web analytics

That “Green Energy” is working good for you is it…. lol

By Patrick Van Roy On September 8th, 2020

92 Responses to “That “Green Energy” is working good for you is it…. lol”

  1. California’s electricity comes from all sources, including coal gas and nuclear.

    The majority of it is produced from natural gas, just as in the communist enclaves of Texas Oklahoma and Alabama.

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/24/climate/how-electricity-generation-changed-in-your-state.html

  2. Phantom do you really want to debate California’s Power and Water infrastructure?

    I’d love to, the state is the perfect example of how environmental policies can do more damage than good.

  3. What environmental policies are producing the blackouts in California?

  4. CA has 274 natural gas generating plants, 2 nukes, 12 fuel oil powered, and 7 coal plants.

    How many of these should they have Patrick?

    https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/05/f22/CA-Energy%20Sector%20Risk%20Profile.pdf

    They also produce hydro internally and buy a lot of it from the Pacific Northwest and from Canada. This is bad?

  5. The list is quite long, from the refusal to build reservoirs which not only help prevent the state from burning but create hydroelectric power, to failed massive wind and solar projects as they eliminate coal.

  6. Phantom, on September 8th, 2020 at 3:03 PM Said: Edit Comment
    CA has 274 natural gas generating plants, 2 nukes, 12 fuel oil powered, and 7 coal plants.

    How many of these should they have Patrick?

    Ask the people with no power on a regular rolling basis.

  7. What should the state do differently?

    New reservoirs won’t help put out fires in remote areas. That’s a bit of RNC hogwash.

  8. “The list is quite long, from the refusal to build reservoirs which not only help prevent the state from burning but create hydroelectric power, to failed massive wind and solar projects as they eliminate coal.”

    The elimination of coal isn’t the problem. Most of the civilised world has eliminated coal for power generation. It doesn’t cause blackouts.

  9. and their policies are also shutting natural gas plants Phantom.

    In a unanimous vote last month, the California Public Utilities Commission said the gas-burning facility should be allowed to keep operating through 2022. The commission said the Redondo Beach facility — and three other coastal gas plants also slated for closure or rebuilding — is needed to keep reliable electricity flowing to Southern California residents for a few more years, until utilities can fully replace them with non-polluting resources.

    https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2019-12-12/california-clean-energy-gas-plants

    But clean energy advocates worry a decision to extend the coastal power plants could set a precedent that reverberates for years.

    “We have to close the door on gas,” said Luis Amezcua, a senior campaign representative with the Sierra Club.

  10. Most of the World has NOT shut down coal….. It is the Number One Fuel for Electric Power in the World.

  11. The principle cause of the blackouts is the heatwave (caused in part by Patrick’s coal fetish). Heatwaves increase demand (due to air conditioning) while also increasing the chances of wildfires. In 2018 a spark from a power line (coming from a PG&E power station) caused a massive fire that burned 150,000 acres, destroyed over 18,000 buildings and killed 85 people. As such during periods of high wildfire risk, and periods of high winds (both of which are happening) PG&E reduce or shut off power generation entirely.

    It really doesn’t matter what fuel a power station is using if you have to turn it off to stop wildfires.

    “Most of the World has NOT shut down coal….. It is the Number One Fuel for Electric Power in the World.”

    I did say most of the civilised world.

  12. Coal causes bad air pollution.

    You don’t want any new coal plants anywhere near population centers.

    The fetish for coal is just silly at this point, when there is so much natural gas around.

    Poor countries will burn coal because they have no choice. They can’t afford other options in some cases. California has a choice. And that choice is theirs to make, not ours.

    NYC banned coal burning ages ago.

    NYS phases out coal burning this year.

    These were good decisions.

  13. I’m not pushing coal, even though 40% of California’s power come from Coal Plants located outside of the State.

    What I’m pointing out is the Fact that the Environmental cases have caused this problem in California.

    and Seamus the cure for a Heatwave is ELECTRIC AIR CONDITIONING. The fact that they can’t maintain a proper level of Electricity to fight the Heat is a regular problem for Ca.

