@GlobalTrlr @Andercot @LoftusSteve Just read it and check the real examples they show with actual costs (not LCOS). These use Chinese LFP cells.
English
Will
5.3K posts
Don't give me that LCOS BS ginned up by battery and green grifter activists.
Use real costs. Mine were based on actual project costs and by the pricing on Tesla's website.
I have built every type of power plant all over the world.
The costs are available. Use real world cost.
English
@1Uprising27091 @CptAllenHistory @EinatWilf And yes, your failure to answer even basic questions after giving that sob story about your origin 3-4 generations ago is very telling.
You don't want peace, you want war and destruction.
English
You are mixing two completely different situations.
First: The UNHCR definition of a refugee generally applies to individuals who fled persecution. But Palestinian refugees are not under UNHCR — they have a separate mandate under UNRWA, established by the UN General Assembly precisely because their situation is unique: a mass, unresolved displacement caused by the establishment of Israel in 1948. UNRWA's mandate explicitly covers descendants by UNGA resolution because the political solution (Resolution 194) was never implemented. This is not a "loophole" — it is a recognition that refusing return for 75+ years creates a multi-generational refugee situation.
Second: Your comparison to Israelis shows you misunderstand your own argument.
Jewish Israelis today are not refugees from Israel — they are citizens of a state that exists. A small number of Jewish refugees from Arab countries were resettled and absorbed into Israel, but no international body defines an entire existing citizen population as refugees. That analogy is false.
Third — and most important — you continue to avoid the core question:
Do you accept that forced displacement permanently cancels the right of return after a certain number of years, regardless of whether a fair solution was ever offered?
If yes, then you are arguing that time alone erases legal rights — which has no basis in international law.
If no, then you accept the principle of return or restitution for Palestinian refugees.
Stop hiding behind false equivalencies. Answer the question:
By what legal principle does the passage of generations extinguish the right of return for Palestinians, but not for any other displaced people in history?
English
This is still one of the most devastating comparisons exposing the UNRWA grift.
@EinatWilf explains:
UNKRA resettled 3.1 million Korean refugees in just 3 years — with a fraction of UNRWA’s budget — and then closed.
UNRWA? 75+ years later and the number of “refugees” has ballooned to millions of descendants because it was deliberately hijacked to perpetuate the refugee status as a political weapon against Israel instead of solving the problem.
This was purposeful. This was the plan. And the West continues to be complicit by funding it.
Captain Allen@CptAllenHistory
How is it that @UNRWA has refused to resettle 700,000 Palestinian Arab refugees after 75 years whereas UNKRA - created for Korean refugees - managed to resettle 3.1 million refugees in only three years and at one quarter of UNRWA's budget? @einatwilf explains:
English
@1Uprising27091 @CptAllenHistory @EinatWilf You see Jews got on with it and rebuilt their lives. They prospered as a result. Compare that with the Palestinians who didn't and still want to pretend they are victims 78 years later.
And none of them really want to return anyway - all they want is the destruction of Israel.
English
@1Uprising27091 @CptAllenHistory @EinatWilf There were more Jewish refugees from the 1948 war than there were Palestinian refugees. That's before we consider that many Jews were refugees from WWII.
So how come we don't consider Jews still refugees despite both Palestinians and Jews living in the same land for generations?
English
@1Uprising27091 @CptAllenHistory @EinatWilf So basically you have no argument here. The accepted definition of refugee does NOT pass through generations. In fact all Israelis would be refugees if you used that definition. Do you accept that they must be granted right of return and their homes/land or restitution?
English
You are narrowing the definition in a way that is not consistent with international practice.
Under UNRWA’s operational definition, Palestinian refugees include both those displaced in 1948 and their descendants. This is not unique; it reflects the fact that refugee situations often persist across generations when no resolution is implemented.
Source: unrwa.org/palestine-refu…
So your claim that “descendants are not refugees therefore rights disappear” is not a legal principle in international refugee frameworks—it is a political interpretation.
More importantly, you are again shifting the discussion from principle to personal identity.
Whether I personally identify as a refugee or where I would choose to live is irrelevant to the legal question being discussed.
The question remains unchanged:
Do you accept that a population permanently loses its right of return and restitution solely because of generational passage, even when displacement has never been resolved under international law?
