Fantasy Demolished - U.S. Climate Goals Threatened by "Green" Power demands

Gee, what a surprise. This Fourth Grade fantasy of free and clean energy from the wind and sun is ending as surely as Puff's dreams in Puff the Magic Dragon. Or, "where have all the flowers gone. An article, in all places, the New York Times, A New Surge in Power Use Is Threatening U.S. Climate Goals (link) describes this process. Excerpt:

See also free article, "The Planet Needs Solar Power. Can We Build It Without Harming Nature? (link in headline).
One can only suspect that the goal or result of this "green" frenzy will be to materially reduce living standards. Why don't they just be straightforward about this?

 

Let's see if I get this right...

Energy demand is increasing
Some 50% of all new sources are solar, wind, or other renewables.

In the face of growing demand being met by renewables you propose we stop all renewable research and implementation.

 

LoL to meet current needs something like 25% of the US's landmass would need to be covered in solar panels and eagle killers.

We could always do what Germany did and buy oil from Russia I guess.

 

LOL

If this were 1954 you'd have a point.
In 2024 you're pointless.

 

The market will adapt to whatever makes the most sense to the powers that be at the respective companies. One of the issues that will eventually have to be addressed is the whole grid credits system. Eventually the big players like Amazon won't be able to keep building solar farms where land is cheap and taking payments as grid credits to redeem in places where electricity is more expensive for their server farms and the like. You are only going to be able to push so many electrons through rural grid infrastructure before things start bursting into flames, and are only going to be able to pull so many electrons off high density area infrastructure before brown and black outs start happening.

 

One.
Just one.

America, and much of the world, are basing their environmental and energy policy on lies.

Follow the money to understand why

 

I want Antarctica, Greenland, northern Canada and northern Russia to be arable. This requires MORE CO2. Im all on board with solar and wind and etc too. We need more and cheaper energy across the board. With enough energy we can drain floodlands and irrigate deserts, and with more CO2 cropyields are more efficient. The missing ingredient to desalinate ocean water into freshwater- cheap energy. I dunno how 'green' became reducing CO2 when CO2 is what makes plants grow and plants are what is 'green', but if we want more green then we want MORE CO2.

 

Climate change is a hoax. It's called "the weather".

 

Yep, the ice age is a hoax.

 

Sorry but exactly WHO is promising “free and clean energy”?? Please point that out otherwise I am calling this for what it is - a giant strawman

 

Oi! Someone else who does not, apparently, know the difference between weather and climate

 

I see you're talking to yourself.

 

Damn sure is. We were supposed to be in one right now. The 'experts' told us so in the '70s.





Surely you aren't referring to millions and billions of years ago? Because if you are, then you are admitting you don't even know what the average historical temperature should be.

 

Sorry but it was only a mere 100,000 yrs.

 

One.
Just one.
The environmental "experts" have been telling us for at least a century that we're ruining the earth.
That we're all gonna die because of our wayward ways, unless we change RIGHT NOW!!

Well, that century of doomsday predictions, ranging from "New York will be under hundreds of feet of ice by the turn of the century" to "We're all gonna bake like a barbecued roast by 2010" to "food riots and mass starvation by 1990" to "our coastal cities will be under water by 1990" have proven less than accurate.

In fact, every one of them has been shown to be false.

The "experts" seem to think it doesn't much matter, they just find a new bunch of "facts" to point to another disaster in 20 or 30 or 40 years, offer suggestions for a fix that one way or the other involve us giving them money/control, and fly off in their private jets that they don't own.

It's interesting that they all seem to subscribe to the old "do as I say, not as I do" concept.

So, every time I see a new prediction from these so called experts I offer up the challenge; show me a single doomsday prediction that has come true, and we can talk about climate change and what we should be doing about it. But until I'm shown a prediction someone got right, well, all I can say is "please, get back in your private jet that you don't own, fly home, and Shut the hell up.

 

I agree. See February 27, 1972 article, Mankind Warned on the Perils of Growth (link). In those days there was pushback. No more. Excerpt:

Now, the panic is on "climate change" since honest discussion didn't work.

 

How about we allow the people to determine what is most important and the correct actions to be taken?

Want to buy an electric car, great. Want a heavy duty diesel truck. Cool. Want solar panels, OK.

 

I don't know what your point is supposed to be. But do you know what is going "Puff the Magic Dragon"? Fossil fuels!

Do you know what we CAN'T build without harming nature? More oil wells.

So those are your options for the future: renewable or NOTHING. The REASON they are called "renewable" is because the alternative is NOT.

So, again, I'm not sure what point it is you're trying to make (your post is strange and obscure), but if we can run away from this alternative as cleanly as possible, fine. But it's our ONLY bet. Better work hard on it NOW that we have an alternative than when we run out.

 

Leonard NIMOY.?? Since when did playing a fictional half alien scientist on TV qualify anyone in climatology???

OKay and obviously here is another word you seem to have missed

https://serc.carleton.edu/microbeli... the study of,serve as useful climate proxies.

 

So who is stopping that from happening now?

 

I cannot repeat this often enough

 

When it comes to energy, both sides have their fantasies.

The left has the fantasy that renewable energy sources will be able to substitute for fossil fuels without enormous cost and potential disruption of high energy consuming lifestyles.

The right has the fantasy that fossil fuels will actually never run out. They NEVER think what will happen when consumers actually realize that fossil fuel reserves will be starting to become depleted.

 

I know I know the level of actual factual knowledge displayed on this thread is jaw dropping. I keep thinking “how can people noypt know even the basic basic facts and then I realise they watch RWM and this is all that is spewed from those outlets.

 

Well, but tell us, what isn't totally organic and natural about oil?

 

It sounds like they're now trying to come up with excuses for why renewable energy has not taken over a larger percent of the total energy generation.

Has got to be especially embarrassing since pro-environmental states like New York and California have not made more progress.

Progressive greenies haven't been able to translate simple thoughts and feelings into actual reality. Reality is complex and gets in the way.

Progressives on the Left never take responsibility for their actions and always try to blame something or someone else.