10 ms·
Warren Buffett is spending billions to make Iowa 'the Saudi Arabia of wind'
- onreact 7y agoSounds good. Let's just hope he doesn't mean to become the Sheikh of Iowa. In a democracy being like SA is not desirable. Remember that SA is killing dissidents and subjugating women and minorities. It's basically an absolute monarchy. They have also invaded neighboring Bahrain to subdue the democratic revolution there. I'd choose my comparisons and metaphors more wisely. Wind energy is fantastic as long as it doesn't kill birds (that depends on the way the wind turbines are built and where they stand). It's strange how one of the richest men on the planet demands government subsidies though. Or is it just me?
- corprew 7y agoIf you care about not killing birds, ban outdoor cats and contribute to your local feral cat spaying charity.
- misiti3780 7y agoit's just you.
- rolltiide 7y ago> I'd choose my comparisons and metaphors more wisely. I was basically looking for your comment but you're the only one that decided to look at the uncommon attributes between Iowa and Saudi Arabia. Metaphors compare dissimilar things with common attributes. The common attribute being an energy production behemoth.
- jakozaur 7y agoDoing good for climate is a valid business strategy, not a philantropy. Long-term investors should factor in their models that carbon heavy industries will be negatively hitted by regulations and taxes. Especially as climate change will get worse and younger generations already overwhelming support such meassures. Leading world economists such as Jeremy Rifkin points out that carbon assests will likely be stranded and this may be the biggest bubble of our times.
- brians 7y agoThat’s not a strategy. It’s an observation. It’s an important observation! Now what do we do about it? Discounting carbon heavy industries is one move. How much? When will those heavy costs hit? My own preference is to start coffee farming in North America, to offset the coming end of global shipping. What year will that be, so I can have my crop ready?
- davedx 7y agoMy strategy is investing in renewable energy shares. So far I am long Vestas, Siemens Gamesa, and Tesla. It’s early to tell if this is a viable long term strategy as carbon assets become stranded etc.
- ghostbrainalpha 7y agoThere will be small market for your backyard craft coffee...but Coffee requires a very particular environment to grow, so you are going to spend more energy adapting your local environment to produce coffee that is expended by the shipping of coffee. What I think will happen is someone will make a completely artificial "coffee flavor" beverage, with added caffeine that the mass market prefers to coffee and doesn't require importing coffee beans.
- stallmanite 7y agoRe: artificial coffee substitutes are you talking about something like Postum? I’m trying to imagine a palatable take on modern energy drinks adapted to be served hot but my imagination is failing me. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postum https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postum
- pochamago 7y agoI genuinely cannot imagine a world where global shipping were to end. At absolute worst, we could return to sailing to accomplish it.
- dwaltrip 7y ago
- WhompingWindows 7y agoBuffett is wary of companies pursuing social and environmental goals. He told the Financial Times that executives shouldn't funnel shareholders' money into peripheral projects and that it was difficult to assess whether businesses were truly doing good. "It's very hard to evaluate what they're doing," the so-called Oracle of Omaha told the newspaper. "I like to eat candy. Is candy good for me or not? I don't know." Wow Warren, really? You don't know if candy is good for you? You don't know if de-carbonization is good for the planet? I really don't get his rationale here...candy is a known treat, it is not "good for you" in any nutritive sense. Is he implying that there is a psychological benefit to the candy, even if it's not healthy? How does that apply to renewables and companies? Overall, I know he's hailed as brilliant at investing, but what is this candy rationale??
- brians 7y agoIt is difficult to tell decarbonization projects with high long term output from those that merely serve the social and identity preferences of executives
- cheez 7y agoHe eats burgers a lot too.
- empath75 7y agoI don’t think he was speaking in a nutritious sense. He’s not an idiot.
- breatheoften 7y agoNot sure why you are down voted. Buffet’s reasoning here is incredibly weak and he deserves to be criticized for it. It’s “difficult to assess” whether or not an investment will produce a financial return but he doesn’t apply that argument to criticize those who pursue investments with the goal of growing their personal wealth. I think this is the worst quote I’ve ever read from warren buffet and it makes me very much dislike him.