    In a State that 2/3rds of it is classified as a Desert electricity is paramount to power that air conditioning, but the lives and comfort of humans is of no concern to the environmentalists.

  14. You haven’t said what you want them to do.

  15. “Seamus the cure for a Heatwave is ELECTRIC AIR CONDITIONING”

    Which is what is causing the power demands.

    “The fact that they can’t maintain a proper level of Electricity to fight the Heat is a regular problem for Ca.”

    Well maybe if there weren’t record heat levels caused by climate change then maybe they’d be able to.

    “In a State that 2/3rds of it is classified as a Desert electricity is paramount to power that air conditioning, but the lives and comfort of humans is of no concern to the environmentalists.”

    The major cause of the blackout is to prevent wildfires. Your plan killed 85 people in 2018. It is right to disrupt the comfort of people to save lives.

  16. Phantom, on September 8th, 2020 at 3:30 PM Said: Edit Comment
    You haven’t said what you want them to do.

    5 Reservoirs with Hydroelectric Dams would go along way to solving both the Electric and Fire problem.

  17. The major cause of the blackout is to prevent wildfires.

    Correct.

  18. The major cause of the blackout is to prevent wildfires. Your plan killed 85 people in 2018. It is right to disrupt the comfort of people to save lives.

    Pure Bullshit.

  19. Reservoirs would do nothing to solve the fire problem in remote areas

    And the huge majority of the big fires are in remote areas

    There needs to be a way for water to get from the reservoir to the fire, Patrick

  20. “5 Reservoirs with Hydroelectric Dams would go along way to solving both the Electric and Fire problem.”

    Where are you building the dams? And how will they solve the wildfire problem?

  21. Seamus there has been a movement for over 20yrs to put ALL powerlines underground. It actually started in Ca, and was killed there by the enviromental cases.

  22. “Pure Bullshit.”

    So you are saying that spark from a power line in 2018 didn’t cause a massive fire, which burned 150,000 acres, destroyed over 18,000 buildings and killed 85 people?

  23. You will never have all power lines underground in remote areas.

    Even theoretically, it would take forever and cost at least $15,000 a customer

    The usual hogwash

    https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2019/10/11/cost-to-bury-california-fire-prone-power-lines-why-not/3937653002/

  24. “Seamus there has been a movement for over 20yrs to put ALL powerlines underground. It actually started in Ca, and was killed there by the enviromental cases.”

    Can you show me where they were killed by the environmental cases? Specific examples please.

    It was probably killed off for commercial reasons, because undergrounding power lines costs about 5 times as much as overgound lines.

  25. Where are you building the dams? And how will they solve the wildfire problem?

    The Locations and the Plans are on record and have been for decades. These Hrdoplant Reservoirs will help with the fires because 90% of California’s rainfall water runs into the Sea. The land does not naturally retain the run off causing wildfire conditions.

    These reservoirs are the keystone to terraforming the state.

  26. Even in much more populated areas nationally, all electric lines are not underground, for economic reasons.

    Even if all California power lines were underground tomorrow, you would still have fires as caused by lightning, careless campers, accidents, arson.

    The environment there makes wildfires ineveitable.

    The Spanish explorers observed California wildfires in the 1500s.

    https://www.kcet.org/shows/lost-la/why-did-a-1542-spanish-voyage-refer-to-san-pedro-bay-as-the-bay-of-the-smoke

  27. I’m not going to pull all the cases your good figure it out.

    As for the cost, one years worth of wildfire cost more than burying the Lines.

    5-19yrs ago the cost analysis to put THE ENTIRE COUNTRY’S powerlines underground was only 12 Billion.

    Besides the fires, one good solar flare can destroy not just Ca’s powergrid, but the entire countries.

    In Ca the burying of the Lines would “Disrupt” nature.

  28. Phantom just like the water has always burned in Pa, yes these aren’t NEW problems.

    As man creates new Tech we can change these things that have been going on for centuries, especially the fires, those are the easiest.

