About that Dakota Access Pipeline

[Kiri]

News tip

In states where the wind doesn't blow all the time to power 100% of the homes the combination of solar/wind to 100% renewables wont work. Dispite what people assume, you cant reasonably transport energy from one half of the country to the other.

But hey, what do I know, I only buy/sell electricity for a living.

Who said 100%? Somehow, people seem to only think of absolutes these days, when it is perfectly possible and viable to simply replace some of the coal and oil with renewables.

[Garnier Fructis]

Would I love a world where power is harnessed by natural resources? You betcha, but it isn't there yet.

Not surprising given that many of the same people supposedly for clean energy keep voting for people who actively try to hamper its spread and development.

It's dem oil companies! They want to take your monies and kill you with dirty water! Or is it the other way around? I forget the order!

Take your money.

You getting fucked over by air and water quality is incidental and they couldn't care less what happens to you.

http://news.energysage.com/what-does...-solar-energy/

You guys yell solar power but you don't understand how they work or how much they put out.
I mean everyone can afford a setup like this and has the real estate space, we all should be driving solar powered cars.

That's a charging station, dude. It even says so in the image link, which you ostensibly had to look at to put the image here.

Studies have shown that buying an electric powered vehicle has a net negative effect on the environment. The manufacturing and powering of the battery leads to more pollution than driving an older car. Experts say that keeping an older car for longer is still the best way to help the environment.

First and foremost, it's a threshold problem: the gradual spread of electric vehicles means that when our power grid and manufacturing gets green enough, so too will electric vehicles. This is basically failure to see that in the long term this is better than suddenly trying to switch out fossil cars in a short period.

Plus, I always find the framing of this fact to be pretty suspect. Why are we comparing the manufacturing of a new electric vehicle with the operation of an old vehicle? How much pollution is caused in the manufacturing of new fossil fueled vehicles? People will buy new cars. If a new electric vehicle takes less pollution to produce than a new non-electric, then that's a plus. Anyone have numbers on this? But either way, the primary reason why this is good is still because of the long game.

Idiotic? Try doing a road trip in a battery powered car. I covered both scenarios, it's not my fault you can't understand the fundamental argument why it's not plausible to go to solar energy charged cars. Taking a basic principle of energy and making it a left vs right issue, brilliant.

Tesla cars can get 200+ miles on a full battery, and they're coming out with models that can get over 300. Add the fact that they're continuously adding to their supercharging station grid. As of right now you'll basically only get stranded in flyover states, and that problem will continue to shrink as they come up with higher range designs and reduce the distance between charging stations.

[Ehrenpanzer]

Yes, trucks/trains would be worse than a pipeline. But again, why should we help Canadian oil companies sell to Asia? What's in it for us?

For one its American oil companies, secondly if they wanted only to sell to Asia, they wouldnt waste money piping it down through the 4th Reich, since they have access to a port city in less a 10th of the pipeline planned. Thirdly, while I do realise most Americans are egotistical dumb asses who are incapable of understanding the rest of the world exists, consider it a favour to keep the wood and other natural resources flowing from the country that still has some

[zenkai]

Not surprising given that many of the same people supposedly for clean energy keep voting for people who actively try to hamper its spread and development.



Take your money.

You getting fucked over by air and water quality is incidental and they couldn't care less what happens to you.



That's a charging station, dude. It even says so in the image link, which you ostensibly had to look at to put the image here.



First and foremost, it's a threshold problem: the gradual spread of electric vehicles means that when our power grid and manufacturing gets green enough, so too will electric vehicles. This is basically failure to see that in the long term this is better than suddenly trying to switch out fossil cars in a short period.

Plus, I always find the framing of this fact to be pretty suspect. Why are we comparing the manufacturing of a new electric vehicle with the operation of an old vehicle? How much pollution is caused in the manufacturing of new fossil fueled vehicles? People will buy new cars. If a new electric vehicle takes less pollution to produce than a new non-electric, then that's a plus. Anyone have numbers on this? But either way, the primary reason why this is good is still because of the long game.



Tesla cars can get 200+ miles on a full battery, and they're coming out with models that can get over 300. Add the fact that they're continuously adding to their supercharging station grid. As of right now you'll basically only get stranded in flyover states, and that problem will continue to shrink as they come up with higher range designs and reduce the distance between charging stations.

Hey kids, we took a short trip out of town, but we need to grab a motel room and stay the night because we went 2 hours out of town and it's going to take 8 hours to charge our car to get back home.

Yeah it's really practical.

