In a country of states, some will thrive and others will stagnate. Trump promises to “ drill baby drill” in states where it is not blocked by green lunacy. Those states will thrive, and in the states that resist, U Haul will flourish. The question for those of us rooted in California, and really unenthusiastic about icy winters, is whether we have the creativity and determination to replace the Newscum ,Hart, and Limon bozos who are playing the role of Thelma and Louise.
Breaking up the current Democrat super-majority in California must also happen. And we have not been able to do that .....yet. We can't even get rid of it here.
Agree, Rep Kevin Kiley it a man to watch. Is he better to keep in Wash DC, particularly right now, or have him beat his head against the wall in current state of California super-majority politics?
Oh Mr. Brown “they think Taco Bell is the Mexican phone company” - and only stupid white liberal voters. The Hispanic community has had a swifter awakening than the libtard white one.
I think Kiley is the future of the Republican Party in CA. That guy would make a great governor. He's liked by the inland and can make mincemeat out of the Coastal Leftie elites. I cringe a lot over the Republicans in CA. Mostly they have negative charisma. Too much yammering about Christianity, too much nostalgia about Reagan, too much focus on what the Dems are doing wrong rather than what they would do right. And then they complain about Trump. Who do they think they're galvanizing? The duffer demographic?
Thank you Andy, people need to wake up to the fact that all of these green initiatives are not about the environment at all but rather about money and power. The global warming hoax is a study in effective propaganda and here in California we have its most devout adherents. The case for anthropomorphic global warming is short on science and long on emotion. One can take the covid narrative and change a few words and recycle it as global warming fear porn. The consensus of the expert class, the unique nature of the problem requiring emergency governmental power, the need for vast sums of money to change hands, the threat to humanity posed, the necessity to defer to experts while ignoring our experience and observations, the dire consequences of not complying. The sticky part about global warming is the time scale is hundreds of years at a minimum and more likely thousands to tens of thousands of years. We saw in short order the lies about covid vaccine effectiveness, fatility rates, natural immunity and exaggerated death rates but we will never see in our lifetimes any manifestation of global warming. Models predict perhaps a 1.5 degree increase in 100 years. But over most of the history of the earth the global temperature was much warmer than today and by much more than 1.5 degrees yet life flourished. All before man walked the earth. Note also that climate models have been wrong 100% so far. First in the 1970s models predicted global cooling. Now models predict global warming. Remember an inconvenient truth? No climate fear lies from that movie have come to pass. Polar bears thrive and kilimanjaro has snow. The predictions of any model are no better then the integrity of the person creating the model or inputting the parameters. While we have no climate crisis, we do have an integrity crisis in the science community. I believe the solution to stop this fraud is political as the expert class will shut up as soon as they stop being payed to lie
Between the coal and rubber burned to create enough heat to melt the quartzite to the fracking to mine the quartzite, the slave labor used to mine for minerals for batteries, the chemicals in EV batteries that last ten years then the toxic chemicals go into a landfill poisoning the ground, to the amount of wild life killed, to the amount of petrol used yo build the massive bases fir these windmills, to the 20 year life span of a windmill that goes into a landfill, etc…
Then the EV owner plugs their car in overnight to charge it when there is no solar or wind power, meaning they use petroleum, fossil, fuels not the “green” environment killing energy sources they advocate for.
Disinformation from our government and media again. So who profits from the government mandates?
Even Micheal Moore raised this alarm in a documentary a number of years ago. Which only put him in "progressive" purgatory. The alarms have been sounded for a long time.
Why are we still funding and entire "sustainability" division within the city of Santa Barbara? What is their mission that justifies the millions of tax dollars spent on their salaries, perks and benefits?
So called green power, isn't all that green. Not only doesn't it produce enough power, but the panels and turbines are also not eco-friendly when it comes to disposal. But like the bridge to nowhere, government goes all in with failed project after failed project.
PS. Perhaps, I should have mentioned "Lurch" otherwise know as our Climate Czar, John Kerry, who could be one of our biggest, individual, polluters flying around the world in private planes to save the world. He should be on Trump's, removal from office, list.
