Trump cancels $700M in battery, manufacturing projects

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No need for grants. Just put a high tariff on Chinese imports, forcing them to manufacture in America. Have a rule that these Chinese companies must be in a partnership with an American company, that is at least 50% American. Then you steal the technology from the factory in America.

And then what? America wont have anyone left who can read a schematic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you driven through eastern Loudoun lately?

It is a dystopian landscape of data centers everywhere. Data centers do not require a lot of employees. What they do require is huge, huge amounts of energy.

The data centers drive the AI industry and the high tech industry. But they use a lot of energy. Count on your electric bills going through the roof until they figure out alternative energy sources. Within the industry, some are considering nuclear energy to fill the need.

If you are a residential customer in Loudoun County, why should your electric bill go up even a penny? You aren't the ones using all that power. The data centers should be the ones paying for it. Residential consumers shouldn't be subsidizing big corporations and their data centers. This is yet another example of capitalism run amok in America.

Ultimately that's a political decision, but the most natural result is that everyone, both residential and commercial, pay more until demand matches supply. Sometimes, increased demand makes a major project (like a whole damn dam) viable, that brings the unit cost back down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you driven through eastern Loudoun lately?

It is a dystopian landscape of data centers everywhere. Data centers do not require a lot of employees. What they do require is huge, huge amounts of energy.

The data centers drive the AI industry and the high tech industry. But they use a lot of energy. Count on your electric bills going through the roof until they figure out alternative energy sources. Within the industry, some are considering nuclear energy to fill the need.

If you are a residential customer in Loudoun County, why should your electric bill go up even a penny? You aren't the ones using all that power. The data centers should be the ones paying for it. Residential consumers shouldn't be subsidizing big corporations and their data centers. This is yet another example of capitalism run amok in America.

Ultimately that's a political decision, but the most natural result is that everyone, both residential and commercial, pay more until demand matches supply. Sometimes, increased demand makes a major project (like a whole damn dam) viable, that brings the unit cost back down.

So your answer is to pick the most expensive available options because you like coal?

[Anonymous]

You are comparing residential prices with wholesale. Connecticut and Rhode Island are so expensive because they are part of RGGI driving up prices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are comparing residential prices with wholesale. Connecticut and Rhode Island are so expensive because they are part of RGGI driving up prices.

No it’s because they use fossil fuels. But hey keep pushing that BS and pay that ignorance tax.

[Anonymous]

Based on reports from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Lazard, and Visual Capitalist, here is a comparison of electricity generation costs:

Onshore Wind $61/MWh
Utility-Scale Solar PV $61/MWh
Combined-Cycle Natural Gas $76/MWh
Offshore Wind $71–$139/MWh
Gas Peaker Plant $149–$251/MWh (assuming $3.45/MMBtu)
Nuclear $111–$236/MWh (for subsidized Pink Hydrogen)

[Anonymous]

We started losing battery manufacturing jobs in the US under Clinton and NAFTA.

We had a rechargeable battery plant employing 500 local people. The factory shut down during the Clinton administration and NAFTA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We started losing battery manufacturing jobs in the US under Clinton and NAFTA.

We had a rechargeable battery plant employing 500 local people. The factory shut down during the Clinton administration and NAFTA.

You don't know what you are talking about.

Nobody uses tech from the 90s any more.

Notice how much smaller your cell phone battery has gotten since then.

Time for bed for you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Revolution Wind project that was canceled by Trump has 20 year contracts with Connecticut and Rhode Island utilities for a $0.09 kWh.

Connecticut price per kWh is $0.29 for residential and $0.21 commercial. Rhodes Island is $0.27 per kWh.

Smart play!

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Batteries are the farthest thing from green energy. Not "clean" or renewable. Massive amounts of CO2 created in mining and manufacturing. The waste is toxic when the batteries are disposed of.

Even with the CO2 from mining and manufacturing using batteries in EVs still results in less CO2 emissions than gasoline-powered vehicles.

But also, batteries can be used to enhance grid efficiency as well as make more use of renewable energy. A lot of grid capacity is not even used currently, an batteries can alswork to make the grid more efficient.

[Anonymous]

The future is nuclear and hydrogen power. US will leapfrog the rest of the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Batteries are the farthest thing from green energy. Not "clean" or renewable. Massive amounts of CO2 created in mining and manufacturing. The waste is toxic when the batteries are disposed of.

Even with the CO2 from mining and manufacturing using batteries in EVs still results in less CO2 emissions than gasoline-powered vehicles.

But also, batteries can be used to enhance grid efficiency as well as make more use of renewable energy. A lot of grid capacity is not even used currently, an batteries can alswork to make the grid more efficient.

+1 even Fox News reported this....
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/tech/evs-beat-gas-after-two-years-study-finds.amp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Batteries are the farthest thing from green energy. Not "clean" or renewable. Massive amounts of CO2 created in mining and manufacturing. The waste is toxic when the batteries are disposed of.

Even with the CO2 from mining and manufacturing using batteries in EVs still results in less CO2 emissions than gasoline-powered vehicles.

But also, batteries can be used to enhance grid efficiency as well as make more use of renewable energy. A lot of grid capacity is not even used currently, an batteries can alswork to make the grid more efficient.

+1 even Fox News reported this....
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/tech/evs-beat-gas-after-two-years-study-finds.amp

Ooos fixed the link

https://www.foxnews.com/tech/evs-beat-gas-after-two-years-study-finds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The future is nuclear and hydrogen power. US will leapfrog the rest of the world.

The future is not nuclear. Nuclear cost way too much, has massive spent fuel problems and take 10-12 to build. Hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels, has high carbon emissions to produce and is very expensive ($15-$35 equivalent to a gallon of gas). Both of these are extremely dirty to produce.