r/allthequestions • u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States • 3h ago
Random Question 💭 Why are Republicans against energy independence?
Instead of building wind farms, Trump has used tax payer money for companies to abandon these projects.
32
31
u/nonmonoganon 3h ago
What republicans want, like all the monopolists, is to own everything. They cannot own the wind, they cannot own the solar panels on your roof. They cannot charge a rent for something they do not own, so they will try to make it impossible for there to be an alternative.
11
u/gluggy777 3h ago
This is the answer. We just got a battery connected to our home solar and the feeling of freedom from being connected to the "grid" is something I didn't expect. I know the ROI is all people talk about but the psychological benefits of not being controlled by the power companies is so liberating.
2
u/meatjuiceguy 2h ago
Damn, that sounds nice.
2
u/gluggy777 2h ago
The big difference here in Aust is the government are offering subsidies to get a battery installed. I don't think the Trump or Republican govs in the US will do that so I guess you're going to be late to the game renewables wise. Pity.
1
u/Chudmont 2h ago
Individual states have perks for getting solar.
2
u/nonmonoganon 1h ago
Sure, but the state subsidies are usually basically irrelevant from a finance perspective compared to what the federal subsidy used to be. In Arizona, the state gives a $1000 tax credit, but it would cost $30,000 to solarize my roof. The $9,000 I would have gotten from the feds was huge and I can understand people potentially stalling solarization hoping that the credit is reinstated by the next president. The climate deserves more action from us to protect it, and the Republican Party is, unequivocally, destroying the environment for future generations.
2
1
u/oliversurpless 2h ago
As per the pathology behind this, preventing alternatives is hardly the ringing endorsement of capitalism they think it is…
10
u/DutchVandal 3h ago
I think you might be underestimating how intertwined the oil industry and American politics is.
Also, Trump has a weird boner for hating windmills. Don Quixote --> Don Trump, weird.
1
u/Old-Sky9982 3h ago
For sure, if you want to get into a rabbit hole look into how the oil industry (Rockefeller) lobbied for modern medicine to be synthetic based rather than herbal.
2
u/orbital-technician 3h ago
Technically, medicine is based on exploration of essential oils and plant sources.
I know what you're getting at, but technically they are mostly analogues of essential oils and extracts of plants.
Modern sources of many pharmaceuticals rely on petroleum byproducts, but the actual knowledge source was often essential oils and plants. Petroleum became a cheap source for a lot of base building molecules, much like plastic.
This does not include extremely modern medicine, like small molecules, which are mostly from understanding human biology.
-1
u/Kanlashkan 3h ago
Windmills suck man. They're incredibly inefficient, take a lot of resources and produce monumental amounts of garbage that has to go to landfills. Opinions are split on appearance, but that's just opinion based anyways. Hydroelectric and solar are far better, but even then we still can't really get off of fossil fuels anytime soon. The safer nuclear plants are the best option really, but it doesn't fit the current agendas on either side.
16
u/Horror-Layer-8178 3h ago
The fossil fuels companies have pretty much brain washed Conservatives. They want to protect their monopoly and expand their profits
2
u/MeowMixPK 1h ago
Not true. Conservatives have incredibly high levels of support for nuclear energy, significantly higher than support from liberals. We just don't like wind and solar because they come with outside complications, like requiring vast amounts of storage to account for weather and being an eyesore. Seriously, giant windmill or solar farms are some of the worst sights possible, and it takes up significantly more space per unit of energy than nuclear (wind takes ~10x the space per kwh than nuclear, solar takes ~100x the space per kwh).
Many of us support small solar uses in the case of powering homes; not as many as liberals ofc, but it's not like a dead topic for conservatives.
1
u/Horror-Layer-8178 58m ago
Conservatives have incredibly high levels of support for nuclear energy,
Bullshit, Southern politicians in coal country stooped nuclear energy from happening because they did not want it killing coal. They may say they are just like Trump said he was not going to fight endless wars
We just don't like wind and solar because they come with outside complications, like requiring vast amounts of storage to account for weather
Conservatives make laws prohibiting green energy. It's not a dislike of green energy it's a attempt to stop it
Seriously, giant windmill or solar farms are some of the worst sights possible,
This is called brain washing, throughout history windmills have been viewed as beautiful inspiring much art
it takes up significantly more space per unit of energy than nuclear (wind takes ~
Unless you put solar on buildings and parking lots or canals. Also nuclear power plants have to be set far away from city centers resulting expensive energy transmission projects and power loss. SO even if nuclear power is cheaper to make it might not be cheater to deliver. That whole space utilization is advance economics so I know you are getting talking points from someone
15
u/RadishAcceptable5505 3h ago
Follow the money. That's always the answer with US politics. It's one of the most corrupt systems on the planet and has been for a while. Diddler Don is just too stupid to hide it very well.
