I though that for the $1000 that it costs, that PS3 better power itself from your karma energy.

 

Hey everyone,
... All of the other leading competitors use coal burning to power their energy plants which every year causes more polution than cars do.

Now im not here to try and sell anything, because to switch to Green Mountain Energy its free. The only difference is that your paying less or in some areas the same for the same type of energy, but also helping out with cleaning up the enviroment. If you wish to continue in contributing to the global polution problems then maybe you can help spread the word onto someone you know.

....

Kinda off the subject but I could not help but comment on coal...It's pollutive but it's an energy source that is abundant and in no short supply of. Cheap to get too. Big companies likely won't make the switch. I held stock in a mining company for awhile until I sold it off. I remembered reading last year that coal was going to be profitable in the long term, a la MSN Money. But all I have seen are losses.

 

More nuclear power plants please :lol:

I couldn't stop myself from clicking on the link out of curiosity.....for some reason that whole deal sounds just like pampered chef and all that other stuff girls get all excited about, but it's energy. An energy pyramid deal...unbelievable. :roll:

Any how...good luck man. Hope it makes you a bit of $.

Time for coffee. I get a little grumpy if I haven't had my coffee :wink:

 

As an employee in the Transmission department of one of largest electric utility companies in the U.S., I find this whole "deal" laughable. Even if you switch to GME and start using power that is supposedly only from renewable, enviromentally friendly sources like wind farms, how are you moving the power? More than likely, you're moving it across our transmission lines, especially if you're in Texas. This of course means that you're (albeit indirectly) paying us, the big, bad, coal-burning utility, for your "clean" energy.

Does GME own the generating facilities or do they simply purchase power by the megawatt from companies that do own wind and/or hydro facilities? Because while my company's coal-burning plants far outnumber the wind, hydro, and nuclear facilities, we still generate a considerable amount of power that way. Is it possible that GME actually pays coal-burning utilities for wind or water generated power? I couldn't find anything on the website that gives this information.

As Bennie said, coal is cheap and extremely abundant in the U.S. We are the middle east of coal. That said, how exactly does not using American mined coal reduce our dependancy on foreign oil?

Finally, while wind and hydro-generated electricity is certainly more environmentally friendly than that generated by burning coal or even natural gas, I know for a fact that there are technologies in the works to reduce emissions from coal-fired plants and increase efficiency in the coal burning process itself. The fact is that it is much less efficient and more costly to generate electricity through wind and water than it is burning coal. You may be "saving" the environment, which is debatable, but you're using much more expensive power.

 

As an employee in the Transmission department of one of largest electric utility companies in the U.S., I find this whole "deal" laughable. Even if you switch to GME and start using power that is supposedly only from renewable, enviromentally friendly sources like wind farms, how are you moving the power? More than likely, you're moving it across our transmission lines, especially if you're in Texas. This of course means that you're (albeit indirectly) paying us, the big, bad, coal-burning utility, for your "clean" energy.

Does GME own the generating facilities or do they simply purchase power by the megawatt from companies that do own wind and/or hydro facilities? Because while my company's coal-burning plants far outnumber the wind, hydro, and nuclear facilities, we still generate a considerable amount of power that way. Is it possible that GME actually pays coal-burning utilities for wind or water generated power? I couldn't find anything on the website that gives this information.

As Bennie said, coal is cheap and extremely abundant in the U.S. We are the middle east of coal. That said, how exactly does not using American mined coal reduce our dependancy on foreign oil?

Finally, while wind and hydro-generated electricity is certainly more environmentally friendly than that generated by burning coal or even natural gas, I know for a fact that there are technologies in the works to reduce emissions from coal-fired plants and increase efficiency in the coal burning process itself. The fact is that it is much less efficient and more costly to generate electricity through wind and water than it is burning coal. You may be "saving" the environment, which is debatable, but you're using much more expensive power.

Actually GME does own their own generating facilities, and in some areas their own distributing centers. GME does not pay companies for their clean energy, it is actually created by GME. The company is relativly new, established in 1997, and already has over 600,000 customers. The comapny already has plans on having the energy available in New York, and New Jersey.

The reason it decreases our dependancy on foriegn oil is that we wont have to fill up the trucks that have to transport the coal, nor the machines that mine for the coal in the first place. Another good part about this is if we stopped using coal to run power plants than we can up the price for export to other countries, and have fewer coal mines. Im not sure if anyone here has actually seen a coal mine but its not pretty. It takes away land that could be used best for other things. Such as Windmills. See if you start mining for coal then hundreds of acres of land is now inhabitable, but people can have windmills on their property because it takes up little to no room at all.

