18 hours ago, bannork said:

Advantages

1. Renewable and clean:..... releasing zero greenhouse gases

that is a disadvantage, co2 is essential for life

1 minute ago, mordothailand said:

that is a disadvantage, co2 is essential for life

There is no more natural adjustments after humans have filled air for year, removed old forests, rain forests, wet lands, the sea doesnt manage more, important biodiversity have disappeared, and if we experience simultaneously natural happenings we are doomed. 

 

Remember we as a species is very young, but we have survived through a few cycles where a few almost wiped us out completely. 

 

So it is okay to be a bit smart, while you also recognize natural climate changes and cycles. We haven’t made the earth a better place. 

 

When that is said, I believe we are to stupid to manage to do anything about it before it is to late. 

 

We talking about Fermi paradox where all intelligent lifeforms manage to self destruct themselves before we manage to leave the planet and colonize space. 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Hummin said:

There is no more natural adjustments after humans have filled air for year, removed old forests, rain forests, wet lands, the sea doesnt manage more, important biodiversity have disappeared, and if we experience simultaneously natural happenings we are doomed. 

 

Remember we as a species is very young, but we have survived through a few cycles where a few almost wiped us out completely. 

 

So it is okay to be a bit smart, while you also recognize natural climate changes and cycles. We haven’t made the earth a better place. 

 

When that is said, I believe we are to stupid to manage to do anything about it before it is to late. 

 

We talking about Fermi paradox where all intelligent lifeforms manage to self destruct themselves before we manage to leave the planet and colonize space. 

 

 

as a matter of fact, we have prolonged conditions for complex life by 60 million years thanks to our heroic recycling of co2 back into the atmosphere where it belong. of course, that is unless some dumb species intentionally remove the co2 that we put up there

10 minutes ago, mordothailand said:

as a matter of fact, we have prolonged conditions for complex life by 60 million years thanks to our heroic recycling of co2 back into the atmosphere where it belong. of course, that is unless some dumb species intentionally remove the co2 that we put up there

Im not especially happy with those remove co2 programs, thats just another try to milk the system, keep the economy pumping and let the tax payers take to responsibility. 

 

There is so many other things we could have done, but not willing to do. It doesn’t help take more forests, polluting more fjords, sea and fresh water or air. 

 

Building more windmills will contribute to doing that. 

 

3 hours ago, Yagoda said:

I dont need AI to think for me, and if I do use it, I ask the right questions.

The big point all the enviro believers and doomsayers are missing, is that the IPCC 'scientific reports' are being challenged by other scientists as being too extreme.  As evidenced by the recent 'about face' by Bill Gates, the predictions of doom and gloom and massively over-exaggerated by zealots like Greta Thunberg, are being more and more challenged.  The 'scientific agenda' associated with climate change is a massive ship, but it is slowly turning. 

 

According to Google AI -

• Emissions Scenarios: Some researchers argue that certain high-end emissions scenarios (like SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5 in the AR6 report), used by many models, are now unlikely to occur based on current trends and thus project warming that is unrealistically high.
• Model Sensitivity: A fraction of climate models have shown a higher "climate sensitivity" (projecting more than 4.5°C of warming if CO2 levels double), which some experts consider implausible when compared with other lines of evidence, such as historical climate data.
• Focus on Outliers: Critics suggest that the IPCC's process can inadvertently give too much weight to outlier, worst-case scenarios or non-peer-reviewed "grey literature" (reports from campaign groups or governments), leading to more alarming-than-warranted conclusions in specific instances (e.g., the since-corrected error about Himalayan glaciers melting by 2035). 

Others say the IPCC reports are too conservative - but IMO they have an 'agenda' like Greta.

 

Besides - when it all comes down to it, crushing the western economies by forcing climate change BS upon everyone and everything, will not make any difference while China keeps pumping CO2 into the air anyway. 

