turtlespeed 212 #101 May 4, 2016 gowlerkQuoteOil in particular is too valuable as a raw material to be simply burned when other sources of energy are available. Yes, we need it to make nylon. And KAYAKS! That way protesters can paddle to the protest of the source material of the vehicle they are taking to get to the protest of the . . . .I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #102 May 4, 2016 kallend***Hi jerry, With a centuries worth of cheap, plentiful, reliable fossil fuel still in the ground, it is foolish to waste limited resources on a non-problem. The landscape of technology will be unrecognizable in twenty years let alone one hundred. Oil in particular is too valuable as a raw material to be simply burned when other sources of energy are available. The market would disagree with your assessment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 1,905 #103 May 4, 2016 QuoteThe market would disagree with your assessment. That's why unfettered free markets are not allowed. They can not appreciate tomorrow only today.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,254 #104 May 4, 2016 QuoteThe market would disagree with your assessment. Yeah, but the market is like Janice from accounting - it don't give a fuck.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #105 May 4, 2016 gowlerkQuoteThe market would disagree with your assessment. That's why unfettered free markets are not allowed. They can not appreciate tomorrow only today. For not being allowed, they are speaking loudly and clearly. Ever hear of "futures?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 1,905 #106 May 4, 2016 QuoteEver hear of "futures?" The oil futures market extends about 8 years. Hardly enough for anyone's children to grow up. Short term thinking like that only suits deadenders.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #107 May 4, 2016 brenthutch***QuoteThe market would disagree with your assessment. That's why unfettered free markets are not allowed. They can not appreciate tomorrow only today. For not being allowed, they are speaking loudly and clearly. Ever hear of "futures?" Indeed. Not much volume at the CME beyond 2018. Not exactly a long-term outlook.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,395 #108 May 4, 2016 >For not being allowed, they are speaking loudly and clearly. As did Bernie Madoff's investors. They loved him - and spoke with their dollars. 17 billion of them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #109 May 5, 2016 billvon>For not being allowed, they are speaking loudly and clearly. As did Bernie Madoff's investors. They loved him - and spoke with their dollars. 17 billion of them. And their dollars spoke back, they lost money, he was jailed and the market taught a lesson. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #110 May 5, 2016 gowlerkQuoteEver hear of "futures?" The oil futures market extends about 8 years. Hardly enough for anyone's children to grow up. Short term thinking like that only suits deadenders. Your lack of financial literacy is stunning, yes, you too Kallend. But of course Kallend knows better, he is just playing stupid. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 1,905 #111 May 5, 2016 QuoteYour lack of financial literacy is stunning, yes, you too Kallend. I know enough to have bought XOM and BP both near the bottom of their recent price ranges. And not to hold any coal stocks. That's literacy enough for me.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,395 #112 May 5, 2016 >And their dollars spoke back, they lost money, he was jailed and the market taught a >lesson. Yep. Just as the market is now teaching the coal investors a very expensive lesson, while solar companies are doing quite well as a whole. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #113 May 5, 2016 billvon>And their dollars spoke back, they lost money, he was jailed and the market taught a >lesson. Yep. Just as the market is now teaching the coal investors a very expensive lesson, while solar companies are doing quite well as a whole. Solar companies like these? Abound Solar (CdTe) bankrupt AQT (CIGS) closed Ampulse (thin silicon) closed Arise Technology (PV modules) bankrupt Azuray (microinverters) closed BP (c-Si panels) exits solar business Centrotherm (PV manufacturing equipment) bankrupt and restructured CSG (c-Si on glass) closed by Suntech Day4 Energy (cell interconnects) delisted from TSX exchange ECD (a-Si) bankrupt Energy Innovations (CPV) bankrupt Flexcell (a-Si roll-roll BIPV) closed GlobalWatt (solar) closed GreenVolts (CPV) closed G24i (DSCs) bankrupt in 2012, re-emerged as G24i Power with new investors Hoku (polysilicon) shut down its Idaho polysilicon production facility Inventux (a-Si) bankrupt Konarka (OSCs) bankrupt Odersun (CIGS) bankrupt Pramac (a-Si panels built with equipment from Oerlikon) insolvent Pairan (Germany inverters) insolvent Ralos (developer) bankrupt REC Wafer (c-Si) bankrupt Satcon (BoS) bankrupt Schott (c-Si) exits c-Si business Schuco (a-Si) shutting down its a-Si business Sencera (a-Si) closed Siliken (c-Si modules) closed Skyline Solar (LCPV) closed Siemens (CSP, inverters, BOS) divestment from solar Solar Millennium (developer) insolvent Solarhybrid (developer) insolvent Sovello (Q-Cells, Evergreen, REC JV) bankrupt SolarDay (c-Si modules) insolvent Solar Power Industries (PV modules) bankrupt Soltecture (CIGS BIPV) bankrupt Sun Concept (developer) bankrupt Array Converter (Module-level power electronics) bankrupt, IP to VC investor