Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

[Starving Steve]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aCGsB8hGkDIg&refer=home

Here is what you are going to be buying next: solar energy at 7X the value of power produced from fossil or nuclear power. This is what the solar energy faith-healers are up to: making the government force consumers to subsidize the cost of solar power. Witness what the solar energy faith-healers have done now in Spain where they have gotten the Spanish govn't to force consumers to pay 7X more for power generated by the sun than power generated by other means.

Let's take this in slow-motion: A power bill now at $200 per month will jump to $1400 per month. This is what paying 7X the market value for power means; this is what a 7X market value subsidy for solar power is all about.

The solar energy movement is very destructive and very dangerous. There is no future in solar power, and there never will be a future solar for the simple reason that the sun only produces 2 caleries per square centimetre per minute of energy at absolute best, with clear sky, at low latitude, at the edge of the Earth's atmosphere in space, on a surface 90 degrees to the direction of the Sun's light, at noon.... Best case!

Duke Energy Company just opened Catawba Two in South Carolina. Using atomic power, Catawba Two produces 1150 mega-watts per hour with no problems from clouds, nor from humidity, nor from low altitude, nor from time of day, nor from season, nor from angle of incidence of the sun's light. And unlike wind, there will be no problems ever from calms. Unlike wind, Catawba Two produces power to be utilized where the plant is sited and where the power is needed. So transmission costs with nuclear are as low as possible.

One more critical point about Catawba Two: It produces power for the free market for electric power. Catawba Two does not depend upon government subsidies and government controls of the free market for power. So the outcome is naturally going to be much cheaper power bills for the consumer--- at least in South Carolina.

[Guest]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

That's just the point flintlock - traditionally the mid-range cars from Alfa Romeo in Italy were not that expensive. They start at only modestly more than the really economy "Fiat Punto" cars on the market, which are equivalent to a Ford Focus maybe. This is why Alfa are potentially a threat to the traditional US economy car segment also - they look "expensive" but their entry level sedans are comparatively priced to your average Ford sedan car. I think Chrysler is going to give the other US automakers a run for their money with these new offerings.

Looks expensive. Is that really what will sell big in a depression? Or will boring cars be the norm?

I think a little Italian styling would do a lot of car makers some good, including Toyota and Honda.

[Chomsky]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

Sorry man. The nuclear industry is just as dependent on government subsidies as solar. Simply put, the nuclear industry is not viable -- at all -- without the government to cover it. Massive capital coasts and insurance liability make it a non-starter without government support.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...r_power_price/

[BadJuju]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

Sorry man. The nuclear industry is just as dependent on government subsidies as solar. Simply put, the nuclear industry is not viable -- at all -- without the government to cover it. Massive capital coasts and insurance liability make it a non-starter without government support.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...r_power_price/

Most of the problems with the nuclear industry are political.

[FRED]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

Most of the problems with the nuclear industry are political.

There are no environmental or political impediments to developing either solar or nuclear power in China. NIMBY does not exist in a country where the government owns the property and the people lease it from the government.

Which is China developing, a large solar or nuclear industry?

That may help us settle the question of which is more scalable, sans politics.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

Sorry man. The nuclear industry is just as dependent on government subsidies as solar. Simply put, the nuclear industry is not viable -- at all -- without the government to cover it. Massive capital coasts and insurance liability make it a non-starter without government support.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...r_power_price/

The nuclear industry does not need government subsidies until you restrict and delay and sue and threaten nuclear power producing companies. What is a potential source of power for one or two cents per kilowatt hour is now all but forbidden to the public--- thanks to the activties of such groups as Salon News, the Sierra Club, the Environmental Protection Agency, Greenpeace, W.A.R.N. in North Carolina, etc.

The fact of the matter is that Duke Energy Company ( DUK )
is now producing energy from nuclear along with coal for the sum of 8cents per kilowatt hour delivered to the public. Anything that you don't understand about 8cents/kwh?

There are no subsidies right now for nuclear. I own stock in Duke Energy Company, and you can too. Anyone can buy DUK or even General Electric (GE) and participate and help to fund the nuclear revolution.

I noticed that your article from Salon News (italics) claims to have what they call, "concentrated solar energy". But no such thing exists as "concentrated solar energy" because solar energy is solar energy at two calaries per square centimetre per minute. And no such thing exists as a market for solar energy because the energy is too weak. And no miracles are going to occur in photo-voltaics because there is nothing to start with to work a miracle with.... The public needs to know this, if they don't already know this from experience with solar lights.

Your news source claims to be what it calls, "a progressive voice". But there is nothing progressive in a viewpoint which has advocated so-called green energy and has driven-up power bills to the point where households and businesses can no longer function.

