Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 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
- “records going back to 1961”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- Historical Weather Analysis With Visitech
- “American Summers Are Starting to Feel Like Winter”
- Joker And Midnight Toker
- Cheering Crowds
- Understanding Flood Mechanisms
Recent Comments
- Jack the Insider on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Bob G on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Bob G on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- conrad ziefle on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- conrad ziefle on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- conrad ziefle on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- John Francis on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- John Francis on Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Bob G on New Visitech Features
- Jack the Insider on New Visitech Features
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!