  29. “These Hrdoplant Reservoirs will help with the fires because 90% of California’s rainfall water runs into the Sea. The land does not naturally retain the run off causing wildfire conditions.”

    Well firstly there are 1,400 dams and 1,300 resevoirs in California, so those 5 new ones will really put a dent in things. Additionally causing less of that water to flow to the sea would drastically change the water content as you get to the sea. Ultimately if not enough fresh water is going into it then the sea water would invade back through the system, salinating the water supply in delta regions (so much of the populated areas of California). So yeah that is a really stupid plan.

  30. 5-19yrs ago the cost analysis to put THE ENTIRE COUNTRY’S powerlines underground was only 12 Billion.

    That project might take decades, and would make no sense to do.

    And that number is complete bullshit.

    It’s a very big country, Patrick.

  31. “I’m not going to pull all the cases your good figure it out.”

    Otherwise known as you made it up and can’t back it up. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Is that another one of your tall tales that you will lose the rag over being called a lie?

  32. “5-19yrs ago the cost analysis to put THE ENTIRE COUNTRY’S powerlines underground was only 12 Billion.”

    Undergrounding power lines costs between $1 and $2 million per mile. Even assuming the smaller of the two would suggest that there is only 12,000 miles of powerlines. Probably closer to 120,000 miles.

    And they only generally underground where it makes sense. So the likely result is that harder to underground areas will be much more expensive.

  33. Every state has many overhead power lines

    Even in very heavily populated NYC, there are at least 10,000 miles of overhead power lines.

    But yes, put them all underground, can do it for a few bucks.

  34. According to this article in the Scientific American:

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-the-smart-grid

    The US has 200,000 miles of high-voltage transmission lines and 5.5 million miles of local distribution lines. Even taking only the transmission network underground would cost $300 billion (splitting the difference between $1 and $2 million per mile). Add in the distribution network and it is about $8.5 trillion.

  35. And there’d be no reason to do such a thing, even if the cost was say 75% less.

    Who the hell is even talking about such a nonsense?

    This is like Trump talking about brushing the forest floor to stop all fires.

  36. one emp would do 5 Trillion in infrastructure damages. If we got hit with a flair like the one in 1859 and the damage would be catastrophic, not just in the physical damage to the infrastructure but the millions of lives that will be lost due to no electricity nationwide.

    The benefit of no fires is a side benefit. This debate has been pushed for a long time and it has been stopped by the environmentalists.

  37. The benefit of no fires is a side benefit.

    Read what was said earlier.

    There have always been fires in California, there always will be fires in California. It’s a dry and semi/dry state for much of it. Fire comes with the territory.

  38. Phantom your ignorance makes you sound like an ASS. Lets just look at ten years ago when your head wasn’t shoved up your ass over trump….. did he have anything to do with this?

    Murkowski Blocks Effort to Protect US Power Grid
    Thursday, 14 October 2010 06:50 PM

    In a surprising election-year gambit, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski has gutted legislation with strong bipartisan support that would protect the U.S. power grid from solar flares and Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) weapons, to benefit a “clean” energy bill backed by Senate Democrats.

    The original bill, known as the GRID Act, authorized the federal government to take emergency measures to protect some 300 giant power transformers around the country. It passed the House of Representatives by a unanimous voice vote in August, an unusual show of bipartisan support in this Congress.

    But when it went to the Senate, the bill was gutted of the measures to protect the power grid from EMP attack by Murkowski and committee chairman Jeff Bingamon, D-N.M., while other portions of the bill were added to her own energy bill, S. 1462, the American Clean Energy Act of 2009.

    “Sen. Murkowski stripped H.R. 5026 of the main elements designed to protect our infrastructure and did not add them to her bill,” said Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition. An aide to Murkowski said that Murkowski voted for stripping out the EMP provisions of the bill on practical, not political, grounds.

