Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (67336)	4/17/2018 9:43:33 PM
From: puborectalis	1 Recommendation Recommended By bentway Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 358587

With tax season under way, American voters say 67 – 24 percent that President Donald Trump should publicly release his tax returns, according to a Quinnipiac University National Poll released today. Every listed party, gender, education, age and racial group, except Republicans, says Trump should release his tax returns.

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (67336)	4/18/2018 10:57:41 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 358587

If you have a lot of available hydro power than going mostly to "renewable"* energy sources, because hydro counts as renewable. It doesn't work quite as well if you have a purchase requirement for solar and wind, because then when they are producing at a high level and the dam is close to full you have to dump water over the spillway without using it to produce electricity which is wasteful, and should count against the estimates of cost for the solar or wind but doesn't. Still it would normally be better to dump some water than burn some coal. The problem is though that it most developed countries, including the US, the best sites for hydro power are taken.** Storage works but its expensive and doesn't easily scale to be a major part of electricity supply. Geothermal tends to be expensive as well, at least when your not using it in the relatively limited places where its easiest to extract. Biogas is very similar to natural gas. Its just a faster process. OTOH a faster process can mean a lot when the slow process isn't renewable. And for some sources like cow manure and landfills, the gas is going to get created and released anyway, by using some of it you can get some benefit out of it. Burning it will produce CO2, but letting it escape without capture leads to emission of methane (and much stronger greenhouse gas, if one where the effect doesn't last as long) and in some cases some nitreous oxide (which is much stronger still than methane as a greenhouse gas, I don't know about the time frame of its impact). And burning the gas will release things like CO, NOx etc. This could be an effective energy source but probably not one that will cost-effectively scale to covering a large part of fuel or electricity demand any time soon. * Technically fossil fuels are renewable while solar isn't. Its just the fossil fuels renew over a very long time and are often not renewable on a normal human time scale, while solar will take billions of years to run down so it doesn't need to renew over normal human timescales. Well I guess some of the material the sun ejects toward the end of its life will go on to be part of other starts so in that sense its partially renewable but that's more of a stretch than calling fossil fuels renewable. Still I'll use renewable (when I use the term at all) for things like solar and wind and not for fossil fuels, because that's the way the term is commonly used, and while technical accuracy is a good thing it shouldn't be at the expensive of effective communication. ** At least for conventional hydro power. You could try to harness tides or ocean currents but that would be an expensive an unproven alternative.