Yep, exactly. I’m sure they appreciate all the fracking and gas pipelines we’ll run through their land to run the gas turbines we used to back up unreliable generation from wind and solar.

If you’re going to do wind power, offshore wind outperforms onshore wind or solar but either way for any of these options to meet demand without depending on lots of fracked gas, it would require an unimaginably huge outgrowth in storage the technology for which largely doesn’t exist in the market yet. The only…

We spent decades figuring out how to sell crap to baby boomers and now you all come along! It’s your fault for not being what we expect consumers to be!

Bet they’ll put a monorail or something running the inside edge of the ring, like they have at big airports.

Did I ever tell you the definition of insanity?

It makes me happy that these are the kind of problems I have

In Summary:

Wind’s 30% capacity Factor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacity_factor
National Renewable Energy LAb says penetrations over 3o% of wind and solar won’t work: http://atomicinsights.com/nrel-study-eastern-interconnect-strain-30-annual-electricity-solar-wind/
Nuclear power is the safest form of production…

Okay I tried Reading this, I really did but when you made it abundantly clear that you didn’t understand what a capacity factor is, by saying “Wind is not capped at 30% nor does it need to be. Solar can be placed anywhere and will take the bulk of power production as a result.” I just couldn’t take it anymore. https:…

I made a comment about how nuclear power is the real solution to climate change and that wind and solar are novelty distractions that are unable to meet demand. You argued otherwise. That has lead to the discussion as it is now. I don’t think you understand what the word “Strawman” means.

Now, you say You’ve never…

You post a bunch of links to Pop-science articles on websites like gizmodo and call it research. If thats how you want to play instead of actually making points, you should have said so, It’s a hell of a lot easier. Here:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-nuclear-power-can-stop-global-warming/

I mostly agree but also disagree. I agree that there’s no silver bullet. there are some technolgoies that will play a larger role than others but it will certainly take everything we can throw at it, all played to their respective strengths. Where I have to disagree is that a major part of this will be a reduction…

I love how even your own sources cite “Wind solar and gas” The fact is wind and solar are nothing more than a fuel saver for fracked gas turbines. It’s why anti nuclear groups like the sierra club keep getting caught with oil and gas money, or why oil and gas companies have sued states for implementing “Zero…

fair point.

only when the things I’m commenting on are worth the effort.

I’m highly skeptical that the storage technology and needed reductions in the price of wind, solar and transmission infrastructure will ever make them a viable method for meeting grid demand. The level of overbuild and amount of storage and transmission to make unstable energy sources reliably meet grid demand is…

Sure, while we’re at it I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

Okay, bad example

So, can we start building more nuclear power yet or do people want to keep playing with their toy wind turbines and solar panels until New York is underwater?

Not acceptable so much as useful. I’m all for giving the Donald as much rope as he needs to hang himself with.