• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

What will it take to convince you of climate change?

It boggles my mind that people could believe there is more money in selling lightbulbs and solar panels than there is in continuing to feed a massive, worldwide infrastructure with fossil fuel.
 
Schnellbandit said:
Speaking of renewables, just what is going to happen to all those lithium batteries and that giga-mess factory when the industry moves away from using them, as it most likely will within the next 5-10 years?

And those renewable energy solar panels you bought and threw up on your roof? PG&E is laughing all the way to the bank as they move to time of use billing. Now, you rates for electric will go up just when your nice panels aren't harvesting anything. Then, since the rates will be lower during sunlight hours, you'll benefit even less when they do harvest.

That was all planned out decades ago.

Attend some utility planning meetings and see what goes on. They pushed CFLs just before LEDs became the rage, to save the planet. Now they push LEDs to save the planet. Next, micro-laser pulsed lights...see the pattern? And none of that stuff is renewable or recyclable nor do they last anywhere near as long as claimed.

Climate change happens, yes, we contribute to it. Mass extinctions have happened before, climate change isn't what will do us in, unless there is no money in it.
Click to expand...

Batteries are usually recycled.

You can still opt out of your smart meter.

The pattern is to adopt technology to minimize waste.
 
Schnellbandit said:
Speaking of renewables, just what is going to happen to all those lithium batteries and that giga-mess factory when the industry moves away from using them, as it most likely will within the next 5-10 years?

And those renewable energy solar panels you bought and threw up on your roof? PG&E is laughing all the way to the bank as they move to time of use billing. Now, you rates for electric will go up just when your nice panels aren't harvesting anything. Then, since the rates will be lower during sunlight hours, you'll benefit even less when they do harvest.

I use solar panels in an off grid design.

That was all planned out decades ago.

Attend some utility planning meetings and see what goes on. They pushed CFLs just before LEDs became the rage, to save the planet. Now they push LEDs to save the planet. Next, micro-laser pulsed lights...see the pattern? And none of that stuff is renewable or recyclable nor do they last anywhere near as long as claimed.

Climate change happens, yes, we contribute to it. Mass extinctions have happened before, climate change isn't what will do us in, unless there is no money in it.
Click to expand...

EHWOT? Peak hours for PG&E are during the daytime. Sure, you don't need the lights on during the day, but thats a fart in a curry house compared to the power used in industry, which happens during the day.
 
byke said:
Batteries are usually recycled.

You can still opt out of your smart meter.

The pattern is to adopt technology to minimize waste.
Click to expand...

It seems the solution for the timed billing scam is to buy even more batteries. :laughing You can store the days electrical intake and use it at night when the fee is higher.
 
Last edited:
That's the way any off grid system is setup, but at night is when the fees should be lower. What I can't seem to find from PGE is how the rate is affected with an analog meter, since I assume they can't see time-of-day usage.
 
TylerW said:
EHWOT? Peak hours for PG&E are during the daytime. Sure, you don't need the lights on during the day, but thats a fart in a curry house compared to the power used in industry, which happens during the day.
Click to expand...

If it wasn't going to raise the rates during evening hours, do you actually believe PG&E would do this?

You do know that electricity rates are different for industry and residential customers right? The time of use will use day time residential use compared to evening residential use, did you miss the meetings?

Why do you think PG&E enjoyed net metering caps? Now, it must be pure coincidence that with net metering 2.0 that time of use suddenly appears.

In 2019, if you use PG&E you will be on time of use billing, period.

Better start paying attention to how this is all be orchestrated. PG&E is not your friend and they aren't chasing efficiency to help you the customer, they are doing it to pay their shareholders, you know that PG&E while regulated, has its market made by the state but has shareholders collecting dividends yeah?

The long term goals of PG&E are to get time of use down to regional and eventually municipal levels so that you won't pay the sames rates people only miles away pay.

Industry subsidizes residential rates and time of use allows that to be changed. Right now they'll tell you, as you're telling us, that prine time is daytime except you forget one thing, when residential rates are delinked from industrial rate subsidies your rates at prime time will be the evening, not day time.

As for charging batteries and using that energy at night, all well and fine if you have enough capacity, not just in batteries but in solar capacity to both run your house and charge the batteries. Start adding up the cost for batteries and do some figuring and you'll see the catch-22/for the average home owner with solar. Very few have batteries now so what do you think happens when the demand for them goes way up because of the changes?

No matter, mark this post and later when it happens, check back and see what came about, lower rates with time of use or higher rates and a scramble for batteries most people are unable to maintain, have no experience using within a hybrid grid tied sysyem and the host of new costs associated with those systems.

Off grid- great. Hybrid grid tied battery systems? Just another way to get into your pockets.
 
Cool I see "we all doomed it doesn't matter" approach didn't work so "let's change the subject to pge" approach is being used.
 
