Trump Administration To Pay German Firm $1.2 Billion To Halt US Wind Projects (bbc.com) 280
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: German energy company RWE has said it will abandon its offshore wind projects in the U.S. after reaching a $1.2 billion payout deal with President Donald Trump's Department of the Interior (DoI). RWE said that it will now reinvest the sum into conventional gas projects, including $900 million in a liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal project in Louisiana. "After careful consideration, it was determined there is no path forward to permit these projects in the US for the foreseeable future," the company said in a statement.
RWE said it has agreed to relinquish its leases off the California and Louisiana coasts as well as in the New York Bight. Overall, the German firm plans to invest approximately $19.6 billion in the U.S. over the next six years "to grow its generation capacity." Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in a statement posted on X that Americans deserve an energy system built on common sense and not one dependent on "costly subsidies." "We welcome RWE's agreement and voluntary investment in projects that strengthen our nation's energy security," he added. Earlier this year, the DOL reached a deal with TotalEnergies putting an end to the French company's offshore wind projects in the U.S. "Instead, the firm agreed to reroute investment to build a LNG plant in Texas and to develop 'upstream conventional oil' in the Gulf of Mexico," reports the BBC.
Another similar deal was signed with Charlotte-based Duke Energy last month to terminate the company's offshore wind lease in the Carolina Long Bay area.
RWE said it has agreed to relinquish its leases off the California and Louisiana coasts as well as in the New York Bight. Overall, the German firm plans to invest approximately $19.6 billion in the U.S. over the next six years "to grow its generation capacity." Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in a statement posted on X that Americans deserve an energy system built on common sense and not one dependent on "costly subsidies." "We welcome RWE's agreement and voluntary investment in projects that strengthen our nation's energy security," he added. Earlier this year, the DOL reached a deal with TotalEnergies putting an end to the French company's offshore wind projects in the U.S. "Instead, the firm agreed to reroute investment to build a LNG plant in Texas and to develop 'upstream conventional oil' in the Gulf of Mexico," reports the BBC.
Another similar deal was signed with Charlotte-based Duke Energy last month to terminate the company's offshore wind lease in the Carolina Long Bay area.
Are you sure that's wise? (Score:5, Insightful)
... the German firm plans to invest approximately $19.6 billion in the U.S. over the next six years "to grow its generation capacity."
The US is sufficiently unstable that I would be very hesitant to invest large sums of money there. I realize that server farms built largely to service the AI bubble need LOTS of power. But even if the demand isn't a bubble, do you really want to be investing in a country which is making an enemy of pretty much all of the rest of the world?
I think America is on very shaky ground now, and may not be nearly as far from "failed state" status as many people imagine it is.
Re:Are you sure that's wise? (Score:4, Informative)
I'm an american and I keep looking for good ways to invest outside of this kleptocracy.
Re:Are you sure that's wise? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. If "whale fall" ever becomes a phrase immediately understood by the masses, I'll amend my sig! ;-)
Re: (Score:3)
It is standard practice now for companies to say they will invest in the US. The gap between what they say and what they do is vast, because this serves their interests:
- saying big things makes Trump satisfied
- doing things involves investing in the US, which is obviously dumb
The risk of the gap being noticed by the admin is very low, so it’s the sane strategy
Re: (Score:2)
What about trump gas? Is it the best investment?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
What about trump gas? Is it the best investment?
I don't think swamp gas - I guess they didn't drain the swamp after all - is very good for the things natural gas is usually used for.
But if Trump was willing to go to Iran personally, perhaps a few of his farts would turn the tide on a war which he otherwise has no hope of winning.
Re: (Score:2)
About as likely as it was for him to go to Vietnam back then.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is all about the coal
As in "rolling coal"? ;->
Re:Are you sure that's wise? (Score:5, Informative)
Unstable: .shrinkage.
