Jump to content

The Miscellaneous Liberal\PC BS\Commie Gibberish\Clown World\Lame Hunt Jokes\Corporate Virtue Signaling Thread

Featured Replies

https://boundingintocomics.com/2022/08/30/rumor-marvel-to-bring-back-chris-evans-as-captain-america-in-order-to-distance-character-from-his-uncomfortable-patriotism-facets/

Quote

 

Rumor: Marvel To Bring Back Chris Evans As Captain America In Order To Distance Character From His "Uncomfortable Patriotism Facets”

 
 August 30, 2022

 

 
  • Replies 14.6k
  • Views 481.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

Posted Images

On 8/29/2022 at 11:41 PM, iladelphxx said:

FB_IMG_1661830787070.jpg

(NSFWL)

 

On 8/27/2022 at 5:41 PM, Dave Moss said:

They should get Lizzo as a model

she's fierce! 

You might think liberals have reached the pinnacle of retardation.

You'd be wrong. 

  • Author

FB_IMG_1662054770132.jpg

5 minutes ago, iladelphxx said:

FB_IMG_1662054770132.jpg

 

its-always-sunny-dennis-reynolds.gif

6 hours ago, iladelphxx said:

FB_IMG_1662054770132.jpg

If he's a blue checkmark, he's going to need a driver service at some point, which will mean he will be in one of these.

7 hours ago, iladelphxx said:

FB_IMG_1662054770132.jpg

You can just sense him literally shaking as he typed that. 

  • Author

FB_IMG_1662121720640.thumb.jpg.2fb4f62d52801937ad233f61324db507.jpg

 

FB_IMG_1662121731036.thumb.jpg.7683e5068cb9337c2df20dd8db1c683f.jpg

11 minutes ago, iladelphxx said:

FB_IMG_1662121720640.thumb.jpg.2fb4f62d52801937ad233f61324db507.jpg

 

FB_IMG_1662121731036.thumb.jpg.7683e5068cb9337c2df20dd8db1c683f.jpg

 

12 hours ago, paco said:

It's literally a program that people who were impacted opt'd in to.

Quote

In an email to The Register, Xcel noted that all customers affected by the lock out had signed up for its Colorado AC Rewards program. The voluntary program allows Xcel to take control of customers' smart thermostats during "the hottest summer days,” to "ease the strain on the electrical grid” in exchange for a $100 bill credit when they sign up and a $25-per-year credit thereafter.

 

 

18 hours ago, iladelphxx said:

FB_IMG_1662054770132.jpg

Locked his account lol

  • Author
1 hour ago, paco said:

 

 

The fact that the program exists in the first place would imply a supply problem. 

Solutions to supply problems don't involve reducing supply 

2 hours ago, iladelphxx said:

The fact that the program exists in the first place would imply a supply problem. 

Solutions to supply problems don't involve reducing supply 

To a degree.

 

But also utilities are doing what they can to flatten the curve when it comes to energy generation to reduce waste.  For example, with Interval Billing\Dynamic Pricing model they will offer cheaper rates during hours of less consumption and more expensive rates during peak hours.  This has been going on for at least a decade and it's more about efficiency with energy generation than not having enough energy.  This isn't an accurate way to explain it, but electricity is use it or lose it and you can't fire up half a plant. If you minimize the peaks and valleys you can provide the same amount of consumed energy with less electricity generated.

15 minutes ago, paco said:

To a degree.

 

But also utilities are doing what they can to flatten the curve when it comes to energy generation to reduce waste.  For example, with Interval Billing\Dynamic Pricing model they will offer cheaper rates during hours of less consumption and more expensive rates during peak hours.  This has been going on for at least a decade and it's more about efficiency with energy generation than not having enough energy.  This isn't an accurate way to explain it, but electricity is use it or lose it and you can't fire up half a plant. If you minimize the peaks and valleys you can provide the same amount of consumed energy with less electricity generated.

What if I told you,  that there was technology that currently exists that can create mass amounts of power, without burnng fossil fuels, that doesnt rely on SUN or wind. It's very efficient and is relatively ECO friendly and Safe???.

 

But - everyone has moved away from it because of an unfair stigma attached to it. 

 

When we want to get serious about lowering greenhouse gases, we will be investing in Nuclear Power plants again. Specifically Thorium based plants. 

11 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

What if I told you,  that there was technology that currently exists that can create mass amounts of power, without burnng fossil fuels, that doesnt rely on SUN or wind. It's very efficient and is relatively ECO friendly and Safe???.

 

But - everyone has moved away from it because of an unfair stigma attached to it. 

 

When we want to get serious about lowering greenhouse gases, we will be investing in Nuclear Power plants again. Specifically Thorium based plants. 

What makes you think I'm against nuclear power?  Thorium plants in particular are a great way to go, IMO.  I've been posting about Thorium here for well over a decade.

 

But the burning issue at hand is grid throughput not the ability to generate more energy.

1 hour ago, paco said:

But also utilities are doing what they can to flatten the curve when it comes to energy generation to reduce waste.  For example, with Interval Billing\Dynamic Pricing model they will offer cheaper rates during hours of less consumption and more expensive rates during peak hours.  This has been going on for at least a decade and it's more about efficiency with energy generation than not having enough energy.  This isn't an accurate way to explain it, but electricity is use it or lose it and you can't fire up half a plant. If you minimize the peaks and valleys you can provide the same amount of consumed energy with less electricity generated.

This is a big idea being pushed over here.  No doubt there is a very solid chunk of efficiency to be gained.

