Solar Overtakes Gas, Wind as Source of New US Power

139 Comments on "Solar Overtakes Gas, Wind as Source of New US Power"

Makati1 on Sun, 17th Jun 2018 8:00 pm 



Another delusional author, who’s unicorn dreams are only exceeded by the author of this dream of a BAU future.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-16/18-best-skills-gig-economy-and-financially-freedom

I thought it would talk about real skills need for the future, like growing food, first aid, carpentry, etc. Nope! All internet tech stuff that will disappear when the SHTF. bUt then, it IS from Bloomberg…lol

Davy on Sun, 17th Jun 2018 8:08 pm 



“Another delusional author, who’s unicorn dreams are only exceeded by the author of this dream of a BAU future.”
3rd world, the author is just starting a simple fact and you twist it into an agenda point that has nothing to do with the article.

“bUt then, it IS from Bloomberg…lol”
Of course you feel that way 3rd world, you and grehggie are financial illiterates. Bloomberg intimidates people like you guys.

JuanP on Sun, 17th Jun 2018 8:29 pm 



Delusional Davy “Of course you feel that way 3rd world, you and grehggie are financial illiterates. Bloomberg intimidates people like you guys.”

More preK bullying from the board’s lunatic. Bloomberg is mostly full of shit and Davy knows it, but he’d rather pick on Mak than say the truth. You are a liar and a bully, exceptionalist!

Davy on Sun, 17th Jun 2018 8:33 pm 



juan, you are finance illiterate too so I would expect that from you. You and 3rd world are school dropouts and it shows in regards to these subjects.

JuanP on Sun, 17th Jun 2018 8:45 pm 



Delusional Davy “iterate too so I would expect that from you. You and 3rd world are school dropouts and it shows in regards to these subjects.”

More lies from a compulsive liar!

Davy on Sun, 17th Jun 2018 8:47 pm 



juan, you are a school drop out you have said that here and 3rd world has said the same. Neither of you got through college. I imagine you didn’t even try being a stupid spoiled rich kid on daddies dime.

Kenz300 on Sun, 17th Jun 2018 9:44 pm 



Solar for the WIN !

rockman on Sun, 17th Jun 2018 10:19 pm 



Great: more solar added that Q then from other sources. Which pushed solar up to 1.3% of US electricity production. Compared to 6.3% from wind, 20%% from nukes and 63% from fossil fuels. The solar folks have to avoid looking at he absolute numbers to generate any false optimism they can.

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3

Simon on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 2:24 am 



Don’t really want to rain on anyones parade but Bloomberg is a trusted source for energy traders.

Cloggie on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 4:07 am 



I don’t doubt the Bloomberg data either.

“The solar folks have to avoid looking at he absolute numbers to generate any false optimism they can.”

What is your point, rockman. Nobody denies that the transition will take sever decades. Germany installed 1.75 GW solar in 2017. Germany has mediocre solar condations, yet is now at 36% renewable electricity. That is significant. It is a matter of choice.

Davy on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 5:05 am 



“Don’t really want to rain on anyones parade but Bloomberg is a trusted source for energy traders.”

Thanks Simon, you are a trust source here. Bloomberg has a lot of slants I don’t like but is worth following. It is a source that reflects white privileged American especially the liberal America of the privileged in general and I have a big problem with this class. I have always had a problem with conservatives. It is a good economic source and that is mostly why I go there not the politics or other off topic issues. I visit both liberal and conservative sites to see where they are at. I subscribe to neither despite what my detractors like to paint. There are many here who insist on categorizing and position taking. I am here to attack lies on both sides. I am a loner not a groupie.

Davy on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 5:18 am 



“yet is now at 36% renewable electricity. That is significant. It is a matter of choice.”

What percent is solar and wind? That is where the real growth needs to be. It is at 22% or so percent now. https://tinyurl.com/y9npysaj. When this intermittent source hits another 10% market penetration then we will likely see significant resistance. Couple this with a potential economic downturn and the much talked about transition goes out further.

