[QUOTE=Elvis2008;3011045]I guess it is too much for your oatmeal of a brain to figure out who benefits from higher oil prices and who does not.[/QUOTE]Clearly, you didn't even know what you intended.
Printable View
[QUOTE=Elvis2008;3011045]I guess it is too much for your oatmeal of a brain to figure out who benefits from higher oil prices and who does not.[/QUOTE]Clearly, you didn't even know what you intended.
This is why the world sees Trump as a laughable, vain-glorious joke with the American people as the butt of that joke.
A must see video, full of clips of Trump's actual words and assertions that show his blithering blathering excuses for his historic failures, particularly with regard to war and peace, reaching new heights.
[URL]https://youtu.be/2wuHPDo8KAI?si=9ZvA_nHEnzDLzXNN[/URL]
However, a major point that O'Donnell missed was Trump's apparent reversal on his opinion of NATO has nothing to do with him finally "learning" something about the value of it. No. It is only him pretending to give a shit about what it was established to accomplish in order to con the Nobel Committee into giving him a Nobel Peace Prize despite him being the biggest warmongerer to ever occupy the White House.
[QUOTE=SubCmdr;3010906]I don't disagree with you per se Spidy. But sometimes when I read you posts it reminds me of the environmentalists [I]hugging trees[/I]. There is NO one more interested in forests always being there than a forestry company.[/QUOTE] Nah, ...not so much a "tree hugger" (well maybe a wee bit), but more of an [i][b]"electrification enthusiast"[/b][/i] and pragmatist when it comes to "electrification of everything", when and where possible.
For some people it's a passion for bitcoin, for some it's geeking-out to AI/computers and for others it's enthusiasm for EVs, clean energy and electrification tech! To each their own!
Hey, feel free to disagree! I welcome any and all opposing arguments (or "disagreements") and counterpoints, brought to a debate, especially when it comes to electrification and the geo-eco-political willingness of countries to take that leap towards a [b]self-sustaining Electrostate[/b] or continue under the [b]yoke of Petrostates.[/b]
[QUOTE=SubCmdr;3010906]A grid needs a 40% stable input of energy. For now that is coal, gas and oil perhaps nuclear in the future or fusion. I am not hating on the petrostate.[/QUOTE]
Sure, if you still believe in yesterday's bygone ("40% baseload") fossil fuel grids, that mostly dealt with one-way only connectivity (ie. centralized power, directly sent to the consumers), is what's still need for the grids of tomorrow?
Today, the [b]smart grids[/b] of tomorrow, need to be dynamic, flexible and deal with [b]bidirectional grid connectivity[/b], smart-digital devices, micro-grids, virtual power plants (VPP) and an ever increasing demand for electricity. (ie. AI, data centers, EVs, Heat-pumps, Net-Metering, V2G, H2G...etc).
Places like California, South Australia, China (in some regions), Britain and Sweden, Denmark have "flipped the script", with fossil fuels now being used, ONLY as backup peaker plants, and renewables as the primary drivers as their bulk input sources of energy?
[QUOTE=SubCmdr;3010906]So no I am not lying prostrate and taking in the ass from the new green lobby as the propose [I]pie in the sky[/I] ideas that are not practical in the real world. It's not a competition. It's about cooperation.[/QUOTE] And what about the fact we've all been [b][i]"...taking in the ass from the..." [/i][/b] mighty fossil fuel lobby, for the last 100+ years? Aren't you sore yet?
[QUOTE=SubCmdr;3010906] I don't know a single electrical grid engineer personally [b]that is hell bent on renewables.[/b] [I]Clean Energy[/I] is a misnomer that does not acknowledge that the original of the actual energy used to mine and process the materials used to manufacture and transport the equipment used to make [I]Clean Energy[/I].[/QUOTE] Would that "Clean Energy" misnomer, be like the fossil fuel industry's [i][b]"natural gas"[/b] misnomer? Or "beautiful clean coal"? Or "Carbon Neutral LNG?"[/i] ...Anyways, I digress!
Power Engineers [i]"...hell bent on renewables",[/i] maybe not! However, I am inclined to believe, most good engineers, they just like "a good problem to solve" OR a good challenge. And try to do so "efficiently", if possible, given what they have to work with.
