• Help Support Hardline Crawlers :

Trump for prez?

Re: Re: Trump for prez?

easleycrawler said:
It wouldn't matter if we got another Ronald Reagan, it would take more than 2 terms, 8 years, to fix the past 25-30 year's worth of **** ups. :****:
Click to expand...
Gotta start somewhere.
 
As long as the Electoral College is in effect your vote doesn't matter. A century ago we needed a system like that, but with the advent of real time communications and computers it's outdated and another way election results are skewed.
 
^^^ Agree, this makes it so screwed up and is how Obama got reelected,its not what the majority wants but anyway Trump gets my vote for now and Paul second. Hope Trump is for Coal Fired Power Plants!
 
jp fan said:
^^^ Agree, this makes it so screwed up and is how Obama got reelected,its not what the majority wants but anyway Trump gets my vote for now and Paul second. Hope Trump is for Coal Fired Power Plants!
Click to expand...

Nuclear Energy is steadily on the rise :dblthumb:
 
It was a statement more like accept the truth that Nuclear Energy is not going to slow, but spread. Bad for coal fired plants, yes. When I think of the future of energy, I think of both Nuclear and Gas Turbine Combine Cycle plants. However, in some locations, coal fired steam plants are always going to be around, until the greenies have their way with unrealistically low emission expectancies.

We just landed the biggest generator order in Siemens' history with Egypt (which really saved us from a bad slow time in generator sales), for I believe it is the biggest Gas fired combined cycle plant to date? 3 mega gas fired plants and a multitude of wind power components.

Wind power derives from a free resource, which is good, but wind farms are not as efficient as nuclear or thermal energy plants, so I don't see them ever just taking over or anything.

http://www.siemens.com/press/PR2015060243PGEN
 
TacomaJD said:
It was a statement more like accept the truth that Nuclear Energy is not going to slow, but spread. Bad for coal fired plants, yes. When I think of the future of energy, I think of both Nuclear and Gas Turbine Combine Cycle plants. However, in some locations, coal fired steam plants are always going to be around, until the greenies have their way with unrealistically low emission expectancies.

We just landed the biggest generator order in Siemens' history with Egypt (which really saved us from a bad slow time in generator sales), for I believe it is the biggest Gas fired combined cycle plant to date? 3 mega gas fired plants and a multitude of wind power components.

Wind power derives from a free resource, which is good, but wind farms are not as efficient as nuclear or thermal energy plants, so I don't see them ever just taking over or anything.

http://www.siemens.com/press/PR2015060243PGEN
Click to expand...

Man signed up for some electrical engineering classes now he is some sort of Einstein. :flipoff1:
 
And actually wind farms are more efficient I would think since they are making power out of FREE wind.
 
Re: Re: Trump for prez?

Elliott said:
And actually wind farms are more efficient I would think since they are making power out of FREE wind.
Click to expand...
Just cause something's free doesn't mean it's a good deal!


Actually I have no idea on wind farms, just saw the opportunity to say that.

I could see where construction and maintenance costs could make a wind farm less economical than other forms of power generation... Even though the generation resource is free and infinitely renewable.
 
Re: Re: Trump for prez?

TBItoy said:
Just cause something's free doesn't mean it's a good deal!


Actually I have no idea on wind farms, just saw the opportunity to say that.

I could see where construction and maintenance costs could make a wind farm less economical than other forms of power generation... Even though the generation resource is free and infinitely renewable.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Requires lots of land, equipment, maintenance, and you can't make the wind blow any faster during times of higher energy needs. The only option is to expand or build more wind farms. You can add fuel to the fire when you are controlling the coal, gas, etc. to ramp up the output during say like dead winter when everybody is dreading those outrageous power bills because their heat pump has ran nonstop for 4 days straight in single digit weather.
 
Re: Re: Trump for prez?

TacomaJD said:
Exactly. Requires lots of land, equipment, maintenance, and you can't make the wind blow any faster during times of higher energy needs. The only option is to expand or build more wind farms. You can add fuel to the fire when you are controlling the coal, gas, etc. to ramp up the output during say like dead winter when everybody is dreading those outrageous power bills because their heat pump has ran nonstop for 4 days straight in single digit weather.
Click to expand...

Well, how efficient it hydro electric power, like TVA had powered large areas of the south with for 100 years?
 
kmcminn said:
Man signed up for some electrical engineering classes now he is some sort of Einstein. :flipoff1:
Click to expand...

That's Mr. Einstein to you.

I don't foresee coal fired plants going anywhere anytime soon, but as time goes on, the evolution of "greener is better" by new companies looking to enter the power generation market, I figure we will start seeing many more Gas turbine (natural gas) and Nuclear plants. It's just like cars. Think of how emissions regulations have evolved and even into hybrid power cars now. If coal fired plant engineers are not able to reduce emissions greatly, you will definitely start to see them fade out.
 
The only reason you don't already see more nuclear plants, is due to how much it costs to build them! There are so many features that have to be built into a nuclear facility, that the others do not require. The big ass cooling towers, HUGE super thick walls encompassing all the dangerous parts of the facility like the reactors, all sorts of back up systems, dead pools to safely house the spent nuclear fuel rods, a security force wielding AR-15's with a check station that is tighter than any airport security in the country - it's all heavily regulated by OSHA, probably moreso than any other form of business in the country. These regulations are what will keep something like the Fukushima (sp?) meltdown from happening in the US. Instead of just having one backup system for different things, there's backup systems for the backup systems! Preparation for the worst.

Lots of folks shun nuclear energy that are pro-coal fired plants, but most all who shun nuclear energy are also not educated about it.
 
Re:

Fukushima is what makes me weary of nuclear power but then I get I don't know a whole lot about it so I usually just keep my mouth shut and try to read what I can when I see it.
 
Re:

onepieceatatime said:
Fukushima is what makes me weary of nuclear power but then I get I don't know a whole lot about it so I usually just keep my mouth shut and try to read what I can when I see it.
Click to expand...

All those places over seas are not regulated by folks like we are by OSHA. You seen the video of the power station workers over in China I think, that pushed the rolling metal scaffolding around the corner and swung too wide, contacting a huge electrical bus or something and it zapped all 4 of them. Their hands did not let go of the scaffolding after their bodies went limp until their bodies started to cook and smoke. That **** wouldn't have happened in the US, because that highly dangerous bus would have been encased behind walls, secluded from human traffic. It made me sick to watch it...can't remember if it's on youtube or liveleak.
 

Latest posts

Random media

300202_301567263190070_593440188_n.jpg
SC1.PNG
image.jpg
P1010670.jpg
goodyears 005.jpg
IMG_3828121277020.jpeg
photo 2.JPG
IMG_1001.jpg
TwistedFortyPhotoshoot005_zpsb521a659.jpg
Back
Top