Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “even within the lifetime of our children”
- 60 Years Of Progress in London
- The Anti-Greta
- “a persistent concern”
- Deadliest US Tornado Days
- The Other Side Of The Pond
- “HEMI V8 Roars Back”
- Big Pharma Sales Tool
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- 622 billion tons of new ice
- Fossil Fuels To Turn The UK Tropical
- 100% Tariffs On Chinese EV’s
- Fossil Fuels Cause Fungus
- Prophets Of Doom
- The Green New Deal Lives On
- Mission Accomplished!
- 45 Years Ago Today
- Solution To Denver Homelessness
- Crime In Colorado
- Everything Looks Like A Nail
- The End Of NetZero
- UK Officially Sucks
- Crime In Washington DC
- Apparently People Like Warm Weather
- 100% Wind By 2030
Recent Comments
- arn on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- Luigi on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- arn on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- arn on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- Bob G on The Anti-Greta
- conrad ziefle on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- Francis Barnett on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- Jimmy Haigh on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- arn on 60 Years Of Progress in London
- czechlist on 60 Years Of Progress in London
0.8% of their usage. I wonder if the cost is congruent with 0.8%?
The .8% just displaces .8% percent, which could have been delivered by existing convetional sources so I don’t see any way how any wind costs are justified considering that wind is the most expensive form of electrical generation.
Yep, any and all additional costs of construction, maintenance, and delivery went towards………absolutely nothing.
Yes, but that .8% makes you feel so good about saving the planet!