EBay to power new data center with fuel cells

Jun 26, 2012 by Bob Yirka report
EBay to power new data center with fuel cells
Bloom's Energy Server

(Phys.org) -- Proving that it’s serious about becoming greener, EBay has announced that a new data center being built in Utah will run entirely on fuel cells, a move that other giants in the technology sector have been hesitant to take. Currently, those companies using fuel cells to power their data centers use them as a supplemental source of power, clearly worried about relying on a still new and in some ways unproven technology.

The new data center is to be built in South Jordan, Utah as an addition to an already existing data center. The existing center will continue to draw from the grid, while the new one will be powered exclusively by fuel cells, but will be hooked to the grid as a backup measure. also has another data center in South Jordan that processes PayPal transactions, though there are no plans currently in place to make any modifications to its power source structure.

As technology has matured, it’s undergone a name change; it used to be called hydrogen fuel cell technology, but because other sources of fuel can now be uses as well, the name has become more generic. Still, the fuel cells for the South Jordan center will be of the hydrogen variety, though EBay has said that it will pay a premium for the creation of an equal amount of biogas in other places to offset the hydrogen used to power its plant. In addition to helping to save the environment, the center is expected to save on electricity costs as the price of hydrogen has dropped dramatically over the past several years.

With fuel cells, the gas is not burned to produce heat to boil water to turn turbines to create electricity, as occurs with other processes. Instead, a chemical reaction occurs at high temperatures and the electricity produced is used to continuously recharge large batteries, which in turn are used to power the plant; this means carbon dioxide and water and very little else is released into the environment, making the process much cleaner than with fossil fuel burning plants. And because the electricity is made onsite, none is lost in transit and the need for bulky and expensive backup generators is eliminated.

To generate the huge amount of power required by the data center, Bloom Energy, maker of the cells will string together enough of them to generate the six million watts the company believes it will need. Each fuel cell is capable of producing about 1.75 million kilowatt hours a year. Construction of the new plant is expected to commence almost immediately with completion likely by the middle of next year.

Explore further: Morocco raises 1.7 bn euros for solar plants

Related Stories

New approach removes sulfur from military-grade fuel

Mar 29, 2006

The military needs to get the sulfur out of its fuel, in order to use the fuel to produce hydrogen for fuel cell use in the field. Fuel cells can generate the electricity necessary to power electronic gadgets and facilitate ...

Hydrogen-powered ice resurfacer promoted

May 30, 2007

A U.S. Department of Energy-funded fuel-cell-powered ice resurfacer is touring ice rinks across the United States, promoting use of hydrogen fuel cells.

Recommended for you

The state of shale

20 hours ago

University of Pittsburgh researchers have shared their findings from three studies related to shale gas in a recent special issue of the journal Energy Technology, edited by Götz Veser, the Nickolas A. DeCecco Professor of Che ...

Website shines light on renewable energy resources

Dec 18, 2014

A team from the University of Arizona and eight southwestern electric utility companies have built a pioneering web portal that provides insight into renewable energy sources and how they contribute to the ...

Better software cuts computer energy use

Dec 18, 2014

An EU research project is developing tools to help software engineers create energy-efficient code, which could reduce electricity consumption at data centres by up to 50% and improve battery life in smart ...

Cook farm waste into energy

Dec 17, 2014

It takes some cooking, but turning farm waste into biofuels is now possible and makes economic sense, according to preliminary research from the University of Guelph.

User comments : 55

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Shakescene21
3.7 / 5 (6) Jun 26, 2012
"this means carbon dioxide and water and very little else is released into the environment, making the process much cleaner than with fossil fuel burning plants"

I thought that hydrogen fuel cells emitted only water vapor. Where would the carbon dioxide come from?
NotParker
2.7 / 5 (12) Jun 26, 2012
"Still, the fuel cells for the South Jordan center will be of the hydrogen variety"

Translation: Natural Gas. A fossil fuel.

"as the price of hydrogen has dropped dramatically over the past several years."

Natural gas has dropped in price. Hydrogen is still very expensive to make.

With wind turbines and solar panels making grid electricity so expensive it is nice to see a large corporation leading the way in showing people how to bypass the greenie taxes.