1. ditching American allies (just about every one) over perceived slights to Dear Leader,
2. attempting to curtail voting because they might vote Democrat but positing the inane travesty that "illegal" immigrants are voting (no evidence),
3. promoting fossil fuels while the American West dries out, forest fires in Canada and the U.S., glaciers worldwide shrinking, Europe's rivers disappearing, all the while claiming global warming is a hoax. . . . even the planet appears in on the Conspiracy,
4. promoting the South and slave owning as beneficial for blacks,
5. coercing soldiers to take testosterone supplements because some idiot in charge gets his science from FOX news,
6. judges telling the Justice Department there is no more regular order, i.e., presuming the Justice Dept. isn't lying their asses off and demanding evidence,
7. electing a convicted fraudster and flim-flam man pres, even after also convicted of sexual abuse and then convicting him again for defamation against the woman he was convicted of abusing,
8. ditching environmental rules because pollution is good for everyone, especially when the polluters pay kickbacks to el Bunko,
9. standing up a Geheime Staatspolizei* to kidnap people off the street because they look brown or have been living here too long "without papers", and sometimes killing people in the process,
10. shaking down companies for contributions to Dear Leader in exchange for gov. favors thus increasing his total take to over $2.8 Billion (that we know about) in under two years and turning the gov. into protection racket,
11. Setting up a Fascist state with the gov. taking stakes in private companies thus protecting them from competition and creating an uneven playing field,
12. Setting up some whack-job of a commission that claimed billions in saved tax money when in fact it was less than $50 million but cost much more in side-effects,
13. fucking up the lives of millions of migrants whose only crime was to come here, get a job and see their kids do better than they, in short, the crime of believing in the American Dream,
14. Pop. the fed. bench with crooked judges who will bend over backwards and forwards (they are not particular) to satisfy the el Bunko's whims,
15. Starting was with Iran and losing the Strait of Hormuz to them causing gas prices to be jacked up,
16. Curtailing alternative energy so Americans are tethered to the oil market with little means of escape,
17. promoting data centers everywhere with their pollution and noise and jacking up peoples' electric bills,
18. paying off those nice billionaires who desperately need more money to make up for their short dick length,
19. feeding those nutjobs in Silicon Valley who really want some sort of Singularity and setting the world on a path to environmental catastrophe because they figure the their Singularity machine will discover warp drive and allow them to escape the catastrophe they caused,
20. making America reviled throughout the free world but loved by dictatorships,
21. pardoning criminals who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6 because el Bunko's ego. . .
Nope, no stability issues here!
* Geheime Staatspolizei is the long name of the Gestapo
Re: (Score:3)
never been a fan of Sleepy Joe but things were less chaotic when he was POTUS even during COVID.
Speaking of "Weekend at Bernie's", where is Mitch McConnell? If his recovery is going so well, why hasn't he made a video statement?
Not a fan? Grow up! this is the alternative!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
never been a fan of Sleepy Joe but things were less chaotic when he was POTUS even during COVID.
Politicians are like toilets. You're not supposed to like them, just pick the least gross one. YOU ARE THE PROBLEM. Sorry, princess, you don't get a everything you want AND a pony. You need to pick the least worst candidate. Even in the primaries. As you admitted, you don't like Joe Biden, but agreed things were better. He was never my favorite, either....but it's him or Trump.
So stop complaining. Pick the least worst candidate and encourage those who will listen to you to pick the rational, sensible decision. Do I like the Democrats? Eh...nope, not really. However, Clinton's record is the best in my lifetime. He entered with a record deficit and left with a record surplus. Bush Jr did the polar opposite. I even think GWB was a cool guy. I'd totally have a beer with him and probably laugh the whole time...would I want him to be president again?...hell no, I thought he ruined the country with his reckless spending and pointless war + that whole patriot act thing....but if he was running against Trump?...OK...GWB it is.
So grow the fuck up, and stop being a democracy pillow princess. Vote with your mind and not your heart. Does AOC/Mamdami inspire me? Nope...not at all. But if it were them or Trump 2.0?...I'd vote for them and not complain.