CoorsLight said:
It boggles my mind that people could believe there is more money in selling lightbulbs and solar panels than there is in continuing to feed a massive, worldwide infrastructure with fossil fuel.
Click to expand...
Why should it?

Don't forget how many people bought into Trump MAGA....
 
UDRider said:
Cool I see "we all doomed it doesn't matter" approach didn't work so "let's change the subject to pge" approach is being used.
Click to expand...

Threadshitting. It's how it works. Shit on the thread until everyone else gives up.

Victory!!!!
 
I provided relevant links on the subject matter of this thread. Which is more then I can say for you.
 
Last edited:
Schnellbandit said:
^ 95% of the posts are nothing but complaining about other posts. At least vary the subject.
Click to expand...

this post offends me and I feel triggered, I demand a barf safe space

4333fcdd9b6871e80baec14840b8374f.gif
 
Well, it seems all the people on some atoll got convinced of climate change and that their tiny little spots of land were sinking as a result of rising sea levels. Then their place on the planet got used and the story sold to a lot of people who believed it all.

Woops, then comes along the little tidit here:

https://i.stuff.co.nz/world/south-p...tuvalu-has-grown-by-73-hectares-over-40-years

And what do you know, they are gaining land. Want to bet no one brings up those islands anymore when it comes to rising sea levels caused by climate change?

Climate change happens but all the time we find out the big stories and examples just don't add up to what is being sold.

For those not averse to other sources (even though breitbart is as questionble a source as cnn).

https://news.google.com/news/amp?ca...and-actually-getting-bigger-shock/#pt0-794133
 
Last edited:
Schnellbandit said:
Well, it seems all the people on some atoll got convinced of climate change and that their tiny little spots of land were sinking as a result of rising sea levels. Then their place on the planet got used and the story sold to a lot of people who believed it all.

Woops, then comes along the little tidit here:

https://i.stuff.co.nz/world/south-p...tuvalu-has-grown-by-73-hectares-over-40-years

And what do you know, they are gaining land. Want to bet no one brings up those islands anymore when it comes to rising sea levels caused by climate change?

Climate change happens but all the time we find out the big stories and examples just don't add up to what is being sold.

For those not averse to other sources (even though breitbart is as questionble a source as cnn).

https://news.google.com/news/amp?ca...and-actually-getting-bigger-shock/#pt0-794133
Click to expand...

So intentionally or out of ignorance miss represented the article, made false equivalency between propaganda website and news Network. What will Kellyanne Conway of barf post next. Stay tuned!
 
And from another source because https://m.phys.org/news/2018-02-pacific-nation-bigger.html

Yeah, the University of Aukland is one of those suspected fake news sources too. :rofl

"
It found eight of the atolls and almost three-quarters of the islands grew during the study period, lifting Tuvalu's total land area by 2.9 percent, even though sea levels in the country rose at twice the global average.

Co-author Paul Kench said the research, published Friday in the journal Nature Communications, challenged the assumption that low-lying island nations would be swamped as the sea rose.

"We tend to think of Pacific atolls as static landforms that will simply be inundated as sea levels rise, but there is growing evidence these islands are geologically dynamic and are constantly changing," he said.""

The study collected data from 1971 - 2014. When were some of the claims about the islands being the posters child of rising sea levels made? If only rush to judgement types had waited just a year or two before the fear mongering started

But in haste to snipe about the content and post, no further thought was given to anything else. :rolleyes

Part of the point? When it comes to convincing people about climate change, throwing up rising sea levels and then using islands that are actually increasing in land mass probably isn't the best way to go. The data was there had they bothered to look. But lets not let false equivalencies get in the way.
 
Last edited:
The land mass is increasing due to increased sediment deposit, and highlights the fact that island mass is a dynamic mechanism, but let's not facts get in a way of yet another SQUIRREL moment from you.
 
Schnellbandit said:
And from another source because https://m.phys.org/news/2018-02-pacific-nation-bigger.html

Yeah, the University of Aukland is one of those suspected fake news sources too. :rofl

"
It found eight of the atolls and almost three-quarters of the islands grew during the study period, lifting Tuvalu's total land area by 2.9 percent, even though sea levels in the country rose at twice the global average.

Co-author Paul Kench said the research, published Friday in the journal Nature Communications, challenged the assumption that low-lying island nations would be swamped as the sea rose.

"We tend to think of Pacific atolls as static landforms that will simply be inundated as sea levels rise, but there is growing evidence these islands are geologically dynamic and are constantly changing," he said.""

The study collected data from 1971 - 2014. When were some of the claims about the islands being the posters child of rising sea levels made? If only rush to judgement types had waited just a year or two before the fear mongering started

But in haste to snipe about the content and post, no further thought was given to anything else. :rolleyes

Part of the point? When it comes to convincing people about climate change, throwing up rising sea levels and then using islands that are actually increasing in land mass probably isn't the best way to go. The data was there had they bothered to look. But lets not let false equivalencies get in the way.
Click to expand...

Doesn't this just defuse your entire argument?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top