|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy |
jpak (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 01:34 PM Original message |
Today’s Clean Tech Could Power the World by 2050 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yurbud (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 01:36 PM Response to Original message |
1. what's wrong with algae based biofuels? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCKit (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 02:40 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. It's coming along. Solar wasn't competetive five years ago, either. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 02:48 PM Response to Original message |
3. Moving the goalposts? Last time is was 2030. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jpak (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 05:45 PM Response to Reply #3 |
6. Different studies, different dates - same conclusion |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FBaggins (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 08:52 PM Response to Reply #6 |
7. Same conclusion? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NNadir (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 10:14 PM Response to Reply #7 |
9. Um, yeah. They're very familiar with numbers in the soothsaying squad. 2050 is the same as 2030 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 12:04 AM Response to Reply #6 |
11. While they are different studies they do use the same material. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogmudgeon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 05:18 PM Response to Original message |
4. This looks like the $100 Trillion plan |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kristopher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 05:39 PM Response to Original message |
5. This validates yet again the claim that "nuclear is a must have" is false |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FBaggins (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 08:54 PM Response to Reply #5 |
8. Repeating a falsehood isn't the same thing as "validating" it. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NNadir (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-02-11 10:27 PM Response to Reply #5 |
10. No, this demonstrates that anti-nukes can't make a statement without soothsaying. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madokie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 09:51 AM Response to Reply #10 |
15. In 1980 we had a plan but your man raygun got in the way of that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 12:05 AM Response to Reply #5 |
12. It is never a technical one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FBaggins (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 12:18 AM Response to Original message |
13. "It’s just a different way of thinking of the system.” |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nihil (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-03-11 05:32 AM Response to Original message |
14. Ah ... the power of "could" ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Confusious (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Feb-04-11 03:59 AM Response to Original message |
16. But.... but... here he said by 2030... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Feb-04-11 05:25 PM Response to Original message |
17. "We suggest ... all new energy with WWS by 2030 and replacing the pre-existing energy by 2050." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Feb-04-11 05:25 PM Response to Original message |
18. In other words, "we suggest 20 years of NO CO2 ABATEMENT." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Feb-05-11 07:07 PM Response to Reply #18 |
19. Am I the only one bothered by this? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nihil (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Feb-07-11 07:43 AM Response to Reply #19 |
20. No, it's not just you ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kristopher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Feb-07-11 08:46 AM Response to Original message |
21. Greenpeace agrees... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 25th 2024, 07:34 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC