OT: Electric cars actually burn fossil fuels

Carbon maybe. Lithium though....

I see the libs in Germany are now firing up coal plants because Russia is cutting off their natural gas. So much stupidity there. Getting in bed with Russia, becoming heavily reliant on Russia for energy, while ignoring Putin's increasing aggression until it was too late. Closing down all their nuclear plants which were zero CO2 emission. And now instead of restarting nuclear and building more, they are restarting coal. But at least they recognized that they have an immediate crisis that needs to be addressed and took action. Biden is still stuck on doing nothing, claiming our terrible crisis as just an unfortunate event in the process of moving away from fossil fuels and no interest in doing anything. That last part is not quite true. I see he's now going to get the oil industry leaders to DC to ask what's going on, why they can't supply enough gasoline. I've been saying here all along that needed to be done. It took Biden and his team how many months to even come up with that?

While that would help eliminate the ones sitting on the stoop with a can of Colt 45 some of the most destructive people in the world are quite intelligent.

Change that to does create carbon pollution if you look at the US as a whole. Do you know of anyplace where the charging power is only generated from a non-CO2 source? There might be some exceptions, but it's insignificant in the big picture.

Show us where there is any place in the US that relies only on renewables.

Even accounting for these

I'd love to see the numbers and actual analysis to back that up. If it's lower I'll bet it's not lower by much. Electricity has to be generated, sent over long transmission lines to the charger before it gets into the car. Electrics would have the advantage of regenerative braking.

To the extent that more renewable energy sources like

If wishes were fishes.. Despite all the aggressive subsidization, today wind is just 9% and solar only 3%. If you want lots of non-CO2 energy we could have it quickly, just build nuclear power plants. But of course the same bunch that tell us the world is going to end in a couple of decades from climate change, won't allow that.

(In 2020, renewables became the

If that is true, it's only because they included hydro, the vast majority of which has been installed for half a century or more. And there aren't many places left where more can be built, especially given the environmentalists.

I tried it. For NJ:

Hydro 1.2% Wind 1.1% Solar 0.7% Biomass 1.6%

Pretty sad, especially given all the billions poured into solar by the federal govt and the lib NJ state that promoted it and subsidized it over the past two decades.

The one surprise there is biomass is larger than any of the others. We have power generation facility at the local dump, I guess it works. We could still be getting non-CO2 from one of our nukes, 650MW facility, but the environmentalists and libs forced it to shut down. That one nuke probably produced more power than all the above renewables combined.

You have cites for that one?

"Located in Parrish, Florida, this 409-MW by 900-megawatt-hour (MWh) battery storage system is the size of 30 football fields "

Or we could build a nuclear power plant that actually produces 1 GW, available

Around here, the same politicians that are telling us the seas are rising are allowing construction closer to the water.

Would have to give a convoluted answer as it is probably not a case of making more money but making less money in the future if they do not go along.

Politicians. We keep renewing most of them. Biden has been renewed for most of his adult life.

I do not have any proof, but with the government giving all the 'rebates' I bet the car companies jack up the prices on most of them. They should not cost much more than a gas car except for the batteries.

I would likt to see a W2 form or a social security payment for those over 62 to let them vote. Also ID with a picture on it. Just like the requirements for some allegery medicine.

Not only can you adjust the output of a reactor to an extent, but you can also dump power into Hydrogen production, desalination and the like, whenever there is too much capacity.

Charging cars at night, electric central heating, electric hot water cylinders, can all absorb power at night, levelling out demand - France have done that for decades, with their chaufe eau.

He cannot be recycled as he falls off.

and, in the UK, pumped storage. The pumped storage site at Glen Cruachan was built to work with Hunterston.

Yes, but I deliberately excluded pumped storage, because while great for smoothing out sudden loads (half-time in a world-cup match for instance), the capacity is relatively small and there are only a limited number of places where it could be built, without huge social and environmental costs.

Desalination plants could run only at times of low demand and store the water in existing reservoirs, to preserves aquifers (especially in the south), while Hydrogen could be produced at similar times and stored for use in vehicles, home heating, etc. where the alternatives are too costly or too disruptive at the moment.

Well, that would let me out. We're currently getting by on his SSDI payments and our cash savings. At some point I'll file for SSI, and we've got $1 million in our retirement savings, but I'm currently without visible means of support.

Term limits is in the Republican Party platform. How is it going?

Nuclear can be ramped up and down between about 30% and full power at about 15% an hour.

However: i) this isn't fast enough for some peaks, so you still need a bit of hydro in there. ii) it gets less effective the older the fuel is, so the French typically only do it to reasonably recently refuelled reactors. iii) the Natrium project expects to use large quantities of molten salt both as a heat exchanger and as a heat bank, to cover diurnal demand fluctuations. This makes a very flexible reactor that can be to some extent modulated both above and below its nominal output. With a few of these in the grid you wouldn't even need the hydro.

Note renewables can't do any of this. All you can to is switch them off, and since their business model depends on selling everything they can produce, you have to pay them just as much to switch them off. Another reason why renewables are so f****ng expensive and useless.