not until we actually stop using fossil fuels. we are still using more fossil fuels than ever. And when/if renewables actually start eating into the fossil fuel market, then fossil fuels will get cheaper. So either we are going to burn through most of our fossil fuels regardless, or we will eventually need to take some kind of punitive actions against using them.
anyway, you’d think republicans would be on board with renewables for exactly the same reasons as china. it makes economic and national security sense if that’s all you care about.
my dad once said that if he was in Bush’s position, he would have used 9/11 to justify decoupling from Saudi oil and push for more solar and wind development
I still think about that. So many missed off-ramps to this…
Perhaps. At the same time, we also had a better reputation then. A lot of countries were quick to jump on board when we decided who was gonna get invaded. Maybe they would have been just as eager to pull together and go green? Not that we’ll ever really know, of course.
It was mostly there for windmills. One of the first big US windmills was built by Charles Brush … one of the early NYC electricity pioneers … over a century earlier. Dependency on oil (political) kept people from realizing how much free energy (fuel) the Sun sends us. WAY more than we can use.
anyway, you’d think republicans would be on board with renewables for exactly the same reasons as china. it makes economic and national security sense if that’s all you care about.
Not for them, and not for the horizon they care about. They’re (and the US as a whole) heavily invested in fossil fuels, so economically for them it makes the most sense to squeeze as much profit from those investments as possible.
Only up to a point, fossil fuels getting cheaper will reach a point where it wont be worth extraction outside of for niche customers.
If renewables become plentiful and cheap enough globally fossil fuels will more or less die off in use, even if right now they’re going upward in use its temporary. The problem is we’re stuck with severe consequences even if they do eventually largely stop. We’re stuck with severe consequences if they stop this very instant in fact.
What we really want is renewable energy to become so cheap and plentiful that not only do fossil fuels stop being used but carbon capture technology’s high energy cost becomes null and it just becomes a net good. ATM the technology is useless because the high energy cost ends up just putting more co2 into the air anyway than is removed.
not until we actually stop using fossil fuels. we are still using more fossil fuels than ever. And when/if renewables actually start eating into the fossil fuel market, then fossil fuels will get cheaper. So either we are going to burn through most of our fossil fuels regardless, or we will eventually need to take some kind of punitive actions against using them.
anyway, you’d think republicans would be on board with renewables for exactly the same reasons as china. it makes economic and national security sense if that’s all you care about.
my dad once said that if he was in Bush’s position, he would have used 9/11 to justify decoupling from Saudi oil and push for more solar and wind development
I still think about that. So many missed off-ramps to this…
If the US has tried that, SA would have tanked the dollar.
Perhaps. At the same time, we also had a better reputation then. A lot of countries were quick to jump on board when we decided who was gonna get invaded. Maybe they would have been just as eager to pull together and go green? Not that we’ll ever really know, of course.
Actually right now US is not dependent on Saudi. Thanks to shale revolution it is now a net exporter.
Though, yeah that still pollutes and it didn’t remove our allies’ dependence so. The green tech should have been the next step.
The tech wasn’t there yet
It was mostly there for windmills. One of the first big US windmills was built by Charles Brush … one of the early NYC electricity pioneers … over a century earlier. Dependency on oil (political) kept people from realizing how much free energy (fuel) the Sun sends us. WAY more than we can use.
Not for them, and not for the horizon they care about. They’re (and the US as a whole) heavily invested in fossil fuels, so economically for them it makes the most sense to squeeze as much profit from those investments as possible.
Only up to a point, fossil fuels getting cheaper will reach a point where it wont be worth extraction outside of for niche customers.
If renewables become plentiful and cheap enough globally fossil fuels will more or less die off in use, even if right now they’re going upward in use its temporary. The problem is we’re stuck with severe consequences even if they do eventually largely stop. We’re stuck with severe consequences if they stop this very instant in fact.
What we really want is renewable energy to become so cheap and plentiful that not only do fossil fuels stop being used but carbon capture technology’s high energy cost becomes null and it just becomes a net good. ATM the technology is useless because the high energy cost ends up just putting more co2 into the air anyway than is removed.
Fund Ukraine to bomb Russian refineries. Huge win for the environment
Incorrect. Why are you speaking in an authoritative voice when you aren’t knowledgeable about the topic?
Percentage of fossil fuels is down -
https://www.worldenergydata.org/wp-content/uploads/11-US-elec-fuel-share-trends.svg
And the absolute amount of fossil fuels is down -
https://www.worldenergydata.org/wp-content/uploads/10-US-elec-fuel-qty-1.svg
Source -
https://www.worldenergydata.org/national-energy-trends/trends-of-united-states-energy-system/