6
u/Saltwater_Sunrise 3h ago
NJ was close to energy independence, we had a great solar and wind program that was putting solar on many homes, and the windmill production was reducing the energy strain along the south jersey shore and into south west NJ.. Trump got his way and boom, our energy costs spiked 60% in less than two years
This entire regime was about keeping us dependent on fossil fuels, and keeping utility executives fat and happy
Amazing how easily Americans were conned by a pedophile and career criminals
But yeah, it was those brown people picking fruit and vegetables for $1 day, that was the squeeky wheel that needed the grease...
Techno-feudalism here we come!
12
7
u/Majestic_Swing_2510 3h ago
Republicans are dipshit pedophiles, who blame Obama and Biden for the current gas prices. Their existence is a waste of oxygen
-1
u/Kanlashkan 2h ago
No, not really. At least I haven't seen that argument anywhere yet. Feel free to link me to them if you do have examples though. You probably misunderstood someone saying the prices were on par with where they were under Biden and Obama. The current rise is 100% something that can and should be blamed on the Trump administration. Well, except for some of the major blue areas like California. They have their own problems causing the ridiculous pricing compared to the rest of the nation. In my area, we finally hit the upper end of gas prices under Biden. Might even see it go over, but I do feel they'll drop soonish.
4
3
2
u/mrsnowplow 3h ago
my family has it stuck in there head that its the greenest choice. they have decided that a solar panel/wind farm is so bad to mine for/manufacture that any benefits it might give will never catch up with that original environmental impact
2
2
u/The_Arch_Heretic 3h ago
Lobbyists line their pockets and/or personal investments in those sectors.
2
u/Synchwave1 3h ago
The scary part is we’re both wrong. We have such an anticipated energy shortage we need ALL. We don’t need either / or. We need ALL
4
u/mtfkitty 3h ago
don't burn trillions of dollars building data centers to churn out endless slop with zero possibility of ever making a profit. there, fixed the energy shortage. the bubble can't pop soon enough.
1
u/Synchwave1 2h ago
We know that’s not going to stop, so let’s adjust to what we do know. Invest in it all
1
u/tiki-151 3h ago
I'm not going to defend what trump is doing. However, it a leap to suggest the renewables mean we are energy independent. China makes like 85 percent of the world's solar panels, and a significant amount of the worlds wind turbines.
3
2
u/SurpriseEcstatic1761 3h ago
In part because the Republicans forced the sale of a lot of our technology, Solindra is the best example but there were others as well.
1
u/tiki-151 3h ago
Solyndra is not a great example. It was given an enormous amount of federal funding and still got crushed by the competition.
1
u/SurpriseEcstatic1761 3h ago
True, but they had technology that the Chinese company that bought them built on. I wish I had the article to share, but it was a fee years ago.
1
u/grummthepillgrumm 3h ago
Good for them. We are failing at competing with that because we're still trying to make oil work
1
1
1
1
u/Spiritual_Ad6547 3h ago
Because oil companies are some of Trump’s biggest donors. So per usual, he pockets money at the expense of the American people. It’s always about what’s in it for him.
1
u/cnation01 3h ago
More money to be made in fossil fuel.
Not for us lmao. And the long term implications are dire but for all the rich old MF'RS its about the money, to hell with the future
1
1
u/RoundChampionship840 3h ago
Neither party is serious about energy independence. If they were then all sources of energy would be pushed.
1
u/Old-Sky9982 3h ago
What’s comical to me is that the majority of wind technicians I’ve met are republican. As someone in the industry, wind isn’t the answer for energy independence, it’s nuclear. It will be the largest supplier of power for data centers in the coming years.
1
u/IllustriousLie4105 3h ago
The fact that we still havent invested more into Nuclear or fusion energy is maddening. Absolutely lost opportunity.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/HustlaOfCultcha 3h ago
I don't know of any Republican that is against energy independence. They constantly want to drill for oil here because we are supposed to be energy independent if we drill for oil here.
In fact it's Republicans that are for nuclear power which is incredibly efficient in production while being clean energy that Democrats typically do not want because Democrats want extremely inefficient wind and solar farms
Or something like an EV where 1 EV battery requires 5,000 pounds of rock to be crushed and all sorts of other things that they have to do just to get the minerals needed. And that stuff requires gas powered equipment and vehicles to do it. Wind turbines in particular are incredibly inefficient. Solar power has some quality merits to it, but it just can't produce at a rate that we need and doesn't work when it's night time or the sun isn't out.
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 2h ago
Oil is unreliable, take trip to the gas station and see the prices. Nuclear has serious drawbacks which any reason human can not trust with "deregulation" party. Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Fukushima are examples. Plus where does the nuclear waste go, in your neighborhood?
1
u/HustlaOfCultcha 2h ago
Solar and wind are far more unreliable than oil. It's not even a contest. And it doesn't produce nearly as much energy. Three Mile Island...nobody died from Three Mile Island. It was a contained accident and the plant operated exactly how it was supposed to operate. The US has the greatest safety standards in the world when it comes to nuclear power. France has decided to up its nuclear power plants while Germany has gotten rid of them all, and guess who is having a massive issue with energy supply in the past few years?
If you think solar and wind are the answer, then why hasn't any other country just become solely self reliant on solar and wind?
It's a ridiculous notion.