I am very impressed with all the renewable talk. I hope they prove me wrong just like I was wrong on shale but currently I have many questions that are unanswered. I can’t stand chauvinistic cheerleading especially when it is used to beat down my country and that is what we get from some of our European clients here.

Anonymouse1 on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 5:52 am 



You are a source too expcetionalturd. A source of constant, and consistent nuttery. But, that is about the extent of it.

Davy on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 6:01 am 



weasel, I can’t remember the last time you said something intelligent that advanced knowledge here so in this regards you are noise. You stalk and prick and that is mostly it. It is not hard to do empty attacks. Pretty lame really. You are a millennial waste case whiner. You are an example of the worst of the youth of Canada and why it is going down the drain. The youth in the US are no better but it is you Canadians that are anti-American and act like you are better proving you are actually worse because you have this inflated self-perception that is false.

JuanP on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 6:10 am 



Delusional Davy ” I am a loner not a groupie.”

Did you mean to say you are alone. I will clarify my position on Bloomberg. By the way, I did not dispute that Bloomberg is a source of good financial data sometimes and their articles are biased like all Western MSM propaganda outlets. When they print DATA they are OK, but when they express opinions they are full of shit.

JuanP on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 6:17 am 



Delusional Davy “You are a millennial waste case whiner. You are an example of the worst of the youth of Canada and why it is going down the drain. The youth in the US are no better but it is you Canadians that are anti-American and act like you are better proving you are actually worse because you have this inflated self-perception that is false.

How can one side be no better if the other is actually worse? You do realize that you are trying so hard to deny the truth that you express opposite thoughts and contradict yourself in one sentence. It has to be one or the other. Which is it? Are american youth better than Canadian youth or not, Davy? Can you provide a straightdorward answer in plain English?

Davy on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 6:23 am 



“Did you mean to say you are alone. I will clarify my position on Bloomberg. “
No, I have family and friends. I have my farm and animals. On this board I walk my own path and avoid group think agendas that you groupies indulge in.

“By the way, I did not dispute that Bloomberg is a source of good financial data sometimes and their articles are biased like all Western MSM propaganda outlets.”
Ah, BTW, that is what I said. All MSM include your Russian variety are propaganda outlets. Propaganda is the name of the game today everywhere and it is those who think theirs aren’t that are deceived.

“When they print DATA they are OK, but when they express opinions they are full of shit.”
Ah, sometimes and our job is to wade through the shit to find nuggets of truth.

baha on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 6:25 am 



I told you we were keeping busy 🙂

Davy on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 6:26 am 



“How can one side be no better if the other is actually worse?”
Quit playing your stupid games this is just conversation with among pricks. You and I being the pricks currently. Why not contribute some knowledge?

deadly on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 9:06 am 



Solar panels provide the power for the Space Station. There is plenty of sunshine 200 miles from the earth’s surface, beyond the atmosphere, all sunshine, except when you are on the night side of the earth for about forty minutes, maybe. Onboard batteries are then charged by the solar panels on the Space Station.

Can’t really burn diesel fuel up there and it would be a tough job to get it there once a month or so, you would need compressed air to burn the diesel fuel generator on the Space Station. Absurd, crazy talk.

Fossil fuels are out of the question up there in space, space is the place, you know. That’s what they say about the Space Needle, ‘the needle is goddess, space is the place’ reads the graffiti.

Solar panels on the Space Station is a necessity. It’ll be bleak up there with no power.

Solar panels come in handy to power lights and store energy in the form of electricity in batteries. Solar panels are used to charge batteries to power electric fences.

Lots of applications for solar panels. The charged batteries can pack a punch enough to start a combine.

rockman on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 12:34 pm 



Cloged – “What is your point, rockman.” My point is as obvious as the data I provided. Solar is an insignificant source of electricity today as it has been since renewable sources began hitting the market place. And there’s no trend data that doesn’t PROVE it won’t continue being an INSIGNIFICANT portion of the mix.

