If we had gotten serious about renewable energy 10-15 years ago

[independentusa]

We could be a richer nation by manufacturing the equipment that goes along with renewables and could tell Putin and all of OPEC to go stuff themselves. We would produce enough carbon based energy to supply our own needs which would become less over time. Instead the energy companies have brought us to this continued need to bow down to those countries that help supply our energy, but of course the politico's from both parties get to collect their money from these companies to enrich themselves. Between wind, solar and nuclear energy, we would have a cheaper and more plentiful supply of energy in the long run, but that would not be the money maker that carbon based energy provides the big corporations and they are the ones who own the politico's. It would have helped the climate, but as we can now see, it is not just about the climate. It is about the security of our nation and other nations.

 

[NatMorton]

We could be a richer nation by manufacturing the equipment that goes along with renewables and could tell Putin and all of OPEC to go stuff themselves. We would produce enough carbon based energy to supply our own needs which would become less over time. Instead the energy companies have brought us to this continued need to bow down to those countries that help supply our energy, but of course the politico's from both parties get to collect their money from these companies to enrich themselves. Between wind, solar and nuclear energy, we would have a cheaper and more plentiful supply of energy in the long run, but that would not be the money maker that carbon based energy provides the big corporations and they are the ones who own the politico's. It would have helped the climate, but as we can now see, it is not just about the climate. It is about the security of our nation and other nations.

To some extent, we have gotten serious. Fracking — for all its problems — has given us a far greater degree of energy independence from the Middle East, and certainly from Russia, that would have otherwise been the case.

The problem you’re describing is actually Europe’s. In kowtowing to their Green movement, they’ve walked away from carbon-based fuel deposits in their region and have instead allowed themselves to become dependent on Russian energy. Hence the awkward predicament Europe finds itself in and the deadly one the Ukraine has been left to.

 

[independentusa]

To some extent, we have gotten serious. Fracking — for all its problems — has given us a far greater degree of energy independence from the Middle East, and certainly from Russia, that would have otherwise been the case.

The problem you’re describing is actually Europe’s. In kowtowing to their Green movement, they’ve walked away from carbon-based fuel deposits in their region and have instead allowed themselves to become dependent on Russian energy. Hence the awkward predicament Europe finds itself in and the deadly one the Ukraine has been left to.

THat is not serious, fracking is poisoning the very land we are fracking. Ask those living in those areas in Pennsylvania. Many can not drink the water from their wells. And it is not renewable. TO get the sand they need, they have to dig in certain areas for the dand which contains cillicas that are so light they float in the air for hours and can cause cancer. I know, much of it is found in Wisconsin where I live and the problem is showing its face. And like many areas of this country where we have drilled for oil, there are the pumps still there rusting to pieces. And Europe has coal and not much more. Coal, the dirtiest carbon based fuel you can use. Most have gone to nukes to get off the carbon based energy.

 

[NatMorton]

THat is not serious, fracking is poisoning the very land we are fracking. Ask those living in those areas in Pennsylvania. Many can not drink the water from their wells. And it is not renewable. TO get the sand they need, they have to dig in certain areas for the dand which contains cillicas that are so light they float in the air for hours and can cause cancer. I know, much of it is found in Wisconsin where I live and the problem is showing its face. And like many areas of this country where we have drilled for oil, there are the pumps still there rusting to pieces. And Europe has coal and not much more. Coal, the dirtiest carbon based fuel you can use. Most have gone to nukes to get off the carbon based energy.

No, it’s very serious and, IMO, very accurate. Yes, fracking has its problems. One of its benefits, however, is energy independence, and your discomfort with it does not change that reality.

 

[NatMorton]

FWIW, take notice how often this logic error comes from the left. It doesn’t matter what the topic is. Could be energy, the economy, race relations, whatever. But if a proposed solution has benefit X and downside Y, our friends on the left will argue against all reason that X doesn’t really exist because Y is so bad.

It’s the hallmark of a zealot that he will never acknowledge a valid point from the opposition.

 

[brianpatrick]

FWIW, take notice how often this logic error comes from the left. It doesn’t matter what the topic is. Could be energy, the economy, race relations, whatever. But if a proposed solution has benefit X and downside Y, our friends on the left will argue against all reason that X doesn’t really exist because Y is so bad.

It’s the hallmark of a zealot that he will never acknowledge a valid point from the opposition.

The elephant in the room here is man made climate change from fossil fuel burning. It can’t last forever. Europe has problems like you described, but we will have similar problems regionally when the southwest can no longer supply its populations with an adequate water supply, and costal cities become flooded. And sure, there are alarmists and grifters on all sides that would like to capitalize on the turmoil of the whole thing, carbon tax, supply/demand schemes, whatever, but we can’t let that spoil the pot, or change the truth as people see it.

On the positive side, renewable energy is slowly becoming more financially viable. It’s too big now to be squashed like it was in the 70’s and 80’s by big oil.

 

[Helix]

We should have announced a public / private moonshot to replace oil decades ago. We still can.

