• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Welcome to Canada, the land of free roads, cheap gas – and the world’s least fuel-eff

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Guest

    SFB , there is no thinking or common sense to any of it

    Comment

    • fjlip
      Senior Member
      • Oct 2002
      • 9816

      Total waste of time resources $$, and risky to work on. Never pay for themselves.

      How much concrete is needed on ocean bottom? Many times more than on land!

      Comment

      • chuckChuck
        Senior Member
        • Dec 2006
        • 12786

        Worldwide investment in clean energy in 2023: 1.8 Trillion for renewables vs about 1 trillion for fossil fuels! Says the IEA

        Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot 2023-10-30 at 06-55-09 World Energy Investment 2023 - WorldEnergyInvestment2023.pdf.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	14.1 KB
ID:	775760

        https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/8834d3af-af60-4df0-9643-72e2684f7221/WorldEnergyInvestment2023.pdf
        Last edited by chuckChuck; Oct 30, 2023, 07:05.

        Comment

        • AlbertaFarmer5
          Senior Member
          • Oct 2010
          • 12516

          Originally posted by chuckChuck View Post
          Worldwide investment in clean energy in 2023: 1.8 Trillion for renewables vs about 1 trillion for fossil fuels! Says the IEA

          [ATTACH]13410[/ATTACH]

          https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/8834d3af-af60-4df0-9643-72e2684f7221/WorldEnergyInvestment2023.pdf
          Tell us again about how wind and solar are the cheapest energy sources.

          Then repeat the stat about how worldwide investment in wind and solar which provide ~5.3% of total primary energy, cost almost twice as much as the investment in fossil fuels which provide 82% of world primary energy. Pretending for a moment that the 5.3% is actually correct(it is grossly inflated), fossil fuels provide 15.5 times more energy for almost half the cost. In other words, wind and solar are only 28 times more expensive.

          But maybe if you repeat it a few more times, maybe yell it as loud as you can, it will make it true.

          Or you could not post statistics which completely contradict your propaganda.

          Comment

          • shtferbrains
            Senior Member
            • Jun 2017
            • 5202

            $1.8 trillion.

            Thats a lot of taxpayer money.

            Think what could have been done with those funds if they would have gone into something productive.

            If SMR's cost $1 to $1.5 Billion how many can you build for $1.8 trillion?

            24 hour baseload with the cheapest fuel available.

            Comment

            • shtferbrains
              Senior Member
              • Jun 2017
              • 5202



              I don't know how to make this live but this young log truck driver explains why it's all BS in less than 2 minutes.

              Comment

              • Guest

                Oh my , that just makes too much sense and simple and clear?
                Maybe simple enough even Chuck types can grasp it ? Or maybe not ?

                Comment

                • chuckChuck
                  Senior Member
                  • Dec 2006
                  • 12786

                  Originally posted by shtferbrains View Post
                  $1.8 trillion.

                  Thats a lot of taxpayer money.

                  Think what could have been done with those funds if they would have gone into something productive.

                  If SMR's cost $1 to $1.5 Billion how many can you build for $1.8 trillion?

                  24 hour baseload with the cheapest fuel available.
                  Thats not all taxpayers money.

                  North Dakota and Texas lead the US in wind energy paid for by utilities.

                  Nuclear is the most expensive option by far and one of the reasons hardly any new nuclear has been built in decades.

                  But wait Saskatchewan, Alberta and Ontario will subsidize the hell out of SMRs instead of letting the market decide what is the best and cheapest option.

                  The same provinces that are led by politicians who say they believe in the free market and don't pick winners and losers? LOL

                  Comment

                  • Guest

                    Originally posted by chuckChuck View Post
                    Thats not all taxpayers money.

                    North Dakota and Texas lead the US in wind energy paid for by utilities.

                    Nuclear is the most expensive option by far and one of the reasons hardly any new nuclear has been built in decades.

                    But wait Saskatchewan, Alberta and Ontario will subsidize the hell out of SMRs instead of letting the market decide what is the best and cheapest option.

                    The same provinces that are led by politicians who say they believe in the free market and don't pick winners and losers? LOL
                    But wait Saskatchewan, Alberta and Ontario will subsidize the hell out of SMRs instead of letting the market decide what is the best and cheapest option.

                    Unlike wind and solar , lol********

                    Comment

                    • blackpowder
                      Senior Member
                      • Feb 2010
                      • 9266

                      Can't wait for the market alone to decide on wind and solar.

                      Comment

                      • Reply to this Thread
                      • Return to Topic List
                      Working...