Democrats are like chemotherapy. It's a miserable shitty experience, but it's far better than letting the cancer spread. This whole liberal vs conservative narrative is a hoax. Nothing about Trumpism is conservative. Similarly, Democrats are not liberal, unless your mind is stuck in the 1950s, back when you could use the N-word freely in most circles.
Modern politics are about adults vs children. The children are fun...build the wall, Mexico will pay for it!...I'll solve all our financial problems with tariffs and China and someone else (China/retailers) will pay it...not you!!!....hey, don't notice our FAILING economy and how your financial prospects are getting worse...look at all the "illegals" we're rounding up like the big tough guys we are!!!. That's fucking fun, but it's a lie and a fantasy. Democrats are boring adults that balance the budget and respect you rights A LOT MORE than Republicans. And I get it, it's a drag....paying for shit in a sustainable way is a buzz kill.
However, the Democrats have no room or freedom to be liberals or chase their ideals because we have this shitty cycle where a Republican breaks the economy (or technically it breaks because through a combination of easily predictable economic phenomena, their reckless laws and tax cuts, and they fail to mitigate the harm through the many obvious solutions available), Bush Sr did, Bush Jr did, and Trump did...and then a Democrat comes in...battles with child like Republican congresspeople who post about Jewish Space Lasers and talk about Pizzagate....fixes the economy...things are boring and stable...and people like you complain about the stupidest shit imaginable, forgetting what we endured...and then a new child gets nominated, makes bold promises...and gets elected...and predictably tanks the economy. Who was the last Republican that left the economy in a better state than it was when he was elected?
It's easy to remember Mexico will pay for this wall....but also, don't forget GWB telling you he'll privatize social security...and how he took a record surplus and blew it on tax cuts that only benefited the wealthy, like repealing the estate tax....so rich assholes can pass more of their money to their worthless offspring while starving you of basic gov functions.
Grow the fuck up. You sound like some asshole who nearly died of COVID complaining about a sore throat from having a doctors save his life with a ventilator.
Re: (Score:2)
given that Slashdot still doesn't allow deleting or editing a comment, perhaps you should verify that you're replying to the right person before publishing your screed
Re:Are you sure that's wise? (Score:4, Informative)
Just keep counting made up votes until they have enough.
What I want to do is this. I just want to find, uh, 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state."
Just have a group of shadowy figures have the password to the autopen.
Oh like say, Peter Thiel or the other cadre of billionaires taking advantage of Sleepy Don?
Also you admit there is 0 evidence of "autopen" anything with Biden right? That it is in fact a fabricated story that you fell for? Meanwhile Trump can't even explain what EO's he's signing and falls asleep during cabinet meetings.
This is the Republican playbook and too many supposedly smart folks here fall for it like a 78 year old grampa. So ready to eat slop all because you all love chicks with dicks too much for your psyche to deal with.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that cuts the other way because Biden was significantly a better President than Trump so apparently by science more cabinet meetings is a bad thing.
Re: (Score:2)
We'll likely be moving to Peru if things get much worse. The government there is even more corrupt, but at least they're open and honest about it. Besides, it's the best food on the planet.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought best food on the planet was in Thailand.
But I was always interested in Peru, certainly worth a visit!
Re: (Score:2)
Where in Thailand they eat rice, in Peru it's potatoes. There are over 3,000 varieties of potato (really!) grown in the country, they originated there. They also eat rice, but it's just a side and almost always just the cheap short grain white variety.
One advantage Peru has over Thailand is that they have every climate there, from the Amazon rainforest, up to cloud forest, wet grasslands, tundra, dry grasslands, semi-desert, and down to the irrigated valleys on the coast in the Atacama Desert, the driest
Re: (Score:3)
So love it or leave it, eh? Fucking fascist!
Re: (Score:2)
No. You GTFO of my country.
Re: Are you sure that's wise? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you don't think the US is unstable you're either mentally deficient, or have found some clever way to avoid all news for the last 11 years.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll be perfectly happy when Trump is gone but many of the conservative policies are not going anywhere and about half the country is perfectly fine with that.
