Posted on 02/16/2021 11:16:01 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Here in the state of Texas, we’re currently experiencing a freak chill with temperatures that dropped well below the southern part of Alaska. Many residents have fled their homes due to not having any power to heat, thanks to the fact that Texas has made around a quarter of its power source “green energy,” mostly in the form of wind farms.
As Tucker Carlson pointed out last night, Texas shouldn’t be having an energy problem at all. The state of Texas is the largest source of natural gas in the world. He likened running out of power in Texas to starving in a grocery store and pointed out that you can only do that on purpose.
But the overall point he was making is pretty clear, and has been clear for some time; green energy is unreliable at best and underperforms when the need calls.
Moreover, green energy comes with a myriad of other problems. For one, it’s expensive to build, and many of the rare-earth metals that are needed to make the fields of solar and wind farms come from China. Moving over to a primarily green energy-producing system will effectively have us owned by our enemies via the debt alone.
Also, this “green energy” is often very damaging to the environment. Not only do large swaths of land need to be cleared and made ready for these green energy farms, but they also damage the environment by their mere existence. From cadmium leaks, the deaths of millions of birds (many of them endangered), to toxic waste they become when they’ve run their course, green energy isn’t exactly something you would consider environmentally friendly.
(READ: The Expense and Destruction Caused by Renewable Energy)
However, if there’s one thing that the green energy worshiping, Church of Climate Change parishioners has right, it’s that we can’t rely on fossil fuels forever, mostly because at some point we will run out. So, if we can’t just stay on fossil fuels and green energy is the power-producing equivalent of the C-squad, then what’s next?
We already have the answer, and you likely already know it.
What about nuclear energy?
Nuclear energy is the only kind of energy that could rival, if not out-perform, oil and gas. It has a myriad of advantages as well.
For one, it releases no carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Its power is generated through fission, which produces steam that spins turbines, generating electricity. According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), the U.S. avoided emitting over 476 million metric tons of CO2 in 2019 via nuclear energy. Energy.gov notes that this is about the same as removing 100 million cars off the road.
It also has a much smaller land demand as well. A single nuclear facility may need only a square mile to operate, whereas a solar farm requires 75 times the amount of space. In order to rival the nuclear facility, you would need 3 million solar panels or 430 wind turbines, and that’s a lot of land that would have to be sacrificed as a result.
According to energy.gov, even the waste that nuclear energy produces is minimal:
Nuclear fuel is extremely dense.
It’s about 1 million times greater than that of other traditional energy sources and because of this, the amount of used nuclear fuel is not as big as you might think.
All of the used nuclear fuel produced by the U.S. nuclear energy industry over the last 60 years could fit on a football field at a depth of less than 10 yards!
What’s holding us back from nuclear are two things we could do without. One is the irrational fear that every nuclear power plant will become a Chernobyl or Fukushima, but it needs to be understood that both incidents, while tragic, were educational in helping us further understand what to do and what not to do.
For one, Chernobyl was an issue that happened because of Soviet incompetence in both its construction and maintenance. Shortcuts were taken when putting it together in order to save the soviet government on costs, and it was administrative and bureaucratic idiocy that caused the plant to meltdown.
Fukushima is the first time that an external force actually caused a plant to release radiation after a 14-meter-high wave hit the plant, which was twice the height it was built to withstand. However, as Ernest Moniz at MIT wrote, this devastating occurrence can only improve how nuclear facilities are built:
The Fukushima disaster will cause nuclear regulators everywhere to reconsider safety requirements—in particular, those specifying which accidents plants must be designed to withstand. In the 40 years since the first Fukushima reactor was commissioned, seismology and the science of flood hazards have made tremendous progress, drawing on advances in sensors, modeling, and other new capabilities. This new knowledge needs to be brought to bear not only when designing new power plants but also when revisiting the requirements at older plants, as was happening at Fukushima before the tsunami. Outdated safety requirements should not be kept in place. In the United States, the NRC’s review led to a recommendation that nuclear power plant operators reevaluate seismic and flood hazards every ten years and alter the design of the plants and their operating procedures as appropriate. With few exceptions, the needed upgrades are likely to be modest, but such a step would help ensure that the designs of plants reflect up-to-date information.
There really aren’t a lot of reasons not to move to nuclear energy. Sure, there are risks, but they are incredibly minimal. Accidents are quite rare, the energy produced is bar-none, the waste it produces also is incredibly minimal and recyclable, it requires very little land to operate, and moreover, it’s cheap.
“Green energy” on the other hand, is destructive, expensive, and unreliable. Taking yourself out of the political argument for a second and looking at the issue on paper would make nuclear energy the obvious choice, but it’s not.
As I mentioned earlier, there are two issues getting in nuclear energy’s way, and the other is a fight to keep it from establishing itself as the main source of energy, primarily by the left who seem to be very invested in solar and wind. It’s an industry that China has a lot to benefit from, and the close relationship between the Biden administration and China can’t be overlooked.
I thought the greenest energy would be the cucumber battery, but no.
Whenever I see an article about some state or country trying to ban petroleum powered cars in favor of electric cars at some future date, I always say the same thing: Apparently they are planning on building a bunch of nuclear power plants.
