''Nuclear Power is the best alternative to Fossil Fuels''

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

Either way, even if the data was complete up to yesterday, the chart is a chart of the past and does not give any clear indication of the future trends projections.

OK.
Care to provide numerical data for how you think the trends I provided will project into the futute?

[Sleeping Giant]

According to the SEIA, there was 418 MW of installed CSP in the US. And there are 4,000 MW under contract for new construction. That's about a 1,000% increase.

The growth of PV installations will probably run up against available supply. US production grew by 74% in 2007.

The new EESA ITC could be as high as $18 billion. That's a lot of money being pumped into solar. Bush (the oil man) signed that one. Obama is talking $150 billion for alternative energy.

It would be hard to put a number on future solar growth, but it's certainly going to be much higher than in the past.

[Sleeping Giant]

SEIA data: Industry Data | SEIA - Solar Energy Industries Association

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

OK.
Care to provide numerical data for how you think the trends I provided will project into the futute?

I will leave that to you, given that you so generously offered. As it stands though, your chart is a chart of the past, not the future.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

In post #131 I offered to provide projections based on known data. That offer still stands.

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

As it stands though, your chart is a chart of the past, not the future.

Quite so.
I posted in direct response to your comment about current trends.
In post #88 I pointed out that growth in renewable energy contribution was falling further behind that of fosssils.
In post #89 you flatly rejected that.
That's life.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

Quite so. I posted in direct response to your comment about current trends. In post #88 I pointed out that growth in renewable energy contribution was falling further behind that of fosssils. In post #89 you flatly rejected that.
That's life.

Your chart does not reflect any future trend projection, thus it's a chart of the past. That's life.

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

Your chart does not reflect any future trend projection, thus it's a chart of the past. That's life.

As you said, you have no more up to date statistics thus yours is also that of the past.
No big deal.
My point was that, as far as the data I have on current trends permits, the aggregate of all renewables is falling further behind conventional thermal.....and pretty much everything else as it happens.
I was specifically addressing that point and that's what the chart I posted shows. It gives current growth and trends in response to your post #87 where you introduced the topics of current growth and trends.
Current, not future.
But, if you'd like me to extend the trends, I can.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

As you said, you have no more up to date statistics thus yours is also that of the past. No big deal. My point was that, as far as the data I have on current trends permits, the aggregate of all renewables is falling further behind conventional thermal.....and pretty much everything else as it happens. I was specifically addressing that point and that's what the chart I posted shows. It gives current growth and trends in response to your post #87 where you introduced the topics of current growth and trends. Current, not future. But, if you'd like me to extend the trends, I can.

Not a big deal. As I further introduced and indicated your chart reflects the past, not the future. Simple as that. It's a chart of the past and does not reflect future trends and cannot be relied upon, to draw meaningful conclusions about future energy trends.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

In post #131 I offered to provide projections based on known data. That offer still stands.

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

Not a big deal. As I further introduced and indicated your chart reflects the past, not the future. Simple as that. It's a chart of the past and does not reflect future trends and cannot be relied upon, to draw meaningful conclusions about future energy trends.

Fine.
Provide one that does.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

Fine. Provide one that does.

I will leave that up to you, given that you so generously offered. However as it stands your chart reflects the past, not the future.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

In post #131 I offered to provide projections based on known data. That offer still stands.

Originally Posted by Besoeker Energy chart of the past