[Extremity]

Yeah, because oil-based disasters are unheard of and adding more lines is safe because we've already GOT lines! There's no way a new pipeline could potentially impact drinking water because we've already got a bunch of them that NEVER spill or fail, the track record is IMPECCABLE! The new pipeline will have a lovely system of pipeline-support-group programs and various pipeline-events with all his pipeline friends that will absolutely prevent catastrophe, as we know that keeping pipelines together leads to stronger and happier pipelines. Pipe lives matter. Pipe lines matter? Shit, I'll think of one.

+1 is +1 whether there are 5 or 500 already. I don't understand the logic of "cannot have negative impact because pipelines already exist". Take a look at the list of spills that have already taken place and maybe you'll understand why routing another pipeline through sources of drinking water might not be the smartest thing in the world. It's easy to link a stupid image but ignore the 50 others showing spills.

All of them! Didn't you know it's safer and environmentally more friendly to transfer all that oil by diesel powered tanker trucks.

It's safer and "environmentally more friendly" (what?) to work towards alternative sources of energy rather than continuously rely on one that is a tremendous source of pollution and environmental catastrophes. I don't understand why we can't do both - it doesn't have to be one or the other. Keep using and selling oil for all your shit, that doesn't mean we can't work towards a better energy future in the meantime. These people acting like it's got to be one or the other are fucking dense.

[Gamdwelf]

http://news.energysage.com/what-does...-solar-energy/

You guys yell solar power but you don't understand how they work or how much they put out.
I mean everyone can afford a setup like this and has the real estate space, we all should be driving solar powered cars.

Those are Tesla super chargers which are provided for free to Tesla owners.

[zenkai]

Yeah, because oil-based disasters are unheard of and adding more lines is safe because we've already GOT lines! There's no way a new pipe could potentially impact drinking water because we've already got a bunch of them. The new pipe will have a lovely system of support and pipe-support program from all his new friends that will absolutely prevent catastrophe.

+1 is +1 whether here are 5 or 500 already. I don't understand the logic of "cannot have negative impact because pipelines already exist". Take a look at the list of spills that have take place and maybe you'll understand why routing another pipeline through sources of drinking water might not be the smartest thing in the world. It's easy to link on stupid image but ignore the 50 others showing spills.



It's safer and "environmentally more friendly" (what?) to work towards alternative sources of energy rather than continuously rely on one that is a tremendous source of pollution and environmental catastrophes. I don't understand why we can't do both - it doesn't have to be one or the other. Keep using and selling oil for all your shit, that doesn't mean we can't work towards a better energy future in the meantime. These people acting like it's got to be one or the other are fucking dense.

Dumb argument, of course it's better to look for alternative energy but until it's cheap and practice, people will buy oil and pipeline or no pipeline it will be transferred here, it's just a matter of HOW it gets here. So please for the love of Cthulu can I stop having people stop saying, "but alternative energy" Like not putting in a pipline would make people switch to alternative energy.

[Gamdwelf]

Studies have shown that buying an electric powered vehicle has a net negative effect on the environment. The manufacturing and powering of the battery leads to more pollution than driving an older car. Experts say that keeping an older car for longer is still the best way to help the environment.

Absolutely unfactual.

[Tsar Bomba]

Considering the environmental impact of using massive machines to build a pipeline... Maybe we shouldn't transfer oil at all and look for safe, more natural sources of ener-

Oh what the fuck am I talking about, nobody cares about free solar energy when you can tax an oil pipeline.

Yes, yes. That "free" solar energy that is totally "free" duh.

[zenkai]

Those are Tesla super chargers which are provided for free to Tesla owners.

Yeah Tesla puts in a whole power station for you, solar panels an all! LOL great job following the conversation.


By the way I will sell you my car and I will throw in a free car, you just have to pay twice as much. Also if you buy your jewelry at the mall it's always 50% off, what savings! I usually buy a bunch and sell them to people and make a 100% profit.

[Gamdwelf]

News tip

In states where the wind doesn't blow all the time to power 100% of the homes the combination of solar/wind to 100% renewables wont work. Dispite what people assume, you cant reasonably transport energy from one half of the country to the other.

But hey, what do I know, I only buy/sell electricity for a living.

If only there was a fusion reactor in the sky that could reach all parts of the country.

[Extremity]

Dumb argument, of course it's better to look for alternative energy but until it's cheap and practice, people will buy oil and pipeline or no pipeline it will be transferred here, it's just a matter of HOW it gets here. So please for the love of Cthulu can I stop having people stop saying, "but alternative energy" Like not putting in a pipline would make people switch to alternative energy.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I said "do both", and said, fairly verbatim, "keep using your oil but research alternative energy at the same time". You're taking two different quote-responses and creating your own meaning.

