I see you can write a lot of bullshit, but not admit to your fabrication. I showed you real data, you are the one that had a problem with it. YOu even put words in my mouth, as i never said the wind stops. Interpret as you like. In the end, we both know you fabricated your contention about German windmills being used for peaking because you didn't like the real world data. That you make stuff up and think it is justified is very telling about you as a person.
Sorry, I was away a few days. I imagine you are still in your dream world, where Germans use windmills for peaking and the real data isn't as important as your wind charts.
I have not moved any goal posts. I am still working on getting you to admit you fabricated your idea that Germans use windmills for peaking. I know you cannot provide a source, because you made it up, and after all this time, and various attempts to move in another direction, you are still stuck with your failure to back up your own bullshit. So, here we are, nobody else reading, and you and I both know your fabrication... so, I'll make sure we don't misdirect and get back to the crux of the matter, which is;
You have been caught chin deep in your own bullshit!. Cite your sources or
admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation
chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is
turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for
peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there
is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are
multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy
usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how
conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But
you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use
of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be
actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP!
You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But
ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the
charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind
generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more
bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to
remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for
maintenance.
You are a bullshitter
who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
That's why they keep drilling more, till prices get below about $3.5/MBTU, wait till prices rise, then start drilling again. Who knows when that cycle will break.
I never said the wind stops over continents. How fucking stupid are you?
QUESTION: How does one get out of a big pile of his own bullshit?
ANSWER: Step 1 = admit your are in it.
You have been caught chin deep in your own bullshit!. Cite your sources or
admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation
chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is
turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for
peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there
is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are
multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy
usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how
conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But
you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use
of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be
actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP!
You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But
ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the
charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind
generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more
bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to
remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for
maintenance.
You are a bullshitter
who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
QUESTION: How do you keep people from noticing your big pile of bullshit?
ANSWER: Attempt to divert their attention.
You continue to perform the trademarks acts of a proven bullshitter!. Cite your sources or
admit it.
You have already proven you
ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until
you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation
chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is
turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for
peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there
is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are
multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy
usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how
conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But
you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use
of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be
actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP!
You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But
ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the
charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind
generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more
bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to
remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for
maintenance.
You are a bullshitter
who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
Paying = price. Yes, they are good for looking at price, but not cost of production. Gas drives those prices in the US, and is the reason they are low. The.05% of our electricity that is solar generated is not really a factor.
QUESTION: What do you get when you try to cover up bullshit with more bullshit?
ANSWER: Deeper in bullshit.
You a proven bullshitter!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
But you a proven bullshitter!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
Wow, you are really ignorant, trying to use a previous post as a source. WTF? Then, repeating your willful ignorance.
You a proven bullshitter!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
Its quite easy to navigate both systems. With all the modern calculational tools available to us, its even quite simple to work in both systems at the same time.
That is stupid, its just a weather wind map. No talk of peak loading of wind power. No backup of any of your points. Only an idiot just post that with no explanation on why its even relevant. But, that's what bullshitters do.
You accused me of making stuff up, and not knowing what I was talking about, but it is you that
is a proven bullshitter!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
I have a RPi, and various HTPCs as well. RPI just not as portable as a dongle, and doesn't support stuff like Netflix unless you get into the Linux/HTML5 approach. Plus, with a RPi, by the time you add the SD card, wifi adaptor, power supply, your cost gets into a higher range where, to me, it makes more sense to just use a NUC.
It is a bit limited in formats it will accept, like typical direct HTTP live streaming, but yes, it works fine for those that it accepts. I just want more.
Slashdot Mirror
Learned from a bullshitter?
I see you can write a lot of bullshit, but not admit to your fabrication. I showed you real data, you are the one that had a problem with it. YOu even put words in my mouth, as i never said the wind stops. Interpret as you like. In the end, we both know you fabricated your contention about German windmills being used for peaking because you didn't like the real world data. That you make stuff up and think it is justified is very telling about you as a person.
Sorry, I was away a few days. I imagine you are still in your dream world, where Germans use windmills for peaking and the real data isn't as important as your wind charts. I have not moved any goal posts. I am still working on getting you to admit you fabricated your idea that Germans use windmills for peaking. I know you cannot provide a source, because you made it up, and after all this time, and various attempts to move in another direction, you are still stuck with your failure to back up your own bullshit. So, here we are, nobody else reading, and you and I both know your fabrication... so, I'll make sure we don't misdirect and get back to the crux of the matter, which is;
You have been caught chin deep in your own bullshit!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
That's why they keep drilling more, till prices get below about $3.5/MBTU, wait till prices rise, then start drilling again. Who knows when that cycle will break.
