What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

unofan said:
It's cute that mookie thinks people care about mookie's act.
Click to expand...

maybe later you can impress us with dumb chit you post again. enlighten us with your grasp of social security. your stupid act is always cute.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Where's the survey of the "video only" debate watchers? Normally some firm puts together a group to watch the debate, keyword: watch, no audio. I haven't seen one report or story on such as of yet.

My guess is those folks are the truest representation of who won. Why? The ubiquitous American short attention span and inability to hear, listen, and comprehend (and yes, those are three different things) makes people far more visual than auditory. You don't have to have won, you just have to look like you've won.
 
The Sicatoka said:
MaizeRage is mad at me because I pointed out that the EPA's CPP*, aimed primarily at coal powered electricity generation in the upper Midwest is a hard spot with me. They claim I want EPA shut down; I just want EPA properly overseen by Congress. They're mad that I pointed out 40% of US electricity comes from coal and that they should've shut off the debate at the 54/90 minute mark last night in support of CPP. They're mad that I could point out the direct harm to local economies that CPP will do.

The CPP is straight out of Mr. Obama's EPA. It's a wonderfully Utopian plan that real people in the real world are left to try to deal with.

Having said all that, yeah, I'm a bit owly** right now. I just got out of a board meeting dealing with these issues. Better? I'm going to a solar farm dedication later. A solar farm with huge State and Federal subsidies that still doesn't interest local investors. A solar farm that, even with the subsidies, still has an ROI of 20 years or more.


*Search the site for posts by me with "CPP" in them to see the origins.
**Should I be using the term "hawkish", or "fighting hawkish"? I'm still adapting to this new moniker thing.
Click to expand...

Do you know what an externality is and why pollution is literally the textbook example of a negative externality?

Your panic strikes me as completely unnecessary. You don't want to pay higher prices, I get that. But allowing companies to pollute because you think it's just too hard or expensive to stop them is pure applesauce. That just shifts the costs from the users of that power plant to those affected downstream or downwind of it. How is that acceptable?
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

The plant in question put in scrubbers (to the tune of $500,000,000.00) making it the second cleanest emissions plant in the world. That's a lot of applesauce.

And it's not panic; it's pure frustration. The draft CPP said ND had to meet an 11% reduction. The State said we could meet that. Then, the final (bait and switch) version came out demanding a 45% reduction for ND. There is no tech on earth to get the State there. The only option? Close plants that still have huge mortgages, for clean coal technologies no less!, on them. (Imagine burning down your house but still having to pay that mortgage, and the mortgage to a new house to live in.)
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Oh, and by the CPP's, the EPA's, own data, all of the CO2 reductions in the plan will reduce global warming by ... well, I'll let the EPA chief tell you what we get for all this.

Here's the spoiler:

... former Obama Administration Assistant Secretary Charles McConnell said at best it will reduce global temperature by only one one-hundredth of a degree Celsius. At the same time it’s going to increase the cost of electricity. That’s going to hurt the lowest income Americans the most. How do you justify such an expensive, burdensome, onerous rule that’s really not going to do much good and isn’t this all pain and no gain.
Click to expand...

So instead of 36.99C it'll be 37C. OK ...

Nobody, no-body, escapes the cost of electricity. It's a cost, and value, adder on every aspect of your life. Forgive me for trying to keep the cost of it somewhat in check.
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Good god and I thought Al Gore was boring...can we have an "All Things EPA" thread so we can get back to mocking Drumpf and the nimrods voting for him please ;)
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Handyman said:
Good god and I thought Al Gore was boring...can we have an "All Things EPA" thread so we can get back to mocking Drumpf and the nimrods voting for him please ;)
Click to expand...

I want my **** video only polling results Handy! :mad:

;) :D
 
The Sicatoka said:
Oh, and by the CPP's, the EPA's, own data, all of the CO2 reductions in the plan will reduce global warming by ... well, I'll let the EPA chief tell you what we get for all this.

Here's the spoiler:



So instead of 36.99C it'll be 37C. OK ...

Nobody, no-body, escapes the cost of electricity. It's a price and value adder on every aspect of your life. Forgive me for trying to keep the cost of it somewhat in check.
Click to expand...

And pricing pollution into it doesn't mean those costs weren't already there, it just means we're making the correct people pay for it.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

unofan said:
And pricing pollution into it doesn't mean those costs weren't already there, it just means we're making the correct people pay for it.
Click to expand...

The end user always pays for all of it.

We're adding massive costs* with benefits that are nearly too small to measure (0.01 degress C).


*I've seen estimates of electricity rates going up 35 to 60% under CPP, and the numbers are not scare tactics. I've seen the books. This isn't everywhere (most are in the teens), but the larger the CPP mandate, the larger the rate increase.
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

The Sicatoka said:
The end user always pays for all of it.

We're adding massive costs* with benefits that are nearly too small to measure (0.01 degress C).


*I've seen estimates of electricity rates going up 35 to 60% under CPP, and the numbers are not scare tactics. I've seen the books. This isn't everywhere (most are in the teens), but the larger the CPP mandate, the larger the rate increase.
Click to expand...
Keep upping the cost and solar will work.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Kepler said:
She is ahead and I think she's going to win, but I would REALLY like to get some godd-mn insurance runs because when you let a crappy opponent hang around bad stuff can happen.
Click to expand...
Jesus. You sound like a Mets fan.




;)
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

unofan said:
This line tells me you really don't know what an externality is, or why pollution is the prime example of one.
Click to expand...

Can you really call it an externality when it's a power cooperative and the member-owners of the cooperative are the ones who live around the plant, breathing the air*, and reaping the benefits of the plant?

*Air that is some of the cleanest in the nation no less.
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

walrus said:
Keep upping the cost and solar will work.
Click to expand...

I award you partial points; you are half correct. Solar will work if the price is jacked high enough (no-CO2 nuclear would still be cheaper to produce ;) ).

However, solar is still not the answer, nor is wind, until large-scale storage technology (batteries) markedly improves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top