Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

General Discussion about electric vehicles.
boars   100 W

100 W
Posts: 138
Joined: Oct 02 2014 12:06am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by boars » Jan 14 2020 1:30am

Hillhater wrote:
Jan 13 2020 11:18pm
...Ahhh ! , yes the BOM.....Bureau Of Misinformation !.....
I'm curious who your reputable source of information on historical weather data is?

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5432
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Jan 14 2020 4:10am

Increasing temperatures mean bad fire years happen more frequently and the extreme years get more extreme.

User avatar
TheBeastie   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1952
Joined: Jul 28 2012 12:31am
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by TheBeastie » Jan 14 2020 5:29am

boars wrote:
Jan 14 2020 1:20am
No matter what drone/engine tech is used, people cost money, yes.
That's certainly one of the reasons why manufacturing in this country is so shafted, we aren't cheap to hire.
The whole issue here was to point out that people are the most expensive part of the usage of drones in business, I am constantly bombarded with "Hydrogen fuel-cell tech will NEVER work/take-off long term", because of overly direct/narrow minded comparisons with other things.
If people argue that no business/government is going to buy a fuel-cell drone that can fly for 4 hours because it costs more then a lithium battery operated one, then I am going argue they aren't looking at the bigger picture.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the other subject...
As for the BOM and climate change, the fact is the BOM has been caught doing dodgy things like deliberately deleting record cold temps to deliberately raise the average mean temp to higher temps etc...
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nationa ... 290028b783
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2017 ... peratures/
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commen ... eea18f100a
While the BOM do things like that^, they do also have some real scientists there too, I have actually met one who left the BOM claiming its all getting political and dodgy.

Check these videos below on what some BOM scientists say causes long droughts and bush fires in Australia, short answer, nothing to do with co2!

Australia's "La Nina/El Nino", which is called the "Positive Indian Ocean Dipole" is in full effect right now.
Bureau of Meteorology - Understanding the Indian Ocean Dipole
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6hOVatamYs


And another one created 3 months ago in November 2019, created by the BOM to explain the low rain increased bush fires.
BOM - Bushfires and exceptional heat: what's driving our weather right now?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FXWsN6331s


Bureau of Meteorology - Understanding ENSO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzat16LMtQk


The unusual weather activity is very connectable to the Solar Minimum...
During December 2019 the local weather reporters on TV etc were saying it was the coldest December in Melbourne for 40 years etc. Another example is record cold summer temperature recorded in NSW, maybe the ONLY reason this was recorded because the BOM were forced to record it and not delete it as like we have seen in the past.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-07/ ... o/11774908
They had a bunch of these types of events in Victoria as well https://twitter.com/9NewsMelb/status/12 ... 75040?s=20
Cooler sun means cooler winters, cooler oceans mean less rain, to put it simply, its easy to heat up the centre of Australia when there is little rain/vegetation/wind to help mitigate the effects.

Then we have the Solar Minimum events caused by the solar cycle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_minimum
We are at the peak of Solar Minimum now as this NASA video has predicted (time linked in this URL where it says "2019/2020" https://youtu.be/kBKJkU06ICQ?t=70

Or you can watch the whole NASA video on Solar Minimum here..


I wish CO2 did cause more warming, it would help give Australia more rain, but its effects are insignificant to other naturally occurring climate change events that humans do not control https://youtu.be/fA5sGtj7QKQ?t=181

I almost ENTIRELY blame broadcast media for all the arguments and extreme focus on CO2, the BOM IOD videos are excellent, and Broadcast-media is *USELESS* and explaining *ANYTHING* properly.
Instead of referencing IOD even once, ABC/broadcast weather reports are conversely injected with garbage information about how it's all caused by CO2 emissions.

Remember this video of USA ABC claiming this spectacular footage at a gun range with high power gun was footage of the recent invasion of Syria by Turkey?
https://twitter.com/PolishPatriotTM/sta ... 27392?s=20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azrjPK1 ... e=emb_logo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... rH8bClnlzQ
^This is the natural effect of humans with access too much power, which is what broadcast is. IP-Streaming neutralises this as everyone in the entire world (ideally) has equal access to have their say, when broadcast dies there will be no major BS ever again, as long as true free speech/competition in media exist which is what high-speed internet provides. There will continue to be BS on the internet as like in broadcast-media, but it will sink the bottom of internet ratings as people choose the most honest information as they will have so many more choices to choose from than they do now.
There will be a % of people who will continue to deliberately enjoy being purely lied to, we know people love fake stuff simply because of Hollywood movies.