But if it is, as you say, perhaps the green/clean energy industry is guilty as charged? However, the same guilty charge, can be equally applied to almost any industry. Just in varying degrees of guilt! With the fossil fuel industry's level of guilt, being a ten, on a scale from 1 to 10.
Although, IMHO, I think the green/clean energy industry has been wayyyyyyyyyy more mindful about this, than the fossil fuel industry.
[QUOTE=SubCmdr;3010906][B]Energy takes long term planning and investment. It is not a matter of politics. It is matter of engineering in the real world.[/B][/QUOTE]
I agree it takes long term planning/investment, w/r to pulling off something like China becoming the world's first electrostate. But I disagree with the rest of the statement.
I think politics has EVERYTHING to do with decades long worth of planning, for a country, for example becoming the world's first electrostate and lifting 800 million people out of poverty, verses the democratic backsliding going on in the states.
As for the engineers, AGAIN I'm just inclined to believe, they love a good problem and most perhaps couldn't care less, if they were FORCED to solve the country's grid problems with hydrocarbons or electrons.
Let us start by watching this.
[URL]https://youtu.be/Sq-y-wiZduE?si=OY0a5g5DWIq1Cfuy[/URL]
This video makes my point about upgrading the grid being an important part of adding renewables over time.
[QUOTE=Spidy;3011106]Sure, if still believe in yesterday's bygone ("40% baseload") fossil fuel grids, that mostly dealt with one-way only connectivity (ie. centralized power, directly sent to the consumers). Today's [b]smart grids,[/b] have to be dynamic, flexible and deal with [b]bidirectional grid connectivity[/b], smart-digital devices, micro-grids, virtual power plants (VPP) and an ever increasing demand for electricity. (ie. AI, data centers, EVs, Heat-pumps, Net-Metering, V2G, H2G...etc).[/QUOTE]Already addressed in the video.
[QUOTE=Spidy;3011106]Places like California, South Australia, China (in some regions), Britain and Sweden, Denmark have "flipped the script", with fossil fuels now being used, ONLY as backup peaker plants, and renewables as the primary drivers as their bulk input sources of energy?[/QUOTE]Why does California have some the highest electricity bills in the entire Dis-United States of America? You are the one throwing about the numbers needed to buy fossil fuels. If the state is significantly using sources to produce electricity that are not fossil fuels based then why haven't electricity rates come down dramatically?
[QUOTE=Spidy;3011106] And what about the fact we've all been [b][i]"...taking in the ass from the..." [/i][/b] mighty fossil fuel lobby, for the last 100+ years? Aren't you sore yet?[/QUOTE]Prime example of the perfect being the enemy of the good. Seems like you would prefer to shoot from the hip and sit in the dark than to use what is available when it is available to have light. [B]ROTFLMAO![/B].
Green Energy Lobby has been about a lot of bullshit brother. I actually power my business location on solar in the Dominican Republic. Because it is remote and I decided to use the money it would have taken me to connect to the grid, on my off grid system and for back up power using fossil fuels. Any mother fucker have something to say about that, dey can sit in the mother fucking dark when the grid goes down. That laughing you going to hear in the dead of night will be me. Cause all dem bitches going to be up in my spot partying naked with the light on. [B]ROTFLMAO[/B]!
[QUOTE=Spidy;3011106]I agree it takes long term planning/investment, w/r to pulling off something like China becoming the world's first electrostate. But I disagree with the rest of the statement. [u]I think politics has EVERYTHING to do with decades long worth of planning[/u], for a country, for example becoming the world's first electrostate and lifting 800 million people out of poverty. [/QUOTE]All I can say is:
You want to know the length of plans for the Dis-United States of America. Look at the budget. Look at the election cycle and look at the terms of federal office for the Dis-United States of America. The Dis-United States of America could not even put together and stick with a plan to manage Iran getting nuclear weapons. That is just a little more important than a few extra hydrocarbons being released into the atmosphere.
[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;3011035][URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/23/arts/music/sean-combs-diddy-trial-sex-night-expenses.html[/URL] But the dood is most definitely a homo, WTF hiring $1000 male escorts. I guess he will be enjoying lots of prison sex, on the house no less.[/QUOTE]And the relationship to American Politics of this post is?
[QUOTE=Spidy;3011038][i][b](...kkkk!)[/b][/i] Dude, stop digging a hole for yourself!
