Based on what I read, Republicans don't fear AOC. On the contrary, they are happy to see her as the face of the Democratic Party, because much of what she says is ridiculous.
David - I wish I could paste a picture here, but the cartoon at this link illustrates the Republican attitude toward AOC https://i1.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2019/04/Screen-Shot-2019-04-16-at-7.50.35-PM.png?w=926&ssl=1
Good question, Layzej. I have no idea. The offer was stupid IMHO. The purpose of coal mining is not to provide work. The correct purpose should be that coal provides 28% of the world's energy, and we have no replacement for it. See https://www.google.com/search?q=world+energy+sources+pie+chart&rlz=1C1GGRV_enUS751US751&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=7mzwCzfF6CXAhM%253A%252C2RzqHpj7AEOquM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kRgmJU4DI9aVuvOCULm4YzYb3fAEA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjMwfu14uHhAhVY_J4KHdooCJ8Q9QEwAXoECAcQBg#imgrc=7mzwCzfF6CXAhM:
BTW I'm not sure that Republicans are right in thinking that AOC will hurt the Democratic Party. She reminds me of Trump in a way. Both say outrageous, ignorant, exaggerated things that get them enormous media coverage. Trump's style led him to the Presidency. AOC's 'Trumpism' has made her a hero to many.
but anyway who says there's no substitute for it. In 2012 coal provided 41% of US electricity. That's now down to 28%. So there must be SOME alternative. (It's natural gas.)
And prices are now at parity:
"It's now cheaper to build a new wind farm than to keep a coal plant running [without subsidies]," CBS News 11/16/18. - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/its-now-cheaper-to-build-a-new-wind-farm-than-to-keep-a-coal-plant-running/
"Locally generated solar and wind energy could already replace almost three-fourths of electricity made by U.S. coal plants for less than the cost of continuing to operate those plants, according to an analysis released today by two clean energy research groups."
- "Analysis: New wind, solar cheaper than operating most existing coal plants," Energy News Network, 3/25/19. https://energynews.us/2019/03/25/midwest/analysis-new-wind-solar-cheaper-than-operating-most-existing-coal-plants/
"Based on what I read, Republicans don't fear AOC. On the contrary, they are happy to see her as the face of the Democratic Party, because much of what she says is ridiculous."
I don't think that's true.
Republicans, esp today's conservatives, need people to denigrate. Divisiveness and racism are a big part of their platform. If AOC wasn't effective they'd find someone else more suitable to pick on. They're worried she's connecting with a generation that has their own ideas, and they aren't ideas conservatives are willing to tolerate. So she must be destroyed.
AOC is everything Republicans fear: young, female, not white, well spoken and smart.
David - Unfortunately your quote was truncated in a way that changed its meaning somewhat. The actual quote, from your link, is "There are some scenarios, in some parts of the U.S., where it is cheaper to build and operate wind and solar than keep a coal plant running," said a Lazard banker who was involved in the report. "You have seen coal plants shutting down because of this."
Regardless of the comment by those clean energy research groups, I am dubious about wind and solar replacing 3/4 of coal. The magnitudes are so different. Wind and solar provide much less total energy than coal. I don't know what the units are, but a worldwide energy exhibit shows coal producing 0.81 units and "Wind+Photovoltaic+Solar Thermal" producing < .005 units. (BTW I suspect that the legend should say "Wind+Photovoltaic+Solar+Thermal") https://www.energygroove.net/energy-topics/world-energy-usage/
DiC: coal provides 28% of the world's energy, and we have no replacement for it
"Coal went from 25% of Ontario’s supply mix in 2003 to zero in 2014, all while grid reliability and domestic supply improved. The elimination of coal stands as the single largest GHG emissions reduction action on the continent and was primarily responsible for Ontario achieving its ambitious 2014 emissions reduction target of 6% below 1990 levels." - https://www.ontario.ca/page/end-coal
USA dreams small while Canada achieves. Things that seem "outrageous, ignorant, exaggerated" to USAians are being achieved by 'lesser' countries.
Sorry for a useless comment, but
ReplyDelete"...it turns out there are no active coal mines in Barr’s district anyway, which underscores her point."
:->
The purest of incompetence of someone who floated up by being willing to be the most corrupt.
