Dutch fall out of love with windmills

People seem to keep saying that. Yet nobody here has provided links and quotes to back that absurd claim up. "VERY expensive", relative to what? Chewing gum? Nuclear subsidies?

Meanwhile as you show me your data on how expensive it is to idle a carbon plant until needed, I'll show you 20 times more data on how using solar thermal to provide free energy during peak use hours more than offsets any doomsday scenario you can paint out.

I know, I know. If you have stock in a carbon fuel source the idea of free energy scares the pants off you. So why not just cut a backroom deal with the racketeers in the DOE to allow you to charge near what you do now for kwh and lower your overhead by not having to buy fuel to produce it?

Duh!

 

If environmentalists like you are building windmills with your own money and you don't mind building a backup gas power plant also at your own expense then you don't have to argue with us about it at all.

You are free to pursue your ideas with no interference from critics like me.

But in fact you won't use your money.

You want to stick your hand in my pocket and make me pay for it and then it does become my business.

 

From the OP's link:

The ressistance from local's about their view has a certain amount of creadence in the NL, as it's the most densely populated country in the West, but there's no reason US, UK, German and France (as examples) couldn't use them.

The bottom line is really far more simple than this however. Carbon fuels are running out - fact. Now ask the same people in Urk if they'd rather have the wind turbines or a nuclear power station...

 

Wasn't the Japanese plant old, placed near the sea, and the pumps were at or below ground level rather than placed high on the roof? Sounds like human negligence failing to keep up with the advance of technology and safety.

_

 

The cost of conventional coal power stations is more or less the same of land based wind generation.

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqHL404zhcU"]Barack Obama Admits: Energy Prices Will Skyrocket Under Cap And Trade - YouTube[/ame]

 

That'll be me and I'd rather pay more and have green energy than build coal powered stations near me. The reality is that most of my energy is gas for the heating.

Plus all new tech costs more in the start and becomes cheaper the more it's used and developed.

 

This smacks of pseudo-religious dogma.


_

 

Reality....near the top of list as liberals worst nightmare.

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/46519

 

Rather like your obsession with money...

 

Unlike many Democrat-voting men, I actually stuck around to raise my children. They actually know my full name, but just call me dad. Their last name is actually my last name. We don't cause last name confusion in the doctor's office or at school. That requires money, and I'm not giving up any for your "dreams". If green energy is the way to go, do it in the free market and get your lips off the gov't teat.


_

 

I'm more than happy with my life, you should stop butting into other people's business (not that it's a traditional Republican's policy to do so).

And BTW - your family arrangements are slightly less than zero of interest to me.

 

Do you read your own material?

_

 

This is really a hopeless argument.

Liberals simply don't care how much green energy costs because their ultimate goal is to save the polar bears.

And to that end they are willing to sabotage our entire modern economy if that's what it takes.

 

From the man that said this:

Why do you set little traps and then walk into them yourself?

 

I've already proved that they're the same price, without any subsidy.

 

Do you know anything about business? Anything about manufacturing and production?

It has to be proven to you that a multi-million dollar plant sitting idle is an EXPENSE and is not producing PROFIT to pay for itself? The loans that built it STILL have to be paid. The workers who man it STILL have to be paid. The investors STILL expect a return on the their money invested in it and it ain't making any money just sitting there.

 

Nonsense.

But if you think so then we are all in luck.

Let's just remove all government subsides on energy and let the free marketplace decide what is the best form of energy.

 

The figures I provided explicitly stated they were subsidy free. The cost of fuel is the deciding factor.

 

I didn't see your figures but the best way to settle the question is just remove all the green and non green subsidies and see what happens.

Here in America the government is giving taxpayer money to green energy companies and many are still going bankrupt anyway.

Without the government pork they would not stand a chance in the free marketplace.

 

A simpler explanation.... If you own a moving van and it sits idle, you are LOSING money.

 

This makes no sense. Then remove all government funding from NASA.

You do know that it was the USSR which developed the first Nuclear Power Station connected to the national grid? You do know that the first comercial Nuclear Power Station was built from UK tax payers money and owned by the state?

The reality is that many countries want to kick start these initatives and best way to do so is the use of state funds in the early stages? Mistakes will be made in these industries, turbines will be placed in the wrong places etc... Private business does not want to take those chances and will continue using resources until they are so scarce that there's no other tech available and then they'll hike prices. I don't want to be there.

And like I said before, the Chinese are partnering with the EU and Germany to buy our tech in wind turbines. I'm happy about this.

 

In the last two years, have we not finally woken up to just how (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up Europeans are ? Have we not seen enough of the trash that the Euro nanny states have produced ? Its one giant liberal cesspool disaster zone.

 

Forget Europe ... and "liberals" ...American entrepreneurs and businesses will go green anyway.. with out subsidy ..

They are already here.. newer. cheaper, cost saving technologies are already hitting the market.

 

Funny you should mention that.

Obama is not using NASA to explore space anymore.

He wants to use our tax money to raise the ethnic pride of Muslims in technology instead.

What an idiot.


Anyway, I thought you were claiming that windmills and such were fully price competitive with fossil fuels.

If so then they don't need any government subsides, do they?