You know this would probably be more true if the Republican's had come to their senses and nominatoed Nikki Haley or even DeSantis instead of Trump in 2024 but there's an ever-increasing possibility that Trump's absolutely inability to govern is going to turn the public against those policies.
Immigration for example, the concept of "abolish-ICE" was fringe lefty shit 2 years ago and now it's going mainstream [yougov.com]. Also on that topic for all the circus of mass deportations have American's seen positive results f
Re: (Score:2)
The silver lining of Trump may be that he ushers in an era of a second New Deal because he managed to be such a colossal fuck-up.
If the pendulum swings back as far the other way that would certainly be a normal and expected occurrence in many democracies. The people wanting to enable a pseudo-dictator will not be so happy when it is no longer their pseudo-dictator.
Re: (Score:2)
None of us are ready for Woke 2.0 but we brought it upon ourselves, ironically for not supporting the black woman.
Re: Are you sure that's wise? (Score:2)
From a business sense it is somewhat unstable.
For example if any investments were made WRT the earlier tarrifs, I bet they don't look so hot now.
Or maybe you invested in a large off shore wind project, how did the stability of the US turn out?
And for more balanced take (Trump is more recent, and extreme, but not the only problem) congress as a whole is unwilling to work together and pass laws so we end up with executive orders and whiplash on policy.
For an investment that will take years to complete and pay
Re: (Score:3)
Unstable? You're an idiot.
You're literally are posting in an article talking about an investment that had to be abandoned due to politics. It is the very definition of "unstable," a situation where the conditions for sanctioning the project today can change the viability of the project tomorrow.
This isn't a hypothetical by the way. I work for an energy company and we literally have placed the USA on the same list that had Libya on it in 2011, right after one of our facilities was destroyed during the civil war: Currently all final i
Re:Are you sure that's wise? (Score:4)
This is literally the same many russians say about their country. Doesn't mean it isn't a corrupt authoritarian shithole.
Re: (Score:2)
If we're a "failed" state, then most the world is a failed state.
He referred to the direction the US is heading, and fast. See Argentina for a precedent, once one of wealthiest countries, now it has a president who waves a chainsaw around on stage.
The federal government is headed for bankruptcy. Interest repayments are $1trillion/year now, more than defence spending. In ten years, the debt will double, with interest costing more than healthcare or pensions. When the bread runs out, the mobs get angry.
Meanwhile, democratic norms are being undermined, an
Re: (Score:3)
Well, we will absolutely never get to a balanced budget if we have Republicans doing their standard bullshit governing algorithm:
IF (president.is_republican?) AND (congress.is_republican?) THEN
cut_taxes();
cut_domestic_services();
cut_regulations();
while(1) {
warmonger();
military_spend();
}
ELSE
military_spend();
obstruct_reform(ALL);
concu
FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:5, Interesting)
how, exactly, is spending over a billion dollars to halt a renewable energy project (literally free electricity after the project is paid up minus a little bit of maintenance) Making America Great Again? are you really concerned about the birds? really? what is the reason? do you even have one? or is this just “follow the leader” ? this is a legitimate question. i really want to know.
Re:FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:5, Insightful)
Give away a Billion dollars in taxpayer's money so he can pocket $100 Million in fossil fuel kick backs? He literally doesn't see a problem with this.
Re:FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:5, Insightful)
Neither do any of the cult followers.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
His followers ie his administration lackeys now give full standing ovations when he enters or leaves the room. One the other day lasted 5 mins on TV, and there was lutnick, rubio etc all constantly clapping after someone has given Trump a shiny bit of gold as a praise present, the only thing now missing is the hand waving and chanting of this cronies. His claim to be the most transparent administration EVER, along his how Dr Trump is healing everyone with his money swindling and his MAGA cronies go "Let buy
Re: FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:2)
Trump couldn't build a coalition of people trapped in a burning building who needed to work together to escape.