With all do respect Sirioja, do a little research once in a while, if you are going to pretend to have a debate, and bring to the table reasonable statements of FACT and not FICTION!
[b]France's S.H.A.M.E.:"[/b]
[LIST]Politico (April 11, 2024): [i][b]"France talks tough on Ukraine while gobbling up more Russian gas."[/b] [url]https://www.politico.eu/article/france-talk-tough-ukraine-while-gobble-up-more-russia-gas/[/url]
"France has paid Russia [u]over 600 million[/u] this year for liquefied natural gas (LNG), new data shows. That's an EU-leading rise from last year."
"In all, [b]Paris has paid over 600 million to the Kremlin[/b] for gas supplies since the start of the year, the data showed leading to calls for France to clamp down on its rising purchases." [/i][/LIST]
[i][b]France,[/b][/i] (not Germany), led the EU in Russian LNG imports in early 2024, paying over 600 million to Moscow, a 40% increase from 2023. Belgium, Spain and the Netherlands, were the three largest buyers of Moscow's LNG after France.
Sirioja, in the future, may I suggest you spend more time, understanding and knowing [i][b]France's shameful politics[/b][/i] and less time vilifying the U.S., for those very same, shameful politics![/QUOTE]Keeping on buying to Russia is a big mistake, when making broke Putin is only way to make him stopping war, when he makes fun of your old senile liar who prefer to try to rob Ukraine and now defend criminal Netanyahou. Not my problem if inflation, lost jobs for Americans because of Trump, but my big problem when he put messe in our world, when just senile at the edge of death, only able to lie, threaten and bullshit, such ignorant he is, shameful image for USA. At least, my beautiful little France don t try to rob Ukraine, but support them and condamn criminal Putin and Netanyahou. Our world would live much better without these 3 crazy dangerous, when Americans have now to worry, even at home.
It's just comical these Maga nuts.
[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;3011035][URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/23/arts/music/sean-combs-diddy-trial-sex-night-expenses.html[/URL]
But the dood is most definitely a homo, WTF hiring $1000 male escorts.
I guess he will be enjoying lots of prison sex, on the house no less.[/QUOTE]Oh yeah, if he were in California where a black man can do no wrong, he would be let go like OJ. But in the Marxist republic of New York, Coombs being convicted (like Trump was) is a done deal in that rigged system.
By the way, some of the Democratic are orgasmic with the guy slotted to be NYC mayor.
Taibbi wrote a great piece about this soon to be mayor, Zohran Mamdani: As they floundered, Trump oozed confidence and claimed to have answers. Mamdani does too, at a time when the heads of the traditional Democratic party look either ancient or dead and have no ideas beyond bleating about democracy and denouncing critics as Russian traitors. A confident salesman will win in this moment. The difference between Trump and Mamdani, of course, lay in their respective "answers. "
There were few true Marxists in America then even among college grads, since we'd been through The Discussion. 17-year-old males of my generation reached college trained to see the main logistical challenges of life as scoring beer, scoring weed, and chasing girls. If you went to a certain type of school (Mamdani's Bowdoin definitely qualifies), there was pretty much always beer and weed somewhere in your dorm, and often girls too. The only admission price was The Discussion. I went to Bard, where a handful of dudes I envied deeply wore Daniel Ortega jackets and Che-style facial hair and talked about Systems of Oppression until women threw themselves at them. It was a great rap. Human problems would disappear if society would just meet citizen needs, not force people to fight for resources, and eliminate sociopathic mechanisms like the corporation that profit from war, disease, and addiction. You can make it sound awesome even now!
If the concept only has to hold up long enough to get a college student laid, socialism works. You only land in the big LOL once you take the step New York just has, into reality. The part no one mentions at campus parties is that the replacement for markets in socialism is not just human authority, but dumb authority. Yes, prices can be oppressive, but try swapping out organic pricing for committees of sociology majors and AOC types deciding how much they think shoes or ice cream or a house should cost. Assuming Mamdani wins, this is going to be a hilarious surprise to voters eager for city-run stores and the fantastic services we've been told, apparently falsely, need to cost something. Why, just look at the Staten Island ferry:
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RScORcC0ssQ[/URL]
And then there is the Taibbi zinger: Billy Mays graphics notwithstanding, Mamdani doesn't inform us that the MTA is running an annual $3 billion deficit, which won't improve once Mr. Mayor cuts into the 25% of revenues the Authority earns from fares and tolls. Ferry rides are free, somewhat randomly and for political reasons, but the service is obviously not devoid of cost.