 

 

 

What is the point when the 2-4 billion tonnes reduced in the west get destroyed by the 10 billion coming out of China and India - and Russia is not even in the stats - nor is all the fires in SEAsia and Sth America.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country

 

All those nutter activists should go to Beijing and Shanghai and New Delhi and Mumbai and block the traffic there - they are absolute delusional idiots. Trump is going to change policies to stop the economy being crushed, while also encouraging more 'clean' production of electricity for the modern world - IMO nuclear. 

 

And the answer is obvious - modern nuclear power plants - clean and safe.  3rd generation nuclear plants are proven safe power production (people and environment), and the currently being developed 4th generation are even more safer and efficient.  The delusional greenies will scream blue murder and say they are too expensive - but if the planet is really dying, then why do they care about the cost. They will even call out Chernobyl and Fukushima as examples - but they were 1st generation reactors and the causes were attributed to human error.  Chernobyl was directly attributed to absolutely unforgivable human error by the Ukrainians running the plant, and the 1 reactor out of 7 that failed at Fukushima was supposed to have been decommissioned, and the backup power generator for that reactor was supposed to have been moved above the water line like all the other reactors back up power in the plant.  The climate nutters are emotionally controlled delusional people who think nuclear is bad - no matter the clear and undeniable evidence that Nuclear is by far the best solution to a problem that is nowhere near as bad as they say it is anyway. 

12 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

The big point all the enviro believers and doomsayers are missing, is that the IPCC 'scientific reports' are being challenged by other scientists as being too extreme.  As evidenced by the recent 'about face' by Bill Gates, the predictions of doom and gloom and massively over-exaggerated by zealots like Greta Thunberg, are being more and more challenged.  The 'scientific agenda' associated with climate change is a massive ship, but it is slowly turning. 

 

According to Google AI -

• Emissions Scenarios: Some researchers argue that certain high-end emissions scenarios (like SSP3-7.0 and SSP5-8.5 in the AR6 report), used by many models, are now unlikely to occur based on current trends and thus project warming that is unrealistically high.
• Model Sensitivity: A fraction of climate models have shown a higher "climate sensitivity" (projecting more than 4.5°C of warming if CO2 levels double), which some experts consider implausible when compared with other lines of evidence, such as historical climate data.
• Focus on Outliers: Critics suggest that the IPCC's process can inadvertently give too much weight to outlier, worst-case scenarios or non-peer-reviewed "grey literature" (reports from campaign groups or governments), leading to more alarming-than-warranted conclusions in specific instances (e.g., the since-corrected error about Himalayan glaciers melting by 2035). 

Others say the IPCC reports are too conservative - but IMO they have an 'agenda' like Greta.

 

Besides - when it all comes down to it, crushing the western economies by forcing climate change BS upon everyone and everything, will not make any difference while China keeps pumping CO2 into the air anyway. 

 

 

 

What is the point when the 2-4 billion tonnes reduced in the west get destroyed by the 10 billion coming out of China and India - and Russia is not even in the stats - nor is all the fires in SEAsia and Sth America.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country

 

All those nutter activists should go to Beijing and Shanghai and New Delhi and Mumbai and block the traffic there - they are absolute delusional idiots. Trump is going to change policies to stop the economy being crushed, while also encouraging more 'clean' production of electricity for the modern world - IMO nuclear. 

 

And the answer is obvious - modern nuclear power plants - clean and safe.  3rd generation nuclear plants are proven safe power production (people and environment), and the currently being developed 4th generation are even more safer and efficient.  The delusional greenies will scream blue murder and say they are too expensive - but if the planet is really dying, then why do they care about the cost. They will even call out Chernobyl and Fukushima as examples - but they were 1st generation reactors and the causes were attributed to human error.  Chernobyl was directly attributed to absolutely unforgivable human error by the Ukrainians running the plant, and the 1 reactor out of 7 that failed at Fukushima was supposed to have been decommissioned, and the backup power generator for that reactor was supposed to have been moved above the water line like all the other reactors back up power in the plant.  The climate nutters are emotionally controlled delusional people who think nuclear is bad - no matter the clear and undeniable evidence that Nuclear is by far the best solution to a problem that is nowhere near as bad as they say it is anyway. 