I hope the smaller SOFC fuel cells arrive soon, so we can all afford to ditch the cruel greenies poor people killing grid electricity.
El_Nose
4 / 5 (7) Jun 26, 2012
Talk about propaganda

*) bloom energy boxes need a power supply
read http://www.bloome...-server/
go ahead -- i'll wait ...

they use fuel to create heat -- then the heat is very
efficiently turned to electricity.

You cannot get something from nothing -- So unless they are building a wind farm or solar farm to power the bloom box they are only slightly lowering there energy bill from the electric company - or gas company -- or where ever -- but they still are using a fossil fuel unless they are getting power to heat the bloom boxes from a green source.

@shakescene

bloom boxes are not hydrogen fuel cells -- please see the link above.

TheGhostofOtto1923
3.1 / 5 (25) Jun 26, 2012
bloom boxes are not hydrogen fuel cells -- please see the link above.
Please see parkers post above that-

"The Bloom Energy Server (commonly referred to as the Bloom Box) is a solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) made by Bloom Energy, of Sunnyvale, California, that can use a wide variety of inputs (including liquid or gaseous hydrocarbons produced from bio sources) to generate electricity on the site where it will be used."

"SOFC systems can run on fuels other than pure hydrogen gas. However, since hydrogen is necessary for the reactions listed above, the fuel selected must contain hydrogen atoms. In order for the fuel cell to operate, the fuel must be converted into pure hydrogen gas. SOFCs are capable of internally reforming light hydrocarbons such as methane (natural gas), propane and butane."
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (24) Jun 26, 2012
*) bloom energy boxes need a power supply
read http://www.bloome...-server/
go ahead -- i'll wait ...
External power is included in total net gain calcs for both gas-fired plants and fuel cell installations.

"Bloom Boxes convert chemical energy to electrical energy in one step, and are more fuel efficient than current gas-fired power stations and also reduce transmission/distribution losses by producing power where it is used."

"most are between 40% and 60% energy efficient. However, when the fuel cells waste heat is used to heat a building in a cogeneration system this efficiency can increase to 85%. This is significantly more efficient than traditional coal power plants, which are only about one third energy efficient. Assuming production at scale, fuel cells could save 20-40% on energy costs when used in cogeneration systems."

"The CEO of eBay says Bloom Energy Servers have saved the company $100,000 in electricity bills since they were installed in mid-2009..."
Caliban
2.6 / 5 (5) Jun 26, 2012

NutPecker --you missed this part:

Still, the fuel cells for the South Jordan center will be of the hydrogen variety, though EBay has said that it will pay a premium for the creation of an equal amount of biogas in other places to offset the hydrogen used to power its plant.


How about that? Apparently, Ebay doesn't share your enthusiasm for a "drill, baby, drill, coalcar-to-hell, fossil-fuel apotheosis!

Maybe that's because they're not King Carbon's toadies --unlike you.
PussyCat_Eyes
1.7 / 5 (6) Jun 26, 2012
"Instead, a chemical reaction occurs at high temperatures and the electricity produced is used to continuously recharge large batteries, which in turn are used to power the plant; this means carbon dioxide and water and very little else is released into the environment, making the process much cleaner than with fossil fuel burning plants."

Hold on !! CO2 is released into the environment? So the process isn't ENTIRELY FREE of CO2, after all, is it? Seems a little disingenuous, doesn't it? Hypocrites
djr
3 / 5 (2) Jun 26, 2012
With the cost of wind and solar falling so fast - the economics are getting interesting. I guess Steven Chu jumped the gun with writing off fuel cells so quickly. See - http://theenergyc...potentia