But you can see that even that the guy is full of shit idea wise, he has Obama like charisma. He even did a decent rap video: [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQVsVNPkPmE[/URL].
Of course, you can imagine Goatbrain wanting to go down on this guy and his I am going to make everything free pledge.
And seeing as how Loony Tooms and Spidy the Amazing China Humper have gone off on Taibbi or anyone else who dares to criticize the Democratic douches, Taibbi had to write a response to a Democratic douche who questioned what he stood for.
The question: Okay, good to lampoon foolishness, regardless of the source, and Democrats are now as soaked in bullshit and rot as Republicans, and your grandpa's half-assed socialism has failed and disgraced itself around the world, but what the fuck are you for, Taibbi? Anything? Have you become a convert to fucking vicious, evil, and stupid predatory Capitalism? Is that what you've decided is the wave of the future? It's hard to tell from your smarmy negativity.
And Taibbi's response: It's a fair question. I do a lot of ridiculing here and don't advocate for much. But to answer seriously: it's strange to ask if someone is a "convert" to "fucking vicious, evil, and stupid predatory capitalism," since it presupposes I started out as something other than a capitalist, which most Americans (including those ostensibly socialist podcasters) naturally are. I'm certainly no zealot about it, but I favor free markets, because I like the idea of people starting their own restaurant or bank or rock band or whatever and being rewarded if they do a good job, a beautiful thing when it happens. I'm not in favor of big enterprises like Goldman, Sachs or GM being backstopped by the government and insulated from failure when smaller companies don't enjoy the same privilege. I don't think everything should be private, and do favor some relief programs to take the harder edges off a free-market system, though I think those work better when they're universally available. I think government should be small and prioritize protecting rights and freedoms over solving the world's problems. In short I'm what used to be called a moderate, and believe society isn't that far from being in great shape, if we could just calm down, find fixes for a problem or two, and learn to appreciate what we have. Hope that answers your question.
So you can see why Goatbrain and Loony Tooms and Spidy the Amazing China humper do not like him!
[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2988849]I have read with amusement the antics of you and the Medellin morons as you have now travelled the Pacific and are littering the board again with your trash talking and insistence that your fucking ugly women is equivalent to those seeking the best. You proudly boast that you are fucking 6's as the chemistry is better. So instead of getting up off your ass and trying to do better and find better looking women, you and the crew of Medellin morons have flamed anyone trying to do better. When I went you on this topic, you griped to Gabacho and that lying Mexican baby ran crying to an admin to give me points. Gabacho is so fucking stupid he even bragged who the admin is and like the baby he is, boasted about getting other guys posts. Since that time, I have put the two of you on ignore and things have been much better. Unlike the child Gabacho, you actually like to argue and you PMed me begging me to respond, and I told you to fuck off. I am not going to debate someone who cannot take a punch.
Thing is I can tell from your posts you are a narcissist. So even when I have you on ignore, I predicted the insults and the narcissistic chest beating, and I signed out and read your post, and you did not disappoint. Trudging through the multiple insults and chest beating, [u]your three objective posts were bonds are callable and redeemable and people will pay for the fastest chips and Nvidia cannot sell all the chips they make[/u].
I gave the person who asked the question the wrong advice. If he is not good at stock picking, he should buy a bond fund and not individual bonds. That is not what I am doing. That is the advice I gave to someone at his level.[/QUOTE]Sign of a bad investor eh?
How have bonds done compared to the Stock Market of the Dis-United States of America since you wrote this?
I am looking at ATH for NVDA on my ticker tape [B]155.61[/B]. What were you saying Elvis 2008 about me being a bad investor and that Nvidia was done?
The highlighted elements in the the post above by Elvis 2008 goes to credibility whenever you see him refer to The Cmdr. I disagree with almost everything Elvis 2008 says. With one exception: [B]We are both International Tricks[/B]!
For the record.
DEMRF a stock I bought as commodity play is down 52% since I bought it. A true trader is not afraid of losses. The idea is to minimize them over your personal investing horizon. I have a very concentrated stock portfolio. Only 12. Of those twelve I have losses in 3 of them. Not bad if I say so myself.