On a positive note, I installed solar just over 1 year ago including a Tesla PowerWall for storage. I have been powered 100% since then. The battery supplies 100% of my nighttime power requirements with around 60% remaining in the morning. This includes charging my Tesla and my Fiat EV. With the increase in SCE rates, recovering the cost has gone from 17 years down to 11 years and with the next proposed rate increase I expect to recover the entire cost even sooner, excepting the new, proposed “tax” on solar in California. The savings on gasoline? I basically drive for free, saving another, approximately $3000 per year. IMHO, naysayers just don’t understand the TRUE story of private solar use. Most downside claims depend on unfounded, illogical and overstated claims with little foundation other than blindfolded, visceral emotion against change. Purely based on economics, this will happen all by itself without government support. The savings are just too great.
Your batteries won't last long enough to realize your green pipe dream of recovering your investment. How much of your investment was payed for by subsidies? The upside of solar is based on unfounded, illogical and overstated claims and subsidies.
Eegads, talk about nitpicking minutia that has VERY little impact, much less practical application to private solar. I get it that it is human nature to be suspicious of change. Some more than others, obviously. Snow on the roof? What % of the country experiences that, for how many days of the year ? What % of people live what % of time in their timeshare? Admittedly, if you installed solar 20 years ago you are probably looking at replacement that, with new technology, improved materials and upgraded storage batteries, will last 30 years this time around. You are still WAY ahead economically, even after 50 years. Aside from environmental benefits (the child labor mining for battery minerals is one of the worst disinformation negative positions possible), the raw economic benefits will prevail over poorly researched, emotionally based misinformation. Couple that with continued, rapid advances in solar technology dramatically reducing costs and solar will rapidly expand, in spite of all the Balderdash.
RH: Ahhh yes ........ the "environmental benefits" ........... who could overlook that balderdash when making this case.
Maybe you could direct us to the data on this part of the equation; not modeling, not hypotheticals, not surrogate endpoints, but real "environmental" data.
Last year I saved $3000+ on gasoline. Carbon footprint from gasoline = zero. Perhaps you could lookup what % of electricity in the USA is generated from coal and petroleum? Are you suggesting there is no environmental consequence from this? Also, in the news this am was a report that Ebridge Pipeline leaked 70,000 gallons of fuel oil from the pipeline going to the fuel depot in Griffith, Indiana. You might ask what the largest consumer from that depot uses the fuel for? To generate electricity. I don’t believe I have used modeling, hypotheticals nor surrogate endpoints, just facts. Not sure what you think Balderdash means.
RH: Trump will be bringing energy costs down. Stay tuned.
BTW: You will also need to add the costs to ship your two old EV's to Karachi for dismantling, since they are too toxic for domestic disposal. (Hint, that was a joke.)
As Brent's journal comment indicates below, it works in So Cal because your roof isn't buried in snow and ice for 3-4 months per year. Plus your vehicle would not get the mileage it does in either freezing or extremely hot temp zones.
Yeah, max mileage in coldest climate drops by around 10%. In my Tesla that is from 380 miles down to 342 miles, still enough to get to the grocery store and work.
Ever heard of heated solar panels for snow country? I guess not.
Where do you get the electricity to heat the solar panels when they are covered in ice and snow? The absolute best, that I am not opposed to, is to have wind and solar as supplement to an energy source that produces 24/7 regardless of the weather.
Andy, the power to run a solar panel heater is the same source you used before you installed solar and the same source you use at night if you don’t have a storage battery as well as the same source you use when solar production is less than consumption. It is called the grid and locally is owned and run by SCE. It sounds like you should maybe study up on solar systems before making more contributions ? Just sayin’
Earl, Yes, just like every other investment I make after serious study and analysis. Right now, my annual savings will fully cover the solar panels and the storage battery after just 11 years. The system is projected to be fairly maintenance free and will supply power for the next 25 to 30 years. It IS a long term investment; but after getting my initial investment covered, the savings over the subsequent 10 years gives me around a 200% return on my investment at the end of that period if rates continue their historic upward trend. That is why I said that the economics of solar will dramatically propel the solar industry without any government subsidies.
OMG. Where did you read such Balderdash? Please quote a specific publication in any scientific journal, if you can find one. What kind of negative energy source supposedly radiates from sealed batteries? I am always willing to learn new things, if they have valid facts behind them. Looking forward to your facts.
Like microwaves being toxic, never been proven that battery powered cars do anything bad to you. Some of the work conditions in which batteries are made are harmful … to the workers making them.