[Gamdwelf]

Yeah Tesla puts in a whole power station for you, solar panels an all! LOL great job following the conversation.


By the way I will sell you my car and I will throw in a free car, you just have to pay twice as much. Also if you buy your jewelry at the mall it's always 50% off, what savings! I usually buy a bunch and sell them to people and make a 100% profit.

Yes they do there is one at a grocery store in my town.

Just try to follow along here.

[zenkai]

Yes they do there is one at a grocery store in my town.

Just try to follow along here.

You didn't follow the conversation because people initially said you could power a car off pure solar energy and I showed them what it took to produce enough energy by solar power to power up a car. So no, you did not follow the conversation.

[Gamdwelf]

You didn't follow the conversation because people initially said you could power a car off pure solar energy and I showed them what it took to produce enough energy by solar power to power up a car. So no, you did not follow the conversation.

You can easily just get a solar roof ezpz

[Captain N]

Yeah Tesla puts in a whole power station for you, solar panels an all! LOL great job following the conversation.


By the way I will sell you my car and I will throw in a free car, you just have to pay twice as much. Also if you buy your jewelry at the mall it's always 50% off, what savings! I usually buy a bunch and sell them to people and make a 100% profit.

A Tesla can be charged off a 240 Volt Outlet -- an outlet most anyone with an electric dryer has (a majority are on an independent circuit as well). Also the battery life on the 100D battery is for 303 miles at 75 mph in 32 degree weather. My Focus gets 350 miles per tank of regular unleaded gas. I get about 5 trips back and forth to work out of the Focus before I have to pay $25 to refill the tank. I'd only get four trips out of the Tesla but I'd never pay for gas again.

Just for measure it's 357 miles from Chicago to Columbus a trip that takes 5 1/2 hours and regardless either vehicle is going to require refueling/charging.
Now I may be inconvenienced a bit because it takes 75 minutes to super charge a Tesla battery from 0-100% where filling my gas tank is only going to take 5 minutes. I guess I'm OK with stopping at a charging place, grabbing a bite to eat, and then getting back on the road.

Here's a map of the charging stations Tesla has around the US:

https://www.tesla.com/supercharger

[Zenfoldor]

As far as the whole "conserve, raise taxes, reduce consumerism" that is just a disguised attempt by certain world power to over-turn capitalism. There are obvious ways to address the problem. Here's what I mean:

Let's say you are getting fat, and the problem is your clothes will no longer fit soon. Okay, so you can:

1. Lose weight(geoengineering)
2. Buy bigger clothes(geoengineering)
3. Gain weight slightly slower and buy yourself time(be carbon conscious and cut emissions)

Now, number 3 is the worst option, because it is unsustainable. That means, eventually you will not be able to fit into the clothes, no matter how slowly you get fatter. Which means that if you do number 3 you will ALSO have to do number 1 or 2 eventually.

Why not skip number 3 and do number 1 or 2 right now? You want to spend money, spend it in the right place: geoengineering.

Edited: You will never be able to keep using energy and cut CO2 to zero. Alternate fuel sources are not an answer to the already too small clothes. Only geoengineering can reverse the fatness to the level that it needs to be. Geo-engineering would be something like deflecting some of the sun's rays strategically to counteract the effect of temperature change on a macro level. You would be surprised how far geoengineering has come, and in fact if we could research some of the unintended consequences with grants, we would be much closer to solving this problem that people on both "sides" of the political debate can't seem to grasp.

[TexasRules]

Free solar energy LOL Go throw a solar panel on your car and see how far you get, meanwhile I love in the real world.

I love in the real world too, especially on Valentine's Day.

[Sky High]

terrible argument, low energy, OP should feel sad. SAD!

[jackofwind]

Yeah Tesla puts in a whole power station for you, solar panels an all! LOL great job following the conversation.


By the way I will sell you my car and I will throw in a free car, you just have to pay twice as much. Also if you buy your jewelry at the mall it's always 50% off, what savings! I usually buy a bunch and sell them to people and make a 100% profit.

My condo has 5 electric charging stations in the UG parking lot, and every personal stall has an electrical stubout for future ones.

We have electric charging stations at all the malls in town, and every new development that goes in has to provide a minimum of 2 stations. It's not always as inconvenient as you're saying it is, depending on where you live.

Regardless, I drive an '81 280ZX running a twin turbo straight 6 so I'm not exactly married into the whole not-buying-gas thing.