GM is pulling back on EVs

[K4fxd]

Amazing. You just keep highlighting your ignorance of how the data is collected. Bravo sir. You are a true “sceptic”. LMFAO.

You mean back in 1950 when the temp sensors were in the forest and now are in the middle of the suburbs or in cities? Whats funny is even my engineer Son needed to "look it up" because he thought temp readings would be COOLER in cities. The indoctrination of young kids is hard to over come.

Sponsored

 

[K4fxd]

But you already knew that, because you’re a well educated physicist. Not a dumbshit who thinks that GHG’s don’t keep our planet warm.

The Sun keeps our planet warm. All the smoke from Canada has kept our spring and summer very cool so far.

 

[GT 550]

I already showed that a few pages back. Do you not remember the bit where the Australia Energy Market Operator (AEMO) said that the wholesale price of electricity was at its lowest in more than a decade? They also said that the reason was thanks to renewables.
Not projection, fact, based on evidence.

But let’s be real here, the simple fact that renewables have a payback period tells us that it MUST, by definition, be cheaper.

But don’t trust me, ask the government bodies who are responsible for measuring the data.

https://www.energy.gov.au/news-media/news/renewables-confirmed-cheapest-source-electricity

And before anyone starts, I’ll drop this here too…

“The GenCost report, led by the CSIRO with the support of AEMO, is an annual update of technology costs and shows that costs are lowest with wind and solar and storage, even up to 90 per cent share of variable renewables.

The latest report does not include the recent surge in gas and coal prices, but still puts the costs of renewables well below the fossil fuel alternatives.”

So no, they aren’t using skewed figures to ”make it fit the agenda”. In fact, if they used the current pricing for fossil fuels, it would look even better for renewables. Not that it matters, when you’re winning, you’re winning. Second place might as well be last place.

And do you not remember the bit where I referred to cost to the consumer i.e. retail?

 

[GT 550]

Emissions by sector - Our World in Data

Maybe you know better than the authors? Maybe not? But nonsense is a strong word

Our World in Data - Wikipedia

Indeed it is and I it may not be entirely appropriate as the report is probably 'technically' correct. However, I maintain that even if correct the data is not useful in the context of the real world and an unhelpful distraction, which in the eye of the wrong beholder can lead to national policies of great cost and little benefit. And then of course there are the matters of it being outdated by nearly a decade and the apparent omission of sectors.

Opinion: Renewables are cheaper than ever – so why are household energy bills only going up? | UCL News - UCL – University College London

I'm not sure however how anybody can provide you with proof about something that has not yet happened!

Clearly, hence I did not ask for it and I trust you're also aware that evidence does not equal proof. So to rephrase my challenge with even greater clarity: 'show me evidence that cheaper wholesale energy will reduce consumer i.e. retail costs'.

 

[sk47]

It’s interesting that you think that both the accuracy of the equipment and measurement system used in 1676 might be identical (or even vaguely similar) to that which we use in 2023.

Amazing. You just keep highlighting your ignorance of how the data is collected. Bravo sir. You are a true “sceptic”. LMFAO.

BYW, the fact that GHG’s produce heat when exposed to infrared radiation in the correct frequency range, isn’t debatable, It’s easily demonstrated, which is precisely how we know which gases react at which frequencies.

But you already knew that, because you’re a well educated physicist. Not a dumbshit who thinks that GHG’s don’t keep our planet warm.

Hello; not sure about 1676 in particular but analogue instruments were accurate for a very long time. I still have a couple of lab quality mercury thermometers from many decades ago. Accurate and reliable. The modern computer/digital age did not come into existence full blown. The analogue science instruments got us most of the way. When a student I was one of those with a slide rule in a case on my belt. I eventually started using a "circular "slide rule after a while.
Been a while but i had a friend who worked at a NOAA lab in Oak Ridge TN. One of his tasks was to record and keep the weather stations calibrated. In the late 1990's to early 2000's old fashioned mercury thermometers were still in use. In that time frame there were issues with "heat islands" affecting weather stations. Not sure exactly what was done to account for the skewed urban temperatures.

 

[K4fxd]

Not sure exactly what was done to account for the skewed urban temperatures.

Nothing, at least up into the 2000's. Most of the data that refutes man made climate change is buried or burned.

 

[RagmopInKona]

Never let facts get in the way of a good story. The data is in. You’re just not paying attention.

The data isn't in . It was edited to get the outcome those paying for the study wanted. That isn't facts it is fraud.

 

[RagmopInKona]

If green renewable are cheaper why if you choose to have that opinion on your electric bill it is more per kwh?
Reality is it is not and never will be .
Solar on my house would be 25479.56 .
It take over 15 years before it start paying for itself .
Never mind the interest on that 25.5 grand to do it.
Cheaper my ass.

 

[Burkey]

And do you not remember the bit where I referred to cost to the consumer i.e. retail?

I’m not even sure what you’re trying to argue then.

Your power bill (in Australia) typically (depending on which state you live in) is made up of 3 basic components.
1. The actual retailers margin
2. The cost of maintenance and augmentation of the network
3. The raw cost of the electricity running in the lines.