With wind and solar nipping at their heels - fossils are being forced to keep their costs down - look at Chesapeak's stock value to see how the markets like that. It will be fascinating to see what happens when solar breaks the 6 cents a Kwh mark - and pity fossils when we do decide to pull the artificial subsidies out from underneath them - see http://cleantechn...bsidies/
PussyCat_Eyes
1.5 / 5 (8) Jun 26, 2012
@Caliban
Funny..but at this very minute, somewhere in the world, coal is being dug and used to make energy; oil rigs are drilling for oil and being used to make gasoline and other products; and gas fracking is happening to provide gas for cooking and heating.
And yet, you haven't done anything to STOP THEM. Haven't you got enough people rooting for you to blow up them oil wells, coal mines and gas fields? What are you waiting for? Do it NOW before Winter comes. I see you talking and talking about stopping fossil fuel usage...but you never actually DO anything. Therefore, It's apparent that you AGWists are all full of it and you're too scared to DO anything but dream.
Winter's coming and the globe is warming. Get your dynamite out and blow 'em up.
Where's Vendicar_De Idiot?
NotParker
2.7 / 5 (12) Jun 26, 2012

NutPecker --you missed this part:

Still, the fuel cells for the South Jordan center will be of the hydrogen variety, though EBay has said that it will pay a premium for the creation of an equal amount of biogas in other places to offset the hydrogen used to power its plant.


How about that? Apparently, Ebay doesn't share your enthusiasm for a "drill, baby, drill, coalcar-to-hell, fossil-fuel apotheosis!



They will use natural gas idiot. Then they will use the subsidies from the government (paid for by poor consumers), to pretend to subsidize the production of biogas. Which is methane. Which is a fossil fuel.

All in all taxpayers will be screwed and idiots will tell lies about not creating any CO2.

Typical composition of biogas:

Compound Chem %
Methane CH4 50 . 75
Carbon dioxide CO2 25 . 50
Nitrogen N2 0 . 10
Hydrogen H2 0 . 1
Hydrogen sulfide H2S 03
Oxygen O2 00

http://en.wikiped...i/Biogas

CH4 and CO2. Carbon.
NotParker
2.7 / 5 (12) Jun 26, 2012
dir, people will be bailing from the grid more and more to escape the grotesque squandering of money on subsidizing intermittent expensive energy sources like wind and solar.

Nice to see big corporations producing CO2 and screwing environmentalists and making greenies look even more dumb and hypocritical.

Even better ... biogas produces NO2.

"Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) warms the atmosphere 310 times more than carbon dioxide and methane 21 times more than carbon dioxide."
Caliban
3.7 / 5 (6) Jun 26, 2012
@pussycat,

Oh! Oh! Ah! Stop, Stop! You slay me with your sarcasm and playground nanna-nanna-boo-boo.

I knew it wouldn't be long before your predictably passive-aggressive downranking attacks would blossom into full frontal attack.

It has been interesting to watch you make your first little baby steps of aggression. And it is always a pleasure to see my understanding confirmed --this time in you. And I clearly discern the color of your coat.

I will be nice just this once.

"Funny", that somewhere else in the world, someone is having this same conversation, as there is plenty of coal, natural gas, and petroleum and it is still relatively cheap and enormously profitable --especially with taxpayer subsidies.

Funnier still is the fact that it becomes less so every day and that at some point, enough people will exert enough pressure, by voting with feet, wallet and franchise, to replace fossil with renewables.

Funniest of all: your opinion on the matter is entirely irrelevant.

Estevan57
2.1 / 5 (33) Jun 26, 2012
What's disingenuous about a press release that states exactly what they are doing, and a link to the technology?
In the article headline it says "greener", not CO2 free. And it states that it runs on Hydrogen. It's quite an overeaction to say they are are "hypocrites" because they don't perform up to a standard they didn't set. Like calling a woman "unatural" for wearing makeup.
The point of the article, as you quoted, but apparently misunderstood, is that it is cheaper and makes "the process much cleaner than with fossil fuel burning plants". A penny saved... Would you really want more air pollution? Just to prove a political point?

Shakescene21
3.5 / 5 (6) Jun 26, 2012
@El Nose
Thanks for clarifying what these Bloom Boxes are doing. They could still be an important intermediate step on the way to a zero-carbon-emmissions hydrogen economy, if the next step is to install photovoltaic and windpower which would produce hydrogen by electrolosis. This hydrogen could be stored and fed to fuel cells as elecricity is needed.
Caliban
3.7 / 5 (6) Jun 26, 2012
They will use natural gas idiot. Then they will use the subsidies from the government (paid for by poor consumers), to pretend to subsidize the production of biogas. Which is methane. Which is a fossil fuel.


nutpecker.