    “The bill was going nowhere. The administration opposed it, and favored a government-wide effort, not a piecemeal approach.” He added that blaming Murkowski, the ranking Republican on the Energy Committee, for altering legislation being managed by the majority Democrats was “an election-year gambit by far right wing groups. Murkowski did not place a hold on the House bill.”

    The stakes of this election year wrangling could not be higher, said Peter Pry, a former CIA analyst and executive director of the congressionally chartered EMP Commission.

    “Within 12 months of an EMP attack or a massive solar flare, between two-thirds to 90 percent of the U.S. population would perish” from lack of electricity, Pry said, quoting the conclusions from the EMP Commission’s two public reports.

    On Aug. 1, NASA reported that satellites had detected a coronal mass ejection, or CME, “heading toward the Earth’s direction,” Pry said. That same day, the federal government issued a warning that a giant electromagnetic pulse from the solar storm might damage the electric grid of the United States.

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration estimated there was a 10 percent probability that the solar storm could cause a severe geomagnetic storm with devastating impact on the national power grid. Luckily, “the Earth dodged a bullet from the sun” that week,” Pry said.

    The EMP Commission made a number of recommendations to protect the power grid, considered by most experts to be the most vulnerable big piece of our national infrastructure to an EMP attack.

    “There are no excuses for the United States to still be vulnerable to EMP,” Pry said. The commission recommended spending between $10 billion to $20 billion over the next five years to protect giant power transformers and transmission lines, which otherwise would simply melt down in the event of an EMP attack or a massive solar flare.

    “Now is the time to act to secure the electric grid, not after a major incident has occurred,” said Mississippi Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson, chairman of the Homeland Security Committee.

    Just days after the federal government was warning of a giant solar flare in August, Murkowski intervened in the Senate Energy Committee to strip away the provisions to protect the national power grid from solar flares and EMP attack, Congressional sources told Newsmax. The EMP provisions could be added back in a revised version of the bill in the lame-duck session after the November election, the sources said.

    The last time the Earth was hit by a giant solar flare was known as the “Carrington event,” which caused significant damage to the nation’s nascent telegraph system.

    “The National Academies of Sciences predicted in a 2008 report that a solar geomagnetic storm as severe as the Carrington event that occurred in 1859 could inflict $1 trillion to $2 trillion and take four to 10 years to recover from,” said Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., one of the original advocates of establishing the EMP Commission.

    “That compares with the $300 billion impact of Hurricane Katrina,” he added.

    Many scientists are predicting massive solar activity between now and the end of 2012.

    “The sun is waking up from a deep slumber, and in the next few years we expect to see much higher levels of solar activity,” Richard Fisher, head of NASA’s Heliophysics Division, told Fox News in June. “At the same time, our technological society has developed an unprecedented sensitivity to solar storms.

    In June, National Geographic broadcast a docudrama titled “Electronic Armageddon” that visualized the impact on the U.S. of an EMP attack or a giant solar flare.

    The hardening of the grid is the burying of the lines and special shielding. The stoppage of these fires is a side benefit……

  39. Yes there have always been fires that’s why it needs the reservoirs….. the State DOES NOT NATURALLY HOLD WATER.

    It’s a tectonic edge covered by a desert, the ONLY way to stop the Fires is change the environment through water retention.

  40. You will stop the fires the same day that you stop the tides.

    It is insane to think that forest fires will be prevented in CA or other dry states. It’s not even desirable that fires not happen.

    Preventing all fires guarantee bigger fires a few years later. It’s how this stuff works.

    They were not talking about burying all the lines. That’s completely unfeasible.

  41. can we not harness cow farts with some anal device, not hurtful to the animals
    instead of it going into the atmosphere and causing global warming
    cow fart methane can be converted to supply californian energy needs
    and its wonderfully hippy and whacked out liberal

    go buy the domain cowpharts.com , sell it in 5 years , be a nice lil return 😉

  42. one emp would do 5 Trillion in infrastructure damages. If we got hit with a flair like the one in 1859 and the damage would be catastrophic, not just in the physical damage to the infrastructure but the millions of lives that will be lost due to no electricity nationwide.

