yes I did, however consider the source.your link shows that LNG is one of the safest forms of transporting fuel, so you proved the point that it's a very safe form of transport, the energy is a stable producer of power with no ebbs and flows.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
yes I did, however consider the source.your link shows that LNG is one of the safest forms of transporting fuel, so you proved the point that it's a very safe form of transport, the energy is a stable producer of power with no ebbs and flows.
Since we're completely off topic.....If you wanted 50MW of solar you're going to need 125 acres of land and 145,000 of the most efficient panels in the world. How long is it going to take to set up 145,000 panels over 125 acres vs installing a turbine generator? How many more acres of batteries will you need. Actually batteries are irrelevant PR uses about 2.5GW of energy right now they are making around 550MW. so 100% of energy created is being used leaving 0 for battery storage. You've got an energy shortage and your solution would use 100% of the energy created during the day leaving 0 at night. A Turbine generator would produce power 24/7. People aren't going to wait months for power from a solar farm when they can have it in a week. It's all a great idea but in reality when you have no power, no one cares where it comes from.
There is not enough power in PR right now. There is no energy to store at night if it's all being used during the day. It takes a week to ship a LM2500 from the mainland and kick up 25Mw of power 24/7. It takes months to build a solar array of the same capacity and get it online. Disaster recovery is completely different than infrastructure improvements.Since we're completely off topic.....
Nonsense. You could easily be doing parking canopy solar installations all over PR without taking up any space. On-site or grid battery storage turns that to 24/7/365 power that's far cheaper when you add in the LNG logistics and expense.
It's not a gas vs. renewables thing. It's just such an obvious subsidy to the gas industry when they should be doing all of the above.
I thought about that too, but the flip side is that the 25 MW is constrained by damage to the grid whereas the 25 MW of PV can be distributed.There is not enough power in PR right now. There is no energy to store at night if it's all being used during the day. It takes a week to ship a LM2500 from the mainland and kick up 25Mw of power 24/7. It takes months to build a solar array of the same capacity and get it online. Disaster recovery is completely different than infrastructure improvements.
Elon Musk stepped down from Trump's economic advisory council... Perhaps he shouldn't have...
I don't think you were fully awake when you wrote this. It's very hard to follow.Many supposed industry 'leaders' acted in the same childish fashion.
They act like rich spoiled kids who want to impress their friends. But when Pop breaks out the wallet, you best bet they are in line early.
There is something about money that erodes common sense in many humans.
Let's say you are against closing more desert land to recreational use. You are invited to become an adviser to Congress who wants to close more deserts. Do you decline because your friends call you names? Or because you've heard Congress members often shoot minority children then eat them, or similar nonsensical rumors?
No. The rumors have nothing to do with deserts, your true friends will still be friends, and being given a microphone in a noisy room helps.
Look, we get it. Nobody wants to lose their cheap gardeners and household staff. But that has nothing to do with political decisions about US industry.
I don't think you were fully awake when you wrote this. It's very hard to follow.
Maybe you're saying that the leaders left because it was unpopular among their friends to be on the council. Unpopular among their customers, maybe. And if they've seen that their input has no effect on policy, why alienate customers just to sit at the table and nod?
Elon left because, despite his urging, the administration still bailed on the Paris agreement. I don't recall the exact clause of the Paris agreement that guaranteed cheap gardeners. Elon's worldview and Tesla's business model has to do with sustainable, carbon free transport. I'm quite certain he made a measured judgement on how this reflects on his own principles and those of Tesla's customers. There's a balance there.
I guess that could be called childish (?) but I think most people would call it principled.
We can no longer afford to support every special interest out there and that applies to all fossil fuel producers, especially big oil.