Broadcast media is RAW POWER, and humans are simply incapable of not abusing it and using it to exert their personal political will.
The situation we live in now is that "broadcast media-power" is like "The Lord of The Rings power" https://youtu.be/O7X1BCCH9a8?t=162, and once it is finally destroyed by a coming IP-Streaming media only world, then people will be SIGNIFICANTLY better informed.
People will just habitually be so much better informed that I don't really think there are words that exist to easily describe it.
Last edited by TheBeastie on Jan 16 2020 4:32pm, edited 5 times in total.
Speed Kills Range, 10mph = 46 miles range, 20mph = 20 miles, 30mph = 8 miles rangehttps://goo.gl/1JNL53
Over Charging Kills ur battery bit.ly/1hzWKl4
Consider PAS as your only throttle https://goo.gl/Kg1F8F
Fuel-Cell is the ultimate battery coupled with 4th-gen Nuclear
https://goo.gl/TcKtHs https://goo.gl/ZhFFot https://goo.gl/gfa215
10 Square Miles of solar panels = 0.12GW average power! https://goo.gl/Ub1S39

boars   100 W

100 W
Posts: 138
Joined: Oct 02 2014 12:06am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by boars » Jan 14 2020 6:08am

Whatever the cause, we can minimise our input if required.

ie if a room catches fire from a lightning strike, we don't all stand around and go, well nature did that, lets burn to death.
You get off your arse and you try to put the fire out.

If we make a more pleasant place to live in the process, what a horrible outcome.

I for one look forward to the day our cities have zero emission cars and I can stand outside work and marvel at how nice the air is.

User avatar
ZeroEm   100 W

100 W
Posts: 232
Joined: May 03 2019 11:53am
Location: San Antonio, TX

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by ZeroEm » Jan 14 2020 9:29am

Most of the World is watching Australia burn (very sad), they are taking up collections and talk about helping by sending money which is great but if they really want to help and take it all to heart they would at least talk about the real problem!
2019 Performer E-Trike 9w/km
2013 Nissan Leaf S 8 bars 328.306w/KM

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10514
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Jan 14 2020 9:56am

ZeroEm wrote:
Jan 14 2020 9:29am
.....t but if they really want to help and take it all to heart they would at least talk about the real problem!
Which is what ? ...in your opinion .
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5432
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Jan 14 2020 10:31am

One thing that would help, regardless of any prediliction for climate change denialism, is to stop cutting down the forests that transport water from the coast inland.

Cephalotus   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 657
Joined: Jun 18 2012 12:27pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Cephalotus » Jan 14 2020 11:55am

Data for electricty in Germany during 2019 is out

renewables for electricity: 42,6% (good wind year)
coal is falling fast (happened througout most of Europe because CO2 price rose to 25€/t)
CO2 Emission: -50 Million t from 2018 to 2019
specific emissions: 414g CO2/kWh in the electricty sector.

I hope that CO2 Price gets even higher and stays there because this would put a quick end to most coal power plants

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1301
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Jan 14 2020 1:48pm


User avatar
ZeroEm   100 W

100 W
Posts: 232
Joined: May 03 2019 11:53am
Location: San Antonio, TX

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by ZeroEm » Jan 14 2020 4:50pm

Hillhater » Jan 14 2020 9:56am
ZeroEm wrote: ↑Jan 14 2020 9:29am
.....t but if they really want to help and take it all to heart they would at least talk about the real problem!
Which is what ? ...in your opinion .
I was just referring to the old saying that you can not just throw money at a problem. So just guessing the first step is to agree that there is a problem or does it look all normal. I just feel like something is not right and wonder what if anything we can do.