    From what I’ve read, you would have to bury these lines very deep to protect them from an EMP or severe geomagnetic storm. Far deeper than they’re normally buried. Plus the main damage done to the infrastructure isn’t the cables, it’s to the power distribution centres, switching stations and transformers, all of which are above ground.
    Even if you did manage to protect the power distribution network, most items with a silicon chip in would be destroyed. From computers to vehicles, data networks and medical equipment, you’d still be in serious trouble.

    5-19yrs ago the cost analysis to put THE ENTIRE COUNTRY’S powerlines underground was only 12 Billion.

    This figure is way too low.

    At a cost of $3 million per mile, undergrounding 81,000 miles of distribution lines would cost $243 billion. PG&E has 16 million customers; distributing that expense equally would amount to a bill of more than $15,000 per account.

    https://eu.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2019/10/11/cost-to-bury-california-fire-prone-power-lines-why-not/3937653002/

  43. it’s to the power distribution centres, switching stations and transformers, all of which are above ground.

    And those things are huge

  44. Methane is subsequently expelled through the cow’s front end – through burping – or through the cow’s backdoor – via farting. A cow burps and farts between 160 to 320 litres of methane per day.

    its the new gold rush , tapping that methane
    As sure as me name is Carney, I’ll be off to Californy
    Where instead of diggin’ prates, I’ll be diggin’ cows backsides

    https://youtu.be/NrQbEaurkyQ

    Stefan Kraan, chief scientist at Ireland-based seaweed product manufacturer Aquaceuticals, says that it all comes down to regulation. Growing seaweed – to the tune of about seven yearly tonnes per hectare of sea – requires governments to issue marine licenses, and Kraan says the application process has often been often too slow.

  45. Phantom,

    And those things are huge

    Indeed. You would have to go into the ground a minimum of 3 feet. And even then that wouldn’t stop severe geomagnetic burst or EMP pulse. Even when power companies bury cable they tend to run it through trunking, less than a foot below the surface to cope with heat and provide easy access for maintenance and repair. Cables buried straight in the ground can heat up and become damaged, especially if they’re carrying a high current.

    Burying cables does not necessarily protect against severe geomagnetic storms and EMP.

    Other known effects of Test 184 were that it knocked out a major 1000-kilometer (600-mile) underground power line running from Astana… to the city of Almaty. Several fires were reported. In the city of Karagandy, the EMP started a fire in the city’s electrical power plant, which was connected to the long underground power line. The shielded electrical cable was buried 3 feet (90 cm.) underground. The geomagnetic-storm-like E3 component of the EMP… can easily penetrate into the ground. The E3 component of the Test 184 detonation… began rising immediately after the detonation, but did not reach its peak until 20 seconds after the detonation. The E3 pulse then decayed over the next minute or so.

    https://www.thespacereview.com/article/1549/2#:~:text=The%20shielded%20electrical%20cable%20was,20%20seconds%20after%20the%20detonation.

  46. “The benefit of no fires is a side benefit. This debate has been pushed for a long time and it has been stopped by the environmentalists.”

    Where have the environmentalists stopped it? Be specific.

  47. Is anyone really speaking of putting facilities like this below ground?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8390qEaIjA

  48. Phantom,

    Is anyone really speaking of putting facilities like this below ground?

    Spot on mate.
    I’m sure it’s the same in the US, but here in the UK those substations, switching stations, transformers etc are everywhere. What’s the point of burying the cables if these installations are all still above ground? In fact, what’s the point of protecting the cables when an severe EMP pulse or geomagnetic storm would knock out everything containing an electric motor, transformer or integrated circuit. Pretty much most of the things that run on electricity would be severely damaged or destroyed.

  49. colm they’re not taking my idea of pharma/phart-acuticals seriously
    I done the math , anal inserts linked to a small balloon , which filters out everything but pure methane, these go into canisters back on the farm, the combination is send through pipes to a large cauldron, which safely burns the methane and propels turbines which generate electricity .
    Its a ripper, a corduroy moment , a silent but violent transformation of energy into power
    sure will blow a hole in Californias need for power.
    putting this down as “case solved “, and onto the next pressing problem

  50. This is why small self containe nuclear reactors are the future

  51. This is why small self containe nuclear reactors are the future

    Absolutely spot-on mate. I’ve been saying this for years.
    Modular nuclear reactors are really the only option in the short to medium term.

