Interesting how the complaining starts when the attack dogs that were great tools when used on undesirable infrastructure and energy projects are now coming back to bite in the **** Are we beginning to sense a theme yet?
I made a similar complaint on Part 1 of this series. The concessions GIVEN to renwables are a travesty. Ms Chiappa and Mccarthy need to realize once and for all that green energy is far from being green.
Hmmmm... spurious lawsuits not based on good science to whose sole purpose delay, and drive up costs, making the projects uneconomic. Are you sure it's not a nuclear plant? Because that sure sounds familiar.
how about wind power is not dispatchable and therefore contributes nothing to decarbonization which is a pointless exercise as co2 is not a climate driver and should be about 900 ppm for a better planet.
To Ms. Chiappa and MacCarthy -- whether or not the aim is to drive up the cost of the product from Wind Turbines -- as Mr. Inks writes - is not really germane to the discussion.
What is germane: -- is that:
--- all of these new "power sources" (wind / sola / "whatever" / being built - with the existing power grids not having the capacity to "add-on any more" without increasing capacity:
--- with the cost of billions of dollars spent to construct them showing up in the monthly bills to be consumer "when - if / when the new sites get connected:
--- are not needed - because of the following:
Last March - EC President Ursula Von der Leyen requested that the US invented / US developed and tested / US Patented / solid-state / small / lightweight / inexpensive to produce / modular / Nikola Tesla based POD MOD technology be brought to Europe for funding - which is now underway - for:
--- manufacturing and installation throughout Europe - but also for:
--- export to other countries - as a long-term leased / universal set rate (with no increases):
--- of $0.10 "...per hour..." - $72 per 30 day month per POD MOD unit - per 23.4 kW unit:
--- "emergency power source": -- which is totally legal / without restriction --to have installed in any US home / commercial / industrial / and vehicle:
--- supplying all the clean electricity needed per site.
And there is no external infrastructure - or power grid connection infrastructure - to pay for.
All of the billions of dollars presently being spent -- will have been for nothing --because there is no law that states that a power-utility connected site - "...has to only use..." the power made available by that connected power utility.
In fortunately -- all US Government Agencies and US Commercial companies contacted during the 60+ year development of the technology -- refused both funding and / or technical aid.
Also -- all forms of the media - when contacted -- refused to make available any information about the technology and it's availability.
Ah, yes. Lawyers at their best. The lawyers on both sides in a legal dispute make big bucks. And they keep making them for as long as the dispute wears on. So, where is the incentive to settle?
Interesting how the complaining starts when the attack dogs that were great tools when used on undesirable infrastructure and energy projects are now coming back to bite in the **** Are we beginning to sense a theme yet?
I made a similar complaint on Part 1 of this series. The concessions GIVEN to renwables are a travesty. Ms Chiappa and Mccarthy need to realize once and for all that green energy is far from being green.
Hmmmm... spurious lawsuits not based on good science to whose sole purpose delay, and drive up costs, making the projects uneconomic. Are you sure it's not a nuclear plant? Because that sure sounds familiar.
how about wind power is not dispatchable and therefore contributes nothing to decarbonization which is a pointless exercise as co2 is not a climate driver and should be about 900 ppm for a better planet.
To Ms. Chiappa and MacCarthy -- whether or not the aim is to drive up the cost of the product from Wind Turbines -- as Mr. Inks writes - is not really germane to the discussion.
What is germane: -- is that:
--- all of these new "power sources" (wind / sola / "whatever" / being built - with the existing power grids not having the capacity to "add-on any more" without increasing capacity:
--- with the cost of billions of dollars spent to construct them showing up in the monthly bills to be consumer "when - if / when the new sites get connected:
--- are not needed - because of the following:
Last March - EC President Ursula Von der Leyen requested that the US invented / US developed and tested / US Patented / solid-state / small / lightweight / inexpensive to produce / modular / Nikola Tesla based POD MOD technology be brought to Europe for funding - which is now underway - for:
--- manufacturing and installation throughout Europe - but also for:
--- export to other countries - as a long-term leased / universal set rate (with no increases):
--- of $0.10 "...per hour..." - $72 per 30 day month per POD MOD unit - per 23.4 kW unit:
--- "emergency power source": -- which is totally legal / without restriction --to have installed in any US home / commercial / industrial / and vehicle:
--- supplying all the clean electricity needed per site.
And there is no external infrastructure - or power grid connection infrastructure - to pay for.
All of the billions of dollars presently being spent -- will have been for nothing --because there is no law that states that a power-utility connected site - "...has to only use..." the power made available by that connected power utility.
In fortunately -- all US Government Agencies and US Commercial companies contacted during the 60+ year development of the technology -- refused both funding and / or technical aid.
Also -- all forms of the media - when contacted -- refused to make available any information about the technology and it's availability.
So -be - it.
Ah, yes. Lawyers at their best. The lawyers on both sides in a legal dispute make big bucks. And they keep making them for as long as the dispute wears on. So, where is the incentive to settle?