I never said the wind stops over continents. How fucking stupid are you?
QUESTION: How does one get out of a big pile of his own bullshit?
ANSWER: Step 1 = admit your are in it.
You have been caught chin deep in your own bullshit!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
Natural Gas prices are what is driving US electrical wholesale prices downward. Its no big secret. Fracking has had a huge impact.
I corrected by error in a followup post, meant to type 0.5%.
that being able to watch football is one of the only issues that's easy to get bipartisan support on
No kidding. Please solve a problem that matters.
Still no source to back up your contentions?
QUESTION: How do you keep people from noticing your big pile of bullshit?
ANSWER: Attempt to divert their attention.
You continue to perform the trademarks acts of a proven bullshitter!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
CORRECTION O.5% Solar. My typo.
Paying = price. Yes, they are good for looking at price, but not cost of production. Gas drives those prices in the US, and is the reason they are low. The .05% of our electricity that is solar generated is not really a factor.
PPAs are wholesale price, not cost. True cost is skewed by subsidies.
QUESTION: What do you get when you try to cover up bullshit with more bullshit?
ANSWER: Deeper in bullshit.
You a proven bullshitter!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
You may be right, I may be crazy.
But you a proven bullshitter!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
Wow, you are really ignorant, trying to use a previous post as a source. WTF? Then, repeating your willful ignorance.
You a proven bullshitter!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
This is just simple equipment monitoring with networked devices.This has been done for decades. Just a PR puff to get some brand names out.
Seems like the WH can't even get that right.
My guess is the ratio of younger to older drivers is lower on those models you suggested, but like you said, we don't have the data.
Looks like they are the car models that are mostly driven by younger drivers. I would guess that explains most of it.
If science keeps progressing there may come a day when only the poor make their children the old fashioned way.
You may have just hit on the solution to economic inequality. Make it so everyone wants to be poor!
Did we abandon terraforming?
Yes, don't you remember the environmentalist protests last time we tried?
The fastest way to breed a population increase would be multiple females for every male.
Its quite easy to navigate both systems. With all the modern calculational tools available to us, its even quite simple to work in both systems at the same time.
That is stupid, its just a weather wind map. No talk of peak loading of wind power. No backup of any of your points. Only an idiot just post that with no explanation on why its even relevant. But, that's what bullshitters do.
You accused me of making stuff up, and not knowing what I was talking about, but it is you that is a proven bullshitter!. Cite your sources or admit it.
You have already proven you ignore facts and obvious data, so what good is it to have a discussion until you admit it. You didn't like the variability in the total wind generation chart for Germany, so you fabricated the contention that in Germany wind is turned on and off for peaking, and conventional sources are not used for peaking. You made it up, and you won't admit it.
I have shown you the actual data from Germany. The charts clearly show there is no correlation between wind output and peaking. In fact, there are multiple points on the charts that show high wind output during low energy usage, and low wind output during high energy usage. The graphs also show how conventional power correlates with peaking, clearly with zero ambiguity. But you ignore it and still stick with your fabricated contentions.
I have shown you the actual law that required use of all available wind power, all the time. You then said it might not be actual law! A clear display of willful ignorance.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A CORNER AND MAKING UP NEW SHIT THAT YOU CAN'T BACK UP! You contend that "Wind has a lot of down time for maintenance". But ignore the fact that even if it were true, it would not be noticeable on the charts because you already took pains to point out how small each wind generator is. So now you contradict your own bullshit with even more bullshit, none of which you can cite a source for. I will be sure to remind you in the future that you contend wind needs a lot of down time for maintenance.
You are a bullshitter who makes stuff up. Cite your sources or admit it.
I have a RPi, and various HTPCs as well. RPI just not as portable as a dongle, and doesn't support stuff like Netflix unless you get into the Linux/HTML5 approach. Plus, with a RPi, by the time you add the SD card, wifi adaptor, power supply, your cost gets into a higher range where, to me, it makes more sense to just use a NUC.
It is a bit limited in formats it will accept, like typical direct HTTP live streaming, but yes, it works fine for those that it accepts. I just want more.