    On an unrelated note, it looks like my prediction of one to one-and-a-half million people dying worldwide from coronavirus by the end of the year may be coming true.

  52. Nuclear is dead in the US.

    As it should be across the world. It is the dirtiest fuel mankind uses. And you say you care about the planet……

  53. Nuclear waste can be used as fuel.

    A very clean fuel at that.

  54. Substations are Hardened in two ways both concrete boxes either above or below ground.

    Every substation can be boxed in concrete room right where they are, and even in better spaces with the lines being fed directly in and out under ground.

    Running the lines underground also solves an additional goal that has a major problem.

    Universal Internet supposedly would be free, but I doubt it, but what they have wanted to do for over a decade was use the powerlines as the transmission lines for the internet. The main obstacle has been the bleedout signal transmission. If you run the internet through the powerlines the background signal that is emitted from the lines drowns out all AM, and SW radio signals. Not only do you lose AM, but ALL Emergency communication and all Ham Bands.

    With the lines buried this problem is eliminated and every electrical outlet becomes a direct internet connection.

  55. Even after being used as Fuel and the waste reused as fuel, the material itself is still deadly 500,000 years from now.

  56. As it should be across the world. It is the dirtiest fuel mankind uses. And you say you care about the planet……

    I’m not claiming nuclear energy is perfect, but Nuclear energy is only a minor contributor of greenhouse gases. Massively less than coal-fired plants. And it also contributes far less radioactive waste to the environment than coal fired power stations do. It has also killed massively fewer people than the coal industry and coal fired power stations.

    According to estimates by the US Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the world’s coal-fired power stations currently generate waste containing around 5,000 tonnes of uranium and 15,000 tonnes of thorium. Collectively, that’s over 100 times more radiation dumped into the environment than that released by nuclear power stations.

    https://www.sciencefocus.com/science/do-coal-fired-power-stations-produce-radioactive-waste/#:~:text=Yes%20%E2%80%93%20and%20the%20waste%20contributes,environment%20than%20nuclear%20power%20stations.&text=According%20to%20estimates%20by%20the,and%2015%2C000%20tonnes%20of%20thorium.


  57. Used nuclear fuel can be recycled to make new fuel and byproducts.

    More than 90% of its potential energy still remains in the fuel, even after five years of operation in a reactor.

    The United States does not currently recycle used nuclear fuel but foreign countries, such as France, do.

    There are also some advanced reactor designs in development that could consume or run on used nuclear fuel in the future.

    US Govt

  58. On an unrelated note, it looks like my prediction of one to one-and-a-half million people dying worldwide from coronavirus by the end of the year may be coming true.

    boo hoo, but glad to know that’s what you’re cheering for Dave……

  59. Every substation can be boxed in concrete room right where they are, and even in better spaces with the lines being fed directly in and out under ground.

    Let me help you out here Patrick, a concrete room wouldn’t really help protect the substation. It would have to have unfeasibly thick walls. the only way you could reasonably protect substations is with a Faraday cage.
    But that’s all immaterial because at the end of the day, the cost and logistics of protecting all of the electrical infrastructure in the USA alone would be completely unfeasible.

  60. boo hoo, but glad to know that’s what you’re cheering for Dave……

    Grow up Patrick.

  61. Unless you’re a Clorox drinker, you’re rooting for the virus

  62. Greenhouse gas emissions are irrelevant….. Nuclear material is deadly forever period.

  63. It’s already out there.

    May as well use it for productive and non polluting purpose

  64. “Greenhouse gas emissions are irrelevant”

    They really aren’t. It may be politically convinient for you and the people you get your views from to pretend otherwise but to those who aren’t scientifically illiterate they are a clear and present danger to the current way of life on the planet.