- Reedx 7y agoBecause he's been around the block enough times to know that it's not so simple. There are a ton of variables, confounding factors and second order effects in play when it comes to things like forecasting climate and nutrition. There are plenty of examples where we got things terribly wrong, even when there were high levels of confidence (e.g., dietary recommendations). In the case of candy, he probably thinks sugar isn't good in and of itself and doesn't eat it with a spoon. But it's the overall effect of candy that matters. If it reduces stress, then maybe it's not so bad or even a net good in some amounts or for some people. Warren himself made it to 89 (so far) eating quite a bit of junk food, drinking coke and is still sharp and has enough energy to be working, traveling and so on. Many examples like that, so indeed it's not so simple. With CO2, he probably thinks there is or can be too much in the atmosphere. But again it's not the whole picture. For one thing, you need to be sure that building and operating the solution (making machines, transporting, maintaining, powering them) doesn't exceed their net benefit. It's easy to find yourself in a situation where the cure is only marginally better or even worse than the disease. Which happens a lot with complex systems. Warren is exceptionally skilled at getting to the ground truth. When he says he doesn't know about something that you feel is obvious or basic, then it may be worth re-evaluating your level of confidence.
- hanniabu 7y agoHave the been any advanced in either technology or farm design to minimize bird deaths? While it's seen as somewhat of not a big deal and a necessary evil now, I imagine that may change as there's more built, there's more built making it more likely to be present in an area with endangered species, dm'd climate change affects increase the amount of engaged species.
- BurningFrog 7y agoBirds will evolve to avoid them. Though I don't know if it takes 10 or 500 years. If not, the ecological niche of eating the dead birds by our wind mills will be filled by some species. Without knowing any numbers, I suspect the actual impact of wind power bird deaths is wholly insignificant, but it makes us feel bad since they're so visible.
- ComputerGuru 7y agoThat’s not how evolution works. Just like the whales will evolve to avoid humans and the pangolin evolved to avoid the Chinese market, right?
- stefs 7y agowell, it does seem like some insects are not as susceptible to death by artificial lighting anymore.
- ceejayoz 7y agoThat's also not how evolution works. Some whale species live in excess of 200 years. They've only had a generation or two; evolution doesn't happen that fast. We found a living whale a few years back with a harpoon stuck in it from the 1800s. https://www.foxnews.com/story/nineteenth-century-harpoon-found-in-live-whale https://www.foxnews.com/story/nineteenth-century-harpoon-fou...
- riffraff 7y agoI am no animal rights fundamentalist, but I found that new item so depressing, it sounds like "we found this awesome >130yo whale, which survived a hunt in 1890. Well it didn't survive this one, the sucker."
- sverige 7y agoIowa is a terrible place to build wind farms since it still has some of the most valuable soil on the planet. Better to build these things on land with steady wind, less agricultural value and nearer big population centers, such as Wyoming and Colorado (near the I-25 corridor from Cheyenne to Colorado Springs) or the barren hills on either side of the Bay Area.
- BurningFrog 7y agoCan't you farm crops under a wind mill farm?
- matt2000 7y agoSeems like it: https://www.awea.org/wind-101/benefits-of-wind/wind-in-my-community/agriculture https://www.awea.org/wind-101/benefits-of-wind/wind-in-my-co... Maybe a slightly biased source based on the name, but probably roughly right at least.
- yostrovs 7y agoThe pads used for the turbines are quite large, they require an access road, power connections, and the turbines create substantial shade, reducing the productivity of the ground below.
- sverige 7y agoEach turbine consumes a minimum of one acre of farmland, and should be offset by at least a half mile from any homes. The problem there is that there are often homes every mile in rural Iowa.
- Robotbeat 7y agoAll of that is practically a rounding error compared to the actual area used for crops. Seriously, look at any satellite image of a wind farm in Iowa. Swamped by 2 or 3 years of annual crop yield growth: https://ourworldindata.org/exports/average-corn-yields-in-the-united-states-1866-2014_v1_850x600.svg https://ourworldindata.org/exports/average-corn-yields-in-th...
- oaiey 7y agoAs long as capitalists like him are not changing we are screwed. He is right with his statements, but only from an investment perspective. As a society we need to do better than that. He will have no excuse when future generations look down on him. What a miserable state for one of the richest persons on Earth.
- oaiey 7y agoIt is interesting how much downvoting happens without arguments. Seems like capitalism is a holy cow.
- tomhoward 7y agoNot a holy cow, but simplistic "capitalism is bad" arguments are done to death and teach us nothing new. From the guidelines: Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents. If you had anything new to say about the topic, that could teach people new things and lead to interesting and productive discussions, you could expect a much better reaction.
- sremani 7y agoTexas produces 25% of its electricity from Wind and US produces about 5% of its electricity from Wind. The point is Wind is location specific - the plains and Rockies is where it is on land. The state of Jefferson has bright offshore wind future ;)
- arh68 7y agoSource for the 25%? I've heard 10% recently on a podcast, and Wiki says 15.6~15.7% for 2017-2018. Maybe that is a peak number?