Jennifer, this is not to say I'm pro going electric, I'm not, but the stuff about microwave ovens being toxic has never been proven. Not for all these years they've been around.
And then in 20 year you get to re-invest in this equipment giving you "free power" all over again.
Our home came with photo-voltaic already installed, When it went out, it could not be fixed plus the manufacturer was no longer in business so no replacement parts were available so the entire system needed to be replaced, let alone adding the increased maintenance costs to clean the roof panels to ensure maximum energy production.
Then the additional significant costs when it came time to replace the roof and tack on the additional solar contractor costs to remove and replace the panels.
Thank you for another excellent piece exposing the moral Roundup the Green Industrial Complex is doused in. I do worry that exposing it without supporting a positive alternative is destructive of true environmentalism. I'm an old hippie who still loves Paul Watson, Edward Abbey, Joel Salatin - who were/are true environmentalists. I'm currently reading John Klar's book Small Farm Republic: Why Conservatives Must Embrace Local Agriculture, Reject Climate Alarmism, and Lead an Environmental Revivalism. Yes! You all should read it. But here today on SB Current I only see the rejecting of climate change, which is healthy. However, anyone can go on about how awful the Green scams are. It's right there in front of us. But when are all you conservatives going to do something besides reject? When are you going to talk about an environmental revival? Trump is doing it. But what's with the CA Republicans? I only see Kevin Kiley talking about positive action.
My 1960's college graduation cohort was challenged by the threat of Cold War nuclear annihilation. I look back and will claim that we children of the 20th Century delivered, since there have been no further Hiroshimas nor Nagasakis. And both recently visited are thriving, regenerated cities today.
The challenge for the new massive energy-dependent generations of the 21st Century is preventing nuclear waste storage from falling into the hands of terrorists, while further exploring what seems to be the best energy production alternative we have on the table today - nuclear power.
My older generation somehow got everyone to behave, and not blow everyone up with malignant nuclear power. So far. What do you say, Gens XYZ? How will you too preserve the peaceful use of nuclear power for your generations?
Thanks Andy. Your article reminds me of a friend who lives in Colorado who said "You better have a backup to solar when it snows." I was not aware of our paying other states to bail us out of our stupidity.
Good article, Andy. I love the picture of the chainsaws. I happened to have a disassembled Dewalt battery powered chainsaw on a table to the left of me. It leaks all of its chain oil when not in use (Made in China). The problem once again is the dumb politicians designing power networks which is what a team of engineers do quite well. Think of all the money exchanging hands to develop solar and wind power machines. Isn't it grand how the money changes hands? Tax the public, pay the companies for their wind and solar devices that occasionally operate, and the politicians taking their cut in the process. It has nothing to do with the environment, it's all to do with the money changing hands.
I'm currently writing an article on how to attack the drones and not blow them up into little pieces for identification purposes. It's quite easy when using choreographed drones to form a choreographed pseudo net to crash into. Each drone could use a small net to increase the chance of net catching. But here's my point with regards to an example of the Dems not demanding to replace polluting, exploding fireworks with non-polluting choreographed fireworks. If the Dems were so consumed with pollution, then why don't we here about the demand for non-polluting fireworks. A big advantage with drones is they don't smoke up the area and you can see them easily. But do you think there's any money to be made by the Dems using drones. I guess not!
Bill, I’m developing dogfighting drones for the gaming industry. The pros I deal with tell me drones with ‘nets’ can be programmed to mitigate the problem.
Yes, but in my opinion even better is programming a dome-shaped array to cover the foe drone(s). The most efficient use of a surface area is to contain a volume is using a sphere-shaped object, or half a sphere often referred to as a dome. A dome-shaped array of drones each containing perhaps a pentagon shaped netting might offer an interesting solution. Today's drones don't look above, so an operator would be confused if a dome descended from above. One thing friendly drone can do is to force a foe drone into an area where the choreographed drones or staged. The goal would be to take down the foe drone in the least amount of broken up pieces. Something to think about. 12/15/2024
In essence, I've realized you need a jet to conquer a jet and a drone(s) to conquer a drone. You are dealing with similar operating parameters. A helicopter doesn't want to face a drone because it can be deadly. A friendly helicopter blade can be struck by a foe drone; not good. The object is to fine tune a drone that can be better than other drones. Someone is going to make a killing in the "smart" drone industry which is outfitted with the most "toys" to destroy another drone. I believe drone on drones is the best weapon inside neighborhoods.