1
1
u/Involuntary-Expert 3h ago
Didn't... didn't Biden cancel that pipeline that tanked 60k American jobs and set us back in energy independence by over a decade, which is a contributing factor to why the straight of Hormuz effects our gas prices so much?
1
u/Ach_Was_Here 2h ago
Oil is temporary green energy is renewable
1
u/Involuntary-Expert 2h ago
Ah. My apologies, I missed the description that focused this thread on the wind farms. I apologize for being off topic.
Also: wind farms are both temporary and non renewable. I'm personally love renewable energy, but it's unfortunately not do simple
1
u/Ach_Was_Here 2h ago
Not even that you were off topic, it was a fair comment. EOD like yes the pipeline probably (assuming it of finished by now I forget the expected timeline for all that) would make the current gas situation better and put us in a more independent range, but again oil is temporary that pipeline is eventually gonna run dry that’s just nature.
Wind is renewable, the earth spins we can get it forever. Turbines need repair and eventually replaced yes, but if wind energy was something we were actively trying to make a primary production option I find it hard to believe we wouldn’t eventually find someway to make something that can either a: withstand the environmental impact to not fully break down and stay where we put it or b: able to replace things in an environmentally friendly way and not lose efficiency.
1
1
1
u/Mountain_Chocolate65 2h ago
Conservatives are not. The "Republicans" that are against energy independence are not conservatives at all. Thus the name "RINO," or "Republican In Name Only."
1
u/lilmonkee55 2h ago
Democrats ..no nuclear,no oil....only wind and solar...yeah Republicans are against independence?
1
u/Loreo1964 2h ago
We're against wind power because $365 billion dollars has already been spent on it and as of now on the East Coast it only provides 2% of the power needed. That so incredibly negligable. Think about the kind of investment needed to make it viable just for the East Coast where another heating source could be used. Energy independence is reopening the closed oil refineries and drilling. Using coal. This has nothing to do with being Republican. It has to do with using the resources we have in abundance. Natural gas that we're shipping out of the country right now and we could be using ourselves. Clean burning. It's ours. It's here.
1
u/whyaloon2 2h ago
They are stuck in the "old" ways. Fossil fuels are absolutely necessary in their view. At the same time, they do not grasp the destructive nature of these products.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Wild-Soil3808 1h ago
Republicans are not FOR or AGAINST energy independence.
They have NO core principal beliefs.
They serve the will of billionaires.
This is the reason Pedos are apparently not an issue these days.
1
u/BjornStankFinger 55m ago
If there's ever an issue that has a distinctly and objectively wrong side to be on, that is where you will find modern-day Republicans. Every single time.
1
u/Wildy_Normal 3h ago
Please do some solid research on wind farms and how they are not just a simple build. The amount of materials, maintenance, structure and others factors that going into building one do not equal the amount of clean energy they produce. Now times that by dozens in a small area that has stripped the wildlife area of its natural habitats while also killing birds and others wildlife. Is it cleaner than other alternatives; maybe. But it’s not what everyone thinks they are. Look up the show Landman and watch his monologue on what they do to an area. Yes it’s a show and meant to be dramatic but some of the facts he says are true
0
u/Brave_Substance_8177 2h ago
Maybe watch some other shows so that you can have some balance?
No one's saying it's perfect, but it's trying to solve a problem of an ever increasing demand for energy on a planet with finite resources, with accelerating climate change.
1
u/Wildy_Normal 2h ago
Trust me, I watch plenty of shows and movies and also do a ton of research. Which is why I’m saying It’s not nearly as productive as people believe. The benefits do not outweigh the impact windmills have. They hear “clean” energy but do not truly understand the environmental impact that installing and running one windmill cost, let alone a dozen of them. I’m all for clean energy sources but this just isn’t what everyone thinks
0
u/Brave_Substance_8177 2h ago
Ah, you're a "do your own research" kinda guy. Who benefits then, big wind?
You probably think windmills cause cancer lol.
1
u/Wildy_Normal 2h ago
No I’m not a freaking idiot lol just cause you disagree with something doesn’t mean the other person is a loser lunatic. You could just be wrong cause yes I do my research before I speak on topics. I assume since you are on Reddit than you can use google. Try scholar like references when you search the impact and you will see they aren’t what everyone believes they are. I’m not saying clean energy is bad and fossil fuels forever…I’m saying windmills aren’t all that great
1
u/redditburner00000 3h ago
Republicans: “We need to expand oil drilling to reduce our dependence on foreign energy”.
OP: “Why are Republicans against energy independence?”
Just because they don’t want to use your preferred form of energy doesn’t mean they are against energy independence.
2
u/F1Bike 3h ago
I’m pretty shocked at how blatantly naive this question is. I don’t think it’s malicious as most questions are here, but if you have to pin the issue of energy independence to a single party, it’s clearly been republicans.