Answer that directly instead of redirecting it into personal questions.
English
@1Uprising27091 @CptAllenHistory @EinatWilf Yes for actual refugees. But not for their descendants as they are no longer refugees (as defined by the UN). It's not something you forever inherit, otherwise we would all be refugees.
Now answer my question honestly: are you a refugee? Do you really want to live in Israel?
English
You are shifting the discussion from a legal issue into a personal framing, which does not address the argument.
Refugee status is defined by forced displacement and international law, not by personal feelings or cultural familiarity.
According to UN General Assembly Resolution 194, refugees who were displaced should be allowed to return or receive compensation.
undocs.org/A/RES/194(III)
So the question is not about identity or intention.
It is about principle:
Do you believe forced displacement permanently cancels the right of return and restitution for refugees and their descendants — yes or no?
English
@1Uprising27091 @CptAllenHistory @EinatWilf You didn't even answer my question. Do you consider yourself a refugee and want to go back to whereever your grand-grand parents used to live? Despite never living in Israel or knowing anything about the culture?
If it's not about wanting to go back, then what's your real goal?
English
Your argument mixes geography with legal and historical facts in a way that distorts the core issue.
“Many resettled in Gaza, the West Bank, and Jordan”
Forced displacement is not “resettlement.” Palestinians who ended up in Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon, or elsewhere did not freely relocate — they were expelled or fled during a war that resulted in mass dispossession in 1948. Where someone ended up does not erase their original place of origin or their legal status as refugees.
The Korea comparison is misleading
Korea is a case of national division after decolonization, not mass displacement of one population and denial of return to their towns and villages in the territory they were removed from. The analogy breaks down because Palestinians outside Gaza and the West Bank are not citizens of the state that now controls their original homes, nor were they part of a voluntary partition agreement that resolved property and return rights.
“Do you want Israeli citizenship?”
This is a false framing of the issue. The question is not whether individuals want citizenship under current conditions, but whether displaced people retain the right to return to their homes or receive restitution under international law.
International law does not condition refugee rights on political loyalty or acceptance of the existing state order. Rights exist regardless of whether the state acknowledges the full national identity of the displaced population.
Recognition is not required for rights to exist
A state not recognizing a people does not eliminate that people’s legal or historical claims. Otherwise, rights would depend entirely on the agreement of the party controlling the territory — which contradicts the entire framework of international humanitarian law.
The core issue he is avoiding:
You are not asking for “permission to become citizens.”
You are raising a basic question of consistency:
Why are displaced Palestinians denied return to their original homes, while immigration rights are granted globally to another group based on identity?
That contradiction is not resolved by telling people to accept where they were forced to end up.
English
@PAndropv @Andercot Google it:
"US data centers are increasingly adopting solar power to meet ESG goals and manage high electricity demand, with major projects in Texas, Ohio, and Nevada. Key initiatives include TotalEnergies providing 1 GW for Google in Texas and 1.5 TWh for Ohio facilities."
English
In our little country, due concern about data centers making power more expensive, our government prohibits new data centers from connecting to the grid.
Data centers and other critical loads cannot depend on renewables nd batteries. To my knowledge there are no data centers considering it. They are planning a gas turbine based system. They aren’t stupid.
English
@PAndropv @Andercot There is also hydro and wind power you know. Or biomass. Basing everything around solar+batteries and overbuilding to the extreme is insane as I showed.
Even if say a huge data center had a dedicated CCGT, it would be cheaper to install a solar array to reduce fuel costs.
English
@__Wilco @Andercot @LoftusSteve Find me the data. Mine is from actual projects and Tesla 's own pricing. You are way off.
English
English
@BellaHende56768 @nicolelampert So no banner with peace.
They are for destroying Israel, not for peace.
English
I’ve reported on several of these marches.
There’s rarely a banner that says peace because they are not ‘peace marches’.
They are marches that call for ‘intifada’ (violent revolution). They call for violent
resistance’. They chant ‘from the river to the sea’ and they also chant ‘we don’t want no two state/ let’s go back to ‘48’.
In short, they are genocidal demonstrations even if some of the people on them - maybe the majority- believe they are marching for peace.