I have helped to organize my local community here in British Columbia against so-called green energy advocates such as yourself. Pay attention this Tuesday, May 12th, to the news because we will help to throw-out the green energy advocates from the Govn't of BC and get rid of the Government of Gordon Campbell. And what we will do here this coming week will be a model for what is going to be done next across the continent, in Canada and in America: the greenies are going out of government for good.

[Guest]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

Starving Steve is in full fulmination mode here. I can imagine him, standing commandingly upon a rock, long flowing white robes give a commanding biblical presence - before the flock of anti-alternative-energy faithful seeking succor from the alt-energy growing babble - a clay tablet with the ten anti-alternative-energy commandments tucked under one arm, long flowing white beard ... Casting down bolts of lightning upon the devious and misleading alt-energy proponents.

You're a piece of work Steve. The scourge of the British Columbia alt-energy airheads.

[ disclaimer - don't come gunning after me. I love nuclear power! Three cheers for nuclear! ]

The nuclear industry does not need government subsidies until you restrict and delay and sue and threaten nuclear power producing companies. What is a potential source of power for one or two cents per kilowatt hour is now all but forbidden to the public--- thanks to the activties of such groups as Salon News, the Sierra Club, the Environmental Protection Agency, Greenpeace, W.A.R.N. in North Carolina, etc.

The fact of the matter is that Duke Energy Company ( DUK )
is now producing energy from nuclear along with coal for the sum of 8cents per kilowatt hour delivered to the public. Anything that you don't understand about 8cents/kwh?

There are no subsidies right now for nuclear. I own stock in Duke Energy Company, and you can too. Anyone can buy DUK or even General Electric (GE) and participate and help to fund the nuclear revolution.

I noticed that your article from Salon News (italics) claims to have what they call, "concentrated solar energy". But no such thing exists as "concentrated solar energy" because solar energy is solar energy at two calaries per square centimetre per minute. And no such thing exists as a market for solar energy because the energy is too weak. And no miracles are going to occur in photo-voltaics because there is nothing to start with to work a miracle with.... The public needs to know this, if they don't already know this from experience with solar lights.

Your news source claims to be what it calls, "a progressive voice". But there is nothing progressive in a viewpoint which has advocated so-called green energy and has driven-up power bills to the point where households and businesses can no longer function.

I have helped to organize my local community here in British Columbia against so-called green energy advocates such as yourself. Pay attention this Tuesday, May 12th, to the news because we will help to throw-out the green energy advocates from the Govn't of BC and get rid of the Government of Gordon Campbell. And what we will do here this coming week will be a model for what is going to be done next across the continent, in Canada and in America: the greenies are going out of government for good.

[Thailandnotes]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

One of my best friends is a pothead.

[Guest]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

Ok, you're busted pal. Association with a known pothead. Plus you're in Thailand. God alone knows what iniquities you've witnessed and participated in over there. Conscientious iTulipers ought to summarily turn you in. Steve! We''ve got a known pothead over here.

One of my best friends is a pothead.

[santafe2]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

This is what the solar energy faith-healers are up to: making the government force consumers to subsidize the cost of solar power. Witness what the solar energy faith-healers have done now in Spain where they have gotten the Spanish govn't to force consumers to pay 7X more for power generated by the sun than power generated by other means.

Let's take this in slow-motion: A power bill now at $200 per month will jump to $1400 per month. This is what paying 7X the market value for power means; this is what a 7X market value subsidy for solar power is all about.

When the article speaks to a 7X cost difference, it's referring to the wholesale cost of energy not the retail cost. I don't really object to your dissenting opinion but it's not OK to propagandize at this level. The "jump" as you call it, is about $10 a month at retail not $1,200. We can discuss the value or lack thereof that renewables bring to the world but when you're 2 exponents away from reality it makes your argument look silly.

The solar energy movement is very destructive and very dangerous. There is no future in solar power, and there never will be a future solar for the simple reason that the sun only produces 2 caleries per square centimetre per minute of energy at absolute best, with clear sky, at low latitude, at the edge of the Earth's atmosphere in space, on a surface 90 degrees to the direction of the Sun's light, at noon.... Best case!

That's quite a statement. Solar PV energy has been growing at 30% a year for 10 years and will likely continue that growth curve. Do you realize you're disrespecting the sun? That's the thing that produces all the energy we have on earth. You're suggesting that ancient sun energy is good and human manufactured sun energy is bad, is dumb, is 'destructive and dangerous'. It all comes from the sun, how is that possible?

Catawba Two in South Carolina. Using atomic power, Catawba Two produces 1150 mega-watts per hour

Megawatts, kilowatts, watts are not a measure over time. A watt or a "mega-watt" is a measure of power at a point in time. I've no problem with nuclear as a midterm solution but I don't care much for you pushing it like it's some super solution. I support it today but nuclear is highly problematic.