 

China's investment in wind power is staggering.

 

AI -China investing in wind power:

China has heavily invested in wind power, leading the world in both installed capacity and new additions. In 2024, China's clean energy investment exceeded $625 billion, and it achieved its 2030 wind and solar capacity target six years ahead of schedule. 

 

China has dominated the global wind energy market, driven by substantial government support, ambitious targets (peaking carbon emissions by 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality by 2060), and a strong domestic manufacturing base. 

 

 China accounts for over 40% of the world's total wind capacity. The top four global wind turbine manufacturers in 2024 were all Chinese.

 

Rapid Expansion: In 2024, China installed 360 GW of wind and solar capacity, which was more than half of global additions for the year. The country's total wind power capacity reached 600 million kW (600 GW) by the end of November 2025.

 

Offshore Wind Power: China is the world leader in offshore wind, with an installed capacity of over 42.7 GW by March 2025, surpassing Europe's total capacity. The country is developing advanced, typhoon-ready turbines and has significant prospective capacity in its coastal provinces.

 

 

The massive investment in wind power is fundamentally reshaping China's energy landscape. 

 

Displacing Fossil Fuels: The growth in wind and solar generated power is meeting most of China's increased electricity demand and is beginning to cut into fossil fuels' market share. In early 2025, combined wind and solar capacity surpassed coal capacity for the first time.

 

Generation Share: Wind and solar power accounted for a record 26% of the country's electricity generation in April 2025.

 

Challenges: The rapid build-out has outpaced the development of necessary supporting infrastructure like energy storage and flexible grids, leading to some power curtailment issues and a continued reliance on coal for grid stability. 

 

13 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Please, if solar power us so cost effective, why are the states with the most solar power have the highest electricity prices?

 

Share some real specifics please? and what are you including in your analsysis?

 

Are you including the costs of coal or oil etc in the overall cost of producing / delivering electricity to the masses? And in your comparisons what items do you include in establishing the cost of toally renewables e.g. solar? 

4 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

Share some real specifics please? and what are you including in your analsysis?

 

Are you including the costs of coal or oil etc in the overall cost of producing / delivering electricity to the masses? And in your comparisons what items do you include in establishing the cost of toally renewables e.g. solar? 

California has the highest percentage of solar power in the US and the highest or second highest electric rates. 

 

 This silly graphic shows that the left has to resort to lying:

16 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Add:

 

Wind, Solar and other renewables can’t be disrupted by foreign wars and there’s no need to go to war to obtain it.

 

lol....other countries dont know how to bomb wind or solar panel farms?

 

5 hours ago, mordothailand said:

as a matter of fact, we have prolonged conditions for complex life by 60 million years thanks to our heroic recycling of co2 back into the atmosphere where it belong. of course, that is unless some dumb species intentionally remove the co2 that we put up there

Even if this were true, which virtually all climatologists deny, according to the guy who came up with this nonsense,we would still have almost 2 million years before this happened.. Almost 2 million years! And yet it's climate change denialists who claim that climatologists are alarmists. It is to laugh.

13 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

1. He is completely beholden to corporate America, the lobbyists, the Saudis, and the oil giants. 

2. He's never been to a national park and he likely hates the outdoors, so the idea of preserving nature simply does not resonate with him. 

3. He has no vision so the concept of environmental degradation just doesn't make sense to him on any level. 

4. It would appear that he thinks we have five or six alternative planets that we can shift to, once we degrade this one to the point where it's no longer habitable. 

5. He just doesn't think about the future, he cares not one iota about the quality of life future generations are going to have, and he doesn't have the wisdom nor the heart to embrace the concept of good stewardship. 

and once again you talk like you know him personally.  So you've always been friends with him and he's never been to park and hates being outdoors? 

you know golf is played outdoors.

 

Closed the boarders and enforcing laws to bring back prosperity to the US.