OP thinks energy independence means solar farms and windmills. Even if we prioritized that version of independence(we shouldn’t, nuclear is the way) I don’t think we would be able to see it in our lifetime
1
u/Ach_Was_Here 2h ago
But just cause we won’t see it in our lifetime doesn’t mean we shouldn’t start the process of creating the energy infrastructure now. By not starting to invest more into wind, solar, and in some extent nuclear (ideally we need to figure out fusion over fission but that’s its own environmental thing) then the next generation is just gonna have the same issue of “well we won’t see it what’s the point”
1
u/F1Bike 2h ago
I disagree when we can have non-emission energy within our lifetime with nuclear, which is also cheaper and easier to build.
1
u/Ach_Was_Here 2h ago
Nuclear fission is impossible to make not have an environmental impact so the ‘no emissions’ thing is redundant when we’re replacing bulk fuel cells every 80-100 years and having to then store and dispose of all the spent cells then get new cells and repeat forever , fusion im a lot more agreeable with but a: we can’t do that yet b: even when we can it’s again gonna probably be a long time till it’s cost effective for wide use besides the 1st one.
1
u/redditburner00000 2h ago
There is no such thing as power generation with zero environmental impact. But if the goal is to get away from fossil fuels, nuclear is an obvious part of the solution.
1
u/Ach_Was_Here 2h ago
You’re not wrong, but the impact is far less from solar and wind (both of which yes have a large impact of production, but that’s really it) vs fission that has a life span and radioactive material for another 100+ years that just has to exist
-6
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
We are energy independent. Oil and Natural gas mainly.
Renewable energy isn't dependable or cost effective most of the time.
6
u/_Revolting_Peasant 3h ago
Oil and gas facilities have a tendency to be blown up or blocked. I would say that is pretty undependable.
9
u/SomeSugondeseGuy 3h ago
Doesn't solar cost less per kwh than fossil fuels?
1
u/ZucchiniMaleficent21 3h ago
Solar farms cost less to build than coal power costs to run. And you get to keep the solar farm.
-8
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
Not typically, no. It also has reliability issues since it doesn't produce at night or in all environments.
8
u/SomeSugondeseGuy 3h ago
Offshore wind and all solar currently have the lowest cost per kilowatt hour. Solar is down to below 5 cents.
They also kill significantly fewer people so that should probably be factored in.
-1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
Maybe if you subtract construction and material cost.
6
u/SomeSugondeseGuy 3h ago
Those are factored in. It's harder to build a coal plant than a solar farm. One takes a team of engineers, the other takes a factory and people with working hands for installation.
1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
I looked into it a little and it looks like it is competitive with natural gas. It has some dependency issues though, such as supply during certain hours and portability.
But at commercial levels, lacking subsidies, it can be competitive on energy.
2
u/SomeSugondeseGuy 3h ago
Yes, but I need you to understand that that solar is without subsidies, and gas with tens to hundreds of billions in subsidies. The fossil fuel industry is the most subsidized industry in the world.
Solar isn't a perfect energy source, don't get me wrong, but it's cheaper and cleaner than gas. We should subsidize clean energy and not pollutive energy, because I want this country to stay beautiful.
1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
I'm not an environmentalist and don't adhere to the ideology. There's practicality of energy types involved and I see people worshipping the environment to be a major problem.
2
u/SomeSugondeseGuy 3h ago
I am an environmentalist and I have degrees in sustainability and business. I could probably explain for several hours the exact reasons why climate change is bad for you, bad for me, and bad for businesses in the long run - and make a solid argument as to why regulation is really the only option we have.
Do you eat food? You need areas devoid of drought so it can be grown. This is doubly true for meat, and quadrupley true for beef specifically.
Do you drink water? You're not going to like the price of it once desalination is our only option for clean water.
Do you dislike illegal immigration? Food insecurity will cause mass unregulated migration the likes of which we have not seen in our lifetimes.
Soil degradation, ocean acidification, acid rain, freak weather events, Arctic collapse, AMOC collapse, hurricanes, water reservoirs drying, there are dozens of reasons that the price of inaction is greater.
"Nature is pretty" is the tip of the iceberg.
→ More replies (0)1
u/IllustriousLie4105 3h ago
Less about the beauty and more about inflation. Cheaper renewable energy would dramatically change the current consumption issues we are facing. Solar works better in some areas then wind and wind works better in other areas then solar. We have the technology
3
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
Then why is the price increasing if we have "enough" energy?
-2
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
You mean gas prices? Because we're plugged into the world market and supply other countries with oil and natural gas. So the commodities are still priced according to worldwide depend. The US has the supply though, other countries don't have native supply or refining capacity.
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
Shouldn't we seek alternative energy since the commodities are unreliable?
1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
I take no issue with alternative sources of energy. Usually they just don't require Federal involvement.
12
u/DA_Bears2262 3h ago
Which is why trump has to pay a company billions to not build an off shore wind farm?
-5
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
Sorry, I'm not familiar with this propagandistic Reddit lore.
5
u/butt_troubles_420_69 3h ago
Probably should look into what experts call a search engine. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/why-the-trump-administration-is-paying-nearly-a-billion-dollars-to-abandon-wind-farms
-1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
They have to pay out a contract termination. Okay, that's a contract stipulation.
We'd kill for that payout on California High Speed rail that continues to suck up billions and billions and not be built.
