froze

[QUOTE=Buzzy;585291]Do you know what Frances main energy producer is?

Here is a hint, it is what most of you will tout as the most effective and efficient[/QUOTE]

Did you complain when Lake cumberland dam, a renewable enrgy source/hydro shut down for repairs? It happens dude, infrastructure needs maintenance.

[QUOTE=ZoraSpook;585293]

Yes I do. And when you read this, you too will find France was doing okay with energy including, Nuclear (about 72%) and renewables at about 21% and fossil fuels (oil and coal ) at about 7%.

And the go grens kept dropping fossil fuels, didn't create enough renewables, and then TA-DA!... Whamo, A number of nuclear power plants were forcibly shut in 2022 due to [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_corrosion_cracking"]stress corrosion cracking[/URL] on [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipework"]pipework[/URL] providing primary cooling.

And now the coal plants are firing back up and they are rushing to get renewable offshore fields built.

So just like I said, you want to go-green.....fine........just make darn sure your plan to do so is that in fact is capable of sustaining contingencies. In plain words, "DONT THROW THE ENERGY BABY OUT WITH YOUR ACO T-SHIRT WEARING BATH WATER". ;););)

Or to put it in terms you may find more acceptable, "DON'T DO LIKE BIDEN'S ADMINISTRATION: "Ready, shoot, aim" In other words, don't execute, then analyse, and plan". It ought go concept, then analyze, then plan, then execute"[/QUOTE]

So what you're saying is that they should have not gone Nuclear and just used it as an offset to fossil fuels? You dont really make sense. They found a different way to produce energy more efficiently than fossil fuels then got caught with their pants down due to repairs.

Has nothing to do with go green people, it is just unlucky. Sounds like you think egg prices are up due to inflation and not the fact several million birds died because of an avian flu.

[QUOTE=Buzzy;585315]So what you're saying is that they should have not gone Nuclear and just used it as an offset to fossil fuels? You dont really make sense. They found a different way to produce energy more efficiently than fossil fuels then got caught with their pants down due to repairs.

Has nothing to do with go green people, it is just unlucky. Sounds like you think egg prices are up due to inflation and not the fact several million birds died because of an avian flu.[/QUOTE]

That’s not at all what I said. Their nuc had a hiccup and they had insufficient fossil available to back that up because the go green ginks had significantly reduced it to the point the renewables could not fill the gap. Responsible go green means making sure you use all resources available to make sure you have emergency capacity. That is what I said. We on track now?

[QUOTE=Buzzy;585315]So what you're saying is that they should have not gone Nuclear and just used it as an offset to fossil fuels? You dont really make sense. They found a different way to produce energy more efficiently than fossil fuels then got caught with their pants down due to repairs.

Has nothing to do with go green people, it is just unlucky. Sounds like you think egg prices are up due to inflation and not the fact several million birds died because of an avian flu.[/QUOTE]

No sure what eggs have to do with an energy issue as you clearly noted that was a bio hazard that caused that issue and the France nuc issue had to do with cracks in concrete. Once again had the go green idiots increased nuc as they did, and increased the renewables without demonizing and rapidly reducing the fossil that could have been the backup they may not have had this issue or atleast could have abated part of it. Are we tracking now. Or in your chicken brained way off thinking, “ don’t out all eggs in one basket”.

[QUOTE=ZoraSpook;585317]No sure what eggs have to do with an energy issue as you clearly noted that was a bio hazard that caused that issue and the France nuc issue had to do with cracks in concrete. Once again had the go green idiots increased nuc as they did, and increased the renewables without demonizing and rapidly reducing the fossil that could have been the backup they may not have had this issue or atleast could have abated part of it. Are we tracking now. Or in your chicken brained way off thinking, “ dont put out all eggs in one basket”.[/QUOTE]

Ahhhh……want to talk about New Jersey Whales and windfarms “ greenie” ??😁😁😁

[QUOTE=ZoraSpook;585316]That’s not at all what I said. Their nuc had a hiccup and they had insufficient fossil available to back that up because the go green ginks had significantly reduced it to the point the renewables could not fill the gap. Responsible go green means making sure you use all resources available to make sure you have emergency capacity. That is what I said. We on track now?[/QUOTE]
This is a reply to all three of your nonsense replies.