Here is some good news for you, San Antonio, TX city counsel decided to keep our coal power plants into the foreseeable future. They even bring it in from across the country and don't use any from Texas and it cost more than the natural gas we have here.
2019 Performer E-Trike 9w/km
2013 Nissan Leaf S 8 bars 328.306w/KM

User avatar
Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh   100 MW

100 MW
Posts: 2573
Joined: Feb 09 2007 3:02am
Location: Marlboro

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh » Jan 14 2020 6:09pm

boars wrote:
Jan 14 2020 6:08am
Whatever the cause, we can minimise our input if required.

ie if a room catches fire from a lightning strike, we don't all stand around and go, well nature did that, lets burn to death.
You get off your arse and you try to put the fire out.
the more apt-propriate comparison would be if a volcano set your town on fire.
you aint doin sweetFA trying to plug the hole or pissing on it.
that's about how much effect h.sapiens has on climate.

billvon   1 GW

1 GW
Posts: 3051
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Jan 14 2020 6:14pm

ZeroEm wrote:
Jan 14 2020 4:50pm
Here is some good news for you, San Antonio, TX city counsel decided to keep our coal power plants into the foreseeable future. They even bring it in from across the country and don't use any from Texas and it cost more than the natural gas we have here.
Well, at least your electric rates will go up.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10514
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Jan 14 2020 7:03pm

Cephalotus wrote:
Jan 14 2020 11:55am
Data for electricty in Germany during 2019 is out

renewables for electricity: 42,6% (good wind year)
coal is falling fast (happened througout most of Europe because CO2 price rose to 25€/t)
CO2 Emission: -50 Million t from 2018 to 2019
specific emissions: 414g CO2/kWh in the electricty sector.

I hope that CO2 Price gets even higher and stays there because this would put a quick end to most coal power plants
Ahh !, the cosy comfort blanket of AVERAGE statistics !
Some points to note..
1) Germany has not reduced its fossil (coal, Gas, Nuclear, etc) generation capacity,..
it has simply added surplus capacity from renewables such tat it now has more than double the capacity needed (200+GW), to support peak demand (85 GW).
2) The only significant reduction in capacity has been the shutting down of some Nuclear generation capacity in 2010, which ironically has the least emissions !
3). Germany, like any sensible country, can NEVER eliminate its fossil generating capacity, (unless they revert back to more Nuclear),... because there are still many periods when Wind and Solar cannot supply even minimal power. Hence why they have retained over 90GW of fossil capacity. There are periods when Germany is running on 90+% Fossil generation.
4) It has taken 25+ years for Germany to achieve 42% (average) RE supply for electricity.
How much longer to double that to 80+% considering the current rate of installation ?? ..(50+ years ?)
.....and at what cost
..and how long before they can completely eliminate the majority of fossil generation capacity ?
5)... ignoring Denmark, (a unrepresentitive small market).. Germany still tops the electricity cost tables for Europe.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10514
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Jan 14 2020 7:06pm

billvon wrote:
Jan 14 2020 6:14pm
ZeroEm wrote:
Jan 14 2020 4:50pm
Here is some good news for you, San Antonio, TX city counsel decided to keep our coal power plants into the foreseeable future. They even bring it in from across the country and don't use any from Texas and it cost more than the natural gas we have here.
Well, at least your electric rates will go up.
Maybe they consider keeping the lights on and preventing blackouts, is worth it ?
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
Dauntless   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 8042
Joined: May 29 2010 1:49am
Location: Coordinates: 33°52′48″N 117°55′43″W

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Dauntless » Jan 14 2020 11:43pm

ZeroEm wrote:
Jan 14 2020 4:50pm
Hillhater » Jan 14 2020 9:56am
ZeroEm wrote: ↑Jan 14 2020 9:29am
.....t but if they really want to help and take it all to heart they would at least talk about the real problem!
Which is what ? ...in your opinion .
I was just referring to the old saying that you can not just throw money at a problem. So just guessing the first step is to agree that there is a problem or does it look all normal. I just feel like something is not right and wonder what if anything we can do..
Agree? So many are only in it for the argument. Hence this thread.

And some even LIKE seeing money thrown without a thought, theyll get real angry at you for trying to have a clue.
Last edited by Dauntless on Jan 15 2020 12:43pm, edited 1 time in total.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC!
- Arthur C. Clarke

Cephalotus   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 657
Joined: Jun 18 2012 12:27pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Cephalotus » Jan 15 2020 6:37am

Hillhater wrote:
Jan 14 2020 7:03pm

Ahh !, the cosy comfort blanket of AVERAGE statistics !
Reagrding CO2 or fuel consumption the absolute numbers are relevant and CO2 emissions have fallen at 50 Million tonnes from 2018 to 2019.