No more giving out money to illegal immigrants because we feel sorry they traveled hundreds of miles to cross the boarder illegally and are now afraid to go to work because they are afraid they will get caught by ICE for entering the US illegally.  

 

When did Trump say anything about moving people to 5 or 6 other planets... now you're just making things up!!

Moving forward with NASA and going to the moon and Mars is a good thing!  It was a good when Kennedy did it, now Trump wants to make NASA great again and it's bad.

 

Doesn't think about the future, but working on a children's fund to help them for their future. Fixing tariffs to help America bring back good paying jobs. Just wait it takes time but the Tariffs will work! It works for over countries.  Thailand has a huge auto industry, why?? because of high tariffs on car imports. 

 

What is happening to Canada? They wanted to fight Trump instead of working with him and now Alberta is talking about becoming the 51st state?

Crown royal closed up in Canada, Walmart pulling back. Auto industry in shatters. Why because Canada wanted to fight against the US instead of working with the US. 

 

Canada needs to look at the big picture and do what's good for Canadians instead of out of spite for Trump!

 

 

33 minutes ago, ericthai said:

 

lol....other countries dont know how to bomb wind or solar panel farms?

 

Well, if that's the case, they don't know how to bomb gas, coal and nuclear powered plants? But they can't cut off supplies of wind and solar, can they? And you're seriously concerned about a bombing campaign waged against America? Will it be Mexico or Canada leading the charge?

1 minute ago, ericthai said:

and once again you talk like you know him personally.  So you've always been friends with him and he's never been to park and hates being outdoors? 

you know golf is played outdoors.

 

Closed the boarders and enforcing laws to bring back prosperity to the US.

No more giving out money to illegal immigrants because we feel sorry they traveled hundreds of miles to cross the boarder illegally and are now afraid to go to work because they are afraid they will get caught by ICE for entering the US illegally.  

 

When did Trump say anything about moving people to 5 or 6 other planets... now you're just making things up!!

Moving forward with NASA and going to the moon and Mars is a good thing!  It was a good when Kennedy did it, now Trump wants to make NASA great again and it's bad.

 

Doesn't think about the future, but working on a children's fund to help them for their future. Fixing tariffs to help America bring back good paying jobs. Just wait it takes time but the Tariffs will work! It works for over countries.  Thailand has a huge auto industry, why?? because of high tariffs on car imports. 

 

What is happening to Canada? They wanted to fight Trump instead of working with him and now Alberta is talking about becoming the 51st state?

Crown royal closed up in Canada, Walmart pulling back. Auto industry in shatters. Why because Canada wanted to fight against the US instead of working with the US. 

 

Canada needs to look at the big picture and do what's good for Canadians instead of out of spite for Trump!

 

 

You mean Trump imposing tariffs on Canadian goods was good for Canada? If you take oil out of the picture, the US actually ran a trade surplus with Canada. And it was Trump who attacked Biden for putting a halt to Keystone 2, which would have increased Canadian oil exports to the USA.

1 minute ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Well, if that's the case, they don't know how to bomb gas, coal and nuclear powered plants? But they can't cut off supplies of wind and solar, can they? And you're seriously concerned about a bombing campaign waged against America? Will it be Mexico or Canada leading the charge?

I'm not concerned about any country bombing the US, now you're just making <deleted> up! Who in their right mind would try and invade or bomb the USA?

Try and get a bomber close to the USA.

 

You said wind farms and solar farms were not capable of being disrupted as the sun shines (some of the time) and the wind blows (some of the time) and nobody can stop that, but again the production of energy from that can be stopped. 

 

The oil is in the ground and nobody is going to stop that from being there. So in both cases it's access to the basic fuel. 

who's going to cut the US supply of oil?  You do understand the US produces enough domestic oil to be self-sufficient. 

 

 

Just now, ericthai said:

I'm not concerned about any country bombing the US, now you're just making <deleted> up! Who in their right mind would try and invade or bomb the USA?

Try and get a bomber close to the USA.

 

You said wind farms and solar farms were not capable of being disrupted as the sun shines (some of the time) and the wind blows (some of the time) and nobody can stop that, but again the production of energy from that can be stopped. 

