brenthutch

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    11,005

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by brenthutch

  1. brenthutch
    I guess we know what hook up strategy Olof and you employ
  2. brenthutch
    https://www.google.com/search?q=sneaky+fucker+strategy+peterson&client=safari&sca_esv=570966760&channel=iphone_bm&biw=1121&bih=728&tbm=vid&ei=bbEeZaf7FvLQ5NoPlJCXyAk&ved=0ahUKEwjn5cy2-d6BAxVyKFkFHRTIBZkQ4dUDCAw&uact=5&oq=sneaky+fucker+strategy+peterson&gs_lp=Eg1nd3Mtd2l6LXZpZGVvIh9zbmVha3kgZnVja2VyIHN0cmF0ZWd5IHBldGVyc29uSMdjUJAKWPFgcAB4AJABAJgBsQGgAeMLqgEDNi44uAEDyAEA-AEBiAYB&sclient=gws-wiz-video#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:7ce6f6da,vid:tly3JAyg4fo,st:0 This confirms what I expected all along and explains the dating strategy of Soy Boys.
  3. brenthutch
    Here is your math https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/fossil-fuels/renewable-energy-still-dominates-energy-subsidies-in-fy-2022/#:~:text=From FY 2016 to FY 2022%2C nearly half (46 percent,%2415.6 billion in FY 2022.
  4. brenthutch
    The fact that the whole “fossil fuel vs renewables subsidies” question has been laid to rest, will cause a great wailing and gnashing of teeth. The hours delay in response to my sharing of the WH report represented the denial phase, after I posted a graph we entered the anger phase, soon we will get to bargaining “well it might be more expensive, but we have to save the planet”. We will blow right past depression and sadly we will never get to acceptance. Lather, rinse, repeat.
  5. brenthutch
    For those members who can’t/won’t read a link, I am posting a graphical representation of just how much renewables cost the taxpayer.
  6. brenthutch

    NPR

    brenthutch replied to brenthutch's topic in Speakers Corner

    22 responses and not a single one had anything to do with the original post
  7. brenthutch
    What are you talking about Bill? I just cited NOAA, showing Arctic sea ice is still stubbornly still here and EIA (another government source) showing how massively subsidized renewables are. (Putting to rest the argument of what sector receives more subsidies, fossil fuels or renewables. Looks like I was right again)
  8. brenthutch
    Not only do ratepayers get hammered by renewables, taxpayers do as well. “According to the EIA report, while renewable energy sources like wind and solar power account for about 21% of domestic electricity production, such sources received a staggering $83.8 billion in subsidies, by far the largest share compared to any other category.” https://climatechangedispatch.com/biden-wh-quietly-released-study-showing-green-energy-gets-far-more-subsidies-than-fossil-fuels/ I can hear it now, someone will try to make the argument that the Biden administration didn’t actually release that study because FOX news reported on it.
  9. brenthutch
    You are confusing the Arctic with the Antarctic. The Arctic is in the north the Antarctic is in the south, thus ends your geography lesson for the day.
  10. brenthutch
    “On September 19, sea ice reached its annual minimum extent of 4.23 million square kilometers (1.63 million square miles). As the sun continues to lower on the horizon, air temperatures will drop further, expanding ice extent through autumn and winter.” What ever happened to our promised summer time “ice fee Arctic”? And to think Olof thought I stopped citing NOAA. He will be unable to resist responding
  11. brenthutch
    No wonder he brings in the big bucks.
  12. brenthutch
    Joe getting paid for speaking is like Hunter getting paid for his art.
  13. brenthutch
    Because…. “The IEA works with governments and industry to shape a secure and sustainable energy future for all” The IEA is an advocacy group for wind and solar energy. They are hardly non biased. Looking to them for anything critical of renewables would be like looking for advice on duck hunting from the Audubon Society.
  14. brenthutch
    Yes Wendy, I read them. Both articles, one from a “denier” source and one from an alarmist source. Both articles support what I have been saying for more than a decade. I simply made a statement of fact and supported it with multiple sources. At no time did I characterize the deniers of this simple reality as “stupid liberal fuckers”. Instead of engaging on the substance of what I shared, we got what we typically get, a screed of personal attacks, red herrings and straw man arguments. As far as the “hook being set” it is merely an observation. With respect to moderators…let’s just say, it is curious to have a moderator “triggered” by the words “accurate, lightweight, modular and affordable”
  15. brenthutch
    Until you actually read what I post,I have no time for you. You are dismissed.
  16. brenthutch
    Let me rephrase that, the Ds need to nominate someone who will not lose to Trump. As of now, it doesn’t matter what I think or what you think, if the election were to be held today, Trump wins, America loses. The only way to avoid this is for the Democrats to nominate a young centrist. Unfortunately the Ds are in the grip of the far left crazies. If Obama ran today, he would not stand a chance given his support for marriage between a man and a woman. We are doomed
  17. brenthutch
    Yet another person who failed to read my link. Nowhere does it advocate for coal. In fact it shows how coal, as a backup to gas, results in higher prices. Hardly an endorsement of coal.
  18. brenthutch
    And if the Ds can’t nominate a guaranteed loser, we will all be talking about Trump as he will be our next president
  19. brenthutch
    He can’t help himself, I set that hook so hard he will never get off.
  20. brenthutch
    You wanted a non biased source and I gave you one. You dismiss the author while failing to address any of his points. The article you linked to is full of “expected to” “projected” and “set to” hardly hard numbers. Even taken at face value, it does nothing to refute my two articles demonstrating the increasing costs of integrating intermittent renewables into the grid. BTW the growth in renewables your article is the easiest and least expensive phase in the transition. It gets much more expensive as more and more renewables come online, just ask California and Germany.
  21. brenthutch
    I didn’t know Bill Maher was a MAGA Trumpist. As far as Trump’s malfeasance, that will be sorted out in the courts and he will get what he deserves.
  22. brenthutch
    Perhaps this source won’t make you so butt hurt. I will even cut and paste for you. https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/10/26/lets-come-clean-the-renewable-energy-transition-will-be-expensive/ “The reality is that wind and solar are only cheap during the early stages of transition. Until now, renewables have been viable because of the massive base of fossil fuel generation that supplies most of our electricity needs and also stands in for intermittent wind and solar. But this changes as renewable penetration increases. Relying on more and more fossil fuels to shore up a growing share of intermittent renewables becomes increasingly costly and risky, as Europe is finding out. Then, moving to the next stage of the energy transition requires massive spending to get past using fossil fuels for baseload and balancing electricity” BTW this is an alarmist site so it should be right up your alley.
  23. brenthutch
    So you didn’t read it either
  24. brenthutch
    Go back and read the archives
  25. brenthutch
    Two things… First, Trump is no longer In office Biden is Second, please explain how I am supporting him, at most I just pointed out how some folks might remember his administration. I was a never Trumper from the beginning, I wrote in “Mickey Mouse” on my ballot as I felt a cartoon rodent would make a better choice.