Re: (Score:2)
Please link us to one actual signed deal.
There has been exactly one signed deal, the 2015 JCPOA because Obama was a better negotiator than Trump and actually understood how international relations and incentives work.
There is no "gulf coalition" because Trump is a terrible leader who is incapable of building coalitions. That's your boy you put your chips on and are too chickenshit to show your face now, a real dumbfuck following bigger dumbfucks. Seriously, eat shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Obama still 1-0
Wind always has significant maintenance costs (Score:2)
how, exactly, is spending over a billion dollars to halt a renewable energy project (literally free electricity after the project is paid up minus a little bit of maintenance)
Maintenance is not a minor cost. Especially so at sea. I have a local land based wind project that has been idle for many years. It was more costly than expected, including maintenance costs. It turns out the hardware did not have the expected longevity and reliability. And this is in a very pro-renewables state, California. If it could have been make viable it probably would have been. Other projects in the state have been commercially successful, and they too have significant ongoing maintenance costs.
Re: (Score:3)
Other projects in the state have been commercially successful, and they too have significant ongoing maintenance costs.
Yes, when the fuel is free, maintenance is going to be the dominant cost. That's not a bad thing, that just shows that the other costs are very very low. It's not nearly as large a cost as with nuclear, though, because when things go wrong they are not nearly as catastrophic so the safety standards don't need to be nearly as tight.
To answer the billion dollar question, its probably that allowing the project to proceed would end up costing the gov’t more than a billion.
Sure, but it would also have given much more than a billion dollars in tax returns on the electricity generated. The profits of course would be massively more than that. That's ho
Re: (Score:2)
Other projects in the state have been commercially successful, and they too have significant ongoing maintenance costs.
Yes, when the fuel is free, maintenance is going to be the dominant cost. That's not a bad thing, that just shows that the other costs are very very low.
Other costs are not low. They just may not be ongoing like maintenance. Yet the projects still has to be profitable enough to recover those costs too.
It's not nearly as large a cost as with nuclear, though, because when things go wrong they are not nearly as catastrophic so the safety standards don't need to be nearly as tight.
The US nuclear industry has released less radioactivity than the coal industry. Staying away from Soviet designs is one of the key safety measures. And newer generation reactors are even safer. And some of them can help address nuclear waste by consuming some waste as fuel. Also nuclear costs have been inflated by lawsuits, and renewables are increasing facing
Re: (Score:2)
Also nuclear costs have been inflated by lawsuits, and renewables are increasing facing the same problem. NIMBY attacks renewables too.
Not nearly as much as they have been reduced by the fact that the nuclear industry does not have to either a) get full insurance for the actual risks they are taking or b) cover the long term cost of maintaining (that word again) storage for their spent fuel.
It's precisely because the nuclear industry won't actually accept the risks from their own systems that it's absolutely correct that they should be subject to the onerous regulation and risk limitation that you are complaining about.
Re: Wind always has significant maintenance costs (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If maintenance is the concern, how do you justify spending millions to remove climate monitoring systems from the ocean, when they could just stop maintaining them for free?
Trash removal? Will the abandoned equipment be leaking anything over time? Also projects are sometimes required to restore the land (sea?) to its natural state when the project ends.
Re: Wind always has significant maintenance costs (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Wind turbines have long been a hate object for Trump.
He has claimed that they cause cancer and that they ruin the environment, etc.
Meanwhile, despite being an intermittent source of energy, wind power in 2026
is used in 138 countries and capacity increased by 40% worldwide last year.
Re: (Score:3)
This has nothing to do with rationality.
Wind turbines have long been a hate object for Trump.
He has claimed that they cause cancer and that they ruin the environment, etc.
And they obscure the ocean view from his beach-front golf course in Scotland.
(He lost the legal battle to have hem stopped/removed.)
How Trump's loathing for wind turbines started with a Scottish court battle [bbc.com]
Re: FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:5, Interesting)
China added 120Gw.
