They don’t mind being under someone’s thumb for basic necessities as long as that someone is an unaccountable business owner.
If you’re falling to the myth of being a strong independent … person …. Pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps, solar and wind are local energy sources without foreign dependencies, and scale both up and down. This should be right up their ally.
I don’t want to be on the Texas electrical grid because of all their blackouts: Deisel generators are noisy and I have to depend on someone to fill the tanks, but I can put solar on my roof and batteries on the side of the garage and be independent. Zero fuel costs. zero have to depend on anyone. —— why isn’t this their line?
I’m not sure if there is a word for fundamentalist in the context of economics the way there is for religion. What ever it is that is the answer to:
—— why isn’t this their line?
A fundamentalist needs certain axioms and won’t come back to check if they line up with reality. This makes it nessesary for certain things to just be false no matter what.
Texas conservatives making rational decisions based on real properties of the physical world?
At least Texas can still give us great comedians too!
Because it is change and visibility they are concerned with. Not the things they claim.
I work in municipal development and permitting.
Texas has had a HUGE surge in solar panel and backup generator installation over the past 4 years.
But the power companies have taken notice. The biggest part of a lot of power bills now isn’t usage, but fees for being connected to the grid at all. And connection to the grid is required for a Certificate of Occupancy if you’re in a city, and to get insurance or a mortgage even if you’re in the county where permits aren’t required.
You can’t even create a legal lot in Texas without having electrical service to the lot.
Freedumb!
To be fair, wind is also a form of solar power. (Wind being caused by the difference in heat between the different hemispheres/poles & the rotation of the earth)
So wind & solar power are indirect & direct long-range nuclear energy sources, respectively.
In the end, all power is solar power
Tides and nuclear power aren’t.
That comes from the energy from earth’s rotation. That energy is left over from the formation of the sun.
Left over from the formation of the solar system, not the sun.
Erm, the solar system formed because of the sun
Where do you think that solar accretion disk went to?
Erm, the sun was formed in the center of a nebula and the planets formed out of the remaining mass that didn’t collapse into the sun. Yes, the gravity of the sun influenced how the remaining mass interacted and formed into planets with rotation, but it is not wholly a direct result of the sun itself, rather the angular momentum of the original nebula.
lol this is so pedantic it’s mindbogglingly fun. I would argue you’re confusing “gravitational effects” with what people are describing as “the sun’s output from nuclear fusion”.
Plus nuclear wouldn’t work without fissionable elements, which wouldn’t be here without supernovae aka dying suns.
So nuclear power is not like solar at all…… it’s GALACTIC POWER! maybe COSMIC POWER!
I suppose it depends on the definition, but yeah - GALACTIC POWER
And you always need to say it in that booming overly enthusiastic voice. It works whether you’re a superhero or a supervillain
Sometimes even extragalactic
Which is why we need to finally develop fusion, to free us from the tyranny of power of stellar origin!
…if you ignore the fact that fusion is basically replicating what a star does, that is
“Watch and dispair, oh mighty stars, how we have enslaved your children to release us from your tyranny!”
Tell them that they need to stop using wind and solar or else in 100 yesrs we’ll run out of wind and sunshine. We’re talking about “adults” who have the toddler mentality of “DON’T TELL ME NO 😡”.
Get the left to protest and Pickett against solar and wind. Say it’s fascist nonsense. The right will jump on it
The “right” aren’t right though, they’re wrong. They should be called “far-wrong” instead of “far-right”, imo, as their stances on many things show.
Maybe if we change the angle like “WE’RE TAKING THE SUN’S ENERGY AND THERE’S NOTHING IT CAN DO ABOUT IT” if we’'re being mean to the sun maybe they’ll like it better.
They like geothermal though, for the simple reason that it’s actually cheaper in the long run. Also solar is nice because you can live off the grid. But otherwise it’s not very popular among conservatives because the cost effectiveness in the long term isn’t quite there. They aren’t motivated by the idea of green energy, it’s a simple cost calculation.
But that’s completely bullshit. Solar and wind are so fantastically cheap that finding a way to deal with the capacity factor isn’t a big deal.
The new geothermal solutions are impressive and should open up a lot more possibilities, but don’t assume they’re being honest about any of it. They’ve advocated for nuclear for decades without actually building new nuclear plants.
I’m talking about point of use. I know a bunch of people who spent a few thousand extra to get geothermal installed and paid it off in a matter of a couple years, and 20 years later they still have cheap, all electric heating and cooling. Solar takes 15 to 20 years last i checked, and then your panels need to be replaced. Wind isn’t even an option.
But yeah that’s really only for point of use energy and is only marginally applicable to scale operations.
Solar panels are warrantied to 25 years to a certain performance level. They still work after that, but tend to have reduced performance.
Geothermal systems have about the same 25 year expected lifetime. A lot will depend on if the owner keeps on top of maintenance or not. Given that most homeowners replace their water heaters in <10 years when it could have lasted 30 with good maintenance practices, it’s fair to say it’ll be closer to 25 years for a geothermal system when it could last 50.
Solar is way less reliable because it’s efficiency depends on outside temperature and on the sun, but it’s more versatile in that it can provide general electricity where geothermal is only good for heating and cooling. It just hasn’t quite broken through to be cost effective enough. People would buy it if it were. I’d like solar and a battery as an emergency backup, but it’s tough to justify.
Energy independence should just be renamed foreign-free energy
Rebranding “let’s stop using oil to save the planet” into “let’s stop using oil because fuck those arabs” might convince some conservatives
“Actually Natural Gas” “Orbital Fusion”
They’re both Orbital Fusion.
We should try to harness the power of the tides, since that’s lunar gravity driven.
um…
Moon Rodeo Power?
I mean Natural Gas is as natural as Iron or Coal. The problem is extracting and burning it is causing issues.
Raw air and bleach ray collector.
That’s why we couldn’t end dst, calling it the sunshine protection act.
Yeah, I experience a bit of cognitive dissonance whenever I remember conservatism and conservation have very little overlap.
It’s almost like most conservatives are after something else…
In conservation, you want to protect and restore the natural world.
In conservatism, you want to protect and restore the social hierarchy.
Seems to fit?
Bunch of NIMSS types on the right. Doubt they’d go for “far-field nuclear”
Now, something like “Ultra far east super nuclear warhead”…that might work.
