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.

Climate Change 3: Whatever you do don't call it a twatwaffle

Status
Not open for further replies.
LynahFan said:
If I cared about winning arguments, I wouldn’t be posting on a message board, now, would I?

Here, I can post the truth, consequence-free!
Click to expand...

Here we can lie, say stupid shyt, and make things up, all without consequence. But we get to be members of the choir.
 
LynahFan said:
People just need to get used to having smaller backyards.

Population density:

US: 36/km2
India: 412/km2

We have plenty of land such that it doesn’t need to be in anyone’s backyard.
Click to expand...

You think people fear Nuclear because they don't want to lose their backyard? I mean that is certainly an opinion you can have I guess.

Of course it could be that Three Mile Island showed exactly why Nuclear is a terrible option. (sadly needed though because this country is fucking lazy and greedy) As long as people in charge are worried about profits they will cut every corner and lie about it until it is too late. Maybe you like the idea of a massive nuclear reactor built by the cheapest bidder by a company that probably flouts regulations (and probably bribe the politicians to help flout said regulations) in your backyard but I sure as hell don't. My water may not be the cleanest ever but I don't need a side of waste to make it even worse.

That is the real argument you are going up against. (obviously a bit hyperbolized) People fear Nuclear because it is friggin dangerous and unlike everything else, the damage is permanent if they fuck it up. Between corporate greed and political malfeasance I dont trust the people that would be involved one friggin bit. Put it another way...imagine under Trump when Rick Fucking Perry would have been in charge, if they had been building Nuclear plants or if God forbid there had been an emergency. Do you really think it would have gone well?

Nuclear is our only option, but lets not pretend it is a good one because our country has its priorities backwards.
 
Texas, who has their own grid, is now asking it's citizens to conserve electricity. Appears their grid can't handle the demand in all the heat. The heat that comes from morons who were too busy to consider climate change.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
Texas, who has their own grid, is now asking it's citizens to conserve electricity. Appears their grid can't handle the demand in all the heat. The heat that comes from morons who were too busy to consider climate change.
Click to expand...

Or it could do with them shuttering baseline coal for wind and the wind in west Texas, where the towers are, being about 10 mph today (<-- no bueno). It looks like they have their quick-start natural gas plants ready to fire up (unlike Feb 2021).

https://www.ercot.com/


Average July 11 high in Midland, TX, is 96F.
 
The Sicatoka said:
Or it could do with them shuttering baseline coal for wind and the wind in west Texas, where the towers are, being about 10 mph today (<-- no bueno). It looks like they have their quick-start natural gas plants ready to fire up (unlike Feb 2021).

https://www.ercot.com/


Average July 11 high in Midland, TX, is 96F.
Click to expand...

Orrrrrr that's absolutely not the problem? But hey, why let facts get in the way.
 
Handyman said:
You think people fear Nuclear because they don't want to lose their backyard? I mean that is certainly an opinion you can have I guess.
Click to expand...
I'm saying that to save the planet, it would be worth eminent-domaining the shit out of nuclear sites so that NOBODY lives very close to one. Let's devote, say, 10% of the land in the US to nuclear power. Kick everyone out. The population density will rise to a whopping 40/km2.
 
LynahFan said:
I'm saying that to save the planet, it would be worth eminent-domaining the **** out of nuclear sites so that NOBODY lives very close to one. Let's devote, say, 10% of the land in the US to nuclear power. Kick everyone out. The population density will rise to a whopping 40/km2.
Click to expand...

How many electoral votes would the power plants get
 
The Sicatoka said:
Or it could do with them shuttering baseline coal for wind and the wind in west Texas, where the towers are, being about 10 mph today (<-- no bueno). It looks like they have their quick-start natural gas plants ready to fire up (unlike Feb 2021).

https://www.ercot.com/


Average July 11 high in Midland, TX, is 96F.
Click to expand...

Sounds like regulatory failure to me. Who'd've guessed that could happen in a conservative paradise like Texas?
 
LynahFan said:
I'm saying that to save the planet, it would be worth eminent-domaining the **** out of nuclear sites so that NOBODY lives very close to one. Let's devote, say, 10% of the land in the US to nuclear power. Kick everyone out. The population density will rise to a whopping 40/km2.
Click to expand...

Build a bunch in the UP. They have the land and need the economic boost.
 
Texas Wind Power Is Failing Right When the State Needs It Most (per Bloomberg)
  • Turbines are generating 8% of installed available capacity
  • High-pressure system brings heat wave while depressing winds
"While countries across the globe are generating more electricity from intermittent wind and solar sources, large-scale, battery storage is still in its ascendancy. That leaves major grids more fragile and vulnerable to shock."

Who here has been preaching that energy storage tech isn't here yet for a conversion to intermittent (meaning presently unreliable) sources.
 
We need more generation near the end users. We already lose 25% of all electricity to transmission.

solar, wind, with nuclear and sunsetting natural gas. Coal should die tomorrow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top