The US : 7 Gw
Sweden 2Gw
https://www.gwec.net/news/global-wind-installations-rise-record-40-as-industry-charts-way-out-of-energy-crisis
Re: (Score:2)
They also are now building the world's largest windmills at a site just off their southern coast. They're so large they've had to construct a special ship just to transport and install the blades.
Re: (Score:2)
how, exactly, is spending over a billion dollars to halt a renewable energy project ...Making America Great Again? ...
Maybe it's to Make Germany Great Again? /s
I'm sure that would track with this administration (*cough* Stephen Miller *cough*) and its supporters...
Re:FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:5, Insightful)
Everyone trying to answer this with technical responses is just dead wrong, sorry.
The explanation is simple: Republicans have been claiming "climate change not real" for 40+ years now and in that timespan the actual evidence keeps stacking up against that, it was already stacked up in the 90's.
So what's a political party to do when faced with overwhelming reality? Change course in light of new evidence? No, make your new reality with force.
That's all this is, a continued denial of reality because Republican politicians and voters would rather die than have to admit the libs were right about this, because after all if they were right about this what else could they be right about?
The same reason you see folks here whip out the same tired arguments about wind and solar power we've been hearing for 30 years.
Re: (Score:2)
The supposed justification is "national security", apparently US radar systems are so deficient that "the enemy" (whoever it is today) could sneak their ships/aircraft/missiles close to the coast just by staying behind the windmills. At least that's their claim. Everyone involved knows it's pure bovine byproduct of course, including the ones making the claims.
Re: (Score:2)
It was an offshore wind plant ...
Against popular believe, birds are neither blind nor stupid:
Scientific Findings on Collision Rates
* German BWO Study: An 18-month analysis tracking over 4 million bird movements at a northern German wind farm found that more than 99.8% of birds avoided the structures during both day and night, showing no spike in risk during heavy migration periods.
* Vattenfall & Spoor Research: A 19-month project at an offshore site tracking thousands of individual flight paths recorded
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I wouldn't say they are that smart. But natural selection will fix the problem regardless.
Re: (Score:2)
Natural selection does not fix stuff like that.
The birds dying in a wind turbine would need something that gets weeded out.
And the birds not dying would need to not have that, or have something else that helps them.
Re: FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:2)
Something like that. Very convenient and soothing little bubble.
Re:FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:5, Informative)
but then other laws essentially blocked their ability to actually build the wind power there
"other laws" = Trump executive orders
Re: FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:5, Informative)
Re: FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:4, Insightful)
2. I agree that it’s important to listen to both sides, but it’s also important to know which side is “speaking”. That being said, I don’t know how much credence I would give to a media outlet owned by someone best known as a “vulture capitalist”, and the fact that you can’t find a better source could also be considered as indicative of something. Believe it or not, actual news outlets actually have an objective of getting out actual true news, and not all media outlets are as biased as yours.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
“A number of sources have branded him a vulture capitalist, largely on account of his role at Elliott Management, which is a vulture fund.”
Yep, I do know that Wikipedia is “woke”. I also know that MAGA and its supporters completely lack human ethics and/or average human intelligence. They have a strong preference for confirmation bias, which is likely the case in...this case. It’s all Biden’s fault, right? Just like losing the 2026 Iran war?
3. Without any further corroboration, I have no way to validate that these people [“Department of Transportation staffer who spoke on the condition of anonymity.”] “said” these things or who these people are or what roles they serve, nor do I have the time or interest to research or frankly even care. I’m open to actual evidence (for example, the “internal memos”, but there is a clear pattern of misinformation and corruption by this administration and its supporters.
4. If the problem is with the woke nature of the policy, then why not deal with the woke nature of the policy?
Don’t worry, I don’t expect any response from you, especially one of any value. You’re going to be losing a lot of arguments here as long as you keep posting here (or anywhere else that is not basically a MAGA echo chamber).
Re: FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're not even beating that person up with the most obvious question: how does a huge project founder because of a less-than-two-percent change in the people working on it?
