geekosystem

I was also surprised by the 1/10% generation by solar and have to assume that if correct, only includes the solar farms delivering their power to the grid and ignores the residential and commercial net metering applications. I don’t plan to research this statistic but if anyone can confirm or deny my intuition, I’d be interested.

“Fox News fails to grasp…” can be put in front of virtually any subject.

Unlike watching Fox for humor, watching it for infomation is a waste of time. You have to double check everydamnthing they say.

This fox biz reporter, and I use the phrase lightly, babbles at the end of the clip that we need a “little bit more of a mixed solution”. Does that mean the tenth of a percent of energy–her number–now generated from solar power is too much or too little?

A jaw-dropping set of lies by this lobbyist for the natural gas industry.

1. No mention of all the harm from unregulated standard-less fracking.

2. No mention of the harm from natural gas emissions REGARDLESS of the harm from the absence of standards.

3. Outright lying on the contribution of solar power to the grid: she says “According to my research, less than a tenth of one percent”. Fact: the DoE and the grids main customers both put the CURRENT contribution of solar-sourced energy to the nation’s electrical grid at a full TEN PER CENT.
(My guess is she’s done this by going all the way back to January 2009 and ‘calculating’ off the entire U.S. energy output, not just into the electrical grid but TOTAL energy product use, throwing in the entire period of 2 to 4 years while solar was still in planning and start-up – IOW an absolutely mind-bogglingly indefensible lie.)

4. Not just the DoE but industry confirms that, besides there being no evidence of fraud or cronyism of any kind in the allocation of the $90B in the STIM dedicated to ‘green energy’ development, there’s been LESS THAN 1% overall of business failure of any and all kinds — and that calculation INCLUDES Solyandra.
(Ever wonder why all you ever hear from the right on this is Solyandra Solyandra Solyandra? It’s because they’re extra-conscious of the fact that it was a Sonny Bush administration project which Bush then starved at a fairly critical time yet they also knew it still was at the forefront of development when the STIM passed, so was likely to receive support. Now — name ANOTHER such failure. You can’t: there hasn’t been any.)

5. Note the elision of ‘subsidies’ for solar with the history of subsidies and tax breaks for Big Oil. That $90B in the STIM for green energy technologies is not only the biggest, by far, single government budgeted subsidy for green energy tech, and not only bigger than the TOTAL government grants to all green energy tech in the prior history of the U.S., but it’s also in turn DWARFED by the total government grants, subsidies and tax breaks provided to the oil industry, by more than TEN TIMES.
(Actually, if you include the breaks to Big Coal and Big Oil associated with infrastructure — rail, highways, building heating, coal-fired energy plants, oil-fired energy plants — and 4 massive war efforts, it’s more like A THOUSAND TIMES more: a one-time less than 10 percent of one trillion to green tech versus a normalized average of 60 percent of one trillion to Big Coal and Big Oil PER YEAR over the course of 150 years.)

Wow. Well that’s even worse than the claim there’s not enough sun in the States…

Also, on the ‘China has out-competed us’ nonsense. When the STIM was passed, China was outstripping the U.S. on manufactured solar units by a ridiculous margin, so that the early close-to-market businesses were pretty much all China-product dependent — thus, Solyandra. But that changed, starting in 2010; indeed, it was already being anticipated to change by the time the STIM passed, but what was unknown was how long it would take for new U.S. businesses to gear up, so the PLANNING, with huge cooperative input from the DOE in its ARPA-E program, began as far back as the transition, and much of the BUILDING was underway by 2010. And don’t forget that there was no grid delivery system in place, even as solar energy production got bigger and bigger; indeed, the delivery system is STILL not anywhere near peak (Same problem with wind, certainly Texas wind.).

At any rate, by 2011-12, the problem with China had already flattened out considerably, to the point where now U.S. businesses are in a decidedly advantageous position over China production on almost every front.

AGAIN!!! Remember these are paid puppet mouthpieces. They don’t know or care what they are saying.

Stupid as a word not an insult: means of low intelligence and having little ability to reason except in the most simple terms. With that in mind I must ask if the people who watch realize that Fox treats them as if they were stupid.

this panel is proof that children should be tested in school.