Methane produced via biomass fermentation is NOT fossil fuel and only a moron or liar would claim it to be so. This probably explains why it was you who claimed it. In addition to your natural predisposition to lie, your state of abject shilldom makes it impossible to make the distinction between truth and lie, fact and distortion, dissimulation and distinction.

And what happened to that "cruel greenies poor people killing grid electricity." you were crying about? Note: if Ebay diverts that subsidy to biogas production, it effectively taxes itself! Or, you could call it an "Investment" in biogas generation. But not really.

Regardless, they will be pumping up the carbon-neutral REPLACEMENT for the fossil fuel they currently use.

Again, unlike you.

NotParker
2.6 / 5 (10) Jun 26, 2012
They will use natural gas idiot. Then they will use the subsidies from the government (paid for by poor consumers), to pretend to subsidize the production of biogas. Which is methane. Which is a fossil fuel.


nutpecker.

Methane produced via biomass fermentation is NOT fossil fuel


I love the idea it produces way more planet killing GHGs.
djr
3 / 5 (2) Jun 26, 2012
dir, people will be bailing from the grid more and more

Shhhh - don't tell the people in California, or New Jersey - http://cleantechn...-market/ And the cost keeps going down - so I wonder what that means for the future?????
NotParker
2.6 / 5 (10) Jun 26, 2012
dir, people will be bailing from the grid more and more

Shhhh - don't tell the people in California, or New Jersey - http://cleantechn...-market/ And the cost keeps going down - so I wonder what that means for the future?????


45 cents per kWh

http://wattsupwit...ifornia/

Of that 45 cents, most of it will go to subsidizing "renewables".
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2012
45 cents per kWh

I am at work - so don't have time to address in depth - I believe that Calif. has tiered rates - in order to encourage conservation during the peak hours - their actual residetial rates are running around 16 cents per kWh
http://www.cpuc.c...Electric Rates/ENGRD/ratesNCharts_elect.htm

But - to bolster my point - if your residential rates are around 16 c. per kWh - and you can put solar on your roof for around 12 c. per kWh - guess what smart people are going to do?????
djr
5 / 5 (2) Jun 26, 2012
repost of that link - it would not edit.

http://www.cpuc.c...Electric Rates/ENGRD/ratesNCharts_elect.htm
Caliban
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 27, 2012
nutpecker,

You've got an answer(of sorts)for everything, don't you, boy?
Sadly, just like the third grade playground bluster it emulates, it is based entirely upon hyperbole and shouting.

Maybe one day you will have grown up enough to sit at the adult table.
djr
5 / 5 (1) Jun 27, 2012
Really good cost breakdown for electricity rates here in the U.S.
http://solarcellc...age.html
If you realize that Peak rates in states like California that have tiered rates may be as high as Parkers 45 cents kWh, and solar tends to offset peak rates well (best production in the early afternoon) - you are offsetting 45 cent rates against 12 cent rates - pretty good deal for solar. And predictions going down to about 7c by 2015 - and probable keep going down from there.
PussyCat_Eyes
1.6 / 5 (7) Jun 27, 2012
'@pussycat, Oh! Oh! Ah! Stop, Stop! You slay me with your sarcasm and playground nanna-nanna-boo-boo.

I knew it wouldn't be long before your predictably passive-aggressive downranking attacks would blossom into full frontal attack.

It has been interesting to watch you make your first little baby steps of aggression. And it is always a pleasure to see my understanding confirmed --this time in you. And I clearly discern the color of your coat.

I will be nice just this once.