And to be fair, even a lot of your old die hard anti nuke people are now in favor of it. just search youtube for “nuclear” and Ted Talk.
Nuclear energy power generation has a minor flaw in relation to providing energy. They are constant output generators. You need to supplement them with NatGas, coal, etc...to meet sudden excess demand during cold snaps or very hot weather conditions where there is sudden widespread demand.
Green Energy is for fools. As is forcing the entire USA to go EV. No one with an ounce of sense doesn’t realize this. But, if you’re a Lib none of that matters. The only thing that matters is your liberal virtue signaling.
“The Greenest Energy Isn’t Even Being Considered”
That’s because it is not about saving the planet. It’s about bankrupting America so that we will accept Communism. Recall Hillary Clinton wrote her college thesis on Saul Alinsky. Alinsky wrote a book which he dedicated to Satan. In it he said the idea was to debase the currency so that it was worthless. The reason was American were too rich to accept communism. Once we were all equally poor we would embrace communism. (The university refused to release her paper.)
Thus Obama made huge “investments” in battery tech companies, solar and wind. All of those investments tanked, cost the taxpayer billions. Incidentally, those companies made huge donations to the Democratic party after they got funding. The officers and backers got huge bonuses. The companies are all gone now, or bought by the Chinese at bargain prices.
Wind power and solar power for a nation are insanely bad investments. When there’s no wind or no sun, there’s no energy. But natural gas is a byproduct of fracking and it is largely being burned off because transporting it is too expensive. It is very clean, yet it is banned for new construction of California homes. Why? See above.
Here’s The Science To Answer Man Made Climate
EARTH TO COOL DOWN WARNS GEO SCIENTIST
Scientific reports from Canada and Greenland has indicated that the the shrinking arctic ice sheets have begun to replace themselves rapidly. Strongly suggesting the earth instead of warming, is beginning to cool down. It is still not known (or proven) if this is the result because of the reduced rate of sun spot activity.
Canadian geo scientist Professor R. Timothy Patterson of Carelton University is urging a go-slow on the rush for governments to “Play God” with global warming legislative blaming this on CO2 (carbon dioxide) discharges. Legislating corrections attempting to control a natural cyclic occurrence caused by; sun spots, the magnetic solar wind, and cyclic earth magnetic polarity reversal, among other natural occurrences including volcanism, meteors etc. Probably plays a very significant role in climate change. Yet ignorantly blaming man made CO2 emissions for climatic change. which is becoming a rapidly discredited and minuscule cause of global warming in his article published by Canada’s Financial Post. 6/20/07
Patterson was selected by the Canadian government to study the fluctuations in certain types of fish populations.
While doing so the Canadian Geo-Scientist found a correlation when certain species of fish had high population and then drastic drop offs. He discovered these fluctuations corresponded with sun spot activity and solar radiation vs cosmic activity. When earth cooling occurred.
Studying deep fjords along the Western Canadian coast where deep pools of low oxidation water exist. The Patterson study reached deep into the earths recent past of 4000 years of undisturbed sediments. Patterson found that when aquatic activity was highest and lowest in those collected sediments having high aquatic content had matched known solar protection when the magnetic wind was highest, and dropped off when earth magnetic fields activities were lowest.Thus causing cosmic radiation to intensify.
Then because the earth became unprotected by its magnetic fields from galactic cosmic activity. Patterson cites several accepted theories which concludes this then created cloud activity during such periods which increased drastically. Thus cooling earth and bringing in its ice ages.
In his presentation here is a professor urging more scientific study (like Pope Benedict)is needed. That politicians including Al Gore, of The Earth Is Flat Society, don’t know what the hell they’re talking about. Strongly suggesting that the global warming may be caused by exhaling politicos rather than serious scientific examination.
Patterson seems to be saying before Canadians start investing in palm trees they should be considering better parkas because what goes up must come down and the Mexicans better move over for a reverse population flow. The 2007story was featured in The Drudge Report, and World Net Daily, which were linked in The US Mat’s last page. But lost due to source link changes .
Earth Axis tilts slightly away from sun
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3877075/posts
Earth Enters Unknown as Magnetic North Pole Continues Push Toward Russia, Crosses Greenwich Meridian
Sputniknews.com ^ | 15:08 13.12.2019 (updated 15:42 13.12.2019) | Staff
posted in the Free Republic Aggregate conservative news site
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3800727/posts
Posted on 12/13/2019, 4:22:18 PM by Red Badger
Earlier this year, US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the British Geological Survey (BGS) were forced to update the World Magnetic Model a year ahead of schedule due to the speed with which the magnetic north pole is shifting out of the Canadian Arctic and toward Russia’s Siberia.
Deep solar minimum on the verge of an historic milestone
wattsupwiththat.com ^ | December 12, 2019 | by Paul Dorian
Posted on 12/13/2019, 3:17:04 PM by Red Badger Posted in the Free Republic aggregate news site http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3800719/posts
Solar minimum is a normal part of the 11-year sunspot cycle, but the last one and the current one have been far deeper than most. One of the consequences of a solar minimum is a reduction of solar storms and another is the intensification of cosmic rays. The just ended solar cycle 24 turned out to be one of the weakest in more than a century – continuing a weakening trend that began in the 1980’s – and, if the latest forecasts are correct, the next solar cycle will be the weakest in more than 200 years.