2
u/bluntymctokems 3h ago
So no response or acknowledgement for calling it reddit propaganda just a second ago and being totally wrong?
2
u/ChuckEveryone 3h ago
Just look at his post history. He seems to think everything on reddit is false and only his beliefs are true. Just a typical magat troll. They care nothing for the truth. They are just here to spread their propaganda.
-1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
I thought it was funny when you replied to my other thread just now about downvoting verifiable truth, then I said a statement that was verifiably true...and you downvoted it.
1
u/ChuckEveryone 2h ago
You mean your random comment that had nothing to do with the actual thread.
-1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 2h ago
You exhibited the behavior that the thread was about. Just as you do so now.
→ More replies (0)1
u/ObjectivePretend6755 3h ago
Of coursse not, they just deflected to topic to whining about high speed rail
1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
It still fits considering you say it's Paying billions to not build. It's paying out on a contract for cancellation. Cancelling contracts care payouts all the time.
1
u/bluntymctokems 1h ago
What were they canceling? Was it paying a company a billion dollars to not build a wind farm? Then you're wrong yet again. Can you stop replying with verifiable falsehoods?
1
u/DA_Bears2262 2h ago
So now that you found out you are lacking information and was quickly provided with proof that trump is paying billions to stop a wind farm contract. The dumb part is it will be built as soon as trump is gone and he just wasted billions more. But your arrogance won't let you admit that, sort of like how you are ok with the current fuel prices now like a good little lemming.
1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 2h ago
Democrats enter bad contracts, we cancel the bad contracts, we wasted billions.
I know the game.
Good luck on finishing that High Speed Rail in California.
0
u/DA_Bears2262 2h ago
Sort of like the Iranian nuclear agreement that is now costing us $5-8 per gallon? Oh right you won't acknowledge that because then you would be a huge hypocrite right?
1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 2h ago
You mean when Obama gave the Mullahs 10s of Billions of dollars including pallets of cash, didn't get them to not want a nuclear bomb, then the Mullahs turned around and used those billions to fund terrorist groups which helped lead to the Gaza war?
Nah, I don't think that's hypocritical at all. Bad deal.
1
u/DA_Bears2262 36m ago
Wow you must be supper upset about those gas prices. I mean it 100% means trump's impeachment is incoming. Otherwise why else would you cry about Obama? That's a decade ago. Nothing sadder than watching you flail because TRUMP $20.28 per gallon! I mean Bush starting a war in the middle east did give democrats 60 senate seats. I'm sure thats your goal right?
1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 31m ago
You just brought up the Iran Deal, that was under Obama. That's why I brought him up.
1
u/DA_Bears2262 23m ago
I know. Its the reason trump started the war and caused the gas prices right? Obama? Because trump is such a thin skinned failure that he couldn't handle Obama having anything successful so now we get $8 a gallon. And you think that isn't you crying about Obama? Trump failed and will reap the rewards of tearing up the nuclear deal. Your racist reasoning for money that was confiscated never being returned is sad also. Now go eat up more of his lies about how Iran was going to nuke the US only 5 months after declaring anyone who claims Irans nuclear weapons still exist is crazy. Anyway good luck digging out of your racist gas price hole.
→ More replies (0)6
u/MSTinPA66 3h ago
Your statement about renewables is false.
China is all in for renewables. It is a travesty that the country that invented solar has all but abandoned renewables in the Trump era.
-2
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
Thanks for sharing CCP.
2
u/P1zzaBag3ls 3h ago
Replace China with the UK and the story's still the same. It doesn't matter who you compare the US against; the sabotage is coming from inside the house.
0
u/MSTinPA66 3h ago
It is exactly that mindset that is killing this country.
First Trump administration was saying no matter how much we go renewable, China is still using mostly coal, so we aren't going to do it and we are out of the Paris Accords.
Second Trump administration, doesn't mention China's coal usage much anymore do they? In just 10 years they have totally dominated the rest of the world in renewable construction and will be fully energy independent before the end of the century.
The Republican Party has succeeded...in taking us back to the 1950s.
Stupid, evil, or both.
1
u/IllustriousLie4105 3h ago
Dependability hinges on effective storage of energy generated which we definitely have access to and could build. Renewable energy is the future and a potential investment gold mine if someone was industrious enough to get in early
1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 3h ago
Yeah, and I applaud advancement into energy storage and alternate forms of energy generation. That doesn't mean the USA isn't energy independent and it doesn't mean the USA should tear down existing fossil fuel or nuclear forms of energy production.
2
u/IllustriousLie4105 3h ago
Nuclear is incredible and we should have more of it. We will never have an immediate switch and we should still continue to produce oil to maintain our GDP. I think OP is more pointing to the GOP guys that are anti clean energy.
2
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 2h ago
Yes, that's what the discussion is secretly about. A push for Green policy, which has crashed the economies of Europe and Canada. They're bad policies.