Avancis (CIGS) discontinuing production Bosch (c-Si PV module) exits module business Concentrator Optics (CPV) bankrupt Cyrium (CPV semiconductors) bankrupt Direct Grid (microinverters) closed EiQ (Module-level power electronics) closed GreenRay (microinverters) closed Helios Solar (c-Si modules) bankrupt Hoku Solar (silicon) bankrupt Honda Soltec (CIGS thin-film modules) closing Infinia (Stirling engine CSP) bankrupt Nanosolar (CIGS) closed Pythagoras Solar (BIPV) closed Solarion (CIGS) went bankrupt but restructured and in limited production SolFocus (CPV) bankrupt Sunsil (module level electronics) closed Suntech Wuxi (c-Si) bankrupt Tioga (project developer) closed Willard & Kelsey (CdTe panels) bankrupt ZenithSolar (CHP) bankrupt And that is in just two years and with billions in government support. Quite well indeed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #114 May 5, 2016 jakeeQuoteThe market would disagree with your assessment. Yeah, but the market is like Janice from accounting - it don't give a fuck. Here is the heart of the eco alarmist argument. It has nothing to do with the planet. It has everything to do with capitalism. Only you are too brainwashed to realize it."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #115 May 5, 2016 All that lists shows is that solar is a highly competitive market, with lots of companies entering and exiting. It says nothing about the viability of the technology. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #116 May 5, 2016 The list rebutts the "solar companies are doing quite well" notion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 1,905 #117 May 5, 2016 QuoteOnly you are too brainwashed to realize it. Coming from our resident totally impartial power company worker.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #118 May 5, 2016 DanGAll that lists shows is that solar is a highly competitive market, with lots of companies entering and exiting. It says nothing about the viability of the technology. Nothing says viability like plunging stock prices. "Shares of Solar City (SCTY), the residential solar power installation company backed by billionaire Elon Musk, have tumbled nearly 40 percent this year. SunPower (SPWR), the second-largest U.S. solar panel manufacturer, is off by about 30 percent. First Solar (FSLR), which also makes panels, has seen its stock fall nearly 9 percent." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #119 May 5, 2016 Are you arguing that because some US solar power companies are not doing well, that solar power is not technologically viable? Did the automobile become technologically unviable when US car companies started losing market share to Japan in the 1970s? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #120 May 5, 2016 You are conflating technologically possible with economically viable. BTW what solar companies are doing well? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #121 May 5, 2016 QuoteYou are conflating technologically possible with economically viable. I am?!? That's what you are doing. You're arguing that solar is a bad technology because it isn't currently economically viable. As evidence you point to a bunch of US solar companies that have gotten out of the business or gone bankrupt. I'm trying to point out that just because some companies are having trouble cashing in on solar, it doesn't mean the technology doesn't have merit. QuoteBTW what solar companies are doing well? Right now, Chinese ones. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #122 May 5, 2016 DanGQuoteYou are conflating technologically possible with economically viable. I am?!? That's what you are doing. You're arguing that solar is a bad technology because it isn't currently economically viable. As evidence you point to a bunch of US solar companies that have gotten out of the business or gone bankrupt. I'm trying to point out that just because some companies are having trouble cashing in on solar, it doesn't mean the technology doesn't have merit. QuoteBTW what solar companies are doing well? Right now, Chinese ones. Which is highly subsidized by the their government"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #123 May 5, 2016 All Chinese companies are highly subsidized by their government. That doesn't say anything about the technology. Actually, the fact that the Chinese are trying to corner the market on solar panel production means they think it will be an important technology of the future. If they shared brenthutch's viewpoint, they wouldn't be investing so heavily in the industry. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #124 May 5, 2016 DanGAll Chinese companies are highly subsidized by their government. That doesn't say anything about the technology. Actually, the fact that the Chinese are trying to corner the market on solar panel production means they think it will be an important technology of the future. If they shared brenthutch's viewpoint, they wouldn't be investing so heavily in the industry. I am very sure their motives are not that simple."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #125 May 5, 2016 QuoteI am very sure their motives are not that simple. What are their motives? Do you believe (like your candidate Donald Trump) that global warming is a Chinese hoax? That they are building lots of solar panels to fool the world into their AGW conspiracy? Why do you think my theory (that they want to make money) is unrealistic? Please, educate me. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