[santafe2]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

Starving Steve is in full fulmination mode here. I can imagine him, standing commandingly upon a rock, long flowing white robes give a commanding biblical presence - before the flock of anti-alternative-energy faithful seeking succor from the alt-energy growing babble - a clay tablet with the ten anti-alternative-energy commandments tucked under one arm, long flowing white beard ... Casting down bolts of lightning upon the devious and misleading alt-energy proponents.

You're a piece of work Steve. The scourge of the British Columbia alt-energy airheads.

[ disclaimer - don't come gunning after me. I love nuclear power! Three cheers for nuclear! ]

Very, very long day closing a few KW of relatively clean solar energy deals. As Starving said, we're the faithful. We're the confused new true believers. No way this is the future. Thanks for humor, it was greatly appreciated here.

[Guest]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

Lighten up Santafe2. It may look like a tough row to hoe for you now, but you are in the catbird seat for the next decade. Uhm, well GRG55 is in a slightly better catbird seat, but you are "next in line". Energy crisis coming up soon - will be the "main act" for a long time to come old sport. Quitcher grumbling, and enjoy yer rosy prospects. Five years down the road you'll be chomping on soft clover. I promise. As for Starving Steve and his snug little cabin in the Puget sound, I envy him. You've got it good up there too Steve, despite the "infestation" of potheads!

Very, very long day closing a few KW of relatively clean solar energy deals. As Starving said, we're the faithful. We're the confused new true believers. No way this is the future. Thanks for humor, it was greatly appreciated here.

[Chomsky]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

There are no environmental or political impediments to developing either solar or nuclear power in China. NIMBY does not exist in a country where the government owns the property and the people lease it from the government.

Which is China developing, a large solar or nuclear industry?

That may help us settle the question of which is more scalable, sans politics.

Looks like both, though nuclear is much larger:

Currently there is one of the most ambitious programs in the world with plans to have over 70 GWe (5%) of installed capacity by 2020, and a further increase to more than 250 GW (16%) by 2030.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China

China has over 400 photovoltaic (PV) companies and produces approximately 18% of the photovoltaic products worldwide. In 2007 China produced 1700 MW of solar panels, nearly half of the world production of 3800 MW, although 99% was exported. . . .

In 2009, a Commission's official name Wang Zhongying mentioned at a solar energy conference in Shanghai that, in his opinion, the plan may be exceeded several-fold, the installed capacity possibly reaching as much as 10,000 megawatt by 2020. [1% of capacity]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_China

[The Dude]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

I'm increasingly inclined toward natural gas filling the "energy gap," at least in the United States market for the next few years.

This assumes our economy doesn't self destruct so far that the only demand for new energy is from the military (or is that what you meant by increased nuclear energy :eek:?)

Officials in Three States Pin Water Woes on Gas Drilling - ProPublica

Norma Fiorentino's drinking water well was a time bomb. For weeks, workers in her small northeastern Pennsylvania town had been plumbing natural gas deposits from a drilling rig a few hundred yards away. They cracked the earth and pumped in fluids to force the gas out. Somehow, stray gas worked into tiny crevasses in the rock, leaking upward into the aquifer and slipping quietly into Fiorentino's well. Then, according to the state's working theory, a motorized pump turned on in her well house, flicked a spark and caused a New Year's morning blast that tossed aside a concrete slab weighing several thousand pounds.

Fiorentino wasn't home at the time, so it's difficult to know exactly what happened. But afterward, state officials found methane, the largest component of natural gas, in her drinking water. If the fumes that built up in her well house had collected in her basement, the explosion could have killed her.

Dimock, the poverty-stricken enclave where Fiorentino lives, is ground zero for drilling the Marcellus Shale, a prized deposit of natural gas that is increasingly touted as one of the country's most abundant and cleanest alternatives to oil. The drilling here -- as in other parts of the nation -- is supposed to be a boon, bringing much-needed jobs and millions of dollars in royalties to cash-strapped homeowners.

But a string of documented cases of gas escaping into drinking water -- not just in Pennsylvania but across North America -- is raising new concerns about the hidden costs of this economic tide and strengthening arguments across the country that drilling can put drinking water at risk.

Near Cleveland, Ohio, an entire house exploded in late 2007 after gas seeped into its water well. The Ohio Department of Natural Resources later issued a 153-page report [1] (PDF) that blamed a nearby gas well's faulty concrete casing and hydraulic fracturing [2] -- a deep-drilling process that shoots millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals into the ground under explosive pressure -- for pushing methane into an aquifer and causing the explosion.