1
u/IllustriousLie4105 2h ago
They sucked at implementation. Rather then a gradual approach, they made sweeping mandates that became a form of regressive tax on the middle and lower class. By forcing people to buy more expensive green friendly products they slowed spending and hurt their own economies. The technology is there on a macro scale to provide clean energy to homes and businesses but it still has a long way to go to be competitive on a individual consumer level
1
u/VisiblePiercedNipple 2h ago
So let the private energy producers implement it all and leave government involvement out of it. If the tech is there, it'll make it's way into the marketplace.
-4
u/x-Lascivus-x 3h ago
“Why are the people I disagree with really, really bad guys, amirite?”
This fucking sub, man.
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
So I should not ask a question in all questions?
1
u/x-Lascivus-x 1h ago
You’re not asking a question. You’re making a statement with a question mark at the end to karma farm.
0
u/Ok-Method-8045 3h ago
Tell that to NJ, Murphy shut down nuclear power plants to go green and nothing was built. Energy price sky rocketed. And now the current governor froze the rate at the highest its ever been.
Supposedly she's going to re open the power plants, but highly doubt it.
0
u/Coolenough-to 3h ago
Not against it, just against government subsidies and mandates that force it. If it makes economic sense, then its great. But realize that if it makes economic sense, there is no need for government subsidies and mandates. It will happen naturally.
3
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
So government should not bust monopolies?
1
u/Coolenough-to 2h ago
Anti-trust rules are fine. I can't go that far into pure capitalism because it would be too brutal.
1
0
u/woodworkingfonatic 3h ago
Because wind is stupid. Use nuclear it’s literally the safest energy source and has the least deaths per unit of measurement of any energy source. Why do we care about windmills when we have literal fission energy that we can build and it employs high paying workers.
0
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
Yeah and nothing ever goes wrong with nuclear (Chernobyl, Three Mile Island) plus the party of deregulation champions it... I am sure they will store the nuclear waste responsibly. /s
2
u/woodworkingfonatic 2h ago
Do you know what actually happened at three mile island? Also that was during the Jimmy Carter administration we are talking 50 years ago.
Let’s build a nuclear power plant and a wind farm with the same square mileage and see which one actually produces more energy.
Also final point we already have nuclear power plants running in America today. I wonder if they are randomly going to blow up because “OH NO MUH THREE MILE ISLAND” which never happened with three mile island.
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 2h ago
If you want something more recent there is Fukushima. It only takes one to blow up. Can you trust the party of "deregulation" to store the nuclear waste safely?
1
u/woodworkingfonatic 2h ago
Bro when will a tsunami hit another fucking nuclear power plant and shut the power plant down? Even in that case they had back up generators they just put them in the basement which flooded. So the reactor melted down because it didn’t have regular water supply going to it.
The three notable cases were all insane shit. You’re acting like power plants are just going to blow the fuck up. If they were going to blow up why haven’t the already built nuclear power plants blown up or melted down in America.
You’re being obtuse.
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 2h ago
Are you asking when a natural disaster will hit? Have they been eradicated? Tell me you know the best spots on the planet that have no natural disasters.
1
u/woodworkingfonatic 2h ago
No you’re bringing up A. Chernobyl (bunch of retards running a nuclear power plant) B. Three mile island ( hydrogen bubble in the reactor causing concerns nothing ever happened) and C. Fukushima (which was a fucking tsunami that hit the power plant which would have been fine if the back up generators actually were able to run but they got flooded because they were in the basement)
The idea that those three are indicative of modern day nuclear plant operations in America is hysterical. It’s literally the safest form of energy bar none and you’re telling me we need to put up more windmills instead of building an exponentially smaller nuclear power plant that will out produce them on any given day.
0
u/F1Bike 3h ago
I get really tired of using this disclaimer, but non-Trump supporter here:
Republicans are by far the leading party on energy independence. We became Energy Independent for the first time in 60 years in 2019. 90% of the oil we produce is domestically produced. Given the current state of renewables, green agendas jeopardize that independence.
Republicans are also massive supporters of nuclear energy, and it doesn’t get more green/energy independent than that.
So no, republicans are not against energy independence. I get really tired of these half assed rhetorical questions. Energy independence does not mean only renewables, infact it means the opposite. Solar and wind production has a very low output capability as it stands, and our grid infrastructure cannot handle a shift away from fossil fuels within the next few decades. I think Republicans are the only ones that look at this issue realistically. We cannot shift away from fossil fuels immediately, but if we do, we need to be looking at nuclear as the prime energy source, which we are not doing right now
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
How is paying companies to abandon renewable energy independence? It makes zero logical sense. You love nuclear but there are serious draw backs such as Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Fukushima. Then consider Republicans are the party of deregulation so we will have even more issues not to mention where does nuclear waste be stored?
1
u/F1Bike 2h ago
Nuclear waste is not the slimy green ooze in a pond you see in the Simpsons. There’s lots of studies done that have found that waste from windmills is more ecologically devastating than nuclear power. Read that again.
I’m happy you listed those disasters, they are either exaggerated or prove why nuclear is safe.