No – it’s not facts. You are completely wrong.
the accurate figure is less than 1%.

So – exactly who is stupid?

This topic is very interesting, and although the young woman was wrong on the why she was right on the fact that Germany is the leader.
In Germany – you install solar panels and you don’t use the energy produced to lower your own energy bill. It all goes into the “collective”. A completely different system than we have here. Here, you want to heat your pool, you install solar but covering your entire house in sunny Arizona with panels, will not provide you with enough energy to heat your pool year around. It will come, but for the present it is not enough to meet your needs.

I recall listening to an expert on alternate energy. He equated it to the size of main frames when computers were first introduced. Massive, wasteful and unsightly. Who would have dreamed of the day when an Apple desktop has it all hidden safely away in your monitor! Same with solar – massive, expensive and inefficient panels will slowly give way to tiny photo cells that will be able to store energy efficiently. Until then, we slog along but we cannot call solar energy a success – because it isn’t.

I’m sure there is a “Bill Gates and Steve Jobs” type person tinkering away in his garage who will figure out the whys and hows. Throwing massive amounts of government money is not going to solve it. We saw the waste and fraud that occurred with the last attempt to prop up an industry that was not ready for prime time. We have to keep it real – the government is a very poor judge of funding “eureka” moments. Private industry is where these discoveries occur.

We watched the awesome discoveries by scientists who worked for oil companies.

Wind turbines – unsightly and a blight on the environment. “Not in my backyard” is the cry heard the loudest. Why doesn’t any do-gooder point out the horrific cost in loss of birds and disrupting the ecosystem? Why?
Why paint it as “clean” energy – it isn’t clean at all. It isn’t as dirty as coal, but it surely isn’t without its drawbacks.

When we start being honest about the different sources of energy and stop maligning the ones we don’t like – then we might start honest discussions. Every source has its drawbacks and its advantages. Not one is perfect.

I think you meant to reply to seek456? ^_^;

Hehehe, thunder thighs… But more sunshine in Germany? Hahaha, whaaat?

That could be cool if you did it like a disc world…

Anytime you attack Fox for anything, seek comes out of the woods to attack you. Repeat this over and over to yourself as seek has done.. “Fox never lies, Fox never edits, Fox never misrepresents”

I know. That was for Anita’s benefit, seek’s Canadian anyway, not sure why she is so pro Fox. Not even sure they get it up there.

Your assertion that private enterprise wouldn’t pursue it isn’t accurate. Read the Wikipedia article “First Transcontinental Railroad.” Using eminent domain to help clear a path is very different that taking money from the people to give to a solar power company.

Passenger rail of all types is still heavily subsidized in the US and they still lose lots of money (5.2 Billion USD in 2012). Subsidies encourage inefficient business practices. If a business cannot convince people that their product is worth the money to sustain their business, then it is a failing venture.

There is an example of a major development that happened without much government subsidy. The internet. Those conservative companies that want to make money, not lose it, have developed a large interconnected network of servers…without government help. The internet has developed to be what it is because of (not in spite of) a lack of government regulation.

One could argue that aspects of the early internet were invented in government facilities, but that is different from impingement it worldwide.

Hmm don’t mind if I check Chu’s numbers.

You guys have to decide if you’re a political site or nerd interest site. I feel like everything from this family of sites is more obsessive about propagating their political prejudices over catering to the non-political nature of 75% of the country. We get the political from enough places. Sometimes I just want to read about nerd stuff without the political crap – and I’m as liberal as it gets.

It would be more appropriate to compare solar power in the Western and Southern U.S. with Spain.

Is it really hard for people to understand what the motivation is behind RENEWABLE energy sources? Fossil fuels are a finite resource, one day they are going to run out. The sooner we can learn to efficiently harness the various types of renewable(clean) energy the sooner we can get off fossil fuels and it will mean our planet will be a cleaner place.
Does anyone remember the amount of subsidization the oil companies received to start and still receive to look for new places to drill? Any comparison to normal business is apples and oranges, because normal business’ do not have the potential to change the world. Yes the output may be small now, but as the economies of scale get larger, and the cost and efficiency of the sources improve you will see renewables compete with fossil fuels.