    “Modular nuclear reactors are really the only option in the short to medium term.”

    Yes and no. Nuclear reactors don’t solve the major problem with renewables – the intermittent nature of renewables. Nuclear doesn’t really provide much opportunity for capacity generation (unlike fossil fuel based plants you can’t really switch a nuclear reactor on and off).

  65. Greenhouse gas emissions are irrelevant…..

    Only if you believe the atmosphere plays no part in plants climate.

    Nuclear material is deadly forever period.

    Wrong again…

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_decay

  66. Seamus

    Yes and no. Nuclear reactors don’t solve the major problem with renewables – the intermittent nature of renewables. Nuclear doesn’t really provide much opportunity for capacity generation (unlike fossil fuel based plants you can’t really switch a nuclear reactor on and off).

    I’m not sure that’s entirely true. Whilst it’s a problem to shut them down completely, modern Nuclear reactors can be brought to an extremely low power state. And their energy output can be ramped up very quickly. (But not too quickly). 😭

  67. Which is an issue in a real-time system, which is why nuclear power’s role in most energy systems is to provide a stable amount of electricity.

  68. “Greenhouse gas emissions are irrelevant”…… because the science is fake.

    Nuclear anything is REAL science that follow the Laws of Physics.

    Climate Science is a fantasy cult based in flawed models.

    One the math works…. each and every time.

    The other can’t give you the same answer twice let alone every time.

    I am a very religious man yet my religion does not interfere with science just the opposite. My wonder of God and his creation is increased with each sliver of knowledge of how things work as we unlock the structures of the Atom, the Gene, The Universe. There is a mathematical formulae for everything that exists, and we’ve just scratched the surface.

    Where Climatology is a religion that masquerades itself as science nothing more.

  69. ” because the science is fake”

    Ok. Prove it.

    “The other can’t give you the same answer twice let alone every time.”

    You have told that lie repeatedly. It doesn’t stop it being a lie.

  70. If he believes it to be true, it’s not a lie.

  71. Dave you can link to all the wiki bullshit you want sunny…….

    What is the fuel for nuclear power plants?
    The nuclear fuel typically used in nuclear power plants consists of uranium in the form of uranium dioxide (UO 2). Uranium dioxide, a ceramic, is used because like all ceramics, it can withstand very high temperatures.

    Uranium-238 is the most stable isotope of uranium, with a half-life of about 4.468 × 10 9 years, roughly the age of the Earth. Uranium-235 has a half-life of about 7.13 × 10 8 years, and uranium-234 has a half-life of about 2.48 × 10 5 years.

    you really aren’t very bright are you, but I give you credit for tenacity.

    The Fuel that is used for reactors is deadly for as long as the planet has already existed….. what’s that 4-6 BILLION years… but that’s not forever…. lmao

  72. Phantom, on September 8th, 2020 at 7:58 PM Said: Edit Comment
    If he believes it to be true, it’s not a lie.

    truer words were never writ…….

  73. We should be exceptionally slow to use the L word

  74. “If he believes it to be true, it’s not a lie.”

    Apologies. I was being kind to him.

    He is either lying or is brain dead & moronically stupid. I went with the kinder of the two options.

  75. Greenhouse gas emissions are irrelevant”…… because the science is fake.

    Claiming something is true, doesn’t make it true. You have to provide evidence to backup your claim. Something you fail on time and time again.

    Even in this post you make several claims which you failed miserably to provide evidence for.

    Seamus asks:

    Can you show me where they were killed by the environmental cases? Specific examples please.

    Where have the environmentalists stopped it? Be specific.

  76. Seamus

    !!!

  77. Phantom,

    There is no rational argument against the concept of climate change, and Patrick’s assertions have been proven untrue repeatedly in the past. That he still asserts them, even though they have been proven untrue, means he is either intentionally being dishonest or he doesn’t understand the explanation and continues to repeat those untruths in ignorance. Which do you believe it is?

