Let me get this straight
- Thread starter mike757
- Start date
La Li Lu Le Lo
Veteran
- May 29, 2010
- 7,414
- 2,649
Don't put words in my mouth.
What I said is
What conservatives are concerned with is ROI, Return On Investment. What good does it do to transition to green energy when it has a fraction of the output of energy per dollar spent?
You know it takes a lot of mining, manufacturing, and fuel cost (that's right FOSSIL FUELS) to feed Green energy.
Do you think it is cheaper to overhaul a traditional generator during a maintenance cycle or to maintain windmills and solar panels?
DO you even think about those issues?
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,292
- 1,427
LIke I said...conservatives care about the debt and our kids future, but they don't give a damn about our kids and clean air and water because the ROI wasn't justified.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Damn Liberal agenda. Doesn’t matter if any part of it makes sense. If they are fer it he’s agin it.
La Li Lu Le Lo
Veteran
- May 29, 2010
- 7,414
- 2,649
So which is it?
Have we not made a lot of progress reducing pollution from fossil fuels?
Are cars not far more fuel efficient and far less polluting than even 20 years ago?
My father worked at a glass plant. He could tell you a few things about the hurdles the company has to clear every year to make sure they are pollution compliant. They use scrubbers to clean the air before it ever reaches outside the plant. You could say they would save money if they went green. Then they would not have to worry about complying with air pollution from their furnaces however, that glass plant uses enough gas in a day to power the whole town for a week (probably more than that). Do you have ANY idea how many damn windmills and solar it would take JUST to power that factory?
Do you want to spend $600 dollars a month for electric instead of $100 because it cost 3X the money to maintain the infrastructure that puts out less than half the power?
Again..... the switch should be a natural progression and not some political agenda that ignores the realities of the deficiencies of what green energy can realistically offer.
Should green energy be developed? YES!!! Should green energy be improved? YES!!! Should we invest billions of dollars deploying a technology that currently cannot even remotely meet our energy needs? NO!!!
KCFlyer this is a serious question. Can you do basic math? If you could you would see how stupid it is to spend multiples of money to get far less power.
You also totally ignore that it takes mining and fossil fuels to feed green energy. Miners (some children) risk their lives in third world countries mining the materials for your idyllic future. How much fuel do you think it takes to transport all those materials around (ships and most semis do not run off green energy), to manufacture those raw goods into usable material, then transport the finished product to the installation location?
Do you think mining for raw materials to feed green energy is less destructive than pumping oil?
I think if you look at green energy objectively you will see that a fast, politically driven transition, is foolish and destructive. Though if there is one thing Democrats are good at it is destroying, just ask any "mostly peaceful" protester as they stand in front of a burning building they just ignited.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Babbling blissfully.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Pick one up at the hospital gift shop if you get out alive.
Vaccinated......trust the science.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Glad to hear it.
Been getting 5G cell phone calls in my left ear ever since.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
At least you aren’t getting the free sex pop ups
