/news/2017/07/09/wind-and-solar-alone-cant-meet-americas-energy-needs/

 

Conclusions

Solar and wind have numerous important physical limitations:

Non-scalable. They can’t be turned on or off to adjust to peak electric demand.

Inefficient. They have exceptionally low capacity factors. They are probably operating near their theoretical limits now.

Siting. Must be built where conditions are suitable, not necessarily where electricity is needed.

Land. Require vast land areas to produce significant amounts of electricity.

Land area is a serious obstacle to both solar and wind power. Most people just assume there is enough. There likely isn’t enough suitable land in the continental United States for them to come close to current electric needs, let alone future ones. If electric cars catch on consumption will skyrocket.

Wind and solar provide less than five percent of all electricity in the United States, despite 10s of billions in government subsidies. Subsidies can’t be sustained forever.

The Administration talks the talk of an all-of-the-above energy strategy. Solar and wind economics will soon force government to walk the walk. Solar and wind disadvantageous prevent their adoption as the primary source of electricity in the United States.

 

http://www.commdiginews.com/environment/solar-and-wind-electric-a-matter-of-land-area-10383/

 

Think about this: Who controls the production of electricity and its distribution in the US. Private Utility corporations.  IF they were profitable they would already be up and going. WITHOUT government (taxpayer subsidies) there wouldn't even be any because they are NOT profitable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ConConfounder said:

 

Moronic bullshyt cooked up by a fossil fuel energy company, suitable only for deceiving gullible retards like yourself, Buttfckalo, or fertilizing rose bushes.

 

In the real world.....

 

Mar 25, 2019 · In all, 74% of coal plants cost more to run than building new wind or solar, analysts found. ... and southwest parts of the state, areas that now have almost no solar power development.
 
Dec 3, 2018 · New analysis shows renewable energy is beating coal on cost cross the U.S.: The price to build new wind and solar has fallen below the cost of running existing coal-fired power plants in Red ...
 
Sep 20, 2019 · There is a trope among politicians on the right that wind and solar power are too expensive, that it would be a fool's errand to pursue renewable energy sources because they could never be ...
 
Mar 25, 2019 · Renewables Cheaper Than 75 Percent of U.S. Coal Fleet, Report Finds. ... By 2025, enough wind and solar power will be generated at low enough prices in the U.S. that it could theoretically replace 86 percent of the U.S. coal fleet with lower-cost electricity, The Guardian reported.
 
Mar 25, 2019 · Around three-quarters of US coal production is now more expensive than solar and wind energy in providing electricity to American households, according to a new study. “Even without major ...
 
Jun 4, 2019 · The energy landscape changes so fast, even experts have trouble keeping up. Prices for renewable power are plummeting, technologies for storage are becoming more cost-effective and ...
 
Mar 25, 2019 · Ohio. Analysis: New wind, solar cheaper than operating most existing coal plants ... “ Regulators need to start thinking now about how to start replacing all that coal generation,” said report co- author ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30 minutes ago, Buffalo said:

Here's some more of my Bullsh!t, confounded!

 

That's pretty much all you ever post' Buttfckalo.

 

 

 

Quote

It is not just the cost operate them. It is also the cost of building them and the land mass required that makes them unfeasible. 

 

More evidence-free, unsupported rightwingnut denier cult myths and nonsense. 

 

The cost of building solar and wind energy systems and the cost of the land they need is figured into all of the cost comparisons between solar&wind vs. fossil fuels, moron.

 

 

 

 

Quote

Keeping a well-functioning grid that provides every American with power on demand requires substantial base-load power capacity. While intermittent renewables like wind and solar can make good supplements, they cannot provide for the energy needs of modern society alone.

 

Even more bullshyt from ol' Buttfckalo.

 

Battery storage of a portion of the energy produced by solar and wind is quickly eliminating the need for gas powered peaker plants.

 

May 21, 2019 · One of the largest utilities in the country scrapped a proposal to build a new peaker plant, opting instead to build a battery system that could store excess electricity from solar and wind when conditions are good and cleanly dispatch it when needed.
 
Nov 13, 2019 · A new Solutions Brief by Climate Central describes the rapid growth of battery storage capacity in the ... For years, utilities have used natural gas “peaker plants” that come online quickly when the grid ...
 
Jan 11, 2018 · Texas is a leader in wind power and quickly growing its solar capacity. ... and even eliminate the need for the use of fairly inefficient and dirty natural gas peaker plants by charging up batteries during low ...
 
Battery storage can be used to meet system peak needs, as SCE is doing in. California in replacing the two- unit Mandalay natural gas peaker plant. • Battery storage can be used to provide firm renewable power, as both.
 
Apr 29, 2019 · The batteries can hold excess solar power early in the day, for example, to use during the late afternoon peak, reducing the need for costly natural gas “peaker plants” that have to be powered up ...

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

LOLOLOLOL......

 

Oct 25, 2012 · The anti-wind power Wind Watch Net site is full of lies, half truths, exaggerations and is aimed at deceiving people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, ConConfounder said:

 

 

That's pretty much all you ever post' Buttfckalo.

 

 

 

 

More evidence-free, unsupported rightwingnut denier cult myths and nonsense. 

 

The cost of building solar and wind energy systems and the cost of the land they need is figured into all of the cost comparisons between solar&wind vs. fossil fuels, moron.

 

 

 

 

 

Even more bullshyt from ol' Buttfckalo.

 

Battery storage of a portion of the energy produced by solar and wind is quickly eliminating the need for gas powered peaker plants.

 

May 21, 2019 · One of the largest utilities in the country scrapped a proposal to build a new peaker plant, opting instead to build a battery system that could store excess electricity from solar and wind when conditions are good and cleanly dispatch it when needed.
 
Nov 13, 2019 · A new Solutions Brief by Climate Central describes the rapid growth of battery storage capacity in the ... For years, utilities have used natural gas “peaker plants” that come online quickly when the grid ...
 
Jan 11, 2018 · Texas is a leader in wind power and quickly growing its solar capacity. ... and even eliminate the need for the use of fairly inefficient and dirty natural gas peaker plants by charging up batteries during low ...
 
Battery storage can be used to meet system peak needs, as SCE is doing in. California in replacing the two- unit Mandalay natural gas peaker plant. • Battery storage can be used to provide firm renewable power, as both.
 
Apr 29, 2019 · The batteries can hold excess solar power early in the day, for example, to use during the late afternoon peak, reducing the need for costly natural gas “peaker plants” that have to be powered up ...

 

 

 

 

 

LOLOLOLOL......

 

Oct 25, 2012 · The anti-wind power Wind Watch Net site is full of lies, half truths, exaggerations and is aimed at deceiving people.

Moonbatty envirowackos like you, confounded, is a huge part of what is wrong with this country. You and your fellow moonbats need to fade away. Maybe drown yourselves in  the rising seas.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Buffalo said:

Moonbatty envirowackos like you, confounded, is a huge part of what is wrong with this country. You and your fellow moonbats need to fade away. Maybe drown yourselves in  the rising seas.  

 

Awwww.....poor little Buttfckalo got his idiotic and fraudulent thread totally debunked....and now his widdle feelings are so butt-hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...