Sign in to follow this  
Visual

Google's privacy terms, The car of your future, and other privacy discussions

Recommended Posts

The Australian government decided to hit us with yet another tax - this was going to generate a lot of wealth for the government by hitting the mining sector especially hard. The carbon tax - the government spent a lot of money to give to low income earners (including pensioners) extra money to off-set the higher cost of living. They spent a fortune on propaganda. Now we are a little further down the track & the new government has figures that show the new tax did not generate anywhere near the amount of revenue that it expected. Jobs by the thousands have been lost & many folk are doing it hard. The government is going to repeal the tax. 

 

Most folk did not put the extra payments away to offset bills. What we did see for quite a while on TV is ways to cut your power & water bills. Basically, they were saying don't be wasteful. Turn off things that you really don't need to have on. Why does my neighbour have their massive wattage light on day & night? Fuel prices are so high here but planning trips saves fuel. There are many ways of saving energy.

 

Conserving energy in whatever form it is produced is a must since all of it harms the environment in one way or the other. If solar only works near the equator, why is Australia going solar with the government again spending squillions to encourage people to do so? True, closer to the equator, it is more efficiently producing power.

 

Daniels, same for my state too. Just so long as we don't have to go back to the horse & cart days! It would take 2 days for us to get to the next town...Nothing wrong with a bit of variety. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold on one moment...why all the solar panel hate?

Nothing says solar panel tech can't improve. Solar panels are constantly being improved and rapidly getting cheaper. Solar panels are being sold for less than a third of the price you gave right now, and the price continues to plummet.

IKEA has integrated renewable energy into their business model. Why? Not because they are trying to save the planet. They are cutting their costs significantly by using solar power. (he talks about it about for a moment 8 minutes and 20 seconds in...sorry I didn't have time to find a better source)

And that is an outdated video. IKEA stores have now collectively installed over 500,000 solar panels. No business in their right mind would invest so much money in something with no potential return. And IKEA, a massive global industrial corporation, dumped billions of dollars into something you are calling a lie.

Solar technology is not dead and useless. It carries much potential, even in places far from the equator. Snow? Add a heating mechanism. Night and clouds? You should have some way to store the energy anyways. Maybe it isn't so viable when you live near the (ant)arctic circle where you don't get sunlight for half the year, but that doesn't mean it can't be used elsewhere.

Keep in mind that technology is not stagnant. We are not at a point where nothing new can be invented. Things like solar panels can be improved and made cheaper, just as nuclear technology has been improved in its 100 years of existence. What's more, a solar panel failure isn't going to turn an entire city into a no-man's land. And I'm not saying nuclear power isn't safe, just that people are not comfortable with it for the time being.

You can buy pieces, but get an installed quote for a complete installed system like a grid-tie. I'm really close with the price.

That is not entirely true. Subsidies for installations pay for a huge amount of their savings. Taxpayers pay that subsidy for them to save. If you don't own nor can install any panels, you pay for their subsidy. Let's talk about being fair. Also, the chinese have undercut and flooded the market with cheap panels that are now being controlled.

 

I'm all for incorporating newer forms of energy, but I most certainly hope things like coal aren't done away with completely... If it weren't for mining, I believe that my state (West Virginia) would soon be dead. Other than tourism, we don't have much else going for us...

Yes, burning coal does produce carbon emissions. But we've been doing it for hundreds of years, and (I'm about to express a really unpopular opinion here...frail ones be warned) if you look at the real climate information (not just the data that the climate control advocates want you to see), you'll see that it's not really hurting the environment. (Unpopular opinion over... ;) )

Exactly right, daniels. Pennsylvania is being hurt as well. This has impacted maybe a milion families and small towns. The greenies don't care becaue it doesn't impact them. China is burning as much coal every day and they don't care about who complains. If we don't burn it, they just sell it to china and they burn even more. I'd be willing to bet that as much or more coal is being burned on earth as it was before the green movement because of china's growth.

 

I'm not a solar hater, just don't be that the hype around it as a solve everything. The last figures i read on it was that solar and windmills make up around 2 percent of america's electric demand. A whole 2 percent after spending how many billions?

Edited by Visual

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A whole 2 percent after spending how many billions?

Right, but how much was spent on our current energy systems?

Again, the fact that it is a technology in development doesn't make it lose its viability. I agree, solar panels are not the answer to all our energy problems. Not even close, in fact. All I'm saying is that they are not "a lie".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Protect the environment.  Shoot all the cows ... then use the people who got obese on MaccyD's to generate power 

 

Win, win, win situation.  Less harmful gas.  Free electricity.  Less health problems to stretch overburdened health care providers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, but how much was spent on our current energy systems?

Again, the fact that it is a technology in development doesn't make it lose its viability. I agree, solar panels are not the answer to all our energy problems. Not even close, in fact. All I'm saying is that they are not "a lie".

I agree they are not a lie, but when the other side tells everyone that it does solve all problems, why do they call me a hater for exploding the myth? The process of making PV panels is toxic and releases harmful agents to the atmosphere.

 

I can't believe that of all channels CNN had a show on how many of the green movement are now fighting for nuclear power. It was called pandora's something. Please watch it when you can. You will see what i've learned and have been fighting for the last decade. They invented an IFR reactor that can't meltdown when backup power is lost, but the green movement had it blocked on the international arena. Sad disgusting people. You will see that radiation levels at the waste storage centers is much lower than in city's around the world, which occurs naturally. They can also reprocess the waste and use it over and over.

Edited by Visual

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correction: it wasn't the green movement that blocked the IFR reactors. It was the people who were/are afraid of nuclear proliferation. In other words, they believed the fuel could be processed into material for nuclear weapons (it can't)

I'm no treehugger myself, but the "green movement" isn't quite dumb enough to turn down their own motto. It takes a politician to do that.

Also, there is technology to recycle a good amount of the waste involved in solar panel production. The problem is that it's made in China where corners are for cutting as bubble-wrap is for popping. Even still, producing solar panels is 90% cleaner than coal, so for the time being, why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correction: it wasn't the green movement that blocked the IFR reactors. It was the people who were/are afraid of nuclear proliferation. In other words, they believed the fuel could be processed into material for nuclear weapons (it can't)

I'm no treehugger myself, but the "green movement" isn't quite dumb enough to turn down their own motto. It takes a politician to do that.

Also, there is technology to recycle a good amount of the waste involved in solar panel production. The problem is that it's made in China where corners are for cutting as bubble-wrap is for popping. Even still, producing solar panels is 90% cleaner than coal, so for the time being, why not?

They labeled co2 as a harmful element. Plants use it to make o2. How is that harmful? The worst thing would be to have less co2, then less o2 is being made. If they want a fight for something that actually is a problem, then they can go and fight the plastics companies. Every ocean has a floating blob mass of plastics that have been called islands of plastic. The sizes that i've seen would make me call them plastic countries instead.

 

IFR reactors were invented long ago, and we have even better technology now. It takes over a decade to complete one. We are way behind what we need. Politicians are just too busy feeding government contracts to family and friends so this goes unfulfilled for our future.

Edited by Visual

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this