1) Germany has not reduced its fossil (coal, Gas, Nuclear, etc) generation capacity,..
it has simply added surplus capacity from renewables such tat it now has more than double the capacity needed (200+GW), to support peak demand (85 GW).
This is wrong.

Nuclear generation capacity has fallen signifiantly and will be zero in 2022

Also coal capacity is falling

On the other hand capacity of gas power plants have to increase because of times with no wind and sun and because of rising demand that comes with electric mobility
2) The only significant reduction in capacity has been the shutting down of some Nuclear generation capacity in 2010, which ironically has the least emissions !
and still co2 emission are falling significantly
3). Germany, like any sensible country, can NEVER eliminate its fossil generating capacity, (unless they revert back to more Nuclear),... because there are still many periods when Wind and Solar cannot supply even minimal power. Hence why they have retained over 90GW of fossil capacity. There are periods when Germany is running on 90+% Fossil generation.
For 1000TWh electricity (this includes 100% electric cars and heating by heat pumps and usage of electrity in indutrial processes) Germany Needs around 100TWh of gas power and around 120-150GW of gas peaker capacity.
This will cost around 400€/kW


The other electricity are from solar (200TWh), wind onshore (600TWh), wind offshore (200TWh) in addition to 100TWh from gas peakers. Add some power from water and waste
This includes 100TWh of losses.

Today the fuel for gas peakers is fossil methane. At 40% efficiency you need 250TWh per year

It can be methane from biogas. Today Germany produces around 100TWh of green methane. If you use the CO2 of the biogas 8around 40% volume) and transform that to methane (Sabatier) you get around 160TWh of green methane.

the rest can be hydrogen without CO2 emissions, made in Germany or imported, but this is not a project for 2020, but for 2040+

4) It has taken 25+ years for Germany to achieve 42% (average) RE supply for electricity.
How much longer to double that to 80+% considering the current rate of installation ?? ..(50+ years ?)
Plan is 65% in 2030
.....and at what cost
Cost for 65% will be lower than for 42% today. The most expensive early German RE power plats have been built before 2010 and will not get any FIT by 2030
5)... ignoring Denmark, (a unrepresentitive small market).. Germany still tops the electricity cost tables for Europe.
Only for housholds and that's mainly because of taxes.

Aberage electricity price at the electricity market (and this is a good indicator for electricity price of industry) has been 35€/MWh in 2019 and was among the lowest in Europe.

Poland for example had electricity costs of 50€/MWh in 2019.

Even a low CO2 price of only 25€/t will harm your electricity market and your competitivness if you use mainly coal like Poland.

Germany is far from beeing the role model because of the still significant amount of coal Generation and shutting down the last nukes in 2020-2022 will not help with CO2 emissions either but there is significnat progress while swithing of the nukes. Currently we also face a problem with not enough new installation for wind onshore.

Here is a world wide comparison from the year 2017:

https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post- ... ean-energy

https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post- ... ean-energy

billvon   1 GW

1 GW
Posts: 3051
Joined: Sep 16 2007 9:53pm
Location: san diego

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by billvon » Jan 15 2020 10:22pm

TheBeastie wrote:
Jan 14 2020 5:29am
Broadcast media is RAW POWER, and humans are simply incapable of not abusing it and using it to exert their personal political will.
The situation we live in now is that "broadcast media-power" is like "The Lord of The Rings power, and once it is finally destroyed by a coming IP-Streaming media only world, then people will be SIGNIFICANTLY better informed.
People will just habitually be so much better informed that I don't really think there are words that exist to easily describe it.
Yep. And climate change denial will die a well-deserved death in the face of raw data. No more FOX News to parrot political talking points from big oil.
--bill von

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10514
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Jan 16 2020 6:37am

Fox is very much in the minority when it comes to media presentation of biased content.
Infact, none of the free to air Australian TV channels promote anything other than “Climate Alarmism””
..and radio is not much different.
So , down here, more access to “raw data” can only be a even bigger threat to the carbon lie
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
ZeroEm   100 W

100 W
Posts: 232
Joined: May 03 2019 11:53am
Location: San Antonio, TX

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by ZeroEm » Jan 16 2020 10:26am