"Funny", that somewhere else in the world, someone is having this same conversation, as there is plenty of coal, natural gas, and petroleum and it is still relatively cheap and enormously profitable --especially with taxpayer subsidies." - Caliban

I would expect you to be nice all the time..gentle, even. But you do prove my point, that fossil fuels are still relatively affordable to the masses, and it will not and cannot go away any time soon, especially when the cold winds blow. (contd)
PussyCat_Eyes
2.1 / 5 (7) Jun 27, 2012
It's the same old story on a continuous basis...it's us against them. Nothing really changes is what I was trying to point out, and whatever GHGs are emitted normally are also emitted by so-called new processes that don't really change things a whole lot...not when CO2 is still being produced from something that shouldn't be emitting it at all.
Maybe you don't regard it as disingenuous, but it is what it is. Before reading the article, I half expected that NO GHGs would be pumped into the atmosphere. No one in their right mind wants to breathe GHGes. But solar and wind and Hydrogen for batteries still can't replace the awesome power of fossil fuels. We are at its mercy in certain ways and alternatives don't provide enough of what humans require...to live comfortably. I just hate all the bickering and pretense that solar, wind and other forms are going to save us. We're too interested in a warm, comfortable life with all the trimmings.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.1 / 5 (23) Jun 27, 2012
They will use natural gas idiot. Then they will use the subsidies from the government (paid for by poor consumers), to pretend to subsidize the production of biogas. Which is methane. Which is a fossil fuel.
Hey thanks for the opportunity to show how fossil fuel gets so much more in subsidies even though you would think they wouldn't need them at all to compete:

"A 2009 study by the Environmental Law Institute[5] assessed the size and structure of U.S. energy subsidies over the 20022008 period. The study estimated that subsidies to fossil-fuel based sources amounted to approximately $72 billion over this period and subsidies to renewable fuel sources totaled $29 billion. The study did not assess subsidies supporting nuclear energy."
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.2 / 5 (26) Jun 27, 2012
t...not when CO2 is still being produced from something that shouldn't be emitting it at all.
-And why would you think this? Why shouldn't fuel cells emit co2? Because you don't WANT them to? Or because you just needed something weighty to say, because you just had to say SOMETHING...?

"The company's founder and CEO, KR Sridhar, said at the official unveiling of the company on Wednesday that the technology--when it's powered by natural gas--can cut carbon dioxide emissions in half compared to the emissions produced conventional power sources, on average."

-you toad.
I knew it wouldn't be long before your predictably passive-aggressive downranking attacks would blossom into full frontal attack.
It's almost like you crave them. What, is caliban also me?
NotParker
2.7 / 5 (12) Jun 27, 2012
A 2009 study by the Environmental Law Institute[5] assessed the size and structure of U.S. energy subsidies over the 20022008 period.


Debunked. The largest portion was the foreign tax credit. US companies operating overseas pay taxes to the country they work in. So the US deducts that tax. It has nothing to do with energy companies and is available to all US companies operaing overseas.
NotParker
2.7 / 5 (12) Jun 27, 2012
Really good cost breakdown for electricity rates here in the U.S.
http://solarcellc...age.html
If you realize that Peak rates in states like California that have tiered rates may be as high as Parkers 45 cents kWh, and solar tends to offset peak rates well (best production in the early afternoon) - you are offsetting 45 cent rates against 12 cent rates - pretty good deal for solar. And predictions going down to about 7c by 2015 - and probable keep going down from there.


Look, California will go bankrupt soon enough. Since I don't live there I don't care if idiots want to destroy the economy by subsidizing stupid renewables. But lets be honest, the only way solar is cheaper than grid power is when grid power is made ridiculously expensive because of subsidies.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (24) Jun 27, 2012
A 2009 study by the Environmental Law Institute[5] assessed the size and structure of U.S. energy subsidies over the 20022008 period.

Debunked. The largest portion was the foreign tax credit. US companies operating overseas pay taxes to the country they work in. So the US deducts that tax. It has nothing to do with energy companies and is available to all US companies operaing overseas.
I provided an excerpt from a reputable website. You ought to do the same or people might think you are making this up.
NotParker
2.8 / 5 (11) Jun 27, 2012
A 2009 study by the Environmental Law Institute[5] assessed the size and structure of U.S. energy subsidies over the 20022008 period.

Debunked. The largest portion was the foreign tax credit. US companies operating overseas pay taxes to the country they work in. So the US deducts that tax. It has nothing to do with energy companies and is available to all US companies operaing overseas.
I provided an excerpt from a reputable website. You ought to do the same or people might think you are making this up.


1) Your source said the #1 "subsidy" was the foreign tax credit.