- CivBase 7y agoAs an Iowan, I'm surprised we're not already the "wind capitol of the world". You can't throw a rock without hitting a turbine, especially along I-80 and I-35.
- Zyst 7y agoThat is cool! Out of curiosity, how intrusive is living around wine turbines? Is it a problem at all? Or are they mostly unnoticeable?
- peteretep 7y agoThe piles of dead Bald Eagles lying around are off putting
- ceejayoz 7y agoWon't be piles unless you're collecting them from all across the country. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/may/31/donald-trump/trump-exaggerates-wind-turbine-eagle-deaths/ https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/may... > Smallwood says about 100 eagles die each year due to impacts with the spinning blades on windmills. > "Mr. Trump could not have arrived at his number (hundreds and hundreds) from any reliable source, unless he is referring to all eagles killed by industrial-scale wind turbines since they were installed in the early 1980s," Smallwood said. "Cumulatively over time, there have been hundreds of eagles killed, probably about 2,000." The article goes on to say that larger, more modern turbines are more carefully sited to avoid eagle deaths, and that it's working.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- tptacek 7y agoMost bald eagles in Iowa apparently nest near the Mississippi, not out in the middle of the state.
- 7y ago
- text70 7y agohttps://www.nrel.gov/gis/images/100m_wind/awstwspd100onoff3-1.jpg https://www.nrel.gov/gis/images/100m_wind/awstwspd100onoff3-... This is a good resource to determine what is financially viable to assess where to put wind farms. According to the chloropleth, light blue has the highest average wind speeds.
- jayd16 7y agoWind must really be something if there's this much misinformation (birds, farm land usage) about it.
- ceejayoz 7y agoDon't forget the wind cancer one. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/apr/08/donald-trump/republicans-dismiss-trumps-windmill-and-cancer-cla/ https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/apr...
- CivBase 7y agoThe most common health concern I hear about is claims or turbines causing headaches. It seems likely to just be misattribution, much like the fabled wifi headaches.
- westurner 7y agoIt's both cost-rational and environment-rational to invest heavily in clean energy (with or without the comparatively paltry tax incentives). The long-term costs of climate change and inaction are unfortunately still mostly external costs to energy producers. We should expect that to change as we start developing competencies in evaluating the costs and frequency of weather disasters exacerbated by anthropogenic climate change. We all get to pay for floods, fires, tornados, hurricanes, landslides, blizzards, and the gosh darn heat. Insurance firms clearly see these costs. Our military sees the costs of responding to natural disasters. Local economies see the costs of months and years spent on disaster relief; on just getting back up to speed so that they can generate profit from selling goods and services (and pay taxes to support disaster relief efforts essential to operational readiness). The cost per kilowatt hour of wind (and solar) energy is now lower than operating existing dirty energy plants that dump soot on our crops, air, and water. With wind, they talk about the "alligator curve". With solar, it's the "duck curve". Grid-scale energy storage is necessary for reaching 100% renewable energy as soon as possible. Iowa's renewable energy tax incentives are logically aligned with international long-term goals: UN Sustainable Development Goal 7: Affordable and Clean Energy https://www.globalgoals.org/7-affordable-and-clean-energy https://www.globalgoals.org/7-affordable-and-clean-energy Goal 13: Climate Action https://www.globalgoals.org/13-climate-action https://www.globalgoals.org/13-climate-action SDG Target 12.6: "Encourage companies to adopt sustainable practices and sustainability reporting" (CSR; e.g. GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards that we can score portfolios with) https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals/goal-12-responsible-consumption-and-production/targets.html https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-develo... : > Rationalize inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption by removing market distortions, in accordance with national circumstances, including by restructuring taxation and phasing out those harmful subsidies, where they exist, to reflect their environmental impacts, taking fully into account the specific needs and conditions of developing countries and minimizing the possible adverse impacts on their development in a manner that protects the poor and the affected communities ... > Thanks. How can I say "try and only run this [computational workload] in zones with 100% PPA offsets or 100% directly sourced #CleanEnergy"? #Goal7 #Goal11 #Goal12 #Goal13 #GlobalGoals #SDGs It makes good business sense to invest in clean energy to take advantage of tax incentives, minimize future costs to other business units (e.g. insurance, taxes), and earn the support of investors choosing portfolios with long term environmental (and thus economic) sustainability as a primary objective.