[QUOTE=EihTooms;3010881]The "spectacular" and "total obliteration" crap was so blatantly obviously more classic Trump lies:
Strike Set Back Iran's Nuclear Program by Only a Few Months, USA Report Says.
Classified findings indicate that the attack sealed off the entrances to two facilities but did not collapse their underground buildings.
LOL. And then he thought if he shouted "fuck" at the press his dumb hillbilly Repub MAGAs would be distracted by that shiny object thrown out and not skip a wet, slobbering stroke in blowing him as their lord and savior.
Well, he probably is right about that one tiny part of it, I suppose.[/QUOTE]OMG. The NY Times says the attack did not work and Fox says it did. Gee, that is a shocker.
This is why the mainstream media sucks. You do not even need to watch or read them to know what they are going to say.
Seymor Hersh is a real journalist who reported that Biden blew up Nordstream. He then was highly critical of Trump's foreign policy on Israel which means the only team he is on is the one called the truth. Here is what a real journalist said about the Iran attack:
I have been told that the destruction of Iran's cache of enriched uranium at Fordo, a secluded base tucked into a mountainside 120 miles south of Tehran, has been at the top of the American and Israeli governments' target list since the last few months of the Biden administration. The Israeli question was: how to get to and destroy the storage site and the high-end centrifuges spinning away 260 to 300 feet below the surface.
A White House team working closely with Israelis struggled with that issue throughout the first months of the Trump administration. Everyone involved supported the Israeli insistence that Fordo had to be eliminated. The solution that became policy—blockading any entrance to the nuclear site—arose because one member of the secret group remembered what he had learned, perhaps in college, about Schliemann's Trench in Turkey.
Heinrich Schliemann was a wealthy German amateur archeologist who spent nearly twenty years in the late nineteenth century trying to find the ruins of Troy. He was convinced they were buried in the hills near Hissarlik, Turkey. Stymied by rocks and debris at his immediate target, he carved a huge 56-foot-deep and 230-foot-wide gash in the side of an adjacent hill until he hit bedrock. In the process he destroyed much of what turned out to be part of the original walls of Troy.
The member of the joint American-Israeli study group brought Schliemann's folly to his colleagues. Why not deal with the buried Israeli nuclear materials not by trying to bomb the working site—even the US's feared bunker-buster bombs would not be effective at the depth of the nuclear complex at Fordo—but by repeatedly striking the entrances and air holes there until there could be no way in or out. In other words, avoid an attack plan that had little chance of working and instead seal the Iranian centrifuges and the store of enriched uranium.
Studies at the time demonstrated that US bunker busters, even if precisely targeted, could not get within 60 feet of the depth needed. As a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran was accurately reporting the constantly growing amount of uranium enriched to 60 percent—now fixed at 900 pounds—that was generated and stored at Fordo. Twenty pounds of uranium enriched to 90 percent is enough for one bomb. It would take days, not weeks, at Fordo to enrich its uranium from 60 percent to weapons grade.
It was finally decided the US armada of bombers and attack planes, when it did get the presidential order to attack, would not try to penetrate Iran's nuclear enrichment area but would aim its bunker busters—at least thirteen of them—at the mountain. All of the known entry ways and air tubes that reached above ground were directly targeted, leaving a huge amount of rubble above the working levels that would be nearly impossible to penetrate.
None of the US bombs was meant to strike the enriched-uranium storage facility or the centrifuges spinning away. The measure of success came later when American sensors reported no increase in the atmospheric radiation levels after the attack. Iran's uranium was intact and simply buried.
America's newspapers and cable news shows have been filled with reports, said to be based on a five-page preliminary after-action analysis by the Defense Intelligence Agency, stating that Iran's nuclear capability was perhaps not eliminated by the US raid, but only set back for several months. The DIA's analysis, if cited correctly, is impossible to credit simply because the total isolation at Fordo of Iran's only known supply of enriched uranium means that the ability to fabricate a nuclear warhead, if Iran's leadership chose to do so, has been grievously impaired. Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium may be intact, but it will be impossible to reach for many years, if ever. The US bunker-busters accomplished their mission at Fordo.