IMHO folk should a least wait until solar contributes as much as wind before puffing out their chests. Currently wind produces almost 5X as much and nuclear 15X as much electricity as solar. And don’t even mention the 50X as much produced from fossil fuels.

Do you get the point now? LOL.

Sissyfuss on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 1:15 pm 



Great Rocker, you just started an international war with the Netherlands. And don’t blame Cloggensogger. He doesn’t know Texas is a separate country from the US.

JuanP on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 1:22 pm 



Delusional Davy “No, I have family and friends. I have my farm and animals.”

We all know your family doesn’t live with you and your kids don’t even call you on Father’s Day. And, yes, we all know you “have” your animals. Or do they “have” you? LOL

Cloggie on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 2:18 pm 



“What is your point, rockman.” My point is as obvious as the data I provided. Solar is an insignificant source of electricity today as it has been since renewable sources began hitting the market place. And there’s no trend data that doesn’t PROVE it won’t continue being an INSIGNIFICANT portion of the mix.

You argument is not very convincing and is based on the false assumption to take the situation in the US as the measure of all things. Perhaps I can invite to have a glance on this graph of the German energy mix this week:

https://www.energy-charts.de/power_de.htm

These yellowish areas are anything but insignificant.

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-that-use-the-most-solar-power.html

Global solar pecking order in absolute terms:

1. Germany…32 GW…7%
2. Italy…..16 GW…8%
3. China……8 GW…1%
4. USA……..7 GW…1%
5. Japan……7 GW…5%
6. Spain……5 GW…4%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_by_country

The US has an economy (and population base) 4 times times that of Germany and yet 4.5 times less solar power. That is a factor of 18. And mind you, the US has many more hours sunshine than Germany.

Could it be that Germany is economically suffering under the weight of its environmental hobbies? Not really. Germany is the largest exporter in the world, even before China and the US the largest importer. So you can’t use “the economy” as an argument against renewable energy.

On top of that, the price of solar panels is expected to drop another 35% over the coming few years, certainly now that China is mysteriously hitting the breaks on rolling out renewable energy installations, offering Europe to by up Chinese solar panels at predatory prices.

I hope you get my point now.

Antius on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 5:21 pm 



“So you can’t use “the economy” as an argument against renewable energy.”

Germany is the high tech manufacturing nexus of the western world. This was the case long before it’s leaders started on their idealistic quest to power their country using ambient energy – a quest that for all their mastery of technology, remains elusive. The strength of their economy rests upon long established companies and infrastructure, with about a century of technical knowledge and patents that the rest of the world cannot easily emulate. The Euro also allows Germany to export at the expense of their neighbours. Ask the Greeks, Spanish and Italians how well that has worked out for them. With advantages like these, the German economy is able to carry the burdens inflicted by expensive idealistic projects.

And expensive they are. Below is a link to a study carried out by Jean-Marc Jancovici for a 100% French renewable electricity system. He compares the cost of a 100% renewable electricity system based on solar or wind, with the cost of a new generation of pressurised water reactors. His conclusion? The full infrastructure needed for a 100% renewable system, including converters, transmission and storage; will cost 6.2-21.5 times as much as the same capacity provided by new generation nuclear power plants. The lower limit assumes an energy system dominated by onshore wind, which is unlikely to be possible even in France, due to the sheer quantity of power that is needed.

https://jancovici.com/en/energy-transition/renewables/100-renewable-electricity-at-no-extra-cost-a-piece-of-cake/

This of course is not the end of the story, as it does not account for the investment required to cover other energy uses like heating and transportation.

The conclusion is undeniable: It will be very difficult and expensive to power a modern industrial economy using ambient energy alone. I do not say that it cannot be done. But the level of resources that it requires makes it an inevitably poorer existence for most of humanity. It will be interesting to see how much longer the Germans can carry the heavy idealistic burden that their ‘Green’ movement have saddled them with. How much stupidity does it take to crush a world beating manufacturing economy?