Throw in the unfathomable amounts of 150+% reliable energy required to support bit-coins and AI, along this current movement to recklessly depend on both, wholly undermines the current Democrat "green energy" scam.
This Bit-coin/AI movement will create a very interesting realignment regarding the future of energy production. And the dawn of another New Age, if/when it is solved.
When President Trump promised to “Drill baby drill,” I take him at his word. Yes, thankfully adults are back in the room and calling the shots. Obviously, there are a multitude of pros and cons on all forms of energy. The reality is our economy is derived from a fossil fuel platform with virtually everything we do or consume being based on oil and natural gas. My issue is not with a given technology, it’s all about letting free enterprise deciding which source is the most beneficial. Government should have limited input as to our energy source, let the marketplace decide. Energy technology should stand on its own merits and NOT depend on the taxpayer.
My issue locally is the multiple “land trusts” in our county, thereby removing these parcels from the tax roles as not-for-profits. Just this week, 3300 acres in Gaviota were designated as a land trust. Will these lands now be open to solar or wind farms? Chumash Marine Sanctuary as a wind farm? Can one imagine our Gaviota coast looking like Palm Springs?
How about the EIR for the Lomoc wind farm that stated on a long term basis there was not enough sustainable energy to justify building it. Of course it was ignored.
The cost in environmental terms of the batteries to store the electricity is substantial. The same for the batteries in EV that take and power the cars.
Oh and has anyone remembered that So. Cal. Gas has produced for years a carbon neutral product???? Now that should put a crimp in the game.
But that is ok as long as the State continues to create massive deficits, destroys water sources, kills Ag. and more it is environmentally preferred.
In addition, to much of our self-induced harm to America, there is the world-wide issue that our efforts are, largely, being negated by other big countries.
China: still heavily dependent on coal for producing energy.
India: Also, still heavily dependent on coal.
Brazil: does produce a significant amount of energy from Hydro. But this is largely negated by continued deforestation in the Amazon.
Russia: without the continued sale of oil and gas, its economy would collapse.
Iran: like Russia, Iran's economy very dependent on continued sale of oil and gas.
Germany: because the government foolishly decommissioned all thr German nuclear power plants and are entirely dependent on Russia for fossil fuels, they lack sufficient energy to take the Industrial sector though the winter months. Therefore, they have recommissioned a very significant number of fossil fueled, electric power producing plants.
So far, our efforts on the world stage, seem to enrich China, and impoverish America, without much evidence that the world as a whole will meet the COP temperature targets, despite the tens of thousands of delegates who meet in conference every year burning even more fossil fuel to benefit the rest of us??
In a country of states, some will thrive and others will stagnate. Trump promises to “ drill baby drill” in states where it is not blocked by green lunacy. Those states will thrive, and in the states that resist, U Haul will flourish. The question for those of us rooted in California, and really unenthusiastic about icy winters, is whether we have the creativity and determination to replace the Newscum ,Hart, and Limon bozos who are playing the role of Thelma and Louise.
Dr. Aijian, I'm excited about Kevin Kiley. I think he could be the next governor and he's the one we need. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngQpJQ0Iw_I
Breaking up the current Democrat super-majority in California must also happen. And we have not been able to do that .....yet. We can't even get rid of it here.
Agree, Rep Kevin Kiley it a man to watch. Is he better to keep in Wash DC, particularly right now, or have him beat his head against the wall in current state of California super-majority politics?
Absolutely right JL, but how do ya do that when:
a) Majority voters rule.
b) Majority voters are so stupid they think Taco Bell is the Mexican phone company.
Oh Mr. Brown “they think Taco Bell is the Mexican phone company” - and only stupid white liberal voters. The Hispanic community has had a swifter awakening than the libtard white one.
https://www.liberalpatriot.com/p/the-democrats-hispanic-voter-crash
Thanks for posting that Kevin Kiley speech, he was quite lucid and persuasive.
I think Kiley is the future of the Republican Party in CA. That guy would make a great governor. He's liked by the inland and can make mincemeat out of the Coastal Leftie elites. I cringe a lot over the Republicans in CA. Mostly they have negative charisma. Too much yammering about Christianity, too much nostalgia about Reagan, too much focus on what the Dems are doing wrong rather than what they would do right. And then they complain about Trump. Who do they think they're galvanizing? The duffer demographic?