 

The oil is in the ground and nobody is going to stop that from being there. So in both cases it's access to the basic fuel. 

who's going to cut the US supply of oil?  You do understand the US produces enough domestic oil to be self-sufficient. 

 

 

Do you understand that as long as there's oil in the ground that can be pumped out at an economically sustainable  rate, the USA will be more or less okay. But do you think that the supply is infinite? Do you think that as more easily tapped sources run dry, that petroleum and gas won't get more costly? Do you believe that exploiting sunshine and and wind power will also dry up the supply of those 2 resources or make them more scarce  sometime in the future?

8 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Well, if that's the case, they don't know how to bomb gas, coal and nuclear powered plants? But they can't cut off supplies of wind and solar, can they? And you're seriously concerned about a bombing campaign waged against America? Will it be Mexico or Canada leading the charge?

Saying they can't cut off supplies of wind and solar is no different than saying they can't cut off the supply of oil. They cut of the means of extraction and delivery.

 

In any event, please, if solar power us so cost effective, why are the states with the greatest reliance on solar power have the highest electricity prices?

 

 

42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Saying they can't cut off supplies of wind and solar is no different than saying they can't cut off the supply of oil. They cut of the means of extraction and delivery.

 

In any event, please, if solar power us so cost effective, why are the states with the greatest reliance on solar power have the highest electricity prices?

 

 

Maybe because they had the highest rates they're now turning to solar to get those rates lower. And in California there has been a tremendous amount of investment in fireproofing the grid. Hawaii always had the most expensive electricity because of its location.

And why is Texas, where there's been a very free market in power sourcing, barreling ahead with massive increases of solar power and storage?

"Since 2019, Texas power firms have boosted solar generation capacity by 800%, wind capacity by 50% and battery storage capacity by an eye-popping 5,500%, according to energy data portal Cleanview, using EIA and state-level data."

What do you know that they don't?

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/texas-tops-us-states-renewable-energy-battery-capacity-maguire-2025-01-09/

In fact, Texas still has more electricity coming from wind power because of their plentiful wind supply and back then wind was cheaper than solar. Now, solar is cheaper and is being built up at a much more rapid pace than wind.  

 

On 12/28/2025 at 9:35 AM, Callmeishmael said:

The states impacted by this are Virginia and the New England states.   How did they vote in the 2024 election?

 

Petty minded vengeance might be part of the reason for this decision.

Sir, you impugn the inherent nobility of The Fragrant Leader!

1 hour ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Maybe because they had the highest rates they're now turning to solar to get those rates lower.

No, the rates have been increasing every year, with another 10% increase announced just this past October. 

 

California rates are over double the national average. 

1 hour ago, Alan Zweibel said:

And in California there has been a tremendous amount of investment in fireproofing the grid. Hawaii always had the most expensive electricity because of its location.

The grid existed long before solar.

1 hour ago, Alan Zweibel said:

And why is Texas, where there's been a very free market in power sourcing, barreling ahead with massive increases of solar power and storage?

"Since 2019, Texas power firms have boosted solar generation capacity by 800%, wind capacity by 50% and battery storage capacity by an eye-popping 5,500%, according to energy data portal Cleanview, using EIA and state-level data."

What do you know that they don't?

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/texas-tops-us-states-renewable-energy-battery-capacity-maguire-2025-01-09/

In fact, Texas still has more electricity coming from wind power because of their plentiful wind supply and back then wind was cheaper than solar. Now, solar is cheaper and is being built up at a much more rapid pace than wind.  

There is no "free market" in power sourcing, due to regulations, mandates and subsidies.

 

Solar makes a lot of sense in Texas to supplement daytime requirements. 

 

Texas gets less than 10% of its annual power from solar, California gets over 40% from solar, yet rates in California are over double that of Texas. 

16 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

No, the rates have been increasing every year, with another 10% increase announced just this past October. 

 

California rates are over double the national average. 

The grid existed long before solar.