Antius on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 5:43 pm 



“On top of that, the price of solar panels is expected to drop another 35% over the coming few years, certainly now that China is mysteriously hitting the breaks on rolling out renewable energy installations, offering Europe to by up Chinese solar panels at predatory prices.”

Will that be before or after the companies making those panels go out of business? Only a fool would view the collapse of the Chinese solar industry as good news for the long-term future of renewable energy in Europe or anywhere else.

It isn’t so mysterious really is it. A 500MW gas turbine power plant generates all the electric power needed for city of a million people. It does it cheaply too. A solar plant of the same capacity, will save between 10-20% of the fuel burned at the gas turbine plant, assuming you already have the gas turbine plant and invest extra for the solar plant along with the extra transmission capacity to bring the power to market. The Chinese have decided that there are more economically practical approaches to reducing pollution. With peak coal and oil imminent, they can no longer afford to keep flogging a dead horse.

Davy on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 5:45 pm 



Great comment Antius and one we have gone over before. There is surely a mix that leverages potential energy sources with a higher energy return. We need renewables but the idea of 100% renewables appears to be a stech.

MASTERMIND on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 5:52 pm 



Davy

We have spent over 2.4 Trillion dollars on renewables such as solar and wind..And last year they produced less than 2 percent total world energy according to BP..That is the worst investment in the history of mankind..I am sure the big tech industry and China appreciates this madness..

MASTERMIND on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 6:03 pm 



Paul Tudor Jones: “The Next Recession Will Be Frightening”

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/goldman-sachs-ceo-lloyd-blankfein-142726234.html

Davy on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 6:08 pm 



Yea, mm, but that is a deceptive number. Try looking regionally and with electricity then get back to me. Renewables have a place above 20% that is for sure how far they can penetrate the electrical market affordably is debatable and a moving target. They are an extender and as such we need more of them.

Davy on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 6:12 pm 



Panels are the lowest part of the total cost so a drop of 35% is another deceptive number.

MASTERMIND on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 6:23 pm 



Davy

Renewable s are not renewable..They are derivatives.. And they are a mass delusion to convince the sheep that “There working on it” and “Everything is okay”..

Anonymouse1 on Mon, 18th Jun 2018 7:20 pm 



You can stop having these conversations with your sock any time now, expcetionalturd. Everyone knows, or if they dont, they should, that ‘mushmind’ is as phony as you are.

Cloggie on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 3:36 am 



The largest vessels in the world, the ones used to transport giant oil platforms to their location, are now being used in the construction of offshore wind parks:

https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2018/06/19/dockwise-used-to-transport-entire-windfarm-from-gulf/

Cloggie on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 4:17 am 



His conclusion? The full infrastructure needed for a 100% renewable system, including converters, transmission and storage; will cost 6.2-21.5 times as much as the same capacity provided by new generation nuclear power plants.

Where does he base his conclusions on? These figures are absurd.

France has 70% nuclear
Denmark has 44% wind

Are you suggesting that the Danes are in reality paying anywhere near 6-21 times as much on electricity as the French? They don’t.

Here is a real study by the Fraunhofer Institute calculating that a 90% renewable energy system will roughly operate at the same cost as the current fossil fuel based system today:

https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/09/16/blueprint-100-renewable-energy-base-for-germany/

Upshot: the “fuel” wind and solar come for free and are inexhaustible, but are offset against extra cost for storage.

Look, I am perfectly willing to assume that advanced countries like France or the UK can run an energy system based on nuclear (the French already do), but the third world not so much. For the latter it can’t be anything else but solar and wind. And then there is the aspect of uranium running out fast (14 years for a world running for 100% on nuclear), which will require a global network of fast breeders and a planet stuffed with plutonium, enabling proliferation of nuclear weapons, an absolute nightmare. I don’t even have to look at the cost aspect to reject that kind of future, just like the rest of the EU does.