At no time, I was told, was the US bombing assault aimed at elements of the Iranian leadership. It was not a decapitation mission, but a modern version of Schliemann's attempt to reach the hidden remains of Troy by coming at them from what he thought would be an easier and much safer access point. Only this time the folly was intentional.
I was told that some members of the Israeli delegation to the talks had second thoughts almost immediately about the fact that the centrifuges and enriched uranium would be left untouched by the US strike. How could Washington be sure that in some future moment the Iranians wouldn't find a way to burrow through the rocks and debris and reach the stored uranium? Everyone involved was aware that enriched uranium would take hundreds of millions of years to decay to the point where it's no longer radioactive.
The Israelis cited the famed rescue of thirty-three miners in Chile who were trapped nearly half a mile underground in 2010 for sixty-nine days when a copper and gold mine collapsed. The world was entranced as the miners were brought to the surface, one by one, in a specially designed capsule. It took weeks of preparation before a rescue shaft was created. Even NASA was brought in to consult.
The Israeli question was obvious: the US attack plan would leave the vital Iranian nuclear complex intact, but locked in, presumably for eons. But couldn't a future Iranian team find a way to burrow its way through the debris, reach the stored uranium, and recover enough for one or two bombs. If Chile could find a way, why not Iran?
I was told that the Israelis asked the Trump administration "just how much was America committed to keeping the enriched uranium underground?" The Israeli concern increased as Trump was pushing, without immediate success, for permanent ceasefire talks.
What it will take for Trump to want peace talks may not be enough for Israel—especially because the Israelis may have their own interpretation of the message of Schliemann's Trench: Be sure to let the dead stay buried.
End of link. And oh yeah, Hersh wrote a different article before the attack saying it was going to happen. It looks like he has great and well placed sources.
So instead of the predictive answers of Fox and MSNBC, a real journalist has sources which reveal the plan and tell what seems to be the truth: the bombing run MAY have worked.
Of course, Loony Tooms, you have been fed so much of the NYT / MSNBC bullshit, that you may not recognized real journalism which is to tell you the truth as best journalists can and not what you want to hear. Reading something this honest may cause you to have a seizure.
[QUOTE=Elvis2008;3011041]Yeah, Friedman is the typical NYT intellectual where people claim that he is so smart but forget about how dead wrong he was about things like the Iraq war.
First off, Netanyahu is the Israeli version of Trump and Friedman gives him no credit. Since when has a sitting president ever won the war on his own? He had intelligence help him? No shit! Netanyahu took 10-7 and destroyed Hezbollah and Hamas and hurt Iran's nuclear program. Yeah, he has had problems with the Supreme Court. A president should have problems with them in a functioning Democracy. Biden had issues with the Supreme Court as did FDR. Give the man credit, but it is fair to ask, now what? As Churchill found out, a leader can be great at war and not so great at peace.
It is funny MDS how when you fly now that the Arab airlines are the ones of luxury: Emirates, Ethiad, Air Qatar, Oman Air. If you get a chance to fly on one, do it! They put our airlines to shame. I do not think people get how influential Qatar has been with all these negotiations and how diverse of a country it is. With the USA pulling out, there is the chance for a flurry of trading between these countries and Israel. I am not sure if Netanyahu is the guy you want running point on making these business deals, but that is up to the citizens of Israel to decide. I do not know about you MDS but I am sick of all the aid money we sent to Israel. They are going to need to get money elsewhere.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/26/upshot/turnout-2024-election-trump-harris.html[/URL]
LMMFAO.
[QUOTE=SubCmdr;3011113]Let us start by watching this.
[URL]https://youtu.be/Sq-y-wiZduE?si=OY0a5g5DWIq1Cfuy[/URL]
This video makes my point about upgrading the grid being an important part of adding renewables over time.
Already addressed in the video. [/QUOTE]
To get an even better start, you can begin by watching this: [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBu0h2OfjYY[/url]
[i][b](...kkkk!)[/b][/i] Good luck, if you think your 6-min video from the WSJ, an news outlet media arm, for the fossil fuel industry is gonna explain how to solve/fix the complex integration of renewables, with an aging U.S. grid, that has been around for 150 years, just like that...overnight.
California, has been on the vanguard of renewables, and have born the brunt of trails and tribulations for this new frontier, conveniently for other states (or countries), to follow. Sometimes that's the price you pay for being #1.
