Member Info for Quady

China is not building renewables for geopolitical reasons.

It's completely for economic reasons.

China is currently building 66% of all the yearly renewables on the planet every year.

All these coal fired stations that slug is on about.

Many are abandoned before they are built.

It's you NeedAbrain that is massively uninformed about the subject.

I don't need to use Google or AI.

I read Nature, the new scientist and the economist.

I also have feeds to NOAA and NASA, and while I can't read all of the content, because there is so much of it.

I read enough to know people like you talk complete rubbish.

NeedAbrain you haven't given any facts about what I posted.

You posted price information.

If you had a brain you would have read the article.

It explains why the price of renewables is high.

I will save you the trouble and put it in baby talk for you.

It's because if renewables were priced correctly.

Gas would be uneconomical to generate electricity.

So the price of renewables is overpriced.

Octopus energy is campaigning to lower the price of electricity by 30%.

Try reading.

You are clueless NeedAbrain.

Increasing gas supply, increases prices as the cost of production alone is more expensive than solar.

That doesn't even take into account the exploration costs.

It's the gas price that keeps the cost of renewables high.

Try educating yourself.

NeedAbrain , may I suggest you need a brain.

It's the pricing structure.

Renewables are 30% cheaper.

Of course renewables can run all the time.

Look at Px2xP.

How about H2V and V2H.

Look at green hydrogen from excess solar.

Another clueless Imbecile.

We have one particular imbecile on here that believes gas and oil is cheaper than renewables.

He doesn't even understand how renewables can supply 24 hour power.

Doesn't require all battery power, but some.

This article relates to Europe, however you can apply it to the world.

We require every ounce of copper on the planet.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/eet/opinion/europe-dodged-a-trade-war-but-its-electricity-market-is-broken/

Correct schlemiel.

When a price is being held down it's usually around ten percent or more of the stock that's in play.

Hence why this has never been held down.

It's just been lack of volume.

Good morning addicknt.

I have always said that this is what makes the book diverse.

Newmont will not be selling their shares for anything they consider below value.

No one will pair fair value.

So they will end up keeping them and show value on their balance sheet.

Sorry Madpunter show me the evidence, I want to try to understand why you believe this stuff.

Let me read what you are reading.

I just run a quick check on the IPCC denying sea ice.

It's complete rubbish.

No, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has not denied sea ice. In fact, the IPCC reports consistently highlight the ongoing decline of Arctic sea ice as a significant consequence of climate change. The IPCC acknowledges that sea ice extent and thickness are decreasing, and that this decline is contributing to rising sea levels and impacting ecosystems.

Madpunter you really are mad.

Post your evidence please.

I think your posts could be posted by slug but we know he's a liar and Imbecile.

Please post the supporting evidence for your post and not by some conspiracy theorist.

Sorry Madpunter that's ridiculous, the tobacco companies ignored peer review and it was conclusively proven what damage smoking did.

The problem was they had politicians that were in their pockets and yes residential scientists that were in their payroll.

But I could be wrong.

Easy to prove.

Please post a peer reviewed study that showed smoking was not harmful.

I have had this conversation before and no one could find one.

No doubt you have the evidence.

Thank you telegraphist50.

What I meant is I reduce the risks I take.

Therefore I never get out at the top and I never buy at the bottom.

I take my time to assess risk and never become panicky because something looks like a bargain.

Jezzoo everyone makes mistakes including me.

But as I have said I invest not to lose money.

So I never sell out at the top as I am a cautious investor.

However I have made millions in the last 44 year's and only spend the dividend income.

So I can live with it.

The difference between me and you jezzoo is I bought around 1.8 million shares at an average of 4.6 pence a share, and sold 600,000 at between 30-35 pence a share.

So I have made my money back already and still own just over 1.2 million on a free carry.

Whereas you are suffering a loss at the moment.

Jezzoo I can't help it, that you have no clue about investing.

Madpunter I don't know about the case.

But whatever is on wiki leaks it has no bareing on the facts that Man Made climate change is real and measurable.

I don't know if you are guilable or just lying and misdirecting in order to support your ridiculous arguments.

Do you understand why slug rubbishes peer review.

It's because proper science has to stand up to scrutiny and all the rubbish he publishes doesn't.

So he trys to pretend that peer review is bought.

That's the only way he can maintain his lies and dishonesty.

Seriously wake up and start reading from proper resources.

Why wouldn't you.

If you want to understand the argument, then read peer reviewed evidence.

Madpunter some of what you say is true, but you misrepresent the facts.

Yes Gulfstream changes, but why has this been exaggerated.

Again the evidence is conclusive.

Please post your resources.

However before you post them, may i suggest you do two things.

First check the credentials of the publisher .

Then fact check the article.

Slug if you have the data you don't exclude it, and you name the weather stations that the data was taken from.

Even if they are not in existence today or have been renamed or moved.

This is done to maintain the integrity of the datasets.

But you don't understand critical analysis, hence why you don't understand datasets.

Slug you really are an imbecile.

Do you really believe climate change is measured by thermometers.

You would have to be a complete imbecile.

Ah good point, I rest my case.

Slug the weather station data happened over many decades of course they are moved and decommissioned.

You still include the data.

Even a complete imbecile would understand that.

Why on earth would you exclude data that had been verified.