Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Gaslighting 1924
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
- Analyzing Big City Crime
- UK Migration Caused By Global Warming
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
- Seventeen Years Of Fun
- The Importance Of Good Tools
- Temperature Shifts At Blue Hill, MA
- CO2²
- Time Of Observation Bias
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Back To The Future
Recent Comments
- Gordon Vigurs on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Mike Peinsipp on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Robertvd on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Bob G on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- conrad ziefle on Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
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!