2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum

GLD 396.31

-0.6%

Dec 31 4:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (168311)	2/9/2021 7:12:29 AM
From: sense	Read Replies (1) of 218898

I've done the math on alternative energy... along with work on the basic science... work that has me still ahead of "them" by a generation, just in what I was doing... after a 22 year hiatus. I've not quit thinking, either, so have thought it out a generation or two farther along. What they have now is not currently economically viable. It's only "doable" at all... by using more fossil fuel based energy in making the "green tech" than the "green tech" being made will itself produce. That's just another way of saying green energy isn't nearly as profitable as fossil fuel based energy... which is the economic argument that actually matters. The fraud practiced in green energy economics is simple enough. They compare the costs of producing green energy... with the PRICE of fossil fuel based energy. Do comparisons on a cost versus cost basis... and you will find the reason that they need to BOTH restrict fossil fuel production... to raise its PRICE... and subsidize green energy... to lower its cost. It they accounted for that honestly... it would be obvious as fraud. I know how to fix that problem and compete on cost... but, since I have solved that problem long ago... I also know they don't really care that I know... because they're not really about solving the problem in the technology... at all... they're only interested in solving the problem of them not owning the source of the energy we use... And that's all they care about... is using the power to control... to ensure they take succeed in taking over control of energy production. And they're going to tax you... to subsidize the project... of giving them control over that market in the future. Fossil fuels will continue to dominate our energy production for the next decade and more... their "solution" requiring they own whatever is "next"... will continue to obstruct the development of actual solutions, which could have been fielded a decade ago, without them owning it. And, we'll still be lucky if we avoid having the planet enter the next ice age over the next 20 years... while they continue flogging the fiction that CO2 causes warming... just never mind the icicles. Do note... that's not me saying we shouldn't care about pollution... but CO2 from burning fossil fuels is less of a problem... than water vapor from jet contrails... or the impact of electric fields we create altering the magnetosphere. Global warming bunk... intended to sell the "need" for you to support them doubling the cost of your energy... while you also pay to have the ownership of energy production transferred to them. It's just a scam. The claim is made that to "kick start" it... they have to subsidize it. That's a lie... the purpose of which is to channel money to their friends... to subsidize their friends businesses... so that when the technology does become viable... they'll already own the market. See Solyndra... and wait for the next one... coming soon.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next