non potendo discutere il messaggio
-----------
ahahahahahahahah
ahahahahahahahah
ahahahahahahahah
ahahahahahahahah
ahahahahahahahah
ahahahahahahahah
dovrei discutere QUESTO ?
-------------
1. In a world that is apparently getting both warmer and colder because of global warming, how is it that we can increasingly rely on non-dispatchable (i.e., intermittent, usually unavailable), weather-dependent electricity from wind and solar plants to displace, not just supplement, dispatchable (i.e., baseload, almost always available) coal, gas, and nuclear power? In other words, if our weather is becoming less predictable, how is it that a consuming economy like ours can, or should even try, predictably rely on weather-dependent resources? ERCOT exemplifies this: the Texas grid operator has around 31,000 MW of wind capacity but goes into winter expecting only 6,000 MW (just 20%) of wind farms to be available to generate electricity. Again, in the marketplace, the “alternatives” you keep hearing about are proving to be far more supplemental than alternative.
Further, good wind and solar spots are finite, based on geography, so new builds, naturally, will be forced into areas that are less windy and less sunny, lowering their already very low 35% capacity factors. And because they devour immense swaths of land, interrupting a whole host of things, that Renewable Rejection Database is mounting very quickly. If wind, solar, and electric cars too are as effective and low-cost as so many keep promising us, there would obviously be no need for government subsidies for broad adoption. Yet, there is, gigantically so. Huge amounts of taxpayer money going into this, what I call “the holy climate panacea triad,” are vulnerable to changing politics and bound to become politically untenable at some point: “Ford Is Losing $66,446 On Every EV It Sells.” Our limited financial resources are obviously very precious, so these NEVER CONSIDERED and wasted opportunity costs forcing wind, solar, and electric cars into the energy complex are truly catastrophic. Schools investing in electric buses over STEM? The $200 Billion Electric School Bus Bust. How can any of this be justified? I’m so utterly confused.
------------
le variazioni climatiche annuali in ogni punto del globo quanto cazzo pensa siano sto analfabeta ? in qualsiasi era geologica s'intende ? .... io ho il fotovoltaico, da quando ce l'ho ho oscillato tra i 26 mila e i 28 mila kWh, di quanto vuoi che vari il vento e la produzione di una pala eolica da anno ad anno in ogni singolo punto del globo ? se nel texas tengono bloccate 4/5 delle pale eoliche cazzi loro sicuramente ci sono i soldi di mezzo vogliono usare le fossili come da noi, dovranno ripagare gli investimenti fatti in impianti termoelettrici imbecillissimi e fuori mercato .... poi esistono gli accumuli .... i posti con buon irraggiamento o buona ventosità sono TROPPI rispetto le necessità planetarie, TUTTE le necessità energetiche di qualsiasi tipo di tutti gli 8 miliardi di umani si possono coprire con 400 kmq di pannelli solari .... i sussidi sono alle fossili e non alle rinnovabili, per le fossili ogni anno si spende il 6% del pil globale annuo, per eliminare il problema energia per i prossimi secoli con le rinnovabili basta quel 6% di pil DI UN SOLO ANNO .....
LO SO .... TU NON CAPISCI UN CAZZO DI UNA MINKIA .... È FIATO SPRECATO IL MIO ....