Christians don’t need to “yammer”. They just need to love their neighbor like themselves. Sounds sort of catchy.
Truth is a lion. Needs no help. Just let it out
He's too bright for the average dim-witted voter.
I think he's going to be governor. Wanna bet a buck I'm right, hippie?
Make it $2!
" Harvard, Yale Law, ’sound fiscal policies’ . . .
W a a a y too smart for the average chump.
Thank you Andy, people need to wake up to the fact that all of these green initiatives are not about the environment at all but rather about money and power. The global warming hoax is a study in effective propaganda and here in California we have its most devout adherents. The case for anthropomorphic global warming is short on science and long on emotion. One can take the covid narrative and change a few words and recycle it as global warming fear porn. The consensus of the expert class, the unique nature of the problem requiring emergency governmental power, the need for vast sums of money to change hands, the threat to humanity posed, the necessity to defer to experts while ignoring our experience and observations, the dire consequences of not complying. The sticky part about global warming is the time scale is hundreds of years at a minimum and more likely thousands to tens of thousands of years. We saw in short order the lies about covid vaccine effectiveness, fatility rates, natural immunity and exaggerated death rates but we will never see in our lifetimes any manifestation of global warming. Models predict perhaps a 1.5 degree increase in 100 years. But over most of the history of the earth the global temperature was much warmer than today and by much more than 1.5 degrees yet life flourished. All before man walked the earth. Note also that climate models have been wrong 100% so far. First in the 1970s models predicted global cooling. Now models predict global warming. Remember an inconvenient truth? No climate fear lies from that movie have come to pass. Polar bears thrive and kilimanjaro has snow. The predictions of any model are no better then the integrity of the person creating the model or inputting the parameters. While we have no climate crisis, we do have an integrity crisis in the science community. I believe the solution to stop this fraud is political as the expert class will shut up as soon as they stop being payed to lie
Excellent. I'd like to read more of you on this.
Green energy is not green.
Between the coal and rubber burned to create enough heat to melt the quartzite to the fracking to mine the quartzite, the slave labor used to mine for minerals for batteries, the chemicals in EV batteries that last ten years then the toxic chemicals go into a landfill poisoning the ground, to the amount of wild life killed, to the amount of petrol used yo build the massive bases fir these windmills, to the 20 year life span of a windmill that goes into a landfill, etc…
Then the EV owner plugs their car in overnight to charge it when there is no solar or wind power, meaning they use petroleum, fossil, fuels not the “green” environment killing energy sources they advocate for.
Disinformation from our government and media again. So who profits from the government mandates?
Not the consumer. Not the taxpayer.
When will people start asking questions?
Even Micheal Moore raised this alarm in a documentary a number of years ago. Which only put him in "progressive" purgatory. The alarms have been sounded for a long time.
Why are we still funding and entire "sustainability" division within the city of Santa Barbara? What is their mission that justifies the millions of tax dollars spent on their salaries, perks and benefits?
Planet of the Humans - a Michael Moore 2019 documentary - as much an anti corporation screed as exposure of the current failed "green" agenda.
That's a pretty good read Brian - I didn't know any of that.
When Earth Day turned into nothing more than selling tie-dye, CBD oils, and running a Beer Garden, you knew their real agenda was dead.
So called green power, isn't all that green. Not only doesn't it produce enough power, but the panels and turbines are also not eco-friendly when it comes to disposal. But like the bridge to nowhere, government goes all in with failed project after failed project.
PS. Perhaps, I should have mentioned "Lurch" otherwise know as our Climate Czar, John Kerry, who could be one of our biggest, individual, polluters flying around the world in private planes to save the world. He should be on Trump's, removal from office, list.
On a positive note, I installed solar just over 1 year ago including a Tesla PowerWall for storage. I have been powered 100% since then. The battery supplies 100% of my nighttime power requirements with around 60% remaining in the morning. This includes charging my Tesla and my Fiat EV. With the increase in SCE rates, recovering the cost has gone from 17 years down to 11 years and with the next proposed rate increase I expect to recover the entire cost even sooner, excepting the new, proposed “tax” on solar in California. The savings on gasoline? I basically drive for free, saving another, approximately $3000 per year. IMHO, naysayers just don’t understand the TRUE story of private solar use. Most downside claims depend on unfounded, illogical and overstated claims with little foundation other than blindfolded, visceral emotion against change. Purely based on economics, this will happen all by itself without government support. The savings are just too great.