 

[independentusa]

FWIW, take notice how often this logic error comes from the left. It doesn’t matter what the topic is. Could be energy, the economy, race relations, whatever. But if a proposed solution has benefit X and downside Y, our friends on the left will argue against all reason that X doesn’t really exist because Y is so bad.

It’s the hallmark of a zealot that he will never acknowledge a valid point from the opposition.

Actually, if you read my OP you would notice I mentioned that if we had gone with renewables, we would have been able to produce enough carbon based energy within our country for our own use. Of course you are so into telling "lefties" where they are going wrong, that you have skipped over what I actually wrote. We will always need carbon based energy sources, but reducing the need for them would put this country in a better position in the future both for our security and economically. And I think if you look at the future, I am the one who is being the reasonable one and those who seem to totally appose moving away from so much dependance on Carbon based energy are the ones who are blind and unreasonable.

 

[NatMorton]

The elephant in the room here is man made climate change from fossil fuel burning. It can’t last forever. Europe has problems like you described, but we will have similar problems regionally when the southwest can no longer supply its populations with an adequate water supply, and costal cities become flooded. And sure, there are alarmists and grifters on all sides that would like to capitalize on the turmoil of the whole thing, carbon tax, supply/demand schemes, whatever, but we can’t let that spoil the pot, or change the truth as people see it.

On the positive side, renewable energy is slowly becoming more financially viable. It’s too big now to be squashed like it was in the 70’s and 80’s by big oil.

An economically viable solution is here and has been for some time: nuclear. Yes, it’s a higher risk energy source, but even events like There Mile Island and Chernobyl seem tame when compared to the dire predictions we hear from the climate change alarmists.

 

[Liberal7360]

We could be a richer nation by manufacturing the equipment that goes along with renewables and could tell Putin and all of OPEC to go stuff themselves. We would produce enough carbon based energy to supply our own needs which would become less over time. Instead the energy companies have brought us to this continued need to bow down to those countries that help supply our energy, but of course the politico's from both parties get to collect their money from these companies to enrich themselves. Between wind, solar and nuclear energy, we would have a cheaper and more plentiful supply of energy in the long run, but that would not be the money maker that carbon based energy provides the big corporations and they are the ones who own the politico's. It would have helped the climate, but as we can now see, it is not just about the climate. It is about the security of our nation and other nations.

There is a place in the United States that has done a lot of what you describe above.

My state doesn't have coal fire plants for electricity. We support alternatives and vehicles that don't use much gas or use none at all.

Hybrids and electric vehicles are at least half the vehicles on the roads here.

I made the choice in 2001 to never buy another regular gas power vehicle again. And I haven't. I've driven a hybrid vehicle for over 20 years now. My next vehicle will be a fully electric one.

We already have the technology and vehicles to not use gas or use a lot less of it.

We just don't have the people who will buy them on the large enough scale to make any difference.

What most Americans don't realize is that we have the power to force the oil and gas companies to be much more responsible and to bring their prices down to a reasonable level.

If we all united and started to honestly work to use less oil and gas, we can succeed in taking control of the oil and gas companies through our buying power.

2020 was a very good example of what we can do if we united together. The shutdowns stopped the use of enough gas that the price of oil crashed and the oil companies were left with a ton of oil and gas they couldn't sell or store.

We could do that again. Not through stopping driving but through changing the vehicles we drive.

The last thing that putin and muslims in the Middle East wants is for Americans to drive hybrids or electric vehicles.

 

[brianpatrick]

An economically viable solution is here and has been for some time: nuclear. Yes, it’s a higher risk energy source, but even events like There Mile Island and Chernobyl seem tame when compared to the dire predictions we hear from the climate change alarmists.

You know as well as I do that building and maintaining nuclear power plants is not economically attractive to the private sector, and that’s why it’s not more popular in the US. The liability involved is only one factor in that calculation.

Environmentalists advocate against, but that isn’t why we aren’t doing it.

 

[BlueTex]

No, it’s very serious and, IMO, very accurate. Yes, fracking has its problems. One of its benefits, however, is energy independence, and your discomfort with it does not change that reality.

I like the geysers in the permian basin...

 

[NatMorton]

You know as well as I do that building and maintaining nuclear power plants is not economically attractive to the private sector, and that’s why it’s not more popular in the US. The liability involved is only one factor in that calculation.

Environmentalists advocate against, but that isn’t why we aren’t doing it.

Disagree there. It is economically viable. What it's not been is politically viable.

 

[NatMorton]

I like the geysers in the permian basin...

View attachment 67378315

How, exactly, does that heat my home through a cold New England winter?

 

[brianpatrick]

Disagree there. It is economically viable. What it's not been is politically viable.

Ok. I’ll agree to disagree with you there.

 

[independentusa]

You know as well as I do that building and maintaining nuclear power plants is not economically attractive to the private sector, and that’s why it’s not more popular in the US. The liability involved is only one factor in that calculation.

Environmentalists advocate against, but that isn’t why we aren’t doing it.