These generally represent an approximate. 33% share each.

Quite easily you can see that the cost of electricity PRODUCTION can drop, whilst the COST to the consumer can increase.

Renewables are reducing the cost of #3. Period.
If your retailer wants to increase their margins, that’s between you and them.
If the network provider is doing extra capital works that cost money, so be it.
But neither of those things have ANYTHING to do with whether renewable can deliver cheaper power, which is precisely what I showed.
The fact that you’re paying more for it, has nothing to do with that. The costs of corporate greed and network maintenance can’t be completely offset by renewables.

You want cheaper power? You’d want to be starting with a cheaper commodity BEFORE adding those costs. Making it dearer to produce obviously isn’t the solution, which is precisely where fossil fuels are right now.

 

[Burkey]

If green renewable are cheaper why if you choose to have that opinion on your electric bill it is more per kwh?
Reality is it is not and never will be .
Solar on my house would be 25479.56 .
It take over 15 years before it start paying for itself .
Never mind the interest on that 25.5 grand to do it.
Cheaper my ass.

Because your retailer thinks you‘re an idiot.
I have no idea how solar on your house would cost more than 25% more for your home than it did on mine WITHOUT converting from USD to AUD, which only makes the equation worse.
7kw’s of panels on my shed, 5kw inverter.
13kw‘s of panels on the house, 10kw inverter.
$18k AUD installed. ($9,200 USD).
On track to pay itself off at the end of year 4.

Your payback period may well be due to how much sunlight you actually receive each year, or how much energy you actually consume, or any number of things.

Put differently, the fact that you can’t make it work, doesn’t mean that it can’t work. It can, maybe just not for you, with your usage and your location, which is when a person might take that money and invest in a solar (or wind) farm in an area where the conditions ARE right. Done well, the returns are pretty good, which is why solar farms are springing up all over the place here in Australia….

 

[Burkey]

You mean back in 1950 when the temp sensors were in the forest and now are in the middle of the suburbs or in cities? Whats funny is even my engineer Son needed to "look it up" because he thought temp readings would be COOLER in cities. The indoctrination of young kids is hard to over come.

This will be fun.
Please explain WHY your son thought the temps would be cooler in cities.

 

[Gregs24]

This will be fun.
Please explain WHY your son thought the temps would be cooler in cities.

UHI got missed I fear!

 

[Gregs24]

Because your retailer thinks you‘re an idiot.
I have no idea how solar on your house would cost more than 25% more for your home than it did on mine WITHOUT converting from USD to AUD, which only makes the equation worse.
7kw’s of panels on my shed, 5kw inverter.
13kw‘s of panels on the house, 10kw inverter.
$18k AUD installed. ($9,200 USD).
On track to pay itself off at the end of year 4.

Your payback period may well be due to how much sunlight you actually receive each year, or how much energy you actually consume, or any number of things.

Put differently, the fact that you can’t make it work, doesn’t mean that it can’t work. It can, maybe just not for you, with your usage and your location, which is when a person might take that money and invest in a solar (or wind) farm in an area where the conditions ARE right. Done well, the returns are pretty good, which is why solar farms are springing up all over the place here in Australia….

Exactly. My panels are 14 years old and still working well and saving me a LOT of money. Solar PV is still being installed in Europe at a fantastic rate - obviously because those installing it want to pay more for their electricity

 

[sk47]

Hello; Has it ben noted that a few posts ago the discussion was about wind farms and solar farms with regard to the cost of electricity delivered into our homes. The champions have been moving from that particular discussion to private solar on an individual's home.
In this case a distinction with a difference.
I cannot nay say the economics of private solar on a person's home. It seems both Gregs and Burkey had their solar installed many years ago. Costs may be different today. Not clear how long to break even with electricity cost savings compared to solar panel instillation expense.
Now in many places any excess personal solar power cannot be sold to the power companies at regular commercial rates. Meaning that back in the day if you paid 15 cents per KWH to an electric company you could then sell your excess power to the utility for the same amount. Now that advantage is either gone or has been revised to favor the power company.

By spinning the discussion to private solar another expensive issue of the switch to "green electricity" is being avoided. That being the cost of building up some sort of excess energy storage when the sun shines and the wind blows so we can have power after sundown and low wind. This is a massive problem to be solved and one which should not be ignored. It may be that a solar or wind farm can make electricity per KWH some cheaper than a fossil fuel plant under good conditions. However, we will still need electricity at night and on windless days.
The cost of storing some electricity has to be part of the overall cost of the electricity not just limited to output costs say during daylight hours.

The champions are slick and very good spin masters. We have to examine their statements closely.

 

[K4fxd]

This will be fun.
Please explain WHY your son thought the temps would be cooler in cities.

Radiant cooling at night, and he thought the concrete would reflect sunlight.

He had a theory and was wrong. He also buys into the man made warming crap since it was hammered into his head since kindergarten. He is now using his engineering brain and finding out what he has been taught is not correct.

Sponsored