It makes it difficult to find contractors that match the required profiles. Its not a 2% problem.
Re: FOR MAGA ONLY (Score:2)
I commend you on your contortions to maintain your world view.
Re: (Score:2)
1. I didn’t make an argument; I simply pasted information for anyone else that might be reading this thread.
Actually you engaged in the logical fallacy of an ad hominem attack, rather than address the actual points made (Did the Biden admin include DEI requirements? Did it impact finding qualifying contractors and employees? Etc). And you continue doing so several times in this response. No evidence, just you don’t like the politics of a reporting organization.
Again, whether an organization is left or right is not a reason to dismiss them. Either can tell the truth when the truth coincidentally aligns wi
Re: (Score:2)
> Actually you engaged in the logical fallacy of an ad hominem attack,
False. I pasted factual information about he source of an article. I agree that this information would cause any critical thinker to question the article itself.
> Did the Biden admin include DEI requirements?
I have no information with which to address these questions, nor to determine whether such requirements had any significant impact on the program.
> whethe
Re: (Score:3)
Offshore wind has a decent capacity factor, with show term variations smoothed out with batteries. In fact some of the North Sea turbines are rivalling French nuclear plants for capacity factor now, although that's more a statement on how old and unable to deal with heat the latter are.
Re: (Score:3)
From what I just read on this, the whole "common sense" bit was the idea that wind power is not stable power.
This is nonsense. We're talking about offshore power. I don't know if you've ever been to a beach, but the wind is pretty much *always* blowing.
Further, paired with battery storage, wind farms can produce a stable source of power. That's how it's being done in, ironically, Texas.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When was the last time the US was attacked by something that a radar could see?
Oh that's right, 9/11. Well, those coastal radar installations are facing the wrong way. And frankly even if they were facing the right way, it wouldn't have helped because it takes too long for a fighter jets to intercept them and for a decision to be made to shoot them down.
And the time before that was Pearl Harbor (80 years ago), where the radar worked perfectly fine but people just ignored it. Well, we have satellites, submar
Re: (Score:2)
When was the last time the US was attacked by something that a radar could see?
Clue: when you create a blind spot, you invite someone to try exploiting it.
This administration (Score:5, Insightful)
is evil.
Re: (Score:2)
No, Donald Trump is not stupid. He knows *exactly* how to play to his base.
Re:This administration (Score:5, Insightful)
No, Donald Trump is not stupid. He knows *exactly* how to play to his base.
Yes, Donald Trump is stupid, and yes he knows exactly how to play to his base. These things are only incompatible if you think it requires intelligence and strategy to play to his base. It doesn't. He just does what he does and it happens to resonate with them, most of the time at least.
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to think it's all a crazy coincidence. I do not. His appearance of lunacy is, I'm convinced, intentional. He has managed to set up a system that allows him to reap billions in personal profits, from a part that was longing for a strong leader. In the process, he convinced them to completely abandon their conservative principles. None of this is coincidence, in my opinion.
Re: This administration (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or perhaps, blatant greed?
Re: This administration (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And what makes you think he shoots himself in the foot? He made $2.5 billion in the last year by exercising his power as President. https://www.forbes.com/sites/d... [forbes.com] I think he did just fine, from his point of view. He doesn't care about Republicans winning, or the economy, or stable government agencies, or the Constitution, or anything, other than that $2.4 billion number, and he got it.
Re: (Score:2)
The intelligence and strategy comes from the dozens of people (CIA, military advisors, financial experts, et cetera) who report directly to him... same as every President before and every President after him. The President is mainly just a figurehead (similar to how the Pope is the church's figurehead). Being intelligent and strategic isn't of the job description.
What you say is true... but basically all of the other president have actually been pretty smart people. There are some who clearly aren't as smart as others, but I can't think of any who were as dumb as Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
But he is senile, willfully ignorant, and surrounds himself with butt kissers who keep him ignorant.