1 hour ago, Ipiggles said:

What if I told you,  that there was technology that currently exists that can create mass amounts of power, without burnng fossil fuels, that doesnt rely on SUN or wind. It's very efficient and is relatively ECO friendly and Safe???.

 

But - everyone has moved away from it because of an unfair stigma attached to it. 

 

When we want to get serious about lowering greenhouse gases, we will be investing in Nuclear Power plants again. Specifically Thorium based plants. 

 

1 hour ago, paco said:

What makes you think I'm against nuclear power?  Thorium plants in particular are a great way to go, IMO.  I've been posting about Thorium here for well over a decade.

 

But the burning issue at hand is grid throughput not the ability to generate more energy.

And this would be a reasonable solution if the goal was to maximize energy production while minimizing CO2 production all while maximizing reliability of energy production.

But I’m not sure that’s actually the goal for some.

1 hour ago, Ipiggles said:

What if I told you,  that there was technology that currently exists that can create mass amounts of power, without burnng fossil fuels, that doesnt rely on SUN or wind. It's very efficient and is relatively ECO friendly and Safe???.

 

But - everyone has moved away from it because of an unfair stigma attached to it. 

 

When we want to get serious about lowering greenhouse gases, we will be investing in Nuclear Power plants again. Specifically Thorium based plants. 

What if I told you that nuclear power is used for baseload and these projects are to manage the need for demand from nat gas peaker facilities?

Right. You wouldn’t follow because you’re an idiot. 

18 hours ago, paco said:

What makes you think I'm against nuclear power?  Thorium plants in particular are a great way to go, IMO.  I've been posting about Thorium here for well over a decade.

 

But the burning issue at hand is grid throughput not the ability to generate more energy.

Not aimed at you... was just making a point, we agree. Also agree with you the infrastructure will not support more supply or demand 

But if we were serious about reducing carbon foot print, we'd be working on both, with Nuclear power plants. 

31 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

Not aimed at you... was just making a point, we agree. Also agree with you the infrastructure will not support more supply or demand 

But if we were serious about reducing carbon foot print, we'd be working on both, with Nuclear power plants. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2022/08/22/the-inflation-reduction-act-will-spawn-the-growth-of-nuclear-energy/

There’s been echoes of a nuclear renaissance for two decades. But the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act may be the catalyst that brings it to fruition. The law provides a production tax credit for existing nuclear energy units — similar to the ones received by wind and solar farms. That is something that will keep those plants competitive, preventing their early retirement. Lenders and investors will now perk up because of those tax benefits.

But the industry will look differently, comprised of small modular reactors — not the jumbo-sized ones, which have been unable to meet their timetables or budgets. The smaller ones, assembled onsite, are cheaper to build, safer to operate, and could soon appear in North America.

"The Inflation Reduction Act puts nuclear on the same playing field as renewables,” says Doug True, the chief nuclear officer at the Nuclear Energy Institute, during a symposium hosted by the United States Energy Association, in which this reporter was a panelist. "It will stimulate more interest in nuclear. Adding 300 reactors that generate 90 gigawatts over 30 years might be on the low end once this plays out.”

Nuclear energy is carbon-free and runs 24-7. Right now, 93 nuclear reactors provide about 20% of the U.S. electricity portfolio. But that energy makes up about half of the country’s carbon-free electricity. Those reactors can operate safely until at least 2050. However, the production tax credits, which start in 2024 and last until 2032, will inspire the building of small modular reactors — units that will last at least 60 years and replace those existing plants.

10 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2022/08/22/the-inflation-reduction-act-will-spawn-the-growth-of-nuclear-energy/

There’s been echoes of a nuclear renaissance for two decades. But the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act may be the catalyst that brings it to fruition. The law provides a production tax credit for existing nuclear energy units — similar to the ones received by wind and solar farms. That is something that will keep those plants competitive, preventing their early retirement. Lenders and investors will now perk up because of those tax benefits.

But the industry will look differently, comprised of small modular reactors — not the jumbo-sized ones, which have been unable to meet their timetables or budgets. The smaller ones, assembled onsite, are cheaper to build, safer to operate, and could soon appear in North America.

"The Inflation Reduction Act puts nuclear on the same playing field as renewables,” says Doug True, the chief nuclear officer at the Nuclear Energy Institute, during a symposium hosted by the United States Energy Association, in which this reporter was a panelist. "It will stimulate more interest in nuclear. Adding 300 reactors that generate 90 gigawatts over 30 years might be on the low end once this plays out.”

Nuclear energy is carbon-free and runs 24-7. Right now, 93 nuclear reactors provide about 20% of the U.S. electricity portfolio. But that energy makes up about half of the country’s carbon-free electricity. Those reactors can operate safely until at least 2050. However, the production tax credits, which start in 2024 and last until 2032, will inspire the building of small modular reactors — units that will last at least 60 years and replace those existing plants.

It only makes sense to go in that direction. 

  • Author

So there's no coincidence that the first time they implemented this in such a drastic way (78 degrees?) is 3 days after they shut down a power plant? 

Fix the grid problem first THEN shut down the plants.... 

Meanwhile 

 

Screenshot_20220903_090830.jpg

17 hours ago, TEW said:

 

And this would be a reasonable solution if the goal was to maximize energy production while minimizing CO2 production all while maximizing reliability of energy production.

But I’m not sure that’s actually the goal for some.

Agreed. 

33 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

It only makes sense to go in that direction. 

Good thing the Democrats are passing good policy while Republicans whine about their radicals being called out.

Create an account or sign in to comment