The way forward is aiming at 90-100% renewable energy by 2050 at the latest, anticipating further price reductions in both solar and offshore wind through economy of scale, radical energy conservation and demand destruction (publicly owned fleet of autonomous driving cars!) and concentration of development efforts on storage techniques. And geothermal + heat pumps and radical insulation for space heating.

As an example: Holland.

Max electricity consumption 2010 (120 units). In 1980 it was half of that (60 units). When I was born in the fifties, it was merely 10 units. My mother described the fifties as the happiest time of her life, when I was still a baby.lol

https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/01/07/dutch-post-war-electricity-production/

In the fifties nobody had a car, television, fridges, washing machines, just light bulbs and a radio and that was it. Life was organized, nobody suffered from hunger or was being homeless. Wages were paid in cash. Males worked until 65 (incl Saturday) and died at 68.

That is what I mean when I say that if the EU succeeds in 32% renewable primary energy by 2030, as announced earlier this month, nobody is going to die if out of the blue 68% fossil/nuclear would stop to contribute (which is not going to happen). It would still be 3 times more than in the fifties. And if we have 32% in 2030, there is absolutely no reason to assume we will not achieve 50-100% by 2050.

Davy on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 5:32 am 



“Where does he base his conclusions on? These figures are absurd. France has 70% nuclear
Denmark has 44% wind.”
Neder Denmark’s population is 6MIL so it does not fit into that conclusion like you are attempting to do. Take Northern Europe as a whole to get proper scale.

“Are you suggesting that the Danes are in reality paying anywhere near 6-21 times as much on electricity as the French? They don’t.”
They don’t because they are part of greater Northern Europe. If they were a standalone country with no connections to the outside then do the numbers with FF backups and storage costs.

Here is a real study by the Fraunhofer Institute calculating that a 90% renewable energy system will roughly operate at the same cost as the current fossil fuel based system today:
Flawed study for political consumption.

“Upshot: the “fuel” wind and solar come for free and are inexhaustible, but are offset against extra cost for storage.”
The sources are free the gathering systems are not. They must be bought, paid for, then depreciated.

“Look, I am perfectly willing to assume that advanced countries like France or the UK can run an energy system based on nuclear (the French already do), but the third world not so much. For the latter it can’t be anything else but solar and wind. “
France does not run on NUK give us their primary power numbers. The latter can likely never become rich enough to afford to be 100% renewable.

“The way forward is aiming at 90-100% renewable energy by 2050 at the latest, anticipating further price reductions in both solar and offshore wind through economy of scale, radical energy conservation and demand destruction (publicly owned fleet of autonomous driving cars!) and concentration of development efforts on storage techniques. And geothermal + heat pumps and radical insulation for space heating.”
Aiming for 90% renewables by 2050 is absurd considering how much is needed. We should also realize where FF will be because of depletion by then. FF build renewables and there is no experience otherwise. Further price reductions are hitting diminishing returns and economic dislocations. China is dumping solar below cost. Autonomous cars are a hoax and a way for techies and cornucopians to dream up new markets. Storage technics are great but there costs are not realistic for what is needed. What is radical insulation? Come on radical likely is way too expensive. Geothermal and heat pumps are not new and suffer their own issues.

“In the fifties nobody had a car, television, fridges, washing machines, just light bulbs and a radio and that was it. Life was organized, nobody suffered from hunger or was being homeless. Wages were paid in cash. Males worked until 65 (incl Saturday) and died at 68.”
We also had less than half the population of today and we were much less affluent but with significant more virgin resources. Your comparison does not work smoothly.

“That is what I mean when I say that if the EU succeeds in 32% renewable primary energy by 2030, as announced earlier this month, nobody is going to die if out of the blue 68% fossil/nuclear would stop to contribute (which is not going to happen). “
NONSENSE, if 68% of fossil/fuels stopped people would starve.

