• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Energy Discussion

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
“During the present ice age, glaciers have advanced and retreated over 20 times, often blanketing North America with ice. Our climate today is actually a warm interval between these many periods of glaciation. The most recent period of glaciation, which many people think of as the "Ice Age," was at its height approximately 20,000 years ago.”

“Although the exact causes for ice ages, and the glacial cycles within them, have not been proven, they are most likely the result of a complicated dynamic interaction between such things as solar output, distance of the Earth from the sun, position and height of the continents, ocean circulation, and the composition of the atmosphere.”
Thanks, Mr Science. I’m familiar.
 

Hair Warrior

Well-Known Member
Contributor
Thanks, Mr Science. I’m familiar.
You asked me about it, so you got an answer.

BT BT

In other news, more evidence that people’s personal energy choices are no longer “suggested best practice” but rather compulsory and dictated for you by others:
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
You asked me about it, so you got an answer.

BT BT

In other news, more evidence that people’s personal energy choices are no longer “suggested best practice” but rather compulsory and dictated for you by others:
I didn’t ask you what it was, I asked why you seem to believe that natural oscillations in climate and anthropogenic climate change are somehow mutually exclusive, and whether any mainstream climate scientists agree with you, which you still haven’t answered.

Secondly, and because this story has come up before, these people signed up to give the utility company control of their thermostats in exchange for a discount… completely voluntary. If you don’t sign up for the program, the utility company has zero control of your thermostat. So, nothing compulsory about it at all. It’s a lie when you say that, which isn’t a particularly effective or persuasive method of making your point.
 

number9

Well-Known Member
Contributor
You asked me about it, so you got an answer.

BT BT

In other news, more evidence that people’s personal energy choices are no longer “suggested best practice” but rather compulsory and dictated for you by others:
It's almost as if some industries - particularly those which are among the dictionary definition of a natural monopoly - cannot be left to regulate themselves...
 

exNavyOffRec

Well-Known Member
I didn’t ask you what it was, I asked why you seem to believe that natural oscillations in climate and anthropogenic climate change are somehow mutually exclusive, and whether any mainstream climate scientists agree with you, which you still haven’t answered.

Secondly, and because this story has come up before, these people signed up to give the utility company control of their thermostats in exchange for a discount… completely voluntary. If you don’t sign up for the program, the utility company has zero control of your thermostat. So, nothing compulsory about it at all. It’s a lie when you say that, which isn’t a particularly effective or persuasive method of making your point.
The cost saving is not worth it, just skip going out to dinner a few times a year and save money that way. I wonder how many are regretting signing up for that program?
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
The cost saving is not worth it, just skip going out to dinner a few times a year and save money that way. I wonder how many are regretting signing up for that program?
Sure, but that’s not the point. This was presented as evidence of some kind of draconian action by the power company to seize control of everyone’s thermostat.
 

exNavyOffRec

Well-Known Member
Sure, but that’s not the point. This was presented as evidence of some kind of draconian action by the power company to seize control of everyone’s thermostat.
I understand, and when I read the article I saw it was this voluntary program, and then I saw the cost savings. This all comes down to people not reading what they are signing up for and not realizing there are other ways to save money without giving up control of things in their lives.
 

Hair Warrior

Well-Known Member
Contributor
It’s not so voluntary if you’re barely making ends meet and the electric company dangles $100 at you. And we don’t kmow how small the fine print was, nor do we know what the utility company led consumers to believe counts as “emergency” usage or who gets to make that call.
“My body temp, my choice” right? ;)
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
It’s not so voluntary if you’re barely making ends meet and the electric company dangles $100 at you.
Seriously? This is a bizarre and profoundly incoherent response. You could cut/paste this same argument into a discussion on college loan forgiveness and you would be vehemently against it, citing Pollyanna themes of "personal responsibility" and "rugged individualism."
 

exNavyOffRec

Well-Known Member
It’s not so voluntary if you’re barely making ends meet and the electric company dangles $100 at you. And we don’t kmow how small the fine print was, nor do we know what the utility company led consumers to believe counts as “emergency” usage or who gets to make that call.
“My body temp, my choice” right? ;)
I am sure there are probably some that are having a hard time making ends meet but nearly every person I know who has said they have trouble making ends meet will say that but continues to smoke or drink, or go out to dinner frequently or purchase cars that they didn't really need or many other things.

I have been there where money was tight, and we realized we had to make adjustments and we did.
 

wink

War Hoover NFO.
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Someone please give me a Pollyanna theme of personal responsibility. Can't quite wrap my head around that concept.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Someone please give me a Pollyanna theme of personal responsibility. Can't quite wrap my head around that concept.
These are the tropes that are oftentimes dispensed by some on the right as a solution the for every downtrodden person's woes. Don't get me wrong, I think self-sufficiency and individualism are generally great ideals to aspire to, but they're not quite the universal panacea that some might suggest... hence the Pollyanna reference.
 

ChuckMK23

FERS and TSP contributor!
pilot
Ah, does it work? Is it feasible? Sure. But does it make economic sense? If it absolutely did, with or without subsidies, you would see that type of extensive conversion up and down the street. As it is, getting your investment back is so far down the road it doesn't make sense for most people. I am certain it is less expensive now, but I had a buddy in CA do the same thing (with storage) about 8 years ago, and he said he would NEVER see a return on the investment. But he didn't do it for economic reasons.
I stayed at a home in Hawaii (Oahu) for a week back in March, the house was 100% off grid with full rooftop solar and multiple Power Walls. The initial investment was already recouped. I was impressed. I was still driving around the island in the owners beater Nissan pickup, but the house was awesome. I was sufficiently convinced.
 
Top