Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 21
  1. #1

    America got to be number one by being ahead of the cruve

    Well get ready America China is getting ready to kick our butts.


    A U.S. solar power company said Saturday it will help build a series of solar thermal power plants in China

    The $5 billion investment would be the largest such project in China,



    China is moving much faster than the U.S. in solar power development, eSolar officials said.

    China has set ambitious goals for solar and other renewable energy in an effort to clean up its environment and curb surging demand for imported oil and gas, which communist leaders see as a strategic weakness.

    Government goals issued in 2005 call for at least 15 percent of China's power to come from wind, solar and hydropower by 2020, up from 9 percent now. Officials say that target may be raised to 20 percent because the industry is developing so quickly.


    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100109/...na_solar_power

    Now lets look at what Obama wants to do and who is in the way.


    President Obama this afternoon called a House-passed energy bill "an extraordinary first step" toward curing global warming and reducing fossil fuels

    The bill also includes strict energy efficiency standards and requirements for wind, solar and other renewable electricity use nationwide.

    Republicans in the House attacked the bill last week as an energy tax that could devastate U.S. families and cost Democrats politically. The Senate's top Republican signaled on "Fox News Sunday" this morning that his caucus will pick up the chorus.

    "It's going to cost jobs," said Mitch McDonnell of Kentucky, the Senate Republican Leader. "Obviously it will. It's going to increase the business of living in America. We all depend on electricity... I don't think putting clamps on our economy when you know the Chinese and the Indians are not going to do it is a good idea."


    http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/po...raordinar.html

    Looks like mitch is wrong


    Looks like the republicans are wrong.

    Who would have thunk it?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    20,677
    They SHOULD do something. They're the environmentally filthiest nation on earth.
    No reserve. No retreat. No regrets.

    For those who have fought for it, freedom has a sweetness the protected will never know.

    http://www.airwarvietnam.com/16thSOSGunners2.jpg

    Proud member of KA Club

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kaufman county, Texas
    Posts
    8,473
    We have HUGE amounts of coal. You insist we start building windmills and solar panels and other cr@p that has not proven to be economically viable?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kaufman county, Texas
    Posts
    8,473
    I have 11 acres, you put up solar panels and windmills and we can split the profits 50/50. Any takers?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Tool-Slinger View Post
    I have 11 acres, you put up solar panels and windmills and we can split the profits 50/50. Any takers?
    50/50 is a little steep.

    'project is worth more than $800 million and would generate 300 megawatts'
    'Local landowners will receive $70 million in lease payments.'

    'Manitoba Hydro will buy wind-generated power as part of a proposed 25-year agreement with Babcock & Brown’s North American Energy Group, which has interests in more than 20 wind farms across North America with an aggregate value in excess of $3 billion.'
    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/st...wind-farm.html

    Guessing at a return of 8% for 25 years you would need $1600 million return on top of your $800 million, so $2400 million. Add the landowner $70 million, do a percentage

    70/2470 = 2.8% landowner cost of project.


    Now if you dropped the 50% down to 3% we might have a deal.

    Shame about the money crisis drying up funds, the developers put the project on hold. The last one did get built though, 99 Mw farm.

    http://www.hydro.mb.ca/projects/wind_st_leon.shtml

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kaufman county, Texas
    Posts
    8,473
    Quote Originally Posted by printer2 View Post
    50/50 is a little steep.


    http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/st...wind-farm.html

    Guessing at a return of 8% for 25 years you would need $1600 million return on top of your $800 million, so $2400 million. Add the landowner $70 million, do a percentage

    70/2470 = 2.8% landowner cost of project.


    Now if you dropped the 50% down to 3% we might have a deal.

    Shame about the money crisis drying up funds, the developers put the project on hold. The last one did get built though, 99 Mw farm.

    http://www.hydro.mb.ca/projects/wind_st_leon.shtml
    Yikes, those numbers suck!

  7. #7
    hydro ain't looking good due to global warming.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/lt_venezuela_electricity

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Tool-Slinger View Post
    Yikes, those numbers suck!
    Not too bad for the landowner. There were suppose to be 200 turbines

    $70M / 25 yrs / 200 turbines = $14,000 year.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,841
    Quote Originally Posted by mikethe ductman View Post
    hydro ain't looking good due to global warming.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/lt_venezuela_electricity
    We have more than enough water.

    What is Hydro doing to help reduce water levels?

    Its channels and control structures have been operating at maximum outflow since November 2008.
    In 2007–08 export sales totalled $625 million with 82 per cent derived from the U.S. market and 18 per cent from sales to Canadian markets.

    http://www.hydro.mb.ca/corporate/wat...wpg_2009.shtml

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by printer2 View Post
    Tell that to the people out west.


    LAKE MEAD ELEVATIONS

    December 1999: 1,213.94

    December 2000: 1,196.12

    December 2001: 1,177.37

    December 2002: 1,152.13

    December 2003: 1,139.12

    December 2004: 1,130.01

    December 2005: 1,137.52

    December 2006: 1,128.12

    December 2007: 1,114.81

    December 2008: 1,110.97

    December 2009: 1,096.30


    http://chanceofrain.com/2010/01/high...ons-1999-2009/

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,841
    I meant locally.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Winter Haven, FL
    Posts
    2,760
    Quote Originally Posted by mikethe ductman View Post
    Tell that to the people out west.


    LAKE MEAD ELEVATIONS

    December 1999: 1,213.94

    December 2000: 1,196.12

    December 2001: 1,177.37

    December 2002: 1,152.13

    December 2003: 1,139.12

    December 2004: 1,130.01

    December 2005: 1,137.52

    December 2006: 1,128.12

    December 2007: 1,114.81

    December 2008: 1,110.97

    December 2009: 1,096.30


    http://chanceofrain.com/2010/01/high...ons-1999-2009/
    Want to guess the water level before the dam was there??

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada
    Posts
    1,647
    Quote Originally Posted by mikethe ductman View Post

    Looks like the republicans are wrong.

    Who would have thunk it?

    At this point, I think most of us would agree with you that the Republicans seem to have their heads almost as far up their @sses as the Democrats. Getting harder and harder to tell the two apart.

    Still trying to figure out what a "cruve" is....
    The views and opinions posted here are my own. They do not reflect the corporate policies of my employer and will most likely get me fired at some point.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •