Skip to main content

View Diary: This is what a Renewable Energy Future -- Looks Like! ... Buh-bye! (212 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm all in favor of this. One question- (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jamess, A Voice, HoundDog, Odysseus

    if the company is not disclosing how much it cost to build, when will we know if this particular project is more economical?

    Not that one must base saving the planet on whether or not projects are economical, as long as they have a pretty good net energy gain.

    Moderation in most things. Except Reactors. IFR forever!

    by billmosby on Sat Mar 19, 2011 at 09:02:20 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Not to nitpick, but we're not saving the planet. (8+ / 0-)

      We're saving ourselves. The planet will be happy to be rid of us if we fail.

      We need to stop saying that we're saving the planet.  People don't really care about the planet nearly as much as their family and friends and pets for that matter.  The green/renewable movement needs to make this personal. The matter of survival that it truly is.

      Otherwise, one blow-hard saying who cares about a stinking endangered owl when there could be jobs created (while destroying their habitat) is all that it takes to make the planet seem not as important.  Because it isn't compared to people who need jobs, whose brother/sister/father/mother/son/daughter/friends/neighbor needs a job.

      "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets..."

      by Back In Blue on Sat Mar 19, 2011 at 10:00:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  we'll be taking out a significant % of life (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HoundDog, jamess

        along with our civilization if we fuck this up. it's not just ourselves. it's worth connecting the two, quite frankly, and making the explicit argument that there is no economy on a dead planet.

        •  Yes, but I really don't think it's make much (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jamess

          of a difference to the average American.  And again, that's too abstract.  We have to make people realize that their own lives, the way they live, survival itself for them and their kids, grandkids is actually at stake.  You can add on everything else to complete the picture, but it it's not personal, it's far too easy to dismiss.

          "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets..."

          by Back In Blue on Sun Mar 20, 2011 at 07:26:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  average american is a sort of myth (0+ / 0-)

            and a rhetorical turn of phrase that - intentionally or unintentionally - strips anyone who doesn't fit whatever stereotype being assumed of their americanness.

            environmentalism and a desire not to irreversably fuck up the world are fairly common values, if not universally so. you'd be surprised how many republicans and conservative independents share that basic assumption, even as they rant about enviros. while solely limiting one's rhetoric to the effects on animals might not always be sound political messaging to a given political audience, reminding people that we are inseparable from the world actually weds those two values that the right wing tries to frame as in opposition: the desire for self-preservation (and going beyond that, the desire for the good life) and the desire to preserve the world around us.

            additionally, this "only speak to the stereotypical average american" line also has an insidious side effect of training people only to speak as if they were a political advertisement, instead of as human beings do to one another. it's a sort of mental discipline that has as an implicit assumption to distrust what one thinks and feels, and to always try to imagine some middle american rural stereotype as your audience.

            i understand your point, i am just tired of that mode of thinking. i do not think that it has nearly the impact people assume.

            •  Really, so what made Americans ditch their SUV's? (0+ / 0-)

              $4.00 gas.  It took a direct hit to their wallet for us to react.  It needs to have direct impact or it's just words.  I see little evidence that the US population understands or believes what is really happening.  

              environmentalism and a desire not to irreversably fuck up the world are fairly common values, if not universally so. you'd be surprised how many republicans and conservative independents share that basic assumption, even as they rant about enviros.

              Really? Show me the evidence?  I see a lot of talk and little action, especially when money is at stake.  

              As for my use of the phrase 'average american', you ascribe far too much.  I'm not prescribing anything other than to make it clear that people should be damn fucking scared for the human race because they are not.  However you want to accomplish that is fine by me.   Few understand or believe it.  

              "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets..."

              by Back In Blue on Mon Mar 21, 2011 at 09:31:57 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, I agree, but it's (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        A Voice, jamess, Odysseus

        kind of been the shorthand expression since Earth Day number 1. I think people really mean "saving the planet for us".

        And even then most of them take "us" to mean "me".

        Moderation in most things. Except Reactors. IFR forever!

        by billmosby on Sat Mar 19, 2011 at 11:17:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sure, but it hasn't really worked. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          billmosby

          The only thing that really got people to ditch their SUVs and buy smaller cars with high mileage was $4 gas.   It hit them where it hurt on a personal level.  Nothing like a shock to the wallet to make it clear to Americans it's about survival.  

          Talking about the planet just gives the deniers fodder for distractions.

          "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets..."

          by Back In Blue on Sun Mar 20, 2011 at 07:21:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Agreed! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pat bunny, jamess

        It is very important, especially for young minds, that the words reflect what is actually going on.  I always cringe when I see "the environment" as opposed to "our environment".  It makes a difference.

        Fools are the teachers of the wise. It is foolish to disrespect one's teachers. - Old Man

        by A Voice on Sun Mar 20, 2011 at 03:29:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, but even the evironment is too obtuse. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jamess

          I've heard so-called serious people talk about how the human race will probably survive, but what they don't say is that it won't be anything like the civilization we have now.

          "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets..."

          by Back In Blue on Sun Mar 20, 2011 at 07:23:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  but the fuel is free so it cant possibly be less (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jamess

      economical.

      every plant takes money and resources to build but when the fuel is free the profit potential must be huge.

      Here in Texas there are these weird state rules that make it so that things like wind and solar and nuclear dont sell for any cheaper than natural gas.  Im not sure how that works but it explains why a 100% wind contract with a retail electric provider can cost more or less as natural gas prices change. i always thought it would cost 'X' dollars and be constant.

      If you live in Texas - see texasobserver.org

      •  well, sure it can. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jamess

        It all depends on the capital it takes to build the plant. And unless you get the capital for free, there will be a point at which the capital cost swamps the fuel cost. Nuclear power is like that, so I have read. The fuel cost is somewhere around one cent per kilowatt hour (cursory web search just now, 3 sources), but the plant capital costs etc bring it up to around the total cost per kw-hr of other power generation technologies.

        Solar fuel is free, the resulting power still costs a fair amount, for another example

        Moderation in most things. Except Reactors. IFR forever!

        by billmosby on Sun Mar 20, 2011 at 09:32:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site