wind energy without windmills
|December 2nd, 2016 at 4:50:40 PM permalink|
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
There is no cost to carbon emissions. Just shakedowns for a non existent problem.
The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it
|December 2nd, 2016 at 5:01:47 PM permalink|
Member since: Nov 9, 2016
Well, I kind of thought that you would retreat into fantasyland as a climate change denier. But look at the figures without taking carbon emissions into account. Solar still is much cheaper.
Also, the chart assumes that fuel for the plant has already been delivered and is readily available. That's the case with solar, but not with coal. The costs of extracting and delivering coal weren't taken into account, and if they were, solar would come out even further ahead.
Facts are a bitch when they contradict beliefs.
|June 6th, 2017 at 1:09:51 AM permalink|
Member since: Aug 3, 2014
Never liked a design that fry's migratory birds anyway. https://www.wired.com/2016/05/huge-solar-plant-caught-fire-thats-least-problems/
Everyone gets thrown from the plane to maintain altitude