Kellie-Jay Keen@ThePosieParker
He’s terribly angry under pressure isn’t he? #AngryDave
English
@PAndropv @Andercot Not a realistic scenario to have no grid. In this region fossil fuels are cheap, so for that case you'd use generators or a gas turbine as the backup for sandstorms etc.
And yes, grid-scale batteries have become much cheaper. Look it up or see this:
ember-energy.org/latest-insight…
English
Putain Thiago, le beau gosse des flottilles de l'amour, a été arrêté et va être jugé en Israël pour suspicion de lien avec des groupes terroristes.
Ils lui ont même pas laissé sa guitare !!!
Greta va péter un cable.
Français
@koshercockney It would be better use of her time to go to a hairdresser to fix that horrible mess.
English
@1Uprising27091 @CptAllenHistory @EinatWilf But many of you resettled within Mandatory Palestine: Gaza, WB, Jordan. Same situation as Korea.
The serious question is, is your goal to become an Israeli citizen and live in peace like the Arabs who stayed in 1948?
English
This comparison sounds powerful, but it collapses under basic scrutiny.
The UNKRA dealt with refugees displaced within their own country after the Korean War. They weren't denied return — there was a state that absorbed them.
Palestinian refugees are not in that situation. We were displaced during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and then systematically prevented from ever going back.
I'm a Palestinian refugee from Jaffa, Ajami neighborhood. My family still holds the key to our home.
UNRWA didn't create that reality. UNRWA exists because that reality was never resolved.
You say 'why not resettle?' Because resettlement isn't a neutral solution — it means giving up my home, my rights, and accepting permanent exile. Resettlement is defeat.
Now here's the contradiction you're avoiding:
Israel applies the Law of Return, which allows any Jewish person — born in Brooklyn, India, or Europe in 2025, with no connection to the land — to move there and get citizenship immediately.
But me? From Jaffa. With documented roots. With the key to my house. I am legally barred from returning.
And this isn't just moral — it's legal. UN General Assembly Resolution 194 affirms that refugees have the right to return to their homes.
So no — UNRWA isn't the 'grift.'
The real double standard is this:
A Jewish person from Brooklyn can move into my home tomorrow because of their identity, while I, the actual owner, am told to 'resettle' and forget it ever existed.
If you're serious about 'solving' the refugee issue, explain why your solution applies to everyone — except the people who are actually from the land.
English
@is_OwenLewis @Andercot It's a 900MW array, so whenever an SMR gets built, it might be 50x smaller. However by then (2040s?) solar panels likely have improved efficiency to 30% which would make it 36x.
English
@Andercot Nuclear could do it with a footprint 500x smaller.
x.com/i/status/20506…
Owen Lewis@is_OwenLewis
This is 10 square kilometers of solar panels. That's roughly 2500 acres. A SMR capable of producing 100 MWe would take up about 5 acres. That's an aerial footprint 500 times smaller. Lots of SMR builders could do this. @AaloAtomics for instance. The answer is obvious.
English
This isn’t accurate.
Here is what is would take to power a 100 MW data center with solar and batteries. 25 square miles of panels and $2 billion
The data center requires power all the time. 100% capacity factor. Assume No grid back up.
In the winter a solar system has about 5 hours to capture 24 hours of power to run the data center. If the data center is 100 MW you need 2400 MWH every day, some to be used some to be stored.
5 hours x 500 MW would yield 2500 MWH. Transformer and inverter losses would require the excess.
On a cloudy day you'd need 1000 MW of panels due to the reduced solar insolation.
Of the 2400 MWH 500 would be used, 1900 MWH would need to be stored. Grid scale batteries have a 30% round trip efficiency due to the large cooling systems that can in some cases keep them from catching on fire.
This means that you would need 30% more generation. Now we are up to 1300 MW of generation, 1600 MW on a cloudy day.
In the summer you'd be tremendously over producing and would have to give the power away... negative pricing.
it takes 10 acres of solar to generate a MW. We need 1600 MW
Total of 16,000 acres or 25 square miles.
Solar is about $400,000 per MW. we need 1600 MW. cost of $640,000,000
We also need 1900 MWH of battery storage. Grid batteries cost about 500,000 per MWH, so about $950, 000,000
Figure in land, engineering, labor, financing costs you easily exceed $2 billion.
you'd still need a backup system.
Wonder why data centers are going with gas? They aren't stupid.
English