Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: More than 68% of New European Electricity Capacity Came From Wind and Solar in 2011 [View all]kristopher
(29,798 posts)64. Just as I thought.
Josh, that supports what I've been writing about.
Ex: "A radical transformation of the power generation sector is necessary to move to a lowcarbon future. "
I have several more points to make from that selection, but I'd like to keep this clear and deal with them one by one.
I have been describing the nature of the MOST EFFECTIVE "radical transformation of the power generation sector".
Can you explain your failure to understand that?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
94 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
More than 68% of New European Electricity Capacity Came From Wind and Solar in 2011 [View all]
kristopher
Feb 2012
OP
The determinant is the operational characteristic within a generation and delivery system.
kristopher
Feb 2012
#6
If "fracking is severely curtailed" then I don't see much NG for electrical generation.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#36
I want data, I want to see that it's actually being pursued, not fantasy plans that...
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#40
I did. I showed that greenwashing natural gas is not going to transition us away from fossil fuels.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#52
Fracking is absolutely necessary to "meet the needs we might have during a transition."
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#39
Lots of sniping and ranting; absolutely devoid of substance related to the topic of transition
kristopher
Feb 2012
#42
I already told you, we don't. Convince me we do. We don't. The evidience is we don't. I gave it.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#49
The chart is not flawed, the chart is specific. The EU and US will reduce coal consumption.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#60
My interpretation of data is perfectly fine, as you've provided no evidence I am wrong.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#63
Because he has a fantasy solution that isn't reflected in any real world trajectory.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#68
Not at all, I think the magical robot factories are just as useful as any other "future planning"...
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#80
Erm, right wing garbage. Making people pay externalized costs is not a subsidy.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#93
Uh, you do realize those electronics are so cheap because they're built in unregulated sectors...
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#86
Are you seriously saying that a snapshot of today supports your assertions about the future?
kristopher
Feb 2012
#91
Yes, because the data I provided is a "snapshot of today," it's not years of trending.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#92
Explain how nuclear power enables a transition to a noncoarbon energy infrastructure.
kristopher
Feb 2012
#18
Why? As stated many times before, humans are not to be trusted with nuclear power.
Nihil
Feb 2012
#24
In other words you can't answer the question without showing you are being misleading.
kristopher
Feb 2012
#26
I'm not the one who is dodging the facts by constantly raising the "nuclear" red herring.
Nihil
Feb 2012
#47
You seem to be laboring under the impression that you're the only one being coherent here
XemaSab
Feb 2012
#67