“It would still be 3 times more than in the fifties. And if we have 32% in 2030, there is absolutely no reason to assume we will not achieve 50-100% by 2050.”
Absurd comparison and the reason why you are in a fantasy world

Davy on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 5:41 am 



“Hopeless” European Millennials And The Populist Takeover”
https://tinyurl.com/yaa2qfmu

“Europe is frequently held up as an example of how the rest of the world should behave on a variety of issues. But this comparison misses at least two things: First, “Europe” is actually a lot of different countries in a lot of different situations. Second, much of what seems to work over there only does so because it’s being financed with ever-increasing amounts of debt. For countries, as for individuals, borrowing money is fun at first but beyond a certain point becomes debilitating, as interest payments begin to crowd out everything else. That’s where a growing number of Europe’s failed states now find themselves, with overly-generous pensions and overly-restrictive labor laws making it virtually impossible to run a functioning market-based economy.”

“As Today’s Wall Street Journal notes, in Italy and Greece, nearly a third of young adults not only aren’t working but aren’t enrolled in school or training. What are they doing? Apparently just sitting around and stewing about life’s injustice. https://tinyurl.com/yc79jpud As for where they’re sitting and stewing, in Greece, Italy and Spain it’s now normal for adults all the way into their 30s to live with their parents, largely because they can’t find work that pays enough to afford a house, car and other requirements of independent life.”

“As for Germany, which looks great by comparison, keep in mind that a big part of its economic outperformance is due to other EU countries borrowing huge amounts of money to buy German exports. When the latter run out of money – a point which is clearly coming – Germany suffers twice, once when it loses important customers and again when its banks, having lent trillions of euros to Italy, Spain, et al, have to eat those losses. But bad-mouthing Europe should not be seen as implicit praise of the US. We, like Germany, have an advantage that’s both unfair and temporary. Where Germany has trading partners willing to borrow big to buy Mercedes and Beemers, the US has the world’s reserve currency, which acts as an unlimited credit card for our entitlement state and military/industrial empire. Slightly different scams, same eventual result: the credit spigot gets turned off and all hell breaks loose.”

Cloggie on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 5:55 am 



LOL – meathead is using tinyurl to (attempt to) hide the fact his article was posted on DOLLARCOLLAPSE.

Davy on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 6:17 am 



everyone of my links are tiny, neder so what is your point? Read the article and let’s talk about that. The end of it is critical of the US too so quit acting as though I am bias. The purpose of the article is to show Europe is not so much better than other places like you are preaching daily. BTW, the dollar will collapse along with other currencies eventually.

JuanP on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 7:18 am 



Delusional Davy “everyone of my links are tiny, neder so what is your point?”

Considering that you bitched, moaned, and whined for hours like a deranged lunatic because I posted a supposed “empty link” which clearly stated the source and subject matter, the least you can do is post the article’s source and title when you post tinyurl links, or do your delusional rules only apply to others, exceptionalist?

JuanP on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 7:26 am 



Delusional Davy “BTW, the dollar will collapse along with other currencies eventually”

That is your opinion and one of your biggest delusions, Davy, but not a fact. The US Dollar may collapse alone, too, and be replaced by a basket of other currencies. You are just to closed minded to accept that the USA and the US Dollar may collapse and the world benefit from it. It is all part of your exceptionalist American delusion. The USA is neither exceptional nor indispensable. If the USA refrains from using nuclear weapons as it collapses, the rest of humanity will be just fine in a multipolar world. I do expect the USA to go nuclear based on an analysis of its extremely violent and agressive history, though. That would make things worse for everyone!

JuanP on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 7:31 am 



Delusional Davy “The purpose of the article is to show Europe is not so much better than other places like you are preaching daily”

Of course, you only post links that support your biases, delusions, and opinions. I have a different opinion. IMO, Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan are much better off than the rest of us and have been for at least four decades. But that is just MY opinion no more important or relevant than YOUR opinion.

