Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

-----signature-----

So did you post that to confirm I'm right?

 

-----signature-----

 

-----signature-----

I'll use your post as my evidence.

Thanks.

 

-----signature-----

 

-----signature-----

And your numbers aren't right anyways. They charge coal plants with expenses that should be charged to solar production.

There are many coal plants intentionally operating below peak efficiency specifically because they are serving as backups for unreliable solar and wind power. The cost of coal would actually be lower if so many plants weren't required to operate inefficiently to compensate for solar and wind. The cost of that inefficiency should be charged to solar and wind but it isn't. It gets unfairly charged to coal.

 

-----signature-----

So you have evidence that supports your claim but you chose to post evidence that supports mine and this is somehow my fault?

Sorry, there's evidence in this thread and it all supports mine. That's your fault since you're the one who posted it.

If you have something else to counter your own evidence you should post that too.

 

-----signature-----

Yet again, Paul, you bring nothing to the table. I thank you for continuing to be ignorant of realities, and crystallizing my point for those who don't know that much about the subject at hand.

You have demonstrated multiple times, both in this thread and in others, that you just don't know what has happened in the last two years with regard to solar costs, and just how much the price has dropped.

You have also demonstrated a shocking lack of knowledge with regard to the differences between a grid tied system (which requires no batteries and no charge controller, and less wiring, which dramatically reduces the cost) and an off grid system.

I like to debate this topic with you, because you reinforce my points over and over again with your ignorance.

 

-----signature-----

Please.

If you are talking about unfair costs to coal, then you have to include the unfair costs externalized to society from burning coal. This includes the following:


erosion resulting from destruction of forests to excavate coal


burning of coal resulting in destruction of ozone


medical costs associated with inhaling fine particulate matter created from burning coal


destruction of biodiversity resulting from mining of coal


destruction of migration routes resulting from transportation of coal from mining site to burning site


contamination of water sources resulting from mining and burning of coal

 

-----signature-----

We have not inherited the Earth from our parents, we have borrowed it from our children.

That was a lot of words and yet you failed to provide any information to counter your own hard evidence which confirmed my argument.

You can't disprove data with ad hominem. There's literally nothing you can say about me that will disprove my argument. My argument is supported by the data you provided. Your argument is supported by nothing. Certainly nothing anyone has posted in this thread.

Do you have anything at all or is all of your support secret and classified?

As for all of your externalized costs, I'll just point out that the more coal we burn, the longer the average lifespan. How bad can it really be? Add a penny per kwh for all that crap if you want. Then add a buck per KWH for solar since it consumes massive amounts of silicon and drives up the cost of computers.

 

-----signature-----