Estevan considered for solar power

[tweety]

Of course digging coal or releasing gas out of the ground and burning it will be cheaper. Did i ever say it was? No.

Perhaps you don't understand what non renewable means. That every other method will cost more that doesn't involve stealing stored energy from the earth.

It will cost more because we first have to generate it. That's the difference. Stealing versus making.

If i go combine my neighbors crop and steal the grain i can farm way cheaper then if i had to grow it first. There is no way i can ever farm cheaper being the one growing it then the one stealing it. As resources run out, we will have less, it will cost more, and harder to find.

Still haven't heard a reason why it isn't ok to stick some silicon out in the sun.

[tweety]

And for those who won't read the above, making energy will always cost more then stealing and releasing stored energy. So stop asking when that will happen.

[oneoff]

[QUOTE=tweety;335249]Of course digging coal or releasing gas out of the ground and burning it will be cheaper. Did i ever say it was? No.

Unquote

I think I'm totally confused

[farmaholic]

"LAST WORD"......

I was hoping to get that in since I have nothing meaningful to contribute to this thread.

[Oliver88]

Hope you realize how silly that sounds. Basically don't do anything, try anything, research anything, learn anything until its proven and workable technology "competing" with the ultimate in condensed energy that - and in case you still don't know - is going to run out!

Why does it all have to be better then non renewable before it gets used? Shouldn't we be doing projects like this BEFORE we are short on non renewable energy?

Oh and btw, hydroelectric is green so chuckchuck is more then half way there, include geothermal and he is there.

Its not about being green, the stupidest term ever, its about realizing non renewable is NON RENEWABLE and we have got to start paying up and not completely screw over future generations ya greedy bunch!

Is being financially responsible silly to the environmentalists? Most likely don't worry about increased SaskPower rates and live in cities and don't have grain to dry.
Saskatchewan is blessed with fossil fuels and to create efficient energy with no worry about running out. We also have RELIABLE hydro electric option coming from a few different dams, environmental hurdles will have to overcome to bring on more dams.
Nuclear is also a very clean option, once again environmentalists/NDP oppose.

When and If solar, wind, geothermal become cost effective, feasible without a subsidy and provides a reliable/on demand power option than we can proceed with.

A lot of residents will simply install the systems IF they are as efficient as Chuckchuck claims!!!

It would be wise to let a larger jurisdiction full of greenies/Al Gore followers develop the technology rather than let our tax payers fund a potential boondoggle. (California, Ontario, etc.......)

[tweety]

[QUOTE=oneoff;335253]

Of course digging coal or releasing gas out of the ground and burning it will be cheaper. Did i ever say it was? No.

Unquote

I think I'm totally confused

Then why not do solar?

[tweety]

Is being financially responsible silly to the environmentalists? Most likely don't worry about increased SaskPower rates and live in cities and don't have grain to dry.
Saskatchewan is blessed with fossil fuels and to create efficient energy with no worry about running out. We also have RELIABLE hydro electric option coming from a few different dams, environmental hurdles will have to overcome to bring on more dams.
Nuclear is also a very clean option, once again environmentalists/NDP oppose.

When and If solar, wind, geothermal become cost effective, feasible without a subsidy and provides a reliable/on demand power option than we can proceed with.

A lot of residents will simply install the systems IF they are as efficient as Chuckchuck claims!!!

It would be wise to let a larger jurisdiction full of greenies/Al Gore followers develop the technology rather than let our tax payers fund a potential boondoggle. (California, Ontario, etc.......)

They never will be cost competitive. That's the flaw in the reasoning for not doing it. You can't generate power as cheaply as just transferring the stored power already made. Can't happen, so we have to pay for that difference and start pulling the reins on that limited energy already stored.

If you don't want to, i get it. Human nature says we won't change till its too late. I can see not shutting every gas and coal plant down, but my goodness, all this squabble and BS over a few MW of solar power.

Really? A cup of Starbucks coffee a week difference? That's what has you all upset about a few solar panels?

[Oliver88]

They never will be cost competitive. That's the flaw in the reasoning for not doing it. You can't generate power as cheaply as just transferring the stored power already made. Can't happen, so we have to pay for that difference and start pulling the reins on that limited energy already stored.

If you don't want to, i get it. Human nature says we won't change till its too late. I can see not shutting every gas and coal plant down, but my goodness, all this squabble and BS over a few MW of solar power.

Really? A cup of Starbucks coffee a week difference? That's what has you all upset about a few solar panels?

Is the flavour of the day "doomsday concern" to reduce GHG levels or is the issue about running out of non-renewable power sources??

If the GHG is your worry nuclear, hydro, natural gas are all reliable options.
If your worry is non-renewables than hydro is your option.

I simply don't think the math will ever work in Saskatchewan for solar or wind.

[tweety]

Definitely my concern is running out. Not for us. But for the future. While we have all this stored energy lets do what we can to create some ways of making power from the sun, wind, biologic photo cells, fusion....

Because how do you start creating some of this stuff in the future as it gets more scarce if there is barely enough energy to grow food. If its not at our societal responsibility to at least do something, to try, well then i have no argument at all. I just personally feel that we have done plenty of damage already to future generations, its time to pay it forward.

I mean if you have grandkids like i do, and when i think about their kids in the future, will all the problems be magically solved because they have run out of stored energy? Unfortunately the only argument against that is screw em, they're on their own, i did my part by burning buck a liter gas in my Escalade. I paid my debt.

Global warming when outside its minus 25, i say bring it on!

[Guest]

Definitely my concern is running out. Not for us. But for the future. While we have all this stored energy lets do what we can to create some ways of making power from the sun, wind, biologic photo cells, fusion....

Because how do you start creating some of this stuff in the future as it gets more scarce if there is barely enough energy to grow food. If its not at our societal responsibility to at least do something, to try, well then i have no argument at all. I just personally feel that we have done plenty of damage already to future generations, its time to pay it forward.

I mean if you have grandkids like i do, and when i think about their kids in the future, will all the problems be magically solved because they have run out of stored energy? Unfortunately the only argument against that is screw em, they're on their own, i did my part by burning buck a liter gas in my Escalade. I paid my debt.

Global warming when outside its minus 25, i say bring it on!

this makes more sense than anything I have heard on this topic ! if only they would go about it in a sane manner