One of the natural impacts of decreasing solar activity is the weakening of the ambient solar wind and its magnetic field which, in turn, allows more and more cosmic rays to penetrate the solar system. Galactic cosmic rays are high-energy particles originating from outside the solar system that can impact the Earth’s atmosphere. Our first line of defense from cosmic rays comes from the sun as its magnetic field and the solar wind combine to create a ‘shield’ that fends off cosmic rays attempting to enter the solar system. The shielding action of the sun is strongest during solar maximum and weakest during solar minimum with the weakening magnetic field and solar wind. The intensity of cosmic rays varies globally by about 15% over a solar cycle because of changes in the strength of the solar wind, which carries a weak magnetic field into the heliosphere, partially shielding Earth from low-energy galactic charged particles.
NEWLY PUBLISHED SCIENTIFIC PAPER TEARS GLOBAL WARMING AND THE IPCC TO SHREDS
Electro verse.net ^ | Dec 11, 2019
Posted on 12/17/2019, 4:54:46 PM by 11th_VA
http://www.freerepublic/com/focus/f-news/3801618/posts
A scientific paper entitled “An Overview of Scientific Debate of Global Warming and Climate Change” has recently come out of the University of Karachi, Pakistan. The paper’s author, Prof. Shamshad Akhtar delves into earth’s natural temperature variations of the past 1000 years, and concludes that any modern warming trend has been hijacked by political & environmental agendas, and that the science (tackled below) has been long-ignored and at times deliberately manipulated.
... Pro human induced global warming scientists exaggerate the contribution of carbon dioxide as a major greenhouse gas in absorbing long wave earth’s radiation. The fact is water vapor is the single largest atmospheric greenhouse gas (2% by volume), Carbon dioxide is second (0.0385% by volume).
Water vapor contributes 95% to the greenhouse effect, all other greenhouse gases combined contribute only 5%. Furthermore, the man-made portion of carbon dioxide contributes only 0.117% to the greenhouse effect.
The IPCC does not consider water vapor a greenhouse gas in its reports.
In addition, water vapor absorbs in a much wider band of long wave radiation (4-8 micrometer and 12-70 micrometer bands), whereas Carbon dioxide absorbs in narrow bands (13-16 micrometer) and ozone absorbs in a much smaller narrow band (9-10 micrometer). Thus, water vapor absorbs in a much wider wave length band, it has the single largest greenhouse effect among all the greenhouse gases.
Sorry folks jane and the China Syndrome put an end to any nuke idears.
“As I mentioned earlier, there are two issues getting in nuclear energy’s way, and the other is a fight to keep it from establishing itself as the main source of energy, primarily by the left who seem to be very invested in solar and wind.”
This author is slow on the uptake.
Just as they are not truly “invested” in any given minority group whose interests they claim to have at heart, “The Left” is not “invested” in “solar and wind”. “Solar and wind” get dropped like a hot brick the second they lose their utility in the left’s relentless march toward obtaining and maintaining total dictatorial power over every human being on earth.
Really. At this late date, how can anyone interested in enjoying a reputation for credibility in the fertile minds of (the few remaining) ordinary, non-NPC American citizens justify remaining or appearing to remain naive about this basic, but essential, fact?
You are on the right track.
https://futurism.com/nuclear-physicists-are-revisiting-a-safer-alternative-to-uranium
Thorium Reactors.
More fuel available than Uranium
Spent fuel can not be made into weapons
Spent fuel is not dangerous for as long a period.
Global Cooling...(Been there, Done that)
Ice Age / Global Warming (1987)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqsRD4HPtH0
(1977) Leonard Nimoy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_861us8D9M
“Greening the world” is only a subgoal for the EcoWackos. The real goal is the destruction of industrial civilization and a return to serfdom. This is why Greenies demand “solutions” that destroy and kill and oppose solutions that maintain prosperity. Their “environmental concern” masks a heart of evil.
Bookmark
Climate alarmism like Leonardo Nimoy’s fearfully pointing toward the prospect of snowball earth arose in the ‘70s, but that was before a causal link between chronically increased incidence of cosmic rays (i.e., seeding or precipitating certain kinds of clouds at particularly critical altitudes) and chronically increased cloud cover (i.e., the albedo effect thereof working to reflect large amounts of solar thermal radiation right back into space before it ever had a chance to reach and warm the earth’s surface) leading to ice ages on the surface of the earth (i.e., beneath such persistent clouds) was posited, and began to be tested, leading to the current body of scientific proof which deserves very close attention.
Well put. See also: 10.
And IIRC, something like 99% of the earth’s water vapor is natural. So even the idea of nuclear reactors “spewing out water vapor, which is a greenhouse gas” doesn’t get anywhere.
Reclamation is too expensive. Cheaper to buy coal from Utah and Wyoming. Lignite has much lower BTU than the bituminous coals in the West.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