Your batteries won't last long enough to realize your green pipe dream of recovering your investment. How much of your investment was payed for by subsidies? The upside of solar is based on unfounded, illogical and overstated claims and subsidies.
Balderdash!
$1500 tax credit.
More emotionally based Balderdash.
Put your brain to work researching REAL facts, not oft repeated disinformation.
Do you have solar in your timeshare?
Eegads, talk about nitpicking minutia that has VERY little impact, much less practical application to private solar. I get it that it is human nature to be suspicious of change. Some more than others, obviously. Snow on the roof? What % of the country experiences that, for how many days of the year ? What % of people live what % of time in their timeshare? Admittedly, if you installed solar 20 years ago you are probably looking at replacement that, with new technology, improved materials and upgraded storage batteries, will last 30 years this time around. You are still WAY ahead economically, even after 50 years. Aside from environmental benefits (the child labor mining for battery minerals is one of the worst disinformation negative positions possible), the raw economic benefits will prevail over poorly researched, emotionally based misinformation. Couple that with continued, rapid advances in solar technology dramatically reducing costs and solar will rapidly expand, in spite of all the Balderdash.
RH: Ahhh yes ........ the "environmental benefits" ........... who could overlook that balderdash when making this case.
Maybe you could direct us to the data on this part of the equation; not modeling, not hypotheticals, not surrogate endpoints, but real "environmental" data.
Last year I saved $3000+ on gasoline. Carbon footprint from gasoline = zero. Perhaps you could lookup what % of electricity in the USA is generated from coal and petroleum? Are you suggesting there is no environmental consequence from this? Also, in the news this am was a report that Ebridge Pipeline leaked 70,000 gallons of fuel oil from the pipeline going to the fuel depot in Griffith, Indiana. You might ask what the largest consumer from that depot uses the fuel for? To generate electricity. I don’t believe I have used modeling, hypotheticals nor surrogate endpoints, just facts. Not sure what you think Balderdash means.
https://media1.tenor.com/images/7822a69643ac09f00b95cf1b10b3b40f/tenor.gif?itemid=17899877
Opened and received a clip n first pitch baseball. Is this your subtle message?
RH: Huh? Real costs for solar also include lifetime repair, maintenance, repositioning and replacement.
Correct! But still substantially less than staying on the grid, especially at future rate increases.
RH: Trump will be bringing energy costs down. Stay tuned.
BTW: You will also need to add the costs to ship your two old EV's to Karachi for dismantling, since they are too toxic for domestic disposal. (Hint, that was a joke.)
As Brent's journal comment indicates below, it works in So Cal because your roof isn't buried in snow and ice for 3-4 months per year. Plus your vehicle would not get the mileage it does in either freezing or extremely hot temp zones.
Yeah, max mileage in coldest climate drops by around 10%. In my Tesla that is from 380 miles down to 342 miles, still enough to get to the grocery store and work.
Ever heard of heated solar panels for snow country? I guess not.
Where do you get the electricity to heat the solar panels when they are covered in ice and snow? The absolute best, that I am not opposed to, is to have wind and solar as supplement to an energy source that produces 24/7 regardless of the weather.
Andy, the power to run a solar panel heater is the same source you used before you installed solar and the same source you use at night if you don’t have a storage battery as well as the same source you use when solar production is less than consumption. It is called the grid and locally is owned and run by SCE. It sounds like you should maybe study up on solar systems before making more contributions ? Just sayin’
Andy,
Please scroll down.
Thank you very much!
Ron, unlike the malcontents here I really enjoyed your first four words, "On a positive note."
Hey, I'm not discontented - I love reading my nuggets! :)
Thanks Dan, so good to hear from you. Merry Christmas and best wishes for a blessed New Year to you and those you love.
Ron
I have a feeling you may have installed an exceptionally good (and expensive) system.