"Most countries tax only income earned within their borders, while the U.S. taxes the worldwide income earned by its citizens; the foreign tax credit is one mechanism to ensure U.S. individuals and businesses are not paying tax twice on the same dollar of income."

http://taxfoundat...they-are
rubberman
2.3 / 5 (6) Jun 28, 2012
As usual it only reads until it sees something to latch onto that hopefully supports it's viewpoint.....should've read it all.

"The study measures subsidy value through the cost of a subsidy to the government"...from PDF in the link

Regardless of the label of "foreign tax credit", the end beneficiaries of said credits were fossil fuel producers (otherwise the dollars could not legally be counted as subsidies to them). Also, the link specifies that of the 72 billion in subsidies, the #1 subsidy is the foreign tax credit amounting to 15.3 billion.
Kudos to Ebay for finding a better way.
Kudos to NP for his consistent level of debate performance, information usage and being able to tie his own shoes.
NotParker
2.8 / 5 (11) Jun 28, 2012
As usual it only reads until it sees something to latch onto that hopefully supports it's viewpoint.....should've read it all.

"The study measures subsidy value through the cost of a subsidy to the government"...from PDF in the link

Regardless of the label of "foreign tax credit", the end beneficiaries of said credits were fossil fuel producers


No. Because the companies paid taxes. Just not in the USA.

Any company can benefit from the foreign tax credit if they get taxed while doing business in a foreign country.

Desperate aren't you?
NotParker
2.8 / 5 (11) Jun 28, 2012

Kudos to Ebay for finding a better way.


What do you call someone who pretends to be against GHG's, but sucks up to a big corporation for producing even more dangerous (supposedly) GHG's than just burning natural gas directly?

rubberman
1.7 / 5 (6) Jun 28, 2012
You are really unintelligent. Just read the whole paper in the link, it explains clearly why it is classified as a subsidy, it is above your head....but it is written in english.

"Any company can benefit from the foreign tax credit if they get taxed while doing business in a foreign country."

Were not talking about "any company", were talking about producers of fossil fuels specifically.

What do you call an internet troll who is made to look foolish with almost everything he posts, has the attention span of a ferret and is repeatedly caught lying and cherry picking data sets?.......Not....Parker?
PussyCat_Eyes
2.1 / 5 (7) Jun 28, 2012
re: California going bankrupt...very true, and Stockton is the first one to go...there'll be others and their solar arrays and windmills on treeless hills won't help them. It's very fitting that the land of the Liberal/Socialist filthy rich chickens are coming home to roost. I can see the state emptying out once the new higher taxes come online. Obamaaaaa Obamaaaaa, ruler of all he surveys. His kingdom lives forever, in Socialistic ways....(second verse) uh, never mind
PussyCat_Eyes
2.1 / 5 (7) Jun 28, 2012
@rubberman
Let me ask you this: Presently....
1) What do you put in your car's engine to make it run?
2) If you own a hybrid car, how do you power up your batteries? Electric from the grid or wishful thinking?
3) With what does your power company produce power to run the turbines that produce your electricity? If they use fossil fuels, are you prepared to cut yourself off from that electricity? Winter's coming, you know.
NotParker
2.7 / 5 (12) Jun 28, 2012
You are really unintelligent. Just read the whole paper in the link, it explains clearly why it is classified as a subsidy, it is above your head....but it is written in english.

"Any company can benefit from the foreign tax credit if they get taxed while doing business in a foreign country."

Were not talking about "any company", were talking about producers of fossil fuels specifically.


If you call it a fossil fuel subsidy and any business that pays taxes in foreign countries can claim the deduction, then you are being dishonest.