I was alarmed, well past that now. I am watching the total destruction of what I grew up knowing, nothing is unaffected.
The low this morning was 68F it's only 40 deg above normal. So it is abnormal. This is the warmest winter I can remember maybe they were warmer in the 1950's before I was born.
2019 Performer E-Trike 9w/km
2013 Nissan Leaf S 8 bars 328.306w/KM

boars   100 W

100 W
Posts: 138
Joined: Oct 02 2014 12:06am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by boars » Jan 17 2020 12:32am

Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh wrote:
Jan 14 2020 6:09pm
boars wrote:
Jan 14 2020 6:08am
Whatever the cause, we can minimise our input if required.

ie if a room catches fire from a lightning strike, we don't all stand around and go, well nature did that, lets burn to death.
You get off your arse and you try to put the fire out.
the more apt-propriate comparison would be if a volcano set your town on fire.
you aint doin sweetFA trying to plug the hole or pissing on it.
that's about how much effect h.sapiens has on climate.
Thankfully some people do more than piss on their problems.

People dig massive trenches, use concrete barriers to try and stop the flows from wiping out towns.
Historically with limited successes based on the just how angry the volcano is, budget and current technological limitations of the tech available at the time of an event.

Some things you cannot (at present) stop, in which case preventative actions are the smarter approach.

I wish the Australian government wasn't so anti CSIRO (publicly funded science research agency) as the more tech we develop, the more new industries we can establish and lead... maybe actually keep some jobs in the country. They're just more interested in propping up mates in fossil fuels unfortunately. Very short sighted and not at all surprising for our country - that's true on either sides of the single coin we get to flip periodically.

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5432
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Jan 17 2020 3:38am

The Australian government unfortunately appears to be in the pocket of it's coal industry. Renewable energy and EV use are way below average for OECD countries.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 10514
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Jan 17 2020 7:23am

boars wrote:
Jan 17 2020 12:32am

Some things you cannot (at present) stop, in which case preventative actions are the smarter approach.

I wish the Australian government wasn't so anti CSIRO (publicly funded science research agency) as the more tech we develop, the more new industries we can establish and lead... maybe actually keep some jobs in the country. They're just more interested in propping up mates in fossil fuels unfortunately. Very short sighted and not at all surprising for our country - that's true on either sides of the single coin we get to flip periodically.
You cannot take EFFECTIVE preventative actions unless you understand the TRUE cause of the issue.
You could be digging a trench to prevent the foot soldiers, when the real issue is going to be the parra’s arriving by air behind you. !

Where do you think the funding for the CSIRO comes from ?
.....from mining royalties and taxes raised from citizens employed in those few remaining industries !
Governments have to be responsible and realistic about promoting industries that can earn foreign income and revenue. Coal, Gas, even Uranium, are some of our most valuable resources and viable industries.
What do you propose to replace them with to generate similar revenue potential and trade possibilities .?
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
ZeroEm   100 W

100 W
Posts: 232
Joined: May 03 2019 11:53am
Location: San Antonio, TX

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by ZeroEm » Jan 17 2020 7:34am

Now, every one knows the warmer Earth gets the more active the plates will be. More earth quakes and increased volcanic activity.

I conceded after reading at length, it's not worth getting into.
Last edited by ZeroEm on Jan 17 2020 6:59pm, edited 1 time in total.
2019 Performer E-Trike 9w/km
2013 Nissan Leaf S 8 bars 328.306w/KM

Cephalotus   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 657
Joined: Jun 18 2012 12:27pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Cephalotus » Jan 17 2020 8:20am

Hillhater wrote:
Jan 17 2020 7:23am

Governments have to be responsible and realistic about promoting industries that can earn foreign income and revenue. Coal, Gas, even Uranium, are some of our most valuable resources and viable industries.
What do you propose to replace them with to generate similar revenue potential and trade possibilities .?
See those wealthy countries in the world, which do neither export coal nor gas nor uranium.

Somehow those countries found other things to produce.

On the other Hand many countries do export raw products and fossil fuels and didn't get wealthy either. See many African countries or Venezuela as an example.

User avatar
jimw1960   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 787
Joined: Jul 23 2008 4:44pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by jimw1960 » Jan 17 2020 9:17am

ZeroEm wrote:
Jan 17 2020 7:34am
Now, every one knows the warmer Earth gets the more active the plates will be. More earth quakes and increased volcanic activity.
That's a bit of a stretch with no evidence to support it. Not sure how you can say "every one knows."

Post Reply