Davy on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 7:38 am 



I posted the title dumbass so quit your “bitched, moaned, and whined for hours like a deranged lunatic” activity. The source is behind the tinyurl. The reason for this is it does not mess the feed up which seems to happen all the time here and it makes dumbass stalker and prickers like you to click on it. I like giving lazy pricks like grehggie juan extra work. The title was there the link was there and content was given. That is not an empty link like you did which was just a link unsupported by title and content. Where are the rules? All I said if you want to do things properly with a little more effort then don’t post empty links. I will call you out and neuter you fake agendas if you get lazy and do empty links. Most of the time the empty links are part of agenda pukes.

Davy on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 7:45 am 



“That is your opinion and one of your biggest delusions, Davy, but not a fact. The US Dollar may collapse alone, too, and be replaced by a basket of other currencies.”
That is your opinion and one of your biggest delusions grehggie juan, but not fact. A basket of other currencies may never happen.

“You are just to closed minded to accept that the USA and the US Dollar may collapse and the world benefit from it.”
Your agenda wants to think that but looking at the world objectively you can see it is likely not going to happen but it should would please you emotionally. BTW spelling nazi use to correctly

“It is all part of your exceptionalist American delusion.”
This is all part of your anti-American extremist agenda with is just a delusion

“The USA is neither exceptional nor indispensable.”
The US is indispensable to the status quo and that is pretty evident with anyone with a brain or extremist anti-Americans with emotional problems.

“If the USA refrains from using nuclear weapons as it collapses, the rest of humanity will be just fine in a multipolar world.”
That is your opinion and one of your biggest delusions grehggie juan, but not fact.

“I do expect the USA to go nuclear based on an analysis of its extremely violent and agressive history, though. That would make things worse for everyone!”
That is your opinion and one of your biggest delusions grehggie juan, but not fact. BTW spelling Nazi please spell aggressive properly

Davy on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 7:48 am 



“Of course, you only post links that support your biases, delusions, and opinions.”
That is your opinion and one of your biggest delusions grehggie juan, but not fact.

“I have a different opinion. IMO, Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan are much better off than the rest of us and have been for at least four decades. But that is just MY opinion no more important or relevant than YOUR opinion.”
Explain your empty opinion of “much better off” oh great thinker with opinions.

rockman on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 9:24 am 



Clogged = “You argument is not very convincing”. I didn’t offer any argument against solar polar. I did present DOCUMENTED DATA showing that solar power is an insignificant source of electricity in the . Data that does not show any indication of that trend changing anytime in the foreseeable future.

You can try to divert the conversation by tossing in solar data from other parts of the world but it won’t those FACTS: in the USA (one of the largest economies in the world with a huge per capita consumption of fossil fuels) solar power barely rates a footnote let alone a spot in the title.

rockman on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 9:26 am 



“…an insignificant source of electricity in the USA.”

GregT on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 9:37 am 



“Of course you feel that way 3rd world, you and grehggie are financial illiterates. Bloomberg intimidates people like you guys.”

Again Davy, I worked in the finance sector for 32 years, and retired comfortably at 53. I am by no means financially illiterate. And Davy, we used to listen to the Bloomberg Market Minute financial report every morning in the office, most of the time for a good laugh. Bloomberg attempts to steer the market, more than it analyzes it.

GregT on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 9:45 am 



“The US is indispensable to the status quo and that is pretty evident with anyone with a brain or extremist anti-Americans with emotional problems.”

The status quo is destroying the planet Davy, and is unsustainable.

GregT on Tue, 19th Jun 2018 9:58 am 



“If the USA refrains from using nuclear weapons as it collapses, the rest of humanity will be just fine in a multipolar world.”

“That is your opinion and one of your biggest delusions grehggie juan, but not fact.”

If the U.S. does not refrain from using nuclear weapons the rest of humanity will not be fine and there will be no multipolar world. That is a fact.