In Dimock, several drinking water wells have exploded and nine others were found with so much gas that one homeowner was told to open a window if he planned to take a bath. Dishes showed metallic streaks that couldn't be washed off, and tests also showed high amounts of aluminum and iron, prompting fears that drilling fluids might be contaminating the water along with the gas. In February, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection charged Cabot Oil & Gas with two violations that it says caused the contamination, theorizing that gas leaked from the well casing into fractures underground.

Colorado has conducted its own study:

"It challenges the view that natural gas, and the suite of hydrocarbons that exist around it, is isolated from water supplies by its extreme depth," said Judith Jordan, the oil and gas liaison for Garfield County, who has worked as a hydrogeologist with DuPont and as a lawyer with Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Protection. "It is highly unlikely that methane would have migrated through natural faults and fractures and coincidentally arrived in domestic wells at the same time oil and gas development started, after having been down there ... for over 65 million years."

The Garfield County analysis comes as Congress considers legislation that would toughen environmental oversight of drilling and reverse the exemptions enjoyed by the gas companies. Colorado has already overhauled its own oil and gas regulations, despite stiff resistance from the energy industry. The new rules, which went into effect earlier this month, strengthen protections against, among other things, methane contamination.

This could become an...explosive issue. 32,360 wells drilled for NG last year, unconventional shale plays are north of 50% and these wells have staggering decline rates - 80% first year in many cases. To supply transportation without a Plan to supplant electrical generation at the same time would require God knows how many more holes - definitely more rigs and roughnecks.

Outstanding new book: Oil 101. You'll grok that refining assay when you're done. Very favorable review. This man has done a lot of excellent research into all stripes of biofuels, too.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Janszen Interview on NPR on 05/01/2009 - Power Hungry...Energy Green Bubble?

Nuclear is not "some super solution"; it is the ONLY solution. In the same manner, the gold standard is not some old relic from Hoover days; it is the ONLY solution for monetary stability and confidence, worldwide. In the same manner, national health insurance is not some "crazy European or Canadian idea"; it is now the ONLY solution to solving the health mess in America.

The faster we call "a spade a spade", the quicker we will be able to focus our efforts and make the needed change. Look at the mess that we are in, and let's get going on change. There is really nothing more to debate.


And we need to run the potheads and the eco-frauds, the Hell's Angels and the drug dealers, the "buy American" and the anti-NAFTA nationalists, the Iran-apologists and the Hamas-lovers OUT of the progressive movement for good..... Otherwise, our movement fails because even if we win in elections, we get nothing done--- as the Clinton years showed. We have to focus our efforts and get going and make the changes.

Here in British Columbia, we had a Gordon Campbell government of so-called "Liberals", and what have they done in five years of complete control in Victoria? Nothing, absolutely NOTHING. As the pot grew tall, absolutely nothing was accomplished for anyone.

Liberalism used to mean progress. Once-upon-a-time, a liberal was a progressive. That was in the 1950s and 1960s when Liberals and Social-Democrats in Canada built the Nelson River hydro-electric project, the St. Lawrence Seaway, the Pinawa atomic power plant in Manitoba, the Defenbaker Dam in Saskatchewan. In Minnesota, the Democratic-Farmer-Labour Party let Northern States Power build the Monticello nuclear power plant. The Iron Range was further developed, and taconite was developed..... This is what liberalism was all about, once-upon-a- time.

In California, water from the Colorado River was shipped to Los Angeles, and water from the Sierras was shipped to Los Angeles. Houses used to cost $19,000, and everyone had could afford atleast a bungalow... That was when Governor Pat Brown--- a liberal--- ran California, once-upon-a-time.

And then the potheads and the Hells Angels and the Hamas-lovers arrived. Jane Fonda began her protest of nuclear power, and the sun-worshippers arrived. The feminists arrived on the scene, too. So naturally, things began to change, and the progress which had helped to improve people's lives came to a complete stop. The curse of segregation was ended in the South with the Civil Rights Movement, and that was the end of liberalism; the liberals went to sleep.

This past week, a woman was hung in Iran by the Islamo-fascists--- an event barely noticed in the world. The Islamo-fascists had great support at the University of California in Berkeley when I went to school there in the late 1960s. I had no idea what "Down with the Shaw" or "Down with the Coronation" was all about; that was the protest for many days.... I had no conception about what potheads and eco-nuts running the government would mean, someday. I had no idea how everything, even the Hells Angels from Oakland would fit together into a future mosaic, even in Canada.

And because the liberals stood for pot, George Bush arrived on the scene. English-only replaced bilingual education in the schools. Alan Greenspan and his incomprehensible Greenspanese would replace any understanding and direction in the field of economics. Lies and bologna about "concentrated solar power" and "break-throughs in photo-voltaics" would replace the real promise of nuclear power, in Canada and America..... So China and India and Brazil (the BRIC countries) would become the economic hub for the world, and America and Canada, even Europe would become the side-shows.