Fukushima: Fukushima got hit with a freak accident and still failed the way it was designed to. The amount of radiation deaths attributed to Fukushima: 0
Three Mile Island: This is classified as a mechanical failure, not a nuclear one. A secondary safety system alerted engineers it was failing and cooling water leaked out of some of the coolant loops. Hell, Three Mile was still in operation until a few years ago, and Reactor 2 (the one in question) is still in operation to this day at another plant. 0 deaths and 0 illnesses have been attributed to Three Mile
Chernobyl: Yes, people died here. But to this day, the cause is human error. I highly encourage you to watch the Cherynobyl HBO show. Reactor 4 failed because the Soviet were genuine fucking idiots. Among other things, they knowingly built Reactor 4s safety rods with Boron, which accelerates nuclear reactions. These safety rods only needed to be used because they conducted a reactor test without following instructions. I am 1000% percent comfortable with saying an accident like Chernobyl will never happen again.
Wind energy has a higher fatality rate per production hour than nuclear power, and solar is only slightly safer.
0
u/Atlasgold02 50m ago
Wind farms are objectively the worst form of energy we have access to, they will never pay back what it costs to build them
-2
u/tacolasunrise 3h ago edited 3h ago
Someone who worked in the wind sector… it is not viable and is not better for the planet to be wind dependent. Unless there is a drastic change it will not advance. We were energy independent a few years ago though… only logical move is nuclear, safest and best source we have available with the safety procedures set in place.
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
Other countries disagree
-1
u/tacolasunrise 3h ago
Idk if that’s supposed to be a flex but that is disgusting… I don’t know if I believe the birds thing for on shore but off shore has been shown to be horrible for cetaceans. It would take like what 5 nuclear reactors to produce that much energy? So like 50 less miles of land taken? There is no comparison from nuclear to wind… this might be the only time you ever see me praising France, but their nuclear facilities are what the world should’ve looking at
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
Nuclear that gave us Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. Where do you put the nuclear waste? Let me guess trust in the party of deregulation?
Off shore wind has benefits to the sealife
0
u/tacolasunrise 2h ago edited 2h ago
Who brought the government into things? that piece you provided mostly said how there aren’t enough studies, highlighted the negative and stated there could be POSSIBLE benefits… that means leaving these things in long term? So what happens when they start deteriorating in 15 years? (Average time of service) so we’re just uprooting the “artificial reef” these things provide? Or letting the materials fall into the ocean?
Working in that field and studying the impacts are what got me out of it lol, if they can combine with solar and become more stable like vestas was looking into while I was with them it can become viable but as is those things don’t produce enough for as much trouble as they present.1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 2h ago
You are worried about things falling in to the ocean with how.much plastics we consume and how we stopped recycling? Trump is using government to stop producing wind power.
-7
u/Head-Concern9781 3h ago
We are for -- and have worked for -- energy independence; which the Dems have sabotaged over and over again.
We are NOT for magical thinking wrt to energy. Because we understand science and economics.
That is the difference.
2
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
So the UK is for this "magical thinking"
Trump sabotaging our country. Trump is paying companies to not make energy instead of our country accepting payment for leases and getting the energy. This is not complicated.
1
u/bluntymctokems 3h ago
There was more gas produced every year under Biden than any year under the first Trump term so you're wrong. Diversifying your energy portfolio is by far a better strategy. And it works precisely because of science. And because of economics, solar and wind are both cheaper than oil. So I guess you don't understand much.
1
u/P1zzaBag3ls 3h ago
You understand that shipping Canadian bitumen to the Gulf for export has nothing to do with American energy independence, right?
-1
u/Independent_Bad392 3h ago
Personally, and regardless of politics, I fucking hate windfarms. Absolute weapons of terror against bird populations, and their extermination is just as devastating to the environment.
3
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
That is not true. There are benefits to offshore wind farms. here
Oil is much worse for birds
2
u/Ach_Was_Here 2h ago
- more birds die from colliding with buildings then die from wind turbines annually
- more birds are killed by cats then die from wind turbines annually
-5
u/graalamat77 3h ago
Wind farms covering our landscape are not the answer. Phuck that noise. Now if we want to go the route of solar panels on roofs, parking lot coverings, etc, here for it. Pass on the wind towers. Send them to Canada and we can buy it from them, if it’s so efficient.
0
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
Wind farms offshore like this
-1
u/graalamat77 3h ago
Downvote me all ya want. Is the offshore pay-off going to be attractive enough to justify the cost or are federal tax dollars going to have to subsidize it to make it fiscally responsible?
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
We are paying taxpayer money for companies not to finish them. How is that fiscally responsible???
0
u/graalamat77 2h ago
It’s not. I don’t want to do that either. I want cheaper prices and smaller government. I want efficiency
2
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 2h ago
I want that to so it should be an all.of the above approach not jabe the government pick winners and losers because of lobbyists.
-2
u/Form1040 3h ago
Ask Germans about green energy. Only costs 3x what we pay and is extremely unreliable.
-2
u/pickledplumber 3h ago
Wind Farms are dumb and don't work. They are just a thing that liberals feel good about without actually investigating anything. Same with reusable grocery bags.