You said have a plan, then execute it. Why would you keep fossil fuels up when you have Nuclear built to take its place? Do you just love government spending?

They had a plan to replace fossil fuels with nuclear and that was to get away from being dependent on other countries for that expensive fossil fuels they dont have in the country. Why would you keep an expensive replaced part in service when a better part has been installed?

You just want to blame the greenies for something they didnt do.

The country built green energy to supplement the nuclear that was their new main source.

You argument is a foolish one mainly because it is made up and fits your agenda.

You have the same logic and a democrat, see a scenario then make up a headline that fits your ideals.

[QUOTE=ZoraSpook;585318]Ahhhh……want to talk about New Jersey Whales and windfarms “ greenie” ??[/QUOTE]


Ya sure, us impacting the environment kills animals, we have done it on land now we are doing in the ocean.

It is easier to get free wifi than clean water in this country.

And to think fossil fuels would have less of an impact is astounding if that is the point you are trying to make. Purely because it is one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard in my life.

[QUOTE=Buzzy;585322]This is a reply to all three of your nonsense replies.

You said have a plan, then execute it. Why would you keep fossil fuels up when you have Nuclear built to take its place? Do you just love government spending?

They had a plan to replace fossil fuels with nuclear and that was to get away from being dependent on other countries for that expensive fossil fuels they dont have in the country. Why would you keep an expensive replaced part in service when a better part has been installed?

You just want to blame the greenies for something they didnt do.

The country built green energy to supplement the nuclear that was their new main source.

You argument is a foolish one mainly because it is made up and fits your agenda.

You have the same logic and a democrat, see a scenario then make up a headline that fits your ideals.[/QUOTE]

Yes they had a plan and their timeline exceed capacity in the event if even a minor hiccup. Why? Because the hit it such a hurry to “ save the world” they dismissed being capable of saving themselves.

I’m a republican. And I use facts to form opinions. In this case I think you are projecting your faulty thought process in defense of your own unfounded idiocy. Just like a democrat to blame others for that you hate most in yourself.

[QUOTE=Buzzy;585323]Ya sure, us impacting the environment kills animals, we have done it on land now we are doing in the ocean.

It is easier to get free wifi than clean water in this country.

And to think fossil fuels would have less of an impact is astounding if that is the point you are trying to make. Purely because it is one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard in my life.[/QUOTE]

Yea you got it. Thanks for recognizing the harm done. Creating harm to reduce it is circular logic. And again, I don’t support fossil fuels outright and support going green but not in a hasty stupid manner that piles up one environmental impact to solve another.
I made not accusation fossil fuels have less impact, and again you like a punk ass Democratic moron just love to try to wrongly accuse people of the few things you feel comfortable discussing in hopes of quieting opinions that challenge and identify your failed logic.

But other than that, how ya doing today? Have you sobered up from your last rant?

[QUOTE=Buzzy;585322]This is a reply to all three of your nonsense replies.

You said have a plan, then execute it. Why would you keep fossil fuels up when you have Nuclear built to take its place? Do you just love government spending?

They had a plan to replace fossil fuels with nuclear and that was to get away from being dependent on other countries for that expensive fossil fuels they dont have in the country. Why would you keep an expensive replaced part in service when a better part has been installed?

You just want to blame the greenies for something they didnt do.

The country built green energy to supplement the nuclear that was their new main source.

You argument is a foolish one mainly because it is made up and fits your agenda.

You have the same logic and a democrat, see a scenario then make up a headline that fits your ideals.[/QUOTE]

Government REGULATION, got in the way of Nuclear. Can we say Marble Hill.......

I guess you forgot about that.

Later,

Geo

Hey Buzzy guy.
Have you masked and diapered your cows yet bubba? 😆😆😆

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;585337]Government REGULATION, got in the way of Nuclear. Can we say Marble Hill.......

I guess you forgot about that.

Later,

Geo[/QUOTE]

they shut down a new nuclear plant being built near me in the 80s at Phipps Bend.
they sold everything for pennies.
funny how the greenies didn't want nuclear back then but they want it now.