There is no "free market" in power sourcing, due to regulations, mandates and subsidies.

 

Solar makes a lot of sense in Texas to supplement daytime requirements. 

 

Texas gets less than 10% of its annual power from solar, California gets over 40% from solar, yet rates in California are over double that of Texas. 

Texas currently gets about 14% of its electricity from solar and it's growing rapidly. 

Here is what is waiting in the queue:

Read more: https://www.mercomindia.com/texas-grid-hit-by-massive-data-center-demand-wave-ercot-warns?utm_source=chatgpt.com

is just more of

And your comment about there being no free market in power sourcing of your willingness to create falsehoods to back up your claims. In fact, the power sourcing is very much a free market in texas. That's why it refused to be part of the national grid in order to keep federal regulations from applying.

How Texas electricity works

Texas operates one of the most market-oriented electricity systems in the world, especially compared with other U.S. states.

What is a free market in Texas:

• Generation is competitive
  Power plants (gas, coal, wind, solar, etc.) compete to sell electricity into a wholesale market run by ERCOT (the Electric Reliability Council of Texas).

• Retail choice for most customers
  About 85–90% of Texans can choose among competing retail electricity providers (REPs) that sell power plans.

• Prices are market-based
  Wholesale prices fluctuate every 5 minutes based on supply and demand.

• No guaranteed profits for generators
  Texas uses an “energy-only” market—generators get paid only for electricity they actually sell, not for just being available.

 

 

Just now, Alan Zweibel said:

Texas currently gets about 14% of its electricity from solar and it's growing rapidly. 

Again, it gets about 14% at peak, and less than 10% annually. But even if you were being honest, that's only about a third what California uses in solar. 

Just now, Alan Zweibel said:

Here is what is waiting in the queue:

Read more: https://www.mercomindia.com/texas-grid-hit-by-massive-data-center-demand-wave-ercot-warns?utm_source=chatgpt.com

is just more of

And your comment about there being no free market in power sourcing of your willingness to create falsehoods to back up your claims. In fact, the power sourcing is very much a free market in texas. That's why it refused to be part of the national grid in order to keep federal regulations from applying.

How Texas electricity works

Texas operates one of the most market-oriented electricity systems in the world, especially compared with other U.S. states.

What is a free market in Texas:

• Generation is competitive
  Power plants (gas, coal, wind, solar, etc.) compete to sell electricity into a wholesale market run by ERCOT (the Electric Reliability Council of Texas).

• Retail choice for most customers
  About 85–90% of Texans can choose among competing retail electricity providers (REPs) that sell power plans.

• Prices are market-based
  Wholesale prices fluctuate every 5 minutes based on supply and demand.

• No guaranteed profits for generators
  Texas uses an “energy-only” market—generators get paid only for electricity they actually sell, not for just being available.

 

 

Why are you deflecting? I have already stated a number of times that some solar makes a lot of sense in Texas, and I have explained why. 

 

Again, please, if solar power us so cost effective, why are the states with the greatest reliance on solar power have the highest electricity prices?

 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Again, it gets about 14% at peak, and less than 10% annually. But even if you were being honest, that's only about a third what California uses in solar. 

Why are you deflecting? I have already stated a number of times that some solar makes a lot of sense in Texas, and I have explained why. 

 

Again, please, if solar power us so cost effective, why are the states with the greatest reliance on solar power have the highest electricity prices?

 

"Solar has been the driving force in renewables’ recent rise in ERCOT. Through August, solar generation is up 13.8 million megawatt-hours (MWh) compared to 2024 and has supplied 13.8% of total demand year to date."

https://ieefa.org/resources/summer-solar-and-battery-storage-records-texas

Since you have accused me of dishonesty, I won't do you the courtesy of acknowledging that you might be mistaken but rather assume that you are being dishonest. Turnabout is fair play, right?

I've also shown, contrary to your ignorant assertion, that there is a robust free market in Texas power. So I guess that means you were being dishonest again.