As usual.
rubberman
2.8 / 5 (9) Jun 29, 2012
It's not called a fossil fuel subsidy unless it's paid to a company that produces fossil fuels or related goods. This is why they can legally call the portion paid to these companies subsidies. If it was paid to a manufacturer of solar panels, it would be classed as a subsidy to them as well....the simplicity of this concept is understood by grade school children.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.1 / 5 (25) Jun 29, 2012
re: California going bankrupt...very true, and Stockton is the first one to go
"On May 6, 2008, the City Council voted 7-0 to file for Chapter 9 bankruptcy, becoming the largest city to do so ever in California."
http://en.wikiped...lifornia

-And many others. Why would you expect people to take you seriously and not conclude that you are a lying dumbass if you are too lazy to check your facts?
rubberman
2.8 / 5 (9) Jun 29, 2012
@rubberman
Let me ask you this: Presently....
1) What do you put in your car's engine to make it run?
2) If you own a hybrid car, how do you power up your batteries? Electric from the grid or wishful thinking?
3) With what does your power company produce power to run the turbines that produce your electricity? If they use fossil fuels, are you prepared to cut yourself off from that electricity? Winter's coming, you know.


Answers Ritchie:
1) Gas
2) Still gas genius, it's a hybrid
3) Bruce Nuclear

FYI, the car is a luxury, I live 55k from work, on days like today I bike, I use the car on days that I have the kids. My house is 660 square feet, the only electricity used in the summer is the clock radio, washing machine, fridge and toaster oven occasionally. Winter, furnace is natural gas. Greenhouse & 700 sq.foot veggie garden provide year round, so do the cherry and pear tree thanks to freezing. Meat is local, salmon is the only import. Yeah, I practice what i preach
NotParker
2.5 / 5 (11) Jun 29, 2012
It's not called a fossil fuel subsidy unless it's paid to a company that produces fossil fuels or related goods. This is why they can legally call the portion paid to these companies subsidies. If it was paid to a manufacturer of solar panels, it would be classed as a subsidy to them as well....the simplicity of this concept is understood by grade school children.


Grade school children would understand that any tax paid to a foreign country is tax deductible in the USA.

It can be a tax on bananas. Children would understand that. For some reason your are not capable of understanding that.
PussyCat_Eyes
1.9 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2012
@rubberman
Let me ask you this: Presently....
1) What do you put in your car's engine to make it run?
2) If you own a hybrid car, how do you power up your batteries? Electric from the grid or wishful thinking?
3) With what does your power company produce power to run the turbines that produce your electricity? If they use fossil fuels, are you prepared to cut yourself off from that electricity? Winter's coming, you know.


Answers Ritchie:
1) Gas
2) Still gas genius, it's a hybrid
3) Bruce Nuclear

FYI, the car is a luxury, I live 55k from work, on days like today I bike, I use the car on days that I have the kids. My house is 660 square feet, the only electricity used in the summer is the clock radio, washing machine, fridge and toaster oven occasionally. Winter, furnace is natural gas. Greenhouse & 700 sq.foot veggie garden provide year round, so do the cherry and pear tree thanks to freezing. Meat is local, salmon is the only import. Yeah, I practice what i preach
PussyCat_Eyes
1.9 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2012
Who the hell is Ritchie? I don't know any Ritchie, rubber....I spoke to Russkiy once and he was very nice. Perhaps you should take lessons from Russkiy at being civil toward strangers.

Anyway....so you DO use gasoline. Very enlightening. That means you're not a full greenie yet. Comes the day when you don't use gasoline at all, or natural gas...then you have the right to be as much of a AGWist prick as you want. But for now...you're a gasoline pumping hypocrite.
PussyCat_Eyes
1.9 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2012
@rubberman
So far, you are divorced or separated, living in a tiny house and you share your kids with your ex/wife. You have a hybrid car that uses gasoline that you use in bad weather and to ferry the kids around. You use the minimum amount of electricity for the essential electrics, and you warm your house with another fossil fuel in winter. But you appear to be committing yourself to other people not using fossil fuels for their own comfort and convenience, right?
And you don't see anything wrong with that?
And you like nuclear?
Newbeak
5 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2012
If these things were powering neighbourhoods in the east,everybody would have A/C.
NotParker
3 / 5 (8) Jul 01, 2012
If these things were powering neighbourhoods in the east,everybody would have A/C.


... but they wouldn't be able to afford it.
Newbeak
5 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2012
If these things were powering neighbourhoods in the east,everybody would have A/C.


... but they wouldn't be able to afford it.