Actually many environmentalists have changed their toon when it comes to nukes. They had advocated coal as a way to stop building nukes and some have now realized their mistake. And with the new way of building plants that are more economical and much, much safer, nukes are looking better every day.

 

[independentusa]

Disagree there. It is economically viable. What it's not been is politically viable.

Public opinion on nuclear energy: Turning a corner?

www.ans.org

I think political opposition to nukes may soon be changing as some polls, this one maybe questionable but is showing a trend, now seem to be going in the direction necessary to move the politico's. Even many who opposed it thirty years ago are beginning to see nukes as the least objectionable way of providing energy over coal and even gas.

 

[Volunteer]

Disagree there. It is economically viable. What it's not been is politically viable.

Nuclear energy is not economically viable. We ratepayers in the South are paying, on every month's electric bills, for failed nuke plant projects that will never produce power. Those failures led to the bankruptcy of Westinghouse Electric, billions in losses at its parent company Toshiba, and resignations of top Toshiba leadership. And nuclear-generated electricity still has unknown costs per kWh.

 

[HenryChinaski]

No, it’s very serious and, IMO, very accurate. Yes, fracking has its problems. One of its benefits, however, is energy independence, and your discomfort with it does not change that reality.

As long as fracking isn’t happening in your backyard..

 

[bave]

My state doesn't have coal fire plants for electricity. We support alternatives and vehicles that don't use much gas or use none at all.

That's not all that special. Coal plants are getting shut down in record numbers, as well as CO2 emission improvements, *entirely* because of the switch to fracked nat-gas.

Hybrids and electric vehicles are at least half the vehicles on the roads here.

You ever seen the analysis of environmental harm caused by a Prius compared to a Civic? The batteries alone in those hybrids are a disaster and a half.

We just don't have the people who will buy them on the large enough scale to make any difference.

I would wager most americans would love a new tesla or ford lightning/mach e. They just don't have the 50-60k to spend on one.

What most Americans don't realize is that we have the power to force the oil and gas companies to be much more responsible and to bring their prices down to a reasonable level.

Lol, what? Explain this one.

If we all united and started to honestly work to use less oil and gas, we can succeed in taking control of the oil and gas companies through our buying power.

You realize they are multinationals, right?

2020 was a very good example of what we can do if we united together. The shutdowns stopped the use of enough gas that the price of oil crashed and the oil companies were left with a ton of oil and gas they couldn't sell or store.

Which in turn created the problem today, it also wasn't just the US, it was the globe. The world shut down. Commerce crashed. That's your plan? Repeat that?

 

[braindrain]

As long as fracking isn’t happening in your backyard..

Similar to those who feel the same about lithium mines.

 

[ataraxia]

No, it’s very serious and, IMO, very accurate. Yes, fracking has its problems. One of its benefits, however, is energy independence, and your discomfort with it does not change that reality.

There are far better options for energy independence than fracking. Public investment in these technologies would no different than the benefits we have had from public investment in everything from airplanes, satellites, and rockets to nuclear energy, lasers, solid state technology, computers, and the internet.

 

[independentusa]

To some extent, we have gotten serious. Fracking — for all its problems — has given us a far greater degree of energy independence from the Middle East, and certainly from Russia, that would have otherwise been the case.

The problem you’re describing is actually Europe’s. In kowtowing to their Green movement, they’ve walked away from carbon-based fuel deposits in their region and have instead allowed themselves to become dependent on Russian energy. Hence the awkward predicament Europe finds itself in and the deadly one the Ukraine has been left to.

Have you seen the report That green energy is keeping Texas's grid afloat this summer. it is supplying them with 40% of their energy.

 

[Bear5131]

We could be a richer nation by manufacturing the equipment that goes along with renewables and could tell Putin and all of OPEC to go stuff themselves. We would produce enough carbon based energy to supply our own needs which would become less over time. Instead the energy companies have brought us to this continued need to bow down to those countries that help supply our energy, but of course the politico's from both parties get to collect their money from these companies to enrich themselves. Between wind, solar and nuclear energy, we would have a cheaper and more plentiful supply of energy in the long run, but that would not be the money maker that carbon based energy provides the big corporations and they are the ones who own the politico's. It would have helped the climate, but as we can now see, it is not just about the climate. It is about the security of our nation and other nations.

China captured the solar panel market 20 years ago, and the left had a hissy fit when Trump put tariffs on China

 

[PoS]

LOL and now Aussieland is facing a huge energy crisis ever since they made a push for "green"energy:

Rolling blackouts on the horizon:

What's going on with Australia's energy supply and will there be blackouts?

www.9news.com.au

Australia power market halted in dramatic move to avert blackouts

Australia's energy market operator took the unprecedented step on Wednesday of suspending the electricity spot market across eastern Australia to ensure it can keep the lights on, amid a string of outages at coal-fired plants.

www.reuters.com

And they admit that the electrical grid will get overloaded by EVs:

Power grid not ready for spike in electric vehicles

A government report has found Australia faces potential energy shortages as electric vehicle numbers rise unless it begins to prepare the grid to handle the increased power demand.

www.smh.com.au

LOL, talk about a sinking ship!