As I also pointed out to you,  solar dominates the queue  for primary power generators waiting to be connected to the Texas power grid.  Given that there is such a free market in Texas when it comes to power sourcing, do you think that the parties building solar are clueless about the costs? 

As for why California and some other states have higher rates, correlation isn't proof of causation. But if you have proof that solar has is responsible for the high rates in these states, provide it.

17 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Again, please, if solar power us so cost effective, why are the states with the greatest reliance on solar power have the highest electricity prices?

Greedy corporations!

Better for each household to generate their own.

2 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

"Solar has been the driving force in renewables’ recent rise in ERCOT. Through August, solar generation is up 13.8 million megawatt-hours (MWh) compared to 2024 and has supplied 13.8% of total demand year to date."

https://ieefa.org/resources/summer-solar-and-battery-storage-records-texas

Since you have accused me of dishonesty, I won't do you the courtesy of acknowledging that you might be mistaken but rather assume that you are being dishonest. Turnabout is fair play, right?

I've also shown, contrary to your ignorant assertion, that there is a robust free market in Texas power. So I guess that means you were being dishonest again.

As I also pointed out to you,  solar dominates the queue  for primary power generators waiting to be connected to the Texas power grid.  Given that there is such a free market in Texas when it comes to power sourcing, do you think that the parties building solar are clueless about the costs? 

As for why California and some other states have higher rates, correlation isn't proof of causation. But if you have proof that solar has is responsible for the high rates in these states, provide it.

That's what I thought, you have nothing. 

24 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

Again, please, if solar power us so cost effective, why are the states with the greatest reliance on solar power have the highest electricity prices?

 

 

You can keep repeating that, but it won't make it true.   You ignored what I posted earlier that contradicts that statement  

 

This is the main part that you don't seem to understand ...

 

 

Here's the rest for you to ignore ... again

 

 

On 12/28/2025 at 9:01 AM, KhunLA said:

 

AI may help you to understand the why, and the fallacy of that statement ...

 

 

 

 

 

Just now, Yellowtail said:

That's what I thought, you have nothing. 

No, I have offered plenty of evidence. It's you who have offered nothing in the way of facts except some states with high solar usage also have high energy costs. Since you offered the correlation, it's your responsibility to provide the proof that there is causation. I'm not obliged to do your homework for you.

On the other hand, I have offered proof that solar is highly competitive in a genuine free market energy system. 

You've got less than nothing.

the swedish military banned windmills on the east coast of sweden because they interfere with radar signals towards russia

10 minutes ago, mordothailand said:

the swedish military banned windmills on the east coast of sweden because they interfere with radar signals towards russia

Well, for one thing, Sweden is a lot closer to Russia than the USA is. For another, 

 

"In announcing their recent efforts to stop offshore wind, Secretary Burgum said the administration was prioritizing the protection of Americans by addressing what it claims are emerging national security risks and citing potential radar interference near East Coast population centers. He pointed to a 2024 Department of Energy report noting that while increasing a radar’s false-alarm threshold could reduce clutter, it could also increase the risk of missing potential targets.

That same report also found that, “the development and use of radar interference mitigation techniques, and collaboration both among federal agencies and between the federal government and the wind industry have enabled federal radar agencies to continue to perform their missions without significant impacts.”

https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2025/12/24/offshore_wind_is_not_a_national_security_threat_misusing_the_term_is_1155371.html

Inflammatory post removed 

 

@Yellowtail

2 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

No, I have offered plenty of evidence. It's you who have offered nothing in the way of facts except some states with high solar usage also have high energy costs. Since you offered the correlation, it's your responsibility to provide the proof that there is causation. I'm not obliged to do your homework for you.

On the other hand, I have offered proof that solar is highly competitive in a genuine free market energy system. 

You've got less than nothing.

But you've never had any firsthand experience of solar power, and no education in science.

What most impresses me about lefties is their complete and utter ignorance about any subject they choose to lecture everyone else about.

 

Not to mention, when they want their choice of action to be implemented, it's always using someone else's money, they never pay for anything themselves.