Based on what I read, Republicans don't fear AOC. On the contrary, they are happy to see her as the face of the Democratic Party, because much of what she says is ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteDavid - I wish I could paste a picture here, but the cartoon at this link illustrates the Republican attitude toward AOC https://i1.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2019/04/Screen-Shot-2019-04-16-at-7.50.35-PM.png?w=926&ssl=1
ReplyDeletecheers
Hi DiC,
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think the offer was rescinded? Why not give her the megaphone?
Good question, Layzej. I have no idea. The offer was stupid IMHO. The purpose of coal mining is not to provide work. The correct purpose should be that coal provides 28% of the world's energy, and we have no replacement for it. See https://www.google.com/search?q=world+energy+sources+pie+chart&rlz=1C1GGRV_enUS751US751&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=7mzwCzfF6CXAhM%253A%252C2RzqHpj7AEOquM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kRgmJU4DI9aVuvOCULm4YzYb3fAEA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjMwfu14uHhAhVY_J4KHdooCJ8Q9QEwAXoECAcQBg#imgrc=7mzwCzfF6CXAhM:
ReplyDeleteBTW I'm not sure that Republicans are right in thinking that AOC will hurt the Democratic Party. She reminds me of Trump in a way. Both say outrageous, ignorant, exaggerated things that get them enormous media coverage. Trump's style led him to the Presidency. AOC's 'Trumpism' has made her a hero to many.
Cheers
This says coal provides 41% of world energy (in 2014)
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption
but anyway who says there's no substitute for it. In 2012 coal provided 41% of US electricity. That's now down to 28%. So there must be SOME alternative. (It's natural gas.)
And prices are now at parity:
"It's now cheaper to build a new wind farm than to keep a coal plant running [without subsidies]," CBS News 11/16/18.
- https://www.cbsnews.com/news/its-now-cheaper-to-build-a-new-wind-farm-than-to-keep-a-coal-plant-running/
"Locally generated solar and wind energy could already replace almost three-fourths of electricity made by U.S. coal plants for less than the cost of continuing to operate those plants, according to an analysis released today by two clean energy research groups."
- "Analysis: New wind, solar cheaper than operating most existing coal plants," Energy News Network, 3/25/19.
https://energynews.us/2019/03/25/midwest/analysis-new-wind-solar-cheaper-than-operating-most-existing-coal-plants/
And, don't forget, coal has enormous negative externalities.
ReplyDelete"Based on what I read, Republicans don't fear AOC. On the contrary, they are happy to see her as the face of the Democratic Party, because much of what she says is ridiculous."
ReplyDeleteI don't think that's true.
Republicans, esp today's conservatives, need people to denigrate. Divisiveness and racism are a big part of their platform. If AOC wasn't effective they'd find someone else more suitable to pick on. They're worried she's connecting with a generation that has their own ideas, and they aren't ideas conservatives are willing to tolerate. So she must be destroyed.
AOC is everything Republicans fear: young, female, not white, well spoken and smart.
David - Unfortunately your quote was truncated in a way that changed its meaning somewhat. The actual quote, from your link, is
ReplyDelete"There are some scenarios, in some parts of the U.S., where it is cheaper to build and operate wind and solar than keep a coal plant running," said a Lazard banker who was involved in the report. "You have seen coal plants shutting down because of this."
Regardless of the comment by those clean energy research groups, I am dubious about wind and solar replacing 3/4 of coal. The magnitudes are so different. Wind and solar provide much less total energy than coal. I don't know what the units are, but a worldwide energy exhibit shows coal producing 0.81 units and "Wind+Photovoltaic+Solar Thermal" producing < .005 units. (BTW I suspect that the legend should say "Wind+Photovoltaic+Solar+Thermal")
https://www.energygroove.net/energy-topics/world-energy-usage/
Cheers
DiC: coal provides 28% of the world's energy, and we have no replacement for it
ReplyDelete"Coal went from 25% of Ontario’s supply mix in 2003 to zero in 2014, all while grid reliability and domestic supply improved. The elimination of coal stands as the single largest GHG emissions reduction action on the continent and was primarily responsible for Ontario achieving its ambitious 2014 emissions reduction target of 6% below 1990 levels." - https://www.ontario.ca/page/end-coal
USA dreams small while Canada achieves. Things that seem "outrageous, ignorant, exaggerated" to USAians are being achieved by 'lesser' countries.