I don't know.Bloom Energy is supposed to market a $3000 unit for homeowners.Failing that,why can't utilities set up a fuel cell farm to supply power to a housing development,and charge each user like they do now to buy the power produced by the fuel cells?
rubberman
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 03, 2012
Ritchie- Calling someone a prick isn't polite.
If you live in Canada or the US and don't rely on fossil fuels for anything, you are homeless, there is currently no way around this.... period.
I like nuclear more than fossil fuel, less than sustainable renewable.
My commitment is to a carbon neutral state, fossil fuel will always be required for something somewhere, we just don't need to use it until the point of exhaustion when cleaner energy is available.
You are correct, it is hypocritical of me to use things I detest having to, but, at least I don't change my handles and attempt to pass myself off as someone else because of the stupidity of my previous posts.
The irony is amusing.
NotParker
2.5 / 5 (8) Jul 03, 2012
If these things were powering neighbourhoods in the east,everybody would have A/C.


... but they wouldn't be able to afford it.

I don't know.Bloom Energy is supposed to market a $3000 unit for homeowners.Failing that,why can't utilities set up a fuel cell farm to supply power to a housing development,and charge each user like they do now to buy the power produced by the fuel cells?


Bloom Boxes are heavily subsidized. I every neighborhood had one, the subsidies would bankrupt 99% of the people.
PussyCat_Eyes
2 / 5 (8) Jul 05, 2012
Ritchie- Calling someone a prick isn't polite.
If you live in Canada or the US and don't rely on fossil fuels for anything, you are homeless, there is currently no way around this.... period.
I like nuclear more than fossil fuel, less than sustainable renewable.
My commitment is to a carbon neutral state, fossil fuel will always be required for something somewhere, we just don't need to use it until the point of exhaustion when cleaner energy is available.
You are correct, it is hypocritical of me to use things I detest having to, but, at least I don't change my handles and attempt to pass myself off as someone else because of the stupidity of my previous posts.
The irony is amusing.
- rubberman

Calling someone Ritchie when she's not Ritchie isn't polite either...and that definitely makes YOU a prick.
Estevan57
1.9 / 5 (30) Jul 05, 2012
In the US where I live you could have electric power and heat, and walk to work as well. All provided by hydroelectric. There really is no such thing as a full greenie, people can embrace as much of the ethos of conservation as they want, it's a free country. Being thrifty with power usage is smart business practice, and using environmentally sound practices doesn't mean you have to save your bike tires to retread your Birkenstocks.

Green practices are not an indicator of political preference, but of taking resposibility for your personal or business impact.
PussyCat_Eyes
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 05, 2012
Tbe AGWists want everyone else to stop using fossil fuels, but won't do it themselves. Double standard. Being thrifty saves you money...if you're not using the electricity, then turn it off. Same with gasoline. You wouldn't leave your car running all day while you're inside your house, right?
But AGWists look at everyone else, but they don't see themselves doing it too. Blind to their own offensive habits, but not blind to everyone else's.

Poor me...I don't live near enough to a hydroelectric plant.
Estevan57
2 / 5 (29) Jul 05, 2012
"Tbe AGWists want everyone else to stop using fossil fuels, but won't do it themselves." This is quite an exaggeration. There is a wide variety of opinions within the population that believe in AGW. 125,000,000 people in the US all think the same?
The notion that 47% to 53% of the US population (believers in AGW) believes this extreme view is preposterous.

While it is a popular argument that AGW are hypocrits because they don't embrace the most extreme claims, there is no reason that a person should have to. Like I have just stated: "people can embrace as much of the ethos of conservation as they want, it's a free country".

Stating the views of others usually distorts them to the point of ridiculousness, and has become very common in society today. Saying "someone wants to do this", or "so and so believes this" is cheap and easy, but doesn't reflect the reality that most things are not black and white.
I use gas for heat, it's cheaper.
PussyCat_Eyes
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 05, 2012
Estevan57....in the other thread "girls"....I gave you about 8 or more "proofs". Did you read them?
Estevan57
1.9 / 5 (30) Jul 05, 2012
OK I'll bite this time, "proofs" of what? The opinions of millions of people, or carefully selected excerpts that only support your particular opinion of what other people believe? With enough googling "proof" of anything can be found.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.