When the video talks about inertia for example, South Australians have long known about this problem, and replaced their gas-powered condensers with electrical-powered synchronous condensers, installed after retiring coal plants to stabilize their grid, alongside batteries (BESS). Newer BESS installations have gird-forming inverters.
[QUOTE=SubCmdr;3011113]Why does California have some the highest electricity bills in the entire Dis-United States of America? You are the one throwing about the numbers needed to buy fossil fuels. If the state is significantly using sources to produce electricity that are not fossil fuels based then why haven't electricity rates come down dramatically?
Prime example of the perfect being the enemy of the good. Seems like you would prefer to shoot from the hip and sit in the dark than to use what is available when it is available to have light. [B]ROTFLMAO![/B]. [/QUOTE] California, is the world's 5th largest economy and that's a large ship to turn around, given their rocky road to the transition to renewables. Whether its the high upfront capital costs from locked-in contracts, aging infrastructure/transmissions, natural gas prices, wild fires, the use of dynamic pricing (which needs revamping) or albeit the never ending suffering from federal/state political, policy and regulation whiplash.
Put succinctly, is has been a confluence of hurdles, California have had to face, which other states, have now benefited from, like Texas. Quite frankly, Texas (believe it or not) are doing some good things with renewables (#1 in wind, #2 in solar, I think) and California could do well to take a page out of their playbook, with when it comes to what Texas is doing right. In the end I think California will figure it out, and prices will come down.
When looking at tomorrow's smart grids, powered mainly by renewables and fossil fuels as backup, California is a good case study, but more and more interesting electrostates are popping up that IMHO, are just as equally interesting, because they have the political buy-in, like China, the U.K., Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Portugal or Australia.
BTW, what fossil fuel numbers are you talking about?
[QUOTE=SubCmdr;3011113]Green Energy Lobby has been about a lot of bullshit brother. I actually power my business location on solar in the Dominican Republic. Because it is remote and I decided to use the money it would have taken me to connect to the grid, on my off grid system and for back up power using fossil fuels. Any mother fucker have something to say about that, dey can sit in the mother fucking dark when the grid goes down. That laughing you going to hear in the dead of night will be me. Cause all dem bitches going to be up in my spot partying naked with the light on. [B]ROTFLMAO[/B]! [/QUOTE] One man's "bullshit" is another man's "brilliance". But like I said, "Aren't you sore yet?" [i][b](...kkkk!)[/b][/i]
[QUOTE=SubCmdr;3011113]All I can say is:
You want to know the length of plans for the Dis-United States of America. Look at the budget. Look at the election cycle and look at the terms of federal office for the Dis-United States of America. The Dis-United States of America could not even put together and stick with a plan to manage Iran getting nuclear weapons. That is just a little more important than a few extra hydrocarbons being released into the atmosphere.[/QUOTE] Naturally, it goes without saying when it comes to WAR!
1. Discredit science and engineering facts presented by SubCmdr because he does not like the source of the information.
2. You were right Subcmdr. California has not lowered it electricity rates in spite of drastically lowing the cost of inputs to generate electricity going into the grid.
[QUOTE=Sirioja;3011127]Keeping on buying to Russia is a big mistake, when making broke Putin is only way to make him stopping war...[/QUOTE] Yep, that's right...France's and the EU's...BIG MISTAKE? But it is good to see you are FINALLY acknowledging this...Good for you!
[QUOTE=Sirioja;3011127]At least, my beautiful little France don t try to rob Ukraine, but support them and condamn criminal Putin and Netanyahou...[/QUOTE] Yes, it is very important to take solace, from France's mistakes, in the best way possible. And you're right, France should try NOT to support Putin, anymore!
[QUOTE=Spidy;3011190]Yep, that's right. France's and the EU's. BIG MISTAKE? But it is good to see you are FINALLY acknowledging this. Good for you!
Yes, it is very important to take solace, from France's mistakes, in the best way possible. And you're right, France should try NOT to support Putin, anymore![/QUOTE]Too old Trump suck Putin since his election when his small balls are in Putin hand, when France support only Ukraine and give them weapons and money. Europe give as much money as USA to Ukraine. Trump now also defending Netanyahou, when he would be prosecuted in Israel if he didn't keep on his wars business. USA supporting wars criminals.