Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
5 hours ago.
by Ohwiseone
BeRight
#1

CLEAN... ENERGY

Offshore wind farms from New Jersey to Virginia took a big step closer to reality with the completion of a review that showed the renewable energy source would not cause major environmental damage, officials said today. Wind projects off the coasts of Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, and New Jersey are being studied. The Mid-Atlantic lease proposal follows the Cape Wind project in Massachusetts that was given the go-ahead in 2010 after 9 years of federal review."No developer should have to wait nine or 10 years," for approval, Salazar said. The response from the developers was "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA"

 
 

Member Comments

Ohwiseone

And your point is ?????

Posted 13 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Most solar generation now has natural gas production when there's clouds or when the load is heavy !

Posted 13 days ago.

BeRight

Do you understand the term Base Load? Base load power sources are those plants which can generate dependable power to consistently meet demand.

Posted 13 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Difference is , solar doesn't pollute !

Posted 13 days ago.

BeRight

Duke Energy (NYSE: DUK) signed a $500 million commitment to expand solar power in North Carolina.

Duke will acquire and build three solar facilities totaling 128 MW in capacity. Duke Energy also signed power purchase agreements (PPAs) with five new solar projects in the state, representing 150 MW of capacity. Together, the eight projects will have a capacity of 278 MW. The commitment includes investments in the three facilities and the value of the PPAs.

278mw? One of Muskingum River Units has 237 and unit 5 has over 615.

Let the sun shine Nelly!

Posted 13 days ago.

Ohwiseone

The facts are there greek , and if you choose to be like a mushroom and live in the dark that's all on you ! But don't try to bring a lot of right -wing hooey here and try to pass it off as "facts" !Just because facts don't agree with your politics doesn't make them any less a fact !

Posted 13 days ago.

Ohwiseone

And then I guess the "Stupid" people should be the only ones allowed to vote since they at least aren't brainwashed by your right-wing bullsh^t and propaganda !

Posted 13 days ago.

Ohwiseone

And greek like I've posted , the facts are these coal fired plants were scheduled to go out of service 25 yrs ago and the government made a killing selling pollution credits and letting them continue to run long after they were supposed to shut down !On top of that , part of the deal was these power plants were suppose to up-grade to clean coal technology but they didn't fulfill their part of the bargain !

Posted 13 days ago.

moderation

Hey greek, we don't run cars and tractors on drip-gas any more, do we?

Posted 13 days ago.

thegreek

I just love the way you dont even keep current on the news and then argue stupid points about topics and then tell me to do some research and educate myself and then you go on to deny that I even showed you any facts. Then you and Munster claim republicans deny and deflect !!!! JEESH....Get a stamp and stamp STUPID on both your foreheads and that should prevent you from even being able to VOTE next NOV.

Posted 13 days ago.

thegreek

In some respects, the 13 percent figure shouldn't be surprising. The EPA predicted coal would supply 30 percent of the nation's power in 2030, down from above 40 percent today, when it rolled out its proposed carbon emissions rule for existing power plants in June. The EPA carbon proposal aims to slash electricity emissions 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030.

Posted 13 days ago.

thegreek

By Zack Colman Published September 16, 2014 Washington Examiner

More coal-fired power plants will close because of environmental regulations and competition from other energy sources than previously thought, according to federal watchdogs. A Government Accountability Office report said 13 percent of coal-fired generation will come offline in 2025, compared with a 2012 estimate that ranged between 2 and 12 percent. The report said that raises concerns about having enough electricity supply to meet demand in certain situations, potentially increasing instances of blackouts."Recent and pending actions on the four existing regulations, as well as [Environmental Protection Agency's] recently proposed regulations to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from existing generating units, may require additional agency effort to monitor industry’s progress in responding to the regulations and any potential impacts on reliability," the report said. In some respects, the 13 percent figure sho

Posted 13 days ago.

thegreek

"""No one is saying we have to get it done by this decade and no one is wanting to ruin the economy."""

UH BALONEY... Have you looked at the EPA proposals to close down MORE power plants than they first proposed????? Where have you been??? You argue stuff you do not even know about..... AND ohnot2wise1. YOUR DEMOCRATS ARE IN FOR ^ YEARS of this mess. You cant blame everything on BUsh, and your parents for a poor childhood. You BIG woos... Grow up some and quit WHINING AND BLAMING... Take responsibility for yourselves and your actions. I dont remember any great people that BLAMED everyone else for their failures !!!

Posted 13 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Just in case you haven't noticed greek the economy is already in shambles thanks to your obstructing republicans ! Google it , you might learn something !

Posted 14 days ago.

Kendall78

No Greek, those are the U.S. Energy Information Administration figures.

"We don't have to do it this decade and ruin the economy"

No one is saying we have to get it done by this decade and no one is wanting to ruin the economy.

But hey...sure...if you want to go about this from an Obama stance and lead from behind, I guess we can do that. We'll just wait til we have to fix a problem. I'm certain China or Russia will sell us a solution in the future.

Posted 14 days ago.

thegreek

Those are your figures. Besides, if we cannot come up with a replacement fuel for coal in the next century or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 then somethings wrong. We don't have to do it this decade and ruin the economy !!

Posted 14 days ago.

Kendall78

And in case you missed it, your estimates about having 500 years of coal to use was about 320 years off.

Posted 14 days ago.

Kendall78

"We are not the only country with coal reserves.."

No duh but we only have 27%, everyone else has lower amounts and they rely on coal for themselves. They will run out before us (possibly) and then want to buy more than they already do from us.

Posted 14 days ago.

thegreek

OH YOU MEAN reserves like Russia, China, India Australia have? We are not the only country with coal reserves..

Make rediculous statements like that and then tell me to do some research...

Posted 14 days ago.

Kendall78

So unless new reserves are found or there is an offset of coal use due to other energy sources, our coal reserves have less than 2 centuries left.

And let's be realistic here for a moment, do you think the coal price is going to hold steady during those years? If you were the coal industry and knew that your easy to mine coal is running down...wouldn't you raise prices?

Try doing some research in the future Greek, it will help you to avoid sticking that foot of yours in your mouth.

Posted 14 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or