Earl, Yes, just like every other investment I make after serious study and analysis. Right now, my annual savings will fully cover the solar panels and the storage battery after just 11 years. The system is projected to be fairly maintenance free and will supply power for the next 25 to 30 years. It IS a long term investment; but after getting my initial investment covered, the savings over the subsequent 10 years gives me around a 200% return on my investment at the end of that period if rates continue their historic upward trend. That is why I said that the economics of solar will dramatically propel the solar industry without any government subsidies.
And I’ve read that the battery powered cars are like riding in a microwave oven … really bad for one’s health ..
sitting on a battery or in front of one.. can you imagine?
Not good for anybody .
OMG. Where did you read such Balderdash? Please quote a specific publication in any scientific journal, if you can find one. What kind of negative energy source supposedly radiates from sealed batteries? I am always willing to learn new things, if they have valid facts behind them. Looking forward to your facts.
Like microwaves being toxic, never been proven that battery powered cars do anything bad to you. Some of the work conditions in which batteries are made are harmful … to the workers making them.
Jennifer, this is not to say I'm pro going electric, I'm not, but the stuff about microwave ovens being toxic has never been proven. Not for all these years they've been around.
And then in 20 year you get to re-invest in this equipment giving you "free power" all over again.
Our home came with photo-voltaic already installed, When it went out, it could not be fixed plus the manufacturer was no longer in business so no replacement parts were available so the entire system needed to be replaced, let alone adding the increased maintenance costs to clean the roof panels to ensure maximum energy production.
Then the additional significant costs when it came time to replace the roof and tack on the additional solar contractor costs to remove and replace the panels.
See my comments to Livingston above.
Oops, I ment to say Barton
NB: There is an edit button in the row of three tiny gray dots - upper right hand corner of your own posts.)
I love that edit button!
Please ignore
Thank you for another excellent piece exposing the moral Roundup the Green Industrial Complex is doused in. I do worry that exposing it without supporting a positive alternative is destructive of true environmentalism. I'm an old hippie who still loves Paul Watson, Edward Abbey, Joel Salatin - who were/are true environmentalists. I'm currently reading John Klar's book Small Farm Republic: Why Conservatives Must Embrace Local Agriculture, Reject Climate Alarmism, and Lead an Environmental Revivalism. Yes! You all should read it. But here today on SB Current I only see the rejecting of climate change, which is healthy. However, anyone can go on about how awful the Green scams are. It's right there in front of us. But when are all you conservatives going to do something besides reject? When are you going to talk about an environmental revival? Trump is doing it. But what's with the CA Republicans? I only see Kevin Kiley talking about positive action.
Pol-Pol - "I'm an old hippie . . ." I knew there something I liked about you! :)
Green on the outside, red on the inside.
My 1960's college graduation cohort was challenged by the threat of Cold War nuclear annihilation. I look back and will claim that we children of the 20th Century delivered, since there have been no further Hiroshimas nor Nagasakis. And both recently visited are thriving, regenerated cities today.
The challenge for the new massive energy-dependent generations of the 21st Century is preventing nuclear waste storage from falling into the hands of terrorists, while further exploring what seems to be the best energy production alternative we have on the table today - nuclear power.
My older generation somehow got everyone to behave, and not blow everyone up with malignant nuclear power. So far. What do you say, Gens XYZ? How will you too preserve the peaceful use of nuclear power for your generations?
Thanks Andy. Your article reminds me of a friend who lives in Colorado who said "You better have a backup to solar when it snows." I was not aware of our paying other states to bail us out of our stupidity.
Nuclear is gonna be safe, cheap and big as a bread box.
Good article, Andy. I love the picture of the chainsaws. I happened to have a disassembled Dewalt battery powered chainsaw on a table to the left of me. It leaks all of its chain oil when not in use (Made in China). The problem once again is the dumb politicians designing power networks which is what a team of engineers do quite well. Think of all the money exchanging hands to develop solar and wind power machines. Isn't it grand how the money changes hands? Tax the public, pay the companies for their wind and solar devices that occasionally operate, and the politicians taking their cut in the process. It has nothing to do with the environment, it's all to do with the money changing hands.
What stocks did Nancy Pelosi buy when all this alternate energy sources stuff was "invented?"