  78. He’s a true believer.

    And those people don’t get convinced away from their beliefs, regardless of the evidence.

  79. you really aren’t very bright are you, but I give you credit for tenacity.

    Back to the personal insults I see Patrick.
    being insulted by someone stupid enough to believe the atmosphere plays no part in the planets temperature, really doesn’t bother me.

    The Fuel that is used for reactors is deadly for as long as the planet has already existed….. what’s that 4-6 BILLION years… but that’s not forever…. lmao

    Did you really actually just make that ridiculous claim Patrick. No. 4-6 billion years is NOT forever. Under your definition, anything that was around for 4-6 billion years, (such as billions of stars), would have been around forever and that’s clearly not the case. Can you really be that stupid? Jesus Christ, 5-year olds can grasp this better than you can.

  80. I know next to nothing about this topic but I have enjoyed reading the debate. Good stuff everyone regardless of what you believe.

  81. Phantom,

    Seamus

    !!!

    Sorry. And Phantom. 😁

  82. It’s like how Trump fans believe that he’s done a great job on the virus.

    It’s crazy to believe that, but these guys largely truly believe that.

    Because he is the best at everything, natch.

  83. Phantom.

    I can’t believe anyone can take Trump seriously. it’s like listening to, at best a narcissist, or at worst a sociopath when he gives his press conferences.

  84. For those of you who have access to Netflix, I recommend this.

    He goes a long, long way back in NYC life, to the seventies, and he has always been the way he is now, for good and bad.

    ( I think that he was good for NYC morale and economy with his hotel and Trump Tower investments )

    https://www.netflix.com/title/80206395

  85. I’ll give that a watch mate cheers.

  86. Both he and his father were very politically savvy.

    They knew how to influence the local politicians in order to get what they wanted.

    Trump at his best was hugely ambitious, dreaming very big, at a time when the NYC economy and morale were low.

    That’s one reason why I think that the current mayor De Blasio is such a complete disloyal fool for writing that BLM graffiti in the gutter in front of Trump Tower. Trump was very good to NYC, it’s economy, it’s tourist trade, it’s image.

    And this is how he is repaid.

    And I say that as his harshest critic on these pages.

  87. Fair points Phantom.

    I also felt that writing BLM in the road was inappropriate.

  88. yeah my thoughts to guys ,BLM should instead have been carved on Trumps forehead
    a masterpiece like in inglorious bastards clip

  89. Seamus, on September 8th, 2020 at 8:06 PM Said: Edit Comment
    “If he believes it to be true, it’s not a lie.”

    Apologies. I was being kind to him.

    He is either lying or is brain dead & moronically stupid. I went with the kinder of the two options.

    I sir am a genius, with all due modesty…… Now if you believe in the scientific method, which is the ONLY method that counts than the only thing that is real is that which can be broken down and reassembled using mathematics and the answers can NOT change.

    There is hard science, and there is theoretical science. We confirmed Physics at 5:29 a.m. on July 16, 1945. Until that day physics as we understood it was theoretical.

    ALL Climate Science is based on faulty models that have not given the same answer twice. That my friends isn’t science. Believing in something with no proof is an act of Faith, not science.

    When you believe in something on “Faith” That’s religion.

    Where is Climatologies Trinity ?

  90. Well said Phantom…..8:33

  91. You might find that documentary very interesting.

    It’s pretty fair to Trump and the others of that 1970s era

    Former mayor Beame loved Trump and played ball with him, Mayor Koch and Trump hated each other but cooperated because they had to.

    Even as a young man, Trump was a hugely gifted promoter. He saw opportunities that others did not see and made a lot of them happen. Good ( Hyatt Hotel, Trump Tower ) and ill advised ( Taj Mahal, Atlantic City )

  92. unfit is the doc we are trying to get in UK, but you guys have an abundance of ways to access

    https://unfitfilm.com/

    AVAILABLE ON: GooglePlay, FandangoNOW, VUDU, Microsoft, DirecTV, Spectrum, Comcast, Cox, Xfinity, U-verse, Fios