Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
While we are talking about subsidies:terryc wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:38:53 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
Why does making a valid observation imply that he doesn't have a life?
Lol, it is a point of view. The validity is still open to debate. Many
insects would laugh at the validity.
The validity that 'subsidies' are other peoples' tax money is indisputable.
Graham
Greenpeace uses a very wide definition of subsidy. The only reasonEeyore wrote:
terryc wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:38:53 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
Why does making a valid observation imply that he doesn't have a life?
Lol, it is a point of view. The validity is still open to debate. Many
insects would laugh at the validity.
The validity that 'subsidies' are other peoples' tax money is
indisputable.
Graham
While we are talking about subsidies:
http://www.stop-fueling-climate-change.org/docs/GPE388.1_FebReport_V5.pdf
Tony
Id love to know how Greenpeace thinks we are going to make iron andEeyore wrote:
terryc wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:38:53 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
Why does making a valid observation imply that he doesn't have a life?
Lol, it is a point of view. The validity is still open to debate. Many
insects would laugh at the validity.
The validity that 'subsidies' are other peoples' tax money is indisputable.
Graham
While we are talking about subsidies:
http://www.stop-fueling-climate-change.org/docs/GPE388.1_FebReport_V5.pdf
Tony
Agreed, but, PV is personal and intimate and offers me certain advantagesPV solar is insane compared to solar thermal.
Cool, my $8,000 will help redress that.The only reason
renewables are not getting a bigger share of the "subsidy" is because
they're not producing a bigger share of the energy.
That is the bullshit yarn they have been telling, but it is never goingSettle on a design, and just repeat it over and over, and the cost comes
down to a point where electricity would be only moderately more
expensive than that produced by coal in Australia.
I don't think so. You'll get a large slice of subsidy without producingOn Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:49:14 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
The only reason
renewables are not getting a bigger share of the "subsidy" is because
they're not producing a bigger share of the energy.
Cool, my $8,000 will help redress that.
Looks to me like the sole advantage is that you can be assured of someOn Mon, 27 Apr 2009 02:55:08 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
PV solar is insane compared to solar thermal.
Agreed, but, PV is personal and intimate and offers me certain advantages
when t is on my roof.
Nope. A decent petrol gennie would cost nearly as much up front and theterryc wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 02:55:08 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
PV solar is insane compared to solar thermal.
Agreed, but, PV is personal and intimate and offers me certain
advantages when t is on my roof.
Looks to me like the sole advantage is that you can be assured of some
power on sunny days that are hot enough to cause power outages.
However you could get the same assurance, at much less cost, by buying a
petrol driven generator.
Sylvia.
Your 1KW solar panel still costs you in the region of $4000, afterOn Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:08:28 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
terryc wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 02:55:08 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
PV solar is insane compared to solar thermal.
Agreed, but, PV is personal and intimate and offers me certain
advantages when t is on my roof.
Looks to me like the sole advantage is that you can be assured of some
power on sunny days that are hot enough to cause power outages.
However you could get the same assurance, at much less cost, by buying a
petrol driven generator.
Nope. A decent petrol gennie would cost nearly as much up front and the
difference would soon go up the spout in petrol costs. A decent petrol
gennie runs for hours and is built for it and is not a $169 special.
Sylvia.
Sadly not. there is a whole pile of crap associated with keeping petrolFurther, the fuel costs are pretty much irrelevant, because if
you're only using it during power outages,
And produces very little power.it uses very little fuel.
Naah, a couple of deep discharge batteries will cover the needed/In addition, you'd be protected
against outages in the evening, when your solar panels are just a load
on your roof structure.
Temperatures are currently FALLING !Eeyore wrote:
terryc wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:38:53 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
Why does making a valid observation imply that he doesn't have a life?
Lol, it is a point of view. The validity is still open to debate. Many
insects would laugh at the validity.
The validity that 'subsidies' are other peoples' tax money is indisputable.
While we are talking about subsidies:
http://www.stop-fueling-climate-change.org/docs/GPE388.1_FebReport_V5.pdf
Live in caves probably.I guess Greenpeace would like us all to starve.
Exactly. It's money down the dunny basically, when it *could* be used moreterryc wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:49:14 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote:
The only reason
renewables are not getting a bigger share of the "subsidy" is because
they're not producing a bigger share of the energy.
Cool, my $8,000 will help redress that.
I don't think so. You'll get a large slice of subsidy without producing
a correspondingly large slice of energy.
I suggest you look at the French answer. It works.Sylvia Else wrote:
Settle on a design, and just repeat it over and over, and the cost comes
down to a point where electricity would be only moderately more
expensive than that produced by coal in Australia.
That is the bullshit yarn they have been telling, but it is never going
to happen in nuclear
Better still, a diesel one.terryc wrote:
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 02:55:08 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
PV solar is insane compared to solar thermal.
Agreed, but, PV is personal and intimate and offers me certain advantages
when t is on my roof.
Looks to me like the sole advantage is that you can be assured of some
power on sunny days that are hot enough to cause power outages.
However you could get the same assurance, at much less cost, by buying a
petrol driven generator.
Cooking and heating use a lot of electricity.Naah, a couple of deep discharge batteries will cover the needed/
essential stuff that the LPG systems don't already cover (cooking,
heating and lighting).
Yes, which is why our stove top is gas and we still have a wood heater,terryc wrote:
Naah, a couple of deep discharge batteries will cover the needed/
essential stuff that the LPG systems don't already cover (cooking,
heating and lighting).
Cooking and heating use a lot of electricity.
Temperatures are not climate.Temperatures are currently FALLING !
Absolutely no information on disposal.I suggest you look at the French answer. It works.