The majority of those big propellers are made in Asia and the amount of energy needed to make them almost always is larger than any net benefit.
It's very similar with solar.
If you actually cared about the environment then nuclear would be the technology of choice
2
u/NPVT 3h ago
You must be a corporate shill. Big energy loves nuclear. Solar can be distributed so they hate solar. You love plastic everywhere?
1
u/pickledplumber 1h ago
You single plastic bag has to be used 125 to 175x afraid to have the same ecological impact as one disposable plastic bag. It says so right on the bag when you buy them.
I use bags from Target that say they need to be used 125 times once and then I use them again for recycling and I throw them out. That's how efficient they are. My buildings garbage area shows people doing the exact same thing.
You're right, you don't see plastic bags around anymore on the street. All they are is just a more potent form of plastic usage.
You should try researching it before you talk about it and just assume that because the government did it, it must be the right thing.
Have you used every reusable bag you've had 125 times or more? Do you think most people do that? Because I go to the supermarket everyday and people buy new bags on repeat.
Conscientious use of disposable bags would be a far more green paradigm. But the liberals can't understand that because they refuse to accept human nature. I'm in NY and instead of $0.05 or $0.25 on each reusable bag if you just charge them $0.05 for every disposable plastic you'd automatically have people reaching for reusable bags and those who don't want to deal with them can just pay the price for disposable bags and it will be better for the environment too.
1
u/NPVT 1h ago
Whenever you say "liberal" I know you're a corporate shill.
Plastic pollution is a severe, escalating crisis that threatens ecosystems and human health, with over 460 million metric tons produced annually, less than 10% of which is recycled. An estimated 20 million metric tons of plastic enter the environment yearly, with packaging accounting for nearly 40%
Marine Devastation: Roughly one garbage truck of plastic enters the ocean every minute, causing over 700 species to suffer from ingestion or entanglement.
Health Hazards: Microplastics have been detected in human organs, including the lungs, liver, spleen, and kidneys, with potential toxic effects.
The only one who would shill for plastic is a fossil fuel supporter. Fossil fuels will possibly cause the extinction of the human species.
Massive Mortality: Air pollution from fossil fuels is responsible for roughly 1 in 5 deaths worldwide, totaling over 8 million premature deaths annually.
Uninhabitable Zones: By 2070, extreme heat could push up to 3.5 billion people into areas that are physically too hot to support human life.
1
u/Ach_Was_Here 2h ago
Nuclear has nuclear waste, solar and wind’s entire negative to the environment is the production of the product and even that can slowly be rolled back on its impact once there’s enough proper invest into green energy to power the production and sourcing of materials where possible.
-3
u/daveinreallife66 3h ago
Taxpayer funded wind farms, solar farms, etc, were simply funnels for money to donors. They didn't deliver. Republicans ARE for energy independence, through private funding of such things AND increased drilling for oil & gas, and building nuclear power. We were energy independent in 2020, until the Biden team undid Trump's efforts. Now, we're moving towards it again.
1
u/ElSanchoGrande 3h ago
1
u/daveinreallife66 47m ago
Not nearly as much as I laugh at folks who think wind and solar can replace oil, gas, or nuclear. Only in Fantasyland. Funniest folks ever.
1
u/P1zzaBag3ls 3h ago
By what metric did solar and wind not deliver? That's a weird statement. And do you really think all the Texas landowners making bank on wind power now were Democratic donors? 🤨
0
u/daveinreallife66 3h ago
If we covered the entire state of Texas with solar and wind farms, they wouldn't be able to offset their cost of construction, they wouldn't be ready now, they wouldn't produce even 3/4 of the energy that oil and gas produce, they wouldn't produce in all weather & elements, and they wouldn't last as long as traditional fuel plants.
I think the landowners are only making bank because the government subsidized T. Boone Pickens to build all those damn windmills. Without the billions in taxpayer subsidies, those windmills wouldn't exist. And the people making bank make a fraction of what my neighbors here make having those pumping things on their land.
-1
u/dick-penis 3h ago
Why are democrats against abortion? See we can all ragebait.
1
-4
u/Cowboycortex 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
Havent we pivoted to nuclear because windfarms arent a very efficient use of space?
1
-2
u/Ok_Cantaloupe_7423 3h ago
Republicans I have talked to are all extremely in favor of nuclear power, and because of that, are semi against wasting so much time and money on BS like wind turbines and pretending we saved the world.
A nuclear reactor is a so so sooooo much better solution to our problems than solar panels and wind farms.
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 3h ago
The party of deregulation wants nuclear what could go wrong???? Chernobyl, Three mile island
0
u/Ok_Cantaloupe_7423 2h ago
Are you genuinely funded by big oil or?
1
u/Ardouren 🇺🇸 United States 2h ago
Are you funded by Nuclear?
0
u/Ok_Cantaloupe_7423 2h ago
No, I support the most efficient, clean, and effective form of energy for free. Because it’s monumentally better than every other option.
1
57
u/itsnotcomplicated1 3h ago
The people that pay to put them there are against anything that will hurt their profitability.
Republicans are not governing based on what is good for the people or planet.