I'm currently writing an article on how to attack the drones and not blow them up into little pieces for identification purposes. It's quite easy when using choreographed drones to form a choreographed pseudo net to crash into. Each drone could use a small net to increase the chance of net catching. But here's my point with regards to an example of the Dems not demanding to replace polluting, exploding fireworks with non-polluting choreographed fireworks. If the Dems were so consumed with pollution, then why don't we here about the demand for non-polluting fireworks. A big advantage with drones is they don't smoke up the area and you can see them easily. But do you think there's any money to be made by the Dems using drones. I guess not!
Bill, I’m developing dogfighting drones for the gaming industry. The pros I deal with tell me drones with ‘nets’ can be programmed to mitigate the problem.
Yes, but in my opinion even better is programming a dome-shaped array to cover the foe drone(s). The most efficient use of a surface area is to contain a volume is using a sphere-shaped object, or half a sphere often referred to as a dome. A dome-shaped array of drones each containing perhaps a pentagon shaped netting might offer an interesting solution. Today's drones don't look above, so an operator would be confused if a dome descended from above. One thing friendly drone can do is to force a foe drone into an area where the choreographed drones or staged. The goal would be to take down the foe drone in the least amount of broken up pieces. Something to think about. 12/15/2024
_Very_ interesting.
In essence, I've realized you need a jet to conquer a jet and a drone(s) to conquer a drone. You are dealing with similar operating parameters. A helicopter doesn't want to face a drone because it can be deadly. A friendly helicopter blade can be struck by a foe drone; not good. The object is to fine tune a drone that can be better than other drones. Someone is going to make a killing in the "smart" drone industry which is outfitted with the most "toys" to destroy another drone. I believe drone on drones is the best weapon inside neighborhoods.
Try a Makita electric chainsaw. I love mine and don’t miss the pain and stress of fighting with my gas powered Stihl
I'll buy your Stihl. Have you seen the prices for a used one?!
Throw in the unfathomable amounts of 150+% reliable energy required to support bit-coins and AI, along this current movement to recklessly depend on both, wholly undermines the current Democrat "green energy" scam.
This Bit-coin/AI movement will create a very interesting realignment regarding the future of energy production. And the dawn of another New Age, if/when it is solved.
When President Trump promised to “Drill baby drill,” I take him at his word. Yes, thankfully adults are back in the room and calling the shots. Obviously, there are a multitude of pros and cons on all forms of energy. The reality is our economy is derived from a fossil fuel platform with virtually everything we do or consume being based on oil and natural gas. My issue is not with a given technology, it’s all about letting free enterprise deciding which source is the most beneficial. Government should have limited input as to our energy source, let the marketplace decide. Energy technology should stand on its own merits and NOT depend on the taxpayer.
My issue locally is the multiple “land trusts” in our county, thereby removing these parcels from the tax roles as not-for-profits. Just this week, 3300 acres in Gaviota were designated as a land trust. Will these lands now be open to solar or wind farms? Chumash Marine Sanctuary as a wind farm? Can one imagine our Gaviota coast looking like Palm Springs?
How about the EIR for the Lomoc wind farm that stated on a long term basis there was not enough sustainable energy to justify building it. Of course it was ignored.
The cost in environmental terms of the batteries to store the electricity is substantial. The same for the batteries in EV that take and power the cars.
Oh and has anyone remembered that So. Cal. Gas has produced for years a carbon neutral product???? Now that should put a crimp in the game.
But that is ok as long as the State continues to create massive deficits, destroys water sources, kills Ag. and more it is environmentally preferred.
In addition, to much of our self-induced harm to America, there is the world-wide issue that our efforts are, largely, being negated by other big countries.
China: still heavily dependent on coal for producing energy.
India: Also, still heavily dependent on coal.
Brazil: does produce a significant amount of energy from Hydro. But this is largely negated by continued deforestation in the Amazon.
Russia: without the continued sale of oil and gas, its economy would collapse.
Iran: like Russia, Iran's economy very dependent on continued sale of oil and gas.
Germany: because the government foolishly decommissioned all thr German nuclear power plants and are entirely dependent on Russia for fossil fuels, they lack sufficient energy to take the Industrial sector though the winter months. Therefore, they have recommissioned a very significant number of fossil fueled, electric power producing plants.
So far, our efforts on the world stage, seem to enrich China, and impoverish America, without much evidence that the world as a whole will meet the COP temperature targets, despite the tens of thousands of delegates who meet in conference every year burning even more fossil fuel to benefit the rest of us??