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.
Energy independence should just be renamed foreign-free energy
I used to challenge conservatives on their nationalism and patriotism whenever it came to infrastructure and renewable energy. The idea was they should get behind efforts to beat, say, China at building rail and ports. We should be the standard bearer for solar, wind, and nuclear!
Turns out they aren't patriots and they're bad at nationalism. They're just lazy and racist.
They don't like nuclear either. Too green. You only need a little drilling and everyone can do it.
They only like things they can regularly drill or mine for so it's tied to owning special land.
Anyone can set up nuclear, solar, and wind power. They're not getting rich off those.
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?
Gotta love the hoax that Windmills and Solar "Aren't feasible"
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 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!
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'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.
Raw air and bleach ray collector.
Nuclear is popular on the left not the right so that name wouldn’t work
The reason we don’t have more nuclear is because the right needed to keep their coal plants
Supporters likes kickback from oil subsidies, fossil fuel deregulation, and supression of competitive technology. That's the angle.
...Maybe solar/wind companies should name themselves things like "Exon"
wind and solar are not popular for conservatives because they were left talking points first. which obviously means it's wrong, libtards owned yet again
Their biggest problem is that there's not big money in them. Once you have solar power on your house, you don't need to keep paying them every month. Where's the fun in that for the rich?
Donald Trump also said that they'll run out of wind if they start wind power farms.
So he thinks humans can affect the environment? Sus
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.
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.
I'm honestly wondering this. Renewables reduce dependency on foreign countries, so using them can be interpreted as a patriotic act. They make sense, geostrategically, not just for saving earth but also for reducing the leverage other countries have over yours. This could be something that both, green activists and nationalists, can jointly agree on. I don't get it.
I think the problem, as it often is, is big businesses lobbying for continued relevancy at the cost of societal progress.
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.
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