Re: (Score:2)
I would agree with you if I thought he was *actually* ignorant. I think he doesn't care about principles, he focuses his mental energy on two things: absolute loyalty, and increasing his personal wealth. He is absolutely achieving his goals. You and I look at a politician and expect them to serve the people. Failing to serve the people is not a sign of a lack of intelligence, it's a sign of a lack of character.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean that he's ignorant in the sense that he knows nothing about the wider world beyond his own social milieu, and has no interest in learning more. Also ignorant in that he does not even read the leading newspapers, so knows only what the butt-kissers tell him. (Apparently he was shocked recently when informed of the shortage of distance weapons and air defense interceptors, and screamed at Hegseth about it.) He's intelligent and cunning, but his overriding self-interest, utter amorality, lack of curi
Re: (Score:2)
I would agree with that.
"Costly subsidies" (Score:5, Funny)
Costly subsidies... like $1.2 billion?
Re: (Score:2)
Think of the entire Iran war, probably at a cost of several trillion dollars in the end, as a subsidy for fossil fuels. Which is what it is. You'll see that paying $1.2 billion to try to get rid of the competition that the fossil fuel companies can't deal with otherwise is a really really small subsidy.
Re: (Score:2)
The Iran war is worse than that. It was intended to be a subsidy to cut the nominal costs of fossil fuels in the US. Instead, it’s a subsidy for Trump insider traders to make money out of the vast increase in the costs of fossil fuels that have followed the interdiction and destruction of fossil fuel assets and supplies, and to pay for the Iranian theocracy.
Re: (Score:2)
The Iran war is not a war on Iran, it is a war on the biggest oil importer of the planet, which used get ~50% of its oil through the Strait of Hormus: China
Also the rest of SE Asia got crippled by Irans blockade, or USA's war on Iran.
The silly circumstances are that historically countries like Thailand are considered "self sufficient" regarding oil (same for Niger), however they can not produce the fuel they need themselves. So they export their raw oil and import - for a significant higher price - the fuel
Snigger- what they don't tell you in the summary (Score:3, Informative)
RWE initially paid a total of approximately $1.26 billion for its U.S. offshore wind leases—$1.1 billion for its New York Bight lease in 2022 plus $163 million combined for California and Louisiana leases—before striking a $1.22 billion exit settlement with the U.S. government in August 2026 to relinquish them
So put your pearls down, this just resets the clock. Or whina nad stamp your feet. No skin off my nose.
Re:Snigger- what they don't tell you in the summar (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Snigger- what they don't tell you in the summa (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So put your pearls down, this just resets the clock.
Hopefully that's also how you feel as well about the $100 billion in refunds of Trump's tariffs, which were ordered by the Supreme Court - not a problem, just resets the clock. But it certainly didn't seem to be how Trump felt about that.
Re: Snigger- what they don't tell you in the summa (Score:2)
Art of the DEAL, amirite? (Score:4, Informative)
Cancellation payouts so far this year for wind projects and lease terminations:
$1.2B to RWE AG
$928M to TotalEnergies SE
$900M to Golden State and Bluepoint
$765M to Invenergy
These deals of course were made very strongly,
Could Sleepy Joe have done this?
Of course not.
A Man of Yesterday (Score:2)
The stupidity is breathtaking (Score:2)
It really is.
The World Laughs (Score:4, Insightful)
And the world laughs even harder at the craven stupidity of the current American government. You're caught up in a kleptocracy my American friends, and the Thief-In-Chief is in the Oval Office. He'll steal your mid-terms if you let him.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps, just perhaps it's the particular characteristics and mode of operation of the president in question? If you had to guess, honestly, three of the main things that you think spinlock_1911 might no like about President Trump, what would they be?
shit (Score:2)
Shouldn't DOGE be stopping this? (Score:4, Funny)
We're paying $1.2 billion to get LESS energy?
When Republicans said to run it like a business I don't think they understood how Trump runs his businesses....
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if there’s a chance you’ll ever be clever enough to understand the difference between stocks and flows. My money is on no.