There are alot of areas in this country that are regulated areas, which means are powered by one energy company. Now i live in chicago and my energy company is Comed. Well they have been jacking prices up every year, its always in the news. They have had problems with power outages in hundreds of city grids. The energy that GME is offering is distributed the same way any other energy company does it, it just costs less. Pretty much all the customers that i have seen switch has ended up saving money because GME doesnt need to pay for their energy, they get it for free through wind, water, and solar. Obviously they have to build the plants and the windmills that get the energy but who doesnt, every energy company has to spend money for these things.

Sure we can lower the emissions put out by coal by coming up with technologies to do so, but it will never be as good as no emissions. GME's goal is to produce and distribute clean enviroment friendly energy at a cheaper cost to customers.

 

I'll ask again, how does GME move power? Do they own their transmission lines? If not, you don't think they're moving power for free do you?

I was thinking to myself, "how is it possible that this company can claim to have cheaper power if they don't use any means of combustion in the generating process?" I was wondering that because wind and solar power are highly inefficient and very unreliable. What does GME do when peak demand eclipses their generating capacity, such as in the dead of summer or winter? I'll tell you what coal-fired plants do, they ramp up pressure to increase turbine speed, thus producing more or less electricity as needed. Is it possible to make the wind blow harder, the sun shine brighter, or a river flow faster? Tell you what, you figure those out and I'll invest... The only thing that GME can do when faced with load shortages like that is use gas-fired spinning reserve or purchase power. One guess where that's likely to come from. The fact is that wind and solar power are more expensive and less reliable. People want the lights to come on when they flip the switch and they don't want to go broke doing it. Coal-fired power is simply cheaper Btu for Btu. This is why more money is going into cleaner-coal as opposed to wind power. So how is it that GME claims to have lower prices than other coal-fired utilites?

Let's talk about the environment. Granted, a coal mine is not a pretty sight. But I have seen firsthand how reclaimation projects can turn a strip mine into a nature reserve in a rather short period of time. Evidence of this is all over south and eastern Ohio. In order for wind power to come anywhere near the generating capacity of coal, you literally would have to have a wind turbine in your backyard, and so would all of your neighbors. No thanks. Those thing are enormous. Also, birds cannot see the props when they are in motion, think of a spinning fan. Hydro facilities usually require the use of a dam. This is rarely a positive for the local ecosystem.

GME's goal to produce and distribute clean enviroment friendly energy at a cheaper cost to customers is a noble one, it just isn't realistic yet. Wind, solar, and hydro energy certainly have a place in America's power grid, but until the technology is available to be able to produce it cheaply with reliability, it will never be more than the 1% of the nations electricity generated today.

Also, I know you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet, but: http://www.boycottgreenmountain.com

 

Fusion energy is the way to go -- but the government doesn't fund research enough!!! It's much cleaner than current fission-based nuclear tech, and there no chance of runaway reactions leading to accidents.

"Fusion power has many of the benefits of long-term renewable energy sources (such as a long-term continuous energy supply and no greenhouse gas emissions) but also some of the benefits of (relatively) short-term energy sources like hydrocarbons and nuclear fission (without reprocessing) , such as very high power-generation density and uninterrupted power delivery (i.e. coal plants work almost entirely independent of the day's weather, unlike wind and solar power)"

 

All forms of energy generation have some sort of drawback. Coal has air polution, hydro impacts the ecosystem, wind kills birds and is an eyesore (IMHO), and nuclear generates radioactive waste. As a consumer, I want my energy at the lowest possible rate, perhaps short sighted, but none the less, reality. I am not willing to pay extra for a warm fuzzy feeling for "green power" as I do not believe that "green power" can completly support our needs and the environmental impacts no better or worse than coal, just different. There is no free luch, so pick your poison.

 

* see my previous post....

 

everyone has a right to their own opinion. If you feel coal and nuclear energy is the only way to go, then i dont have a problem with you making that choice. All im offering is an alternative. The reason I posted this was to offer this alternative to people out there that might be intrested in green energy.

If you would like to check out the company for yourselves, then please go to www.pollutionfree.com, This is their main website that gives all the information you need to know.